Excuse for ignorance

Discussion in 'Islamic Theology and Ideology' started by Ibn Muhammad, May 19, 2007.

  1. Ibn Muhammad

    Ibn Muhammad New Member

    As salamu alaikum - Firstly this is not IbnMuhammed but i hope someone can answer this question inshallah -
    If a person belives allah is one and his messenger is muhammed (saw) but he commits acts of kufr not knowing they are acts of kufr .. will this nullify his emaan
    .. im not talking about making takfir on the individual but his reality is the man classfied a muslim !! hope that makes sense .. jazakallah
     
  2. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    Depends what type of kufr he is committing, whether he knows its kufr or not, and whether ignorance is an excuse with respect to the kufr he commits.
     
  3. knowrass

    knowrass New Member

    az, what about a person that makes duaa through saints or the dead to Allaah (a bareilwi) or calls upon "gawth-e-azam", and when we explain that it's shirk etc. they say "taahir ul-qadri explained that it isn't and he taught us true tawheed!", what's the ruling on such a person?
     
  4. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    He is a mushrik by merely praying to other than Allah, according to the correct opinion, Allahu Alam.
     
  5. knowrass

    knowrass New Member

    so, is he an "out of the fold" kind of mushrik? such that you can't give salaams to him etc.?
     
  6. Ibn Muhammad

    Ibn Muhammad New Member

    Do u think u can give a more detailed response bro .. cos this is very vague
     
  7. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    beyond the pale of Islam
     
  8. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    Well, the question itself is vague...

    Plus, I cannot respond about any individual in particular. I can only speak about actions, as I don't know whether the person is really guilty of what he's being accused of, etc.
     
  9. Ibn Muhammad

    Ibn Muhammad New Member

    I think the questioner is refering to actions of major kufr, wherby the perpretator is unaware that the action constitutes to major kufr.
     
  10. Um Abdullah M.

    Um Abdullah M. Nothing

    well can you give examples of actions of major kufr your speaking about?
     
  11. Salam

    The is an important topic and i was talking about it the other day.

    Many 'ulema dont give the excuse of ignorance to those who go against matters of usool ad-deen, like for example someone slaughtering to other than Allaah.

    The 'ulema who say this are many from the past especially the "najdi" 'ulema and some notable 'ulema of our times hold this opinion such and ibn baaz rahimallah.

    No doubt this is the correct position, but the question is can we make this a definet saying? "there is no 'udhr bil jahl in matters of major shirk" And this is the problem today, because a lot of people paint it as if it is either 'udhr bil jahl or no 'udhr bil jahl, when unfortunately its not allways that simple.

    Because if you look at the letters and works and sayings of scholars like Ibn 'Abdul-wahab, you will see statements where he says that people can enter kufr without even having knowledge of it , and in some other statements you will see him saying that his opponents lie upon him by saying he makes takfeer of people for major kufr/shirk with out establishing the hujjah on them.

    So this is why the 'ulema say that we dont give the excuse of ignorance generaly but their are some times when we give it, like for example if someone is in an area where he has no one who is really muslim (im not talking about barwelvis etc) to teach him deen, or he is a revert or he is away from the land of the muslims.

    As for those who live among the muslims like in makkah for example then there is no excuse for this person, and this is understandable for obvious reasons.

    And this is the ruling of ibn baaz .

    Also, people sometimes get confused and think that no 'udhr bil jahl is the ruling of most of the najdi 'ulema when actually if you look into it, you will see that its the other way round, most of them gave the excuse.

    This is very intresting if you think about it because theres conflicting statments and different arguments and intresting answers.

    Like some of ibn 'abdul-wahabs family and other generations of the da'wa of najd feircly say that he never gave the excuse of ignorance, like for example Ishaaq ibn hassan ibn 'abdurahman Aal Shaykh in his letter "at-takfeer al-mu'ayyun wa farg bayn al-hujjah wa qiyam al-hujjah"

    points to think about:

    can you have tawheed and major shirk in a muslim, the two most oposites in one person?

