HT And the Qur'an being created is NOT Kufr! [Archive]

View Full Version : HT And the Qur'an being created is NOT Kufr!

abu imaan an-nepalee

25th March 2005, 02:42 AM

As-sallamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu

A while back I had an interesting discussion with a generally nice brother from Hizb ut-Tahrir (AQZ) and in that discussion I raised the issue of the Qur'an being created being a belief which is Kufr, the brother (Who is regarded as mujtahid by the Hizb) told me that noone from the salaf has said this?!?!?!?! I was truly amazed at this statement! so much so that I didn't even try to convince him otherwise as he repeated it again!

Anyway in the book 'Ahkam as-salah' it is a book which reports the positions of shaykh taqi ud-deen an-Nabhani(Rh)'s positions regarding the salah which many shabab of the Hizb have now adopted. In the chapter regarding leadership/imamah in salah it states that as long as the person is a muslim and not kafir then it is ok for you to pray behind that person, the example given was of the mu'tazilah and shi'a who stated the Qur'an was created, that this belief is not kufr just bid'ah therefore you could pray behind them!?!?!?

Well we know who to follow on this issue innsha'ALLAH...

Imaam Malik(Rh) was asked about the one who said the Qur'an is created the Imaam said: "He is an unbeliever so kill him" kitab ash-Shifah of Qadi 'iyaad(Rh) page 419 english.

ibn 'abdul-barr(rh) has reported that Imaam Malik(rh) stated: "Whoever says the Qur'an is created he must be beaten painfully and repressed until he repents" al-'Inqitaa p35

Al-imaam ash-shafi'ee(Rh) has said: "whoever says the Qur'an is created, then he is a disbeliever" 'Sharh usool i'tiqaad ahl sunnah wal jamm'ah' of laalika'ee volume 1 page 252

In the same book by Imaam al-Laalika'ee volume 2 page 366 the chapter being called: "What has been narreted from the ijmaa' as-sahaba(Raa) on the Qur'an not being created"

"And from 'umar bin dinaar.. .from the companions of Rasul Sallahu 'alayhi was-sallam they all said whoever says the Qur'an is created verily he is a kafir"

Imaam Ahmed(Rh) replied to someone who stated the Qur'an was created he replied: The Qur'an is from the 'Ilm of ALLAH , and the 'ilm of ALLAH Ta'ala is not created, for whoever says its created is a kafir"

Sharh i'tiqad ahl sunnah wal jamm'ah al-Laalika'ee volume 2 page 512.

I'll leave it there for today innsha'ALLAH

AFK

10th July 2005, 06:28 PM

Assalaam alaikum

Why is the Quran uncreated?

Logic lover

14th July 2005, 06:26 PM

The following is taken from HT publication, 'Islam - The Decisive Belief', which refutes the notion that Quran is created.*******





Beginning of quote ''Some have argued that the Qur'an is not the speech of Allah SWT because it is supposedly limited. These arguments will be backed by superficial claims that the Qur'an has a beginning and an end, i.e. Surah AI Fatihah and Surah AI Nas. Therefore due to the Qur'an beginning with Surah AI Fatihah and ending with Surah AI Nas, they apply the logic that the Qur'an must be limited. This they will argue is because the Qur'an is claiming to be the speech of Allah SWT and like Allah SWT his attributes must be unlimited, otherwise if they were limited they would act as limitations upon him. This in turn would limit him as a whole, consequently disproving him as the actual Creator. Therefore their claim is that the Qur'an being limited is a proof of it not being the speech of Allah SWT as it is against the essence of him and his attributes having to be unlimited. By also claiming that the Qur'an possesses a beginning and an end, they also concluded that it was created, hence further proof that it is not an attribute (speech) of Allah SWT rather a creation. **************To clarify these claims one needs to again understand what the Qur'an is. The Qur'an is the speech of Allah SWT given to Gibrael (as) and revealed to Prophet Muhammed SAW. The emphasis should be on the 'reveal' aspect as the Qur'an is what Allah SWT has chosen to reveal to us. To claim that Surah AI Fatihah and AI Nas are the beginning and end is shallow as these chapters are not in chronological order. Also the Qur'an is the speech i.e. what is recited, while the book is how it has been preserved. Furthermore the Qur'an (speech of Allah SWT) which we have is only what Allah SWT has chosen to reveal to us; hence it is neither the beginning nor the end of his speech. For example we know from the Qur'an that Allah SWT spoke to Adam (as), Musa ( as) and Isa ( as) but this speech occurred before the revelation of the Qur'an to Muhammed SAW. Hence the Qur'an is not all of Allah SWT's speech it is only what he has chosen to reveal. As a result the argument of the Qur'an having a beginning and end is flawed. With regards to the Qur'an being created this too is also flawed due to the fallacious conclusion of it having a beginning. For that reason to claim that the Qur'an is limited and created is iniquitous and false from its root.''******* end of quote.Allah knows best

abu imaan an-nepalee

16th July 2005, 03:39 PM

as-sallamu 'alaikum, the issue is not whether ht say the qur'an is created it is regarding the fact that they say it is not a belief which constitutes kufr just bid'a. and they say that none of the salaf stated it was a kufr belief. ahkam as-salah is nabhanee book of fiqh on salah and many members adopt it. wa ALLAHU A'lam

abu imaan an-nepalee

16th July 2005, 04:00 PM

in their(ht) book 'Ahkam as-salah' In the chapter 'Every muslim is qualified for leadership in prayer'*******it states:
*******
"As for the innovator, he is considered. If his innovation (bid'ah) makes one kafir i.e. he is a kafir because of this innovation like the one who says ALLAH translocated in our master Ali, the imamah of one similar to this, if known for that, is like the imamah of the kafir is not correct because they are kuffar even if they claim Islam. As for the innovator who is not made a kafir by his innovation like the one saying the Qur'an is created and like the mu'tazilah and khawarij: their imamah is correct because they are muslims..."

Salahudin

18th July 2005, 01:56 AM

Sallam,

The book 'Ahkam as Salat' is not an adopted Party book nor is it a HT book. Rather it is the*******work of an individual.

As for the issue of Al Quran being created..some said that this amounts to disbelief for the one who carries it and others said it is a major innovation. So there exists a difference of opinion over this matter. 

Ws

asharee_salafi

18th July 2005, 04:25 PM

Ahh the good old "non adoption '' HT trick to hide your bid'ah.

Even if your party doesnt adopt on the issue, the fact is that your imam still wrote the book, and you still accept it as a permissble opinion, likewise you dont adopt on the 4 madhabs rather the ht's are allowed to choose because all the 4 madhabs are correct in their own way and fit within the realm of a permissble opinion, *therefore*......to hold that saying that denying the vision of Allah is permissble, deny POTG etc etc....even though your party dont adopt on the issue, you still allow it because you say it falls within the realm of ijtihad.....

So in short,*******without going into all this adoption rubbish........you are an islamic party******* ( you claim)******* if you hold unislamic opinions, then you are not an*******islamic party......by default.....hence your*******party allows unislamic opinions.....hence you*******are not a islamic party.....hence you are bid'ah con artists.......hence you are under the threat of divine punihsment....hence you are an obstacle to revival....................simple really.*******

Salahudin

18th July 2005, 08:41 PM

TO be honest and in all fairness, it is clear that those who I have spoken to do not understand the concept of adoption or the nature of an Islamic Political Party. The Party only adopts in those matters which are relevant*******to its work i.e the work to Resume the Islamic Way of Life and Carry Islam to the world via Jihad. 

your anthropomorphism is startling:

This is clear cut and decisive..

