Sayyid Abul A'la Maududi

[Azimush Shan]

Assalamu alaikum

I would like to know what everyone thinks of him because alot of people say bad things like the Salafis at Spubs.

[Azimush Shan]

I ask because I was thinking of getting some books by him

[suhail]

He has his good and his mistakes as any other person have. He was more a person like Sayeed Qutb (rah) with leaning towards Ikhwan. I am not very familiar with his writing but i do know that some of it is very contreversial.

If i remember he has denied the concept of mahdi (I may be wrong) and his book about Khilafah was not well received. So please check with some knowledgable folks before you read something about your deen from his books.

He sure has done a lot for the muslims and people respect him for that.

JK
Suhail

[Suhaib Jobst]

I have Towards Understanding Islam and several of his small booklets on the Islamic political and economic structure. I know what the neo-'Salafis' claim about him, but I have yet to find such a heretical statement which truly comes from his books. Either they are lying upon him (would this be anything new?) or the statement is from an obscure book which did not accurately reflect his opinion. Wa Allahu A'lam.

[Tawheedist]

Tell them to bring their proof if they are truthful!

[suhail]

The book that he has is called "khilfahat aur mulkiyat" something like that in urdu and is quite a famous book. Sorry Suhaib it is not a obscure book but a famous book. I have not read the book totally but he was criticized by the scholars a lot for that book. I am not sure what was the reason. I have just read one paragraph.

Secondly the accusation that he denied the concept of mahdi i am not sure of as i told you in my post.

JK
SUHAIL

[Suhaib Jobst]

The book that he has is called "khilfahat aur mulkiyat" something like that in urdu and is quite a famous book. Sorry Suhaib it is not a obscure book but a famous book. I have not read the book totally but he was criticized by the scholars a lot for that book. I am not sure what was the reason. I have just read one paragraph.

Perhaps there is some validity to this. I just have some skeptism when it comes to followers of Madkhali, as many of their slanders against Sayyid Qutb Shaheed (rahimahullah) were exposed. When I first read some of the accusations made against him, I went back to Milestones and found that he had written something entirely opposite!

These brothers seem to have some agenda against Muslim activists who challenge the corrupted institutions of their day. As I mentioned, I have six books by Sayyid Mawdudi (rahimahullah) - Towards Understanding Islam, Political Theory of Islam, Process of Islamic Revolution, The Sick Nations of the Modern Age, Islam Today, and The Economic Problem of Man and its Solution - where I have yet to find anything objectionable.

He was known as an activist focused on the ideological struggle between Islam and other ideologies which were then making inroads into Islamic societies, so I am not dismissing the possibility he was excellent in dealing with these socio-economic and political challenges, but less qualified to make judgement on 'Aqeeda. Wa Allahu A'lam.

[suhail]

I agree with you brother Suhaib. He has good works that he has written and was one of the famous personality of his time with Allama Iqbal. I think that scholars criticized that book because he passed some comments on the sahaba which were deemed as derogatory. Also him tafsir "Tafhimul Quran" was criticized because how he talked about the Prophets of Allah. He was criticized by the scholars of deoband a lot if i remember correctly.

I am not sure how much it is right or wrong because i dont want to be hold accountable for something which is not there. As i said the books name is Khilafat aur Mulkiyat in urdu and his tafsir.

May Allah forgive his mistakes and give him jannah. Ameen.

JK
Suhail

[ahaneefah]

Assalamu Alakum.

I have been reading his books for the last 10 years yet I still cannot find those accusations in his tafseer which is translated in english and other books.

Most of them are lies but yes he has made mistakes like everyone else.

We as Allah for forgiveness.

ahaneefah

[Suhaib Jobst]

The Deviations of Abul-A'la Mawdudi

In the course of new research, I now retract my claim that the books of Abul-A'la Mawdudi did not contain any serious errors. I have since come across a few very serious statements, which raised my eyebrows and simply could not be disregarded.

Questioned the 'Isma of the Prophets

Mawdudi denied the 'Isma of the Prophets, or their immunity to sin. So he went against our Belief about the Prophets when he uttered the statement: "But sometimes [Allah] lifts His protection so that they will commit some blunders, and Allah by this means to show people that they are human beings and not deities." (Mawdudi, Tafhimat, 3rd edition, vol. 2, p. 57)

Denied the Advent of Dajjal!

