Perhaps Ibn taymiyah was upon shariah sufism

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

IBN TAYMIYYA ON
"FUTOOH AL-GHAYB" AND SUFISM

The external evidence of Ibn Taymiyya's affiliation with the Qadiri tariqat by a chain through three shaykhs named Ibn Qudama has been given by Ibn Taymiyya's disciple, Ibn Abd al-Hadi. Further internal evidence of Ibn Taymiyya's sufi inclination can be seen in his hundred-page commentary on Gilani, covering only five of the 78 sermons of "Futooh al-Ghayb", but showing that he considered the sufi path a salutary effort and even essential within the life of the Islamic community.
The commentary is found in volume 10:455-548 of the first Riyadh edition of the "Majmoo` fatawi Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya".

It can be seen from this commentary that Ibn Taymiyya calls Abd al-Qadir "shaykhuna", "our shaykh," a title which he never gives anyone else in his entire works, just as he never gives the title "imamuna", "our imam", to other than Ahmad ibn Hanbal.

In his commentary on the "Futooh" Ibn Taymiyya stresses that the primacy of the shari`a forms the soundest tradition in sufism, and to argue this point he lists over a dozen early masters, as well as more contemporary shaykhs like his fellow Hanbalis, al-Ansari al-Harawi and Abd al-Qadir, and the latter's own shaykh, Hammad al-Dabbas:


"The upright among the followers of the Path - like the majority of the early shaykhs (shuyukh al-salaf) such as Fudayl ibn `Iyad, Ibrahim ibn Adham, Ma`ruf al-Karkhi, al-Sari al-Saqai, al-Junayd ibn Muhammad and others of the early teachers, as well as Shaykh Abd al-Qadir [Gilani], Shaykh Hammad, Shaykh Abul Bayan and others of the later masters - do not permit the followers of the Path to depart from the divinely legislated command and prohibition, even were that person to have flown in the air or walked on water. p516"
In his treatise on the difference between the lawful forms of worship and the innovative forms, entitled "Risalat al-`ibadaat al-shar`iyya wal-farq baynaha wa bayn al-bid`iyya" (in "Majmoo`at al-rasa'il wal- masa'il", Beirut, Lajnat al-turath al-`arabi 5:83),
Ibn Taymiyya unmistakably states that the lawful is the method and way of "those who follow the path" (al-salikeen) or "the way of self-denial" (zuhd) and those who follow "what is called poverty and Sufism", i.e. the fuqara and the sufis:


"The lawful is that by which one approaches near to Allah. It is the way of Allah. It is righteousness, obedience, good deeds, charity, and fairness. It is the way of those on the path (al- salikeen), and the method of those intending Allah and worshipping Him; it is that which is travelled by everyone who desires Allah and follows the way of self-denial (zuhd) and religious practice, and what is called poverty and Sufism and the like."
Regarding Abd al-Qadir's teaching that the salik should abstain from permitted desires, Ibn Taymiyya begins by determining that Abd al- Qadir's intention is that one should give up those permitted things which are not commanded, for there may be a danger in them. But to what extent? If Islam is essentially learning and carrying out the Divine command, then there must be a way for the striver on the path to determine the will of Allah in each particular situation. Ibn Taymiyya concedes that the Qur'an and Sunna cannot possibly cover every possible specific event in the life of every believer. Yet if the goal of union of will and desire with Allah is to be accomplished by those seeking Him, there must be a way for the striver to ascertain the Divine command in its particularity.

Ibn Taymiyya's answer is to apply the legal concept of ijtihad to the spiritual path, specifically to the notion of ilham or inspiration. In his efforts to achieve a union of his will with Allah's, the true Sufi reaches a state where he desires nothing more than to discover the greater good, the action which is most pleasing and loveable to Allah. When external shar`i arguments cannot direct him in such matters, he can rely on the standard Sufi notions of private inspiration (ilham) and intuitive perception (dhawq):


"If the salik has creatively employed his efforts to the external shar`i indications and sees no clear probability concerning his preferable action, he may then feel inspired - along with his goodness of intention and reverent fear of Allah - to choose one of two actions as superior to the other. This kind of inspiration (ilham) is an indication concerning the truth. It may be even a stronger indication than weak analogies, weak hadiths, weak literal arguments (zawahir), and weak istisHaab which are employed by many who delve into the principles, differences, and systematizing of fiqh. p.473."
Ibn Taymiyya bases this view on the principle that Allah has put a natural disposition for the truth in mankind (p. 474), and when this natural disposition has been grounded in the reality of faith and enlightened by Qur'anic teaching, and still the striver on the path is unable to determine the precise will of Allah in specific instances, then his heart will show him the preferable course of action. Such an inspiration, he holds, is one of the strongest authorities possible in the situation.

Certainly the striver will sometimes err, falsely guided by his inspiration or intuitive perception of the situation, just as the mujtahid sometimes errs. But, he says, even when the mujtahid or the inspired striver is in error, he is obedient.

Appealing to ilham and dhawq does not mean following one's own whims or personal preferences (p. 479). In his letter to Nasr al-Manbiji ("Majmu`at al-rasa'il wal-masa'il" 1:162), he qualifies this intuition as "faith-informed" (al-dhawq al-imaani). His point is, as in the commentary to the "Futooh", that inspirational experience is by nature ambiguous and needs to be qualified and informed by the criteria of the Qur'an and the Sunna. Nor can it lead to a certainty of the truth in his view, but what it can do is give the believer firm grounds for choosing the more probable correct course of action in a given instance and help him to conform his will, in the specific details of his life, to that of his Creator and Commander.

Other works of his as well abound in praise for Sufi teachings. For example, in his book "al-ihtijaaj bi al-qadar" (Cairo: al-matba`a al- salafiyya, 1394/1974 p. 38), he defends the Sufis' emphasis on love of Allah and their voluntarist rather than intellectual approach to religion as being in agreement with the teachings of the Qur'an , the sound hadith, and the imja` al-salaf:


"As for the Sufis, they affirm the love (of Allah), and this is more evident among them than all other issues. The basis of their Way (tariqa) is simply will and love. The affirmation of the love of Allah is well-known in the speech of their early and recent masters, just as it is affirmed in the Book and the Sunna and in the agreement of the salaf."
Blessings and Peace on the Prophet, his Family, and his Companions.

G Fouad Haddad ©
20 Mar 1996

[Skillganon]

I am trying to make head & tales out of this article, but it is trying to justify sufis theological innuendo.

Well it does not sound like ibn Taymiyaah to praise the sunnah of the innovator in his innovation i.e. sufism and what it all entails.

If his(sufis) great love of allah(swt) is their basis for the inspirational innovation than woe to them and woe to those who came before who led astray with such notion.

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

I just wonder if there is tasawwuf that is legitimate today. such as the deobandiyah i have discourse on islamic way of life by mufti muhammad taqi usmani hafidullah and when he speaks of tariqas he speaks a lot about following quran and sunnah and leaving innovation including mawlid.

[moubeen]

I have read in a book translated in english titled "Al-furqaan baynal-awliyaah ar-rahmaan wa awliyaah ash-shaytaan" - The Criterion - In it I remember Shaykh ul islam mentions these things about ilham, and how Umar ibn-alkhattab RA was one who would speak with inspirations and many time his opinion would be confirmed by revelation afterwards - however Ibn taymiyyah made some good points along with that to say he was not always correct in everything and Abu Bakr RA was correct in certain matters and he gave some examples.

I recommend people read that for a really good explanation on this topic. For it is not like the sufi deobandees like to potray that their sheikh has knowledge of the unseen and what is in someones heart with certainty. Rather a lot fo what they speak can be whispers of shaytaan and mere conjecture with no certain knowledge.

So advise those confused to read the book by Ibn Taymiyyah and not rely on Sufi 'asharees to selectively quote what suits their school of extremism.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

I am trying to make head & tales out of this article, but it is trying to justify sufis theological innuendo.

Well it does not sound like ibn Taymiyaah to praise the sunnah of the innovator in his innovation i.e. sufism and what it all entails.

If his(sufis) great love of allah(swt) is their basis for the inspirational innovation than woe to them and woe to those who came before who led astray with such notion.

You don't seem to understand that Sufi can mean more than one thing, just as Salafi can (ie. Madhkhali, Ikhwani, or Jihaadi). Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) wrote a commentary on "Futuh al-Ghayb" and Imam Ibn al-Qayyim (RA) wrote a commentary on the Invocations of Shaykh Abdullah al-Ansari (RA). If Shaykh Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani (RA) were here today, he would be opposed on all sides. The Madhkhalis would call him a "Soofee deviant" and the Sufis would call him an "anthropomorphist Wahhabi extremist".

[Skillganon]

One cannot convince me....sufism is not deviant.

It stands for deviancy.

Why would madkhali's call him sufi?

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

One cannot convince me....sufism is not deviant.

It stands for deviancy.

Why would madkhali's call him sufi?

I do not mean to insult you, but you are as stubborn as a jackass. Do you understand that words have nuanced meanings? Do you understand that "tasawwuf" DOES NOT mean grave-worship? Do you understand who Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani and Imam Junayd are?

[joefso]

Perhaps more intrinsic talk rather then superficial talk?

[Skillganon]

I do not mean to insult you, but you are as stubborn as a jackass. Do you understand that words have nuanced meanings? Do you understand that "tasawwuf" DOES NOT mean grave-worship? Do you understand who Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani and Imam Junayd are?

Stubborness. Sufi is innovation.....tawassul is not..it means drawing close.

Their is a way to draw close....and this is they way the salaf do it..

What sufism is, is not tawassul...how do you draw close by the sunnah of innovator in his innovation?

Secondly bro....I never said tawassul means grave worship although it is an act found in some sufis...so let not put red herring into it.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Stubborness. Sufi is innovation.....tawassul is not..it means drawing close.

Their is a way to draw close....and this is they way the salaf do it..

What sufism is, is not tawassul...how do you draw close by the sunnah of innovator in his innovation?

Secondly bro....I never said tawassul means grave worship although it is an act found in some sufis...so let not put red herring into it.

I didn't write "Tawassul" I wrote "Tasawwuf" (Sufism). I was saying that Sufism is not grave-worship, hence Sufism is not intrinsically innnovation.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Sufism means purification of the self through dhikr. This is called Tazkiyyah.

[Skillganon]

I didn't write "Tawassul" I wrote "Tasawwuf" (Sufism). I was saying that Sufism is not grave-worship, hence Sufism is not intrinsically innnovation.

Where did you get the notion that sufism is not innovation. It is innovation.

Where did you see me say sufism means grave worship..?

Sufism is innovation itself...it has bidah amongst it and shirk amongst it. Different group differ amonst their bidah to their shirk.

How do you purify yourself by the sunnah of innovator in his innovation? when it is repungent to allah and his messenger?