"No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. " (6;103)



Iman (belief)*******is decisive.******* POG is not. Iman increasing and decreasing is a falsehood. A decrease in iman i.e less belief is tantamount to kufr...and you have the audacity to call the Hizb of being innovators. I advise you armchair scholors to acquire some knowledge before accusing others..

abu imaan an-nepalee

19th July 2005, 08:53 PM

salahudin, briong your quotes and references about this 'ikhtilaf' that some scholars only stated it is bid'a to say the qur'an is created! If you cannot furnish the references then please remain quiet. 

createdtoworshipallah@hotmail.com*******is my email address

contact me , we will meet up and record the discussion and transcribe it then post it, bring taha, altaf, fareed, and whoever you want, bring your references explainging your dala'il, and we can take it from there. All accusations of antropomorphism, not understanding the hizb, 'adhabul qabr, the Kalaam of ALLAH ta'ala being haqeeqi, methodology, ijtihad, 'usool, the definitions of yaqeen, imaan, 'ilm, shaak, dhunn, kufr, bid'a. taqleed, i'ttibah*******etc whatever you want to discuss we can do it innsha'ALLAH. 

of course we have offered before on this forum, and others, and you guys just run away. Why haven't you as of yet answered the points about mutawatir ma'nawee that was posted ages ago, and about your claims of ijmaa' on the forum of salam magazine in the general discussions section as usual you guys just ran away...something we are all becoming accustomed to...

we know ahkam as-salah is not an adopted book, but shaksiyyah volume 1 is, and it entertains aspects of this discussion there, however nabhanee's conclusion on the matter is represented in 'ahkam as-salah, also you as a member of Hizb #2 have also claimed it is an issue of ikhtilaf (i,e, if it kufr or bid'a) so your post is an evidence for us. JazakALLAHU Khairan.

Accusing people of kufr with antropomorphism when we hold the same opinion as Imaam Ahmed(rh), who by tawatur concensus of this ummah was a representative of the correct position of Ahl sunnah's 'aqeedah in the matter is*******a sign of what you and your people are about!

Unfortunatly for you, there are people who know about you and your 2 hizb's, and what you all hold. As for ''adhabul qabr, we blew away your fellow collegues a couple of years ago when they had no answers for 40:46. 

The verse you quoted about ru'ya, is that your evidence to say that it is impossible to see ALLAH Ta'ala on yaum al-akhirah? well your i'tizal is becoming even more evident! 

Needless to say it is obvious who is in need of studying so that they don't accuse others

wa ALLAHU Musta'an

Salahudin

20th July 2005, 01:57 AM

Ws,

You guys really make me laugh and despair at the same time. 

If someone brings a valid arguement against a perceived matter which has been stated as decisive by you then it no longer is a decisive matter! Something that is decisive is decisive to all, muslims and non muslims alike.

There are scholars, people of knowlege etc who all challenge your alleged proofs and statements...which by itself is sufficient proof of the untenable position of your statements...

the Mufasireen differed over many matters including 40:46...

The issue of Mutawatir Manawee is settled..just because you refuse to accept the stronger arguement is your problem not mine...or maybe you just don't understand it??

I'd also like to see some intellectual proof about 6:103 and how this contrasts with your gangs statements...

Ijma ulema? Wheres the proof for this usool??

abu imaan an-nepalee

20th July 2005, 11:30 AM

*
* as-sallamu 'alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu,

Our brother salahudin's comments appear in bold

"You guys really make me laugh and despair at the same time."

response:Subhanullah! Now that is a sign of confusion, i recommend you go visit a specialist about that asap

"If someone brings a valid arguement against a perceived matter which has been stated as decisive by you then it no longer is a decisive matter!"

The problem is, by you bringing a few statements is not*enough to classify you having a*'valid argument' is it?!? Your posts are there to be seen by all, where is the 'validity' in your arguments? You have hardly gone into much depth for anyone to appreciate what your saying and how your using your evidences.

"Something that is decisive is decisive to all, muslims and non muslims alike."

well it depends upon what matter your refering to, so if the Qur'an and it's contents are decisive only to muslims and NOT to *non-muslims, this has no bearing upon the Qur'an, nor the final Messenger(saw), etc and this is the same for other matters of 'aqeedah you reject, the decisiveness of a particular issue/mas'alah is in the actual proof, and it doesn't matter who accepts it or rejects it. The only time it matters as to whether a group of people have accepted or rejected a matter explicitly is in the case of ijmaa' as-sahaaba(raa)

"There are scholars, people of knowlege etc who all challenge your alleged proofs and statements...which by itself is sufficient proof of the untenable position of your statements..."

Unfortunately for us, you make statements without any substance and this is rampunt amongst your people. I started this thread after a member of ht aqz (not your ht) stated that no-one from the salaf stated it was kufr to believe the qur'an was created, so i gave certain quotes that there are scholars from the salaf who say it is kufr. Now you bring me the statements that you have of 'people of knowledge' rejecting the matters you do such as 'adhabul qabr, ru'ya saying the qur'an is created is only kufr, etc show us example from the first 3 generations who's understanding of the deen is considered the soundest and there generations are the paths from which knowledge was transmitted and filtered*innsha'ALLAH if you can*so we do not have yet another round of hot wind escaping from you guys again.this challenge-so to speak-is not to do taqleed to a scholar(s) rather it is about you providing us with names to fit your statement.

"the Mufasireen differed over many matters including 40:46..."

This is something which again you need to prove. I have my references numbering well over 100, will you give me yours? Also we want what was actually stated by the mufasireen and by that i mean proper references. If you can't be bothered to go to the actual books go to www.altafsir.com and maybe see what is stated about 6:103 aswell. But it is interesting none the less that we have the following observations about this comment of yours:

Firstly: 40:46 you state the ulema have 'differed' over it's meaning (a claim still to be proven), therefore it cannot be used as a decisive proof for the ithbaat of 'adhabul qabr. Yet we find it used as a proof for imaan in the hellfire's 'adhab (punishment) being tangible in ht adopted book shaksiyyah islamiyyah volume 1 in the chapter 'the meaning of imaan in the last day/day of judgment '. Now in this chapter it uses 40:46 as a primary evidence for imaan in the punishment of the hellfire being tangible i.e it is the actual proof for the subject matter. It is not an evidence which is used to describe the qati'e but is in itself dhunnie dalalah. Quite contrary, when dhunnie*adillah(evidences) are used to describe*something which is qati'e they have to be qati'e dalalah*in the first place, so*this verse is according to al-Hizb qati'e thabout and qati'e dalalah that it refered to the punishment of the hellfire to be tangible and therefore it is impossible for it to refer to 'adhabul qabr.*So my question is, where does this tafsir exist amongst the mufasireen of ahl sunnah? How did you guys understand that the fire is tangible and the fire of jahannam?

