Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗙𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗳 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱 - 𝗦𝗵. 𝗔𝗯𝘂 𝗜𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗾 𝗮𝗹-𝗛𝘂𝘄𝗮𝘆𝗻𝗶 Books mentioned by the Shaykh: - Sharḥ Uṣūl Iʿtiqād Ahl as-Sunnah (al-Lālakāʾiyy 418H) - Al-ʾIbānah al-Kubrā (Ibn Baṭṭah 387H) - Ash-Sharīʿah (al-Ājurriyy 360H) - Kitāb at-Tawḥīd (Ibn Khuzaymah (311H) - Kitāb at-Tawḥīd (Ibn... show more

Rachid Abu Khuzaymah

4,906 subscribers

14,189 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Образование Новости и политика Искусство

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 6

Фото профиля Elise Oyin

Elise Oyin1 год назад

All in Christ Jesus for all ages, every efs each using sap on eaic decree with their living spirits, souls, faiths, wills, efs that is not under Moroccan man connected to Atiku Abubakar is not Elise Oyinkromeineifa's master even 0.1% ever by Yahweh's word

Фото профиля 𝐌𝐔𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐁𝐈'

𝐌𝐔𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐁𝐈'1 год назад

Ruqyah-List for Crypto-Jahmites mashaAllah ... ☝️

Фото профиля Ipin

Ipin1 год назад

as-Sunnah by al Khallal ?

Фото профиля Rachid Abu Khuzaymah

Rachid Abu Khuzaymah1 год назад

Of course, there are many other books. It's not a comprehensive list.

Фото профиля Abu Abdullah

Abu Abdullah1 год назад

السلام علیکم ورحمة الله وبركاته Do you give permission for me to spread this onto my YouTube sheikh? بارك الله فيك

Фото профиля Moravid

Moravid1 год назад

Literally none of those books are from the salaf...It's clear salaf means Hanbalis and not early Muslims

Похожие видео

New YouTube Video: Shaykh Abdur Rahman Hassan mentions his ijāzah in the Kitāb Wuqūt al-Salah of Imām Mālik’s Muwatta received from the Noble Musnid and Muhaddith of Mecca, the Musnid of Hijāz, Shaykh Abdul Wakīl Ibn Abdul Haqq al-Hāshimī al-Makki Full video in replies below - The shaykh also mentions a benefit about Salah in the books of Fiqh and Hadīth

New YouTube Video: Shaykh Abdur Rahman Hassan mentions his ijāzah in the Kitāb Wuqūt al-Salah of Imām Mālik’s Muwatta received from the Noble Musnid and Muhaddith of Mecca, the Musnid of Hijāz, Shaykh Abdul Wakīl Ibn Abdul Haqq al-Hāshimī al-Makki Full video in replies below - The shaykh also mentions a benefit about Salah in the books of Fiqh and Hadīth

ابن محبوب

27,686 просмотров • 1 год назад

Shaykh al-Albani was a pious learned scholar who sought to create unity among Muslims. For this reason, he was diplomatic in how he spoke about Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Before al-Albani, major scholars outside Saudi Arabia typically insulted Ibn Abd al-Wahhab as a ignorant deviant khariji at war with Ahl al-Sunna (e.g., Ibn Abidin, al-Sawi, al-San'ani, Ahmad Zayni Dahlan). Following Rashid Rida, al-Albani was much more respectful of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab because he did not want to antagonize scholars in Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, he criticized Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's teachings on multiple occasions. He correctly states that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab is limited in knowledge - lacking in understanding of fiqh and not knowing the difference between weak and sound hadiths. He also states that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab took extremist positions in matters of aqida, leading him to mass takfir Muslims without reason. Alhamdulillah, al-Albani's sensible views influenced other Salafis scholars like Ibn Uthaymin and Uthman al-Khamis, such that they tacitly distanced themselves from Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's errors. Today, due to the influence of al-Albani and others, most Salafis do not even read the deviant works of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Their notion of Salafism is simply al-Albani, Bin Baz, and Ibn Uthaymin. They don't even know the names of major traditional Wahhabi scholars like Abdullah ibn Muhammad Al al-Shaykh (1752-1826), Hamad ibn Atiq (1813-1884), and Sulayman ibn Sihman (1850-1930) (that some write Sahman). They don't study the deviant books of these figures alhamdulillah. There would be no problem if all Salafis were simply followers of al-Albani, Ibn Uthaymin, and Uthman al-Khamis. However, unfortunately, among Salafis there are still significant subgroups like ISIS, Madkhalis, and other sectarians, who are still heavily influenced by Ibn Abd al-Wahhabi deviant ideas. These deviant ideas center on calling for hatred, killing, and takfir/or targeting the general Muslim masses, subjecting them to endless aqida checks in order to shun them. Groups like ISIS want to kill every Muslim outside their small group. Meanwhile, Madkhalis want to kill every Muslim who has not pledged allegiance to a Gulf dictator.

Shaykh al-Albani was a pious learned scholar who sought to create unity among Muslims. For this reason, he was diplomatic in how he spoke about Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Before al-Albani, major scholars outside Saudi Arabia typically insulted Ibn Abd al-Wahhab as a ignorant deviant khariji at war with Ahl al-Sunna (e.g., Ibn Abidin, al-Sawi, al-San'ani, Ahmad Zayni Dahlan). Following Rashid Rida, al-Albani was much more respectful of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab because he did not want to antagonize scholars in Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, he criticized Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's teachings on multiple occasions. He correctly states that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab is limited in knowledge - lacking in understanding of fiqh and not knowing the difference between weak and sound hadiths. He also states that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab took extremist positions in matters of aqida, leading him to mass takfir Muslims without reason. Alhamdulillah, al-Albani's sensible views influenced other Salafis scholars like Ibn Uthaymin and Uthman al-Khamis, such that they tacitly distanced themselves from Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's errors. Today, due to the influence of al-Albani and others, most Salafis do not even read the deviant works of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Their notion of Salafism is simply al-Albani, Bin Baz, and Ibn Uthaymin. They don't even know the names of major traditional Wahhabi scholars like Abdullah ibn Muhammad Al al-Shaykh (1752-1826), Hamad ibn Atiq (1813-1884), and Sulayman ibn Sihman (1850-1930) (that some write Sahman). They don't study the deviant books of these figures alhamdulillah. There would be no problem if all Salafis were simply followers of al-Albani, Ibn Uthaymin, and Uthman al-Khamis. However, unfortunately, among Salafis there are still significant subgroups like ISIS, Madkhalis, and other sectarians, who are still heavily influenced by Ibn Abd al-Wahhabi deviant ideas. These deviant ideas center on calling for hatred, killing, and takfir/or targeting the general Muslim masses, subjecting them to endless aqida checks in order to shun them. Groups like ISIS want to kill every Muslim outside their small group. Meanwhile, Madkhalis want to kill every Muslim who has not pledged allegiance to a Gulf dictator.

