|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 18, 2016 9:01:15 GMT
Alhamdulillah, if the number of likes had any effect, I would not have written this. My Lord knows what I intend. It is about speaking lies upon the Salaf and indulging in something you completely have no knowledge of. The main purpose was only to make you realize of your mistakes. I was not even going to publish this until you yourself requested me to, and it was then that I told you I will try to review it and give it to you as soon as possible. I even sent it to you before publishing it out, and I clearly told you if you realize your mistake after reading it, I will not publish it. But you were not sincere enough to even leave a reply. Had it been for publicity, then wallaah, I would not have bothered keeping it in my documents for two years and sending it to you first! Wallah, I am amazed at your insincerity that despite knowing everything you are trying all the very best to defend your tail! If you think you are sincere in this then say for once that, "Whatever you have written in your document, after reading my reply, you still abide by every single one of your claims, and you were not wrong in any aspect whatsoever" - then wallaah, I will not bother you ever after! It will only tell me how sincerely you take your deen and being questioned on that Day! Just say it for once! This is not about showing it to others. This is about you and your sincerity towards the Deen. Even if you then say it silently in my inbox, I will never say a word! If you cannot say it, then you really need to question yourself and your integrity! You must be the master of contradictions, now you're claiming you did it for me yet here you are posting and promoting it publicly. I'm glad you did reply, you've proven to the world that you salafis do believe in this anthropomorphic creed and thats why I didn't object to you making it public. If you assume yourself to be correct just because I don't feel the need to respond to your nonsense then you're deluded. Shaykh Abul Hasan has already demonstrated in two places where your reply contained ridiculous errors which you can't reply to. I suggest you go read them carefully rather than being cocky here. This is my last reply to you, you're more than welcome to keep talking to yourself
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 15, 2016 21:13:55 GMT
Ep 4 - Ibn Arabi, Hallaj and Their Salafi AdmirersIbn Arabi and Mansur al-Hallaj are two controversial individuals who have been the basis of attacks on many present day scholars including the elders of Deoband. It has been alleged by the pseudo-salafis of today that they are disbelievers and that likewise those who praise them or hold them in high esteem are too heretics. In this episode, you'll find that the ulama of Deoband and others are not alone in their praise for these individuals, not only were they praised by classical scholars in the past, but they were also praised by the very esteemed elders of those who attack the admirers Ibn Arabi and Mansur al-Hallaj. For long enough the truth has been hidden from the masses, it's time to smash the glasshouses of the critics
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 14, 2016 23:53:08 GMT
No problem, let it stay public inshaAllah because I highly doubt that anyone, even from your own ilk has bothered to read your nonsense. Last we checked you were on 13 likes on your Facebook post, what is it now, 14? How nice it is to see that your cronies got out in full force behind you masha'Allah lol. We understand that you're very desperate for attention and free publicity so that you can at least try to redeem yourself from the embarrassment that you suffered first time around. We get it, you're trying your best to invoke a response to yourself so that you can attract some attention to what you have written. We're not running, we don't even need to say anything, your every reply just keeps demonstrating how childish you are and you're exposing yourself with every comment so keep going, be our guest
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 14, 2016 23:24:22 GMT
We, unlike yourself, do not feel obliged to answer out of pride or for the sake of giving an answer, especially not to some of the silly and laughable responses you've given. Nobody has removed your comments, I assure you they'll stay there so that people can see your arrogance, lack of respect and childlike-amateurish behaviour. Dig your heels in the ground and sulk as much as you like, this issue was done and dusted two years ago whether you like it or not
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 14, 2016 17:14:44 GMT
Despite your painstaking and I'm sure arduous efforts in compiling this red-herring filled reply, you will not be getting a response from any of the brothers that you have mentioned within this "refutation" for a number of reasons other than the fact that the doors on this issue were sealed almost two years ago and you are now attempting to beat a dead horse. The proof that your attempted reply is full of red-herrings and nonsensical ramblings of no relevance is evident in your opening words wherein you attempted to accuse Shaykh Dr. Abul Hasan Hussain Ahmad of giving himself the title of "shaykh" and claiming that he likes to be called as such. Let us make it clear here that it was us that added this title and further proof of that is that we placed it in brackets, it doesnt take anybody of great intelligence to understand that this was added after and not by him himself but I suppose we over-estimated your intelligence, and the rest of your attempted reply is further filled with these ludicrously weak irrelevancies. The only reason why you have responded is as you have yourself stated, a matter of pride in that you wanted to answer those who were taunting you and saying that you were unable to reply, so you were not embarking on this endeavour out of sincerity. Apart from the above mentioned, here are a few reasons why you are not worthy of being answered other than this short reply; 1. You have claimed to have obtained a preface from Abu Hibban and Abu Khuzayma when in reality, Abu Hibban whose real name is Kamran Malik, was jailed for 5 years over a £2.5 million mortgage fraud in 2014. (see here: www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-solicitor-struck-over-52-7749947). To make it worse, he then coerced witnesses in order to avoid jail (see here: www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/solicitor-coerced-witness-bid-avoid-6700881)So how is it that you have come to attain a preface from this individual whilst he sits in a jail cell? Kamran Maliks accomplace Abu Khuzayma has been lying for some time now claiming that his buddy is still writing articles with him when we know this is far from truth. In defence of his partner in crime, he stated that Kamran's conviction does not count because he was convicted in a kafir court. If this is the case then why was Kamran working as a solicitor in a kafir court/legal system? It is bad enough that you sought a preface from a criminal who is dishonest but you have gone further and lied stating that he has provided you with a preface. This is sufficient enough to reject your entire attempt at a reply and anything else that you have produced or will produce. In fact, here is a challenge; show to the world whether Kamran Malik did actually co-author the preface from his jail cell signed and witnessed by two people or give likewise proof on whether he is or is not still languishing in a jail cell. 2. You have diverted the topic from addressing whether this particular creed which you appear to be defending, is truth or falsehood, to arguing whether it has been related from scholars of the salaf and yet still you couldnt answer our closing challenge. Anyway, this was not the issue, the issue was on whether this creed is acceptable and since you have diverted from the issue at hand it is pointless responding to you. 3. You, just as before, have contradicted yourself very severely. You claim that the creed in question is one that you are not partial to or in agreement with, you have stated that your own opinion and that of your ilk is not that of which you are defending yet interestingly you are here defending it as though it is your belief. You have made an attempt to show that this creed was accepted by many of the salaf yet you are not willing to take it as an acceptable belief for yourself, this shows that you are not confident in your own research and on that basis neither can anybody else take confidence in what you have attempted to present. Either you do hold this creed to be truth but you are ashamed to express it, or it is false and you are defending something you don't agree with, something that is absurd to any sound mind. 4. You have stated in many places in your "reply" in reference to the creed in question, "maqam al-mahmood" when in fact it should be "al-maqam al-mahmood". The state of a person who does not know basic arabic grammar and the difference between mawsuf-sifa' and mudhaf-mudhaf ilayh but then attempts to boast about their knowledge in usul al-hadith is highly laughable. Due to the above reasons we do not see it befitting that your obfuscations should be graced with a reply from us. As I have mentioned, the chapter on this is closed but we implore you to respond to the several other challenges that have been put forward by Shaykh Dr. Abul Hasan such as Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyims fabrication of the word "jalis" in the hadith of Musnad Ahmad which has not been answered for 7 years now. You may also take it upon yourself to answer an upcoming challenge by Shaykh Mohammad Yasir on the pseudo-salafi anthropomorphic belief that "istiwa" means sitting or settling. If you are so eager for the truth and not so much in defending your pride, we are sure you will take up these challenges but this particular topic, as it stands, is over. P.s If you'd like lessons on arabic grammar then we will be more than happy to assist in arranging a few lessons for you.