"Everything that was narrated in the [mutawatir] hadiths of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in connection with the Anti-Christ - all of it - was mere opinion and conjecture on his part (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and he was undecided concerning it. One time he thought he would come out from Khurasan, another time from Asbahan, another time from between Sham and Iraq, and yet another time he though that the Anti-Christ was Ibn al-Sayyad in Madina. And one time he said something which was narrated from him by that Palestinian Christian Monk, Tamim al-Dari." (Mawdudi, Rasa'il Masa'il, p. 55)

"The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) thought that the Dajjal would come out in his time or very near it and yet 1350 long years have passed and the Dajjal did not come out. So it is established that what he (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) believed was untrue." (ibid., p. 57)

Astaghfirullah! This is a calamity against the Deen, as it questions our Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam)! Mawdudi apparently claimed that he possessed Ilm al-Ghaib (knowledge of the unseen), even when it was not granted to the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) except as much as willed by Allah (Azza wa-Jall). Yet again expressing rafidi tendencies, Mawdudi also reviled Tamim ad-Dari (radiallahu anhu), a noble Sahabi who had already accepted Islam when he narrated this story.

Reviled Uthman (radiallahu anhu)!

I have discovered that he indeed spoke ill of Khalifa Uthman ibn Affan (radiallahu anhu), wa na'udubillah:
"One of the two reasons why the institution of caliphate weakened was because Hadrat Uthman did not have as much quality of a leader as his predecessors had had." (Mawdudi, Revivalist Movement in Islam, Kuala Lumpur: 1999, p. 23)

This was not the end of his rafidi-influenced tirade. With no scholar having preceded him in the matter, Mawdudi made generalized takfir against Banu Umayya: "Atheism grabbed power and authority in the name of caliphate." (ibid., pp. 17-20)

Indeed, every khalifa following Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz (rahimahullah) was not safe from his criticism: "After the death of Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz, the reins of government passed into the hands of Ignorance permanently, and the political authority was at last transferred to the Turkish Kings through the Umayyad and the Abbasids." (ibid., p. 39)

Misunderstood Khilafa

This should come as no surprise when we consider his definition of Khilafa, which opposed the entire body of Islamic scholarship. This is because he claimed khilafa had no political connotations but rather was a "personal" matter: "According to Islam, governments in this world are actually representatives (khulafa') of the Creator of the universe, and this responsibility is not entrusted to any individual or family or a particular class or group of people but to the entire Muslim nation." (Mawdudi, Human Rights in Islam).

In reality, there is absolutely no connection between the ayat (2:30) and Khilafa as a political system. We consult one of the most renown mufassireen, Ibn Jarir At-Tabari (rahimahullah): "The meaning of Khalifa which Allah (Subhanahu wa-Ta'ala) has mentioned is only the succession of one generation after another and the word Khalifa is used here in the same way in which one would say: such-and-such person has succeeded so-and-so." (Tafsir At-Tabari)

The 'State' is the Basis of the Deen?

"The purpose of Religion is something near what is called today 'State'." (Mawdudi, Siyasa Kashmakash, vol. 3, p. 93)

So he replaces Tawhid with political concerns. Rather, the basis of Islam is to worship the One God, Allah (Azza wa-Jall), submitting to His Unity and not associating any partners with Him in worship. Needless to say, there is also no Islamic evidence for the concept known as "state", a creation of the capitalist kufr order.

Compared Imam Mahdi to Revolutionaries!

Mawdudi continued to exhibit some rafidi-influenced views, when he compared Imam Mahdi (alaihi sallam) to "any other revolutionary leader." This is what led him to support the revolution of Khomeini (may Allah give him what he deserves), who claimed that he was the "representative" of Mahdi on earth.

