التوحيد at-Tawhid

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
باب الطعن في الأنساب Chapter on Slandering the Lineage (of others)

It is narrated from Abű Hurayrah Radiyallâhu Anh in a Marfű Hadîth,

اثنتان في الناس هما بهم كفر: الطعن في الأنساب، والنياحة على الميت
“Two (things) are found among people which are tantamount to Kufr for those who indulge in them: slandering the lineage (of others) and wailing over the dead.” (Muslim, Hadîth no: 67)
2
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Quote from: Question
My first question is: What ruling can be given to those who live in Dar’ul Harb whose Aqidah is unknown by us? Is there a difference between the lands in which the Kufr law is implemented and the lands which used to be Dar’ul Islam and became Dar’ul Kufr when giving ruling to the people? In addition, does everyone have a ruling for their own situation and will these matters be taken in consideration?

Second question: Has the Alamat of Islam ever changed in the past? What are the Alamat of Islam today?

Click on the link for the response.
3
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Quote from: Question
My question is regarding those who accept prayer as alamah of Islam or those who do not accept it as alamah but do not make takfeer of the one who accepts it as alamah. Their doubt is as follows: If you accept prayer as something peculiar to Muslims and make takfeer then Imam Ahmad must be kaafir for you. If you say that prayer was alamah of being Muslim after kufr during the time of Imam Ahmad and only Muslims pray it we say: During the time of Imam Ahmad even before him there were zanadiqah. So both the Muslims and the kafir were praying. (Jahmiyyah, Hululiyyah etc) If I am not wrong, they bring evidence from Ibn Muflih that he accepted prayer as alamah of Islam when kufr and shirk was wide spread. What is the response to these? I hope with your response they will find guidance.

Click on the link for the response.
4
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Quote from: Question 05.09.2018, 14:08
Assalamu alaykum.

Some of them claim they hold the middle course between the two paths and that they view salah and the other shiar as Alamat of Islam. Even though our era consists of abodes of kufr, they still say that they account these as Alâmat. When they say between the two paths, they say that they neither invalidate nor give hukm of Islam with these Alamat. They claim they will treat such person as a muslim and will not pass the judgment of kufr or Islam until they witness their kufr or Islâm.

Is there a thing such as this, not passing judgment of Islam yet treating such person as muslim due to witnessing the Alamat?

Click on the link for the response.
5
E-Books / Re: THE AQÎDAH (CREED) OF IMÂM AHMAD BIN HANBAL
« Last post by Izhâr'ud Dîn on 11.07.2019, 12:08:24 AM »
.
6
Takfîr / Re: THE RULING OF THE PEOPLE
« Last post by Izhâr'ud Dîn on 11.07.2019, 12:00:36 AM »

Quote from: Quote Question 05.09.2018, 14:08
Assalamu alaykum.

Some of them claim they hold the middle course between the two paths and that they view salah and the other shiar as Alamat of Islam. Even though our era consists of abodes of kufr, they still say that they account these as Alâmat. When they say between the two paths, they say that they neither invalidate nor give hukm of Islam with these Alamat. They claim they will treat such person as a muslim and will not pass the judgment of kufr or Islam until they witness their kufr or Islâm.

Is there a thing such as this, not passing judgment of Islam yet treating such person as muslim due to witnessing the Alamat?

Wa Alaykum.

I truly do not know what to say regarding these individuals you have described. These exemplary ignorant utterances are the dead-end of declarations. Just as these individuals will not be able to narrate such views from any eminent scholar, I do not think that they will be able to narrate this from today’s Mushrik Balâm. These are merely statements of ignorant individuals whom have no share of Ilm.

What is this, they treat individuals who pray Salâh as Muslimîn, yet they do not call them Muslim? What type of Fiqh is this? What is the evidence for this? Was there such appliance during the time of the Salaf? Can they bring a single letter as evidence for this from the history of Islâm? All of this consists of rubbish, and rubbish does not heave Ta’wîl.

We will still try to explain this in summary since you asked. What these people claim will never be a point at issue, since it is only the Muslimîn who deserve the treatment of Muslim.

If individuals who apply the Shi’ar such as praying Salâh, uttering the Shahâdah etc. do not receive the Hukm of Muslim, this would mean that they are Kâfir and the slaughter of the Kuffâr cannot be eaten, the Salâh cannot be performed behind the Kâfir etc.

