Darul Ilm

Darul Ilm


 
HomePortalFAQRegisterArcadeLog in
Imaam al-Shaafi’i Rahimahullaah said: ‘There is nobody except that he has someone who loves him and someone who hates him. So if that’s the case, let a person be with the people who are obedient to Allaah `Azza Wa Jall.’

Share | 
 

 Ignorance is not an excuse!

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: Ignorance is not an excuse!   Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:16 pm

Part 1

Although people had been living in ignorance, the evidence regarding the fact that, their attribute of mushrik had been valid prior to the Hujjah brought by Nabi


1- Evidence regarding the validity of the attribute shirk in spite of jahiliyyah before the Nabawi ikama (establishment) of hujjah


First Evidence: The following ayah is the first evidence:

First Evidence: The following ayah is the first evidence:

“If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.” (At-Tawba, 9/ 6)

In the tafsir of this ayah Imam Tabari states: “Allah’s word to His prophet is: O Muhammad after the months of haram have passed, if one among the mushrik I had ordered you to fight against and kill asks asylum from you to hear the word of Allah ‘give him time’: Give him asylum until he hears and until you recite to him the word of Allah. Afterwards take him to where he is going. What is meant here is: After hearing the word of Allah if he does not become Muslim and if he is not influenced by the word of Allah you had read and if he does not accept take him to the place he is going in security…

“That is because they are men without knowledge”

By granting them asylum you must act in such manner so that they listen to the Qur’an. The reason behind taking them to the place they are headed in security is because they are a tribe of ignorance who is not able to comprehend any evidence of Allah. As such, they will not know of the advantages if they are to have iman in Allah nor will they be aware of the disadvantages of sin and crookedness originating against them in abandoning their iman in Allah. (Tabari, Tafsir)

Imam Baghawi states: “Until they hear the word of Allah.” Here it is meant they would not know what the advantage and disadvantage is as reward or punishment.

“That is because they are men without knowledge”

They do not know the deen of Allah and tawhid. For this reason they are in need of hearing the word of Allah. Hasan (ra) had said this ayah is muhkam until qiyamah.”

Imam Shawkani in his tafsir stated: “…they are men without knowledge…” This means it is because they have lost the beneficial knowledge which distinguishes between khayr (benefit) and sharr (wickedness).”

As seen with the guidance of the Qur’an the nass which is muhkam proves that the hukm of shirk is still valid in spite of continuous and extreme ignorance (jahl). Even in an era which the tracks of shariah have been diminished openly and the path of haq has been erased.

In the explanation Imam Nawawi brings to the hadith of Ibn Jud’an he states: “What had been meant by jahiliyyah is the era prior to nubuwwa. Due to their extreme ignorance they have been given this name.”

While Ibn Taymiyyah describes jahiliyyah he states: “It must be known that without doubt when Allah sent Muhammad as an envoy to His creations on earth, the entire nation except for those who survived from among most of the ahl Kitab who died before his arrival, with its Arab and ajam (non-Arab) was in a condition of exposed to the rage of Allah.” *(‘…Then Allah looked at the people of the earth and disliked them all, the Arabs and non-Arabs among them, except a few from among the Children of Israel.’ (Ahmad, Muslim and Nasai)”)

In that era, people had been in either of the following 2 states:

1- They were either ahl kitab who embraced the book whether it had been mutilated or not didn’t make a difference. Or the traces of some had been lost, therefore they had become unknown and some had embraced a religion abandoned.

2 – Those who fit this group are the ummi either Arab or non Arab. These individuals would idolize stars, statues, graves, monuments and any other thing which they liked and believed would bring advantage to them.

But only these individuals had been within deep ignorance. Within this deep ignorance they believed some words to be knowledge which in reality were only words of ignorance, some acts to be pleasant and salih amal which in reality were only corruption. The intention behind those faces which were reckoned to be chosen in knowledge and action was to either achieve crumbs of knowledge from the turbid ‘ilm which had been left from the previous prophets but in the hands of the defeatist or ahl bidah; the haq was mixed with batil, or they dealt with ‘ilm which some had been legitimate but most had been fabricated. The owner of this knowledge would only benefit so little. These individuals were trying to be beneficial with a philosophical attitude. In this sense their efforts were spent on matters of nature, mathematics, and manners. This effort of theirs was senseless because although they had been trying, the knowledge they had was more of batil than haq.

These individuals had many and deep disagreements among them. Besides evidence and reason have been very distant from the real matter.” (Iktidau Siratil Mustakim, 2)

“It is He Who has created you; and of you are some that are Unbelievers, and some that are Believers: and Allah sees well all that ye do” (at-Taghabun 64/ 2)

Ibn-i Hazm (ra) touched upon this: “For an individual there are only two religions: Islam or kufr, otherwise kufr or iman. Whoever is not Muslim then he is kafir.” (Al-Faslu fi’l-Milal wa’l-Ahwau wa’n-Nihal, 3/276-285) This is proof that even if it is before the arrival of hujjah people in jahl, are kafir.

The Second Evidence: The second evidence is the following revelation from Allah: “Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence” (Al Bayyinah 98/ 1)

Ibn Taymiyyah states: Abu’l Faraj Ibn Jawzi is among the ones who explain this. He states: ‘there had not been from the ahl kitab anyone who performed kufr.’ The Jewish and the Christian ‘among the polytheists’ they were idol worshipers, ‘munfakkina’ meaning those who abandon… The meaning of this is, until bayyinah had come to them they were not to abandon their kufr and shirk. The remark of the ayah is future tense (mustakbal) however its meaning belongs to the past (mazi). Bayyinah is a messenger. The messenger is Muhammad (saw). Considering that he had showed them their straying from the right path and their ignorance…

The explanation of Baghawi is similar to this. He states: “They will put an end to their kufr and shirk. ‘Until bayyinah comes to them.’ The remark of this ayah is mustakbal but the meaning is mazi. This means until open proof (bayyinah) comes to them in other words until Muhammad (saw) comes to them with the Qur’an and shows them their straying from the right path and their ignorance and calls them upon iman and until Allah saves them from their ignorance and straying from the right path.” (Majmul Fatawa 16/483-486)

Shawkani states: “Wahidi said: Allah informs us the kuffar will not end their shirk and kufr until RasulAllah (saw) comes to them with Qur’an and explains to them their straying from the right path and their ignorance. This is explaining a blessing and ending straying from the right path and ignorance.”

This ayah clearly shows that before Muhammad (saw) had been sent and before the evidence from the Qur’an had been revealed the attribute of shirk and kufr was valid for individuals. Just like in the phrases from the salaf both ignorance and shirk salaf had been mentioned together. In reality in the Qur’an they have been described with ignorance and negligence many times. The following ayah is only one of them: “It is He Who has sent amongst the Unlettered a messenger from among themselves, to rehearse to them His Signs, to sanctify them, and to instruct them in Scripture and Wisdom,- although they had been, before, in manifest error” (Al-Jumua 62; 2)

Tabari stated: “…Our glorious Lord states those illiterates, had gone astray from the right path and were very distant to embracing clear hidayah before an envoy had been sent. This means that He explains hope and desire for those who are strayed from the right path and are in error.” (Tabari)

Ibn Kathir said: “So, Allah -- all praise and thanks be to Him -- sent him when the Messengers ceased and the way was obscure. Indeed it was a time when it was most needed. Especially since Allah hated the people of the earth, Arabs and non-Arabs alike, except for a few of the People of the book, who kept to the true faith Allah the Exalted sent to `Isa bin Maryam, peace be upon him.” (Tafsir)

Some could state that it was already:

Without doubt before the Nabi (saw) had been sent, the hukm that they had been mushrik had already existed. The reason is because, for them the evidence of nabawi risalah was completely valid. The ignorance and negligence they had been in, was not because the evidence had been destroyed, on the contrary it was because they had rejected them.

Whereas the statements of the salaf mentioned above rejects this suspicion. They had described this era as an era of fatrah which the traces of the right path had been erased and the coming of the Rasul had been cut.


Last edited by tawhid1 on Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:19 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: a- The Difference between the Reaching of the call and Under   Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:17 pm

a- The Difference between the Reaching of the call and Understanding it

“Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikoon will abide in the fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures” (al Bayyinah 98/6)

RasulAllah (saw) said: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, no one of this nation, Jew or Christian, hears of me then dies without having believed in that with which I was sent, but he will be one of the people of the Fire.” (Muslim)

The ulama of Najd state that there is a difference between the reaching of the call and understanding the call. It is because anyone who had reached the call even if he does not understand it in the correct manner; he will be counted among those whom the call reached. Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahab (ra) said:

“Regarding the asl of the deen which Allah (awj) had declared clear and absolute; it is undoubtly the hujjah of Allah (swt), Qur’an. Whoever had reached the Qur’an than it means the hujjah had reached to him. The source of the problem is, your dividing to establishing hujjah and understanding the hujjah. Most of the kafir and munafiq did not understand the hujjah of Allah (awj) even though it is established against them: “Or thinkest thou that most of them listen or understand? They are only like cattle;- nay, they are worse astray in Path.” (al Furqan 25/ 44) Establishing the hujjah and transmitting the hujjah is different than their understanding of the hujjah while it is established to them. The condition that specify their kufr is; it had been established against them even though they did not understand the message. If it is hard to understand then look at the words of RasulAllah (saw) concerning the khawarij: ‘Wherever you come across with them, kill them’, ‘they are the worst of the deads under the sky’ whereas they lived in the century of the sahaba and beside them one may almost underestimate the deeds of sahaba. People made ijma regarding the points which took them out of the fold of deen; the harshness of their view, extreme and ijtihad, they were thinking that they were making ibadah to Allah (swt). Whereas the hujjah had reached them but they did not understand it.” (ar-Rasailu’sh-Shahsiyya, 244-245)

Ibn Qayyim (ra) said: “The one who has the opportunity of learning the orders and the restrictions of Allah (swt) but does not learn will be counted among those who had established the hujjah.” (Madariju’s-Salikin, 1/239)

Those whom the call reached and who believed in Allah (swt) alone and did not associate anything to Him, such as; Waraqa ibn Nawfal, Qiss ibn Saa’idah and Zayd ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl are on the contrary of those whom the call reached and who did not believe Allah (swt) alone and associated others to Him.