No it is not purification it is perversion...in the mind and soul.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Where did you get the notion that sufism is not innovation. It is innovation.

Where did you see me say sufism means grave worship..?

Sufism is innovation itself...it has bidah amongst it and shirk amongst it. Different group differ amonst their bidah to their shirk.

How do you purify yourself by the sunnah of innovator in his innovation? when it is repungent to allah and his messenger?

No it is not purification it is perversion...in the mind and soul.

You don't understand that words can have nuanced meanings. Sufism does not "mean" innovation and shirk. It means purification. There are Sufis who have taught shirk and innovation. But the tasawwuf of Imam Junayd (RA) and Shaykh Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani (RA) is pure and upon the Sunnah, with no hint of shirk or bidah.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Good tasawwuf:

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b6378.html

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b6149.html

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b8900.html

Bad tasawwuf:

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b5848.html

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b5866.html

http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b9202.html

[Skillganon]

You don't understand that words can have nuanced meanings. Sufism does not "mean" innovation and shirk. It means purification. There are Sufis who have taught shirk and innovation. But the tasawwuf of Imam Junayd (RA) and Shaykh Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani (RA) is pure and upon the Sunnah, with no hint of shirk or bidah.

Bro I am not talking about semantics. I am talking about reality what sufism stands for and what it is by practice, adherance and belief.

My issue was not anything to do with those people.

Was sufism invented by Abd_Qadir Jilani and Imam Junayd?

Was it practices that our prophet as a way? or any of the salaf as a way of of life, manner, even if it was no bidah and shirk?

Will it be astute to claim that the salaf was sufis? the prophet was sufis?
The Muslim are sufis?

What is the difference between salafi and sufi?

In my book sufism is innovation a later innovation that appeared even if one want's to claim by word or not, by meaning of words lot of sects will be legitamized.

[Skillganon]

Here Bad tawassuf which are all bad

http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?pg=rslt&txt=sufism&st=2&fld=5&pglist=0&ln=eng

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

I'm not talking semantics, you are. You don't know what the word means (and probably don't speak Arabic) but you feel capable of arguing.

No Imam Junayd (RA) didn't invent tasawwuf. Tasawwuf is another word for tazkiyyah and zuhd, and tazkiyyah and zuhd was practiced by all of the Sahabah. Hence, true tasawwuf comes from the minhaj of the Salaaf. False tasawwuf is in the hellfire with all the other innovations.

Do you hate Imam Junayd (RA) or Shaykh al-Jilani (RA)? Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) considered them Imams of Ahl us-Sunnah, and recognized Shariah-based tasawwuf as a legitimate part of Islam. There can be NO DOUBT about this to anyone who has read him extensively.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Here Bad tawassuf which are all bad

http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?pg=rslt&txt=sufism&st=2&fld=5&pglist=0&ln=eng

I didn't see anything there that said "tazkiyyah and zuhd are shirk and bidah", which is basically your belief.

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

tawheedullah what do you think ofthe deobandi tasawwuf?

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

tawheedullah what do you think ofthe deobandi tasawwuf?

Their tasawwuf is upon the Sunnah, but I don't associate with them because they're Maturidis.

[Skillganon]

I'm not talking semantics, you are. You don't know what the word means (and probably don't speak Arabic) but you feel capable of arguing.

No Imam Junayd (RA) didn't invent tasawwuf. Tasawwuf is another word for tazkiyyah and zuhd, and tazkiyyah and zuhd was practiced by all of the Sahabah. Hence, true tasawwuf comes from the minhaj of the Salaaf. False tasawwuf is in the hellfire with all the other innovations.

Do you hate Imam Junayd (RA) or Shaykh al-Jilani (RA)? Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) considered them Imams of Ahl us-Sunnah, and recognized Shariah-based tasawwuf as a legitimate part of Islam. There can be NO DOUBT about this to anyone who has read him extensively.


First issue of Jilani or Junayd I will not talk about as it is of no concern. It won't legitimize sufism any bit.
Also I never went into semantics by meaning of words to Justify such sects and their practice. One was trying to convince me of it...

IF tazkiyaah and zuhd was practiced by the shahabah than it was legilsated and authentic without going into extreme in it or without negligence of other aspects of Islam.

What is concern is sufism itself....sufism itself is bidah....I don't care if it was Jilani or Junayd that sufis claim to emulate or call them sufism.

So no their is not art form or practice that is sufism which is without bidah nowday's or any other days and secondly Imam Ghazalli has deviancy so no his not exactly a prime example of anything.

Secondly it is well known that sufism is a later sect that appeared after the salaf. Nor was it a practice emulated by the shahabah.


Sufism (tasawwuf) did not appear until after the first three generations which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) praised when he said, “The best of mankind is my generation, then those who come after them, then those who come after them…” (narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2652; Muslim, 2533; from the hadeeth of Ibn Mas’ood).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to the word soofiyyah (Sufism), it was not known during the first three generations, rather it became known after that.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 11/5

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to the word soofiyyah (Sufism), it was not known during the first three generations, rather it became known after that.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 11/5


Tasawwuf was once a reality without a name, now it's a name without a reality.

You don't seem to realize it but our argument has been semantic from the beginning and we actually agree on this issue.

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

I think the tasawwuf of ibn taymiyah that he praised was zuhd. for he thought it impermissible to submit your affairs to a shaykh blindly following anything he says with no questions.

This is precisely what bayah is you give bayah to a shaykh in a tariqa to follow him and recieve his remedies for the sickness of your heart (like set disciplines that he lays down for one).


Im thinking that this giving bayah to a shaykh which the tariqas does is indeed innovation. For the sahabah did not do such thing rather they gave bayah to the ruler and before that the bayah was given to the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam but we know not from the early ones of doing this practice and allah knows best.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

I think the tasawwuf of ibn taymiyah that he praised was zuhd. for he thought it impermissible to submit your affairs to a shaykh blindly following anything he says with no questions.

This is precisely what bayah is you give bayah to a shaykh in a tariqa to follow him and recieve his remedies for the sickness of your heart (like set disciplines that he lays down for one).


Im thinking that this giving bayah to a shaykh which the tariqas does is indeed innovation. For the sahabah did not do such thing rather they gave bayah to the ruler and before that the bayah was given to the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam but we know not from the early ones of doing this practice and allah knows best.

Honestly, this has been the opinion of most of the Sunni Muslims (all four madhhabs) for most of history. The Sufis of today like to whitewash this fact. The reason I make an exception for the Deobandis is because in their book Ta'lim al-Islam, it says that blindly following a Sufi Shaykh is haraam.

[Yasir]

Whether you call it Tasawwuf or Tazkiyyah, the point is to achieve that Zuhd through total adherence to the Sunnah of the Prophet sallallahu 'alaihi wasallam. That should be something we all agree upon.

[aMuslimForLife]

As Salaam alaykum Ahlus Sunnah,

There are many tariqas upon the Shariah, however there are many more that are not.

I know you won't agree with my list of tariqas upon the Shariah but here it is.

Shadhili tariqa as taught by the students of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Shaghouri for Syria, such as Shaykh Nuh Keller and Shaykh Muhammad Al Yaquobi.

Ba Alawi Tariqa as taught by the Habaib of Yemen.

Naqashabandi tariqa as taught by the Deobandis.

Qadiri tariqa as taught by the Shaykh of Muhammad Sharif, which is a tariqa based on Imam Uthman Dan Fodio, who was taught both Shadhili and Qadiri.

I don't know of others, I know of them because I have actually talked to their followers and/or sat in some of their classes.

But the Tariqa you are probably looking for is the Qadiri tariqa as taught by the Shaykh of Muhammad Sharif based on Imam Uthman Dan Fodio, because they are strict malikis, and the strict malikis and Hanbalis have the same definition of innovation, which tend to differ with the Shafis and the Malikis who follow the Shafi position of innovation.

And Allah knows best.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

As Salaam alaykum Ahlus Sunnah,

There are many tariqas upon the Shariah, however there are many more that are not.

I know you won't agree with my list of tariqas upon the Shariah but here it is.

Shadhili tariqa as taught by the students of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Shaghouri for Syria, such as Shaykh Nuh Keller and Shaykh Muhammad Al Yaquobi.

Ba Alawi Tariqa as taught by the Habaib of Yemen.

Naqashabandi tariqa as taught by the Deobandis.

Qadiri tariqa as taught by the Shaykh of Muhammad Sharif, which is a tariqa based on Imam Uthman Dan Fodio, who was taught both Shadhili and Qadiri.

I don't know of others, I know of them because I have actually talked to their followers and/or sat in some of their classes.

But the Tariqa you are probably looking for is the Qadiri tariqa as taught by the Shaykh of Muhammad Sharif based on Imam Uthman Dan Fodio, because they are strict malikis, and the strict malikis and Hanbalis have the same definition of innovation, which tend to differ with the Shafis and the Malikis who follow the Shafi position of innovation.

And Allah knows best.

I've come to have the Mauritanian opinion on turuq, which is: all of them today are on bidah in some way or another.

[Skillganon]

It should be noted amongst the sufis you have to be careful with Zuhd and Tazkiyyah.

It is not the Zuhd that most sufism(sects) claim. That is total Ascetism.

It is the moderation between love of the dunya and total abandonment of wealth provided by allah(swt):

28:76 Qarun was doubtless, of the people of Moses; but he acted insolently towards them: such were the treasures We had bestowed on him that their very keys would have been a burden to a body of strong men, behold, his people said to him: "Exult not, for Allah loveth not those who exult (in riches).

28:77 "But seek, with the (wealth) which Allah has bestowed on thee, the Home of the Hereafter, nor forget thy portion in this world: but do thou good, as Allah has been good to thee, and seek not (occasions for) mischief in the land: for Allah loves not those who do mischief."


Secondly if you wan't to seek purification (Tazkiyyah) than the only way is to be a salaf i.e. adhering to the Quran and the sunnah only, and not sufism and their books or imam Ghazali as they have lot of fitnah and perversion or any of those crap they sell in those name.

[aMuslimForLife]

I've come to have the Mauritanian opinion on turuq, which is: all of them today are on bidah in some way or another.

There is nobody in this world who doesn't follow a weak position here or there.

No one is free from critizism. There is something that each one of us believes and practices that one can find fault in it. ANd if you believe otherwise your perception has some delusion.

[Skillganon]

As Salaam alaykum Ahlus Sunnah,

There are many tariqas upon the Shariah, however there are many more that are not.


This tareeqah and its like are among the innovated ways that go against the Qur’aan and Sunnah and the way followed by the best generations. All the shaykhs of these tareeqahs have made up their own wirds (phrases to be uttered as dhikr), hizb (books of du’aa’ to be read daily by their followers) and ways of worship by which each of them may be distinguished from the others; this goes against sharee’ah and divides the ummah.