Daniel Haqiqatjou

59,935 просмотров • 1 год назад

People who are saying: 1) “This Ibn Arabi criticism is just a Salafi talking point today that others have moved on from.” 2) “Non-Salafi scholars only differed on him in the distant past.” 3) “Anyone who made takfir/tabdi of Ibn Arabi just misunderstood him.” Here is Dr. Saeed Foudah, one of the leading, world-renowned Ashari scholars of today. He gives you a non-exhaustive list of scholars who either did Takfir or tabdi' of Ibn Arabi (or of his views) and asks how in the world you can call these people ignorant or misinformed. Scholars he mentions as having made takfir of Ibn Arabi: Ala al-Din al-Bukhari Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani Burhan al-Din Ibrahim ibn 'Umar al-Biqa'i Ibn al-Muqri Abdullah Bin Ahmed Bamakhramah Scholars he mentions as having strongly critiqued, made tabdi' of, or implicitly hinted at the takfir of Ibn Arabi and/or his views: Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani Ala al-Dawla al-Simnani Imam Ahmad al-Sirhindi Ahmad Zarruq Zakariyya al-Ansari He also mentions that Ibn Arabi himself speaks dismissively about al-Ghazali and says that he’s "veiled" (mahjub) from this level of knowledge (this is found in al-Futuhat according to Foudah). He also points people to Imam al-Sakhawi’s work: “al-Qawl al-Munbi” (on Ibn Arabi), which lists hundreds of scholars across madhhabs and regions who either made takfir or tabdi' of Ibn Arabi and/or his views. He even mentions that some of Ibn Arabi’s defenders, like al-Sha‘rani, couldn't accept his views as they appear in his books, so they felt forced to claim the text wasn’t fully reliable and had been tampered with. So no, this isn’t “just a modern Salafi trend,” and it isn’t as simple as “they misunderstood him.”

People who are saying: 1) “This Ibn Arabi criticism is just a Salafi talking point today that others have moved on from.” 2) “Non-Salafi scholars only differed on him in the distant past.” 3) “Anyone who made takfir/tabdi of Ibn Arabi just misunderstood him.” Here is Dr. Saeed Foudah, one of the leading, world-renowned Ashari scholars of today. He gives you a non-exhaustive list of scholars who either did Takfir or tabdi' of Ibn Arabi (or of his views) and asks how in the world you can call these people ignorant or misinformed. Scholars he mentions as having made takfir of Ibn Arabi: Ala al-Din al-Bukhari Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani Burhan al-Din Ibrahim ibn 'Umar al-Biqa'i Ibn al-Muqri Abdullah Bin Ahmed Bamakhramah Scholars he mentions as having strongly critiqued, made tabdi' of, or implicitly hinted at the takfir of Ibn Arabi and/or his views: Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani Ala al-Dawla al-Simnani Imam Ahmad al-Sirhindi Ahmad Zarruq Zakariyya al-Ansari He also mentions that Ibn Arabi himself speaks dismissively about al-Ghazali and says that he’s "veiled" (mahjub) from this level of knowledge (this is found in al-Futuhat according to Foudah). He also points people to Imam al-Sakhawi’s work: “al-Qawl al-Munbi” (on Ibn Arabi), which lists hundreds of scholars across madhhabs and regions who either made takfir or tabdi' of Ibn Arabi and/or his views. He even mentions that some of Ibn Arabi’s defenders, like al-Sha‘rani, couldn't accept his views as they appear in his books, so they felt forced to claim the text wasn’t fully reliable and had been tampered with. So no, this isn’t “just a modern Salafi trend,” and it isn’t as simple as “they misunderstood him.”

Abdul Rahman (TAP)

43,748 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Do Not Trust the Opinions of Those Youth Who Isolate Themselves from the Established Salafī Centres Al-ʿAllāmah Ḥasan ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Banná admonishes those who isolate themselves from the Salafī duʿat and elders. [Q]: Likewise Shaykh, when these students return from either Makkah, Riyāḍ or al-Madīnah, they return claiming salafiyyah but they isolate themselves from the established Salafīs (i.e. elders). For example, they isolate themselves from the likes of Abū Khadījah and Abū Ḥakīm, [and] in Canada they isolate themselves from the Salafīs at Masjid al-Furqān (TROID). [A]: Do you mean they speak ill of them? [Q]: Yes. [A]: The people of innovation speak ill about Ahl al-Sunnah. Abū Khadījah is from ʿAhl al-Sunnah, Abū Ḥakīm Bilāl is from Ahl al-Sunnah, and Ḥasan al-Ṣumālī is from Ahl al-Sunnah. They are from the callers of Ahl al-Sunnah — this is something which is well-known. If they err, we will tell them to retract their error, and they will retract. So why do you speak ill of them? Do you want to cause fitnah for them? Do you want to deter the people from them? The people of Sunnah are few in number, how can you speak ill about the people of Sunnah? Those who speak against the people of Sunnah are not from them. Rather, they concur with the people of innovation. So my dear brothers, do not speak ill of these Duʿāt, the likes of Abū Khadījah and other than him, because they are from the callers of Ahl al-Sunnah. If they err, we will tell them to retract. Do not try to discredit them and ruin their reputation because this is something that hurts the People of Sunnah. May Allāh reward you for listening to this advice, may Allāh bless you and may the peace and blessings of Allāh be upon the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Translated by: Munīb al-Ṣumālī

Do Not Trust the Opinions of Those Youth Who Isolate Themselves from the Established Salafī Centres Al-ʿAllāmah Ḥasan ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Banná admonishes those who isolate themselves from the Salafī duʿat and elders. [Q]: Likewise Shaykh, when these students return from either Makkah, Riyāḍ or al-Madīnah, they return claiming salafiyyah but they isolate themselves from the established Salafīs (i.e. elders). For example, they isolate themselves from the likes of Abū Khadījah and Abū Ḥakīm, [and] in Canada they isolate themselves from the Salafīs at Masjid al-Furqān (TROID). [A]: Do you mean they speak ill of them? [Q]: Yes. [A]: The people of innovation speak ill about Ahl al-Sunnah. Abū Khadījah is from ʿAhl al-Sunnah, Abū Ḥakīm Bilāl is from Ahl al-Sunnah, and Ḥasan al-Ṣumālī is from Ahl al-Sunnah. They are from the callers of Ahl al-Sunnah — this is something which is well-known. If they err, we will tell them to retract their error, and they will retract. So why do you speak ill of them? Do you want to cause fitnah for them? Do you want to deter the people from them? The people of Sunnah are few in number, how can you speak ill about the people of Sunnah? Those who speak against the people of Sunnah are not from them. Rather, they concur with the people of innovation. So my dear brothers, do not speak ill of these Duʿāt, the likes of Abū Khadījah and other than him, because they are from the callers of Ahl al-Sunnah. If they err, we will tell them to retract. Do not try to discredit them and ruin their reputation because this is something that hurts the People of Sunnah. May Allāh reward you for listening to this advice, may Allāh bless you and may the peace and blessings of Allāh be upon the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Translated by: Munīb al-Ṣumālī

𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐢𝐝.𝐨𝐫𝐠

16,708 просмотров • 1 год назад

𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻….. (final thoughts on the controversy) When will we move beyond the 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 & 𝗽𝗲𝘁𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮 𝗽𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗻𝗲'𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗳𝘀? (Take a look at those in the video). When will we begin 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗲𝘀 to arrive at conclusions that align with what is most pleasing to Allah? (Take a look at those in the video). 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 between groups, so that we can focus on the greater enemy, especially in testing & challenging times like the one we are living in here in the west? (𝗔𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗔𝗹𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗶 & others and of course، 𝗻𝗼𝘁 undermining the continues importance of theology). When are we going to arrange conferences in the West, similar to the one in the video, 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 so that the sincere can reach what is most pleasing to Allah? 𝗜 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗼𝘄 (who have been slandered for years) have done and 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗧𝗮𝘆𝗺𝗶𝘆𝘆𝗮𝗵 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲, someone who hinged the concept of 𝗺𝗶𝘅𝗶𝗻𝗴/𝗱𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴/𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 with those from different theologies to pros and cons. 𝗧𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲: The following was uttered by the shaykh of the Atharis in Aqeedah in modern day era, Shaykh Al-Alaama Abdallah Al Qunaiman: “𝗜𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀, 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗶𝗲𝘁𝘆. This is evident from the fact that Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, رحمه الله, 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗔𝘀𝗵'𝗮𝗿𝗶 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀. 𝗜𝗻 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁, 𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗺𝗹𝘂𝗸 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲, the majority of whom were Ash’ari. Furthermore, the heroic leader and martyr Nur ad-Din Zangi, as well as Salah ad-Din al-Ayyubi, were also Ash'ari, as stated by al-Dhahabi in his "Siyar A'lam al-Nubala." P.S. - 𝗜 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲 with every detail and statement in this video; I shared it to highlight how many of the scholars today operate. Let’s save the same energy.

𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻….. (final thoughts on the controversy) When will we move beyond the 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 & 𝗽𝗲𝘁𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮 𝗽𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗻𝗲'𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗳𝘀? (Take a look at those in the video). When will we begin 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗲𝘀 to arrive at conclusions that align with what is most pleasing to Allah? (Take a look at those in the video). 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 between groups, so that we can focus on the greater enemy, especially in testing & challenging times like the one we are living in here in the west? (𝗔𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗔𝗹𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗶 & others and of course، 𝗻𝗼𝘁 undermining the continues importance of theology). When are we going to arrange conferences in the West, similar to the one in the video, 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 so that the sincere can reach what is most pleasing to Allah? 𝗜 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗼𝘄 (who have been slandered for years) have done and 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗧𝗮𝘆𝗺𝗶𝘆𝘆𝗮𝗵 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲, someone who hinged the concept of 𝗺𝗶𝘅𝗶𝗻𝗴/𝗱𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴/𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 with those from different theologies to pros and cons. 𝗧𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲: The following was uttered by the shaykh of the Atharis in Aqeedah in modern day era, Shaykh Al-Alaama Abdallah Al Qunaiman: “𝗜𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀, 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗶𝗲𝘁𝘆. This is evident from the fact that Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, رحمه الله, 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗔𝘀𝗵'𝗮𝗿𝗶 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀. 𝗜𝗻 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁, 𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗺𝗹𝘂𝗸 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲, the majority of whom were Ash’ari. Furthermore, the heroic leader and martyr Nur ad-Din Zangi, as well as Salah ad-Din al-Ayyubi, were also Ash'ari, as stated by al-Dhahabi in his "Siyar A'lam al-Nubala." P.S. - 𝗜 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲 with every detail and statement in this video; I shared it to highlight how many of the scholars today operate. Let’s save the same energy.

MJ - Abu Taymiyyah

131,318 просмотров • 1 год назад

Most people have no idea about the real history of Al-Aqsa Mosque, because they’ve only been fed the Islamic Palestinian propaganda version of events. They believe that Al-Aqsa has always been Islam’s third holiest site, that it has belonged to Muslims since the dawn of time, and that Israel is the oppressor for merely existing near it. None of that is true. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem was the holiest site in Judaism for over a thousand years before Islam even appeared in history. It housed the First and Second Jewish Temples, the center of Jewish worship and pilgrimage. When the Romans destroyed the Second Temple in 70 AD, they built pagan shrines over it, but its Jewish identity never disappeared. In the 7th century Islam emerges and expands through conquest, and begins hijacking Jewish and Christian sites, prophets, and narratives. At first, Jerusalem had no major significance in Islam. Muhammad never set foot there. There was no mosque. There was no pilgrimage. There was no Islamic history tied to the city. But that changed during the brutal power struggle between Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan and Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr. By the late 7th century, Islam was deeply divided. Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr controlled Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities in Islam. And Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, the Umayyad Caliph, controlled the Levant. But Abd al-Malik had a problem, he didn’t want the people of the Levant traveling to Mecca for pilgrimage, because that would give power to his rival. Abd al-Malik declared the Temple Mount as Alaqsa mosque that was mentioned in the quran, and he made it an alternative place of pilgrimage. He ordered the construction of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque to divert attention from Mecca. And just like that, Islam manufactured a holy site for political gain. The real Masjid Al-Aqsa referred to in the Quran was not in Jerusalem, it was between Mecca and Ta’if. There was no mosque in Jerusalem at the time. There was no Islamic presence there. Yet, centuries later, after Islam had conquered the city, the Islamic narrative retroactively applied this Quranic verse to Jerusalem, again, for political convenience. If Israel wanted to act like Islamic conquerors, it could have easily done to Al-Aqsa what Turkey did to the Hagia Sophia. It could have converted the mosque into the Third Temple, banned Muslim prayer on the site, erased any trace of Islamic history, as Muslims did to Christian and Jewish sites throughout history. But Israel didn’t do that. Israel allows Muslims to pray there freely. Israel protects Al-Aqsa, even as it is used to spread anti-Semitic propaganda and incite violence. Yet, despite this, the world condemns Israel for merely existing in its own capital.

Most people have no idea about the real history of Al-Aqsa Mosque, because they’ve only been fed the Islamic Palestinian propaganda version of events. They believe that Al-Aqsa has always been Islam’s third holiest site, that it has belonged to Muslims since the dawn of time, and that Israel is the oppressor for merely existing near it. None of that is true. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem was the holiest site in Judaism for over a thousand years before Islam even appeared in history. It housed the First and Second Jewish Temples, the center of Jewish worship and pilgrimage. When the Romans destroyed the Second Temple in 70 AD, they built pagan shrines over it, but its Jewish identity never disappeared. In the 7th century Islam emerges and expands through conquest, and begins hijacking Jewish and Christian sites, prophets, and narratives. At first, Jerusalem had no major significance in Islam. Muhammad never set foot there. There was no mosque. There was no pilgrimage. There was no Islamic history tied to the city. But that changed during the brutal power struggle between Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan and Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr. By the late 7th century, Islam was deeply divided. Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr controlled Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities in Islam. And Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, the Umayyad Caliph, controlled the Levant. But Abd al-Malik had a problem, he didn’t want the people of the Levant traveling to Mecca for pilgrimage, because that would give power to his rival. Abd al-Malik declared the Temple Mount as Alaqsa mosque that was mentioned in the quran, and he made it an alternative place of pilgrimage. He ordered the construction of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque to divert attention from Mecca. And just like that, Islam manufactured a holy site for political gain. The real Masjid Al-Aqsa referred to in the Quran was not in Jerusalem, it was between Mecca and Ta’if. There was no mosque in Jerusalem at the time. There was no Islamic presence there. Yet, centuries later, after Islam had conquered the city, the Islamic narrative retroactively applied this Quranic verse to Jerusalem, again, for political convenience. If Israel wanted to act like Islamic conquerors, it could have easily done to Al-Aqsa what Turkey did to the Hagia Sophia. It could have converted the mosque into the Third Temple, banned Muslim prayer on the site, erased any trace of Islamic history, as Muslims did to Christian and Jewish sites throughout history. But Israel didn’t do that. Israel allows Muslims to pray there freely. Israel protects Al-Aqsa, even as it is used to spread anti-Semitic propaganda and incite violence. Yet, despite this, the world condemns Israel for merely existing in its own capital.