Secondly: The verse is:''an-naar yaraduu 'alayhim ghaduwan wa 'ashian" which means "the fire is shown to them morning and evening" 40:46

Now we know the following from this verse:

-That it started when Musa(as) was saved by ALLAH Ta'ala by the death of ahl fir'awn as is stated: "then ALLAH saved him from (every) ill that they had plotted (against him) , but the brunt of the penalty encompassed all sides of ahl fir'awn" tmq: 40:45 fir'awn wasn't punished in the dunya i.e. while still alive, and if they claim it was the drowning then it is replied that this is not the punishment described in the qur'an as then ALLAH Ta'ala tells us what this punishment was in the very next verse and sentence 'an-naar yaraduu 'alayhim ghaduwan wa 'ashian" which means "the fire is shown to them morning and evening" tmq: 40:46

-That ALLAH Ta'ala mentions 2 types of punishments. In 40:45 it is 'su'ul-'adhab , which means harsh punishment,this is after musa(as) is saved and ahl fir'awn are dead and in the next verse 2nd sentence of 40:46 ALLAH ta'ala stated "wa yauma taqumus-sa'ah ad-khiluu 'ahl-fir'awn ashad-dul-'adhab" which translates: "and when the (final) hour is established 'cast yee the ahl fir'awn into the severest punishment" so we know that ashad-dul-'adhab is after the hour is established and is more severe and different than 'su'ul-'adhab which is after the death of ahl fir'awn and before the hour is established and different from the punishment in the hellfire. So salahudin please tell us what these 2 punishments are and when they occur innshaALLAH as you make it clear you don't believe su'ul 'adhab is in the barzakh (interval between dunya and yaum al-akhirah-mentioned in the qur'an but verse alludes me).

And why is it Your hizb is capable of using it as a proof of imaan while others can't? And you accuse others of using 'dhunnie' 'ikhtilafee' dala'il for imaan yet you have it in your own books? How ignorant to claim a verse is differed over regarding it's meaning yet you use it to indicate a decisive meaning in your own books, this is either hypocrisy or outright ignorance! Not only that there is clearly only one meaning for this verse as you can see from the statements of the mufasireen time and time again* And the only person to hold what you are saying is al-Fara'(d.207ah) the mu'tazili scholar and grammarian(al-firhist 98-100 of ibn nadim*and tareekh al-baghdad 1/166.167 by khateeb al-bagdadee*c.f 'manhaj li-imaam ash-shawkanee f'il 'aqeedah*by Dr. 'Abdullah nawmsuk makhtabah dar al-qalam wal kitab*and he was refuted by*nearly every subsequent mufassir who ever commented upon his understanding showing how it was impossible to even say what he did!*Ajeeb!

What al-Fara' said was the following:"enter the people of fir'awn, the fire they are shown mornign and evening"* (c.f fath ul-qadeer 4/705 by ash-shawkanee, dar al-fikr, 'jami al-ahkam al-Qur'an by al-Qurtubee 15/209 dar al-kutub al-'ilmiyyah) so the verse was transformed and it doesn't make way for the 2 types of punishment, nor the fact that the people of fir'awn are shown the fire after death before the hour is established etc. Needless to say, we don't refer to the mu'taziliates for 'aqeedah matters alhamdulillah! How about you salahudin? Other people*were muhiy-ud-deen ibn al-'arabee the sufee said this verse was for Imaam mahdee!?!?!!?!(refer to 'tafseer al-Qur'an al-Kareem 3/400-401 ...exactly, and then we have 'The meaning of the Qur'an by Muhammed asad who states that this verse is to scare the people of fir'awn.....ok. And then you have an-nabhanee who's roots are in the tafseer of the mu'tazilites and also he goes furthur by making it qati'e for his meaning alone! so if these are the people who represent your 'ikhtilaf' them Allahu musta'an!

"The issue of Mutawatir Manawee is settled..just because you refuse to accept the stronger arguement is your problem not mine...or maybe you just don't understand it??"

Akhee, points were made against the q&a you posted, yet you failed to respond. So don't tell me the matter is delt with by running away, lets discuss it properly i.e. We respond to the points made, even if you or I may think it is a rubbish/stupid/un-educated point lets see rebuttles at least. Since when were matters delt with by just leaving discussions when they just get started?

"I'd also like to see some intellectual proof about 6:103 and how this contrasts with your gangs statements..."

Which gang are you talking about? Ahl sunnah? Alhamdulillah! Firstly lets have a premise when you bring evidence state what you are proving and why/how. Your posts are extremely d.i.y. However we are accustomed to that as we see the same from your invisable amir who hides from the people and takes money off his followers like yourself. But ahl sunnah have delt with the arguments of the mu'tazilah before including 6:103 used by the devients to say the ru'ya doesn't exist. So lets discuss innshaALLAH.

The primary evidence for the ru'ya or beautific vision is "yujuhu yauma'idhin nadhira, ila Rabbiha nazhira" which translates:"some faces that day will beam looking towards their Lord" now this verse associates nazar-looking with the eyes as it uses the preposition of ila which means towards. When nazar is used with or without prepositions it carries various meanings As is demonstrated in 'look at -unzuru ila-its fruits when it bears fruit ' (6:99) so with the preposition ila it means to look at with our eyes, when without a preposition it means: 'to wait' for example; "wait for us-unzuruna-so that we may borrow some light from you" (57:13) and with the preposition fee it means to reflect upon or think "do they not reflect upon-lam yanzuru fi-the sovereignty over the heavens and the earth" (7:185) so in the verse 75:22-23 the preposition of ila is used refering to nazar with the face,and of course nazar with the face is with the eyes on the face wa ALLAHU A'lam. As for the keyfiyyah or how(ness), it is in a manner which befits the majesty of ALLAH Ta'ala. Now how is this explicit verse not refuted by 6:103? Simple like this:

The verse reads: "no vision can grasp Him, but he grasps all vision . He is al-Latif , al-Khabeer" tmq 6:103. Now these words were said by ALLAH Ta'ala while praising Himself-subhanahu-and praising is a form of affirmation. But simply negating something is not to affirm anything. And you can't praise someone simply by negating something . So when ALLAH Ta'ala praises Himself with a negation, it implies an affirmation. For example: He-subhanahu-denies slumber or sleep for Himself, which is a praise which implies perfection of His world-sustaining activity, negation of death implies perfection of His life, negation of partner, son etc implies perfection of His Lordship,negation of forgetting and ignorance implies perfection of His knowledge and its comprehensiveness, and negation of any peers implies the perfection of His essences and attributes. This is why ALLAH Ta'ala does not praise Himself by simply negating something that does not imply anything positive. That is why the true meaning of the verse "no vision can grasp Him, but he grasps all vision . He is al-Latif , al-Khabeer" underlines His greatness-subhanahu wa ta'ala-that He is so exalted above everything that none will encompass Him even though they will see Him-subhanahu. And that is why the mufasireen of ahl sunnah w'al jamm'ah affirmed the ru'ya while the mu'tazilah and jahmiyyah denied it. As for what is related by mujahid(rh) in the compilation of his tafseer, there was no tahqeeq or isnad in the version I read, but even his understanding of 75:22-23 does not negate ru'ya at all. Wa ALLAHU A'lam.