Uttering words that had absolutely no basis in Islam, rather which contradicted the authentic ahadith of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), Mawdudi wrote: "Neither do I expect that he will proclaim himself to be the Mehdi. Most probably he will not be aware of his being the promised Mehdi. People, however, will recognize him after his death from his works." (Revivalist Movement in Islam, pp. 114-115)

Supported the Rafidi Revolution of Iran

"Allama Khomeini had a very old and close relationship with Abba Jaan (father). Ayatollah Khomeini translated his books in Farsi and included it as a subject in Qum. Allama Khomeini met my father in 1963 during Hajj and my father's wish was to create a revolution in Pakistan similar to Iran. He was concerned about the success of the Iranian revolution till his last breath." (Ahmad Farouk Mawdudi, Roz Naame, Lahore, 29 September 1979)

Dualism

The Islamic political activists have expended great efforts in implementing Shari'a and restoring the Dar al-Islam. However, one fundamental error many made was to frame their struggle as one between Islam and jahiliyyah. One of these who did so was Mawdudi, who promoted the dualistic notion that there was a "long and bitter struggle between right and wrong, truth and falsehood." (Mawdudi, The Meaning of the Qur'an, Lahore: 1967, Vol. 1, p. 35)

On the surface this statement would appear correct. But there is a subtle, yet dangerous, error: We do not believe there is any other power except Allah (Subhanahu wa-Ta'ala). Shaitan was only given the ability to divert people from the Straight Path, with the permission of Allah (Azza wa-Jall); he has no independent power on his own (Qur'an, 16:98-100).

Similarly, falsehood cannot stand against Truth for the fact that it vanishes (Qur'an, 17:81). All things come with the command of Allah, both the good and the bad (Qur'an, 4:78). To ascribe power to any other than Allah (Azza wa-Jall), violates the core essence of our Deen.

No Compulsion in Deen

Mawdudi was also one of the modern commentators who make justification for acceptance of other religions, using the fact that Jihad does not mean forcing others to embrace Islam. This occurred in his explanation of Surah Al-Baqarah 2, verse 255, an ayat which was abrogated:

"'La ikraha fid-Deen' is abrogated by the ayat of fighting. This is the position of Ibn Zayd [Al-Qayrawani]. The second position is that it is particular to the People of the Book who are excerpted when they pay Jizya. According to this it applies to every category from whom Jizya is accepted." (Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-'Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur'an).

Abrogation (naksh) is a part of our Deen, as Allah (Subhanahu wa-Ta'ala) says (see Qur'an, 2:105). On the other hand, Mawdudi was one who denied the abrogation: "It is therefore, wrong to say that the law about making a will [Qur'an 2:179-182] has been abrogated" (The Meaning of the Qur'an, Vol. 1, p. 136), and promoted some strange theory about degrees in imposition of obligatory duties. (ibid., pp. 136-137)

Conclusion

So while I believe Mawdudi (rahimahullah) uttered many calamities and employed faulty arguments due to the influence of the modernist reformers (like Abduh and Rida), I will continue to recognize the good he did in refuting arguments of other ideologies (capitalism, socialism, hinduism, ahmadiyya) and his efforts to implement Shari'a. Nonetheless, his errors are such that he was a calamity upon the Muslims. Wa Allahu A'lam.

Suhaib Jobst
18 Rabee al-Awwal 1429H / 26 March 2008

[abu hafs]

Bro, Is this your own research or a cut and paste from some article ?

[Suhaib Jobst]

Bro, Is this your own research or a cut and paste from some article ?

My own, drawn from several articles which documented his statements. I do not cut and paste, without including the author's name or linking to the URL. Otherwise, my posts represent my own sentiments, may Allah (Subhanahu wa-Ta'ala) make them conform to the Truth. Ameen.

[iloveislam]

I have come across claims that Maulana Maududi created the group called "Jamaat-e-Islami" or JI for short.

How true is this? and what is the position of Mainstream Islam against Jamaat-e-Islami?

[AbiSalahuddin]

Seems like brother Suhaib Jobst is 'tripping' once again. May Allah guide these people.

[Brother_Mujahid]

Mawlana Mawdudi was a political thinker, but not a religious scholar. As such his works, as noted by brother Suhaib Jobst, do contain many serious errors. The problem that many of these political Islamic movements of the post-Uthmani Khilafah era (Jama'at-e-Islami, Hizb at-Tahrir, Muslim Brotherhood) had was that they were infected with modernism (via al-Afghani and 'Abduh). Their aims were noble, but their knowledge incomplete or tainted.

[Suhaib Jobst]

As Salaam Alaykum,

I have come across claims that Maulana Maududi created the group called "Jamaat-e-Islami" or JI for short.