Narrated by Ibn 'Umar: “Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail went to Sham, inquiring about a true religion to follow. He met a Jewish religious scholar and asked him about their religion. He said, "I intend to embrace your religion, so tell me some thing about it." The Jew said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you receive your share of Allah's Anger." Zaid said, "'I do not run except from Allah's Anger, and I will never bear a bit of it if I have the power to avoid it. Can you tell me of some other religion?" He said, "I do not know any other religion except the Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He said, "Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian, and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" Then Zaid went out and met a Christian religious scholar and told him the same as before. The Christian said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you get a share of Allah's Curse." Zaid replied, "I do not run except from Allah's Curse, and I will never bear any of Allah's Curse and His Anger if I have the power to avoid them. Will you tell me of some other religion?" He replied, "I do not know any other religion except Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He replied, Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" When Zaid heard their Statement about (the religion of) Abraham, he left that place, and when he came out, he raised both his hands and said, "O Allah! I make You my Witness that I am on the religion of Abraham." (Bukhari)

Ibn Hajar (ra) in his commentary stated: “In the hadith of Zaid ibn Harith the following is included: ‘One of the old Jewish scholars of Sham told me that: In the peninsula of Arab I know one old man who is worshipping Allah which the religion you had asked me. He said: I went to him and he said: It (religion) occurs in your land. Whoever you see is in deviation.” In the narration of Tabari it is: “In your land a nabi occurred or will occur soon, go back; confirm him and have iman on him…”

In the narration of Ibn Ishaq it is narrated as: “He said, O Allah, if I had known the way of ibadah you like I would have make ibadah to you on the way you like. But I do not know, and he was making sujud on the earth with his hands.” (Fathu’l-Bari, 7/144-145) (for more information regarding him see Fathu’l-Bari, 7/144-147; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah a’l-Nihayah, 2/230)

Examples for the latter one is the parents of RasulAllah (saw): It was narrated from RasulAllah (saw) that his parents are in Hell. A man said: “O RasulAllah, where is my father?’ He said: ‘In Hell.’ When the man turned away, he called him back and said: ‘My father and your father are in Hell’.” (Muslim) Imam Nawawi (ra) said, while commenting on the hadith: “This indicates that whoever died during the fatrah (interval between two Prophets) following the way of the Arabs at that time, namely idol-worship, is among the people of Hell. We cannot say that the message did not reach these people, because the message of Ibrahim (as) and other Prophets had reached these people.” (Sharh Sahih Muslim, 3/79) With regard to his mother RasulAllah (saw) said: “I asked my Lord for permission to pray for forgiveness for my mother, and Allah (awj) did not give me permission. I asked Him for permission to visit her grave, and He gave me permission.” (Muslim) It says in ‘Awn al-Ma’bood: “But He did not give me permission” means: because she was a kafirah (disbeliever) and it is not permissible to pray for forgiveness for the kuffar. Imam Nawawi (ra) commented: “This shows that it is not permitted to pray for forgiveness for the kuffar.” (Sharh Sahih Muslim)

Alongside this we will provide evidence of 2 ayahs regarding the fact that before the risalah of RasulAllah (saw) the evidence of the nabawi risalah had been vanished.
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: The era of Fatrah   Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:22 pm

b- Prior to the arrival of RasulAllah (saw) the risalah had been interrupted (The era of Fatrah: interval when no Prophet was sent or between two Prophets)

The first ayah: The first ayah regarding the matter is the following word of Allah: “O People of the Book! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger, after the break in (the series of) our messengers, lest ye should say: "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)": But now hath come unto you a bringer of glad tidings and a warner (from evil). And Allah hath power over all things.” (Al-Maeda 5/ 19)

Qurtubi stated: ““making things clear” that their evidence had been cut. So that they do not say no warner came to us. “After the break in (the series of) our messengers” this means fatrah meaning to stop (break). It is stated that a thing became fatr meaning it became calm (stopped). “Upon fatrah” it has been said that this means the calamity between two nabi. Ar Rumani had narrated this from Abu Ali and a group of ahl ilm.”

Ibni Kathir said: “Allah sent Muhammad after a period of time during which there was no Prophet, clear path, or unchanged religions. Idol worshipping, fire worshipping and cross worshipping flourished during this time. Therefore, the bounty of sending Muhammad was the perfect bounty at a time when he was needed the most. Evil had filled the earth by then, and tyranny and ignorance had touched all the servants, except a few of those who remained loyal to the true teachings of previous Prophets, such as some Jewish rabbis, Christian priests and Sabian monks. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Iyad bin Himar Al-Mujash`i said that the Prophet gave a speech one day and said, ‘…Then Allah looked at the people of the earth and disliked them all, the Arabs and non-Arabs among them, except a few from among the Children of Israel.’ (Ahmad, Muslim and Nasai)”

Therefore, the Hadith states that Allah looked at the people of the earth and disliked them all, both the Arabs and non-Arabs among them, except a few among the Children of Israel, or a few among the People of the Book as Muslim had recorded. The religion was distorted and changed for the people of the earth until Allah sent Muhammad, and Allah, thus, guided the creatures and took them away from the darkness to the light and placed them on a clear path and a glorious Law. Allah said, (lest you say, "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner.") meaning, so that you, who changed the true religion, do not make it an excuse and say, "No Messenger came to us bringing glad tidings and warning against evil.'' There has come to you a bringer of good news and a warner, Muhammad.” (Tafsir)

Tabari stated: ““After the break in (the series of) our messengers” this carries the meaning the era it was inkitaa. The fatrah here means inkitaa to stop (calm). According to this it is said: In an era the coming of any nabi had stopped our envoy came to announce haq and hidayah. “lest ye should say: "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)"” the meaning of this is that our envoy came to declare to you, so that you would not say an informer or a warner did not come to us. Allah teaches them the following: With the arrival of the rasul they were left with no excuse and hujjah was going to be given to them.” (Tafsir)

Shawkani stated: “So that you would not say basher and nazir did not come to us” After the era of fatrah because the Rasul came with bayan it was to prevent from making this detestable statement to cover their unrighteousness. In summary Allah had said do not make any excuse because without doubt bashir and nazir being Muhammad (saw) had come to you.

The second ayah is the following: “If (We had) not (sent thee to the Quraish),- in case a calamity should seize them for (the deeds) that their hands have sent forth, they might say: "Our Lord! why didst Thou not sent us a messenger? We should then have followed Thy Signs and been amongst those who believe!" (Al-Qasas 28/ 47)

Tabari stated: “Our Almighty Lord states: If those who I sent you to were not going say; if before you were sent to them We were to punish them and give them a taste of our punishment for sinning and diving into filth and as a result they would not say: O ye our Lord before punishing us you should have sent us a messenger so that we would subject to the evidence and the ayah you revealed to your Rasul. We could have believed in your divinity and we would have attested to your Rasul of Your commands and restrictions. If they were not to make this statement before we sent you to them, we would have speed up the outcome of their actions of shirk. However We sent you to them to warn them of the outcome in result of their kufr. The aim is that they do not have any excuse left after the envoys.” (Tabari)

From az-Zajjaj, Shawkani narrates the following: “The importance of the ayah is as follows: If they were not going to say as such, We would not send them any envoys. Meaning; the reason We send them envoys is to set aside such excuses and crookedness. This is like the following ayah: “Messengers who gave good news as well as warning, that mankind, after (the coming) of the messengers, should have no plea against Allah: For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.” (An-Nisa 4; 165)

The ayah carries the following meaning: Without doubt if We were to punish them they would say: Although there had been long time between the envoys Allah had not sent us a messenger. They believed this would be an excuse for themselves. Whereas, after the messages of the envoys reached them, they were left with no excuse. However, We had made the hujjah muhkam, we rid the excuses and O Muhammad by sending you we completed our declaration.”

Qurtubi: “they might say “Our Lord! If only Thou should have sent us a messenger” if they were not to say this We would not send envoys. It was said that it carries the meaning We would speed up their consequence. However Allah (awj) had said the envoys were sent to rid the excuses of the kuffar.”

Qusayri said: The sahih thing is the mahzuf (indirect) of Lawla -which is a particle in Arabic- is understood in the following sense: If perchance it was not like this there would be no need for an envoy to be sent. In reality those kuffar had not been excused. The reason for this is that the news of shariah and the invitation of tawhid had reached them. However there is a reality that it had been a long time between them. For this reason if We were to punish them for their crookedness it is possible that one from among them say: A long time has past since the last envoy had come and would essentially believe this to be an excuse. However the fact that the message of the envoys had reached them they have no excuse. We have rid these weak excuses and made the necessary explanations. Consequently O Muhammad (saw) we sent you to them for this reason. In reality Allah had made the hukm that He would not hold anyone responsible before completion of bayan, hujjah and before sending an envoy.”