Dan Burmawi

119,306 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Reflections on Waadil Aqeeq: A Blessed Valley in Madinah While in Madinah, I had the privilege of visiting Waadil Aqeeq once again yesterday, Friday, the 3rd of Dhul-Hijjah, 1446AH. Waadil Aqeeq is a blessed valley, as stated by Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him). The valley is approximately 52 kilometres long, beginning from Taa'if and running through Madinah before ending in Khulaly. Furthermore, Umar ibn Khattab and other companions reported that the Prophet said, "Someone came to me tonight from my Lord" (referring to Angel Jibril) while I was in the 'Aqiq (valley), and said to me: "Offer prayer in this blessed valley" (Bukhari: 5507 and 7343). The valley is also known for its pure and blessed water, which used to be transported by some pilgrims to other countries. The valley was once abundant with trees and vegetation, and they still exist today. Due to its blessed nature, some of the Prophet's companions lived on its banks, including Abu Hurairah (RA) and Saeed ibn Al-Ass (RA), when he was the governor of Madinah. Among the early generations after the companions, Urwah ibn Az-Zubair and Sukaynah Bint Hussein ibn Aliyy bn Abi Talib (RH) also lived on the bank of the valley. In fact, the palaces of Urwah and Sukaynah were built along the bank of the valley, and parts of the palaces and their gardens are still standing. In the tradition of our pious predecessors, while I was appointed as a professor at the International University of Madinah in 2014G, Allah blessed me to stay in Faysaliyah, and my house was close to the blessed valley. All praises and thanks are due to Allah. Historically, when His Eminence AbdulAzeez ibn Abdillah ibn Baz was consulted by King Saud ibn Abdulazeez in 1961G on where to build the international University of Madinah, he recommended it to be built along the bank of the blessed valley of Aqeeq. It is an interesting and blessed place to visit while in the city of Madinah. Shaykh AbdulKareem Bn Abdillah bn Khubair stated that some sources from the early generations attributed that the valley originated from paradise. We always ask Allah for more blessings. Madinah is a blessed city. The city is also blessed with the valley of Aqeeq, among others. Blessings upon blessings. As the blessed valley of Aqeeq is one of the blessings of Allah in this world. We supplicate to Allah to continue to bless us. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami. From the city of Madinah (4/12/1446AH)

Reflections on Waadil Aqeeq: A Blessed Valley in Madinah While in Madinah, I had the privilege of visiting Waadil Aqeeq once again yesterday, Friday, the 3rd of Dhul-Hijjah, 1446AH. Waadil Aqeeq is a blessed valley, as stated by Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him). The valley is approximately 52 kilometres long, beginning from Taa'if and running through Madinah before ending in Khulaly. Furthermore, Umar ibn Khattab and other companions reported that the Prophet said, "Someone came to me tonight from my Lord" (referring to Angel Jibril) while I was in the 'Aqiq (valley), and said to me: "Offer prayer in this blessed valley" (Bukhari: 5507 and 7343). The valley is also known for its pure and blessed water, which used to be transported by some pilgrims to other countries. The valley was once abundant with trees and vegetation, and they still exist today. Due to its blessed nature, some of the Prophet's companions lived on its banks, including Abu Hurairah (RA) and Saeed ibn Al-Ass (RA), when he was the governor of Madinah. Among the early generations after the companions, Urwah ibn Az-Zubair and Sukaynah Bint Hussein ibn Aliyy bn Abi Talib (RH) also lived on the bank of the valley. In fact, the palaces of Urwah and Sukaynah were built along the bank of the valley, and parts of the palaces and their gardens are still standing. In the tradition of our pious predecessors, while I was appointed as a professor at the International University of Madinah in 2014G, Allah blessed me to stay in Faysaliyah, and my house was close to the blessed valley. All praises and thanks are due to Allah. Historically, when His Eminence AbdulAzeez ibn Abdillah ibn Baz was consulted by King Saud ibn Abdulazeez in 1961G on where to build the international University of Madinah, he recommended it to be built along the bank of the blessed valley of Aqeeq. It is an interesting and blessed place to visit while in the city of Madinah. Shaykh AbdulKareem Bn Abdillah bn Khubair stated that some sources from the early generations attributed that the valley originated from paradise. We always ask Allah for more blessings. Madinah is a blessed city. The city is also blessed with the valley of Aqeeq, among others. Blessings upon blessings. As the blessed valley of Aqeeq is one of the blessings of Allah in this world. We supplicate to Allah to continue to bless us. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami. From the city of Madinah (4/12/1446AH)

Prof. Isa Ali Ibrahim, CON

14,994 просмотров • 1 год назад

𝐉𝐢𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐞, 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐞 𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝐷𝑜𝑛'𝑡 𝑁𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚 𝐿𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝐼 𝑁𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇̣𝑎𝑤𝑎̄𝑔̇𝑖̄𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎 This is the hypocritical principle of the Khārajī Ahmed Musa Jibril. We should remember a certain type of Khārijī that the ʿUlemāʾ of the past recognized and classified into their own sect, and they are the 𝗞𝗵𝗮𝘄𝗮̄𝗿𝗶𝗷 𝗮𝗹 𝗤𝗮ʿ𝗱𝗶𝘆𝘆𝗮𝗵 [𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗿 𝗮𝗿𝗺𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗿 𝗞𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗷𝗶𝘁𝗲𝘀], who are, as defined by al Sakhāwī and Ibn Hajr, those who incite the people with words by mentioning the faults of Muslim leaders and governments, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺𝘀𝗲𝗹𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗵𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗳𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁. During the height of ISIS there were two infamous western social media “tough guys” who were popular amongst ISIS fighters and online Takfīrīs. Ahmed Musa Jibril based in Dearborn, MI & Musa Cerantonio based in Australia. At that time they took advantage of the anger of Muslim youth at the suffering of Muslims in various Muslim countries especially Syria, to turn them into Takfīris who would join groups that, ironically, were killing those same Muslims. But these two “tough guys” themselves never went overseas to fight, they were content to stay in comfort in the West tweeting whilst naive youth, some just young teenage girls, went to Syria and either died there or are wasting away in foreign prisons. Musa Cerantonio actually claimed he did join ISIS overseas, but that was later proven to be false when he was later arrested in the Philippines. He is now an apostate, after making Takfīr of Muslims he himself became a kafir. From the Sunnah of Allah in dealing with his creation is the principle: الجزاء من جنس العمل The recompense for a deed is similar to the deed. Similar to the saying: “You reap what you sow.” He made Takfīr unjustly and was forsaken by Allah and is now a Kafir himself. As for Ahmed Musa Jibril his fanboys will defend him tooth to nail, even though he has a criminal record of defrauding people and banks. A few years ago I encountered a group of people who were taking lessons from him online, and they all held it permissible to steal from and defraud non-Muslims in America because this is Dar al Harb. If you want to see how brave their “Mujāhid Shaykh” is just watch him run away from a Kāfir reporter. Even the Kafir reporter recognizes that he is just an internet troll that no one should fear, he literally chases him down a street. If AMJ is sincere in his claims why doesn’t he go and fight overseas!? Oh, that’s right. It’s because he needs permission from the Ṭawāġīt authorities in America, but only him—not the 14-year-old girl in the UK. She can run away, but he can’t. In contrast the Salafi Mashāykh have only ever been brave against opposition and faced it like men and true Mujāhidīn. Shaykh Rabīʿ ibn Hādī al-Madkhalī fought the Soviets in Afghanistan with Shaykh Jamīl ar-Rahmān al Afghanī. He climbed those steep Afghani mountain tops and fired at the enemies of Allah with his own weapon. Shaykh Jamīl ar-Rahmān al Afghanī another Salafi Shaykh fought the Soviets and gave Dawah and established the Islamic Emirate of Kunar upon Salafiyyah, but was assassinated by the Ikhwan al Muslimūn and Kunar was conquered by drug dealing Ikhwanīs. Shaykh Muqbil al-Wādiʿī gave Dawah in Yemen for decades and faced a number of assassination attempts by various deviant sects. Shaykh Yāsīn al-ʿAdanī who bravely spoke the truth against the Ikhwan al Muslimūn, the Houthis, and al Qaeda up until they assassinated him. Do not be deceived by these keyboard warriors, nor allow them to portray Ahlus Sunnah, who they label to be “Madkhalis”, as cowards, while our Mashāykh have a proven track record of bravery and implementing what they preach and their “Shaykhs” are nothing but internet trolls who radicalize youth and lead them to their destruction.