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 6, 2016 23:59:26 GMT
Taqdeer in a Nutshellby Shaykh Mohammad Yasir
Some brothers were invited by Shaykh Mohammad Yasir to his home for food and after the meal, they requested shaykh to answer, in a simple way, a common question that both youngsters and elders ponder about. The question was of taqdeer (pre-destiny) and the answer which shaykh explains was taught to him by his noble teacher Hazrat Maulana Yusuf Darwan of Darul Uloom Dewsbury.
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Feb 6, 2016 23:48:42 GMT
The "REAL" Fadha'il al-A'malby Shaykh Mohammad Yasir al-Hanafi
We've heard attacks time and time again regarding the authenticity of narrations in Shaykh Zakariyya's Fadha'il al-A'mal. It's obvious that the ahlul batil, especially the salafis, were not comfortable with the fact that this book guided so many people and so they decided to make their own "authentic" Fadha'il al-A'mal. Find out in this video, just how authentic this book really is, it's surprising!
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Jan 31, 2016 16:16:11 GMT
Issues in Tasawwuf ‘The Fifth Issue: The Khirqa (cloak) of Tasawwuf and Attachment to a Tariqah (path)' By Shaykh Abd al-Fattah al-Yafa'iTranslated by Usamah MuttakinThe following is a translation of the fifth chapter of the book 'Masa'il fi al-Tasawwuf' by Shaykh Abd al-Fattah al-Yafa'i. In this chapter he highlights and lists some of the classical scholars who were attached to a khirqa'/tariqah in tasawwuf, among them are the Imams; Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudamah, Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi, Izz ibn Abd al-Salam, Ibn al-Salah, Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Dhahabi and al-Shawkani. The PDF version can be viewed/downloaded from here: Issues in Tasawwuf.pdf (561.74 KB)
The definition of ‘tariqah’ according to its people is the name of the methodology in tazkiyah (spiritual purification) and the awrad (litanies) taken for one to reach Allah Most High and therefore attribution to this methodology is known by this name.[1]
Ibn Taymiyyah has said as mentioned in his fatawa:[2]
“Regarding the wearing of the cloak [khirqa’] which is worn by some of the masha’ikh of the mureeds (devotees/students), then it does not have any specific origin [asl] which has been made specific mention of in the Qur’an and sunnah. The early scholars (mutaqadimin) and many from the latter (muta’akhirin), did not clothe their students with the cloak, however a group of them from among the later scholars (muta’akhirin) have narrated that they did and they also encouraged it.”
He further says:
“Some of them i.e the muta’akhirin, have inferred [as an evidence for clothing a student/devotee with a cloak] using the incident of the Prophet ﷺ in which he clothed Umm Khalid bint Khalid bin Sa’id bin al-‘Aas with a thobe and saying to her: ‘Radiate and radiate the beautiful language of the Abyssinians’ (as she was born in the land of the Abyssinians and it was for this reason she was addressed in this manner). They also infer from the narration of the cloak that was woven by a woman for the Prophet ﷺ regarding which some of the sahabah asked for. The Prophet ﷺ gave it to one of them saying: ‘I wanted to use it for my burial shroud.’
Within these two ahadith there is not any evidence upon which their intended use can be applied; if a man gives to another man what he wears then it is like giving him that which benefits him. Taking a garment from the Prophet ﷺ for the purpose of blessings is like taking his hair for the purpose of blessings and this is not the same as wearing a garment or a cap for the purpose of continuing or following this practice, however in some aspects it resembles the reason that the kings would remove [these items of clothing] as a sign or token of dignity and it is for this reason that it is called an honour.
Therefore this and the likes of it is its objective that it should be made to be from among the permissible acts, and if coupled with it is a valid intention, it becomes acceptable from this perspective. As for making it a sunnah and a path to Allah then it is not like that. As for attachment of a group towards a certain shaykh, then no doubt that the people are in need of receiving from him the faith, the Qur’an, just as the sahabah received it from the Prophet ﷺ and the successors received it from them and then the first from the followers among the predecessors in goodness. Just as that man from whom one learns the Qur’an and other than it, then like that from him does another person learn the religion; both the inner and outer.
It should not be that a particular person, without the need of other people, attaches themselves to a particular shaykh and takes their every statement as a beneficial religious statement. That every [spiritually] dead came to be among the [spiritually] living from his words, his actions and his effects. Whatever can be benefited from him in, he is the shaykh in this regard as the predecessors of the ummah are the shuyukh of the leaders, century after century. None of them attached to a shaykh in a manner that they befriended his followers and remained strict on only that. Rather they would befriend everyone from among the people of faith and those who were known for piety from a large number of shuyukh and other than them. It did not concern them to be more loyal to one except when it was apparent that he was superior in his faith and his piety.” Ibn Taymiyyah says elsewhere in his Majmu’:[3]
“ Rather the names which are warranted to use as names such as the ones people attach to an Imam like; al-Hanafi, al-Maliki, al-Shafi’i and al-Hanbali or towards a shaykh like al-Qadiri, al-U’dawi and others like this, or for example the attachment to tribes like; al-Qisi and al-Yamani or to regions such as; al-Shami, al-Iraqi and al-Misri. Thus it is not permissible for anyone to test the people, befriend them or be hostile towards them based on these names [i.e to be biased to individuals due to these names alone], rather the noblest of creation according to Allah are those fearful of being from any of these groups [those who have bias]."
Some from Among Those Who Wore the Khirqa’ or were Attached to a Tariqah
Imam al-Muwaffaq Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali (author of al-Mughni)
He wore the cloak of tasawwuf from Shaykh Abd’al Qadir al-Jilani. This was mentioned by Imam Ibn al-Mulqin in his Tabaqat al-Awliya (pg. 494), that his chain in the wearing of the khirqa’ (cloak) of tasawwuf passes through al-Muwaffaq Ibn Qudamah, in fact Ibn al-Mulqin would produce his khirqa’/chain from Abu Bakr al-Hanbali, who took from Is’haq al-Wasiti, from al-Muwaffaq Ibn Qudamah and then from Shaykh Abd’al Qadir al-Jilani.