By applying the ruling of Muslim to people they call Kâfir, these individuals are doing something never done throughout history, not even done today by the sects of Dalâlah. Their statement of not giving the Hukm of Kufr nor the Hukm of Islâm will go no further then absurdity.

As mentioned in the beginning portion of Sűrat’ut Taghâbun, people are either Mu’min or Kâfir; there is no third type. This is as such in the sight of Allâh and in the Dhâhir Hukm.

If these people apply the ruling of Muslim to those who they claim to display the Alâmat of Islâm, this would mean they call them Muslim. This time, they would contradict their claim of not giving the Hukm of Islâm to such people.

As we see it, these individuals have concocted such a theory in order to establish a path between Îmân and Kufr, just like the Munafiqűn. This way by treating the Mushrikűn as Muslimîn, they do not react, thus according to their intellect; they also do not invalidate the Nass. However, when they are asked, they respond by saying, “We do no call them Muslimîn”, they supposedly do not call those who do not openly display Tawhîd Muslim!

May our Rabb (Lord) guide them, Âmîn. Truly, ignorance has reached its limits amongst those who attribute themselves to Tawhîd, they even do not know the difference between Îmân and Kufr passed slogans. The only way to break free from this is to attain Ilm according to the Manhaj of the Salaf.

Wallâhu A’lam!
7
Questions and Answers / QUESTIONS REGARDING ALÂMÂT (SIGNS) OF ISLÂM
« Last post by Izhâr'ud Dîn on 09.07.2019, 01:15:46 AM »
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Quote from: Question
Assalamu alaykum.

I want to ask a question regarding a matter which I searched for but could not find on your beneficial website.

Some people say and bring statements of the scholars that salaah, the beard, isbaal, and hijaab are signs of Islam in daarul kufr and that one who posesses these should be treated like a Muslim until he openly manifests kufr. Now, is the salaah, the beard, the isbaal, and the hijaab signs of Islam and -if these are the asl- can a person whose ‘aqeedah is unknown in daarul kufr be treated like a Muslim? They say these signs are in their origin of Islam and because of this fact we treat the possessors of such signs like Muslims and that if they had the signs of Kufr, they would have treated them like the kaafir. Inshaallah you will be able to give a detailed explanation to this. May Allah be pleased with you all.

Click on the link for the response.
8
Takfîr / Re: THE RULING OF THE PEOPLE
« Last post by Izhâr'ud Dîn on 07.07.2019, 02:22:44 AM »

CAN THE RULING OF MUSLIM BE GIVEN TO A PERSON WHO HAS AN ISLÂMIC ATTIRE?

Quote from: Quote Question 04.09.2018, 19:28
Assalamu alaykum.

I want to ask a question regarding a matter which I searched for but could not find on your beneficial website.

Some people say and bring statements of the scholars that salaah, the beard, isbaal, and hijaab are signs of Islam in daarul kufr and that one who posesses these should be treated like a Muslim until he openly manifests kufr. Now, is the salaah, the beard, the isbaal, and the hijaab signs of Islam and -if these are the asl- can a person whose ‘aqeedah is unknown in daarul kufr be treated like a Muslim? They say these signs are in their origin of Islam and because of this fact we treat the possessors of such signs like Muslims and that if they had the signs of Kufr, they would have treated them like the kaafir. Inshaallah you will be able to give a detailed explanation to this. May Allah be pleased with you all.

Wa Alaykum.

Before I go onto explaining the matter, I would like to clarify that the answer of your question is already on the website, and that which has been written above is also an answer for your question. What is of importance is the understanding of the Ilal (pl. of Illah; reasons) and Qawâ’id (pl. of Qâ’idah; rulings) the matter is based upon. When a person comprehends fully the Ilal of any Hukm, then he will have comprehended all matters which the issue comprises of. However, if you search for thousands of issues connected to one Asl individually, it is normal for you not to be able to find them per se.

We have tried to explain in length in the Risâlah above the reality of what is known as “the Alâmât of Islâm”. The meaning of “Alâmât of Islâm” is: signs which are specific only to the Muslimîn which are statements, actions, or apparent signs which only emanate from the Muslimîn. The person who examines the statements of the Ulamâ regarding the Alâmat of Islâm can see clearly from all the Ulamâ that they require the Alâmat’i Fâriqah (distinguishing sign) meaning, signs and indications of being able to distinguish between Islâm and Kufr in order to give the Hukm of “Muslim” to a person. Not a single scholar has attempted to fix Salâh, Adhân, the Kalima’i Shahâdah, or by saying that there are Ahâdîth (pl. Hadîth) or narrations concerning the turban or beard as Alâmât of Islâm -like some Zanâdiqah (pl. of Zindîq; heretics) and Juhhâl (pl. of Jâhil; ignorants) do today. This is only a behaviour which merely suits this century wherein the ignorance of the Âkhir Zamân (last days) is apparent and this has no relation with Ilm.