𝐉𝐢𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐞, 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐞 𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝐷𝑜𝑛'𝑡 𝑁𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚 𝐿𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝐼 𝑁𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇̣𝑎𝑤𝑎̄𝑔̇𝑖̄𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎 This is the hypocritical principle of the Khārajī Ahmed Musa Jibril. We should remember a certain type of Khārijī that the ʿUlemāʾ of the past recognized and classified into their own sect, and they are the 𝗞𝗵𝗮𝘄𝗮̄𝗿𝗶𝗷 𝗮𝗹 𝗤𝗮ʿ𝗱𝗶𝘆𝘆𝗮𝗵 [𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗿 𝗮𝗿𝗺𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗿 𝗞𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗷𝗶𝘁𝗲𝘀], who are, as defined by al Sakhāwī and Ibn Hajr, those who incite the people with words by mentioning the faults of Muslim leaders and governments, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺𝘀𝗲𝗹𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗵𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗳𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁. During the height of ISIS there were two infamous western social media “tough guys” who were popular amongst ISIS fighters and online Takfīrīs. Ahmed Musa Jibril based in Dearborn, MI & Musa Cerantonio based in Australia. At that time they took advantage of the anger of Muslim youth at the suffering of Muslims in various Muslim countries especially Syria, to turn them into Takfīris who would join groups that, ironically, were killing those same Muslims. But these two “tough guys” themselves never went overseas to fight, they were content to stay in comfort in the West tweeting whilst naive youth, some just young teenage girls, went to Syria and either died there or are wasting away in foreign prisons. Musa Cerantonio actually claimed he did join ISIS overseas, but that was later proven to be false when he was later arrested in the Philippines. He is now an apostate, after making Takfīr of Muslims he himself became a kafir. From the Sunnah of Allah in dealing with his creation is the principle: الجزاء من جنس العمل The recompense for a deed is similar to the deed. Similar to the saying: “You reap what you sow.” He made Takfīr unjustly and was forsaken by Allah and is now a Kafir himself. As for Ahmed Musa Jibril his fanboys will defend him tooth to nail, even though he has a criminal record of defrauding people and banks. A few years ago I encountered a group of people who were taking lessons from him online, and they all held it permissible to steal from and defraud non-Muslims in America because this is Dar al Harb. If you want to see how brave their “Mujāhid Shaykh” is just watch him run away from a Kāfir reporter. Even the Kafir reporter recognizes that he is just an internet troll that no one should fear, he literally chases him down a street. If AMJ is sincere in his claims why doesn’t he go and fight overseas!? Oh, that’s right. It’s because he needs permission from the Ṭawāġīt authorities in America, but only him—not the 14-year-old girl in the UK. She can run away, but he can’t. In contrast the Salafi Mashāykh have only ever been brave against opposition and faced it like men and true Mujāhidīn. Shaykh Rabīʿ ibn Hādī al-Madkhalī fought the Soviets in Afghanistan with Shaykh Jamīl ar-Rahmān al Afghanī. He climbed those steep Afghani mountain tops and fired at the enemies of Allah with his own weapon. Shaykh Jamīl ar-Rahmān al Afghanī another Salafi Shaykh fought the Soviets and gave Dawah and established the Islamic Emirate of Kunar upon Salafiyyah, but was assassinated by the Ikhwan al Muslimūn and Kunar was conquered by drug dealing Ikhwanīs. Shaykh Muqbil al-Wādiʿī gave Dawah in Yemen for decades and faced a number of assassination attempts by various deviant sects. Shaykh Yāsīn al-ʿAdanī who bravely spoke the truth against the Ikhwan al Muslimūn, the Houthis, and al Qaeda up until they assassinated him. Do not be deceived by these keyboard warriors, nor allow them to portray Ahlus Sunnah, who they label to be “Madkhalis”, as cowards, while our Mashāykh have a proven track record of bravery and implementing what they preach and their “Shaykhs” are nothing but internet trolls who radicalize youth and lead them to their destruction.

Islamic Center of North Sacramento

69,264 просмотров • 2 лет назад

NEW: Important Advice to Maḏhab Fanatics by Shaykh Sulaymān al-Ruḥaylī 1. We study the fiqh that was known to the Companions, and known to the Tābiʿīn, and known to the Imāms. 2. We study fiqh that is connected to evidence and built upon proof. This is the legitimate Sharʿī fiqh—the fiqh whose practitioner is praised, whose action is commended, and which is true understanding of the religion of Allāh. 3. As for binding people to a single Maḏhab from which they may not depart, and obligating them to adhere to everything stated within it, then this is an innovation—an innovation that did not exist in the time of the Companions. Rather, the Companions used to forbid it. It did not exist in the time of the Tābiʿīn, nor in the time of the four Imāms. In fact, the four Imāms were united upon forbidding the sanctification of people’s statements; rather, matters are to be examined in light of their evidence. 4. It is authentically reported from the four Imāms that they said: "If the Ḥadīth is authentic, then it is my Maḏhab." 5. Evidence for this is that the students who were raised upon the teachings of the four Imāms did not sanctify the Imām's opinion; rather, they would sometimes differ with the Imām's opinion. Anyone with even minimal exposure to the books of jurisprudence will find this clear and evident. 6. The four Imāms did not teach their students to sanctify their opinions. Rather, they taught them to look to the evidence and to support the evidence. Whoever examines the books of the Maḏhabs will find this plainly evident. 7. If you look into the books of the Ḥanafīs, you will find that Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan sometimes differed with Abū Ḥanīfah, and that Abū Yusuf sometimes differed, and that Zufar sometimes differed. 8. If you look at the statements of ibn al-ʿArabī al-Malikī, and Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, you will find this clearly evident. This is how Imām Mālik nurtured his students. Imām Mālik would sometimes not hold a particular view, but when a Ḥadīth reached him, he deemed it sound and adopted it. The same applies to al-Shāfiʿī when you look at his students, and likewise Imām Aḥmad. 9. The strict obligation to adhere to Maḏhabs in such a way that one may not depart from them only arose among the later scholars. We, in reality, do not condemn following a Maḏhab or affiliating oneself with a Maḏhab —this is a permissible matter according to what is well known among the scholars. Rather, what is blameworthy is fanaticism to Maḏhabs, and tying fiqh to Maḏhabs in such a way that one does not go beyond them and does not consider the evidence at all. Instead, issues are decided solely by the statements of the scholars of the Maḏhabs. 10. Following a Maḏhab, according to the scholars, if taken as a path to fiqh and not as fiqh itself, they do not condemn it. But if it is taken as the fiqh itself, and one restricts himself to it—indeed, even casting doubt upon what people know of rulings established upon evidence—then this is not permissible, and it is not the praiseworthy fiqh.