Ibni Kathir stated: “And We have sent you to them to establish proof against them, and to give them no excuse when the punishment of Allah comes to them because of their disbelief, lest they offer the excuse that no Messenger or warner came to them.” (Tafsir)

Baghawi states: ““In case a calamity should seize them” meaning when it seizes them as a consequence and punishment. “For (the deeds) that their hands have sent forth” meaning the things they did like kufr and evil. If they were not to say: "Our Lord! why didst Thou not sent us a messenger? We should then have followed Thy Signs and been amongst those who believe”. The answer to the lawla (if) particle is mahzuf (indirect). And it is as such: We would have made their consequence sooner. In summary if they hadn’t set forth the excuse of an envoy not being sent We would have punished them sooner due to their kufr. The meaning of this had also said to be: We would not have sent you as an envoy to them. However again We sent you so people would not have any excuse left in front of Allah after the envoys had been sent.”

From these nass the following is understood: If Mawla subhanahu, was to rush and punish those people before the arrival of the envoy as a result of shirk and sin, they could have suggested they had lived in an era distant from envoys that would inform them of khayr, and keep them distant from shar. For this purpose to keep them from having this excuse Allah sent Muhammad (saw). With this the salaf have made ittifak that they are of the gayr-i Muslim, mushrik and kafir. Yet they will only be punished after the nabawi hujjah. There is ikhtilaf regarding this last matter between the scholars.

Now those people lived in an era distant from envoys; an era of fatrah. In spite of the extreme ignorance they lived in, they were still mushrik.

The third evidence: The shirk of the tribe of Nuh (as); the first shirk that came into existence on earth.

As known for certain Adam (as) had left his offspring upon pure tawhid. Later on shirk spread among his offspring as Ibn Abbas describes it, slowly through evil (shaytan). They became mushrik and upon this Allah (awj) sent Nuh (as). According to the sahih hadith of shafaah he is the first Rasul on earth.

As known, Nuh (as) would address his tribe as mushrik not Muslim. In this context it should be asked where was the envoy before him, which gave evidence (hujjah) to them? So that the attribution of shirk and mushrik could be established upon them. In an ayah Allah (swt) states:

“Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.” (Al-Baqarah 2/ 213)

Ibn Kathir reported that: “Ibn Jarir reported that Ibn `Abbas said: "There were ten generations between Adam and Nuh, all of them on the religion of Truth. They later disputed so Allah sent the Prophets as warners and bringers of glad tidings.'' He then said that this is how `Abdullah read the Ayah… "They all had the guidance. Then: They disputed and Allah sent Prophets. The first to be sent was Nuh."” (Tafsir)

Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) stated: “People had been upon tawhid and ikhlas after Adam (as) and before Nuh (as). Just like the ancestor of all human beings Adam (as) had been. Until they fabricated the bidah of shirk and began to worship idols. However, Allah had not sent a book or an envoy regarding what they had been acting upon. Shaytan had done this profanity with the doubts he adorned with fasid qiyas and deviated thoughts. A tribe from among them had said: Without doubt the sculptures are the spark of the stars in the sky, the stairway to heaven and exalted spirits. A tribe from among them had the concept and pictured them in forms of the nabi and salih from among them. Another tribe had built these idols upon the spirits of the jinn and shaitan. And another tribe had others views… Most of them were imitating their leader and turning away from the path of hidayah. At that time Allah sent His nabi Nuh (as). He would call them upon ibadaah to Allah without shirk and would keep them distant from ibadaah to any other. Although they would claim they were only doing this so that these idols would bring them closer to Allah and so that they would be intercessors for them in the grounds of Allah.” (Fatawa, 28/603-604)

In a narration from Ibn Abbas in Sahih Buhari the following is stated: “All the idols which were worshipped by the people of Noah were worshipped by the Arabs later on. As for the idol Wadd, it was worshipped by the tribe of Kalb at Daumat-al-Jandal; Suwa' was the idol of (the tribe of) Murad and then by Ban, Ghutaif at Al-Jurf near Saba; Yauq was the idol of Hamdan, and Nasr was the idol of Himyr, the branch of Dhi-al-Kala.' The names (of the idols) formerly belonged to some pious men of the people of Noah, and when they died Satan inspired their people to (prepare and place idols at the places where they used to sit, and to call those idols by their names. The people did so, but the idols were not worshipped till those people (who initiated them) had died and the origin of the idols had become obscure, whereupon people began worshipping them.” (Bukhari; Fath’ul-Bari, 8/535)

When we look at the expression of Ibn Abbas we see that these idols had not been worshiped in the beginning. The illah (reason) of which they began to be worshipped was due to the disappearance of ‘ilm and the spread of ignorance. The reason behind this is that, wherever or whenever the mushrik lives his religion, he believes the idol brings him closer to Allah. Why or how should a slave (abd) get closer to Allah with something he believes is batil. Likewise the following is a regulation: contrary to rebelling, the source and starting point of shirk is belief. Whereas, the source and starting point of the other is only, desire.

Likewise the adulterer, thief and drunk know that their rebellious behaviour is haram and ugly. However the force that makes one do these actions is evil desire. Of course this is the opposite of sacrifice, votive offering, du’a and taking refuge. Because the force that makes one do these is not desire it is firm belief in Allah (itiqad).

For this reason it is not possible to see an ‘abd that would believe the haram and ugliness of this shirk and know that this act would drag him to eternal jahannam and prevent him from entering jannah and that it completely destroyed his amal (actions) and yet continues to do this with the intention to get closer to Allah. Now… this is not possible.
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: The Inseparability of the attributes Shirk and Ignorance   Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:23 pm

c- The Inseparability of the attributes Shirk and Ignorance (jahl)

It should be known that shirk is mates to ignorance and that Tawhid is an inseparable mate of ‘ilm (knowledge). Allah states: “…that is the right religion, but most men understand not...” (Yusuf 12/ 40)

Ibni Kathir stated in the tafsir of ayah the following: “and this is why most of them are idolaters” (Tafsir)

The meaning is mentioned in many ayahs that it is the ignorance of most people, it is the fact that they do not know.

“If thou ask them, who it is that created the heavens and the earth. They will certainly say, "Allah". Say: "Praise be to Allah!" But most of them understand not.” (Luqman 31/25)

“We created them not except for just ends: but most of them do not understand.” (Ad-Dukhan 44/39)

“No men can be its guardians except the righteous; but most of them do not understand.” (Al-Anfal 8/34)

In reality reference to these individuals as ignorant and non-knowledgeable is seen in many ayahs. Likewise most of the human race have been referred to as mushrik and deviated in many ayahs of the Qur’an. As seen in the following:

“And most of them believe not in Allah without associating (other as partners) with Him!” (Yusuf 12/106)

“Wert thou to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead thee away from the way of Allah. They follow nothing but conjecture: they do nothing but lie.” (Al-Anaam 6/116)

It is evident that the invariable and clear declarations of the Qur’anic ayah show that without doubt most people perform shirk and ignorance together.

When Allah (awj) states: “Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him.” (An-Nisa 4/48) most individuals claim this is valid for only those who have knowledge and those who are stubborn. However this is only like such in rare conditions. As known ayahs have been revealed not for rare situations, on the contrary they have been revealed for matters which are general.

After Imam Abu Butayn related the following from Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah “whoever performs the action of shirk with no doubt is mushrik. He will be invited to repent. If he has repented it is great, if not he will be killed” he said: “With no doubt Imam Ibn Taymiyyah in many places has clarified that an individual who performs any action of shirk will be given the hukm of takfir. Although he had narrated from the ijma of the Muslim he had not distinguished the ignorant etc. Allah stated “Allah forgiveth not (the sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right).” (An-Nisa 4/116) Allah also with the expression of Masih states: “…Whoever joins other gods with Allah, Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.” (Al-Maeda 5/72) Now whoever claims this avoidance to be particular to only the stubborn (muannid) individuals and excludes the ignorant, the misinterpreters and the imitators (muqallid) with no doubt will have opposed Allah (swt) and RasulAllah (saw) and he will have separated from the path of the Muminoon. Moreover in the books of the fuqaha, the section of ‘the hukm of the murtad’ commences with the following: “Whoever performs the action of shirk to Allah… and they never limit it with the muannid. In reality this is an open matter. Alhamdulillah.” (Al Intisar li Hizb’ il Muwahhidun. Abu Butayn, Al-Shaykh Abdullah ibn Abdurrahman, Al Intisar li Hizb’ il Muwahhidun warRad ala’l Mujadil an’ il-Mushrikeen, 27, Aqidat ul-Muwahhideen wa'r-red ala’d-Dullul wal Mubtedeen.)