It was mentioned in the above Risâlah when signs such as Salâh and the Kalima-i Shahâdah are Alâmât of Islâm. These can only be evaluated as Alâmât of Islâm only when they are specific to the Ahl’ut Tawhîd. Whenever these become common actions between both the Ahl’ut Tawhîd and the Ahl’ush Shirk -as is today-, giving the Hukm of Muslim by looking at these signs will be abandoned. If these Alâmât become peculiar to the Muwahhidîn sometime in the future, then in this case, they will be evaluated as Alâmât of Islâm once again.

The evidence for this implementation is the abundant narrations mentioned above. We are not going to repeat their mention here. What is stated regarding Salâh, Adhân, the Kalima-i Shahâdah and the like are also valid regarding outward appearance. Scholars have evaluated the Islâmic attire, circumcision, dyeing the beard etc. as Alâmât of Islâm when these Alamât were specific to Islâm.

It is possible to evaluate the veil, turban etc. when they are peculiar to the Muslimîn. However, today these Alâmât have also ceased to specifically distinguish the Ahl’ut Tawhîd like the others. The reason being, as everyone who is concerned with the Aqîdah of Tawhîd will accept, among those men who grow their beard, shorten their trousers or women who wear veils are those whom are more ferocious than Abű Lahab and his wife. Moreover, when the Aqîdah of the groups who apply these Shi’âr, such as the Sűfî’s and the supposed Salafî’s are examined, it would be clearly seen that what we mentioned is not an exception, and that it is a reflection of the situation most people are in. Also, no one will deny this fact other than the ignorant who have nothing to do with Tawhîd or the arrogant who is stubborn.

We ask those who claim that the beard, turban, Isbâl, and the veil are Alâmât of Islâm, which Islâm are they a sign for? How do they define Islâm?

If what they mean is those other than the Christians and the Jews when they say Islâm, this is true, however, according to the Kitâb (Book of Allâh) and Sunnah, the definition of Islâm is not those who are not Jewish and Christian. Islâm means to reject Shirk and the Ahlu’sh Shirk, to distance from the Tâghűt and to make Takfîr of them and their followers.

If someone is to claim that today the long beard, short trousers, and the veil are only peculiar to those who accept Islâm, this would mean making a mockery of the intellect and the religions.

If they identify Islâm with today’s Salafîsm, then millions of Talafî’s who follow the Saudi Balâm carry these Alâmât. Likewise, those who have taken on names such as the “Jihâdî”, the “Takfîrî” etc. who bear many Bâtil carry these Shi’ar. When the condition is as such, according to what are these claimed to be Alâmât of Islâm?

Our advice to you is to read this article from beginning to end and ponder especially over the narrations of the scholars. We are posting below just a few of these narrations as a reminder:




إنْ وُجِدَ مَيِّتٌ بِفَلَاةٍ لَا يُدْرَى أَمُسْلِمٌ هُوَ أَمْ كَافِرٌ فَلَا يُغَسَّلُ وَلَا يُصَلَّى عَلَيْهِ قَالَهُ ابْنُ الْقَاسِمِ. قَالَ: وَأَرَى أَنْ يُوَارَى. قَالَ: وَكَذَلِكَ لَوْ وُجِدَ فِي مَدِينَةٍ مِنْ الْمَدَائِنِ فِي زُقَاقٍ وَلَا يُدْرَى أَمُسْلِمٌ هُوَ أَمْ كَافِرٌ قَالَ ابْنُ رُشْدٍ: وَإِنْ كَانَ مَخْتُونًا فَكَذَلِكَ لِأَنَّ الْيَهُودَ يَخْتَتِنُونَ قَالَ ابْنُ حَبِيبٍ: وَمِنْ النَّصَارَى أَيْضًا مَنْ يَخْتَتِنُ