Indeed, he founded Jamaat-e-Islami as an Indo-Pakistani version of the Arab Ikhwan al-Muslimin. The objectives were largely the same, albeit with minor differences to reflect the unique condition of the Subcontinent Muslims. Like the Ikhwan, the problem rested in the reformist ideology which infected them and marred their otherwise good intentions.

The problem that many of these political Islamic movements of the post-Uthmani Khilafah era (Jama'at-e-Islami, Hizb at-Tahrir, Muslim Brotherhood) had was that they were infected with modernism (via al-Afghani and 'Abduh). Their aims were noble, but their knowledge incomplete or tainted.

Jazakallah khair. They operated at the premise of restoring the lost condition of the Muslims and freeing them from the yoke of the colonialist powers. However, the means which these groups took towards that end reveal their infection with the bitter fruits harvested by 'Abduh and Rida. This ideology remains a clear obstacle which prevents them from realizing their objectives, partly due to its "Islamization" of kufr institutions which are contrary to Islam (i.e., Parliament, Constitution, Banking, etc.).

Eid Mubarak.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

[Brother_Mujahid]

As Salaam Alaykum,

This ideology remains a clear obstacle which prevents them from realizing their objectives, partly due to its "Islamization" of kufr institutions which are contrary to Islam (i.e., Parliament, Constitution, Banking, etc.).

wa 'alaykum as-Salam,

You actually reminded me of all the khutbahs I heard given by modernist Ikhwanis about how Muslims devised the first constitution and other such malarkey. Many of these individuals are so historically illiterate or else they would have known that the Greek city states had constitutions and that the great philosopher Aristotle wrote about these constitutions.

'Eid Mubarak

[nobody]

Mawlana Mawdudi was a political thinker, but not a religious scholar. As such his works, as noted by brother Suhaib Jobst, do contain many serious errors.

mawdidi rahimahullah was both.

his tafseer is considered to be the best ever written in urdu. his first book which he wrote as a young boy was on jihad. he was sentenced death penalty in 1954 by a marshal law court because of his severe opposition of qadiyanis. but it was over ruled later on. he wrote against the rejectors of hadeeth. his scattered works on different fiqhi issues have been published in 8 volumes.

he was against the creation of pak in the begining but after its creation he left this stance like many scholars.

he did make mistakes in his religious works as well as in politics but his scholarship cannot be dismissed altogether.

May Allah forgive his mistakes and give him jannah. Ameen.

[Brother_Mujahid]

As far as I know Mawdudi had no scholarly background. Sayyid Qutb too wrote a tafsir, but no one claims that this fact makes him a religious scholar.

[nobody]

As far as I know Mawdudi had no scholarly background. Sayyid Qutb too wrote a tafsir, but no one claims that this fact makes him a religious scholar.

yes, he didnt have scholarly background. his tafseer is different than SQ rahimahullah's. his tafseer is not the only reason to assert that he was a scholar but it definitely is a strong reason. smile

[hshad]

As far as I know Mawdudi had no scholarly background. Sayyid Qutb too wrote a tafsir, but no one claims that this fact makes him a religious scholar.

That's incomplete info. He did have some traditional education, but not enough. There was a book (more like a booklet) that mentioned his education and teachers, but I believe it's at my parent's house or otherwise I would have quoted from it. But, clearly he wasn't well grounded in it and hence it led to mistakes. Mawdudi just didn't write the tafsir; he had many other works which included denouncing sufism and ilm al kalam in which he had some harsh words for Imam al-Ghazali (rahimahullah). However, I do believe that if someone says that he was against sufism because it didn't fit his analytical mind rather than considering it an innovation from a theological prespective, then I wouldn't ceremoniously dismiss this idea.

I would definitely call him more of a thinker than a scholar but he wasn't completely void of any scholarly knowledge. Also, when Shaykh Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi wrote a refutation of Mawdudi's ideas, he criticized his ideas and not questioned his education background. This could be due to manners of disagreement, but it could also be because Mawdudi did have some scholarly education.

On the other hand, I wouldn't call his tafsir the best written in Urdu because it's really "tafsir" (as in traditional way). Rather, like Syed Qutb, it's his thoughts on the Qur'an. So, it's more of a unique "tafsir" rather than the best tafsir in Urdu.