Likewise; when Ibn Abbas analyzes the beginning of shirk in the era of Nuh (as) he explains that it began with the disappearance of ‘ilm. He says: “they did not worship idols until those who carried ‘ilm died, this knowledge (information) had been lost and now they were worshiped.” Whereas, this tribe had been upon tawhid at first and they had come from a lineage of muwahhid. Subsequently with the effects of ignorance and tawil and their types slowly as a bidah from their side without any evidence from Allah shirk began with the deception and slander of drawing them near Allah. In this way they became mushrik. In an environment as such, Allah sent Nuh (as) as a bearer of good news and warner to explain the evidence of the worldly and akhirah punishment of those who oppose. In surah Hud Allah states: “We sent Noah to his people (with a mission): "I have come to you with a Clear Warning: "That ye serve none but Allah: Verily I do fear for you the penalty of a grievous day."” (Hud 11/25-26)

Ibni Kathir said: “Allah, the Exalted, informs about Prophet Nuh (as). He was the first Messenger whom Allah (awj) sent to the people of the earth who were polytheists involved in worshipping idols. Allah mentions that he (Nuh) said to his people, (I have come to you as a plain warner.) meaning, to openly warn you against facing Allah's punishment if you continue worshipping other than Allah. Thus, Nuh said, (That you worship none but Allah.) This can also be seen in his statement, (surely, I fear for you the torment of a painful Day.) This means, "If you all continue doing this, then Allah will punish you with a severe punishment in the Hereafter.'' (Tafsir)

Everything stated about the tribe of Nuh (as) is also valid for the ummah between two messengers (fatrah). The reason is that every envoy in general meaning is sent with Islam to ignorant and mushrik tribes. Most the time the tribes reject and rebel against them, only some which Allah gave hidayah, believe. Then Allah distants those, from their tribes and after the destruction of those who deny, Allah will allow the muwahhid to survive. From then on, they continue upon tawhid until the time Allah wills otherwise. Until the ‘ilm disappears from them, and leads the way slowly to shirk which than begins. Of course they do this without evidence from Allah, with slander to Allah due to ignorance. In this case Allah will send them an envoy to reunite them from darkness to light, from shirk to tawhid and from ignorance to knowledge. Also to warn them that after the nabawi hujjah if they are to continue their shirk and kufr they will be punished in daraiyn (both dunya and akhirah). This is stated in the following ayah: “Messengers who gave good news as well as warning, that mankind, after (the coming) of the messengers, should have no plea against Allah: For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.” (An-Nisa 4/165)

What is understood from all of this is that, without doubt the name mushrik is invariable before the message had reached. However, the punishment will be in both worlds; this world and in the akhirah.

Narrating from Muhammad b. Nasir al Marwazi, Ibn Taymiyyah stated: “‘Ilm concerning Allah means iman, and ignorance concerning Allah means kufr. As such, knowledge regarding fard is iman; however ignorance prior to the commandment of the fard does not mean kufr. The reason behind this is that when Allah first sent RasulAllah (saw) to the ashab they confessed their iman however after this they did not know the commanded fard. Even so their ignorance of the, to be commanded fard was not kufr. Afterwards Allah sent them the fard. Their confession of these fard and performance of these fard became iman. Nevertheless those who rejected them became kafir for declaring the news from Allah to be untrue. If news from Allah had not come, being ignorant of this would not make one kafir. In the same sense after the arrival of the news if from among the Muslim there was some who did not hear of it, this ignorance would also not make one kafir. However ignorance regarding Allah is kufr, either before the arrival of the news or after.” (Fatawa, 7/325)

According to an explanation by the author of Badai’us Sanai, Abu Yusuf narrated from Imam Abu Hanifah: “Abu Hanifah stated: No servant (‘abd) has an excuse regarding knowledge of his Rabb due to ignorance. All creatures must know their Rabb and make tawhid. The reason for this is that they see the created sky, the creation of themselves and all things Allah created. When it comes to the fard; regarding those who do not know them and related news had not reached them, means that evidence had not been stable as hukm (ie. an ayah had not been revealed yet, or a hadith had not been stated yet etc.)” (Badai’us Sanai 7/132)

Ibn Taymiyyah stated: “When mentioning Hud (as) He notifies what had been said to his tribe: “… ye do nothing but invent!” (Hud 11/50) Before passing hukm of them with what they had opposed him with, he characterized them as slanderers. The reason for this was because they had taken on other deities besides Allah. Without doubt the attribute of mushrik had been fixed before risalah. Before such risalah they had been making shirk against their Rabb, they had been associating partners to Allah and they had taken on other deities and other nidds. (*Nidds are things which represent that which is loved more than Allah; things which are made into measures. For a thing to be a nidd it does not have to be a special existence.) This shows that these attributes have been fixed before risalah. Just like the names jahl and jahiliyyah. Likewise before the arrival of RasulAllah the era had been called jahiliyyah and those affiliated as jahl. However punishment is not the same, because turning faces was only to run/escape from obedience. Just as the following ayah: “But on the contrary, he rejected Truth and turned away!” (Al-Qiyama 75/32) And a situation as such is only possible with the arrival of the message.” (Fatawa, 20/37)

The forth evidence: is the following ayah of Allah “(The messengers were sent) thus, for thy Lord would not destroy for their wrong-doing men's habitations whilst their occupants were unwarned.” (Al-Anaam 6/131)

Qurtubi in the tafsir of the ayah explains “…We did this to them because I have never been the destroyer of any land for their zulm. Meaning because of their shirk before sending an envoy. So they would not say neither bashir nor nazeer came to us. It has been said to have the following meaning: I did not destroy any land for the shirk of the shirk doer. This is similar to the following ayah: “…Every soul draws the meed of its acts on none but itself: no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another. (Al-Anam 6/164) If Allah would destruct them before sending an envoy He would have needed to do this.”

From Baghawi: what we are explaining is a situation related to envoys and those who declare them to be false because your Rabb was not a destroyer of lands with zulm. Meaning no one destructed them with zulm. This means with the shirk of the shirk doer ‘whilst their occupants were unwarned’ meaning in the condition that they were not warned. In summary before an envoy had been sent to them.

From Shawkani: “with zulm” meaning I did not destruct their land for the reason of those who performed zulm. Especially when the inhabitants had been unwarned and an envoy had not been sent. This means without doubt Allah had sent his servants envoys. The reason for this is because before the books had been revealed and before the Rasul had been sent while in a state of no fright and no warning, Allah will not destruct the land of those who rebel with their kufr.”

As understood from the statements of the salaf, this ayah shows that the attribute of shirk had been fixed before the arrival of an envoy and while they had been in a state of unwarned. Only, will punishment occur after risalah.

In the illah of the hukm in Al Araf 7/172-174 it is clearly shown that with this hukm the attribute of mushrik is stable, it is fixed even before hujjah had been established and before the message had been attained only because of being mixed up in shirk. In reality this hukm is general for all nations and creations. It would be beneficial to add that the ulama had ittifak regarding the fact that this ayah is mustakil evidence. And they have had ikhtilaf regarding the fact that this ayah is mustakil evidence for punishment. However there are two views concerning this.

This holding of a witness has been referred to as being a statement only by tongue or as the actual state itself. There are two views regarding this also.

These are what the scholars had ittifak over and what they had ikhtilaf over. The purpose behind revealing this is so that minds are not confused and so that the hukm is fitted as muhkam.
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
Admin
FrequentlyAbsent (EvenThoughFounder)
avatar

Male Number of posts : 3564
Location : Admin Panel
Religion : Islam
Registration date : 2007-11-01

PostSubject: Re: Ignorance is not an excuse!   Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:40 pm

I asked some salafis about this 'ignorance is not an excuse' thing and they said it is not a belief held by the salaf, they said it's a neo salafi belief.

_________________
“There is no worse calamity for knowledge and its people than when outsiders intrude. They are ignorant, but presume to know. They cause trouble yet think that they are helping.” - Imam Ibn Hazm Rahimahullah



Last edited by Admin on Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:00 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : correction)
Back to top Go down
http://darulilm.forumotion.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Ignorance is not an excuse!   Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:48 pm

Did you ask salafis or talafis?
Back to top Go down
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: Attribute of Shirk had been Fixed Prior to Hujjah   Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:23 am

2- The reasons behind the Attribute of Shirk had been Fixed Prior to Hujjah

a- Misak is an Evidence on Its Own


“When thy Lord drew forth from the Children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants, and made them testify concerning themselves, (saying): "Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)?"- They said: "Yea! We do testify!" (This), lest ye should say on the Day of Judgment: "Of this we were never mindful": Or lest ye should say: "Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them: wilt Thou then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?" Thus do We explain the signs in detail; and perchance they may turn (unto Us). (Al-Araf 07/172-174)

Shawkani explains this in this following manner: “We did this so that you would not use not knowing as an excuse or so that you would not blame your ancestors for this and so that you would not excuse yourselves with either of these. In the past they had used both excuses. “We were a generation after them” for this reason we could not reach haq, and did not know the truth. “Are you going to destroy us for those who did acts of bateel?” Because of our ancestors; we are not to blame for our inability of research and our content with our pasts. With this hikmah Allah has taken human beings as descendents of Adam and has made them witnesses of their own attestation and state: We did this so they do not make these statements so that they do not embrace these bateel evidences and attach themselves to such invalid excuse and present it.

Imam Qurtubi narrates from Tartushi: “Although people do not recognize the ahd in this life, without doubt, they are responsible of it. Ibn Abbas (ra) and Ubayy b Ka’b (ra) said the following: ‘His (awj) saying shahidna (we are to be the witness) belongs to ban-i adam (mankind). It means: We, undoubtedly be the witness of You being our Rabb and Ilah.’… ‘Are you going to destroy us for those (mubtil) who did acts of batil?’ This means: You will not act like such. Indeed muqallid has no excuse regarding the matters of tawhid.” (Tafsir)

Tabari explains this ayah in the following manner: “Our almighty Rabb states: “We made you witness” those who state Allah is their Rabb. The purpose is so that you would not say you did not know on the Day of Judgment. And so you would not say Without doubt we did not know this. We had been not aware of this. Or without doubt our ancestors had performed shirk and we are a generation which came after them…
With an ignorance originating from our ignorance we had followed their path.” (Tabari, 2/713)