The verse reads 'laa tudrikuhu...' which translates 'no vision can grasp Him...' The word Idrak means to 'to comprehend and to encompass' it is more than just seeing. For example : "When the 2 groups saw each other, the people of Musa said: 'we are going to be overtaken (mudrakun)" tmq: 26:61-62.
This verse in itself is not taken 'ala dhaahir by it's literal meaning except by the mu'tazilah, while ahl sunnah affirm the ru'ya and explain the verse as I have mention which actually is an epitome of sharh 'aqeedah tahawiyyah by ibn abi al-'izz(rh) so therefore you should apply your principle because when you stated in an earlier post about 6:103 "This is clear cut and decisive.." then you stated about our evidences:"If someone brings a valid arguement against a perceived matter which has been stated as decisive by you then it no longer is a decisive matter!" and you stated: "There are scholars, people of knowlege etc who all challenge your alleged proofs and statements...which by itself is sufficient proof of the untenable position of your statements..." i've just given you 1 scholar out of many i can give to show this verse does not negate the ru'ya. So it is you who actually can't use this verse as a proof. So tell us which 'scholar' told you this verse was qati'e dalalah to negate the ru'ya of ALLAH Ta'ala on yaum al-qiyamah by the believers? Wa ALLAHU A'lam

"Ijma ulema? Wheres the proof for this usool??"

Deary me, when I said there has been a tawatur ijmaa' that imaam ahmed's(rh) 'aqeedah regarding the issue of the Qur'an being created is kufr and how he understood it was correct (and this is general for his 'aqeedah in general inc ru'ya) it is not a 'usooli point rather a description of a reality to show how idiotic your statement is that certain beliefs are anthropomorphic. Anyway proof for this 'usool exist and can be found in many of the books of 'usool so go read them and come back to us when you have, and ui mean read not search internet for articles or just refer to shaksiyyah vol 3.

I hope to hear adequate responses soon innshaALLAH ta'ala , jazakALLAHU Khairan

Logic lover

20th July 2005, 12:15 PM

Salaudin wrote ''something that is decisive, is decisive to all, Muslims and non-muslims alike''

Question to Salaudin:

It is decisive to all Muslims that ''La Ilaha Illallah, Muhammadur Rasullullah saws''.

Using the statement of Salaudin, the above testimonies should be decisive to non-muslims as well. But, in reality this is not the case, otherwise everyone would become Muslim.

Can salaudin see the logical fallacy of his statement and come to the agreement that 'decisiveness' is not universal?

abu imaan an-nepalee

21st July 2005, 02:24 AM

as-sallamu 'alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

akhee i really hope you will reply fully innshaALLAH and so we can have a proper discussion i have done my best to be as clear as i can and i'm not doing taqleed nor did i go and ask someone for 'help' so to speak and i hope you are sincere enough to appreciate that so that if you had to do these things, then seriously consider how you are adopting things. there are plenty more decisive evidences for the ru'ya but i only presented that muvh which was necessary for my post. wa ALLAHU A'lam

asharee_salafi

21st July 2005, 04:50 PM

salahudeen will run away like last time, when his skirt was lifted

abu imaan an-nepalee

22nd July 2005, 07:04 PM

they open their mouths then run away. but if he had known how to adopt 'aqeedah matters in the first place he would have been able to furnish an answer without any problems. this is not the first time we have seen ht boys shout then run, and i doubt it will be the last. waste of timers, waste of space. these neo-mutazilites call the 'aqeedah of ahl sunnah antropomorphic! astagfirullah! you bring daleel to say the ru'ya doesn't exist! yet you don't even know the way ahl sunnah viewed the evidence! (6:103) sincere advice, don't accuse people of kufr when you are walking in it's midst claiming ru'ya, 'adhabul qabr are not real, saying imaan increasing and decreasing is falsehood and more of your rubbish. wa ALLAHU Musta'an

AFK

23rd July 2005, 07:18 PM

Assalaam alaikum

I asked the original question because it's never been made clear to me why the Quran should be considered uncreated (much less what that actually means). I only became aware of the issue when I was a kid reading an encyclopedia britannica (!) entry regarding the mutazilah. Most Muslims aren't aware of what the mutazilah were about, if they're aware of them at all, hence I imagine that to most Muslims the contention of the original poster could be the biggest non-issue of all time. In fact judging by the community as I see it around me, many might actually appreciate the "liberal" attitude of HT.

That's why I implore the poster to explain why it should be considered kufr to say the Quran was created.

Apart from that watching you people argue about the meanings of words would be hilarious if it wasn't so thoroughly counterproductive.

I seem to have a bit of time spare so I'll mention a*******few things.

The book 'Ahkam as Salat' is not an adopted Party book nor is it a HT book. Rather it is the*******work of an individual.

The issue of the book's non-adoption isn't relevant when the point under discussion seems to be a general principle and the author of the book was the founder of the party.

Can salaudin see the logical fallacy of his statement and come to the agreement that 'decisiveness' is not universal?

Clearly what he meant was that the decisiveness must be objective.

you are an islamic party******* ( you claim)******* if you hold unislamic opinions, then you are not an*******islamic party......by default.....hence your*******party allows unislamic opinions.....hence you*******are not a islamic party.....hence you are bid'ah con artists.......hence you are under the threat of divine punihsment....hence you are an obstacle to revival....................simple really.

Not really - you say an Islamic party would not *hold* an un-Islamic opinion, then change that to *allow* an un-Islamic opinion without explaining why.

You also don't explain why someone who is under the threat of divine punishment is an obstacle to revival, seeing that it seems entirely possible that the actions of those who shall receive punishment could*******produce a scenario*******more favourable to*******the revival of Islam.

abu imaan an-nepalee

24th July 2005, 03:33 AM

salaam , still nothing from salahudin, why does that not surprise me. anyway regarding why it is regarded as kufr to say the qur'an is created is available at the following link:

http://www.as-sahwah.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=267&sid=1c11ab9244bb4fc18017ee041fe5f723

it is a long topic, which maybe i will post on later innshaALLAH.

AFK

24th July 2005, 09:01 PM

anyway regarding why it is regarded as kufr to say the qur'an is created is available at the following link:

http://www.as-sahwah.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=267&sid=1c11ab9244bb4fc18017ee041fe5f723

it is a long topic, which maybe i will post on later innshaALLAH. 

I had already read that. The post wasn't*******very clear.

abu imaan an-nepalee

25th July 2005, 02:43 AM

innshaALLAH tomorrow i will post something for you

abu imaan an-nepalee

28th July 2006, 02:07 PM

This is clear cut and decisive..

"No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. " (6;103)................

I'd also like to see some intellectual proof about 6:103 and how this contrasts with your gangs statements...

response:

Which gang are you talking about? Ahl sunnah? Alhamdulillah! Firstly lets have a premise when you bring evidence state what you are proving and why/how. Your posts are extremely d.i.y. However we are accustomed to that as we see the same from your invisable amir who hides from the people and takes money off his followers like yourself. But ahl sunnah have delt with the arguments of the mu'tazilah before including 6:103 used by the devients to say the ru'ya doesn't exist. So lets discuss innshaALLAH.