“If a dead body has been found in a rural area and if it is not known if the person is Muslim or a Kâfir he will not be washed or prayed (funeral prayer) over. Ibn’ul Qâsim said: I see (it fits) burying him. He also said, Likewise if a dead body has been found in the cities and if it is not known if the person was Muslim or a Kâfir then his Hukm is also the same. Ibnu Rushd said, Hukm is the same even if he is circumcised since the Jews also circumcise. Ibnu Habîb said, Among the Nasâra (Christians) also there are those who circumcised. (Abdârî, at-Tâj wa’l Iklîl, 3/71)

As Shawkânî quoted, Imâm Baghawî (Rahimahullâh) stated,

الْكَافِرُ إذَا كَانَ وَثَنِيًّا أَوْ ثَنَوِيًّا لَا يُقِرُّ بِالْوَحْدَانِيَّةِ، فَإِذَا قَالَ: لَا إلَهَ إلَّا اللَّهُ حُكِمَ بِإِسْلَامِهِ ثُمَّ يُجْبَرُ عَلَى قَبُولِ جَمِيعِ الْأَحْكَامِ وَيَبْرَأُ مِنْ كُلِّ دِينٍ خَالَفَ الْإِسْلَامَ

وَأَمَّا مَنْ كَانَ مُقِرًّا بِالْوَحْدَانِيَّةِ مُنْكِرًا لِلنُّبُوَّةِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُحْكَمُ بِإِسْلَامِهِ حَتَّى يَقُولَ: مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، فَإِنْ كَانَ يَعْتَقِدُ أَنَّ الرِّسَالَةَ الْمُحَمَّدِيَّةَ إلَى الْعَرَبِ خَاصَّةً فَلَا بُدَّ أَنْ يَقُولَ إلَى جَمِيعِ الْخَلْقِ، فَإِنْ كَانَ كُفْرُهُ بِجُحُودِ وَاجِبٍ أَوْ اسْتِبَاحَةِ مُحَرَّمٍ فَيَحْتَاجُ إلَى أَنْ يَرْجِعَ عَنْ اعْتِقَادِهِ

“If the Kuffar whether from among the idol worshiper pagans or Thanawiyyâ (dualists) who do not affirm the Wahdâniyyah says, La-Ilaha Illallâh then he will be given the ruling of Islâm. Then he will be forced to accept the entire Ahkâm and to be Barî (distant) from every Dîn that opposes Islâm.

As for the one who affirms the Wahdâniyyah and rejects the Nubuwwah then the ruling of Islâm will not be given until he says Muhammadun Rasűlullâh (Muhammad is the Messenger of Allâh). So if he believes the Risâlah of Muhammad is peculiar to the Arabs then it is unavoidable for him to say that Rasűlullâh was sent to the entire creation. If his Kufr is regarding the denying of Wâjib (obligatory) or Istihlâl (making permissible) of what is made Harâm then he needs to withdraw from his I’tiqâd (in order to be given the ruling of Islâm).
(Shawkânî, Nayl’ul Awtâr, 7/234)

One must ponder upon the fact that the Ulamâ (pl. of Âlim; scholars) have not accepted the Islâm of the Jews of Iraq since they claimed that Muhammad Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam was a prophet sent only to the Arabs, even though there are many apparent Nass (textual proofs) that the one who says the Kalima'i Shahâdah is Muslim. This indicates that even the Kalima'i Shahâdah is not accepted although it is the most strongest proof amongst the Alamât of Islâm. Thus, if the same situation is a point at issue, then actions that are lesser than the Shahâdah not being accepted is more superior.

Ibnu Qudâmah al-Maqdisî (Rahimahullâh) in “al-Mughnî” stated the following regarding the reasons behind the Hanâbilah accounting the Salâh, Kalima'i Shahâdah, and its like as Alâmât of Islâm:


وَلِأَنَّ الصَّلَاةَ رُكْنٌ يَخْتَصُّ بِهِ الْإِسْلَامُ، فَحُكِمَ بِإِسْلَامِهِ بِهِ كَالشَّهَادَتَيْنِ

“It is because the Salâh is a Rukn (principle) that is peculiar to Islâm. So Hukm (ruling) with Islâm is given with it as with the Shahâdatayn.”