Ibn Kathir states: “Allah stated that He brought the descendants of Adam out of their fathers' loins, and they testified against themselves that Allah is their Lord and King and that there is no deity worthy of worship except Him. Allah created them on this Fitrah, or way…Also some from among the salaf and halaf had stated the following: Without doubt what had been meant by this witnessing is to inform that they had been created with a fitrah of tawhid and inclined to tawhid.” (And later begins to provide evidence to proof the truthness) “These scholars have stated: What had been meant by witnessing is that the evidence that, they had been created inclined to tawhid is the fact that Allah had made this witnessing a hujjah regarding shirk. If this incident had occurred in reality everyone would remember it so that it could be evidence towards them. If perchance it is said: RasulAllah informing of the matter is sufficient proof for its occurrence. The answer to this would be without doubt the disclaimer mushrik disclaim everything the Rasul brings, this and others. Since this testifying had been made an independent hujjah, the fitrah they had been created upon is a fitrah inclined to acknowledge tawhid. For this reason He says: “lest ye should say” meaning so that you would not say this on the Day of Judgment “we were never mindful” of Tawhid (unaware. Or lest you should say: "It was only our fathers a foretime who took others as partners in worship along with Allah.'' (Tafsir)

The explanation of Baghawi is: “If it is said how can a testification, not remembered be relevant evidence against someone? It will be answered: Without doubt Allah had established many evidences regarding the truth of the oneness of Allah and the matters His envoys had informed of. Regardless of this whoever denies this is a stubborn invalidator and will mean that hujjah had been presented to him. Furthermore their forgetfulness and not being able to remember especially after the message had been given to them by the miracle proprietor messenger does not nullify relying on this evidence. In the ayah the following is stated: “Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them.” This means O ye mushrik we made you promise so that you would not say: for certain our fathers before us performed shirk and broke their promise and we are a generation who came after them which means we are their dependents consequently we complied with them. So that you would not make this your excuse shield and say “wilt Thou then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?" Or are You going to punish us for the batil deeds and ignorance of our ancestors? As you see after Allah had informed of the promise regarding tawhid it is not possible for them to defend themselves with such statements. “Thus do We explain the signs in detail” Meaning we announce the ayahs so that servants will think thoroughly. “and perchance they may turn” they may return from kufr to tawhid.

Ibn Qayyim states: `and made them testify concerning themselves, “(saying): "Am I not your Lord” This means they must state His rububiyyah. An acknowledgement as such that it will be evidence against themselves. Without doubt this statement is such that it will have been brought to them by the tongues of the Rasul. Like in the following ayah: “Their messengers said: "Is there a doubt about Allah, The Creator of the heavens and the earth?” (Ibrahim 14/10) “If thou ask them, who it is that created the heavens and the earth. They will certainly say, "Allah".” (Luqman 31/25) “Say: "To whom belong the earth and all beings therein? (say) if ye know!" They will say, "To Allah!"” (Al-Mumenoon 23/ 84-85) There are many similar ayahs in the Qur’an. In these ayahs proof has been provided against them that they had been created with a fitrah that they would acknowledge their rabb and creator, also with this opportunity they are invited to do ibadaah only to Allah without any shirk. In reality this is a method particular to the Qur’an. One of these is the statement of Allah in surah Araf: “When thy Lord drew forth…lest you should say on the day of judgment of this we were never mindful.” Here a conclusion has been drawn with their statements against them regarding their shirk in rububiyyah and ibadaah to another. This way it has been requested that they do not present an excuse of not knowing or of imitating batil. The reason for this is because there are two principals of deviation: 1- either not knowing haq 2- or either imitating the deviators.” (Ahkamu Ahl dhimma 2/527)

Allah states think about when they are taken out of the loins of their fathers and later when they are being born opposing themselves with the fitrah of acknowledging their creator Allah as Rabb. As you see this acknowledgement is hujjah against them on the Day of Judgment. (Ahkamu Ahl dhimma, 2/562)

“Lest you say” meaning to prevent you from saying or so that you would not say” “of this we were never mindful” meaning of this acknowledgement of Allah being Rabb and that only to Him ibadaah will be done… “Or lest ye should say: "Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them"” Allah taa’ala presents us with two evidences here which refute the excuses. 1- So that they would not say they had not been aware of this. Here He declares that ‘ilm is of fitrah and that it is essential. Also that every human being must recognize Him. This comprises the hujjah of Allah; the invalidity of the lack of constraint, moreover the statements aimed at providing evidence of the creator are already of fitrah and essential information. This is hujjah for the invalidity of lack of constraint. 2- Our ancestors had performed shirk prior to us and we are a generation after them. Are You going to destruct us for the doings of those who dived into batil? They are our mushrik fathers. Or are You going to punish us with the offence of others? Now without doubt it is typical and a necessity of nature that an individual follows his father from art, development, clothing and food even belief; although they had sought their ancestors as a mushrik generation before them, if they had not been predestined with the knowledge of Allah being their Rabb. The reason for this is because the father is who up brings the individual and if the parent had made the child a Jew, a Christian or a Zoroastrian and if he did not carry anything in his mind, fitrah naturally they’d say: we are excused. Those who did acts of shirk was our ancestors. We are a generation after them. Also there was nothing to inform us of our mistakes. Whereas in their fitrah the information regarding Allah being their only Rabb is present means that there is something present to declare the invalidity of shirk; which is tawhid they had made shahadah to, against themselves. When it is like this if they are still naturally going to be followers of their ancestors, their past action and natural fitrah will be definite evidence against this claim and ugly custom of theirs. Meanwhile their fitrah which means Islam is much precious and ranks a higher place before their latter day custom which they try to embrace. The meaning of this is; the mind which tawhid is established in is an open evidence of shirk being batil all on its own, without the need for any Rasul. For this reason the misak (their word, promise) has been taken as evidence against them in place of any Rasul. This does not contradict the word of Allah in surah Isra “…nor would We visit with Our Wrath until We had sent an messenger (to give warning).” (Al-Isra 17/15) The Rasul will invite to tawhid however fitrah is evidence of ‘aql. Likewise the existence of the creator will be known with it. Even if the risalah of Nabi had not been brought to them as hujjah, this shahadah (misak) is sufficient evidence over their susceptible nafs that Allah is their Rabb. With this, the information relating to this is necessary information for the human race. Infact the hujjah of Allah’s ratification of the Rasul becomes stabled with this. Consequently on the day of qiyamah no one will be able to say: “I had not been aware of this. For this reason this sin does not belong to me it belongs to my mushrik father. He had known that Allah had been his Rabb and that Allah had no partners.” Even if in such situation this individual is not excused for his aimlessness and shirk. On the contrary the punishment he deserves is validated for him. Besides without doubt Allah will not destruct any without sending them an envoy; even if the individual is the doer of that which necessitates condemning and punishment due to His perfection of mercy and generosity. In reality upon his servants Allah has two separate hujjah. Allah has made these hujjah muhkam over individuals. And without establishing both these hujjah He will not punish anyone. The first is; the fact that Allah has created individuals susceptible and able to acknowledge that Allah is the Rabb, Malik and the creator, also that Allah has the right over his servants. The second is; that Allah had sent envoys. These envoys explain the misak, repeat it and complete it. This way upon individual’s both fitrah and the attestation of shariah, are valid. In this case if they do not accept these they will have attested to their own kufr just like in the following ayah: “So against themselves will they bear witness that they rejected Faith.” (Al-Anam 6/130) This means the hukm one deserves will only penetrate if he acknowledges and after two witnesses/ hujjah/ evidence are provided.” (Ahkam’u Ahl dhimmi, 2/527-570)
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
Admin
FrequentlyAbsent (EvenThoughFounder)
avatar

Male Number of posts : 3564
Location : Admin Panel
Religion : Islam
Registration date : 2007-11-01

PostSubject: Re: Ignorance is not an excuse!   Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Quote :
Did you ask salafis or talafis?

They said they were salafis, why? do you also believe ignorance is not an excuse?

_________________
“There is no worse calamity for knowledge and its people than when outsiders intrude. They are ignorant, but presume to know. They cause trouble yet think that they are helping.” - Imam Ibn Hazm Rahimahullah

Back to top Go down
http://darulilm.forumotion.com
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: 1- Servants have been created with the Fitrah to Submit only   Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:23 pm

1- Servants have been created with the Fitrah to Submit only to Allah (awj)

Ibn Taymiyyah stated: “Alhamdulillah. When it comes to the hadith of RasulAllah (saw) “Every child is born upon the Fitrah, it is only his parents who turn him into a Jew, a Christian or a Zoroastrian” The truth to the matter that Allah has created humans upon this fitrah. This fitrah is the fitrah of Islam. The fitrah which had been created on individuals on the day they had said “Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)?" They said: "Yeah! We do testify!"” (Al-Araf 7/172) This means breaking loose from batil convictions and accepting the sahih aqidah, because the essence of Islam is to submit to only Allah not any other. In reality this is the meaning of la ilaha illa Allah. RasulAllah (saw) had given an example for this; he said: “Just like an animal giving birth to a healthy one. Do you see any defect in it.” This means the heart being flawless from defects is the well-being of the body. Defects are ugly. In Sahih Muslim in a qudsy hadith narrated from Iyad b Himar RasulAllah (saw) stated that Allah (jj) informed him (saw) that “I have created My servants as one having a natural inclination (hanif) to the worship of Allah but it is Satan who turns them away from the right religion and he makes unlawful what has been declared lawful for them and he commands them to ascribe partnership with Me, although he has no justification for that.” For this reason Ahmad b. Hanbal (ra) according to one of his views carried the following thought: When one of the kafir parents of a child has died the child will be given the hukm Muslim because the reasons which will change the nature of his fitrah will have ceased. Again according to a riwayah by him and Ibn Mubarak he stated: “The child will be born with the fitrah of unhappiness and happiness (i.e his fate) he had been created upon.” This statement will not negate the first one. Without doubt the child will be born sound. Allah will know that it will do kufr. Therefore in ummu’l kitab he will have to transform into what had been for him. Just like the animal is born sound. Whereas Allah knows it will be defected… Essentially being born upon fitrah does not necessitate they believe in Islam in actual fact. Allah has taken us out of our mothers’ abdomens not having knowledge of anything. However here Islam means being created with the fitrah of having sound hearts, being accepting and having the will power. It is as such if there is no effect of a deviator upon him he will remain Muslim. See here as long as there is no barrier to prevent it this ‘ilm and power of practice which necessitates Islam is the fitrah Allah had created humans with. (Fatawa, 4/245)

As seen in the expressions of Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) ahd is the fitrah Allah (swt) had created humans upon. Without doubt Allah has created all humans upon a fitrah sound of batil convictions and accepting of haq convictions. If this fitrah is not disturbed most certainly the owner will be Muslim. Shaikh also widely discusses the same issue in his book "Dar‘u Ta‘arud al ‘Aql wa al Naql".