Imam Abd’al Ghani al-Maqdisi al-Hanbali (author of al-Kamal fi Tarajim al-Rijal)
He wore the cloak of tasawwuf from Shaykh Abd’al Qadir al-Jilani also, al-Ulaymi said in al-Manhaj al-Ahmad fi Tarajim al-As’hab al-Imam Ahmad [2/191] “al-Muwaffaq (Ibn Qudamah) said: ‘Myself and Hafiz Abd al-Ghani wore the cloak at the hands of Shaykh al-Islam Abd’al Qadir al-Jilani, we occupied him with [teaching] fiqh, we heard from him, benefited from his company and we could not keep up with his life [i.e his worship] more than fifty nights.’”
Sultan al-Ulama Izz al-Din bin Abd al-Salam
He wore the cloak from Imam al-Suhrawardi as mentioned in Tabaqat al-Shafiyya of Ibn al-Subki [8/214]: “As narrated by al-Qadhi Izz al-Din al-Hakari Ibn Khatib al-Shumu’nin in his musannaf, mentioning within it the biography of Shaykh Izz al-Din that he once issued a fatwa in something and then it appeared to him that he had erred. He cried in Egypt and in Cairo upon himself in search of the one who he gave the fatwa saying ‘so and so, such and such, do not act on it for indeed it is erroneous’.
He [Qadhi Izz al-Din Hakari] mentioned that Shaykh Izz al-Din bin Abd al-Salam wore the khirqa’ of tasawwuf from Shaykh Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi and “he took from him and mentioned that he would read Risala al-Qushayriyya from between his hands. Once in his presence came Shaykh Abul Abbas al-Mursi asking what brought him from Alexandria to Cairo, Shaykh Izz al-Din told him to speak on a particular chapter and so he took from what al-Mursi spoke. Shaykh Izz al-Din would sneak into his circles and would say ‘listen to this speech which he speaks that is a testament to his Lord.’ Shaykh Izz al-Din had a long hand in tasawwuf and in his writings by which he would judge. “
Imam Ibn al-Salah
Imam al-Suyuti said in his book, Ta’ayid al-Haqiqa al-Aliya (pg. 13): Imam Ibn al-Salah said: I was crowned in wearing the khirqa’ of a very high chain, I was clothed with the khirqa’ of Abul Mu’eed bin Muhammad al-Tusi, who took the khirqa’ from Abul As’ad Hebat al-Rahman Ibn Abi Sa’id Abdur Rahman bin Abul Qasim al-Qushayri, he said I took the khirqa’ from my grandfather Abul Qasim and he took it from Abu Ali al-Daqaq, he took it from Abul Qasim Ibrahim bin Muhammad bin Hamawi al-Nasrabazi, who took it from Abu Bakr Dalf bin Jahdar al-Shibli, who took it from Junaid and he took it from Sariya al-Saqati, who took it from Ma’ruf al-Karkhi, who took it from Dawud al-Ta’i, who took it from Habib al-Ajmi, who took it from Hasan al-Basri, who took it from Ali bin Abi Talib and he took it from the Prophet ﷺ.
Ibn Salah said: “Do not attack what is mentioned regarding the wearing of the khirqa’, it has no connection upon the conditions of the people of hadith in isnad, for indeed what is intended to be obtained by it is the blessing and benefit by its attachment to many righteous men.”
Imam Ibn Taymiyyah
Imam Yusuf bin Abdul Hadi al-Hanbali mentioned in his book Ba’d al-Ilqa bi Labs al-Khirqa that Imam Ibn Taymiyyah is within the chain of the Qadiri tariqah with other Hanbali shuyukh. Ibn Abdul Hadi also mentioned that this is the chain of the khirqa’ as follows: “Ibn al-Qayyim – from Ibn Taymiyyah – from Ibn Abu Umar Ibn Qudamah – from Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudamah – from Abu Umar Ibn Qudamah – from Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani.”
Early orientalists have said that Ibn Taymiyyah said in al-Masa’il al-Tabriziyya as it is written in the Dhahiriyya library in Damascus in number 12/1186 “I wore the blessed khirqa’ of Shaykh Abdul Qadir and between him and myself there were two.”
Imam Yusuf bin Abdul Hadi himself wrote an earlier book mentioned from Ibn Nasir al-Din that he said: “One of its ways which we relate a chain to ourselves, praise be to Allah, was that we received the tariqah which was indicated toward, the remainder of the worlds, one of the shaykhs of Islam, Taqi al-Din Abul Abbas Ahmad bin Taymiyyah may Allah have mercy on him, he said: “I wore the khirqa’ of tasawwuf from the paths of many shuyukh, collectively from Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani and it is an honourable path that is well known.” He once said: “So the most honourable of paths is the path of the master of Abdul Qadir al-Jilani may Allah have mercy on him.”
Imam al-Dhahabi
He wore the khirqa’ from Imam Dhiya al-Din al-Ansari, who took it from Imam al-Suhrawardi. Imam al-Dhahabi says about himself in Si’yar A’lam al-Nubala [22/377]: “I wore the khirqa’ of tasawwuf from our shaykh, the muhaddith, the zahid, Dhiya al-Din I’sa bin Yahya al-Ansari of Cairo and he said: ‘I wore it from the shaykh Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi [author of Awarif al-Ma’arif] of Makkah, from his uncle Abul Najib.’”
He said in Tarikh al-Islam [1/4689]: “I say: I wore the khirqa’ in Cairo from Shaykh Dhiya al-Din I’sa bin Yahya al-Ansari al-Sibti and he said: I wore it from Shaykh Shihab al-Din of Makkah in the year 720 A.H.
In Mu’jam al-Shuyukh [2/87], he said: “I’sa bin Yahya bin Ahmad bin Mas’ud, the Imam and the jurist, the beneficient muhaddith, Dhiya al-Din Abul Hadi al-Ansari al-Maghrebi, al-Sibti, al-Shafi’i, al-Sufi...he wore the the khirqa’ from Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi of Makkah in the year 720 A.H and I wore it from him.”
Imam al-Shawkani Being taught the dhikr upon the tariqah of the Naqshbandiyya, he said in al-Badr al-Tali’ [1/506]: In the biography of Abdul Wahhab bin Muhammad Shakir al-Hisni from Imam al-Hussaini from the father, “In the year 1234 (A.H) was my contact with him, he collected between theology and the knowledge of bodily ailments with good understanding, eloquence of the tongue, the best of speech and signs and knew much from the lands such as Egypt, the Levant, Iraq and the two holy sanctuaries. He entered in Rome, spending and making connections with scholars of the land and visiting its springs and kingdoms, narrating to us about this land and its people with the best of news with truth and as proof to explore the truth; he wrote in the style of their poems with precision....and I received from him the dhikr upon the methodology of the Naqshbandiyya.”