Allaah has blessed this ummah by perfecting its religion and completing His Favour upon it, so everyone who comes up with an act of worship or a way that was not brought by sharee’ah is effectively rejecting what Allaah has said and accusing the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) of betraying the trust.

Along with this innovation of theirs, they may also be lying by claiming that they received their tareeqah from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or that they are following the path and guidance of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (al-khulafa’ al-raashideen).

The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:

Is there any such thing in Islam as the numerous tareeqahs like the Shaadhilyyah, Khalwatiyyah etc? If there is such a thing, what is the evidence for that? What is the meaning of the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And verily, this is My straight path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His path. This He has ordained for you that you may become Al‑Muttaqoon (the pious)”

[al-An’aam 6:153]

“And upon Allaah is the responsibility to explain the Straight Path. But there are ways that turn aside (such as Paganism, Judaism, Christianity). And had He willed, He would have guided you all (mankind)”

[al-Nahl 16:9]

What are the ways that separate people from the path of Allaah, and what is the way of Allaah? What is the meaning of the hadeeth narrated by Ibn Mas’ood, according to which the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) drew a line and said, “This is the path of guidance,” then he drew lines to its right and another to its left and said, “These are other paths and on each path there is a devil calling people to it”?

They answered:

There is no such thing in Islam as the tareeqahs that you mentioned, or anything else like them. What there is in Islam is what is indicated by the two verses and the hadeeth that you quoted, and what was indicated by the hadeeth in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The Jews split into seventy-one sects, and the Christians split into seventy-two sects. My ummah will split into seventy-three sects, all of which will be in Hell except one.” It was asked, “Who are they, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “Those who follow the same path as I and my companions are on today.” And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “A group among my ummah will continue to follow the truth and to be victorious, and they will not be harmed by those who forsake them or oppose them, until the command of Allaah comes to pass when they are like that.” The truth lies in following the Qur’aan and the saheeh, unambiguous Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This is the path of Allaah, this is the Straight Path. This is the straight line mentioned in the hadeeth of Ibn Mas’ood, and this is what was followed by the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (may Allaah be pleased with them and with their followers among the early generations (salaf) of this ummah, and with those who follow their path). All other tareeqahs or groups are the paths mentioned in the verse (interpretation of the meaning):

“… and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His path…”

[al-An’aam 6:153]

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 2/283, 284
ref:
Sufi tareeqahs and the ruling on joining them (http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=20375&ln=eng&txt=sufism)

And Allah knows best.

Yes allah(swt) knows best so it is incumbent on you to abandon it (tareeqahs).

[aMuslimForLife]

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 2/283, 284
ref:
Sufi tareeqahs and the ruling on joining them (http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=20375&ln=eng&txt=sufism)



thanks. for the link.

[Skillganon]

I don't take knowledge from websites, but thanks anyway.

Nor do you seem to take knowledge from the Allah(Swt) and the messenger or adhere to it,

or abandon the sunnah of the innovator in his innovations but rather adhere and take knowledge from them.

[aMuslimForLife]

Nor do you seem to take knowledge from the Allah(Swt) and the messenger or adhere to it,

or abandon the sunnah of the innovator in his innovations but rather adhere and take knowledge from them.

Allah says in the Quran, "Obey Allah, His Messenger and those in authority."

Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa salam) also said, "Stick to my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided successors."

And i try my hardest to do just that.

And Allah knows best.

[Abuz Zubair]

Allah says in the Quran, "Obey Allah, His Messenger and those in authority."

Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa salam) also said, "Stick to my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided successors."

And i try my hardest to do just that.

Fine, but Hazrat Aristotle has no authority in Islam. You don't have to believe that the world is either substance or accident.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Fine, but Hazrat Aristotle has no authority in Islam. You don't have to believe that the world is either substance or accident.

The Anti-Aristotelian movement is in full effect.

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh (Amuslim4life)

Shadhili tariqa as taught by the students of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Shaghouri for Syria, such as Shaykh Nuh Keller and Shaykh Muhammad Al Yaquobi.


Actually my dear brother, Nuh ha mim keller is a deviant who calls to misguidance and calls to blindly following a Shaykh of a tariqa. That one should be like a dead under its washer. You must submit your affairs to your shaykh. This is the falsehood that he was taught and that which he passes on.

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=3795 (Nuh ha mim keller's appraisal of Deviant people)


There are many tariqas upon the Shariah, however there are many more that are not.

Could you please give me evidence dear brother on giving bayah to a shaykh and becomming like a dead under the washer (for ghusl). If you submit your entire affairs to a shaykh of a tariqa you could be mislead by one who appears to be righteous but indeed is misguided.

Imaam Malik said:

Everyone after the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) will have his sayings accepted and rejected - not so the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam)."


He also said

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it"
(Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), & similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72) )


Now as far as a sufi shaykh , you are not to question him. So if you see something that appears to oppose the shariah you cannot question him for perhaps you dont know what he knows (from direct experiance with the divine! or some other sufi state). And this is the reality.

Muhammad ameen al kurdi an naqshbandi says

"The Mureed should serve the sheikhs physically and with his wealth and 'must not disapprove their deeds, because the one who manifests disapproval of their deeds would not be safe." (An Naqshbandiyyah p82, from al-mawaahib as-sarmadiyyah p79)


Ibraaheem Ad=-Dusuqi said, "It is necessary that the mureed should be careful not to make taweel of the obvious meaning (ath thaahir) of the words of his sheikh if he commands him to do something. Rather he should immediately carry on his command without taweel (of its meaning)"


Not to mention the odd relationship with ones shaykh.

Ar Rifaa'ee said, "Whoever remembers Allah (through dhikr) without a sheikh, he neither attains allah or his prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam nor his sheikh." (Kashf p 321 qouting from Qilaadat Al-jawaahir fee Thikr al ghawth al rifaaee wa atbaa'ahu al-akaabir, by muhammad ibn al hudaa afandee al rifaa'ee al-khaalidee al-saiyaadee (p.177 1st edition, 1400/1980)

Sheikh naqshband emphasizes that, "From the manners of dhikr is that the mureed should turn to his sheikh, receiving from him, being certain that he is unable to turn to allaah ta ala except through his mediation." (An Naqshbandiyyah p92 qouting al mawaahib as sarmadiyyah p170 and al anwaar al qudsiyyah p167)

Note my dear brother that Mawaahib as sarmadiyyah is recognize by nuh ha mim keller and he praised it. Just check the biography of Muhammad ameen al kurdi in nuh ha mim keller's (Reliance of the traveler).

not only this but statements such as Muhammad ameen al kurdi saying "Some of the sheikhs (from the sufis) said, 'Allaah assigns to the grave of the Waliy an angel to carry out the requests. SOmetimes the waliy gets out from his grave and fulfills the needs by himself." (An naqshbandiyyah p.55 qouting Tanweer al-Quloob p534)

Akhi you are my dear brother and I love you for the sake of Allaah ta ala but above what you see is clear cut shirk within a book that nuh ha mim keller praised. And this work is from an individual (Muhammad ameen al kurdi) who is suppose to be one of the greatest naqshbandi masters of the last century as Nuh keller describes him.

Not only this akhi but another passage

'At times of distress people used to call upon him (muhammad al-masum) for help. One time a man on a ship that was about to sink called upon muhammad al-masum for help. Al masum extended his hand while he was at home with his friends and he was able to lift the ship and save it from sinking. Those sitting around him were amazed to see that his sleeve became wet after he extended his hand in the air. ( An naqshbandiyyah p52 qouting al mawaahib as sarmadiyyah p210-213. Also reported in Yoosuf An Nabahaanee's jami' karaamaat al-awilyaa', 1:199-200, and as-sanhuti's Al-Anwaar al-Qudsiyyah fee manaaqib as-saadah an naqshbandiyyah p195-196, Matba'at as-sa'saadah, egypt.)

Dr. salih qoutes after this a beautiful ayah from the quran

"Is it not He (better than your gods) who responds to the distressed one, when he calls Him, and Who removes evil, and makes you inheritors of the earth, generations after generations. Is there any ilaah (god) with Allaah? Little is that you remember! (Qur'aan, Soorat an-Naml 27:62)


So what is the reality of the sufism preached by these individuals? Is it zuhd? Or is it zuhd mixed with deviancy and mysticism in resemblance of other religions.

Allaah guide our brother nuh ha mim keller, hamza yusuf, and all those on his way ameen.

Allaah also guide us from deviant sects and to be united and staunch upon the sunnah being fearless to all innovators and may Allaah accept our repentence if we have repented from deviant sects and creeds. Ameen

Truely the way to safeguard ourselves is by learning beneficial knowledge from trustworthy ulama who are firm upon the sunnah and are not known for propagating strange mysticism or rebellious violent paths.

Allaahuma sali ala muhammadin wa ala ali muhammad

wasalaam

-mustafa

[Fajr]

"... But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance. So We gave those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah)." [al-Hadeed: 27]

[Abu_Abdallah]

"... But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance. So We gave those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah)." [al-Hadeed: 27]

JazakAllah. This Aya tells it all.

As for Ibn Taymiyyah and the Sharh on Futuh al-Ghayb, then he also explained the famous Risalah of al-Qushayri in his well-known critique K. al-Istiqama. Would this make him more of a Sufi?

And Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a commentary on the Asas al-Taqdisi of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, the philosophying Ash'arite. Would this make him an Ash'arite, with a taste for philosophy?

[ali]

I addressed this before on the ahya forum and also here http://z3.invisionfree.com/sunnipress/index.php?showtopic=361

so after reading the link above in th last post, it is understood that if Ibn taymiyyah is to be considered to be a sufi, it would have to be looked at from what he viewed authentic sufiship is, that being the salafi concept of tazkiyyatu-nafs. That would mean that every salafi would undoubtedly be a sufi, if we all were to view sufism in Ibn Taymiyyah's definition.

asalamu alaikum

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

Fine, but Hazrat Aristotle has no authority in Islam. You don't have to believe that the world is either substance or accident.

hazrat aristotle! dars funny!

[moubeen]

Sorry about the arabic text formatting ... having problem with copy and pasting it


الفُرْقَان
بين أولياء الله
وأولياء الشيطان

لشيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية


فمنهم من إذا اعتقد
والناس في هذا الباب " ثلاثة أصناف "
في شخص أنه ولي لله وافقه في كل ما يظن أنه حدث به قلبه عن ربه وسلم إليه جميع ما يفعله ومنهم من إذا رآه قد قال أو فعل ما ليس بموافق للشرع أخرجه عن ولاية الله بالكلية وإن كان مجتهدا مخطئا وخيار الأمور أوساطها وهو أن لا يجعل معصوما ولا مأثوما إذا كان مجتهدا مخطئا فلا يتبع في كل ما يقوله ولا يحكم عليه بالكفر والفسق مع اجتهاده . والواجب على الناس اتباع ما بعث الله به رسوله وأما إذا خالف قول بعض الفقهاء ووافق قول آخرين لم يكن لأحد أن يلزمه بقول المخالف ويقول هذا خالف الشرع . وقد ثبت في الصحيحين عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : { قد كان في الأمم قبلكم محدثون فإن يكن في أمتي أحد فعمر منهم } وروى الترمذي وغيره عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : { لو لم أبعث فيكم لبعث فيكم عمر } { وفي حديث آخر إن الله ضرب الحق على لسان عمر وقلبه وفيه لو كان نبي بعدي لكان عمر } وكان علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه يقول ما كنا نبعد أن السكينة تنطق على لسان عمر . ثبت هذا عنه من رواية الشعبي . وقال ابن عمر : ما كان عمر يقول في شيء : إني لأراه كذا إلا كان كما يقول . وعن قيس بن طارق قال كنا نتحدث أن عمر ينطق على لسانه ملك . وكان عمر يقول اقتربوا من أفواه المطيعين واسمعوا منهم ما يقولون فإنه تتجلى لهم أمور صادقة . وهذه الأمور الصادقة التي أخبر بها عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه أنها تتجلى للمطيعين هي الأمور التي يكشفها الله عز وجل لهم . فقد ثبت أن لأولياء الله مخاطبات ومكاشفات ؛ فأفضل هؤلاء في هذه الأمة بعد أبي بكر عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنهما فإن خير هذه الأمة بعد نبيها أبو بكر ثم عمر . وقد ثبت في الصحيح تعيين عمر بأنه محدث في هذه الأمة فأي محدث ومخاطب فرض في أمة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم فعمر أفضل منه ومع هذا فكان عمر رضي الله عنه يفعل ما هو الواجب عليه فيعرض ما يقع له على ما جاء به الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم فتارة يوافقه فيكون ذلك من فضائل عمر كما نزل القرآن بموافقته غير مرة وتارة يخالفه فيرجع عمر عن ذلك كما رجع يوم الحديبية لما كان قد رأى محاربة المشركين والحديث معروف في البخاري وغيره ؛ فإن { النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قد اعتمر سنة ست من الهجرة ومعه المسلمون نحو ألف وأربعمائة وهم الذين بايعوه تحت الشجرة وكان قد صالح المشركين بعد مراجعة جرت بينه وبينهم على أن يرجع في ذلك العام ويعتمر من العام القابل وشرط لهم شروطا فيها نوع غضاضة على المسلمين في الظاهر فشق ذلك على كثير من المسلمين وكان الله ورسوله أعلم وأحكم بما في ذلك من المصلحة وكان عمر فيمن كره ذلك حتى قال للنبي صلى الله تعالى عليه وسلم يا رسول الله ألسنا على الحق وعدونا على الباطل ؟ قال : بلى قال : أفليس قتلانا في الجنة وقتلاهم في النار ؟ قال : بلى قال : فعلام نعطي الدنية في ديننا فقال له النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إني رسول الله وهو ناصري ولست أعصيه ثم قال : أفلم تكن تحدثنا أنا نأتي البيت ونطوف به ؟ قال : بلى . قال : أقلت لك أنك تأتيه العام ؟ قال : لا قال : إنك آتيه ومطوف به فذهب عمر إلى أبي بكر رضي الله عنهما فقال له مثل ما قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ورد عليه أبو بكر مثل جواب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم } ولم يكن أبو بكر يسمع جواب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فكان أبو بكر رضي الله عنه أكمل موافقة لله وللنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من عمر وعمر رضي الله عنه رجع عن ذلك وقال : فعملت لذلك أعمالا . وكذلك لما مات النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنكر عمر موته أولا فلما قال أبو بكر : إنه مات رجع عمر عن ذلك . وكذلك في " قتال مانعي الزكاة " قال عمر لأبي بكر : كيف نقاتل الناس وقد قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم { أمرت أن أقاتل الناس حتى يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله وأني رسول الله فإذا فعلوا ذلك عصموا مني دماءهم وأموالهم إلا بحقها } فقال له أبو بكر رضي الله عنه ألم يقل : " إلا بحقها " فإن الزكاة من حقها والله لو منعوني عناقا كانوا يؤدونها إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لقاتلتهم على منعها . قال عمر : فوالله ما هو إلا أن رأيت الله قد شرح صدر أبي بكر للقتال فعلمت أنه الحق . ولهذا نظائر تبين تقدم أبي بكر على عمر مع أن عمر رضي الله عنه محدث ؛ فإن مرتبة الصديق فوق مرتبة المحدث لأن الصديق يتلقى عن الرسول المعصوم كل ما يقوله ويفعله والمحدث يأخذ عن قلبه أشياء وقلبه ليس بمعصوم فيحتاج أن يعرضه على ما جاء به النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولهذا كان عمر رضي الله عنه يشاور الصحابة رضي الله عنهم ويناظرهم ويرجع إليهم في بعض الأمور وينازعونه في أشياء فيحتج عليهم ويحتجون عليه بالكتاب والسنة ويقررهم على منازعته ولا يقول لهم : أنا محدث ملهم مخاطب فينبغي لكم أن تقبلوا مني ولا تعارضوني فأي أحد ادعى أو ادعى له أصحابه أنه ولي لله وأنه مخاطب يجب على أتباعه أن يقبلوا منه كل ما يقوله ولا يعارضوه ويسلموا له حاله من غير اعتبار بالكتاب والسنة فهو وهم مخطئون ومثل هذا من أضل الناس فعمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه أفضل منه وهو أمير المؤمنين وكان المسلمون ينازعونه فيما يقوله وهو وهم على الكتاب والسنة وقد اتفق سلف الأمة وأئمتها على أن كل أحد يؤخذ من قوله ويترك إلا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم . وهذا من الفروق بين الأنبياء وغيرهم فإن الأنبياء صلوات الله عليهم وسلامه يجب لهم الإيمان بجميع ما يخبرون به عن الله عز وجل وتجب طاعتهم فيما يأمرون به ؛ بخلاف الأولياء فإنهم لا تجب طاعتهم في كل ما يأمرون به ولا الإيمان بجميع ما يخبرون به ؛

[moubeen]

http://www.almeshkat.net/books/open.php?cat=25&book=371

[defenderofbusharraf]

"... But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance. So We gave those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah)." [al-Hadeed: 27]


Masha'allah

[Skillganon]

Sorry about the arabic text formatting ... having problem with copy and pasting it
...
فمنهم من إذا اعتقد
والناس في هذا الباب " ثلاثة أصناف "
في شخص أنه ولي لله وافقه في كل ما يظن أنه حدث به قلبه عن ربه وسلم إليه جميع ما يفعله ومنهم من إذا رآه قد قال أو فعل ما ليس بموافق للشرع أخرجه عن ولاية الله بالكلية وإن كان مجتهدا مخطئا وخيار الأمور أوساطها وهو أن لا يجعل معصوما ولا مأثوما إذا كان مجتهدا مخطئا فلا يتبع في كل ما يقوله ولا يحكم عليه بالكفر والفسق مع اجتهاده . والواجب على الناس اتباع رون به ؛.......

Lo siento akhi. No Hablar arabia. :(

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

Como ce dice 'Teach me arabic!' gracias

-White mexican brother Mustafa

[RahmatUllah]

"There are a people who have chosen and preferred the wearing of woolen clothes, claiming that they want to resemble al-Maseeh ibn Maryam. But the way of our Prophet is more beloved to us, and the Prophet (s.a.w) used to wear cotton and other garments."

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

Como ce dice 'Teach me arabic!' gracias

-White mexican brother Mustafa

hay mucho diferencia entre los chicanos y los "blancos" de mexico?

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

hay mucho diferencia entre los chicanos y los "blancos" de mexico?

soy mitad mexicano y mitad blanco ( aleman ie germany). Pero, hay Mexicanos de piel blanco y de piel oscura.

[moubeen]

In the book al-furqaan - The descisive criterion between the friend of Allah and the friends of shaytaan (english translation) Ibn taymiyyahmentions from page 142 onwards the issue of Wilaayah and the peoples stances regarding it. The book is translated into English and I have seen two differant publications of it. The book would benefit anyone confused about this topic.

On Page 142 Ibn Taymiyyah starts by mentioning the Mujtahid who made a mistake is not sinful and Allah rewards his ijtihaad and forgives his error. He mentions some proofs from Quraan and sunnah in this regard. The Mujtahid who is correct has two rewards and is therefore better than the one who was in error. He then goes onto to metnion it is possible for a Waliy of Allah to be mistaken, then it is not obligatory to believe everything he says.

Furthermore it's not permissable for the waliy to depend upon every feeling of inspiration that is placed in his heart which he believes to be from the Truth (Allah), unless it first conforms to the Sharee'ah. Rather it is obligatory upon him to judge all of this according to what Muhammed (SAW) came with; if in conformity then he can accpet it, if not he should reject it and if he cannot tell then he should refrain from accepting it or rejecting it.

Ibn Taymiyyah goes on to say fall into 3 categories regarding wilaayah, two extremes and one balanced.

Ibn Taymiyyah says "So from amongst them are those who, when they believe that a particular individual in a waliy of Allah, accept everything that he thinks his heart has conveyed from his Lord and accept anything he does. Others, when they see someone who they believe is a Waliy of Allah, saying or doing something that does not conform to the Sharee'ah, eject him from being a Waliy of Allah altogether, even if he be a Mujtahid who has made a genuine mistake. The best of ways is the middle, balanced way and this is not to believe the Waliy to be sinless or sinful in the case that he is a Mujtahid who has made a genuine mistake. He is not to be followeed in everything that he says and neither is he given the verdict of disbelief or sin when he undertakes ijtihaad (and is incorrect)"

He mentions "In the case that one disagrees with the stances of some Legal Jurists and agree with the stances of others, then it is not allowable for anyone to force him to the stances of those Legal Jurists he disagrees with and say, 'this person has opposed the Sharee'ah'"

Ibn Taymiyyah then goes on to mentions several narrations one being from the two Ssaheehs (Bukhari and Muslim) in relation to Umra (ra) being inspired. The narration in Bukhari is translated as "Amongst the nations before you were those who were inspired [by Allah]. If there is one of them amongst my nation then it is Umar". Ibn Taymiyyah then mentions several narrations that give similar meanings, some being narrations from other companions.

Ibn Taymiyyah goes on to say that the matters that Umar (ra) mentioned are those realities that Allah unveils to them. It is established that the Awliyaa of Allah have certain matters disclosed to them or certain realities unveiled to them. The best of Awliyaa amongst this nation after Abu Bakr (ra) was Umar (ra).