The primary evidence for the ru'ya or beautific vision is "yujuhu yauma'idhin nadhira, ila Rabbiha nazhira" which translates:"some faces that day will beam looking towards their Lord" now this verse associates nazar-looking with the eyes as it uses the preposition of ila which means towards. When nazar is used with or without prepositions it carries various meanings As is demonstrated in 'look at -unzuru ila-its fruits when it bears fruit ' (6:99) so with the preposition ila it means to look at with our eyes, when without a preposition it means: 'to wait' for example; "wait for us-unzuruna-so that we may borrow some light from you" (57:13) and with the preposition fee it means to reflect upon or think "do they not reflect upon-lam yanzuru fi-the sovereignty over the heavens and the earth" (7:185) so in the verse 75:22-23 the preposition of ila is used refering to nazar with the face,and of course nazar with the face is with the eyes on the face wa ALLAHU A'lam. As for the keyfiyyah or how(ness), it is in a manner which befits the majesty of ALLAH Ta'ala. Now how is this explicit verse not refuted by 6:103? Simple like this:

The verse reads: "no vision can grasp Him, but he grasps all vision . He is al-Latif , al-Khabeer" tmq 6:103. Now these words were said by ALLAH Ta'ala while praising Himself-subhanahu-and praising is a form of affirmation. But simply negating something is not to affirm anything. And you can't praise someone simply by negating something . So when ALLAH Ta'ala praises Himself with a negation, it implies an affirmation. For example: He-subhanahu-denies slumber or sleep for Himself, which is a praise which implies perfection of His world-sustaining activity, negation of death implies perfection of His life, negation of partner, son etc implies perfection of His Lordship,negation of forgetting and ignorance implies perfection of His knowledge and its comprehensiveness, and negation of any peers implies the perfection of His essences and attributes. This is why ALLAH Ta'ala does not praise Himself by simply negating something that does not imply anything positive. That is why the true meaning of the verse "no vision can grasp Him, but he grasps all vision . He is al-Latif , al-Khabeer" underlines His greatness-subhanahu wa ta'ala-that He is so exalted above everything that none will encompass Him even though they will see Him-subhanahu. And that is why the mufasireen of ahl sunnah w'al jamm'ah affirmed the ru'ya while the mu'tazilah and jahmiyyah denied it. As for what is related by mujahid(rh) in the compilation of his tafseer, there was no tahqeeq or isnad in the version I read, but even his understanding of 75:22-23 does not negate ru'ya at all. Wa ALLAHU A'lam.

The verse reads 'laa tudrikuhu...' which translates 'no vision can grasp Him...' The word Idrak means to 'to comprehend and to encompass' it is more than just seeing. For example : "When the 2 groups saw each other, the people of Musa said: 'we are going to be overtaken (mudrakun)" tmq: 26:61-62.

This verse in itself is not taken 'ala dhaahir by it's literal meaning except by the mu'tazilah, while ahl sunnah affirm the ru'ya and explain the verse as I have mention which actually is an epitome of sharh 'aqeedah tahawiyyah by ibn abi al-'izz(rh) so therefore you should apply your principle because when you stated in an earlier post about 6:103 "This is clear cut and decisive.." then you stated about our evidences:"If someone brings a valid arguement against a perceived matter which has been stated as decisive by you then it no longer is a decisive matter!" and you stated: "There are scholars, people of knowlege etc who all challenge your alleged proofs and statements...which by itself is sufficient proof of the untenable position of your statements..." i've just given you 1 scholar out of many i can give to show this verse does not negate the ru'ya. So it is you who actually can't use this verse as a proof. So tell us which 'scholar' told you this verse was qati'e dalalah to negate the ru'ya of ALLAH Ta'ala on yaum al-qiyamah by the believers? Wa ALLAHU A'lam

almost a year has past and no response from our resident hizbite...will we be seeing anything cut n paste? or how about a demonstration of non-taqleed in 'aqeedah matters to the hizb's position?

abu imaan an-nepalee

30th July 2006, 09:32 AM

and still we wait for brother salahudeen....

sultanmuradII

3rd August 2006, 10:31 AM

Salaam,

It is likely that Salahudeen will not reply, in anycase I have some queries regarding the topic at hand if any can clarify for me insha-Allah.

Those who said that Qur'an is created were all kaafir, that is what I understood as being the proposed opinion held by the scholars quoted, at the beginning of this thread.

I would like to know some of the principles to understand when a matter of belief becomes an innovation, deviancy or disbelief.

Also a point to note is that the group HT do not say quran is created in fact they rebuke those who say so. The qualm with them seems to be why they did not classify as kaafir those who said qur'an is created.

Does this make them kaafir for not believing as kaafir those who are 'supposed' to be considered kaafir, or are we creating divisions amongst ourselves on minor issues?

w/s

Salahudin

4th August 2006, 12:10 AM

response:

almost a year has past and no response from our resident hizbite...will we be seeing anything cut n paste? or how about a demonstration of non-taqleed in 'aqeedah matters to the hizb's position?

Aysha rejects the Hadith related to the prophet (saw) seeing his God on the night of Israa.

Al-Shatibi wrote in his book al-Muwafaqat: “And Aysha (ra) rejected the Hadith related to the prophet (saw) seeing his God on the night of Israa, because of Allah’s saying: “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.” [6-103]

Noureddine al-Imam wrote: “When Aysha was asked whether Mohammed (saw) saw his God, she replied: “O you! My hair has stood because of what you just said. Then she recited Allah’s (swt) saying: “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.” [6-103], because the reports are doubtful in text. To this effect, Sheikh al-Islam Ibnu Taymyyah said: “Whoever from among people says that the Awlyaa or others see Allah with their eyes in this life, he is an aberrant innovator.”

Seems Aysha (ra) who was a Mujtahid , rejects what you have tried to elucidate from the verse!
Again I see much logic and incorrect deduction of the verse. The verse is clear cut and decisive but you did the old wahabi twist !

abu imaan an-nepalee

4th August 2006, 12:51 AM

Aysha rejects the Hadith related to the prophet (saw) seeing his God on the night of Israa.

Al-Shatibi wrote in his book al-Muwafaqat: “And Aysha (ra) rejected the Hadith related to the prophet (saw) seeing his God on the night of Israa, because of Allah’s saying: “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.” [6-103]

Noureddine al-Imam wrote: “When Aysha was asked whether Mohammed (saw) saw his God, she replied: “O you! My hair has stood because of what you just said. Then she recited Allah’s (swt) saying: “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.” [6-103], because the reports are doubtful in text. To this effect, Sheikh al-Islam Ibnu Taymyyah said: “Whoever from among people says that the Awlyaa or others see Allah with their eyes in this life, he is an aberrant innovator.”

Seems Aysha (ra) who was a Mujtahid , rejects what you have tried to elucidate from the verse!
Again I see much logic and incorrect deduction of the verse. The verse is clear cut and decisive but you did the old wahabi twist !

firstly quotes from the scholars are not evidence. You have not even given the reason why the verse you use is a proof to say the Ru'ya is not possible from the verse you quoted, but alas you are a ht muqalid and why are we surprised?

secondly, the subject matter is the Ru'ya in the akhirah. The ikhtilaf amongst the sahaaba(raa) was for the ru'ya regarding what was reported to have occurred on the Night of the Mi'raaj And so you again have not even got any understanding about the correct subject matter!