[nobody]

he has the moving style of SQ and the traditional style of ibn katheer like explaining the different madhahib of aimmah then explaining his own preference. almost all the other school of thoughts are against him to some degree. so they show their reservations towards his tafseer.

[junaid123]

That's incomplete info. He did have some traditional education, but not enough. There was a book (more like a booklet) that mentioned his education and teachers, but I believe it's at my parent's house or otherwise I would have quoted from it. But, clearly he wasn't well grounded in it and hence it led to mistakes. Mawdudi just didn't write the tafsir;

Not every scholar can write a tafsir, and when even mawdudi(rh) hadn´t even enough study; how reliable is his tafsir from academic view?

And reading a lot of books doesn´t bear proof for being a .....

I would say religios schoalr can may be get some idea from him about politic according to religion rules, but wouldn´t trust him personally as a schoalr.

[hshad]

Not every scholar can write a tafsir, and when even mawdudi(rh) hadn´t even enough study; how reliable is his tafsir from academic view?

And reading a lot of books doesn´t bear proof for being a .....

I would say religios schoalr can may be get some idea from him about politic according to religion rules, but wouldn´t trust him personally as a schoalr.

Please rewrite your post. I didn't get what you're saying.

A student of knowledge who is not in the habit of 'reading a lot of books' is not going to become a real scholar no matter what unveristy or madrassa he went to. Similarly, reading many books without understanding the spirit and essence of Islam won't help either (i.e. what the orientalists do). A scholar is one who studies are principles of Islam, then many texts, then vast number of books independently all the while knowing and understanding the spirit of Islam. Mawdudi fits none of the categories I mentioned above. He was a thinker with some traditional Islamic education (which really means being educated in the principles of the religion). Therefore, he wasn't well grounded in the principles of Islam. But, he was a voracious reader, which aided his knowledge of Islam. Hence, there is a lot of good in his works but some mistakes too.

[iloveislam]

If Maududi was not a scholar then does not that invalidate his tafsir simply because he was not qualified to do tafsir on the Qur'an. I am saying this because of the following Hadith:

Jundub (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “If anyone interprets the Book of Allah in the light of his opinion even if he is right, he is still wrong”. [Sunan Abu Dawud – Book 25, Number 3644]

[iloveislam]

Brother Suhaib Jobst, if you could please provide for me (the links) to some or all of the references that you mentioned in your long post about Mawdudi, that will be appriciated.

Jazakullah Khair

[Suhaib Jobst]

As Salaam Alaykum,

Brother Suhaib Jobst, if you could please provide for me (the links) to some or all of the references that you mentioned in your long post about Mawdudi, that will be appriciated. Jazakullah Khair

I received the quotes from a multitude of sources, including some from his own works and also helpful was the monumental book by Sidi Umar Vadillo, entitled The Esoteric Deviation in Islam. As for online articles, then I would recommend the following:

1. "A word about Mawdudi's ideas," www.sunnah.org/history/Innovators/mawdudi2.htm

2. "The Mawdudi Calamity!", www.central-mosque.com/aqeedah/Mawdudi.htm

[Abuz Zubair]

From an anti-Qutb Madkhali to an anti-Mawdudi Sufi... back to square one.

Mawdudi had a very stable faith history, unlike some who chop and change their deen 101 times a day.

[Jak Nafar]

As Salaam Alaykum,



I received the quotes from a multitude of sources, including some from his own works and also helpful was the monumental book by Sidi Umar Vadillo, entitled The Esoteric Deviation in Islam. As for online articles, then I would recommend the following:

1. "A word about Mawdudi's ideas," www.sunnah.org/history/Innovators/mawdudi2.htm (http://www.sunnah.org/history/Innovators/mawdudi2.htm)

2. "The Mawdudi Calamity!", www.central-mosque.com/aqeedah/Mawdudi.htm (http://www.central-mosque.com/aqeedah/Mawdudi.htm)
Sidi Umar Vadillo ? Isnt he the so called "Khaleefah" from the Murabitun group?
Honestly, I found it hard to take anything from them due to their extreme deviated ideology based on logic and jahl.
I watched a video from one of their meetings, where their leader couldnt even read passages from Al-Qur'aan properly let alone give a speech with evidences from Kitaab and Sunnah.
Just pure "what makes sense" talk mixed with logical kalaam.