    Isnt knowledge a condition of the shahada, so would that mean that someone who says the shahada but thinks that calling out to a saint is ok, then would it be fair to say that he never even became a muslim in the first place?

    Isnt having the Qur'an in your house or in the masjid near you hujjah itself?


    Very intresting stuff , keep up the nice threads.

    jazakomallah
     
  12. Die for Allah

    Die for Allah TIOCFAIDH AR LA

    From Shaykh Saalih al-Munajid's Islam QA site:


    Who are the ones who will be excused for ignorance about ‘aqeedah and matters of fiqh?

    Question:
    Who are the ones who will be excused for ignorance? Will a person be excused for ignorance about matters of fiqh, or about matters of ‘aqeedah and Tawheed? What is the duty of the scholars with regard to this matter?

    Answer:

    Claiming that one is ignorant or using this as an excuse is a matter which needs further discussion. Not everyone can be excused for his ignorance. With regard to the things which were brought by Islam, which the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) explained and which were made clear in the Book of Allaah and are widely known among the Muslims, no claim of ignorance will be accepted in these cases, especially in matters with have to do with ‘aqeedah and the basics of religion. Allaah sent His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to teach the people their religion and explain it to them, and he conveyed the message clearly and explained to the ummah the truths of their religion. He explained everything and left them with a clear path which is always obvious. In the Book of Allaah there is guidance and light. If some people claim to be ignorant about things which are known to be essential parts of the religion and which are well known among the Muslims, such as claiming to be ignorant about shirk and worshipping anything other than Allaah, or claiming that salaah is not obligatory, or that fasting Ramadaan is not obligatory, or that paying zakaah is not obligatory, or that doing Hajj when one is able to is not obligatory – in these and similar matters, claims of ignorance are unacceptable from those who live among the Muslims, because they are matters which are well known among the Muslims. They are known to be essential parts of the Muslim religion and are widely known among the Muslims, so the claim of ignorance of these matters is unacceptable. This is the case if a person were to claim that he does not know that what the mushrikeen do at the graves or idols is wrong, when they call upon the dead, seek their help, offer sacrifices to them and make vows to them, or offer sacrifices to the idols, stars, trees or rocks; or seek healing or help against their enemies from the dead or idols or jinn or angels or Prophets… All of these are things which are known essentially in the religion that they are major shirk (al-shirk al-akbar). Allaah explained this clearly in His Book, and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) explained it clearly. He remained in Makkah for thirteen years warning the people against this shirk, and he preached the same message in Madeenah for ten years, explaining to them that it is obligatory for their worship to be purely and sincerely for Allaah Alone, and reciting to them the Book of Allaah, such as the verses (interpretation of the meaning):

    “And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him”

    [al-Israa’ 17:23]

    “You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything). [al-Faatihah 1:5]

    “And they were commanded not, but that they should worship Allaah, and worship none but Him Alone (abstaining from ascribing partners to Him) [al-Bayyinah 98:5]

    “So worship Allaah (Alone) by doing religious deeds sincerely for Allaah’s sake only.

    Surely, the religion (i.e. the worship and the obedience) is for Allaah only [al-Zumar 39:2-3]

    “Say (O Muhammad): ‘Verily, my Salaah (prayer), my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allaah, the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists).

    He has no partner. And of this I have been commanded, and I am the first of the Muslims.’” [al-An’aam 6:162-163]

    And Allaah says, addressing His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):

    “Verily, We have granted you (O Muhammad) Al-Kawthar (a river in Paradise).

    Therefore turn in prayer to your Lord and sacrifice (to Him only).” [al-Kawthar 108:1-2]

    “And the mosques are for Allaah (Alone), so invoke not anyone along with Allaah” [al-Jinn 72:18]

    “And whoever invokes (or worships), besides Allaah, any other ilaah (god), of whom he has no proof; then his reckoning is only with his Lord. Surely, Al-Kaafiroon (the disbelievers in Allaah and in the Oneness of Allaah, polytheists, pagans, idolaters) will not be successful” [al-Mu’minoon 23:117]

    The same applies in the case of those who make fun of the religion, attack it, mock it and insult it – all of these are forms of major kufr and are things for which none may be excused on the grounds of ignorance, because it is well known in the religion that insulting the religion or insulting the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) are forms of major kufr, as is making fun of the religion or mocking it. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “Say: ‘Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?’

    Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed” [al-Tawbah 9:65-66]

    It is obligatory for the scholars in every place to spread this knowledge among the people and to make it known so that the common folk will have no excuse and so that this important knowledge will become widespread among them; and so that they will give up their attachment to the dead and seeking help from them whether that is in Egypt, Syria, Iraq or in Madeenah at the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or in Makkah or anywhere else; and so that the pilgrims and the people will be aware, and will know the laws and religion of Allaah. The silence of the scholars is one of the reasons for the loss and ignorance of the common folk. The scholars, wherever they are, must convey to the people the religion of Allaah and teach them about the unity of Allaah (Tawheed) and the kinds of shirk, so that they will give up shirk out of understanding and so that they will worship Allaah Alone with understanding. Similarly, they must speak out against the things that happen at the grave of al-Badawi, the grave of al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with him), or at the grave of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qaadir al-Jeelani or at the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in Madeenah and at other graves. The people must know that worship is due to Allaah alone, and no one else has any right to it, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “And they were commanded not, but that they should worship Allaah, and worship none but Him Alone (abstaining from ascribing partners to Him) [al-Bayyinah 98:5]

    “So worship Allaah (Alone) by doing religious deeds sincerely for Allaah’s sake only.

    Surely, the religion (i.e. the worship and the obedience) is for Allaah only [al-Zumar 39:2-3]

    “And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him” [al-Israa’ 17:23]

    i.e., your Lord has commanded. So the duty of the scholars throughout the Muslim world and in the areas where there are Muslim minorities and in every place is to teach the people about the unity of Allaah (Tawheed) and to educate them about the meaning of worshipping Allaah, and to warn them against associating anything with Allaah (shirk), which is the greatest of sins. Allaah has created the two races (of mankind and the jinn) to worship Him, and He has commanded them to do that, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “And I (Allaah) created not the jinn and mankind except that they should worship Me (Alone)” [al-Dhaariyaat 51:56]

    Worship means obeying Him and obeying His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), devoting worship sincerely and purely to Him, and focusing one’s heart on Him. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “O mankind! Worship your Lord (Allaah), Who created you and those who were before you so that you may become Al-Muttaqûn (the pious)” [al-Baqarah 2:21]

    With regard to matters which may be unclear, such as some transactions and some matters of prayer and fasting, the one who is ignorant of them may be excused, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) excused the man who entered ihraam dressed in a cloak and wearing perfume. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to him, “Take off the cloak and wash off the perfume, and do in your ‘umrah what you do in your Hajj.” He did not tell him to pay a penalty (fidyah) for his ignorance. By the same token, some matters which may be unclear should be taught to the one who is ignorant so that he will come to understand them. But as far as the basics of ‘aqeedah, the pillars of Islam, and things which are clearly haraam are concerned, claims of ignorance cannot be accepted from anyone who lives among the Muslims. If anyone who lives among the Muslims were to say, “I did not know that zinaa is haraam”, this is no excuse. If he were to say, “I did not know that disobeying my parents is haraam,” this is no excuse; rather he should be beaten and disciplined. Or if he were to say, “I did not know that homosexuality is haraam,” this is no excuse. These are matters which are clear and are well known among the Muslims and in Islam.

    But if he lived in a land far away from the Muslim world or in a remote part of Africa where there are no Muslims around him, then the claim of ignorance may be accepted from him, and if he dies in that state his case will rest with Allaah; he will come under the same ruling as those who lived during the fatrah (time between two Prophets). The correct view is that they will be tested on the Day of Resurrection: if they respond and obey they will enter Paradise, and if they disobey they will enter Hell. But the one who lived among the Muslims but did actions of kufr and neglected the well known obligations, has no excuse, because the matter is clear and there are Muslims around him, who fast and perform Hajj. All of this is well known and widespread among the Muslims, so the claim of ignorance in this case is a false claim. And Allaah is the One Whose help we seek.