Shaykh Műwaffaq’ud Dîn Ibnu Qudâmah (Rahimahullâh) then explains reasons for Zakâh, Hajj etc. not being accounted as Alâmah. So he says:


وَأَمَّا سَائِرُ الْأَرْكَانِ، مِنْ الزَّكَاةِ وَالصِّيَامِ وَالْحَجِّ، فَلَا يُحْكَمُ بِإِسْلَامِهِ بِهِ، فَإِنَّ الْمُشْرِكِينَ كَانُوا يَحُجُّونَ فِي عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - حَتَّى مَنَعَهُمْ النَّبِيُّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - فَقَالَ: «لَا يَحُجُّ بَعْدَ الْعَامِ مُشْرِكٌ.» وَالزَّكَاةُ صَدَقَةٌ، وَهُمْ يَتَصَدَّقُونَ

“As for other Arkân (pl. Rukn; principles) among them is the Zakât (obligatory charity), the Siyâm (fasting), and the Hajj (pilgrimage to Ka’bah): the Hukm would not be given with them. Indeed the Mushrikîn were performing Hajj during the era of Rasűlullâh (Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam) until the Nabî (Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam) prohibited them, so he said,

لَا يَحُجُّ بَعْدَ الْعَامِ مُشْرِكٌ
“After this year, no Mushrik may perform (will be allowed to perform) Hajj…” (Bukhârî, Hadîth no: 3177; Muslim, Hadîth no: 1347)

The Zakâh is a Sadaqah (charity) and they (Kuffâr of Makkah) were giving Sadaqah...” (Ibnu Qudâmah, al-Mughnî, 9/22, no: 7114)

As it is clearly seen, the reason for Salâh being accounted as an Alâmah of Islâm is because it is something peculiar to the Muslimîn. Owing to not having this Illah, other types of Ibadâh were not taken into account as Alâmah. Some amongst the Hanbalî Ulamâ accounted other types of Ibâdah other than the Salât as Alâmah. Mardâwî in his book “al-Insâf” stated the following regarding other types of Ibâdah to be accounted as Alâmah and mentioned the views concerning it:


وَاخْتَارَ الْقَاضِي: يُحْكَمُ بِإِسْلَامِهِ بِالْحَجِّ فَقَطْ. وَالْتَزَمَهُ الْمَجْدُ، وَابْنُ عُبَيْدَانَ. وَقِيلَ: يُحْكَمُ بِإِسْلَامِهِ بِبَقِيَّةِ الشَّرَائِعِ وَالْأَقْوَالِ الْمُخْتَصَّةِ بِنَا، كَجِنَازَةٍ وَسَجْدَةِ تِلَاوَةٍ

“al-Qâdhî preferred that with the Hajj alone the Hukm of Islâm can be given. Al-Majd and Ibnu Ubaydân also share this view. It was also stated that the Hukm of Islâm is given with the remaining Shi’ar and views that are peculiar to us such as Janâzah (the funeral prayer) and Sajdatu Tilâwah (prostration of recitation).” (Mardâwî, al-Insâf, 1/395)

Consequently, the discussion is related with the Ibadâh peculiar to the Muslimîn and its determination. This is the Illah for specifying some acts as Alâmât of Islâm. The Ikhtilâf amongst the Ulamâ is regarding the designation of acts. The fact that should be understood here is: the Ulamâ take the Illah of the Hukm in consideration and it is its being an Alamât’i Fâriqah between Islâm and the Kuffâr namely the distinguishing mark. However once the Illah disappears, than the Hukm disappears as well. The Salâh not being an Alâmah in our era is due to it not being something peculiar to the Muslimîn.

At this point, we are going to bring a citation from Ibnu Muflih –to whom the doubters harp on the same string- to end this section Inshâllâh. Ibnu Muflih (Rahimahullâh) explains the Salâh being an Alâmah in the same manner:


قَالَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ -: «نُهِيتُ عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمُصَلِّينَ» وَظَاهِرُهُ أَنَّ الْعِصْمَةَ تَثْبُتُ بِالصَّلَاةِ، وَهِيَ لَا تَكُونُ بِدُونِ الْإِسْلَامِ، وَلِأَنَّهَا عِبَادَةٌ تَخْتَصُّ شَرْعَنَا

“Rasűlullâh (Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam) stated,

نُهِيتُ عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمُصَلِّينَ
“I have been prohibited from killing people who pray (perform Salâh).” (Abű Dâwűd, Hadîth no: 4928)

Its Dhâhir (apparent) is the protection/infallibility becomes established with the Salâh. Salâh does not exist in (any religion) other than Islâm since it is an Ibâdah that is peculiar to our Sharî’ah.” (Ibnu Muflih, al-Mubdî, 1/267)