He then goes on to explain the superiority of the Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq to Umra who was specifically mentioned as the Muhaddath of this nation (as established in the saheeh). Ibn Taymiyyah continues from this point to say
"So if one were to take any muhaddath or makhaatab of this nation, Umar would be better than him; yet despite this he (ra) would do all that was obligatory upon him and judge anything that was inspired to him according to what the messenger (SAW) came with. Sometimes he would be in accordance to it, and this would be co8unted amongst his noble qualities, as occured on more than one occasion with regards the revelation of the Quraan confirming what he said. Other times he would be incorrect and he would retract what he said as occurred on the day of Hudaybiyyah when he thought that the polytheists should be fought."

Then he mentions some evidences in this regard from al-bukharee and elsewhere. He gives an example of when the Prophet (SAW) passed away, and Umar (ra) inital rejection of the fact that he had actually dies and when Abu Bakr (ra) confirmed that he had passed away, Umar (ra) retracted his stance. He gives other examples and then says "these show Abu Bakr precedence over Umar, Despite Umar (ra) was a Muhaddath. The rank of as-Siddeeq is greater than the rank of al-Muhaddath because the Siddeeq takes everything that he says and does from the Messenger who is sinless. On the other hand, the Muhaddath takes some things from his heart which is not sinless and therefore he is in need of judging this according to what the Sinless Prophet came with. Therefore umar(ra) used to consult the companions (ra) Debate with themn and refer to them in some matters. They used to disagree with him concerning some issues and he would bring his proof and they their from the Book and the sunnah. He allowed them to do this and never said 'I am Muhaddath, one who is inspired and to whom realities are disclosed, therefore it is necessary for you to accept what I say and not argue with me.' Hence anyone who claims, or his followers claim on his behalf, that he is a waliy of Allah to whom certain realities are disclosed, and that it is neccessary for his followewrs to accept everything he says without objection and to beleive in his condition without referring back to the Book and Sunnah, are in grevious error. Indeed such a person is from the most misguided of people for Umar bin al-Khattab (ra) was better than him, he was the leader of the believers, and the Muslims used to disagree with what he said that was erroneous, basing their arguments upon the Book and the Sunnah. The salf of this nation and their Imaams are agreed that every person's saying is taken or left except for the Messenger of Allah (saw)."

Later on in this book Ibn Taymiyyah explains that Miracles are not a condition for Wilaayah. He cautions against the dangerous beleif that some people have which is if they think a particular person is a wali of Allah, then everything he says and does has to be accepted and beleived even if it contradicts the Book and the Sunnah. In genral it is a excellent book showing Ibn Taymiyaah balanced approach. His stances towards people like Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilaani and Junaid are clarified. And from these quotres you can understand his stances and follow them. I remember reading another quote from Ibn Taymiyyah quoting al-Jilaani elsewhere in his works and it is along the lines of a question and answer:

~Has there ever been a Waliy of Allah who was upon other than the aqeedah of Imaam Ahamd, Abdul Qadir al-Jilaani answered by saying "that has never happened and can never happen"

[moubeen]

GF Haddad and his follwers have habbit of confusing people by quoting only what suits them and their beliefs.

[aMuslimForLife]

Fine, but Hazrat Aristotle has no authority in Islam. You don't have to believe that the world is either substance or accident.


I never said he did, now did I.

Nor do I have to believe Allah is like the moon. For Allah is not like the moon, for Allah says, "There is nothing like Him, yet He is Hearing and Seeing."

[Abu_Abdallah]

Dear brother,

No Muslim ever compared Allah to the moon. If you insinuate Ibn Taymiyyah did, may Allah have mercy upon this soul, may Allah Curse the liars.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

The Sufis have a double-standard about tashbih.

One the one hand, they condemn Shaykh al-Islam because they think he compared Allah (subhanu wa ta'ala) to the moon.

On the other hand, Rumi can say "Allah is the Sun" and they're cool with that.

[Abuz Zubair]

I never said he did, now did I.Then stop believing in the fairytale that the world is either a substance or an accident. It would be less ridiculous if you were to believe in tooth-fairy instead.

[aMuslimForLife]

The Sufis have a double-standard about tashbih.

One the one hand, they condemn Shaykh al-Islam because they think he compared Allah (subhanu wa ta'ala) to the moon.

On the other hand, Rumi can say "Allah is the Sun" and they're cool with that.

I actually don't have a problem with Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah.

There are double standards which others place on us as well. Ibn Taymiyyah can say, Allah is with us like the moon is with the traveler, which based on the apparent meaning of it, any logically person reading that text will assume he is liking Allah to His creation.

However, if one is truly Muslim, and seeks to find an excuse for him, then he would ponder on why Ibn Taymiyyah said that, and try and figure out what are the different ways that this could understood, so as not to make Ibn Taymiyyah into an anthropomorphist.

The Hanbaliyya on this board, want us to have a good opinion of them, but they don't want to have a good opinion of us.

The thing is this, I would have never said that, if Abuz Zubair would have never said what he said to me. He insinuated that I believe Aristotle has an authority in Islam, based on his false belief that the Ashari school is based on Aristotle. So I just reversed that and inusinuated that he believed Allah is like the moon based on the false belief that Ibn Taymiyyah liken Allah to the moon.

So if he wants to play silly games, why can't I?????

It is ok for him to do it, but it is wrong me to do it???
Double standards.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

He insinuated that I believe Aristotle has an authority in Islam, based on his false belief that the Ashari school is based on Aristotle. So I just reversed that and inusinuated that he believed Allah is like the moon based on the false belief that Ibn Taymiyyah liken Allah to the moon.


The basic tenets of Ashari aqeedah (apart from the ones shared by all Sunnis, such as the six articles of Imaan), are that Allah (swt) has no direction, is not a substance, has no accidents, etc. All of which are from Aristotle's system of categories, not Qur'an or Sunnah.

[WM]

He doesn't liken Allah to the moon in such a way. Rather, if we say that a traveller writes to a person and says: 'we are with you', and then compare this to Allah's Ma'iyya, we are not committing tasbih.

[Abu_Abdallah]

He doesn't liken Allah to the moon in such a way. Rather, if we say that a traveller writes to a person and says: 'we are with you', and then compare this to Allah's Ma'iyya, we are not committing tasbih.

Its sufficient to know that Ibn Taymiyyah himself was questioned concerning his formulation of this argument in the Munazarah about al-Wasitiyyah by pantheïsts, Sufis, Ash'arites and others. He explained himself, and then they all agreed verbally - except those who still harboured ill-feelings and hatred for the man and what he stands for, in silence - that whatever he said is sound and correct.

So who would still think - after this - that he made Tashbih, when the same people who interrogated him in front of the Sultan agreed afterwards that al-Wasitiyyah is sound and no blasphemy contains it? Only one deprived of knowledge, sincerity and respect for Muslims may say so.

And what is worse: to use such examples to make a point or statement, as if it is OK to insinuate falsely ascribed blasphemies to a Muslim, whomever he may be. Let alone one considered by the very smae person to be a Shaykh al-Islam!?!

How would you react if I insinuate something about your parents, your father and mother? Would you like that too, i.e. reverse in a similar vein? And even if I did so, and it would be something about Zina or Qital, it would be even less grave. For no sin can be compared to major Kufr and major Shirk.

My advice: don't make examples, even for the sake of debate, which are out of place.

[Abu_Abdallah]

The basic tenets of Ashari aqeedah (apart from the ones shared by all Sunnis, such as the six articles of Imaan), are that Allah (swt) has no direction, is not a substance, has no accidents, etc. All of which are from Aristotle's system of categories, not Qur'an or Sunnah.

Here you have a list of books Ibn Taymiyyah had knowledge about the Ash'ari Madhhab - a list you might call:

Ibn Taymiyyah's Knowledge of the Ash'ari Madhhab

Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari (d.324)

- al-Luma' fi al-Radd 'ala Ahl al-Zaygh wa'l-Bida'
- Risalah ila Ahl al-Thagr
- Risalah fi'l-Iman
- al-Mujiz
- Maqalat al-Islamiyyin wa-Ikhtilaf al-Musallin
- Maqalat Ghair al-Islamiyyin (Minhaj al-Sunnah 5:283, Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 1:158, al-Safadiyyah 2:294 and in many places elsewhere)
- al-Ibanah 'an Usul al-Diyanah

Ibn Mahdi al-Tabari (d.ca.380)

- Ta'wil al-Ahadith al-Mushkilat

Ibn al-Baqillani (d.403)

- al-Ibanah 'an Ibtâl Madhhab Ahl al-Kufr wa'l-Dalalah (Majmu' al-Fatawa 5:99, Dar al-Ta'arrud 3:382)
- al-Tamhid al-Awa'il wa-Talkhis al-Dala'il (idem.)
- Risalat al-Herat (published as: al-Insâf)
- Kitab al-Bayan 'an al-Farq bayn al-Mu'jizât wa'l-Karamât wa'l-Hiyal wa'l-Kahana wa'l-Sihr wa'l-Narinjât (K. al-Nubuwwat)
- Hidayat al-Mustarshidin wa'l-Muqni' fi Ma'rifat Usul al-Din (al-Tis'iniyyah p.241, al-Furqan bayn al-Haqq wa'l-Batil p.109)
- Daqa'iq al-Kalâm wa'l-Radd 'ala man Khâlaf al-Haqq min al-Awa'il wa-muntahili'l-islâm (Dar al-Ta'arrud 5:158, Naqd al-Mantiq p.158, Minhaj al-Sunnah 5:283 and many places elsewhere - the book is lost)
- Sharh al-Luma' [li-Abi'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari] (Dar al-Ta'arud in many places)
- Kitab fi al-Imân (Furqan bayn al-Haqq wa'l-Bâtil p.38)

Ibn Furak (d.406)

- Mujarrad Maqalat al-Ash'ari
- Mushkil al-Hadith wa-Bayanuh
- Usul al-Din (Majmu' al-Fatawa 16:90)

Abu Ishaq al-Isfara'ini

-

Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni

-

Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi (d.329)

- al-Farq bayn al-Firaq
- Usul al-Din
- Ta'wil Mutashabih al-Ta'wil

Abu'l-Qasim al-Qushayri (d.465)

- al-Risalah [fi al-Tasawwuf]
- Shikayat Ahl al-Sunnah bi-Hikayat mâ nâlahum min al-Mihnah (mention in the Tabyin)

Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi (d.458)

- al-Asma' wa'l-Sifat
- al-I'tiqad
- Dala'il al-Nubuwwa
- Ithbat 'Adhab al-Qabr
- al-Jami' li-Shu'ab al-Iman

Abu'l-Ma'ali al-Juwayni (d.478)