[1] The name khirqa’ (cloak) was also used in place of tariqah as rather than a path being followed, the transmission of the teachings was seen to be like the handing down of a cloak. [2] Majmu’ al-Fatawa [11/510] [3] Majmu’ al-Fatawa [3/416]
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Jan 28, 2016 20:16:10 GMT
Chapter 2: Ahadith Affirming TaqleedIn this part, those ahadith will be mentioned that show us that taqleed was also done at the time of the Prophet ﷺ and the fact that sahabah radi'Allahu anhum followed one another merely on the basis of positive assumption will be affirmed. (حسن ظن) Hadith 1: Hadrat Irbaad bin Saariyah radi’Allahu anh narrates that once the Prophet ﷺ lead Fajr salah and after completing salah he gave a very emotional and eloquent speech, which affected the people so much that tears began flowing and fear had entered their hearts. One person said; “O’ Prophet of Allah ﷺ it is as if this is your farewell and final speech, so advise us on a few things. The Prophet ﷺ said fear Allah, listen to the amir (leader) and carry out his orders, even if an Abyssinian is chosen as your leader, because after my demise you will come across a lot of dispute in your lives, thereafter he mentioned:
فعليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين المهديين – عضُّواعليها بالنواجذ وإياكم ولأمور المحدثات فإن كل بدعة ضلالة
(سنن ابن ماجه ٤٢) “Hold strongly onto my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided khalifahs. And hold them tight with the molars. And stay away from new things in deen, because every new thing is an innovation and every innovation (in deen) is misguidance.”[1] From the above hadith we learn: 1. Wherever the Prophet ﷺ has advised regarding fearing Allah, he has also mentioned about obeying the amir; even if it is an Abyssinian slave. 2. Wherever the Prophet ﷺ emphasized regarding following his Sunnah to the sahabah and the public; he has also emphasized on holding tight to the Sunnah of the rightly guided khalifahs. 3. The Prophet ﷺ mentioned a quality about the rightly guided khalifahs, that they will follow the right path (راشد) and will be rightly guided (مهدي). So whichever Sunnah they have will be correct and righty guided. 4. All of the Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah agree that Hadrat Abu Bakr, Hadrat Umar Hadrat Uthman and Hadrat Ali radi’Allahu anhum were amongst and are the rightly guided khalifahs. 5. Whatever will emerge later on and made part of deen, if it is against the sayings or actions of the rightly guided khalifahs, then it is an innovation and every innovation is a misguidance, according to the saying of the Prophet ﷺ. With the points mentioned we should also analyse the following: At one time there can only be one khalifah, which is necessary for the Muslims to follow and obey. Two khalifahs cannot be followed or chosen at the same time. Our Prophet ﷺ has said:
إذا بويع لخليفتين فاقتلوا الآخر منهما (مسلم١٨٥٣) “When an oath of allegiance of two khalifahs is taken, then kill the second from them.” [2]
Hadrat Arfajah radi’Allahu anh narrates that I heard the Prophet ﷺ saying:
من أتاكم وأمركم جميع على رجل واحد يريد أن يشقَّ عصاكم أو يفرق جماغتكم فاقتلوه (مسلم١٨٥٢) “Whoever approaches you whilst you are in agreement with one person and he wants to create division amongst your group, then kill him.” [3]
We clearly come to realise from these ahadith that when there is already a khalifah, then there is no room for a second and if the second is adamant on becoming khalifah then he should be killed. The entire Ummah unanimously agree upon this. Imam Nawawi (rahimahullah) has also mentioned that to take the oath of allegiance (bay’ah) of two khalifahs at one time according to all ulama is not permissible. So at the time of Hadrat Abu Bakr’s radi’Allahu anh caliphate it was necessary to follow him and whatever he ordered; whether it be related to deen (religious) or worldly affairs. This is the same with Hadrat Umar, then Hadrat Uthman and then Hadrat Ali radi’Allahu anhum. It was necessary to follow them at the times that they were appointed the position of khalifah.
So by making ananalogy (qiyas) of what has been mentioned above, for those who follow an Imam (i.e. Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad), for them to follow more than one is not permissible and for those who say we follow all four Imams is also not permissible.
Hadith 2:
رضيت لكم ما رضي لكم ابن أُم عبد(مستدرك حاكم ٥٣٩٤) “I am happy for you, with whatever ibn Umm Abd is happy with.”[4]If following an individual was shirk, then the Prophet ﷺ would not have specifically mentioned Hazrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh. This hadith is also a form of encouragement in following Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh, which the Ahnaaf (i.e. the Hanafis) have done and they have laid their foundations on the teachings of Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh. If the Prophet ﷺ is pleased with something then that also means that Allah is also pleased. This was also a positive assumption of the Prophet ﷺ regarding Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh. This shows there is no problem in following someone on the basis of positive assumption.
Hadith 3: What Hadrat Abu Musa al-Ashari radi’Allahu anh mentioned regarding Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh: لا تسألوني ما دام هذ الحبر فيكم (بخاري٦٧٣٦) “Do not ask me whilst this scholar is amongst you”[5]If asking another person or following him was shirk, then Hadrat Abu Musa radi’Allahu anh would not have said follow Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh and would have refrained from it. The Prophet ﷺ also encouraged following Hadrat Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh as mentioned previously. Hadith 4:
أتانا معاذ ابن جبل باليمن معلِّما وأميرا فسألناه عن رجل توفي وترك ابنته وأخته فأعطيالابنة النصف والأخت النصف (بخاري ٦٧٣٤) “Muadh Ibn Jabal came to us in Yemen as a teacher or a leader. So we asked him regarding a man who had passed away and had left behind a daughter and a sister. So he gave the daughter half and the sister half.”[6]Through this hadith the following things have been clarified:
1. Just like the obedience of a leader is necessary, similarly the obedience of a teacher is also necessary as clearly stated.
2. Why would the Prophet ﷺ send Hadrat Muadh ibn Jabal radi’Allahu anh alone to Yemen if his rulings had no authority?
3. If the people of Yemen had to follow Hadrat Muadh ibn Jabal radi’Allahu anh which they did, the opposition would have to accept the permissibility of following an individual (taqleed shakhsi) otherwise العياذ بالله the Prophet ﷺ sent Muadh ibn Jabal radi’Allahu anh to spread shirk.
4. That following an individual (taqleed shakhsi) was there at the time of the Prophet ﷺ , because Hadrat Muadh ibn Jabal radi’Allahu anh was sent to Yemen during the life of the Prophet ﷺ and his words were an authority for the people of Yemen in غير منصوص(non-Qur’anic) rulings.