Âkhiru Da’wânâ an’il Hamdulillâhi Rabb’il Âlamîn...
9
Timely Fiqhî Issues / 1 DHU’L QA’DAH 1440H
« Last post by Izhâr'ud Dîn on 04.07.2019, 04:53:16 AM »

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ

١ ذُو القَعْدَةِ ١٤٤٠
1 DHU’L QA’DAH 1440H
THE FIFTH OF THE SEVENTH MONTH (05.07) 2019

Tonight, on the 29th of the month of Shawwâl (the third of the seventh month 2019), the Hilâl (crescent moon) of the month of Dhu’l Qa’dah 1440H was observed and the Hilâl could not be sighted. Therefore, the month of Shawwâl will be completed to 30 days as was prescribed in the Sunnah.

Thus the 1st day of the Month of Dhu’l Qa’dah 1440H will fall on the fifth day of the seventh month (05.07.2019). Wallâhu A'lam!
10
باب الفخر Chapter on Boasting

The statement of Allâhu Taâlâ in the Âyah,

أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْهُ
“I am better than he.”1 (al-A’râf 7/12)

It is narrated from Iyâdh bin Himâr Radiyallâhu Anh in a Marfű Hadîth,

إن الله تعالى أوحى إلي أن تواضعوا، حتى لا يفخر أحد على أحد ولا يبغي أحد على أحد
“Verily, Allâhu Ta’âlâ has revealed to me that you should behave humbly, so that nobody should be haughty over the other, and that nobody should transgress against another.” (Muslim, Hadîth no: 2865)

It was narrated by Muslim.

It was also narrated from him, from Abű Mâlik al-Ash’arî that he said: Rasűlullâh Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam said,


أربع في أمتي من أمر الجاهلية لا يتركونهن: الفخر بالأحساب، والطعن في الأنساب، والاستسقاء بالنجوم، والنياحة على الميت. وقال: النائحة إذ لم تتب قبل موتها تقام يوم القيامة وعليها سربال من قطران ودرع من جرب
“There are four matters in my Ummah (nation) that are from the matters of Jâhiliyyah (pre-lslâmic days of ignorance) which the people will not leave: Boasting of ancestry, slandering the lineage (of others), Istisqâ (seeking rain) by the stars, and wailing over the dead.”

He Sallallâhu Alayhi wa Sallam said, “If the wailing woman does not repent before she dies, she will be made to stand on Yawm’ul Qiyâmah (the Day of Resurrection) while wearing a dress of tar and an armour of mange.” (Muslim, Hadîth no: 934)

And it is narrated in at-Tirmidhî, and he graded it Hasan (good),

لينتهين أقوام يفتخرون بآبائهم الذين ماتوا، إنما هم فحم جهنم، أو ليكونن أهون على الله من الجعلان. إن الله أذهب عنكم عبية الجاهلية وفخرها بالآباء، إنما هو مؤمن تقي أو فاجر شقي. الناس بنو آدم وآدم خلق من تراب
“People should stop boasting about their fathers who have died, however, they (their fathers) are the charcoal of Jahannam (Hell), or they will certainly be more humiliated with Allâh than the dung beetle. Verily, Allâh has removed the “Ubbiyyah” of Jâhiliyyah and its boasting about lineage from you. (Indeed, a person is either) a Muttaqî (pious) Mu’min (believer), or a Shaqî (miserable) Fâjir (sinner). People are the children of Âdam, and Âdam was created from dust.” (at-Tirmidhî, Hadîth no: 3955)

“Ubbiyyah” with Tashdîd of the Bâ while it carrying a Kasrah is pride and boasting.

Quote
Footnotes:

1 Allâhu Ta’âlâ states,


وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ صَوَّرْنَاكُمْ ثُمَّ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنَ السَّاجِدِينَ. قَالَ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَلَّا تَسْجُدَ إِذْ أَمَرْتُكَ قَالَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْهُ خَلَقْتَنِي مِنْ نَارٍ وَخَلَقْتَهُ مِنْ طِينٍ
“It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels prostrate to Âdam, and they prostrated; not so Iblîs; He refused to be of those who bow down. (Allâh) said: “What prevented thee from bowing down when I commanded thee?” He said: “I am better than he: Thou didst create me from fire, and him from clay.”” (al-A’râf 7/11-12)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10