Thirdly wahabi twist? Nah mate, as has been reported in various books the belief of the ru'ya in the akhirah is ijmaa as-sahaaba(raa) and would you like me to post the ahadith narrated by Umm al-Muhmineen A'isha(ra) pertaining to this subject?

please re-read your post and understand you are making a complete fool of yourself here. Maybe we shouldn't ask you to comment furthur. You wanted a reply to your claim and it was given, a full understanding of the text as to why the Ru'ya was possible, yet you in response have brought a couple of quotes when you yourself abhore quoting from the 'ulemah, and they are not even in context of the discussion, nor do you even show why the verse you use is a proof! You then claim this verse is clear cut, when if you were to even know the context of the quotes you used, there was ikhtilaf amongst the sahaaba(raa) about the Mi'raaj and this is from the famous cases of ikhtilaf yet you claim it is a clear-cut decisive matter?

Can you even give me a full reference of the books you quote from?

it would have been better for you to say you didn't know...because clearly you don't

you say you see (from my post) logic and incoherent deduction from the verse, but I don't seem to be able to find your reasons why in the post of yours....are we surprised? of course not!

Run along salahudin, go and protect your party's views at any cost. Don't come here again and think people are wahabis and do taqleed to their 'goverment scholars' while you do taqleed to your majhul imaam! Your incapable of discussin the topics given to you...and your attempts are ridiculous and an out-right shambles! But thanks anyway, at least you help us show people what HT really are! Cheers!

sultanmuradII

5th August 2006, 10:28 PM

My advice to Salahudin is to research a topic thoroughly and then make your points clear on the topic at hand.

To brother napalee, I would like to meet with you. The email address that you have posted, can I communicate with you through that?

abu imaan an-nepalee

6th August 2006, 10:30 AM

abu imaan an-nepalee

8th August 2006, 11:14 AM

salahudin, have you started researching on the correct topic yet?

Abu Hafsa

27th March 2007, 10:57 AM

Iman (belief)*is decisive.* POG is not. Iman increasing and decreasing is a falsehood. A decrease in iman i.e less belief is tantamount to kufr...and you have the audacity to call the Hizb of being innovators. I advise you armchair scholors to acquire some knowledge before accusing others..

The Second Introduction, from the Book Actions Which Expel The Doer From The Relgiion:

A Clarification that Īmān Increases and Decreases<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

The Islamic texts from the Qur’an and Sunnah indicate that Īmān increases and decreases; rising with acts of obedience, diminishing and weakening due to acts of disobedience and transgression.

Allah (swt) has said, “That they may add Īmān to their Īmān.” Al-Qur’an, Surah al-Fath 48:4

He (swt) also said, “We increased them in guidance.” Al-Qur’an, Surah Kahf 18:13

He (swt) also said, “Whenever there comes down a Surah, some of them say: ‘Which of you has had His faith increased by it?’ Indeed, those who believe, their faith is increased and they do rejoice.”<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

In this narration the Prophet (saw) described Īmān as an action and deemed it to be the best of all actions. The Prophet (saw) also said, [I]“Īmān has over seventy branches; its uppermost is the testimony of faith; There is no true god except Allah, and the lowermost of which is removing a harmful object from the road.” [Sahīh Muslim]
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

Imām Bukhari in his ‘Saheeh’ has mentioned,“Īmān is speech and actions; increasing and decreasing.”<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

Ibn Rajab in his book, ‘Fath al-Bāri’, said,<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
“The increasing and decreasing of Īmān is a statement of the vast majority of the scholars. It has been narrated that this statement has been attributed to a group from the Sahābah including Abī Dardā, Abu Hurayrah and Ibn Abbās amongst others. Statements carrying the same meaning have been narrated from Ali and Ibn Masūd as well; and from the Ta’bi'īn, Mujahid and others.” <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

Salahudin

27th March 2007, 12:01 PM

Here follows the explanation for the arm chair scholars (who do not appreciate the linguistic definitions or the sharia definitions and their usage such as for the word Iman): I urge you all to read, re-read this carefully to absorb what it says:

Iman

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

Several questions and queries have reached us stipulating that Iman is the decisive assent that conforms to reality and is based on evidence; that this is a Shari’ah definition of Iman and that there are several Ayat denoting that Iman increases, such as the saying of Allah (swt) in Surat al-Anfal: “For, Believers are those who, when Allah is mentioned, feel a tremor in their hearts, and when they hear His signs rehearsed, find their faith strengthened, and put their trust in their Lord.” [TMQ]. So does Iman increase? Does it also decrease? What is the opinion in the difference among the scholars of the Ummah in respect of this matter? Is it the assent (Tasdeeq) that increases or the effect of Tasdeeq, in terms of humility, piety and deeds? What is the denotation of the Ayat in which the increase of Iman is mentioned?

Answer:

The concept of Iman has been the subject of difference. It had been said that it was the assent with the heart, the acknowledgement with the tongue and the performing of pious deeds. It had also been said that it was the assent with the heart alone, and that it was the acknowledgement alone. Hence, when a difference occurred over the link between the acknowledgement with the tongue and the action of the limbs on the one hand and the assent of the heart on the other hand, and over what comes under the definition of Iman and what does not, the issue of increase and decrease in Iman or the lack of either branched out.

Those who adopt the opinion that actions come under the concept of Iman say that Iman increases and decreases according to the multitude and the scarcity of actions. Those who exclude actions from the concept of Iman say that Iman neither increases nor decreases, because assent is unacceptable with doubt, thus there is no room for increase and decrease.

Those who adopt the opinion of increase and decrease in Iman use a host of rational and textual arguments. The rational arguments are: The Iman of individuals from among the Ummah, including the Fussaq (transgressors), is not equal to the Iman of the prophets and the angels. Also, assent has several grades, because the assent of the Muqallid (imitator) is not like the one who knows the evidence, nor is it like the assent of the observer or the absorbed one who sees (the signs of) Allah (swt) in everything.

Also, the assent by the heart increases and decreases according to the multitude or the scarcity of insight and the clarity of evidences; assent increases through manifestation, and the Iman of the righteous is free of suspicion, thus it is stronger than the Iman of others.

As for the textual evidences, they include the saying of Allah in Surat al-Fatah: “It is He Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the Believers, that they may add faith to their faith;-” [TMQ] Also, the saying of Allah in Surat al-Anfal: “For, Believers are those who, when Allah is mentioned, feel a tremor in their hearts, and when they hear His signs rehearsed, find their faith strengthened, and put (all) their trust in their Lord.” [TMQ] And His saying in Surat al-Muddathir: “And that the Believers may increase in Faith.” [TMQ]; and in Surat al-Tawbah: “Yea, those who believe, - their faith is increased and they do rejoice.” [TMQ]. The textual evidence also includes the Hadith in which the Messenger of Allah (saw) was asked: “Does Iman increase and decrease?” He said: “Yes, it increases until one enters paradise and it decreases until one enters hell.”; and the Hadith of: “If the Iman of Abu Bakr were weighed against the Iman of this Ummah, it would outweigh it.” They also said that the Ayat mentioned the increase and anything that increases is also subject to decrease, except for the prophets due to the infallibility factor. The increase in the Iman occurs because of the increase in the pious deeds and the decrease occurs because of the decrease in pious deeds. The pious deed is to undertake what is commanded and abstain from what is prohibited.