NEW: Important Advice to Maḏhab Fanatics by Shaykh Sulaymān al-Ruḥaylī 1. We study the fiqh that was known to the Companions, and known to the Tābiʿīn, and known to the Imāms. 2. We study fiqh that is connected to evidence and built upon proof. This is the legitimate Sharʿī fiqh—the fiqh whose practitioner is praised, whose action is commended, and which is true understanding of the religion of Allāh. 3. As for binding people to a single Maḏhab from which they may not depart, and obligating them to adhere to everything stated within it, then this is an innovation—an innovation that did not exist in the time of the Companions. Rather, the Companions used to forbid it. It did not exist in the time of the Tābiʿīn, nor in the time of the four Imāms. In fact, the four Imāms were united upon forbidding the sanctification of people’s statements; rather, matters are to be examined in light of their evidence. 4. It is authentically reported from the four Imāms that they said: "If the Ḥadīth is authentic, then it is my Maḏhab." 5. Evidence for this is that the students who were raised upon the teachings of the four Imāms did not sanctify the Imām's opinion; rather, they would sometimes differ with the Imām's opinion. Anyone with even minimal exposure to the books of jurisprudence will find this clear and evident. 6. The four Imāms did not teach their students to sanctify their opinions. Rather, they taught them to look to the evidence and to support the evidence. Whoever examines the books of the Maḏhabs will find this plainly evident. 7. If you look into the books of the Ḥanafīs, you will find that Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan sometimes differed with Abū Ḥanīfah, and that Abū Yusuf sometimes differed, and that Zufar sometimes differed. 8. If you look at the statements of ibn al-ʿArabī al-Malikī, and Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, you will find this clearly evident. This is how Imām Mālik nurtured his students. Imām Mālik would sometimes not hold a particular view, but when a Ḥadīth reached him, he deemed it sound and adopted it. The same applies to al-Shāfiʿī when you look at his students, and likewise Imām Aḥmad. 9. The strict obligation to adhere to Maḏhabs in such a way that one may not depart from them only arose among the later scholars. We, in reality, do not condemn following a Maḏhab or affiliating oneself with a Maḏhab —this is a permissible matter according to what is well known among the scholars. Rather, what is blameworthy is fanaticism to Maḏhabs, and tying fiqh to Maḏhabs in such a way that one does not go beyond them and does not consider the evidence at all. Instead, issues are decided solely by the statements of the scholars of the Maḏhabs. 10. Following a Maḏhab, according to the scholars, if taken as a path to fiqh and not as fiqh itself, they do not condemn it. But if it is taken as the fiqh itself, and one restricts himself to it—indeed, even casting doubt upon what people know of rulings established upon evidence—then this is not permissible, and it is not the praiseworthy fiqh.

Yasar A Rahman

16,413 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

💫 Sayyid al-Istighfār: The Best Prayer for Seeking Forgiveness Narrated Shaddād ibn Aws رضي الله عنه: The Prophet (ﷺ) said "The most superior way of asking for forgiveness from Allāh is: اللهم أنت ربي، لا إله إلا أنت ، خلقتني وأنا عبدك، وأنا على عهدك ووعدك ما استطعت أعوذ بك من شر ما صنعت أبوء لك بنعمتك علي، وأبوء بذنبي، فاغفر لي فإنه لا يغفر الذنوب إلا أنت The Prophet (ﷺ) added. "If somebody recites it during the day with firm faith in it, and dies on the same day before the evening, he will be from the people of Paradise; and if somebody recites it at night with firm faith in it, and dies before the morning, he will be from the people of Paradise." [Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 6306] Transliteration: Allāhumma anta rabbī, lā ilāha illā ant, khalaqtanī wa-anā ʿabduk, wa-anā ʿalā ʿahdika wa-waʿdika mā’istaṭaʿt, aʿūdhu bika min sharri mā ṣanaʿt, abūʾu laka bi-niʿmatika ʿalayy, wa-abūʾu laka bidhanbī, fa’ighfir lī, fa-innahu lā yaghfir al-dhunūba illā ant. Translation: O Allāh, You are my Lord, there is no God but You. You created me and I am Your servant, and I abide by Your covenant and promise (to honour it) as best as I can. I seek refuge in You from the evil that I have committed. I acknowledge Your favor upon me, and I acknowledge my sin, so forgive me, for surely none can forgive sins but You.

💫 Sayyid al-Istighfār: The Best Prayer for Seeking Forgiveness Narrated Shaddād ibn Aws رضي الله عنه: The Prophet (ﷺ) said "The most superior way of asking for forgiveness from Allāh is: اللهم أنت ربي، لا إله إلا أنت ، خلقتني وأنا عبدك، وأنا على عهدك ووعدك ما استطعت أعوذ بك من شر ما صنعت أبوء لك بنعمتك علي، وأبوء بذنبي، فاغفر لي فإنه لا يغفر الذنوب إلا أنت The Prophet (ﷺ) added. "If somebody recites it during the day with firm faith in it, and dies on the same day before the evening, he will be from the people of Paradise; and if somebody recites it at night with firm faith in it, and dies before the morning, he will be from the people of Paradise." [Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 6306] Transliteration: Allāhumma anta rabbī, lā ilāha illā ant, khalaqtanī wa-anā ʿabduk, wa-anā ʿalā ʿahdika wa-waʿdika mā’istaṭaʿt, aʿūdhu bika min sharri mā ṣanaʿt, abūʾu laka bi-niʿmatika ʿalayy, wa-abūʾu laka bidhanbī, fa’ighfir lī, fa-innahu lā yaghfir al-dhunūba illā ant. Translation: O Allāh, You are my Lord, there is no God but You. You created me and I am Your servant, and I abide by Your covenant and promise (to honour it) as best as I can. I seek refuge in You from the evil that I have committed. I acknowledge Your favor upon me, and I acknowledge my sin, so forgive me, for surely none can forgive sins but You.

•

23,409 просмотров • 8 дней назад

WATCH | Al-Qassam Fighter Storms Israeli APC in Khan Younis, Kills 7 Soldiers in Close-Range Ambush In a dramatic ambush captured on video, resistance fighters from Hamas’s military wing carried out a complex operation against two Israeli armored personnel carriers (APCs) near the Ali Ibn Abi Talib Mosque in Khan Younis, southern Gaza. Israeli authorities acknowledged that the attack, part of the “David’s Stones” campaign (Hijarat Dawud), has killed 7 soldiers, including an officer. Some 15 others were reportedly injured. Footage released by Al-Qassam shows one of its fighters running toward an APC packed with Israeli troops, climbing aboard under fire, and dropping a Shuwaz explosive device directly into the command cabin before withdrawing safely—all while filming himself with a cellphone in the other hand. According to Al-Qassam, the attack was followed by a second ambush targeting Israeli military rescue efforts, reportedly resulting in additional casualties. The operation has been widely circulated across Arabic media and pro-resistance channels, hailed as one of the most direct and high-risk strikes carried out at point-blank range since the conflict began. It marks the single largest loss for the Israeli military in Gaza since it renewed its genocidal assault in March this year.