- al-Shamil fi Usul al-Din
- al-Irshad ila Qawati' Adillat Usul al-I'tiqad
- Luma' al-Adillat fi Qawa'id 'Aqa'id Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jama'ah
- 'Aqidat al-Nizamiyyah
- al-Waraqat fi Usul al-Fiqh
- al-Burhan fi Usul al-Fiqh

Abu'l-Qasim al-Ansari

-

Kiya al-Harassi

-

Abu Nasr al-Qushayri

-

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d.505)

- al-Arba'in fi Usul al-Din
- al-Qawa'id al-'Aqa'id
- al-Iqtisad fi'l-I'tiqad
- Tahafut al-Falasifah
- al-Faysal al-Tafriqa bayn al-Islam wa'l-Zandaqa (Bughyat al-Murtadd p.101 and elsewhere)
- al-Mustasfa min 'Ilm al-Usul (Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.14-15 and elsewhere)
- al-Mishkat al-Anwar (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 1:317, 5:354, 6:223 and elsewhere and in many of his works)
- al-Maqsad al-Asna' fi Sharh Ma'ani Asma' Allah al-Husna (Jami' al-Rasa'il 2:187, al-Safadiyyah 2:334-338 and elsewhere)
- Maqasid al-Falasifah (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 6:223 and Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah 1:362)
- Mizan al-'Amal
- Mi'yar al-'Ilm (Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.15, Bugyat al-Murtadd p.18 and elsewhere)
- Mihakk al-Nazar (Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.15)
- Masa'il al-Nafkh wa'l-Taswiyyah (Jami' al-Rasa'il 1:163)
- Mishkat al-Anwar (Dar' al-Ta'rrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 1:317 and many places)
- al-Munqidh min al-Dalal
- al-Madhnun bih 'ala Ghayr Ahlih (Jami' al-Rasa'il 1:172, al-Safadiyyah 1:209, Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.487 and elsewhere)
- Jawahir al-Qur'an (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 6:223)
- Qanun al-Ta'wil (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 1:5 and elsewhere)
- Iljam al-'Awwam 'an 'Ilm al-Kalam (Ibid. 10:270 and Naqd al-Mantiq p.60)
- Ihya 'Ulum al-Din (al-Nubuwwat p.115-117 and Naqd al-Mantiq p.53)
- al-Risalat al-Laduniyah
- Fada'ih al-Batiniyyah
- al-Qistas al-Mustaqim (Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.15)
- Kimiyyat al-Sa'adat (Jami' al-Rasa'il 1:163)

Ibn Tumart (d.524)

- al-Murshidah (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 6:56-57 and other places)
- al-Fawa'id al-Mashriqiyyah (idem.)

Abu Bakr b. al-'Arabi (d.534)

- Qanun al-Ta'wil
- al-'Awasim min al-Qawasim

al-Shahrastani (d.538)

- Nihayat al-Iqdam fi 'Ilm al-Kalam (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 2:315 and many other places)
- Ghayat al-Maram (Ibid. 3:385)
- al-Milal wa'l-Nihal (Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.536, Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 5:204, 9:67 and elsewhere in many places)
- al-Mu'asari'at (Minhaj al-Sunnah 6:306 and elsewhere)

Ibn 'Asakir (d.571)

- Tabyin al-Kadhib al-Muftari fima Nusiba ila'l-Imam Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606)

- Aqsâm al-ladhât
- al-Matâlib al-'Aliyyah (Jami' al-Rasa'il 1:181, Naqd al-Mantiq p.53, al-Nubuwwat p.132 and many other places)
- Nihayat al-'Uqul (Bayan al-Talbis al-Jahmiyyah 1:383-384, Jami' al-Rasa'il 2:9 and many other places)
- Asas al-Taqdis (Naqd Asas al-Taqdis as a whole)
- al-Arba'in fi Usul al-Din (al-Safadiyyah 1:24-60, Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 1:323, 2:207 and elsewhere)
- Ma'alim Usul al-Din
- Ithbat al-Wâjib al-Wujûd (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 3:164)
- al-Muhassal al-Afkar al-Mutaqaddimin wa'l-Muta'akhkhirin min al-'Ulama wa'l-Hukama' wa'l-Mutakallimun
- Lawami' al-Bayyinât Sharh Asma' Allah ta'ala wa'l-Sifat
- I'tiqadat Firaq al-Muslimin wa'l-Mushrikin
- al-Khamsin fi Usul al-Din
- al-Munzarat fi Bilad mâ wara' al-nahr
- al-Mabahith al-Mashriqiyyah (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 4:290, Minhaj al-Sunnah 1:257, Radd 'ala'l-Mantiqiyyin p.140 and many places elsewhere)
- Sharh wa'l-Isharat wa'l-Tanbihat li-Ibn Sina (Minhaj al-Sunnah 3:299 and many places elsewhere)
- 'Ismat al-Anbiyya'
- al-Tafsir al-Kabir
- Tafsir Hadith al-Mi'raj (Naqd al-Mantiq 53 and elsewhere)
- al-Mulakhkhas fi al-Hikmah wa'l-Mantiq (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 5:125)
- al-Mahsul fi Usul al-Fiqh
- Sirr al-Maktum fi Mukhâtibat al-Nujûm (al-Safadiyyah 1:66, al-Istighatah 2:302 and elsewhere)
- Manâqib al-Shâfi'i (al-Iman p.386)


Sayf al-Din al-Amidi (d.631)

- Abkâr al-Afkâr (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 3:88, Minhaj al-Sunnah 2:600 and in many places elsewhere)
- Ghayat al-Maram fi 'Ilm al-Kalam
- Daqa'iq al-Haqa'iq (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 3:93 and in many places elsewhere)
- Rumûz al-Kunûz (Dar' al-Ta'arrud al-'Aql wa'l-Naql 3:277 and elsewhere)

Ibn 'Abd al-Salam (d.660)

- al-Mulha fi I'tiqad Ahl al-Haqq (Majmu' al-Fatawa 4/118)
- al-Isharat ila al-Ijâz
- al-Imam fi Bayan Addilat al-Ahkam
- Qawa'id al-Ahkam

Shams al-Din al-Isfahani (d.749)

- al-'Aqidah (see his Sharh upon it: Sharh al-Asfahaniyyah)

And many more, unfinished list. The following works are popular manuals of Ash'arism. Some are authored before him, and some after him:

Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari (d.324)

- al-Luma'

Abu Bakr b. al-Baqillani (d.403)

- al-Tamhid al-Awâ'il wa-Talkhis al-Dala'il

- Sharh al-Luma'

Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d.429)

- Usul al-Din

Imam al-Haramayn (d.478)

- al-Shâmil fi Usul al-Din

- al-Irshâd ilâ Qawâti' al-Adillat Usul al-I'tiqad

- Luma' al-Adillah

Abu'l-Qasim Salman al-Ansari

- al-Ghunya

Abu Hamid al-Ghazzâli (d.505)

- al-Qawâ'id al-'Aqâ'id

al-Shahrastani (d.538/1153)

- Nihâyat al-Iqdâm fi 'Ilm al-Kalâm

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606/1209)

- Asâs al-Taqdis fi 'Ilm al-Kalâm

- al-Arba'in fi Usul al-Din

- Ma'âlim Usul al-Din

- Muhassal al-Afkâr al-Mutaqaddimin wa'l-Muta'akhkhirin

Sayf al-Din al-Amidi (d.631)

- Ghâyat al-Marâm fi 'Ilm al-Kalâm

- Abkâr al-Afkâr

al-Baydawi (d.681/1282)

- Tawâli' al-Anwâr min Matâli' al-Anzâr

" is the most outstanding compendium that has ever been written in the science of theological speech", Ibn al-Subki in the Tabaqat al-Kubra

- Misbah al-Arwâh

Mahmud al-Isfahani (d.749/1348)

- Matâli' al-Anzar Sharh Tawâli' al-Anwar

Sa'd al-Din al-Taftazani

- Sharh 'Aqâ'id al-Nasafiyyah

- Maqâsid al-Tâlibin fi Usul al-Din

'Adud al-Din al-Iji

- al-Mawâqif fi 'Ilm al-Kalâm

al-Dhurdhani

- Sharh al-Mawâqif fi 'Ilm al-Kalam

al-Dawâni

- Sharh 'ala'l-'Aqa'id al-'Adudiyyah

al-Laqâni

- Sharh Jawharat al-Tawhid

[b]The million-dollar question is:

Which of these works does not mention anything at all about substances, accidents or bodies? Which of these works does not uphold the rule or argument of dalil al-huduth, or dalil al-tarkib when it comes to Allah Himself and His Attributes?

Please, answer these questions. And if you are not capable of answering them, surely you have no authority to criticize someone who might have.

[aMuslimForLife]

The million-dollar question is:

Which of these works does not mention anything at all about substances, accidents or bodies? Which of these works does not uphold the rule or argument of dalil al-huduth, or dalil al-tarkib when it comes to Allah Himself and His Attributes?

Please, answer these questions. And if you are not capable of answering them, surely you have no authority to criticize someone who might have.

Knowledge is not taken from books, it is taken from the people who possess it. People can read books and be mislead, because they lack proper understanding.

All true living Ashari/Maturidi scholars will tell you that our aqidah is based on the Quran and Sunnah.

Imam Abdullah Al Haddad said, "If you look with a sound understanding into the those passages relating to the Faith (Aqeedah) in the Book and Sunnah and the saying of the virtuous predecessors(Salafus Saleh), whether they be companions or folllowers, you will know for certain that the truth is with the party called the Ashari, named after Shaykh Abu'l Hasan Al Ashari, may Allah have Mercy on him, who systematized the foundations of the creed of the people of truth (Ahlul Haqq), and recorded its eariler version, these being the belief which the Companions and the best among the Followers agreed upon."
(The Book of Assistance)

Imam Taj al-Din al-Subki (d. 771/1370) who was himself steeped in kalam theology wrote:

"Upon reflection – and no one can tell you like someone who truly knows – I have not found anything more harmful to those of our times or more ruinous to their faith than reading books of kalam written by latter-day scholars after Nasir al-Din al-Tusi and others. If they confined themselves instead to the works of the Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani, the great Abu Ishaq al-Isfarayini, the Imam of the Two Sanctuaries Abu al-Ma'ali al-Juwayni, and others of those times, they would have nothing but benefit. But truly I believe that whoever ignores the Qur'an and sunna [defended by these scholars] and instead occupies himself with the debates of Ibn Sina and those of his path – leaving the words of the Muslims: "Abu Bakr and 'Umar (Allah Most High be well pleased with them) said," "Shafi'i said," "Abu Hanifa said," "Ash'ari said," "Qadi Abu Bakr said"; and instead saying: "The Sovereign Sage (al-Shaykh al-Ra'is) said" meaning Ibn Sina, or "The Great Master (al-Khawaja) Nasir said," and so on – that whoever does so should be whipped and paraded through the marketplaces with a crier proclaiming: "This is the punishment of whoever leaves the Qur'an and sunna and busies himself with the words of heretics" (Mu'id al-ni'am, 79*80).