Although these Ayat have mentioned the increase of Iman, the Mufassireen did however differ over their interpretation (Tafseer). Some of them proceeded with the attempt to confirm the increase and decrease in the assent, and they interpreted the Ayat as follows: The saying of Allah in Surat al-Anfal: “And when they hear His signs rehearsed, find their faith strengthened,” i.e. the assent, they said that “the Iman of this hour is greater than yesterday’s, for he who assents twice and thrice, his assent increases in comparison with the past; what is meant by the increase is not the strength of the evidence, but rather the multitude of evidences.

Those who rejected the notion of decrease and increase interpreted the texts as follows:

The saying of Allah (swt) in Surat al-Anfal: “and when they hear His signs rehearsed, find their faith strengthened”, and His saying in Surat al-Fatah: “It is He Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the Believers, that they may add faith to their faith;-” they said that this was applicable to the Sahaba, because the Qur’an was being revealed all the time and they would believe in it, thus their latter assent is an addition to the former; as for us, the revelation has ceased; and what has increased through confidence, multitude of pondering and the accumulation of proofs is in fact the fruit of assent and not its origin. As for the saying of Allah: “Find their faith strengthened” [TMQ], and His saying in Aal Imran: “So it increased their Iman” [TMQ], it means the collective composed of the assent, the approval and the action, not the assent alone. As for the Hadith, “If the Iman of Abu Bakr were weighed against the Iman of this Ummah, it would outweigh it”, it was a preponderance in the reward because he was first in Iman. They also said: “It is not wrong to use the word Iman in reference to these actions in respect of their indication of assent with the heart overtly. – “And never would Allah make your faith of no effect” [TMQ] – i.e. your Salat. – “Iman is over 70 grades, its top is the Shahada of there is no god but Allah and its last is removing nuisance from the road.”

Some of them said that the difference between Abu Hanifah and the rest of the Imams was simulated, because the fact that the actions of the limbs are imperative to the Iman of the heart, or part of Iman, while agreeing that the perpetrator of a major sin does not leave the fold of Iman, would render the difference irrelevant. Those who said that the neglecter of Salat is Kafir added to this foundation other evidences and they agreed that the adulterer, the thief, the drinker and the plunderer are not stripped of the quality of Iman completely. The saying of Ahl al-Sunnah that “Iman is a saying and an action” means that Allah (swt) wanted from the servants to assent with the heart and confirm with the tongue.

They also agreed that if one assented with his heart and confirmed it with his tongue, then refrained from acting with his limbs, he would be a rebel against Allah and His messenger, and he would deserve punishment, and some of those who do not include the actions in the definition of Iman say that his Iman would be like that of the Sahaba, the prophets and the angels, because Iman is the same thing.

Those who adopt the increase and decrease dealt with the Iman of the angels and the prophets and said: “The Iman of the prophets increases but does not decrease, because the perfect is only prone to perfection, and the Iman of the Messenger of Allah (saw) after the ascent does not necessitate a disparity in Iman; they conveyed the consensus that the Iman of the angels and the prophets cannot decrease because of decrease in righteous deeds. They interpreted the saying of Allah in Surat al-Baqarah: “He said: ‘Have you not believed then?’ He said: ‘Yes, but for my heart to be reassured.’” [TMQ] as meaning: ‘Does your Iman not suffice you?’ He answered: ‘I have believed but just to reassure my heart by seeing the manner.’

In fact Iman according to Shari'ah is “the decisive assent that conforms to reality and is based on evidence.” The decisive assent means the gelling of the heart with the consent of Aql (reason), i.e. its origin is the decisive assent by the Wijdan (heart) on condition of the Aql consenting. As for action, it is not included in the definition of Iman, but rather the fruit of Iman, not its origin or its essence. Iman, in this Shari'ah sense, is not susceptible to increase and decrease, because the decisiveness that bars the contradictory cannot be predisposed to increase and decrease. Either it is a decisiveness that bars any contradictory to it, or it isn’t. Hence, if the decisiveness is established, then there is no room either for increase or decrease. The increase is non-existent and is worthless in respect of the occurrence of decisiveness, and the decrease is to bring decisiveness to a lower level, denoting doubt and suspicion, which amounts to Kufr by unanimous agreement.
As for what they listed in terms of rational and textual proofs about the increase and decrease of Iman, the rational proof represents the evidence that Aql (reason) generates independently to confirm an issue. What they listed in terms of rational proofs cannot be deemed as sound evidence to confirm the issue, because the Iman of the angels cannot be researched rationally, because angels are beyond the senses. As for the Issue of the prophets’ Iman in comparison with the individuals of the Ummah, if Iman in this context means the assent by heart and the righteous deeds, then it has been established according to Shari'ah that the prophets are ahead of others. However, if by Iman the decisive assent were meant, then to say that the Iman of the two are disparate must be built upon the soundness of various degrees of decisiveness. Such an issue does not arise as, rather than itself being sound, independent evidence, it would be dependent upon it. These two issues are subject of difference; besides, if the disparity in the Iman of the two can be rationally established, how could Aql prove that the Iman of Lut and Haroun (peace be upon them) were below the Iman of Ibrahim and Mousa the moment they were chosen for prophethood? There is no way to prove this and to delve into it is a waste of time. As for the extensive contemplation and the level of clarity in the evidences, these are subject to difference about whether they are related to the root of Iman or to its fruits, and to take a decision on either of the two matters must be directly referred to sense perception in order to deem it as a sound rational proof; otherwise, the preponderance would be a judgement that lacks evidence.

As for the textual evidences, the issue of Iman is part of Aqeedah matters and its evidence must be conclusive, because Aqeedah matters can only be taken by way of certitude. The mentioned Ayat are not conclusive in their allusion to the increase of Iman within the context of the assent by heart, let alone their denotation to its decrease. Scholars differed over their Tafseer but none of them claimed that the Tafseer of the others contradicted conclusive evidence and none of them accused the others of Kufr; each party deemed his Tafseer preponderant with one of the aspects of preponderance. Were the Ayat conclusive in meaning, they would stand as a valid argument with their own wordings and syntheses without the need for a Qareenah (conjunction) to indicate the intended meaning from them.

As for the Ahadith, not one single Hadith has been deemed as Sahih (sound) regarding the increase and decrease of Iman, neither Marfu’ (attributed) nor Mawquf (discontinued), and the issue was unknown in the time of the Sahaba. As for the report, “If the Iman of Abu Bakr were weighed against the Iman of this Ummah, it would outweigh it”, it is textually part of the dispute and Iman was explained as being the reward, because he was among the first in Iman. Besides, it is impossible for Iman to mean assent in this context, for among people, there are thousands of Sahaba and they include the ten who were promised paradise, those who were mentioned in the Qur’an as having gained the pleasure of Allah (swt), the martyrs and righteous till the day of judgement. Hence to interpret it in the manner they did would not leave any merit or Iman for the Ummah. Besides, the report was not established as soundly attributed (Marfu’); it is rather the saying of Omar (ra) and the attribution in it is not specified; its wording in the book of al-Shu’ab of al-Bayhaqi is as follows: “If the Iman of Abu Bakr were weighed against the Iman of the People of the earth, it would outweigh them.” Even if these reports were sound, they would not be deemed as proof because the issue is doctrinal and Aqeedah cannot be established via probability.