As understood from this, the mushrik has annulled the promise and agreement which had been taken from him. After the quotations regarding the ayah of misak, after the evidence which is muhkam and absolute would there be any need for any other evidence?

After this evidence is there need for another?

After these explanations is there need for any other?

Without doubt the scholars mentioned above have made ittifak regarding the fact that this ayah is mustakil (self-contained) evidence concerning shirk. For instance Qurtubi states there is no excuse for a muqallid (imitator) regarding tawhid. And Tabari states the carelessness and blind imitation of the mushrik invalidates misak as evidence. Baghawi and Shawkani also state this. Ibn Kathir had considered this attestation mustakil evidence against them in means of shirk. Ibn Qayyim stated: Without doubt by acknowledging rububiyyah hujjah is established. This is the evidence against them from Mawla by the tongue of the Rasul. With this He makes ihtijaj (to reach a conclusion from the nass) and with it He invites them to acknowledge uluhiyyah.

Imam Jawziyya adds on to this and states this is the method of the Qur’an. He states their excuse of carelessness; ignorance and imitation of their ancestors are annulled with un-rejectable open evidence. Likewise without doubt the ‘aql they learned tawhid with is evidence invalidating shirk which also leaves no need for an envoy. In reality while in this state the reason they deserve punishment materializes. Only, due to the perfect mercy of Allah which comprises everything this punishment has been bound to the arrival of the nabawi hujjah. This ayah lifts all excuses which mankind can embrace regarding ibadaah to any other than Allah. Surely Allah created the universe so that all would worship Him without shirk. Mankind will be dispatched to akhirah due to this truth which books had been revealed and envoys had been sent. Likewise Allah had prepared jannah or jahannam for those who show faithfulness or no faith to this promise. Before concluding this issue it would be best to clarify a doubt regarding this matter. It is regarding the attestation. This attestation concerns rububiyyah not uluhiyyah. Consequently this is hujjah is not about the shirk in deity (ilah) it is about the shirk in lordship (rabb). Whereas according to most of the scholars from the salaf and the khalaf including Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, and Ibn Kathir, this attestation is metaphorical. This is just to refute that claim by proving Allah had created mankind upon fitrah, because fitrah is Islam. Thus this had been quoted from Ibn Taymiyyah just like when Ibn Qayyim mentions the ayah of misak he quoted from Ibn Abdilbarr (Ahkamu ahl’ dhimma)

Ibn Qayyim (ra), did not regard fitrah as mere knowledge of right and wrong at birth but as an active, inborn love and acknowledgement of Allah (swt) which reaffirms His Lordship. He also explained that ‘And Allah brought you forth from the wombs of your mothers, knowing nothing…’ (an-Nahl 16:78) does not refer to innate knowledge of Allah (awj) or Islam, but rather to knowledge of the particulars of religion in general which is why the latter type of knowledge is absent at birth. Moreover, fitrah is not merely the capacity or readiness to receive Islam, in which such a condition can be unfulfilled when parents choose Judaism or Christianity as the child’s religion; fitrah is truly an inborn predisposition to acknowledge Allah (awj), tawhid and deen al-Islam. (Fathul Bari, 198)

Essentially the mufassir had made ijma that fitrah meant Islam. Likewise the open sahih hadith expresses this. The following hadith of RasulAllah (saw) carries this meaning: “His mother-father (parent) will make him Jewish, Christian or Mazdean (Zoroastrian).” In this hadith he does not mention they will make him Muslim. Likewise the hadith mentioned in Sahih Muslim (upon this nation) is also an absolute evidence for this. There are also other hadith concerning this. Furthermore the explanation Abu Huraira makes of surah Rum ayah 30 also carries the same meaning. Apparently Abu Huraira (ra), cited this verse after the hadith which means that, in his view, the fitrah of the hadith is the same fitrah in the ayah. The ayah refers to the fitrah as good because the right religion is being described as Allah’s fitrah. Thus according to Abu Huraira (ra), "fitrah is associated with the deen of Islam." (Qurtubi, Tafsir)

The Laws or the shariahs, which the prophets were sent with, are guiding lights to the essential faith in Allah (swt) which is created in every human being. Furthermore, since this faith comes from Allah (awj), it naturally follows that only laws capable of guiding man back to it must also come from Allah (awj), hence Islam is also called deen al-fitrah, the religion of human nature. That is to say, "fitrah is Islam; Islam is deen al-fitrah": the religion of human nature, because its laws and its teachings are in full harmony with the normal and the natural inclination of the human fitrah to believe in and submit to the Creator.

There is no difference between the fitrah of individual men: all men are endowed with the same or an ‘equal’ fitrah. The believer is in harmony with his fitrah because his instincts are directed in service of Allah (awj), but the unbeliever is alienated from his fitrah because his instincts are in the service of everything else besides Allah (swt). The reason for man’s destruction of himself and his environment is that he has become alienated. Nevertheless, he can overcome this estrangement his will and intellect with the Divine will and knowledge. It is man’s recourse to Islam which will enable him to effect such a reconciliation. Fundamentally there is no need for much discussion regarding this issue.

Secondly there is also the belief by the words of many scholars among the salaf and halaf that, this attestation took place in reality.
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: b- The Tawhid of Rububiyyah necessitates the Tawhid in Uluhiyyah this is another hujj   Sat Mar 28, 2009 4:59 pm

b- The Tawhid of Rububiyyah necessitates the Tawhid in Uluhiyyah this is another hujjah

Those who have discovered the pleasure of the Qur’an will know very well that the tawhid of rububiyyah necessitates the tawhid of uluhiyyah. It will also very well be known that the Qur’an invites the mushrik to the tawhid of uluhiyyah, with establishing evidence which concern rububiyyah.

“Verily this Qur'an doth guide to that which is most right (or stable)” (Al-Isra 19/9)

The Qur’an presents many ayah against the kuffar as they confess the rububiyyah of Allah, that tawhid in ibadaah also must be established. In this sense they are referred to, in a questioning style just like their dictation in the invitation to the tawhid of rububiyyah. Meaning when they acknowledge His rububiyyah as a result the Qur’an puts forward the fact with evidence that He also has the right of ibadaah to. By this although they confess that Allah is the only Rabb they are condemned for associating partners to him. The reason for this is because even if they confess that Allah is the only Rabb at the same time they must confess He is the only one who has the right (mustahak) of being worshiped. An example for this is the following ayah:

“Say: "Who is it that sustains you (in life) from the sky and from the earth? or who is it that has power over hearing and sight? And who is it that brings out the living from the dead and the dead from the living? and who is it that rules and regulates all affairs?" They will soon say, "Allah".” Once they acknowledge that Allah is Rabb they have then been condemned for associating others as partners to Allah: “Say, "will ye not then show piety (to Him)?" (Yunus 10/31)

The following ayah is also like this: "To whom belong the earth and all beings therein? (say) if ye know!" They will say, "To Allah!" When they confess they are condemned for their shirk: "Yet will ye not receive admonition?" (Al-Mumenoon 23/84-85)

And after it is continued:

“Say: "Who is the Lord of the seven heavens, and the Lord of the Throne (of Glory) Supreme?" They will say, "(They belong) to Allah." And again after they confess their shirk is thrown in their face and they are condemned: “Say: "Will ye not then be filled with awe?" (Al-Mumenoon 23/86-87)

And then it continues

“Say: "Who is it in whose hands is the governance of all things,- who protects (all), but is not protected (of any)? (say) if ye know." They will say, "(It belongs) to Allah." And again once they confess they are condemned with the following expression because of their shirk: “Say: "Then how are ye deluded?" (Al-Mumenoon 23/88-89)

The same continues in the following ayah:

“Say: "Who is the Lord and Sustainer of the heavens and the earth?" Say: "(It is) Allah." Say: "Do ye then take (for worship) protectors other than Him, such as have no power either for good or for harm to themselves?" Say: "Are the blind equal with those who see? Or the depths of darkness equal with light?" Or do they assign to Allah partners who have created (anything) as He has created, so that the creation seemed to them similar? Say: "Allah is the Creator of all things: He is the One, the Supreme and Irresistible." (Ar-Rad 13/16)

“If indeed thou ask them who has created the heavens and the earth and subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law), they will certainly reply, "Allah". How are they then deluded away (from the truth)?” (Al-Ankaboot 29/61)

And again in the following ayah:

“And if indeed thou ask them who it is that sends down rain from the sky, and gives life therewith to the earth after its death, they will certainly reply, "Allah!" Say, "Praise be to Allah!" But most of them understand not.” (Al-Ankaboot 29/63)

“If thou ask them, who it is that created the heavens and the earth. They will certainly say, "Allah". Say: "Praise be to Allah!" But most of them understand not.” (Luqman 31/25)