Mawdudi was ahead of his time in many ways, he had opinions of some issues that could be discussed of course, but as a whole I believe he had a good intention mixed with good knowledge inshallah, may Allah have mercy upon him and forgive him his sins.

[Suhaib Jobst]

As Salaam Alaykum,

From an anti-Qutb Madkhali to an anti-Mawdudi Sufi... back to square one. Mawdudi had a very stable faith history, unlike some who chop and change their deen 101 times a day.

The self-proclaimer speaks! I know your cheerleading squard are lurking around here somewhere, hanging on your every word in awe. You are very far from being a scholar, exhibiting the worst of manners and you should fear Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala). You don't know me personally, so don't act like you can psycho-analyze me.

Even when I was a Madkhali, I still admired Sayyid Qutb and read Milestones, although I kept this fact hidden from the "Salafi" brothers. I was first attracted to Islam through the books of Sayyid Qutb and Mawdudi, coming from a political, economic and social perspective.

I was told these were "deviants", a statement which repulsed me although I kept these doubts to myself until my knowledge in Islam deepened. I also continued to associate with some non-"Salafi" brothers, which earned me admonishment among the Madkhalis. All these doubts kept intensifying and the break finally came three years later.

The issue is not about Sayyid Abul-A'la Mawdudi. I continue to glean some from his economic and political works, and use his Towards Understanding Islam in da'wa. My point was merely that he made some serious errors, which however shouldn't take from his good points. Is it really that difficult for you to understand there are shades of grey and it can't always be reduced to a dichotomy of "pro" or "anti"?

As for changing my deen "101 times a day", which is nothing but an absurd and vindictive statement which demonstrates how distant you are from the manners of a scholar, then are you sure you would be immune from scrutiny in this regard?

My life is excellent and everything is going good, masha'Allah. If you want to squander good deeds by your dribble, then be my guest. So in my eyes your words are as insignificant as a speck in the sand. I can only conclude with the ayat: "Inna Allaha Ma'as-Sabireen."

[Brother_Mujahid]

As Salaam Alaykum,

I received the quotes from a multitude of sources, including some from his own works and also helpful was the monumental book by Sidi Umar Vadillo, entitled The Esoteric Deviation in Islam.

wa 'alaykum as-Salam,

Is this book available online in a PDF format?

[Abdullah Abbas]

wa 'alaykum as-Salam,

Is this book available online in a PDF format?

i use to have it but lost it , its a well written research mayby akhi Suhaib can upload it and share it with us.

[nobody]

to suhaib jobst.

it is upon me to respond to the allegations you copy-pasted. it wont be soon but insha'Allah i will respond. and i am not jam'ati.

side note. if you really care about serious errors you should delete the advertisement of marifah dot net from your sign. and if you agree with their shirki aqaid then i would say that you changed your deen atleast once.

[iloveislam]

Brother Suhaib, I find it difficult to believe what you have written in your post about Mawdudi. This is because when i asked you for SOURCES to these references, you did not provide them but you provided instead two very very weak websites which i do not trust at all.

Now regarding Mawdudi, one has to be very careful of what one says about him. If i don't have crystal clear proof about his beliefs then i cannot talk wrong about him because if i am wrong then that will add to my account on the Day of Judgement.

Do you have any other evidence to prove what you have said about him?

[Suhaib Jobst]

As Salaam Alaykum,

Is this book available online in a PDF format?

Obviously people here have a problem with the web-site, but here is the only link I found which allows one to download the book:

www.marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3070

“Better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees.” -Dolores Ibárruri

For those not familiar with Ibárruri (1895-1989), she was a founder of the Spanish Communist Party and a leading activist, known under the nickname La Pasionaria (The Passion-Flower). She returned after the death of Franco and was elected to the Parliament (Cortes).

if you really care about serious errors you should delete the advertisement of marifah dot net from your sign. and if you agree with their shirki aqaid then i would say that you changed your deen atleast once.

Why should I follow the matter as you perceive it? In all actuality, I deny the very premise that Tawassul generally is shirk. Even those past scholars who opposed it refrained from calling it such (I am thinking here of Ibn Taymiyya as one notable example). For a good explanation of Tawassul:

http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4767&CATE=24

Wa Allahu A'lam.