Nuh Keller adds, "For Subki, it showed how far kalam had strayed for latter-day authors to call heterodox figures such as Ibn Sina[2] or Tusi[3] "Sovereign Sage" or "Great Master" in works supposedly explaining the faith of Islam. The reason he found nothing "more harmful to those of our times or more ruinous to their faith than reading the books of kalam theology written by latter-day scholars" was that they had vitiated the very reason for kalam's existence: to defend the truth. By widening its universe to include heretics and giving them titles of authority, kalam literature had become a compendium of wrong ideas.

To summarize, although Sunni theology first defined orthodoxy and rebutted heresy, it afterwards swelled with speculative excesses that hearkened back those of the Jahmiyya and Mu'tazila. At this juncture, it met with criticism from figures who knew it too well to accept this, such as Imam Ghazali, Taj al-Subki, Nawawi, and others, whose view was that kalam was a medicine useful in moderation, but harmful in overdose. Their criticisms were valid, for when theology obeys a speculative rather than an ethical imperative, it ceases to give guidance in man's relationship to God, and hence is no longer a science of the din."

And Allah knows best.

[Abuz Zubair]

Keep your ignorant rant to yourself, little boy, and admit that you haven't a clue what's coming out of your Greek head.

Now, from amongst the books listed by bro Sharif, which of them have you studied with or without a Shaykh to be able to make a comment that may worth a penny?

Grow up.

[melo061]

Brother sharif, do you have links or literature regarding the incident of Ibn taymiyyah and his interrogation?

[aMuslimForLife]

Keep your ignorant rant to yourself, little boy, and admit that you haven't a clue what's coming out of your Greek head.

Now, from amongst the books listed by bro Sharif, which of them have you studied with or without a Shaykh to be able to make a comment that may worth a penny?

Grow up.

As Salaam Alaykum,

Why don't you wake up to reality and stop living in a dream world.

This is the reality of the living Ashari school today. And I'll give some examples of some of my conversation with my shuyukh.

Point #1: So i was reading some books on kalam. After reading them, I appraoch my shaykh and told him I have a problem with Kalam, I want to understand things from the Quran and Sunnah.

So my shaykh told me, "There are rational arguments which make sense and others which do not. Imam Shafi said, “I believe in Allah and in what has been reported concerning Allah, upon what was intended by Allah. And I believe in the Messenger of Allah and in what has been reported concerning the Messenger of Allah, upon what was intended by the Messenger of Allah.” And you should study Aqidah Tahawi."

Point #2: So I sat in a Aqidah Tahawi class with a shaykh and brother started mentioning some of kalami arguments from the scholars of the past.

The Shaykh replied, "Who cares what the scholars of the past have said if it doesn't conform to the Quran and Sunnah. We are not obligated to follow the mistakes of scholars, we only obligated to follow the Quran and Sunnah."

Point #3: So I was studying a high level ashari text with a shaykh, who isn't my main teacher in aqidah. And he said some things which I didn't feel was in accordance with the aims and objectives of the ashari school. So I then approach my main shaykh concerning the points I had a problem with. And he told me, I have to be careful who I take my aqidah from, and not everyone who has in a ijaza in aqidah is necessarily qualified to teach it. He told me the things which to believe and things which were not necessary.

So my question I have for you is this:

Why would I attempt to defend the kalami arguments of the ashari scholars of the past,

1. which are not obligatory for me to believe.
2. some of them make sense while other do not.
3. some of them conform to the Quran and Sunnah while others do not?

And why would I want to argue with kalami arguement, especially with someone who is against kalam. The point of ashari engaging in kalam in the first place was to refute those who believed in it. Arguing with kalami argument with someone who does not believe in it is a waste of time. It is not even logical.

So reality of the Ashari school today is that it is not based on kalam. It is based on the Quran and Sunnah.

Even if some ashari scholars of the past, believed it was obligatory to study kalam. That is between them and Allah.

I am only responsible for what I believe not what the scholars of the past believed and taught.

So if you want to refute the modern Asharis, you have to refute what we actually believe and not what you think we believe and teach. That is only fair. Right.

For me to refute something you don't believe, like Ibn Tamiyyah liken Allah to the moon. Isn't a refutation at all. But rather it is slander. I have to refute how you actually understand it, irrespective of how I understand it. True or not true You have to refute what people actually believe, not what you think they believe.

Asharis are muslims and every muslim wants to follow the Quran and Sunnah, in sha Allah. That should be the objective of every muslim.

And Allah knows best.

[Abuz Zubair]

What a pretentious liar! (and this is the second time I am accusing you of that)

Now, for the 100th time I am asking you this question, so plz respond and do not run away this time:

1) Who are your heretic Shaykhs? Plz name them and pm me their contact details.

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?

Answer these two questions to prove your truthfulness.

Besides, whatever you've written above only goes on to show how deeply ignorant you are. You are an embodiment of the very Jahil al-Shafi'i said that one cannot win against. There is nothing to say to your garbage except that it is utter nonsense, coming from someone who has not read a single Ash'ari theological work to determine what is or is not Ash'arism.

Your heretic forefathers negate movement from Allah because movement is hadath, and hadath is an accident, and accidents subsist in substances.

If you do not believe in Aristotelian premises of substance and accidents, a jahil bigot like you does not have a leg to stand on, to deny that Allah literally comes to the lowest heaven, and that He literally rose over the Throne, or that He literally becomes angry and pleased.

[aMuslimForLife]

What a pretentious liar! (and this is the second time I am accusing you of that)

Now, for the 100th time I am asking you this question, so plz respond and do not run away this time:

1) Who are your heretic Shaykhs? Plz name them and pm me their contact details.

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?





you are the same aren't you? Madad fi adab.

[Abuz Zubair]

The only way to deal with ignorant and lying bigots like you is the way I do.

Now, answer my two questions:

1) Who are your heretic Shaykhs? Plz name them and pm me their contact details.

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?

[aMuslimForLife]

As Salaam Alaykum,

You can learn this aqidah from Zaytuna, Sunnipath, Dar Mustafa in Yemen. They will teach that the Ashari aqidah is based on the Quran and Sunnah.

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, Shaykh Zaid Shakir, Shaykh Muhammad Al Yaqoubi at Zaytuna.

Shaykh Hamza Karamali, Shaykh Faraz Rabbani, Shaykh Nuh Keller at Sunnipath.

The Habaib in Yemen.

And you will learn pretty much the same things.

The text they study, Jawahart Tawhid, Aqidah Tahawi, Sharh Taftazani, Aqidah Awwam, Aqidah al Islam, Aqidah bajuri, Marifa , Aqidah As Sanusi and others.

And you will generally learn that the Ashari aqidah is based on the Quran and SUnnah and that Ilm Kalam is a means and not an end. And that you don't need to know a single point of ilm kalam to have a sound aqidah.

There is a list of books and shuyukh.

And Allah knows best.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

aMuslimForLife, where do the terms "atom", "substance", "accident", "direction", "relation", etc. come from. Are they from Qur'an and Hadith, or are they from Greek Philosophy? And if the latter, why are they used so profusely in Ashari books of Aqeedah?

[WM]

Doesn't every group claim its aqidah is based on the Qur'an and sunnah?

[aMuslimForLife]

aMuslimForLife, where do the terms "atom", "substance", "accident", "direction", "relation", etc. come from. Are they from Qur'an and Hadith, or are they from Greek Philosophy? And if the latter, why are they used so profusely in Ashari books of Aqeedah?

Well, the Ashari scholars believe that learning the language of the deviants is fard kifaya, namely that a certain number of scholars should know it in order to refute those who use it.

It is not a bad logical system, but like any man made system it has its limitations. This is why Ilm kalam is used as a means and not an end.

Most Asharis don't even know anything of atoms, substances etc. It is not taught in any basic text of aqidah.

[aMuslimForLife]

Doesn't every group claim its aqidah is based on the Qur'an and sunnah?

Yes, and it is incumbent upon the believer to strive if he is able to ensure that his belief conforms to it.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Well, the Ashari scholars believe that learning the language of the deviants is fard kifaya, namely that a certain number of scholars should know it in order to refute those who use it.

It is not a bad logical system, but like any man made system it has its limitations. This is why Ilm kalam is used as a means and not an end.

Most Asharis don't even know anything of atoms, substances etc. It is not taught in any basic text of aqidah.

Why should they be taught in any book of aqidah? Is the Qur'an and Sunnah not sufficient? Besides, no one follows Aristotelian physics anymore. Shouldn't you Asharis be learning about Quantum Mechanics and String Theory to explain your theology now?

[Abuz Zubair]

So you lied about your imaginary Shaykhs and the Ash'ari works they have supposed to have taught you?

Shame on you.

[aMuslimForLife]

Why should they be taught in any book of aqidah? Is the Qur'an and Sunnah not sufficient? Besides, no one follows Aristotelian physics anymore. Shouldn't you Asharis be learning about Quantum Mechanics and String Theory to explain your theology now?

There are still Mutazila today, few but they exist, and the Shia, I believe use it. I think there is a need to learn it, to understand what the scholars of the past have written.


Q. Shouldn't you Asharis be learning about Quantum Mechanics and String Theory to explain your theology now?

It depends on how threaten quantum mechanic and string theory is to Islam. I don't know if they pose any thread to Islam.

[aMuslimForLife]

So you lied about your imaginary Shaykhs and the Ash'ari works they have supposed to have taught you?

Shame on you.

Lol, you are so funny, you should become a comedian.

I never said I lied, you did. I refuse to tell you which shuyukh I've studied with and what books I studied, so I gave you an alternative, a list of shuyukh who would teach basically the same thing, and the books I know they teach from.

If you sincerely want to know, then you can contact them. I believe you can find their e-mails at their websites.

and allah knows best.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Q. Shouldn't you Asharis be learning about Quantum Mechanics and String Theory to explain your theology now?

It depends on how threaten quantum mechanic and string theory is to Islam. I don't know if they pose any thread to Islam.


The idea that Asharis had to adopt Greek beliefs in order to refute them seems terribly illogical. That's sort of like saying we should adopt belief in the Trinity in order to refute Christianity. If someone claims to be a Muslim the best way to refute them is to use the Qur'an and Ahadith, not adopt their deviant beliefs and change them around a little.

[Skillganon]

Bro, what element of the ashari aqeedah do you follow?

It seems like you are trying to give a impression that you do not follow the ashari of the old but you follow ashari of the new...when methodoligically they are the same regardless of wheter one disregards some of the points of belief of the old ashari.
The point is you do hold/claim some of the belief that makes the ashari's deviant, wheter you do not one to profess it or not.