5. The people that asked Hadrat Muadh ibn Jabal radi’Allahu anh did not ask for any evidence, even though he had it. They followed him merely on positive assumption and this is taqleed shakhsi.
Hadith 5: No one can deny the blessed understanding of Hadrat Ibn Abbas radi’Allahu anh through the blessed du’a of our Prophet ﷺ:
اللهم فقهه في الدين وعلِّمه التأويل(مسند أحمد٢٣٩٦)
“Oh Allah give him the understanding of deen and the understanding of explanation [of Qur’an].”[7]Despite that, Hadrat Ibn Abbas radi’Allahu anh had a great positive assumption of Hadrat Ali radi’Allahu anh regarding which Ibn Hajar writes:
روي ابن سعد بإسناد صحيح عن ابن عباس قال إذا حدثنا ثقة عن علي لم نتجاوزها (فتح الباري صفحه ٦٠ جلد ٧) “Ibn Sa’d narrates with a strong chain of narrations from Ibn Abbas radi’Allahu anh saying ‘when a strong source narrates to us from Hazrat Ali radi’Allahu anh we do not exceed it.’”[8]Hadith 6: That once a woman came to the Prophet ﷺ and asked regarding something. The Prophet ﷺ told her to come at another time (Prophet ﷺ was ill at that time). The woman asked what if I come at a later time and do not find you (i.e you have passed away). The Prophet ﷺ answered:
فأتي أبا بكر
(بخاري ٣٦٥٩) “Then approach Abu Bakr” [9]
Along with proving the khilaafah of Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh through this hadith, taqleed shakhsi (following an individual) has also been proven, because the woman had come to ask a question to which the reply was “if I am not there approach Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh”. If taqleed shakhsi (following an individual) was shirk, then the Prophet ﷺ would have said “ask whoever you want”. Why would Hazrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh specifically be mentioned? From this we realise that it not a sin. Hadith 7: When Hadrat Umar radi’Allahu anh was wounded and signs were showing that he wasn’t going to recover from his injuries, he was asked regarding the khilaafah upon which he said:
إن أستخلف فإن أبا بكر قد استخلف وإن لم أستخلف فإن رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم لم يستخلف(بخاري ٦٧٩٢/مسلم ١٨٢٣) “If I specifically choose someone, then verily Hadrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh specifically chose someone. And if I don’t, then the Prophet ﷺ did not specifically choose anyone.”[10]Meaning I have two options in front of me. The Prophet’s ﷺ, and Hadrat Abu Bakr’s radi’Allahu anh. The Prophet ﷺ is authority anyway, but choosing Hadrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh was merely on positive assumption. And by Hadrat Umar radi’Allahu anh doing this has not degraded the status of Prophethood in anyway whatsoever, this was an optional act to which there were two options, one the Prophet's ﷺ and the other Hadrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh. Both ways were correct. Imam Nawawi writes:
فإن تركه فقد اقتدي لرسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم و إلا فقد اقتدي بأبي بكر
(نووي شرح مسلم صفحه ١٢٠ جلد٢) “If he left it then he has followed the Prophet ﷺ, if not (i.e. specifically chosen) then he has verily followed Abu Bakr”[11]Hadith 8: Abdullah ibn Zubair radi’Allahu anh was asked regarding the inheritance of the grandfather. So he mentioned the opinion of Hadrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh and then mentioned the virtue of Hadrat Abu Bakr radi’Allahu anh; that the Prophet ﷺ said ‘If I was to have a friend, I would have made Abu Bakr my friend.’ And then the Prophet ﷺ said:
ولكن خلة الإسلام أفضل (بخاري ٤٦٧) “But the friendship of Islam is the best.” [12]
[1] Ibn Majah [#42] [2] Muslim [#1853] [3] Muslim [#1852] [4] Mustadrak al-Hakim [#5394]. Ibn Umm Abd is Abdullah ibn Masood radi’Allahu anh [5] Bukhari [#3736] [6] Bukhari [#6734] [7] Musnad Ahmad [#2396] [8] Musnad Ahmad [#2396] [9] Bukhari [#3659] [10] Bukhari [#6792] and Muslim [#1723]
[11] Sharh Sahih Muslim [2/120] [12] Bukhari [#467]
|
|
|
Post by IbnNurAlShanti on Jan 28, 2016 3:15:33 GMT
The Beneficial Message in Affirmation of Taqleed By Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar (rahimahullah) Translated by Maulana Mohsaib Mohammad
The following are a few chapters from an ongoing abridgement and translation of the late Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar's (rahimahullah) famous work in defence of taqleed. Duas are requested from all for Allah to grant the translator the tawfeeq to complete this noble task.
IntroductionNo Muslim denies that the purpose of the deen is to obey Allah, so much so that the Prophet ﷺ, through his sayings and actions etc. has given a physical form and explained the orders of Allah by telling us what is halal and haram. We only have to follow Allah and the Prophet and whosoever believes that anyone other than Allah’s orders and the Prophet are to be followed; is without doubt out of the fold of Islam. In the Qur’an and ahadith we will come across some issues which every layman may understand without it being intricate, ambiguous or contradictory. On the other hand there may be issues that are intricate, ambiguous or contradictory. Needless to say, deriving rules from the Qur’an and ahadith can be difficult. One solution is that we use our own understanding and insight in to such issues in order to make our judgments, or another solution may be that instead of making independent rulings ourselves, we look into what the predecessors ruled concerning these issues. If we consider with fairness, from the two opinions, the option of using our own understanding; we find that it is fraught with difficulties. The second option, of relying on scholars, is much more cautious and safer. This is not because it seems like a humble approach but merely because it is an undeniable reality that we have very little resemblance with the scholars of the first Muslim era. We fall short of their knowledge, understanding, intelligence, memory, morals and piety. In addition, the scholars of the first era were close to the environment and time when the Qur’an was revealed, which allowed understanding the Qur’an and Sunnah in its entirety. We on the contrary, are so distant from the time when the Qur’an was revealed. After considering all of these points, if we do not rely upon our own understanding but instead follow the opinion of a scholar of the past in such matters that are ambiguous, intricate or contradictory, then it will be said that we are following or making taqleed of that scholar. Taqleed of an Imam or a Mujtahid is only valid in areas where understanding a rule of the Qur’an or Sunnah is difficult. Whether it be because of an additional meaning being from the text or there is some intricacies in the text or even if there seems to be an apparent contradiction in the text. An absolute and conclusive text where there exists no ambiguity or apparent contradiction in the text of the Qur’an or Sunnah, there is no taqleed of any Imam or Mujtahid.