WATCH | Al-Qassam Fighter Storms Israeli APC in Khan Younis, Kills 7 Soldiers in Close-Range Ambush In a dramatic ambush captured on video, resistance fighters from Hamas’s military wing carried out a complex operation against two Israeli armored personnel carriers (APCs) near the Ali Ibn Abi Talib Mosque in Khan Younis, southern Gaza. Israeli authorities acknowledged that the attack, part of the “David’s Stones” campaign (Hijarat Dawud), has killed 7 soldiers, including an officer. Some 15 others were reportedly injured. Footage released by Al-Qassam shows one of its fighters running toward an APC packed with Israeli troops, climbing aboard under fire, and dropping a Shuwaz explosive device directly into the command cabin before withdrawing safely—all while filming himself with a cellphone in the other hand. According to Al-Qassam, the attack was followed by a second ambush targeting Israeli military rescue efforts, reportedly resulting in additional casualties. The operation has been widely circulated across Arabic media and pro-resistance channels, hailed as one of the most direct and high-risk strikes carried out at point-blank range since the conflict began. It marks the single largest loss for the Israeli military in Gaza since it renewed its genocidal assault in March this year.

Drop Site

171,776 просмотров • 1 год назад

Refuting M Jilaani (AT) and his propaganda for a ‘silence’ against Ahlul Bida The Irony ‼️ 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗮𝗶𝗸𝗵, 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝘆𝗸𝗵 𝗦𝗮𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗵 (𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲), 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗹𝗹-𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 the corruption of deviant Islamic groups. They have both emphasized that such groups are destructive to the Ummah from within. The list of major scholars is endless… Notably, Shaykh Saalih 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁, 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀, 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗜𝗸𝗵𝘄𝗮𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗹 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻—a significant irony. It is remarkable that while Imam al-Albaani is reported to have made the above statement, he also critiqued Hamas during one of their earlier uprisings, for which he faced significant backlash. Furthermore, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗵𝗲𝘁 ﷺ 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗯𝗶𝗱 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲. This is evident from the Hadith of Dhat Anwat during the journey to Hunayn, where some new Muslims made a request that amounted to shirk. The Prophet ﷺ immediately corrected them and did not delay by saying, “Wait until after the battle.” (Refer to the hadith for details). 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗮𝗶𝗸𝗵 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗝𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗮𝗻𝗶 (AT) 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝘀 but rather for a balanced approach: refuting both secularists and deviant Muslim sects corrupting the deen, prioritizing one over the other based on the time and place, without neglecting either. The Prophet ﷺ said: “By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, you must enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, or else Allah will soon send upon you a punishment from Him. Then you will call upon Him, but He will not respond to you.” (Sahih at-Tirmidhi 2169) The key point from the hadith: forbidding evil includes all its forms, not just one. 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗱 Images (in order): 1. Fatwa of the The Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta, labeling Ikhwaan as a terrorist org. 2. An order for all khateebs in Saudi to refute Surooriyyah on the pulpit. 3. A big conference in Riyaadh refuting Surooriyyah, with Scholars participating. 4. Shaykh saalih al Usaymi having an official lecture exposing the Ikhwaan and other groups such as tableegh

Refuting M Jilaani (AT) and his propaganda for a ‘silence’ against Ahlul Bida The Irony ‼️ 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗮𝗶𝗸𝗵, 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝘆𝗸𝗵 𝗦𝗮𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗵 (𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲), 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗹𝗹-𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 the corruption of deviant Islamic groups. They have both emphasized that such groups are destructive to the Ummah from within. The list of major scholars is endless… Notably, Shaykh Saalih 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁, 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘀, 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗜𝗸𝗵𝘄𝗮𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗹 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻—a significant irony. It is remarkable that while Imam al-Albaani is reported to have made the above statement, he also critiqued Hamas during one of their earlier uprisings, for which he faced significant backlash. Furthermore, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗵𝗲𝘁 ﷺ 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗯𝗶𝗱 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲. This is evident from the Hadith of Dhat Anwat during the journey to Hunayn, where some new Muslims made a request that amounted to shirk. The Prophet ﷺ immediately corrected them and did not delay by saying, “Wait until after the battle.” (Refer to the hadith for details). 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗮𝗶𝗸𝗵 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗝𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗮𝗻𝗶 (AT) 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝘀 but rather for a balanced approach: refuting both secularists and deviant Muslim sects corrupting the deen, prioritizing one over the other based on the time and place, without neglecting either. The Prophet ﷺ said: “By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, you must enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, or else Allah will soon send upon you a punishment from Him. Then you will call upon Him, but He will not respond to you.” (Sahih at-Tirmidhi 2169) The key point from the hadith: forbidding evil includes all its forms, not just one. 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗱 Images (in order): 1. Fatwa of the The Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta, labeling Ikhwaan as a terrorist org. 2. An order for all khateebs in Saudi to refute Surooriyyah on the pulpit. 3. A big conference in Riyaadh refuting Surooriyyah, with Scholars participating. 4. Shaykh saalih al Usaymi having an official lecture exposing the Ikhwaan and other groups such as tableegh

Al-I'tisam bi-Sunnah

16,304 просмотров • 1 год назад

𝗦𝗵. 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀 (𝗶𝗻 𝗧𝗮'𝗶𝗳): 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝘀𝗵𝗮'𝗶𝗿𝗮𝗵 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱. 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Someone who holds the statement of the Ash‘aris, i.e. that the Qur’an is the word of Jibril? 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇: This is false. This is false. 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Is prayer behind him valid? 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇: No, because the one who says this is a disbeliever. Whoever denies that it is the Word of Allah and claims that it is the word of Jibril, or that it is merely a narration (hikayah), and that the Word of Allah is 'the meaning that exists within Allah,' then this means that he denies the Qur’an. Source: Sharh al-‘Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah – ash-Sharh al-Jadid fi at-Ta’if – Lesson 07 ( Click the source above for the full audio and transcribed text on the website of Sh. Ibn Baz. Unfortunately, some individuals have omitted the question in which the term "Ash‘aris" was mentioned and have only included the Shaykh’s response. Sadly, this is not the only distortion found on the Shaykh’s website. On one hand, this is futile, as the Shaykh clearly describes the Ash‘aris in his answer. The Ash‘aris believe that the Qur’an, which we read in the Mushaf and recite, is the created word of Jibril, or the created word of the Prophet, or simply something created. The belief that the Qur’an is a created narration (Hikayah) of 'the real Qur’an, which is a meaning that exists within Allah,' is the creed of the Kullabiyyah, the predecessors of the Ash‘aris. The Ash‘aris believe the same thing but instead say that the Qur’an is a created expression (‘Ibarah) rather than a created narration (Hikayah), which amounts to the same thing. On the other hand, many people are ignorant and need to hear the word 'Ash‘aris'; these distorters are cleverly exploiting this fact. The fatwa of the Shaykh is fully in line with the methodology of the Salaf, who declared as disbelievers anyone who said that the Qur’an is created. But unfortunately, this is a reality that some try to obscure for political or ideological reasons. How many people have been labeled as extreme or “Haddadi” simply for saying the exact same thing as the Shaykh in this fatwa?

𝗦𝗵. 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀 (𝗶𝗻 𝗧𝗮'𝗶𝗳): 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝘀𝗵𝗮'𝗶𝗿𝗮𝗵 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱. 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Someone who holds the statement of the Ash‘aris, i.e. that the Qur’an is the word of Jibril? 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇: This is false. This is false. 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Is prayer behind him valid? 𝗜𝗯𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘇: No, because the one who says this is a disbeliever. Whoever denies that it is the Word of Allah and claims that it is the word of Jibril, or that it is merely a narration (hikayah), and that the Word of Allah is 'the meaning that exists within Allah,' then this means that he denies the Qur’an. Source: Sharh al-‘Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah – ash-Sharh al-Jadid fi at-Ta’if – Lesson 07 ( Click the source above for the full audio and transcribed text on the website of Sh. Ibn Baz. Unfortunately, some individuals have omitted the question in which the term "Ash‘aris" was mentioned and have only included the Shaykh’s response. Sadly, this is not the only distortion found on the Shaykh’s website. On one hand, this is futile, as the Shaykh clearly describes the Ash‘aris in his answer. The Ash‘aris believe that the Qur’an, which we read in the Mushaf and recite, is the created word of Jibril, or the created word of the Prophet, or simply something created. The belief that the Qur’an is a created narration (Hikayah) of 'the real Qur’an, which is a meaning that exists within Allah,' is the creed of the Kullabiyyah, the predecessors of the Ash‘aris. The Ash‘aris believe the same thing but instead say that the Qur’an is a created expression (‘Ibarah) rather than a created narration (Hikayah), which amounts to the same thing. On the other hand, many people are ignorant and need to hear the word 'Ash‘aris'; these distorters are cleverly exploiting this fact. The fatwa of the Shaykh is fully in line with the methodology of the Salaf, who declared as disbelievers anyone who said that the Qur’an is created. But unfortunately, this is a reality that some try to obscure for political or ideological reasons. How many people have been labeled as extreme or “Haddadi” simply for saying the exact same thing as the Shaykh in this fatwa?

Rachid Bouabid

31,312 просмотров • 1 год назад

Daniel Daniel Haqiqatjou Gives "Shirk Apologist" Unique Significance DH finally answers the question he's been asked about for months regarding his beloved shaykh Salek. According to DH, it's possible that Salek's statements and beliefs expressed in the video below are NOT shirk akbar. DH says, "When I read scholars influenced by Taqi al-Din al-Subki, and they talk about the Prophet ﷺ controlling the universe, I consider the possibility that this might mean control through their dua, even if they don't mention it explicitly. Rather, I only rule this interpretation out if they themselves say that the control exercised by the prophets and saints is not through their dua. This is how I interpret statements made by Taj al-Din al-Subki, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Suyuti, Sh Salek, and others. I know all of them have read the works of Taqi al-Din and other similar thinkers, and likely share their views." According to DH, it's possible that Salek merely means that the Prophet can make dua to Allah for certain things to happen and for our duas to be answered by Allah. This is the limit of the Prophet’s "control of the universe." DH says that he only rules out this interpretation if someone like Salek himself explicitly says that the "control of the universe" by the Prophet is NOT exercised through du'a to Allah. Guess what? Salek himself explicitly does just that! The video below starts by Salek addressing the topic of making istighatha and asking the Prophet DIRECTLY for things. Salek contrasts this with asking THROUGH the Prophet or asking the Prophet to make du'a for us. Salek explicitly says that we can ask the Prophet DIRECTLY for whatever we want without restrictions. This is because Salek believes that Allah gave all of His dominion to the Prophet for him to do with it whatever he pleases. The entire universe is under the direct authority and control of the Prophet. Salek explicitly says that the Prophet gives us whatever he wants FROM HIMSELF, not by making du'a to Allah or by Allah providing it because Allah already gave it to the Prophet to do with it whatever he pleases. Some examples of what Salek explicity says that we can ask the Prophet for DIRECTLY and that he can provide DIRECTLY FROM HIMSELF: Religious guidance of the heart, ANYTHING from the dunya or akhirah, knowledge, wealth, etc. Salek says that everything in the entire universe is his slave, including space and time and that the Prophet went BEYOND space (La Makaan) and time. Salek says that anyone who accuses him of committing shirk or kufr by making these statements becomes a kafir himself according to Imam al-Shafi'i. QUESTION: According to DH, how could anyone possibly express the shirki understanding of istighatha or al-wilayat at-takwiniyyah in clearer terms than his beloved shaykh Salek in the videos below? QUESTION: Why would DH desperately attempt to make ta'wil of his shaykh's statements when his shaykh explicitly denies DH's interpretation in the videos below? I'll let you all be the judge. Dan, you've cemented yourself as a shirk apologist. Enjoy.

Daniel Daniel Haqiqatjou Gives "Shirk Apologist" Unique Significance DH finally answers the question he's been asked about for months regarding his beloved shaykh Salek. According to DH, it's possible that Salek's statements and beliefs expressed in the video below are NOT shirk akbar. DH says, "When I read scholars influenced by Taqi al-Din al-Subki, and they talk about the Prophet ﷺ controlling the universe, I consider the possibility that this might mean control through their dua, even if they don't mention it explicitly. Rather, I only rule this interpretation out if they themselves say that the control exercised by the prophets and saints is not through their dua. This is how I interpret statements made by Taj al-Din al-Subki, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Suyuti, Sh Salek, and others. I know all of them have read the works of Taqi al-Din and other similar thinkers, and likely share their views." According to DH, it's possible that Salek merely means that the Prophet can make dua to Allah for certain things to happen and for our duas to be answered by Allah. This is the limit of the Prophet’s "control of the universe." DH says that he only rules out this interpretation if someone like Salek himself explicitly says that the "control of the universe" by the Prophet is NOT exercised through du'a to Allah. Guess what? Salek himself explicitly does just that! The video below starts by Salek addressing the topic of making istighatha and asking the Prophet DIRECTLY for things. Salek contrasts this with asking THROUGH the Prophet or asking the Prophet to make du'a for us. Salek explicitly says that we can ask the Prophet DIRECTLY for whatever we want without restrictions. This is because Salek believes that Allah gave all of His dominion to the Prophet for him to do with it whatever he pleases. The entire universe is under the direct authority and control of the Prophet. Salek explicitly says that the Prophet gives us whatever he wants FROM HIMSELF, not by making du'a to Allah or by Allah providing it because Allah already gave it to the Prophet to do with it whatever he pleases. Some examples of what Salek explicity says that we can ask the Prophet for DIRECTLY and that he can provide DIRECTLY FROM HIMSELF: Religious guidance of the heart, ANYTHING from the dunya or akhirah, knowledge, wealth, etc. Salek says that everything in the entire universe is his slave, including space and time and that the Prophet went BEYOND space (La Makaan) and time. Salek says that anyone who accuses him of committing shirk or kufr by making these statements becomes a kafir himself according to Imam al-Shafi'i. QUESTION: According to DH, how could anyone possibly express the shirki understanding of istighatha or al-wilayat at-takwiniyyah in clearer terms than his beloved shaykh Salek in the videos below? QUESTION: Why would DH desperately attempt to make ta'wil of his shaykh's statements when his shaykh explicitly denies DH's interpretation in the videos below? I'll let you all be the judge. Dan, you've cemented yourself as a shirk apologist. Enjoy.

Jake Brancatella

43,006 просмотров • 1 год назад