Now it would not be too much to answer the following question, that others asked one:

1) Who are your Shaykhs? Plz name them and pm me their contact details.

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

as salaamu alaykum,

in my humble opinion i believe if an innovator comes we refute with the Quran and sunnah. For an example the people of Tashbih we should show them from the Quran and sunnah, both ayahs and ahadith that show that Allah is unlike creation. To the people of tateel we should show them narrations from the quran and sunnah that show affirmation of the divine attributes. And for the people of Tawil we show them their errors based on the quran and sunnah.

I dont think we have to adopt the language of the heretics. Speaking of accidents and substance etc... I dont believe we have to speak about Yad of Allaah saying it entails a LIMB if literally believed. None of this. I do not agree to any of it.

Allaahu alim

wasalaam

-mustafa

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

aMuslimForLife, it appears that the Hanabilah have you surrounded.

[aMuslimForLife]

The idea that Asharis had to adopt Greek beliefs in order to refute them seems terribly illogical. That's sort of like saying we should adopt belief in the Trinity in order to refute Christianity. If someone claims to be a Muslim the best way to refute them is to use the Qur'an and Ahadith, not adopt their deviant beliefs and change them around a little.

Actually this example makes no sense what so ever.

We are talking about a logical system, or methodology which are governed by principles by which one draws his or her conclusion, not a practicular belief.

Trinity is a practicular belief.

Do you understand the difference?

[aMuslimForLife]

Bro, what element of the ashari aqeedah do you follow?
?

The objective the Ashari school was and still is to follow the Quran and Sunnah in accordance with the Salafus Saleh. And that is the element that I follow.

[aMuslimForLife]

aMuslimForLife, it appears that the Hanabilah have you surrounded.

The Hanbaliyyah are good muslims who intend to follow the Quran and Sunnah the best way they know how, so in sha Allah I am surrounded by good people. Al Hamdullah.

[Skillganon]

The objective the Ashari school was and still is to follow the Quran and Sunnah in accordance with the Salafus Saleh. And that is the element that I follow.

That is the thing Asharis don't....and how you going to establish it? with greek methodology and hence affirming their theology in sense.

You see the issue is that they(Asharis) came with certain predisposed theology based on (derived from) greek methodology and than twist or reject the Quran and the sunnah into confirming that what they established.

So they placed the Methodology and thus the theology they derived from it above the Quran and the sunnah, regardless of wheter they realised it or not.

The problem with such digression is the mehodology is by far involve certain premise that are false.

Importantly this kind of methodological innuendo involves affirming about Allah(swt) certain thing that Allah(swt) and his messenger has not said/ or affirmed.

People here asked you simple question:

1) Who are your shiekhs (contact):

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?

So they can evaluate to what extent you belief conforms to the Quran and Sunnah.

Their is no need to be shy about it...

[aMuslimForLife]

People here asked you simple question:

1) Who are your shiekhs (contact):

2) Which Ash'ari manuals did they teach you?

So they can evaluate to what extent you belief conforms to the Quran and Sunnah.



If that is the reason, then just ask me what I believe. Pick a topic and ask me what I believe about it.

I don't want to answer the question because the only thing he will do is bash my shuyukh.

Let me ask you a question in a same way he asked me.

What is the name of your heretical shaykh???

honestly, if someone approached you and asked you this question would you answer them??? I hardly think so.

[aMuslimForLife]

Importantly this kind of methodological innuendo involves affirming about Allah(swt) certain thing that Allah(swt) and his messenger has not said/ or affirmed.
...
But I could say the same thing for the Salafis as well.


So what do they affirm for Allah that Allah and His Messenger has not affirm for Allah?

[abubakr]

Asalamu alaykum

ok bro muslim4life lets ask you nicely what is the name of your sheikhs and their websites?

Jazakallah khair

[Abu_Abdallah]

Asalamu alaykum

ok bro muslim4life lets ask you nicely what is the name of your sheikhs and their websites?

Jazakallah khair

He will never give you their names, since it could lead to an embarassment.

Beside, a person who sees himself as an Ash'arite and tolerates by his silence the 'bashing' of Fakhr al-Razi, al-Juwayni and other prominent and recognized Ash'arites will never mention a Muhammad, Ahmad or Hasan of today, fearing they be 'bashed' too! If he really cares about the Ash'arites', he would not safe his unknown, unverifiable 'teachers' and bare the patience wherein men like al-Razi are exposed.

Aint I right?

PS: this post is not directed to aMuslimForLife.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

Actually this example makes no sense what so ever.

We are talking about a logical system, or methodology which are governed by principles by which one draws his or her conclusion, not a practicular belief.

Trinity is a practicular belief.

Do you understand the difference?

Believing that everything in the universe is made of unbreakable atoms, which form substances, which have accidents, etc., ARE particular beliefs. Beliefs that are not countenanced anywhere in the Qur'an or Sunnah.

[aMuslimForLife]

Believing that everything in the universe is made of unbreakable atoms, which form substances, which have accidents, etc., ARE particular beliefs. Beliefs that are not countenanced anywhere in the Qur'an or Sunnah.

Yes but the difference between trinity and aristolian logic is that, trinity is specifically in correct, while aristolian logic can lead to things which contradict the Quran while other times it can lead to things which conform to the Quran.

The general belief of aristolian logic is not forbidden specifically in the Quran and Sunnah, while the trinity is.

If it general belief of aristolian logic was forbidden Imam Shafi would not have engaged in kalam.

Therefore the example of trinity is a bad example.

And Allah knows best.

[aMuslimForLife]

He will never give you their names, since it could lead to an embarassment.
PS: this post is not directed to aMuslimForLife.

It is not about embarassment. Abuz Zubair is not a fair man. Allah is my witness. I tried to be open, honest, and fair with him a few times and the only thing he does with it, is twist your words, just to bash you. He is not about fairness.

You cannot be open with a person like that.

[Skillganon]

Assalamu alaikum bro

If you do not wan't to give names of your shiekhs than one can answer the second question.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

If it general belief of aristolian logic was forbidden Imam Shafi would not have engaged in kalam.


Imam ash-Shafi'i (rahmatullah alayh) engaged in Kalam? I doubt it, since he was the man who said:

"My judgment concerning the mutakallimun is that they should be beaten with palm branches and carried in that condition among the tribes and clans. While pronouncing "this is the penalty of those who desert the Qur'an and the ahadith and take themselves to kalaam."

[Abuz Zubair]

I don't want to answer the question because the only thing he will do is bash my shuyukh. No, in fact I wouldn't, until I have contacted them by whatever means and presented to them the garbage you are attributing to Ash'arism under the guise of: 'you are wrong, because my Shaykh told me this or that'.

The least you can do is refer us to an Ash'ari work which explains the Ash'ari aqida without mentioning a) jawhar, b) 'aradh, c) hadith or muhdath, d) jism, etc, etc...

You are a shameless liar.

[Abu_Abdallah]

Most Asharis don't even know anything of atoms, substances etc. It is not taught in any basic text of aqidah.

Before we misunderstand eachother, this means according to the one who said it:

- Most Ash'arites such as the list I mentioned of leading authorities do not know anything at all about atoms, substances etc.

- No manual of any Ash'arite mentions this: not the earliest al-Luma', nor the late work of al-Dasûqi, neither the dozens in between?

[aMuslimForLife]

Before we misunderstand eachother, this means according to the one who said it:

- Most Ash'arites such as the list I mentioned of leading authorities do not know anything at all about atoms, substances etc.

- No manual of any Ash'arite mentions this: not the earliest al-Luma', nor the late work of al-Dasûqi, neither the dozens in between?

I wasn't talking about scholars, I was talking about common people.

[Abu_Abdallah]

I wasn't talking about scholars, I was talking about common people.

I leave aside the question whether common people can be considered Ash'arite. You said also:

It is not taught in any basic text of aqidah.

So it is neither mentioned in any basic Ash'arite text of aqidah, such as a manual? For if it is not taught in any basic text of aqidah, it is neither mentioned therein? Right?

PS: By the way, your response of just now: why isn't it an answer on the whole (less than 5 lines) post of mine? why do I have to ask this question too? Why not touch the 'basic text' thing along with it?

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

as salaamu alaykum

tawheedullah could you tell me more about imam al junayd and others who followed tasawwuf upon haq. Do you think imam suyuti was of those?

[miskeen]

salaam

I read that ibn taymiyya and ibnul qayyim took 'sufism' or what had been labeled 'tassuwuf' at that time and place and 'brought it within the bounds' of Quran and Sunnah. Would this be an accurate description?

[Abuz Zubair]

I believe they tried to purge the tradition/science from all the false beliefs and practises.

[ali]

hence as i said in clarification of IT the sufi shaykh.

if people wish to deem him sufi, then they would have to as well accept what HEVIEWED to be authentic sufihood. And hn his definition of authentic tassawuf, then hell, every salafi is a sufi

as for amuslimforlife

akhee, I see you havn't a clue as to what your own aqeedah necessitates of you.

here is the more major problem. While you hold kalaam to be those 3 positions you mentioned earlier, you are stuck on a revolving catastrophe.

at one hand you can deem kalaam as what you deemed it and then you boldly accept the idea that
1. Allah is not above the arsh as a reality and that He literally rose above as the tentirety of the muslim world beleived save the heretics among he ahlul-kalaam groups, first being the jahmiyyah
2. that all of His sifaat cannotate both a majaazi menaing (if the language necessaitates that) and an actual reality

you are in the position of denying what has been affirmed. Do you know why. That is the problem, if you hold kalaam to be these 3 position you mentioned earlier, then you are likewise chosing a chosen ignorance as to why the ash'ari aqeedah is necessitating upon you to deny the above.

You don't realize that the reasons as to why your heretical forefather made compulsury on their ash'ari heretical successors to deny Allah's istiwaa is because in their world, that was a movement., and such movements cannot exist in the world of the divine.

So while the past ash'aris were at least knowldgeable as to why they were deviants, you on the other hand had no clue as to by you beleive in deviance.

that is why it can truthfully be said that you nor many of the ash'ari claiments among the lay masses could not really be considered ash'ari, for the simple fact that the very systematic core of their theology remains in the world of unaccessibility save those few muqalids who chose to be its bearers.


if you were to reverse this nature of yours in an ahlu-sunnic fashion, that would be like asking a sunni if Allah is 1. And then he affirms it and then is not able to defend the reasons and arguements as to why that is a reality.

likewise what you are arguing about here is how kalaam is a means, and then accept the fruits of what that kalam necessitated upon you (such as denying the attributes under the false premise that it is anthropomorphic). What a great form of biting the hand that feeds you.

that is why Az is naming you what you are pretty much exposing yourself here to be whether intentionally or not.

asalamu alaikum