So following an Imam or Mujtahid does not entail believing the Mujtahid to be an independent source of law (shariah), who has to be followed in totality. Rather, the idea is that the Qur’an and Sunnah is being followed, however, a particular Imam’s understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah is being followed. The Mujtahid or Imam is regarded as a commentator of the law and his interpretation is held as authoritative. This is why taqleed is not an issue in those rules, which are conclusive, since what is intended by Allah and his Prophet ﷺ is achieved without taqleed. The imam whose opinion is followed is regarded as an interpreter and not a law maker.
What is taqleed?The word taqleed is derived from the Arabic word qiladah. This linguistically has two meanings.One meaning is in regards to humans i.e. necklace, collar. And the other is in regards to animals i.e. rope/string. But the meaning we take is in regards to humans. This is supported by the hadith of Hadrat Aisha radi’Allahu anha when she borrowed a necklace from Hadrat Asma radi’Allahu anha: عن عائشة أنها استعارت من أسماء قلادة فهلكت فأرسل رسول الله ناسا من أصحابه في طلبها فأدركتهم الصلوٰة (بخاري ٣٣٦ و مسلم ٣٦٧) “A’isha narrates that she borrowed a necklace from Asma’, and she lost it. The Prophet sent some people to look for it, and the time for prayer came...”[1]The applied meaning of taqleed is:
التقليد إتباع الإنسان غيره فيما يقول أو يفعل معتقدا للحقيقة من غير نظر إلي الدليل كأن هذا المتبع جعل قول الغير أو فعله قلادة في عنقه من غير مطالبة دليل (كشاف اصطلاحات الفنون صفحه ١١٧٨ طبع كلكة)“Taqleed is a human following someone else in what he says or does, believing it to be the truth, without looking at the evidence. It is as if the follower has made the saying or action of someone a necklace around his neck without asking for evidence.”[2]التقليد اتباع الغيرعلي ظن أنه محق بلا نظر في الدليل(حسامي شرح نامي صفحه ١٩٠) “Taqleed is to follow someone without looking at the evidence, believing him to be correct and truthful.”[3]
That was a brief introduction to taqleed and the concept of taqleed. Moving on to the evidences for taqleed from Qur’an and ahadith, starting with the Qur’an: Allah says: يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ أَطِيعُواْ ٱللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ ٱلرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي ٱلۡأَمۡرِ مِنكُمۡۖ فَإِن تَنَٰزَعۡتُمۡ فِي شَيۡءٖ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ وَٱلرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمۡ تُؤۡمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلۡيَوۡمِ ٱلۡأٓخِرِۚ ذَٰلِكَ خَيۡرٞ وَأَحۡسَنُ تَأۡوِيلًا
( النساء آية ٥٩)
“Oh you who believe! Obey Allah and obey his messenger and those in authority among you.” [4]
In this verse we have been ordered to do 3 things: 1. Obey Allah 2. Obey the Prophet ﷺ 3. Obey those in authority No one has an issue or dispute in obeying the first two, but regarding the third there are few things to consider:
1. A Muslim has to obey another Muslim who has authority 2. You should only obey him when his orders are to abide by Allah and the Prophet ﷺ as clearly mentioned by Prophet ﷺ:
فإذا أمركم بمعصية فلا سمع ولا طاعة (بخاري ٢٩٥٥)“When you are ordered with [to commit] a sin, then do not listen and do not obey”[5]
3. When the person in authority is obeying Allah and the Prophet ﷺ, it is not only permissible to follow him, but the order of Allah orders us to follow him. The Prophet ﷺ said:
من أطاع أميري فقد أطاعني ومن عصا أميري فقد عصاني(بخاري ٢٩٥٧)
“The one who obeys the leader has obeyed me and the one who disobeys the leader has disobeyed me.”[6] These are conditions laid down for following a person in authority, but the question remains, who is a person of authority? Two commentaries are given: 1. Scholars/Ulama
2. Army generals/Leaders
Our claim for "the people in authority" being scholars and fuqaha is proven: 1. Hadrat Jabir ibn Abdullah radi’Allahu anh says:
قال أولِي الفقه والخير
(مستدرك الحاكم ٤٢٢)
“He said [regarding the ayah] "the people in authority" are the people of fiqh (scholars) and goodness.”[7]Allamah Dhahabi and Imam Hakim (rahimahumallah) have both said that the chain of narration for this is authentic.
2. Hadrat Abdullah ibn Abbas radi'Allahu anh (regarding whom the Prophet ﷺ made a special du’a saying “give him the understanding of the Qur'an”) mentioned:
That "the people of authority" are the people of fiqh (scholars) and people of deen (those people who call towards good and refrain from evil) and he carries on to say that Allah has made it necessary to follow them.[8]Scholars mention regarding the commentary/tafseer of a sahabi (as mentioned above) saying:
تفسير الصحابي مسند، تفسير الصحابي حجة، تفسير الصحابي مرفوع(مستدرك ۱۹۸۸/ تدريب الراوي صفحه ٦٥ طبع مصر)"The commentary of a sahabi is musnad (i.e. saying of the Prophet), the commentary of a sahabi is solid evidence, the commentary of a sahabi is marfoo' (chain which leads up to the Prophet).”[9]
So when Hadrat Jabir and Hadrat Ibn Abbas radi’Allahu anhuma have commentated on "the people of authority" to be people of fiqh (scholars). According to the rule mentioned regarding a sahabi’s commentary, we will have to accept that the commentary was directly heard from the Prophet ﷺ himself.