[iloveislam]

Obviously people here have a problem with the web-site, but here is the only link I found which allows one to download the book:

www.marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3070



Again...Akhi Suhaib, you are simply forwarding the works of other about Mawdudi. I am asking for a book/article/audio/video/letter/anything which is written by Mawdudi himself.

If I see that then i will believe you otherwise anyone can make claims and give references, but these references have to be checked for one to believe in it.

[nobody]

Why should I follow the matter as you perceive it? In all actuality, I deny the very premise that Tawassul generally is shirk. Even those past scholars who opposed it refrained from calling it such (I am thinking here of Ibn Taymiyya as one notable example). For a good explanation of Tawassul:

http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4767&CATE=24

Wa Allahu A'lam.

dont make it complex. see this:
http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=48

do you agree with this?

[2struggleWithin]

dont make it complex. see this:
http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=48

do you agree with this?

Wow I can't believe what I just read! Where do these people come up with this? Ya'Allah

[Abu wakee]

Wow I can't believe what I just read! Where do these people come up with this? Ya'Allah

Trust me, all of the arab sufis, sub-continental barelwis, sufis from indonesia/malaya, African sufis, so-called western "traditional" muslims, and the apologetic "deobandis" all believe in this stuff!

[Abdullah ibn Adam]

:eek:Subhanallah, I just read that fatwa of ar-Ramli. Unbelievable.

It really puts the last nail into the coffin of the barelwi lie that "we only ask the deceased to make du'a' to Allah for us".

The fatwa mentions that the if someone calls on the shuhada' for help, then the actual deceased shuhada' may come to the rescue and physically kill the caller's opponents in battle!

If the kind of actions promoted in that fatwa are not clear-cut shirk, then there is no shirk in the world!!!

I ask anyone who believes in what is written in ar-Ramli's fatwa, what is the difference between what ar-Ramli is promoting and the shirk of the ancient pagans?! It is disgraceful, disgusting... wallahi words cannot express the revulsion I feel towards reading such words that are purportedly coming from a "Muslim" person of knowledge! Allahul-musta'an!!!:mad:

This is even worse than the shirk that the Christians do in the "Hail Mary" prayer in which they directly ask Mary to "intercede" for them by praying to God for them!

The people on that website should:
[1] return to their senses,
[2] renew their shahadah (if they actually believe the kind of things promoted in that fatwa),
[3] and put into practice the quote of al-Imam Malik that is found on their disclaimer at the bottom of the screen: "Everyone's saying may be accepted or rejected except the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam)."

[junaid123]

Trust me, all of the arab sufis, sub-continental barelwis, sufis from indonesia/malaya, African sufis, so-called western "traditional" muslims, and the apologetic "deobandis" all believe in this stuff!

which muslims left now? you nearly mentioned all the muslim except my salafi brothers and those who dont come in the mosque :D

[Abdullah Abbas]

which muslims left now? you nearly mentioned all the muslim except my salafi brothers and those who dont come in the mosque :D

according to some pseudo salafis i met only they are true muslims the rest are either deviant(they say it in a tone like they are non muslims) or dont exist this minority sect is a joke a later day cult.

Hanafis are the majority in the ummah alongside the other madhhabs. the salafis are a minority there are even more Ismailis lol.

[Abdullah Abbas]

As Salaam Alaykum,



Obviously people here have a problem with the web-site, but here is the only link I found which allows one to download the book:

www.marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3070



For those not familiar with Ibárruri (1895-1989), she was a founder of the Spanish Communist Party and a leading activist, known under the nickname La Pasionaria (The Passion-Flower). She returned after the death of Franco and was elected to the Parliament (Cortes).



Why should I follow the matter as you perceive it? In all actuality, I deny the very premise that Tawassul generally is shirk. Even those past scholars who opposed it refrained from calling it such (I am thinking here of Ibn Taymiyya as one notable example). For a good explanation of Tawassul:

http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4767&CATE=24

Wa Allahu A'lam.

Akhi Suhaib what are your personal views regarding: Haddad/Kabbani/Nazim/ etc? i read Sidi Vadillos research a while ago very interesting a bit chaotic in the sense that its way too much information and not enough refutation. but after all its interesting

[Abu wakee]

which muslims left now? you nearly mentioned all the muslim except my salafi brothers and those who dont come in the mosque :D

Why you feel left out?