To argue that the Ayat mention the increase, that all that is susceptible to increase is also susceptible to decrease, that the Iman of the prophets is susceptible to increase in Iman through the increase of righteous deeds but not to decrease because of the exigency of infallibility, and that the decrease of Iman due to lack of righteous deeds cannot be applicable to the angels and prophets, is not correct. This is because if it is conceded that all that is susceptible to increase is also susceptible to decrease and that the Iman of the prophets is susceptible to increase, then the exception given to the susceptibility of decrease in the Iman of the prophets is arbitrary, especially that the exception is not conformable. The decrease in righteous deeds does not affect the infallibility, because the righteous deeds are wider than the performing of Fardh and refraining from Haram; the righteous deeds means to perform all the commanded deeds and avoid all the prohibited deeds. The Ayat mentioned the disparity in the levels of righteous deeds among the prophets; besides, the evidence of infallibility is rational and not textual and the infallibility of the prophets is specific to the Tableegh (conveyance). Furthermore, the unanimous consensus that the prophets are exempted from decrease in Iman serves in itself as an evidence of the error in the claim that Iman increases and decreases, because if the increase and decrease were possible in Iman, it would be applicable to all humans; this inconsistency led them to justification and interpretation. As for the justification, they said that the Iman of the prophets increases but does not decrease because the perfect is that which is only susceptible to perfection. This is rejected, because it is only the absolute perfection that is not susceptible to increase and decrease. As for the relative perfection, it is susceptible to both increase and decrease and the perfection of the prophets is relative in comparison to other humans and not an absolute perfection that takes them out of their humanity. As for their interpretation, they found that the prophets experience a major manifestation from time to time as was the case with the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the night of ascent, and they conceded that his Iman is not of the same level after it, and yet they said that this does not necessarily suggest a disparity in their Iman. This is odd, because if the Iman after the ascent was different to that before it, then this is none other than disparity itself. Since no sound evidence was produced in exempting the prophets from decrease in Iman, this compels them to list the Iman of the prophets under the denotation of the Ayat which were interpreted by the increase and decrease of Iman, because the Messenger of Allah (saw) is included in the address; they have no other choice but to resort to interpretation or to seek a different Tafseer.

On the basis of the aforementioned, we conclude that the dispute over the increase and decrease is built upon the definition of Iman. The dispute in the definition of Iman emanates from the inclusion of actions in the name of Iman. This was attributed to the fact that some scholars relied on their definition of Iman on the reality of Iman demanded by Shari'ah, so they said it was an assent by the heart and they deemed the actions as an effect of this assent. The others relied on what was mentioned in the texts – Ayat and Ahadith – which talked about Iman and described it by increase and decrease, where they considered the actions included in the definition of Iman. The former said that doubt or defect must not creep into the decisive assent, because it would amount to Kufr; hence, the increase and decrease pertain to the effect of Iman, which is the actions. The latter said that the increase and decrease pertain to the second part of the definition of Iman, which is the action. Hence, we find that there is an agreement between them on the Hukm (verdict) on Iman and on the fact that a defect in Iman amounts to Kufr; they also agree on the Hukm of actions, namely that they amount to sin and not Kufr, except for their dispute over the neglecter of Salat, because Salat was singled out through texts stipulating the Kufr of he who forsakes it, thus some of them adopted the literal meaning of the texts, like Imam Ahmed, and others interpreted these texts and classified Salat as an action because this is its reality, like the other Imams among others.

Therefore, the increase of Iman mentioned in some verses of the Qur’an means the strength of the link with Allah (swt) and the decrease of Iman means the weakness of the link with Allah. It does not mean the decrease in the decisive assent that conforms to reality and is based on evidence, because the decrease in the decisive assent means the creeping of doubt and suspicion, and this is Kufr. The meaning of, “It increased their Iman” and “So that they may add Iman to their Iman”, is that their link with Allah (swt) has been strengthened due to their remembering that Allah will suffice them and that He is al-Qadir, and al-Nasser, who alone can bring benefit and inflict harm, that nothing will happen to them except for what Allah has prescribed for them. Hence, the reports about the increase reflect the increase in their link with Allah, with the presence of their Iman; this is due to their remembering that to Allah belong the soldiers of heavens and earth and due to their conviction that Allah will grant them victory. This link is strengthened through the remembrance of Allah, the reading and the reciting of the Qur’an. Also, in order to strengthen this link, one needs to crystallise the concepts that emanate from the Aqeedah, by illustrating the reality of these thoughts, perceiving their denotations and consolidating the assent in them by establishing their conformity to reality and delving into their evidences. Iman weakens when one engrosses his mind in worldly affairs and spends his time chasing the pleasures of this life.

15th Rabi’ al-Thani 1426

24th May 2005

Skillganon

27th March 2007, 12:26 PM

Assalamu alaikum wr wb bro

.

Therefore, the increase of Iman mentioned in some verses of the Qur’an means the strength of the link with Allah (swt) and the decrease of Iman means the weakness of the link with Allah.

How do you measure strength of the link with Allah(swt)?

Imaam is not independent of action, not it is static.

Faith increases and decreases. It flactuates.
Increase and decrease in imaam obviously has an effect on action,
whereas inversely action has an effect on immam.

It does not mean the decrease in the decisive assent that conforms to reality and is based on evidence, because the decrease in the decisive assent means the creeping of doubt and suspicion, and this is Kufr. The meaning of, “It increased their Iman” and “So that they may add Iman to their Iman”, is that their link with Allah (swt) has been strengthened due to their remembering that Allah will suffice them and that He is al-Qadir, and al-Nasser, who alone can bring benefit and inflict harm, that nothing will happen to them except for what Allah has prescribed for them. Hence, the reports about the increase reflect the increase in their link with Allah, with the presence of their Iman; this is due to their remembering that to Allah belong the soldiers of heavens and earth and due to their conviction that Allah will grant them victory. This link is strengthened through the remembrance of Allah, the reading and the reciting of the Qur’an. Also, in order to strengthen this link, one needs to crystallise the concepts that emanate from the Aqeedah, by illustrating the reality of these thoughts, perceiving their denotations and consolidating the assent in them by establishing their conformity to reality and delving into their evidences. Iman weakens when one engrosses his mind in worldly affairs and spends his time chasing the pleasures of this life.

15th Rabi’ al-Thani 1426

24th May 2005

Now this part I don't think you even understand. Not to mention the rest.

abu imaan an-nepalee

27th March 2007, 06:28 PM

another "cut n paste" special from the man without a plan salahudin.

what do you say about the ijmaa' as-sahaaba(radi ALLAHU 'anhum) where they declared takfeer upon the people who refused to pay zakat even though they believed in it's obligation to pay? As opposed to those who refused to pay an rejected the obligation as well.

The sahaaba(radi ALLAHU 'anhum) made takfeer of these people due to the fact that they refused to pay the zakah and fought not to pay it.

Do you accept this situation or reject it brother?

jazakALLAHU Khairan