Imam Abu Bakr Jassas writes:
أُختلف في تأْويل أولي الأمر، فروى عن جابر بن عبدالله و ابن عباس رواية والحسن و عطاء و مجاهد أنهم أولوالفقه والعلم و عن ابن عباس رواية و أبي هريرة أنهم أمراء السرايا- و يجوز أن يكونوا جميعا مرادين بالآية لأن الإسميتناولهم جميعا لأن الأمراء يلُوْن أمر تدبير الجيوش والسرايا و قتال العدوِّ والعلماءُ يلون حفظ الشريعة و ما يجوز و مما لايجوز(أحكام القراٰن صفحه ٢٦٤ جلد٢)
“There have been differences in the commentary on "the people of authority". Hadrat Jabir ibn Abdullah and Hadrat Abdullah ibn Abbas radi’Allahu anhuma, Hasan Basri, Ataa, and Mujaahid radi’Allahu anhum have mentioned that "the people of authority" is mentioned for the people of fiqh and knowledge (scholars). And it is mentioned by Hadrat Ibn Abbas and Hadrat Abu Hurairah radiallahu anhuma that "the people of authority" is mentioned for army leaders. And it is permissible that both interpretations are taken in this verse, because "the people of authority" includes both of them, because army leaders are busy organizing the army and battling against the enemy and the scholars are busy protecting the shariah and those things that are permissible and not permissible."[10]
And he also mentions in another place:
قال الحسن وقتادة وابن أبي ليليٰ (هم أهل العلم والفقه) وقال السدي (الأمراء والولاة)- قال أبوبكر: يجوز أن يريدبه الفريقين من أهل الفقه والولاة لوقوع الإسم عليهم جميعا(أحكام القراٰن صفحه ٢٦٩ جلد٢)
“Hadrat Hasan, Qatadah and Ibn Abi Laylah radiallahu anhum mention that "the people of authority" are the people of knowledge and fiqh. Hadrat Suddi radiallahu anh mentions that "the people of authority" are the leaders. Imam Abu Bakr says that people of fiqh and leaders (both groups) are taken because these two are included in the word.”[11]So from the quotations mentioned we realize that there is absolutely no problem in taking any of the two meanings mentioned. Allamah Alusi (rahimahullah) writes:
وقيل المراد بهم أمراءالسراياو روي ذلك عن أبي هريرة وميمون بن مهران إلي قوله وقيل المراد بهم أهل العلم وروي ذلك غير واحد عن ابن عباس وجابربن عبدالله ومجاهد والحسن وعطاء وجماعة واستدل عليه أبو العالية بقوله تعاليٰ وَلو ردُّوه إلى الرسول وإلي أولي الأمر منهم لعلمه الذين يستنبطونه منهم فإن العلماء هم المستنبطون المستخرجون للأحكام وحمله كثير وليس ببعيد غلي ما يعم الجميع لتناول الإسم لهم لأن للأمراء تدبيرالجيش والقتال وللعلماء حفظ الشريعة ومايجوز وما لا يجوز
(روح المعاني صفحه ٦٤ جلد ٣-٤) “And it has been mentioned that army leaders is what is meant by "the people of authority" and this has been mentioned by Hadrat Abu Hurairah radi’Allahu anh and Hadrat Maymoon Ibn Mihraan radi’Allahu anh and it is also mentioned by many others that the people of knowledge (scholars) are meant by it (i.e. people of authority). This has been mentioned by a few sahabah such as Ibn Abbas, Jabir ibn Abdullah radi’Allahu anhum and also mentioned by Mujahid, Hasan and Ataa (may Allah be pleased with them). Abul A'liyah radi’Allahu anh has derived this from the Qur’anic ayah:
"Had they referred it to the messenger and to those having authority among them, the truth of the matter would have come to the knowledge of those who are able to investigate"[12]
"Because the scholars are those who investigate and derive rulings. And a lot have kept it open (to both meanings) and this is not far off either because "the people of authority" includes both because the army leaders organize the army and tactics and the scholars protect the shariah and what is permissible and what is not."[13] The second ayah: وَإِذَا جَآءَهُمۡ أَمۡرٞ مِّنَ ٱلۡأَمۡنِ أَوِ ٱلۡخَوۡفِ أَذَاعُواْ بِهِۦۖ وَلَوۡ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى ٱلرَّسُولِ وَإِلَىٰٓ أُوْلِي ٱلۡأَمۡرِ مِنۡهُمۡ لَعَلِمَهُ ٱلَّذِينَ يَسۡتَنۢبِطُونَهُۥ مِنۡهُمۡۗ وَلَوۡلَا فَضۡلُ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيۡكُمۡ وَرَحۡمَتُهُۥ لَٱتَّبَعۡتُمُ ٱلشَّيۡطَٰنَ إِلَّا قَلِيلٗ (النساء آية ٨٣)
“And when news concerning peace or fear comes to them, they go about spreading it. Had they referred it to the Messenger and those having authority among them, the truth of the matter would have come to the knowledge of those who are able to investigate.”[14]
In this verse it is clearly telling people that not everything is understood very easily, that is why when they hear news of peace or fear they should inform the Prophet ﷺ and the people of authority and whatever they find to be correct, tell the people, then they should act upon it. We realise the following things from the verse: 1. Even though the verse is concerning peace and fear, the main reason behind this is because proclaiming peace and fear can at times confuse a layman, which is why, in important issues every person should not rely on his own intellect, but instead he should refer to someone more intelligent and aware of the situation. Similarly every ruling of deen, every person will not understand so we should resort to the people more aware of it. 2. The people of authority have been mentioned as those people who have the ability of investigating. This is so that they can evaluate the non-Qur’anic (ghair mansoos) rulings and compare them with Qur’anic rulings, to reach a conclusion. And this is the job of only the Fuqaha and Mujtahidin. Abu Bakr Jassas mentions: فقد حوت هذه الأٰية معاني: منها أن في أحكام الحوادث ما ليس بمنصوص عليه بل مدلول عليه ومنها أن علي العلماء إستنباطه والتوصل إلي معرفته بردِّهِ إلي نظائه من المنصوص ومنها أن العاميَّ عليه تقليد العلماء في أحكام الحوادث(أحكام القراٰن صفحه ٢٧٠ جلد٢) “Without doubt this verse has various meanings and commentaries. Firstly, there are masaail (issues) that have not explicitly been proven textually. Secondly, it is necessary upon the scholars to derive/extrapolate it and find a way to recognise it by referring to similar sacred texts. Thirdly, that it is necessary upon the layman to follow the scholars in the new rulings.[15]
But what we have to remember here is that investigation isn’t everyone’s cup of tea and there are conditions for such people. So whoever is not able to investigate, and cannot find the answer through Qur’an, Sunnah and Ijma’, should refer back to a mujtahid and follow what he says. The conditions for a mujtahid in brief are: أن يحوي علم الكتاب بمعانيه وعلم السنة بطرقها ومتونها ووجوه معانيها وأن يعرف وجوه القياس
(كنز الوصول إلي معرفة الأصول صفحه ٢٧٨ طبع مصر) “That he encompasses the knowledge of the Qur’an along with its meaning and knowledge of ahadith with its chain of narrations and the text itself with its reasoning and should know the ways of qiyas (analogical reasoning).”[16]
These are the conditions laid down in brief for a Mujtahid. The layman who hasn’t read and mastered the tafsir and ahadith, has neither mastered the Arabic language and has not even the slightest idea of the science of usul al-fiqh but rather has read only summaries and English translations of books; how can he possibly claim to be a mujtahid and how can he be worthy of such a high status? If the sayings of “the people of authority” were not evidence, especially at the time of the Prophets, then why would the Qur’an order us to refer to them?
And if to accept the opinion of anyone or saying with the Prophet ﷺ being present was shirk fi al-risalah (attributing partners to the message), then why would the Qur’an give permission for such shirk? We seek refuge in Allah from this.
And if the sayings of “the people of authority” are not shirk fi al-risaalah then why are the rulings of the four great imams shirk?
In this verse even though some people have taken “the people of authority” to be army leaders etc, the majority of the mufasireen (exegetes) have said that they are the people of understanding. Allamah Alusi writes: وهم كبار الصحابة البصراء في الأمور هو الذي ذهب إليه الحسن و قتادة و خلق كثير(روح المعاني صفحه ٩١ جلد ٣-٤)
“And they are the senior sahabah who had in-depth understanding of situations."[17]
The reason for mentioning sahabah is because they were present at the time of the Prophet ﷺ, otherwise it refers to all the people of understanding. In simple terms, it wasn’t shirk to refer back to the people of understanding and investigation at the time of the Prophet ﷺ, otherwise it would have meant that the Qur’an also orders us to do shirk and of course this is incorrect, we seek refuge in Allah from such thoughts. But what it really means is under the guidelines set by the Prophet ﷺ to abide by the rulings of “the people of authority” in reality is following and obeying the Prophet ﷺ.
The hadith of Bukhari mentions: من أطاع أميري فقد أطاعني ومن عصا أميري فقد عصاني(بخاري ٢٩٥٧)
“The one who obeys the leader has obeyed me and the one who disobeys the leader has disobeyed me.” [18]
Third ayah: وَٱتَّبِعۡ سَبِيلَ مَنۡ أَنَابَ
(لُقۡمَانَ ١٥) “And follow the way of the one who has turned (himself) towards me.” [19]
Allah is ordering a believer, that if your parents force you or order you to do shirk do not obey them in that. But do help them in their worldly affairs, and then the verse above was mentioned. So it is obvious what this verse is telling us, that whoever turns to Allah it is not only permissible to obey him, but at times necessary because the word ittabi’ is an order which indicative of a necessary act. Allamah Alusi wrote:
واتبع سبيل من أناب إلي بالتوحيد والإخلاص بالطاعة و حاصله اتبع سبيل المخلصين(روح المعاني صفحه ٨٦ جلد١١-١٢) “Those people who follow the ways of oneness and sincerity with obedience. So follow the ways of the sincere ones.”[20]
We ask the opposition that weren’t the four great imams steadfast on oneness, the Sunnah and sincere? And didn’t they carry out the orders of Allah and the Prophet ﷺ with sincerity? If the answer is no, then it is their responsibility to prove it. Those people who claim that in the presence of the Prophet ﷺ we cannot obey anyone else, claim this falsely because as mentioned before, obeying the amir (leader) is in actual fact obeying our Prophet ﷺ.
It is as if it has merged together and the obedience of our Prophet ﷺ has been merged with the obedience of Allah.
We have to remember however that the Imams are not perfect and can make mistakes. And if there are any rulings that clearly go against the Qur’an or hadith, then we should abide by what the Qur’an and ahadith mention.
Fourth ayah:
Whilst refuting the belief of the mushrikeen that Prophets cannot be human Allah says:
وَمَآ أَرۡسَلۡنَا مِن قَبۡلِكَ إِلَّا رِجَالٗا نُّوحِيٓ إِلَيۡهِمۡۖ فَسَۡٔلُوٓاْ أَهۡلَ ٱلذِّكۡرِ إِن كُنتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلمون(النَّحۡلِ آية ٤٣)
“We did not send (messengers) before you other than men whom we inspired with revelation. So ask the people of remembrance (of the scriptures), if you do not know.”[21] We find from this verse, that for unknowledgeable people to ask someone more knowledgeable, if not wajib (necessary), then at the very least it is mustahab (recommended). If he is alive then he can be asked directly and if he has passed away then we can refer to his books. Allamah Alusi wrote:
أن من الناس من جوّز التقليد للمجتهد لهذه الأٰية فقال لما لم يكن أحد المجتهدين عالما وجب عليه الرجوع إلي المجتهد العالم لقوله تعاليٰ فاسئلواالأٰية فإن لم يجب فلا أقل من الجواز
(روح المعاني صفحه ٣٨٧ جلد ٧) “Without doubt some people have proven taqleed to be permissible from this verse. The reason is if any of the mujtahideen were unaware, then it is necessary for him to refer to a mujtahid who is aware because of the verse فَاسْئَلُوْا and if it is not wajib, then it is permissible at the very least least.“[22]
Scholars such as Imam Bukhari, Hafiz Ibn Hajar, Imam Muslim, Allamah Dhahabi are not present with us today, so we are unable to ask them regarding ahadith. However their books are available to which we can refer to and feel content. In the same way the four great Imams, even though they are not here present with us, their books written by their students are present with us.
If we can ask Imam Bukhari regarding ahadith, then why can’t we ask from the likes of Imam Abu Hanifah? If the first isn’t shirk they why is the second? And if the second is shirk then why the first isn’t?
So basically if to ask a knowledgeable scholar a question and following his answer and relying upon it was not permissible, then why does Allah order us to ask them? And also why would the Prophet ﷺ mention the hadith:
إنما شفاء العي السؤال “Indeed the cure for ignorance is questioning”[23]
In a narration in which a sahabi mentioned: فسألت أهل العلم فأخبروني“I asked the knowledgeable one, so he informed me.”[24]
According to the context of this hadith, even though at this time the decision that was given to the companion was incorrect, and was refuted by the Prophet ﷺ, he did not refute the fact that why the sahabi had asked a knowledgeable person. If it was incorrect it would have been refuted by the Prophet ﷺ. Even though this verse was revealed regarding the Jewish scholars, there is a consensus (ijma’) of the ulama and they all unanimously agree that the Qur’an will not be confined to the reason it was revealed.
[1] Bukhari [#336] Muslim [#367] [2] Kashaf Istilahat al-Funun, pg. 1178 [3] Hussami Sharh Nami, pg. 190 [4] Surah al-Nisa [4/59] [5] Bukhari [#2955] [6] Bukhari [#2957] [7] Mustadrak al-Hakim [#422] [8] Tafsir al-Tabari [5/88] and al-Itqan #80 [9] Mustadrak al-Hakim [#1988] and Tadrib al-Rawi, pg. 65 [10] Ahkam al’Qur’an [2/264] [11] Ahkam al-Qur’an [2/269] [12] Al-Nisa’ [4/83] [13] Ruh al-Ma’ani [3-4/64] [14] Al-Nisa’ [4/83] [15] Ahkam al-Qur’an [2/270] [16] Kanz al-Usul I’la Ma’arifat al-Usul, pg. 278 [17] Ruh al-Ma’ani [3-4/91] [18] Bukhari [2954] [19] Luqman [31/15] [20] Ruh al-Ma’ani [11-12/86] [21] Al-Nahl [16/43] [22] Ruh al-Ma’ani [7/387] [23] Abu Dawud [#336], Ibn Majah [#93], Mustadrak al-Hakim [630] and Musnad Ahmad [#3057] [24] Bukhari [#2724] and Muslim [#1697]
|
|