“Say: Praise be to Allah, and Peace on his servants whom He has chosen (for his Message). (Who) is better? Allah or the false gods they associate (with Him)? Or, Who has created the heavens and the earth, and Who sends you down rain from the sky? Yea, with it We cause to grow well-planted orchards full of beauty of delight: it is not in your power to cause the growth of the trees in them.” Surely they only had one answer with no other alternative. And that answer was obviously the one who created the heavens and the earth is better than those which have no life. Once their confession is declared they are once again condemned: “(Can there be another) god besides Allah? Nay, they are a people who swerve from justice.” (An-Naml 27/59-60)

…There are many ayah in the Qur’an which exemplifies this. Certainly all the questions regarding the tawhid of rububiyyah have been repeated many times with the aim that when they acknowledge this, they will deserve to be condemned. In spite of this acknowledgement there will be no denial. Because the one which acknowledges rububiyyah inevitably needs to acknowledge the tawhid of uluhiyyah. Like in the following ayah:

“Is there a doubt about Allah” (Ibrahim 14/10)

“Say: "Shall I seek for (my) Cherisher other than Allah, when He is the Cherisher of all things (that exist)?” (Al-Anaam 6/164)

Regarding the following ayah Tabari states: “Say: "Do ye see what it is ye invoke besides Allah? Show me what it is they have created on earth, or have they a share in the heavens bring me a book (revealed) before this, or any remnant of knowledge (ye may have), if ye are telling the truth!” (Al-Ahqaf 46/4) Allah taa’la states: O Muhammad (saw) to those from among your tribe who commit shirk say: “O my tribe do you see the idols you worship other than Allah? What have they created on earth? Whereas my Rabb has created the entire earth. Can you show me? You must be calling upon them as your Rabb and Diety for those which they have created. Yes what have they created on earth? So in this state it will be evidence for you to worship them. Surely the evidence for worshipping my lord and allotting uluhiyyah to Him is because He has created the entire earth and had created them from nothingness. When it comes to the following ayah “or have they a share in the heavens” (Al Ahkaf 46/4) Allah states: O ye mankind do those which you worship have a share in the seven heavens? In this manner so it would be evidence for your worship to them. Surely the evidence of my worship to my Rabb is because He has no partners in creating. Likewise He is the sole creator. Let’s also take a look at the following ayah: “…bring me a book before this or any remnant of knowledge…” (Al ahkaf 46/4) Meaning something before the Qur’an had been revealed to me from Allah; a book which includes the deities and idols you worship had created something on earth or that they hold partnership with Allah in the sky, so that this would be evidence for your worship to them. Because if such thing is true this will be evidence for their partnership in the blessing you are in. In addition you will need to show gratitude and it will be haq for you to serve because only a deity has the strength to create. (Tafsir)

Ibni Kathir stated: “The meaning that is reiterated here is that Allah is the Creator, the Sustainer, the Owner and Provider of this life, all that is in and on it. Hence, He alone deserves to be worshipped, and no one and nothing is to be associated with Him.” (Tafsir) in the commentary of the following two ayah: “O ye people! Adore your Guardian-Lord, who created you and those who came before you, that ye may have the chance to learn righteousness; Who has made the earth your couch, and the heavens your canopy; and sent down rain from the heavens; and brought forth therewith Fruits for your sustenance; then set not up rivals unto Allah when ye know (the truth).”

Regarding this matter Baghawi states: “Worship Him” make tawhid of Him. Ibn Abbas had stated everything in the Qur’an regarding ibadaah carries the meaning of tawhid. “Then set not up rivals unto Allah” meaning do not worship them like you worship Allah” “when ye know” He is one and the creator of all.

Ibn Taymiyyah states: The tawhid of uluhiyyah is the alamati fariqa between the Muwahhid and the mushrik. In fact the before and after (dunya and akhirah) the rewards and punishment are given according to this. Whoever does not come to the presence with the tawhid of uluhiyyah he will be among the mushrik who will eternally remain in jahannam. Surely Allah will not forgive shirk made against Him. Only those others! He will forgive whoever He pleases. When it comes to the tawhid of rububiyyah the mushrik already acknowledge this. But they do ibadaah to others than Allah and they loved them as they loved Allah. In this situation this tawhid of rububiyyah had been evidence against this belief of theirs. If that is the way it is; Allah is the Rabb and Malik of all. There is no other creator and no other Razzaq (provider of provision) so why do they worship (ibadaah) any other besides Allah? Moreover these idols do not have anything created for them nor have they given them provision. Like this, it does not hold the possibility of giving or preventing. On the contrary they are just servants like them. They do not have the strength of being able to damage or be beneficial; moreover no death nor life nor do they have the power to revive. (Fatawa, 14/380)

Ibn Qayyim (ra) stated: “Uluhiyyah is the matter which the rasul invited upon their nation with the tawhid of Rabb (lordship). This means ibadaah and deity (ilah). One of its requirements is this: what the mushrik had accepted was the tawhid of rububiyyah which Allah had drawn conclusions against them. This tawhid at the same time necessitates the acceptance and acknowledgement of tawhid of uluhiyyah.” (Ighasat’ul luhafan 2/135)

Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab stated: “Surely Rabb taa’la confronts the incorrect path they are on with only the acceptance of tawhid rububiyyah. The reason for this is that if He is the one to manage all on his own, also if no other creation is the owner of even an atom; in this situation how is it that although they accept this, yet they make dua to another.” (Kitab’u Rasail’ish-Shahsiyya min Tarikh’i Najd, 432)

These expressions of the scholars regarding tawhid rububiyyah show it also necessitates tawhid uluhiyyah. Without doubt in the Qur’an, evidence is provided against them with this. Just as they acknowledged the fact that the rububiyyah of another is batil, in the same sense the uluhiyyah of another is also batil.

As known the acknowledgment of rububiyyah is the testimony that we are ‘abd (servants). In this context the word Rabb has been derived from the word tarbiyya (manner). Tarbiyya requires the right of legislation –the designation of commands, restrictions, halal and haram. Tashri (making laws) requires transmitting this to others, meaning the principle of iman to the envoys. In the same sense rububiyyah necessitates obedience and the acceptance of this rabb inclining to Him and without doing the act of shirk in deity (ilah) making tawhid solely to Him. Basically all these are present in the kalam of Allah: “Am I not your Rabb” (Araf 7/172)

Here Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab attracts attention to one point: Rububiyyah and uluhiyyah unite in some places and separate in others. Like in the following ayah: “Say: I seek refuge with the Lord and Cherisher of Mankind, The King (or Ruler) of Mankind, The god (or judge) of Mankind” (An-Nas 114/1-3) Likewise it is said: The Rabb of the universe and the ilah of the prophets, when He is made one, they will unite. Like the statement of the one who says: “Who is your Rabb…” When this is established the following must be known: the statements of the two angels; who is your Rabb? Means who is your ilah? Because, no one will be examined of the point regarding rububiyyah the mushrik already accept. The following ayahs are like this: (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is Allah (Al-Hajj 22/40) “Say: "Shall I seek for (my) Cherisher other than Allah, when He is the Cherisher of all things (that exist)?"” (Al-Anaam 6/164) “In the case of those who say, "Our Lord is Allah", and, further, stand straight and steadfast …” (Fussilat 41/30) Rabb mentioned in these ayah carry the meaning of ilah. Here there is no separation in the sense of the shares of two separated things. Both are the same. This issue must be comprehended well.” (Tarikh ul Najd 259)

This is the declaration of a scholar who has understood the message of the Qur’an. In reality the Qur’an has been revealed according to this foundation.

“Am I not your Lord.” Meaning Am I not your ilah. A hadith mentioned in the sahihayn also explain this in open and clear. According to this to the ahl jahannam the following would be said: If you had gold as much as the face of the earth would you trade it in exchange for the situation you are in? He would say yes. And the Mawla would say “When you had been in the loins of Adam I had requested something easier than this I had asked you not to associate partners to me. But you turned your face from this.”(Bukhari)

Hafidh from Iyad narrates: “He points out the following with this: “When thy Lord drew forth from the Children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants, and made them testify concerning themselves, (saying): "Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)?"- They said: "Yea! We do testify!" (This), lest ye should say on the Day of Judgment: "Of this we were never mindful": Or lest ye should say: "Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them: wilt Thou then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?" (Al-Araf 7/172-173) The one who shows loyalty to this (misak) attestation which had been given when they were in the loins of Adam, after he is born he is surely a mu’min. As known the one who only accepts the rububiyyah of Allah cannot be mu’min. (from the words of Hafidh it should be understood that the attestation taken regarding the tawhid of rububiyyah necessitates the tawhid of uluhiyyah.) And whoever is not loyal he is kafir. The message the hadith presents is: When I took the misak from you I requested this from you. However when you were born you did not withdraw from the act of shirk” (Fath’ul-Bari, Kitab’ur-Rikak, 11/411)

As understood from this hadith the promise (misak) taken from mankind was regarding abandoning shirk against Allah in tawhid uluhiyyah and rububiyyah. The expression is general: “So you do not associate partners to Me” in reality to rid the doubt this much explanation is sufficient. With this the one who reads the Qur’an will understand at ease the misleading notion of the opposite.

Before concluding, the explanations regarding this ayah the connection between this ayah and “…nor would We visit with Our Wrath until We had sent an messenger (to give warning) (Al-Isra 17/15) shall be beneficial. Although there is a connection between these ayahs some believe there is a contradiction between them. There is no need to prove there is no contradiction within the Qur’an. But in order to straighten out the mind of the confused, it would be beneficial to explain and clarify this matter so that the confusion is rid.
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
tawhid1
Member
avatar

Female Number of posts : 73
Religion : islam
Registration date : 2008-04-12

PostSubject: Misak is evidence that shirk is batil. Wrath is after Nabawi Hujjah   Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:01 pm

c- Misak is Evidence that Shirk is Batil. Wrath (punishment) a Necessity of this is Only After the Arrival of the Nabawi Hujjah

The attestation (bearing witness) in the misak ayah (Al Araf 7/172-173) is mustakil hujjah for mankind regarding shirk. However the mushrik will only be punished in this world and in the akhirah after the nabawi hujjah (the message of Islam) has arrived.