    Kitaab Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutnawwi’ah li Samaahat al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), vol. 7, p. 132
     
  13. Die for Allah

    Die for Allah TIOCFAIDH AR LA

    I know that one of those things which is known by necessity is that we worship Allah alone so in other words one has to be aware of this fact in order to be a muslim in the first place.

    As for the one who worships other than Allah the most high then he is not a muslim and ignorance is not a excuse in such a case.
     
  14. Abu_Abdillah2000

    Abu_Abdillah2000 New Member

    But the real issue here is that many people who ascribe themselves to al-Islam yet fall into these kind of shirkiyyat (like many of the "Bareilwis") don't think that they are "worshipping" them, because they don't actually know the proper definition or meaning of worship/'ibadah. So they think that calling on dead awliya' for help is not 'ibadah. This is the real problem that causes all of the confusion.
     
  15. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    This is in reference to Takfeer in batin, i.e. that takfeer in the next world. As far as the takfeer in this world is concerned, or Takfeer in dhahir, then that is when the person merely commits an act of Shirk.

    A person who is living faraway in a distant land such that the message of Islam cannot reach him is still a mushrik for practising Shirk, but the ruling on him is that of Ahl al-Fatra, i.e. they are pagans, yet they will be tested on the Last day. But due to their takfeer in dhahir, they are not to be prayed for, nor prayed over, nor to be burried in a Muslim burial ground, and their buried property is treated as Rikaz, simply because they are a people of Jahiliyya to whom Islam did not reach.

    Sh Ibn Baz's ruling is quite clear on this one. He was asked by Sh 'Abd al-Maqsud about a villager in Egypt who refers to his local Imam as to what he should do when worried and stressed about something. His Imam told him that he should seek aid from those buried in the grave. He asked the Shaykh what is the ruling on him. The Shaykh replied he is a Mushrik if he practises Shirk. Sh Abd al-Maqsud then asked, even if he is a layman villager who went to someone he thinks to be a person of knowledge to ask him what Islam orders him to do in his situation? Ibn Baz replied, even so, because he should have gone to a person with correct knowledge, and because there is no excuse for ignorance in matters of Tawheed and Shirk.

    Definitely. However, the ultimate ruling one a person who is guilty of Shirk is that he is a Mushrik.

    Depends. If he is just a villager who has been praying to other than Allah all his life, i.e. this is how he has been brought up then he is an original Mushrik. If, however, his parents prayed to Allah alone, and then he decided to pray to other than Allah then he is an apostate.

    This is Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's argument.

    But there is also a difference between iqamat al-hujja and fahm al-hujja, as there is a difference between takfeer in dhahir only before iqamat al-hujja and takfeer in dhahir and batin after iqamat al-hujja.
     
  16. Salam

    Agreed.

    This is why some say that some of the barwelvis are kuffar from asl.

    but as for saying that ibn 'abdul-wahab was refering to takfeer in batin , he was just declairing them to be kuffar as a dunya ruling not akhirah, then not everyone explains it that way because the shaykh in some statments says that he doesnt even do that with the idol worshipers e.g

    in ad-durrar as-saniyyah (1/66) the imam says:

    " ..and if we do not pronounce as kuffar those who worship the idols that are present upon the graves of 'abdul-qadir and ahmad al-badawi, due to their jahl, and because they do not have people that explain their shirk to them, then how can we consider as kuffar those who who do not migrate to us , or one who does not consider everyone besides us to be a kaafir, or one who does not fight with us? glorified be Allaah , indeed this is an evil slander"


    Here he clearly says that he didnt even make takfeer of those who clearly worshiped graves because they were ignorant and had no one to explain to them. Yes, some of the najdi scholars explain that the shaykh never pronouced takfeer of them for sake of da'wa, but if that was the case then he need not give the reason of ignorance or that there was no one there to teach them.

    This is what i mean, what you , ibn baaz and others understand is just one understanding of ibn 'abdul-wahab's words, but others have understood them in a different way.

    And like i said not giving the excuse was not the majority opionion from the najdi scholars or others.

    Anyway, i just wanted to throw that into the mix so the thread doesnt look too black and white.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2007
  17. ykhan

    ykhan New Member


    Quote:
    can you have tawheed and major shirk in a muslim, the two most oposites in one person?
    Definitely. However, the ultimate ruling one a person who is guilty of Shirk is that he is a Mushrik.


    Sorry, akhi but, can you please explain what you mean by "Definately"

    I understand than only Allah can judge the hidden shirk in the heart and we can only the the apparent has takfeer in the duniya.

    But how can can tawheed and major shirk exist in the heart as the same time...???

     
  18. Expergefactionist

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    This is the problem. Where in the quoted statement does he indicate that he is talking about takfeer in dunya and/or akhira.

    Moreover, how on earth can Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab call them idol worshippers and yet not 'pagans'?! It is inconceivable.

    Also, remember that when the scholars usually mention making takfeer of someone, they usually mean takfeer in Akhira, and hence the statement of Ibn Taymiyya that Takfeer is a serious issue because it entails that so-and-so will be in paradise or hell. I.e. the takfeer in the akhira and not the dunya.

    As far as the dunya is concerned, then the one who commits Shirk is a Mushrik. Takfeer in the akhira depends on iqamat al-hujja.

    I.e. takfeer in the akhira

    I don't buy that, either.

    Yes, I realise that, too. But since I have been looking into this issue for the last four years, I believe that those who understand other than what Sh Ibn Baz and the Lajna understand, they simply misunderstand Sh Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's words. There are always new books coming out on the topic from both sides, and there was I time I would buy everyone of them. Now I have reached a point where I simply flick through the book and look for something new, and in most cases, I don't find anything new so I put the book back on the shelf.

    Unfortunately, the works I have read from the other side do not mention all the statements of Sh Muhammad, nor his sons, students and followers and the rest of the Imams of Najd to paint a balanced picture. They often seem very apologetic, and therefore, only project one opinion as if that is the only correct opinion.

    In fact, I found the opposite, and from what I remember, I can mention Hanafis and Hanbalis for certain.

    Great, by all means.
    I mean, that a person may have both Tawheed and Shirk in his heart, both major and minor.

    Obviously, one is not declared a mushrik due to minor kufr/shirk.
     
  19. asharee_salafi

    asharee_salafi New Member

    Sorry I am not following the entire discussion, i like to stay away from matters of takfeer, as our noble brother abuz zubair has pointed out in the past that people of qualification have to deal with this subject.

    Although, we shoudl prounounce it if its clear cut.

    Just one quick question, about that villager Sh Bin Baz was talking about, will he be accounted on qiyammah the way a person is who never knew about Islaam, because if he went to his Sheikh and trusted him, then how would he be held accountable.

    Will he be held accountable because he had a Qu'ran in his house? i.e that his hujaah against him?

    And what of the state of people who convert to Islaam , but came to the proclaiming Islaam via sufees?

    Thanks.
     
  20. JustAnotherAnas

    JustAnotherAnas Well-Known Member

    This is indeed a complicated situation and just like brother Abu Zubair has mentioned in the begining it all depends on the type of kufr and also individual cases are judged individually so a ruling for someone might not necessary be the ruling for someone else. Even in cases of kufr we have daleel that it might be forgiven when they are acompained by a believing factor and motivation just like the hadith of the man that said to his sons to burn him after his death and to spread the ashes. Ibn Taymiyah in kitab ul Iman mentions and also other schoolars too that him doubting the ability of Allah to put him together is in and of itself kufr but due to his ignorance he was forgiven. The believing factor of him was the fear of Allah as it states in the hadith. Also as it was mentioned before in some posts there is a difference between the original kufar and those who fall into kufr from ahlul qiblah. Indeed it is difficult to present an underlying principle in this matter that is why you will find different words from the same schoolar on this issue. So I think that the best stand one has to take is to take these cases in individual bases and then see. And Allah knows best.
     

Share This Page