In the ayah it is stated “nor will We visit our wrath”. It does not say We will not pass the hukm of shirk until the arrival of a rasul. On the contrary the salaf has made ijma that everyone who has done shirk is mushrik whether the nabawi hujjah has reached them or not. Just as there is ijma regarding those who died upon jahiliyyah before the arrival of risalah and the Qur’an, could not be called Muslim. Likewise istighfar could not be done for them either. Surely, the scholars only had ikhtilaf regarding whether they would be punished or not. (Aqidat’ul-Muwahhidin wa’r-Radd a’la’d-Dullal’il-Mubtadeen, 151)

The question of ikhtilaf regarding this had been whether or not they deserved to be punished with the mentioned wrath before the hujjah had been established or is it necessary that the hujjah is established for punishment?

Essentially the greatest evidence regarding the correctness of what had been explained is the salaf understanding of the mentioned ayah. “…Nor would We visit with Our Wrath until We had sent an messenger (to give warning)” (Al-Isra 17/15) the explanation of this ayah is that surely Allah will not punish anyone of His creatures in this world nor in the akhirah before sending an envoy. This envoy will warn and help avoid (inzar and i’zar), they will rebel against this envoy and after this inzar and i’zar if they continue to insist with kufr and sin only then will they be punished. Just as Allah had explained in many other ayah. For example:
“Messengers who gave good news as well as warning, that mankind, after (the coming) of the messengers, should have no plea against Allah: For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.” (An-Nisa 4/165)

This mentioned ayah and many other like it shows that those of ahl fatrah, because no warner had reached them, even if they do die upon kufr they are excused. A jamaah from among the ahl ‘ilm had stated this and another jamaah stated everyone who dies upon kufr are in jahannam even if a warner had not reached them. They had taken this thought from the zahir of the ayah in the book of Allah and the hadith of RasulAllah (saw). One of the ayah they take upon as evidence is the following: “Of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil, until death faces one of them, and he says, "Now have I repented indeed;" nor of those who die rejecting Faith: for them have We prepared a punishment most grievous.” (An-Nisa 4/18.) Subsequently it is easy to extend with mentioning other similar ayahs and hadith. Such as the one “my father is in jahannam as your father” as proof that the ahl fatrah mushrik are not excused. This usool is a famous ikhtilaf amongst the scholars. Are the ahl fatrah idolater mushrik in jahannam because of their kufr or are they excused?

In the book Maraki’us-Su’ud the following is explained: the ahl fatrah will not be questioned (responsible) for those of furuuddeen (details). However there is ikhtilaf among the scholars whether or not they are responsible of the essential issues (usul). Nawawi is among those who state the ahl fatrah people who die upon kufr belong in jahannam. Also in the sharh of Karrafi At Tankih it is shown that there is ijma regarding this matter. Likewise the author of the book Nashr ul Bunuud had also mentioned this. Qurtubi, Abu Hayyan, Shawkani and others have stated; this is the opinion of the majority. Mukayyid stated: It seems the correct view regarding the matter are the mushrik excused for being ahl fatrah or aren’t they? They are excused due to fatrah on earth (in dunya). However in qiyamah Allah will test them with fire. He will command them to enter fire. At this time whoever jumps in the fire will enter jannah. Essentially this will mean that if a rasul had reached them while in dunya they would have attested to his truth. Whoever avoids from entering it he will go to jahannam and will be punished. This will show that this individual while in dunya would have declared it false/untrue if a rasul had reached him. The reason for this is because Allah knows what they would have done if an envoy had reached them.” It must be taken notice of this ittifak between the ulama that whoever has infected themselves with shirk is mushrik, whether or not the message had been established to him. The scholars had only ikhtilaf regarding the fact whether or not an individual whom the hujjah had not reached will receive punishment or not. There are two views regarding this and the preferred view is that, before the nabawi hujjah reaches anyone an individual will not be punished in this world neither in the akhirah. In reality this is a point which many minds and understandings are mistaken. They believe the ayah “…nor would We visit with Our Wrath until We had sent an messenger (to give warning)” (Al-Isra 17/15) is a reference for the excuse of the individual who has mixed himself in the dirt of associating partners to Allah (shirk). They believe even if the individual is lost within this shirk that he is still Muslim, still muwahhid. They believe he is saved in this world and in the akhirah until the nabawi hujjah arrives at him.

The ittifak of the scholars clearly shows that this batil claim is incorrect. They state whoever from among the ahl fatrah commits shirk whether this individual had lived in an era which the shariah had been lost or in where the true path had been destroyed an individual as such will be mushrik for annulling his misak and fitrah. Likewise ‘aql is a hujjah which certifies this. However they have had ikhtilaf regarding two issues. Will an individual as such be punished in dunya and in the akhirah for his actions? Alongside this the scholars without ikhtilaf have agreed that an individual as such will not be blessed with jannah. And they take the following ayah as evidence:

“The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will)” (Ali-Imran 3/19)

“If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good). (Ali-Imran 3/85)

“And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful." Nay,-whoever submits His whole self to Allah and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” (Al-Baqara 2/111-112)

Now none of those individuals are nor can be Muslim. And only will the Muslim and the Mu’min enter jannah. Likewise this has been stabilised with a sahih hadith. Also Allah had restricted the entrance of a mushrik into jannah.

“…Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode…” (Al-Maeda 5/72)

Ibn Taymiyyah had stated: No one will be saved from the punishment of Allah other than those who make their deen and ibadaah peculiar to Allah and only make dua to Him. And whoever had not made an act of shirk against Him but has not made ibadaah to Him like Pharoah (firawun) and his likes will have remained behind from ibadaah. Those in this situation are in a worse state than the mushrik. Ibadaah solely to Allah is essential. As this is fard to everyone it is not lifted from anyone. This is general Islam which Allah accepts none other as deen. However Allah will not punish anyone without sending an envoy. As He will not punish an individual as such, He will not permit any other than the Muslim Mu’min into jannah; just as He will not permit the mushrik and those who refrain from ibadaah (mustakbir) into jannah. Besides all this whoever the message had not reached in this world will be tested in the akhirah. Certainly, only will those who submit to the shaytan, will go to jahannam. Those who have not sinned will not enter jahannam. Allah will not punish anyone without sending an envoy. And those which the dawah had not reached, for instance a child, the insane, or someone who dies as ahl fatrah will all be tested (imtihan) in the akhirah. The nass (evidence) indicate this. (Fatawa 14/477)

These are matters which the ulama had referred to those which the message had not reached (hujjah of dawah had not reached) and the ahl fatrah; those who lived in the era which the risalah had been cut. The era of fatrah is an era which the path of truth had been lost, ignorance has spread and ‘ilm had been lifted. With this there wasn’t a samawi book which they could refer to or a source they could learn tawhid from. Regardless of all this the scholars had made ittifak that these individuals had been mushrik. They only differed and had two views regarding their punishment; if they would be punished or not. Now if the misak ayah is not sufficient evidence (mustakil) than with what evidence did the scholars pass the hukm shirk to those individuals?

In this sense after the rasul is sent what is the status of those who fall in shirk? All the rasul has declared is apparent although it is mahfuz. Moreover the ayah of Allah and the hadith of His envoy are read to them day and night. And with many surrounding them who know deen and are describing it everywhere.

It is possible to enumerate the issues in the following manner:

1- Surely misak is evidence against ones self it has been taken from mankind and necessitates tawhid rububiyyah in the style of tawhid uluhiyyah.

2- Surely the misak ayah is mustakil hujjah regarding shirk. However it is not accounted mustakil hujjah regarding punishment.

3- Surely the hukm of shirk existed and was established before the arrival of risalah. Besides shirk is ugly, bad and condemned and if the shirk doer insists on his act after the nabawi hujjah his doing is a punishment threatened for both in this world and in akhirah.

4- The scholars have made ittifak about the ahl fatrah who worship those other than Allah that they are mushrik and that they are not Muslim. This is the hukm of ahl fatrah on earth (dunya). They will not be punished in this world nor in the akhirah. However they will not be benefiting from the blessings until they are tested (imtihan) until the ‘ilm is zahir by Allah regarding them. In this sense whoever obeys Allah, will enter jannah and whoever turns his face from Allah will be of ahl jahannam. Islam is the cleansing of ibadaah to other than Allah; it is the concept of the oneness of Allah in ibadaah and deity (ilah). Surely if they will die upon this state they cannot enter jannah. It is peculiar to only the Muslim, the Mu’min. Our desire from Allah the owner of the arsh is to be one of them.

5- There is no connection between banishing punishment and the hukm of shirk. The one who is punished in darayn (both in dunya and akhirah) are all mushrik, kafir. However not every mushrik will be punished. At least not until hujjah is established. In reality there is general, particular and absolute difference between them. Attention must be paid to this difference.

Success is from Allah (awj).
Back to top Go down
http://www.darultawhid.com/en/forum/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Ignorance is not an excuse!   

Back to top Go down
 
Ignorance is not an excuse!
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» EBT card not working? Here is why or an excuse as to why, truth??? Dunno

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Darul Ilm :: Learn About Islam :: Aqeedah-
Jump to: