التوحيد at-Tawhid

Author Topic: MANIFESTING THE ENMITY TOWARDS THE KUFFAR & ACTS THAT CONTRADICT IT  (Read 1274 times)

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Manifesting the Enmity towards the Kuffar and Acts that Contradict it
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الحَمْدُ للهِ وَحْدَهُ، وَالصَّلاة وَالسَّلامُ على مَنْ لا نبيَّ بَعْدَهُ، وَبَعْدُ

Muqaddimah (Preface)

The Aqidah of al-Wala wa’l Baraa, which could be summarized as befriending Awliyaullah (the friends of Allah) and having enmity to the enemies of Allah, one of the greatest acts of manifestation is to voice this enmity openly and not to confine it to the heart. Allah Ta'ala stated:


{قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ إِذْ قَالُوا لِقَوْمِهِمْ إِنَّا بُرَآءُ مِنْكُمْ وَمِمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ كَفَرْنَا بِكُمْ وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةُ وَالْبَغْضَاءُ أَبَداً حَتَّى تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَحْدَهُ}

There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Ibrahim and those with him, when they said to their people: We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone!.. (al-Mumtahina 60/4)

Allah (Ta'ala) and His Rasul (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) have commanded in many evident Nass to manifest enmity towards the disbelievers openly and not to confine it to the heart. Regarding this Hamd ibn Atiq an-Najdi (rahimahullah) in his renwoned book Sabil'un Najat stated the following regarding the above mentioned Ayah (verse of the Qur'an):


وتأمل تقديم العداوة على البغضاء ، لأن الأولى أهم من الثانية ، فإن الإنسان قد يبغض المشركين ولا يعاديهم فلا يكون آتياً بالواجب عليه حتى تحصل منه العداوة والبغضاء ، ولابد أيضاً من أن تكون العداوة والبغضاء باديتين ، أي : ظاهرتين بينتين .واعلم انه وإن كانت البغضاء متعلقة بالقلب ، فإنها لا تنفع حتى تظهر آثارها وتبين علاماتها ، ولا تكون كذلك حتى تقترن بالعداوة والمقاطعة ، فحينئذ تكون العداوة والبغضاء ظاهرتين ، وأمـا إذا وجدت الموالاة والمواصلة ، فإن ذلك يدل على عدم البغضاء ، فعليك بتأمل هذا الموضع فإنه يجلو عنك شبهات كثيرة

Pay attention (to the fact that), in the Ayah ‘enmity’ has been mentioned after ‘hatred’. It is because the first state is much important then the second. One may show hatred towards the Mushrikin (pl., Mushrik; polytheists/idol worshipers) but not show enmity towards them. However unless one openly shows enmity, along with showing hatred towards the Mushrikin, he would not do the obligation which is due on to him. Both enmity and hatred should be Dhahir (apparent, clearly shown openly). Know that hatred is related with the heart. It has no benefit if its signs are not manifest. This will be established until the individual shows enmity and cuts his relations with them. With this anger and enmity will be manifest.  When relations continue, this will show they have no hatred. This is a serious matter which should be contemplated. Once it is contemplated as it should be, many doubts will be lifted... (Majmuat’ut Tawhid, 335)

As seen, the open manifestation of enmity towards the Kuffar (pl., Kafir, disbelievers) can be more important than hatred by heart depending on the incident. The reason for this is because as long as one does not openly show enmity, mere hatred will not benefit, hence when an individual carries enmity merely by heart towards his enemy while befriends outwardly in the open, in this case his action becomes a type of Nifaq (hypocrisy).
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
The Difference between Mudarah1 and Mudahanah2

The scholars did not reproach Mudanah shown to the Kuffar alone, even when the Muslimin who acted upon this towards the Fasiq (corrupted) and Bid’ah (innovation) doers from among the Muslimin were reproached for such actions and it was named to be Mudahanah (flattery) and they have reproached such actions eventhough this act was without any love but merely for the sake of the world. Regarding this Ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) stated the following:


قَالَ بن بَطَّالٍ الْمُدَارَاةُ مِنْ أَخْلَاقِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَهِيَ خَفْضُ الْجَنَاحِ لِلنَّاسِ وَلِينُ الْكَلِمَةِ وَتَرْكُ الْإِغْلَاظِ لَهُمْ فِي الْقَوْلِ وَذَلِكَ مِنْ أَقْوَى أَسْبَابِ الْأُلْفَةِ وَظَنَّ بَعْضُهُمْ أَنَّ الْمُدَارَاةَ هِيَ الْمُدَاهَنَةُ فَغَلَطَ لِأَن المداراة مَنْدُوبٌ إِلَيْهَا وَالْمُدَاهَنَةُ مُحَرَّمَةٌ وَالْفَرْقُ أَنَّ الْمُدَاهَنَةَ مِنَ الدِّهَانِ وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَظْهَرُ عَلَى الشَّيْءِ وَيسْتر بَاطِنه وفسرها الْعلمَاء بِأَنَّهَا مُعَاشَرَةُ الْفَاسِقِ وَإِظْهَارُ الرِّضَا بِمَا هُوَ فِيهِ مِنْ غَيْرِ إِنْكَارٍ عَلَيْهِ وَالْمُدَارَاةُ هِيَ الرِّفْقُ بِالْجَاهِلِ فِي التَّعْلِيمِ وَبِالْفَاسِقِ فِي النَّهْيِ عَنْ فِعْلِهِ وَتَرْكُ الْإِغْلَاظِ عَلَيْهِ حَيْثُ لَا يَظْهَرُ مَا هُوَ فِيهِ وَالْإِنْكَارُ عَلَيْهِ بِلُطْفِ الْقَوْلِ وَالْفِعْلِ

Ibn Battal stated: Mudarah is from the manners of the Mu’minin (believers). This is to (protect) lower ones wings for the people, to speak softly, abandoning obscene speech and the likes. All of these are reason for acquaintance. Some have mistaken Mudarah for Mudahanah. The reason is because while Mudarah is Mandub (Sunnah), Mudahanah is Haram (prohibited). The difference between them is this: Mudahanah comes from (the root word) الدِّهَانِ al-Dihan which means the inner and outer of a person are different. The scholars have explained this as an individual to be intimate with the Fasiq without denying and rejecting their state and outwardly showing consent.  And Mudarah is being kind; while teaching the ignorant and restricting the Fasiq and denying their statements and actions gently. (Fath’ul Bari, 10/528)

At this point many have confused Mudarah which is speaking softly to people, in order not to startle them, with Mudahanah which is to hide ones Aqidah (creed) and to conceal ones enmity in order to gain worldly benefit. It must not be forgotten that one will not save himself from Mudahanah by merely rejecting the Kuffar and the Fajir reluctantly with the tip of his tongue. In his Tafsir, Burhan ad-Din al-Bikai who has written a Risalah regarding Ibn Arabi the leader of the Wahdati Wujud belief, after having explained the meaning of Mudahanah stated the following:


فهو على هذا إنكار على من سمع أحداً يتكلم في القرآن بما لا يليق ثم لا يجاهره بالعداوة، وأهل الاتحاد كابن عربي الطائي صاحب الفصوص وابن الفارض صاحب التائية التائية أول من صوبت إليه هذه الآية

“According to this, just like Ibn Arabi at-Tai the author of Fusus and Ibn’ul Faridh the author of Taiyyah those who reject it when they hear one speak regarding the Qur’an in a non suiting manner, but after does not openly show enmity take precedence in inclusion to the scope of this Ayah.” (Nazm’ud Durar, 19/240)

With this, he qualifies as Mudahanah, the acts of those from among the Awam (lay people) and the Hawas (elite) who have knowledge of the Kufr of Ibn Arabi and the likes, and rejects what they say yet they do not openly express it.  Their aim is to secure their worldly profit by hiding through concealment of belief, whereas it is a condition to manifest enmity and Takfir towards the Kuffar. Now we would like to provide statements regarding how the manifestation of Din should occur.




Quote from: footnotes
1- الْمُدَارَاةَ Mudarah is managing the Kuffar i.e., to express friendship and love only outwardly without having love for them and their beliefs internally.

2- الْمُدَاهَنَةُ Mudahanah is flattery, hypocrisy, deceit, compromising ones principles i.e., to give up the Din in order to obtain what is worldly…
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
The Characteristic and Essence of the Manifestation of Din

Regarding this Ishaq ibn Abd’ur Rahman Al’ush Shaykh stated the following while explaining the above mentioned ayah from Surah al-Mumtahina:


{وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا} أي: ظهر؛ هذا هو إظهار الدين، فلا بد من التصريح بالعداوة، وتكفيرهم جهاراً، والمفارقة بالبدن

“The statement ‘it began’ mentioned in the Ayah means it became manifest. This is manifestation of the Din. Certainly manifesting enmity, declaring Takfir and separating from them physically must be done.” (Durar’us Saniyye, 8/306)
 
In the same source the manner manifestation of Din is suppose to be is explained in the following:


من يسافر إلى بلاد المشركين للتجارة، ويرجع إلى بلده في المسلمين، فهؤلاء قسمان أيضا: قسم ينـزه دينه عن الصلاة وراء أئمتهم، ولا يأكل ذبحهم، ولا يركن إليهم بالمودة ولين الكلام، ويكفرهم، ولا يسلم عليهم، فهذا لا يعادى ولا يهجر، لأن بعض الصحابة سافر، ودخل بلاد الشرك للتجارة

”Those who go to the lands of the Mushrikin for trade and return to the lands of the Muslimin are of two types:

Those who protect their Din and not perform Salah behind them (the Mushrikin), do not eat their slaughter, with love and soft speech do not incline to them (the Mushrikin), declare Takfir on them (the Mushrikin), they do not give Salam to them (the Mushrikin), there will be no hostility towards them (the Muslimin) nor will they be abandoned. Hence some from the Ashab have traveled to the lands of Shirk for trade.” (Durar’us Saniyya, 8/424)

For an individual to keep distant from actions described and the likes relating to enmity towards the Kuffar, and it makes no sense that they distant themselves from the Kuffar with some for show actions without establishing them openly. When the sons of Shayk’ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abd'il Wahhab were asked about the Hukm of traveling to the lands of Kufr for the trade they answered in the following manner:


أنه يحرم السفر إلى بلاد المشركين، إلا إذا كان المسلم قوياً له منعة، يقدر على إظهار دينه، وإظهار الدين تكفيرهم وعيب دينهم، والطعن عليهم، والبراءة منهم، والتحفظ من موادتهم، والركون إليهم، واعتزالهم؛ وليس فعل الصلوات فقط إظهاراً للدين. وقول القائل: إنا نعتزلهم في الصلاة، ولا نأكل ذبيحتهم حسن، لكن لا يكفي في إظهار الدين وحده، بل لا بد مما ذكر

“Traveling to the lands of Kufr is Haram unless the Muslim is strong and able to display his Din openly. Open display of Din is: declaring Takfir on them, disgracing their Din, criticize them, Baraa (distancing ones self) from them, protecting ones self from inclination to them, and to keep separated from them. Performing Salah alone is not enough to be open display of Din. When it comes to the statement ‘we separate from them during Salah and do not eat their slaughter’ it is fine. However it is not enough for one to manifest his Din. Other mentioned matters should be executed.” (Durar’us Saniyya, 8/413) 

In another section of his Sabil'un Najat, Hamd ibn Atiq stated:

Most people fall into the greatest mistake by deeming that one can live among the Mushrik or in abode owned by the Murtad (society) if he can utter the Kalimah of Shahadah, pray his five daily prayers, if he is not prohibited to go to the Masjid and the Jamaa'ah.

As known, Kufr has types and divisions; such that the types of Kufr are as much as the count of the Kuffar. Some of these had been mentioned in the previous pages. Each Kafir group has a wide spread type of Kufr during their own era. Without rejecting all of these wide spread types of Kufr, without opposing each group and openly declaring enmity towards the Kuffar and without cutting relations with them, a Muslim will not be accounted as manifesting his Din.

If the Kufr of the society he lives in is Shirk, a Muslim openly displays his Din means declaring Tawhid openly before them, prohibiting them from Shirk while making the necessary warning and admonition them from them.

If the society which he is in, is a society of Kufr who rejects the prophethood, what must be done in such situation is to openly state that Rasulullah sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam is the messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and that it is necessary to submit to him.

If their Kufr is abandoning Salah, (the duty should be) open display of Din before them would mean performing Salah in the society and commanding them to pray Salah.

If they are in Kufr due to showing friendship to the Mushrik and submitting to them, (he) should show enmity towards them and cut ties with them and the Mushrik.

In summary: Unless an individual lives his Din openly among the Kuffar he lives with, until he cuts his relationship with them he will not be considered to be living his Din. For this reason the Mushrik would say the following regarding Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam): “He condemns our religion, mocks our intellect, talks against our deities.”

Allah (azza wa jall) commands:


قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِن كُنتُمْ فِي شَكٍّ مِّن دِينِي فَلاَ أَعْبُدُ الَّذِينَ تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ وَلَـكِنْ أَعْبُدُ اللّهَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُمْ وَأُمِرْتُ أَنْ أَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَأَنْ أَقِمْ وَجْهَكَ لِلدِّينِ حَنِيفاً وَلاَ تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ وَلاَ تَدْعُ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ مَا لاَ يَنفَعُكَ وَلاَ يَضُرُّكَ فَإِن فَعَلْتَ فَإِنَّكَ إِذاً مِّنَ الظَّالِمِينَ

“Say: O ye men! If ye are in doubt as to my religion, (behold!) I worship not what ye worship, other than Allah! But I worship Allah; Who will take your souls (at death): I am commanded to be (in the ranks) of the Believers. And further (thus): Set thy face towards religion with true piety, and never in any wise be of the Unbelievers; Nor call on any, other than Allah; Such will neither profit thee nor hurt thee: if thou dost, behold! thou shalt certainly be of those who do wrong.” (Yunus 10/104-106)

Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) commanded Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to say: “O People! If you have doubts regarding the Din I am upon, know that I am distant from the false religion which you are upon, I have no connections with your religion. It is because my Rabb commanded me to be among the Mu'minun and turn away from the Mushrik.” Allah (Jalla Jalaluhu) commands:


قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا الْكَافِرُونَ لَا أَعْبُدُ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ وَلَا أَنتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ وَلَا أَنَا عَابِدٌ مَّا عَبَدتُّمْ وَلَا أَنتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ

“Say: O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine.” (al-Kafirun 109/1-6)

Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) commanded Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to declare: I have no connections with the religion which you are still upon. I am distant from that religion. You too are distant from the religion which I am upon.”

Here the main point which is implied is: the declaration of them (the Mushrik) to be upon Kufr. Being distant from the Kuffar and their religion should be openly mentioned. Whoever submits to Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam), must utter this. Revealing his Din openly is bound upon this act.

The Sahabah of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) had been subjected to torture and Dhulm by the Mushrikun due to acting according this. For this reason Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) gave permission to his Ashab to make Hijrah (emigrate) to Abyssinia. If there was a permit regarding keeping silent towards the Mushrikun, he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) would not have commanded them to make Hijrah to a place which they have no knowledge of.   

As it is mentioned in the sources of Siyar (history); when the people of Yamama became Murtad, Khalid Ibn Walid (radiyallahu anh) sent them twohundred riders as banner-bearers and commanded them stating: Catch whoever among the people you come across. The riders caught twnetythree people with Majaa. When Majaa reached Khalid, he told him: O Khalid! You also know that I went to Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) when he was alive and I gave Bay'ah (pledging allegiance) and today I am still upon the same thing I was upon yesterday. Musaylimah came out from my tribe however Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) commands:


تَكْسِبُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلاَّ عَلَيْهَا

“…Every soul draws the meed of its acts on none but itself…” (al-An'am 6/164)

Upon this Khalid told him: O Majaa! Today you left that which you were upon yesterday. Although you were the most respectful person of your people by keeping silent you show consent to the doings of this liar. You are only saying these because you learned I have arrived. You accepted Musaylimah and whatever he brought by keeping silent. This will never be an excuse for you. You spoke whatever you need to speak. Samama and Yashkuri also spoke; but it is not accepted from them. If you say: I fear for my tribe, in this situation would not you come to me or sent a messenger to me? Therefore Majaa said: O Ibn Mughira! Won’t you forgive all these? Khalid told him: I have bequeathed your life, however I still have difficulty setting you free.

All of these show that, the person who lives in the land of Kufr; if he can live his religion openly, if he can utter that they are Kuffar without any fear, if he can cut his relationship with them and if he can exclaim that they are his enemies then he will be one who protects his Din. The objective here is that, if one can not do these, meaning does not stay distant from the Ahl Kufr and can not openly declare to them that they are infidels and that he is an enemy to them then he will not be considered as one who openly lives his Din. (Majmuat’ut Tawhid, 366-369)

The explanations of Shaykh Hamd ibn Atiq (rahimahullah) are clear and appropriate. The evidences in addition to Surah al-Mumtahinah establish the obligation of openly displaying ones Din against the Kuffar and that as in the story of Majaa the Salaf had been extremely firm against those who lived among the Kuffar hiding their Aqidah and handling their situation with them. As he mentioned this is only possible when the individual openly declares he makes Takfir of them and gives up pretending to be from their religion and stops pretending that the only difference between him and them is that he is more pious and religious and openly displays the difference between the religions. This is how the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the perception of the Salaf and the explanation of the Ulama establishes the open display of Din.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Denouncing those who claim Denial of Openly Displaying Din due to Oppression by the Kuffar

Before examining the ruling of the different varieties of Mudahanah towards the Kuffar one matter remains; that is the rejection of the excuses those who do not openly display their religion bring forth. These people who live among the Kuffar claim oppression and that if they manifest the Ahkam (pl., Hukm; rulings) of Din openly they would be tortured in many ways and that they are in a sense under coercion and that this is the reason they do not openly display their Din.

First of all the definition of Ikrah (coercion) within the Shari'ah is evident; it is the lifting of ones will power. Hence Imam Burhan ad-Din al-Marginani (rahimahullah) from among the Hanafi Ulama in the section regarding coercion in his renowned book, al-Hidayah stated: ‘It is the name given to someone directing something which terminates the consent and will of desire.’ Therefore some restraint which does not lift ones consent completely can not be called coercion. Anyways, if there are violent threats which is great enough to take ones will, in the land which one lives in, by moving to another land in which he can live more comfortably he could save himself from such threats. Allah Ta’ala stated:


يَا عِبَادِيَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنَّ أَرْضِي وَاسِعَةٌ فَإِيَّايَ فَاعْبُدُونِ

“O My servants who believe! Truly, spacious is My Earth: therefore serve ye Me (and Me alone)!” (al-Ankabut 29/56);

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ ظَالِمِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَالُوا فِيمَ كُنْتُمْ قَالُوا كُنَّا مُسْتَضْعَفِينَ فِي الْأَرْضِ قَالُوا أَلَمْ تَكُنْ أَرْضُ اللَّهِ وَاسِعَةً فَتُهَاجِرُوا فِيهَا فَأُولَئِكَ مَأْوَاهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ وَسَاءَتْ مَصِيرً إِلَّا الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ حِيلَةً وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ سَبِيلًا فَأُولَئِكَ عَسَى اللَّهُ أَنْ يَعْفُوَ عَنْهُمْ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا

“When angels take the souls of those who die in sin against their souls, they say: "In what (plight) were ye?" They reply: "Weak and oppressed were we in the earth." They say: "Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to move yourselves away (from evil)?" Such men will find their abode in Hell, What an evil refuge! Except those who are (really) weak and oppressed -men, women, and children- who have no means in their power, nor can they find a way (to escape). For these, there is hope that Allah will forgive: For Allah doth blot out (sins) and forgive again and again." (an-Nisa 4/97-99)

Regarding this Ayah Allamah ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) stated:


الْآيَةُ الْكَرِيمَةُ عَامَّةً فِي كُلِّ مَنْ أَقَامَ بَيْنَ ظَهَرَانَيِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ وَهُوَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى الْهِجْرَةِ، وَلَيْسَ مُتَمَكِّنًا مِنْ إِقَامَةِ الدِّينِ، فَهُوَ ظَالِمٌ لِنَفْسِهِ مُرْتَكِبٌ حَرَامًا بِالْإِجْمَاعِ، وَبِنَصِّ هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ

This al-Ayah al-Karima (honorable verse) is Amm (general) concerning those who reside among the Mushrikin (idolators), while able to perform Hijrah (emigration) and unable to practice the faith. Such people will be committing injustice against themselves and falling into a prohibition according to the consensus.

Therefore the land which one lives in is not an excuse for one to perform acts of Kufr or Haram which is less than Kufr. In summary it is not an excuse for one to not worship Allah alone.  If one can not openly display his Din in the country, the city, the village, the neighborhood, even the house he lives in, he is obligated to move to another place in which he can openly display and live his Din. Only those who can not find a way to immigrate and can not find any other method to move are exempt from this. While on the topic immigration namely Hijrah is not only done from the abode of Islam to the abode of Kufr. Therefore it is not an excuse for one to claim their remains no abode of Islam to live in while he continues to live in a land he can not openly display his Din.

The greatest evidence for this is the Hijrah of the Ashab (radiyallahu anhum ajmain) migrating from Makkah to another land of Kufr which is Abyssinia (al-Habasha; modern-day Ethiopia and Eritrea) where they could openly display their Din. Such that it is mentioned in the sources of Siyaar that other than the Muslimin who had a clan to protect them in Makkah, all the Muslimin had made Hijrah. Therefore the Muslim who do not have the option to openly display his Din in the land of Kufr that he lives in and does not have the option of the Dar'ul Islam (abode of Islam), he is responsible with moving to somewhere he can live most comfortably. Those who do not want to throw themselves in to the fire are obligated with making use of all the power they have in order to protect their Din and to make use of all available possibilities.  Otherwise they will not be included in the group mentioned in the Ayah. Hamd ibn Atiq (rahimahullah) stated the following in his Sabil'un Najat:


المستضعف هو الذي لا يستطيع حيلة ولا يهتدي سبيلا وهو مع ذلك يقول : { ربنا أخرجنا من هذه القرية الظالم أهلها واجعل لنا من لدنك وليا واجعل لنا من لدنك نصيرا } وبيان أن الذي يعتذر بوطنه أو عشيرته أو ماله ويدعي أنه يكون بذلك مستضعفا ، كاذبا في دعواه وعذره غير مقبول عند الله تعالى ولا عند رسوله ولا عند أهل العلم بشريعة الله

Mustadhaf (oppressed); are those who live among the Mushrikin due to weakness and oppression. Moreover they say: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!” (an-Nisa 4/75) and can not find a way. When it comes to those who show their land, children and their wealth as an excuse their claim is a lie. As their excuse is not valid in the sight of Allah Ta’ala and His Rasul sallalahu alayhi was sallam it is not accepted by the Ahl Ilm (People of Sacred Knowledge) in accordance with the Shari'ah of Allah Ta’ala. (Majmuat’ut Tawhid, 371)

For more information refer back to the aforementioned book.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
How should the circumstances of those who conceal their Iman be understood?

To finish the matter we would like to mention the circumstances of those in the lands of Kufr who conceal their Iman. Some have thought there is a general permission regarding hiding ones Iman while living in the Dar’ul Kufr (the Abode of Disbelief) due to the narrations regarding Mu’minin who concealed their Iman such as the Mu’min from the family of Firawn (Pharaoh), Nagus the Abyssinian King or the Mu’minin in Makkah who concealed their Iman. These people also claim that it is not necessary to openly display ones Iman in the lands of Kufr even if one has the strength to do so. Whereas, this is a legitimate excuse only for the above mentioned individuals, those under certain conditions such as those who do not have the might to openly display their Din nor immigrate. If there was a general excuse for everyone who lives in the lands of Kufr to conceal their Iman there would be no need for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and his Ashab to go through difficulty they did, and they would not have to leave their land and make Hijrah (migrate) to a unfamiliar land. Regarding those who conceal their Iman in the lands of Kufr while explaining the fact that Allah does not burden His slaves with more than what they can carry, in his Minhaj’us Sunna, Shaykh’ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah stated the following:

“In the same manner, although he was in the land of Kufr, the call of Nabi sallalahu alayhi was sallam had reached him, he had learned Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi was sallam was a Rasul and believed in those which had been revealed to him, had obeyed Allah as much as he could within his power, however because he was prevented he was not able to immigrate to the abode of Islam and because he was prevented from openly displaying his Din and also because there wasn’t anyone to teach him the Shariah of Islam he was not able to perform with all the Hukm of Islam; Nagus (the Abyssinian King) and those like him are Mu’min and are Ahl Jannah (People of Paradise). The state of the Mu’min within the family of Firawn and the wife of Firawn are like this as well.” (Minhaj’us Sunna, 5/11)

As seen Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) has connected the concealment of Din by Nagus and his likes to the following conditions:

-they were prevented from ‘migrating to the Dar’ul Islam (Abode of Islam);

- they were prevented from manifesting their Din in the lands of Kufr;

- they had no one to teach them the Shariah of Islam...

Hence it is narrated that namely mentioned Nagus has said the following:


لَوْ كُنْتُ أَسْتَطِيعُ أَنْ آتِيَهُ لَأَتَيْتُهُ

“If I was strong enough to go to him, I would surely go to him.” (Ibn Sa’d, Tabakat, 1/259)

Meaning he was not staying back although he had the power to go. Other wise he would not be excused. Even when one of the mentioned conditions is lifted, ones excuse is lifted and it would become Wajib (obligatory) on him to openly display his Din and abandon the acts which oppose it.

Shaykh Abd’ul Latif ibn Abd’ur Rahman (rahimahullah) responded to those who claimed it was not necessary to manifest ones Din relying on the statements of Ibn Taymiyyah:
 
“In the method of it and in what was preceding it he had mentioned that man is not responsible with what doesn’t have strength for or the knowledge or when incapable. Hence Allah Ta’ala had stated:


لاَ يُكَلِّفُ اللّهُ نَفْساً إِلاَّ وُسْعَهَا

On no soul doth Allah place a burden greater than it can bear. (al-Baqarah 2/286)

The word
وُسْعَ Wus’a; burden mentioned in the Ayah is different than power. This is the intention of Ibn Taymiyyah. In his statements where do we find meanings such as it is not necessary to show enmity towards the Mushrikin or ones Islam can still be sleek without it? One being incapable from manifesting his Islam is the last resort. The statements of our Shaykh are regarding those who are strong and powerful. And not regarding incapability and not having knowledge.” (Misbah’uz Zalam, 124-125)

These narrations brought from the Ahl Ilm show the invalidity of the excuse used by those who claim to conceal their Iman like the Salih (righteous) individuals and do not show enmity to the Mushrikin and contrary to it befriends them. Wallahu A’lam (Allah knows the best)!..
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Actions opposing the manifestation of enmity

Although the matter of manifesting Din is extremely important, the ignorance and insensitivity regarding it among the people has increased and increased. Many among those who attribute themselves to Tawhid have begun to live in hypocrisy; either by hiding their Aqidah (creed) while living among the Mushrikin or by just displaying that which will not disturb the Mushrikin and concealing the rest. They have begun to live with a Batil (false) understanding of Taqiyyah (dissimulation), by hiding the matters of enmity especially the fact that they make Takfir of the Kuffar. Those who pretend to perform Salah behind the Kuffar or pretend to lead them in Salah, those who give Salam and receives their Salam, those who celebrate with them the two Eids which exclusively belongs to the Muslimin or those who say ‘may our Eid be Mubarak’ in order to supposedly avoid conflict with them, those who slaughter sacrificial animals with them, those who get into partnership with them for sacrificing an animal, those who take on the duty of power of attorney and slaughter the sacrificial animals of the Kuffar so that the animal the Kuffar slaughter will not go to waste, more over those who continue to be very intimate with the Kuffar and do not distance themselves from them, they do all these so that the Kuffar do not acknowledge the fact they are made Takfir of. These are all acts that are in opposition with manifesting the Din of Islam and they are acts aimed to be Mudahanah and gratifying the Kuffar.

Although there are countless methods of displaying the acts of Mudahanah and gratifying the Kuffar which are acts contrary to manifesting Din, with the permission and help of Allah Ta’ala we will draw attention to the most wide spread ones among these acts and will answer the doubts of those who try to illustrate them to be permissible. Obviously instead of explaining the Qur’an and Sunnah according to our own desires, we seek refuge with Allah from this, and we will act according to the understanding and reflect it under the light of the Salaf InshaAllah. In this sense we will be refuting those who fall into Ifrat and pass judgement on acts that are not Kufr to be Kufr.

Many of those who attribute themselves to Tawhid permit the acts mentioned in this Risalah by reason of benefit, dissimulation etc., others deem them to be Kufr although they are at the most deemed to be Haraam (unlawful) or Makruh (disliked) by the scholars of Din, and go as far as to make Takfir of those who perform them. Some among them actually permit these acts with many excuses although they call these acts to be Kufr. Our aim in this work is to establish which Ahkam (rulings) the scholars of Ahl’us Sunnah wa’l Jam’aah took as evidence relying on the Qur’an and Sunnah, distant from both Ifrat and Tafrit.  Before getting in to the details of the matter we would like to remind bits and pieces of the Usoul (methodology) path of how such matters should be approached in the prospect of the scholars.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
The Usoul (methodology) which must be followed while establishing the Ahkam (pl., Hukm; rulings) of the matters of Wala (friendship)

In todays world many suggest that the reproached friendship with the Kuffar is merely regarding Wala. They are unaware of the fact that, although it is not Kufr there is the possibility of many different types of Wala which are reproached, Haraam or Makruh (disliked). According to them when an act is not Kufr it means it is permissible, whereas, the Salaf  (predecessors) never approached Islamic matters in such a way. Those individuals who repeated their Wudu (ablution) when they shook hands with the Kuffar, they would choose to keep distant from them even when there wasn’t a definite Hukm regarding the matter due to their hatred towards the Kuffar, let alone passing the judgement of permissibility on matters which are not Kufr.

It must be specifically known that the scholars of Ilm (knowledge) have divided the relations meaning Wala with the Kuffar into two sections; religious and worldly.  While referring to the one who is pleased with Kufr, even though he does not claim their (the Kuffar) belief and to the types of friendship that means rejection of Islam, to be Kufr, they have referred to ones closeness with the Kuffar for worldly gain to be either Haraam or Makruh depending on the situation. It has also been expressed by the scholars that when an individual approaches the Kuffar if he performs any act which means verbal or physical acceptance of their Din, even if it is merely outwardly, he will become a Kafir.

Qurtubi stated: The command of Allah Ta’ala: And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. (al-Maidah 5/51) means whoever gave them support against the Muslim ‘is of them.’ Allah Ta'ala in this command informs that ruling of such person is the same as theirs. This means this is an obstacle for the Muslim to take inheritance from the Murtad (apostate). The one who took them as Wali during the period of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) was Ibn Ubayy. On the other hand this ruling is valid till the Day of Qiyamah (Doomsday) with regards to cutting the relations of Muwalat with them.

As seen, although they do not enter their Din, everyone who has joined the ranks of the Kuffar has been deemed to be Kafir. However not every act under Wala which is in opposition of acquittal from the Mushrik, is Kufr.  The reason is because there is the Asl (bases) of Wala and the Furu (secondary matters) of Wala. Meaning, there are some acts which are grouped under friendship with the Kuffar and they are Kufr, and will take one out of the fold of Islam. On the other hand there are types of Wala which are not Kufr yet they are Haram or Makruh and they will not take one out of the fold of Islam. The greater Wala which takes one out of the fold of Islam is; joining the ranks of the Kuffar, siding with them, and showing consent to their Kufr. Regarding this in his Tafsir of the statement in Surah al-Ma’idah Ayah 5/51 And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them.  Imam Tabari stated:

And that He (azza wa jall) informed us that whoever takes them as a supporter, an ally and protector instead of Allah (azza wa jall), His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and the believers he is from them in uniting against Allah (azza wa jall), His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and the believers… and of that, Allah (azza wa jall) and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) are innocent… ‘And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them’ that Allah (azza wa jall) meant; whosoever takes the Jews and Christians as allies instead of the believers is from them…

And then, he (rahimahullah) said:


فإن من تولاهم ونصرَهم على المؤمنين، فهو من أهل دينهم وملتهم، فإنه لا يتولى متولً أحدًا إلا وهو به وبدينه وما هو عليه راضٍ. وإذا رضيه ورضي دينَه، فقد عادى ما خالفه وسَخِطه، وصار حكُمه حُكمَه

meaning anyone who takes them as Awliya against the believers is from their Din and Millah, because no one takes anyone as a protector except that he is pleased with and his faith. And if so, such a person will show enmity towards anything that conflicts with the faith that he is loyal to, and therefore the same verdict of disbelief is applicable to both.”

As seen, the essence of Wala relies on consent. However if the friendship one shows the Kuffar has not reached the level of consenting their Din and if it has remained in the level of a worldly relation, what he did is not permissible, although the individual will not be made Takfir of. When Hatib ibn Abi Balta’ah (radiyallahu anh) had written a letter to the Kuffar (Quraysh; Mecca) revealing the secret of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), he had apologized by presenting an excuse saying ‘I have not done this because of any unbelief or apostasy and I have no liking for the unbelief after I have (accepted) Islam’, and although Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wassallam) reproached him he had not made Takfir of Hatib. While on the topic, the rule consent to Kufr is Kufr is not consisting of belief in Kufr as some ignorant may think. Essentially it is clear that taking Kufr as a belief and Din is Kufr, there is no need to mention this. This rule the scholars mention is applicable to all those who do not show hatred to Kufr, and those who have abandoned showing enmity towards the Kuffar both inwardly and outwardly, although they may not have taken Kufr as their Din.

In his Tafsir of Surah al-Mumtahinah Qurtubi stated the following:

The one who knows the secrets of the Muslim and attracts this against them, informs their news to their enemies, if he does this for worldly reasons and although his I'tiqaad (creed) is strong; -as Hatib, when he did that, had not the intention to turn back from Din, but intending to keep them under indebtedness- he will not become Kafir because of his this behavior.

The story of Hatib is as follows according to Qurtubi in the same section:

"Regarding the command ‘O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as friends’ scholars of Hadith narrated that Ali (radiyallahu anh) said –wording of Muslim-: Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) sent me and Zubayr and Miqdad saying: Go to Rawdat Khakh (the garden of Khakh; a place between Madinah and Makkah at a distance of twelve miles from Madinah) and there you will find a woman riding a camel. She would be in possession of a letter, which you must get from her. So we rushed on horses and when we met that woman, we asked her to deliver that letter to us. She said: There is no letter with me. We said: Either brings out that letter or we would take off your clothes. She brought out that letter from (the plaited hair of) her head. We delivered that letter to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) in which Hatib ibn Abu Balta'ah had informed some people amongst the polytheists of Makkah about the affairs of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: Hatib, what is this? He said: Rasulullah, do not be hasty in judging my intention. I was a person attached to the Quraysh. Sufyan said: He was their ally but had no relationship with them. (Hatib further said): Those who are with you amongst the emigrants have blood-relationship with them (i.e., the Quraysh) and thus they would protect their families. I wished that when I had no blood-relationship with them I should find some supporters from (amongst them) who would help my family. I have not done this because of any unbelief or apostasy and I have no liking for the unbelief after I have (accepted) Islam. Thereupon Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: You have told the truth. Umar (radiyallahu anh) said: O Rasulullah, permit me to strike the neck of this hypocrite. But he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: He was a participant in Badr and you little know that Allah revealed about the people of Badr: Do what you like for there is forgiveness for you. And Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said:" O you who believe, do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends" (al-Mumtahina 60/1).” (Muslim; Bukhari; Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud; Ahmad, Musnad)

It is said that the one who conveyed the letter was a woman, Mawla of Quraysh, whose name is Sarah. The following was written in the letter: “Indeed Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) is coming to you with (very crowded) an army which is running like flood, and likes night. By Allah even if he had come to you alone, Allah will give him victory over you and will realize the promise which He gave him about you. It is because Allah is his real friend and helper..." This was mentioned by some scholars of Tafsir...

Regarding this Shaykh Abd’ul Latif ibn Abd’ir Rahman from among the Najd Scholars stated the following:

While some Muwalat necessitates Riddah (apostating) and leaving Islam completely, some of it is lesser than this and is Haram or Kabair (greater sin). You know this statement of Allah Ta’ala:

“O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as friends (or protectors),- offering them (your) love, even though they have rejected the Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Messenger and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your Lord! If ye have come out to strive in My Way and to seek My Good Pleasure, friendship unto them: for I know full well all that ye conceal and all that ye reveal. And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path.” (al-Mumtahine 60/1)

As you know this Ayah had been revealed regarding the one who had written the secret of Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa salam. What he did had been characterized as Wala which is Haram even though his heart had been filled with Iman. (ad-Durar’us Saniyya, 8/342)

The statements of the scholars regarding the division of Wala which takes one out of the fold of Islam and the Wala which is Haram and does not take one out of the fold of Islam, are so vast they would not fit here. Whoever joins the ranks of the Kuffar military or sides with them; helps them outwardly in a manner which can not be interpreted in any other way but as Kufr; is Kufr by the Ijma (consensus) of he scholars. However as in the incident of Hatib when an individual helps in a manner which may be interpreted as Kufr, in such a case Hukm can not be passed unless his situation is questioned. Statements such as ‘what Hatib did was not helping the Kuffar’ are empty statements, because there isn’t any type of help done to the Kuffar superior than passing them the secrets of the Muslimin.

Essentially if this had not been helping the Kuffar an Ayah would not have been revealed to scold him and the scholars would not have characterized his action to be Muwalat that is Haram. The measure of establishing whether an act is Muwalat that is Haram or Muwalat that is Kufr, is to establish if the act which is done carries no other meaning than to open ones heart to Kufr or consent to Kufr. If there is a possibility that the performed act is done by a Mu’min, in such case he will not be made Takfir of until his intention is established. If no other possibility exists then the act is Kufr. Hence Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wassallam stated:


أَنَا بَرِيءٌ مِنْ كُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ يُقِيمُ بَيْنَ أَظْهُرِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ‏‏

"I am free from every Muslim that lives among the idolaters." Tirmidhi)

However as understood from the text of the Hadith that he (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) had not made Takfir of the Muslimin who had not made Hijrah. Moreover in Surah al-Anfal Ayah 8/72, Allah Ta’ala had declared them to be individuals who have believed in Allah and His Rasul:


وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَلَمْ يُهَاجِرُوا مَا لَكُمْ مِنْ وَلَايَتِهِمْ مِنْ شَيْءٍ حَتَّى يُهَاجِرُوا وَإِنِ اسْتَنْصَرُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ فَعَلَيْكُمُ النَّصْرُ إِلَّا عَلَى قَوْمٍ بَيْنَكُمْ وَبَيْنَهُمْ مِيثَاقٌ

“As to those who believed but did not emigrate, ye owe no duty of protection to them until they emigrate; but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance. And (remember) Allah seeth all that ye do.” (al-Anfal 8/72)

As seen those who did not make Hijrah had not been taken out from the circle of Iman furthermore it has been declared that they’ll be helped against the Kuffar.  Many examples regarding Wala that is Haram could be given. Those who claim all types of Wala take one out of the fold of Islam are the most ignorant people on the face of the earth. Every act which is considered to be befriending the Kuffar does not mean the individual appoints them as his Wali. Only when the individual directs the essence of Wala to the Kuffar meaning if he consents to their Kufr and joins them, then he will be Kafir.

In his Awsaku Ur’il Iman, Sulayman ibn Abdillah (rahimahullah) stated the following regarding those who developed relations with the Kuffar dependent on benefit:

“If the Muslimin befriend the Kuffar which come to their lands, they are rebellious and sinners. At the same time they are face to face with al Wa’id (the threat of punishment). If their friendship is based on worldly benefit, certainly Ta’zir (discretionary punishment) should be performed. In example their relationships with others should be restricted and they should be taught a lesson to cause to get his/her head screwed on right; cause to start behaving sensibly. If this friendship is regarding Din then he is like them, because whoever loves a society will be resurrected with them.” (Majmuat’ut Tawhid, 159-160)

If the acts of worldly benefit mentioned in this pamphlet such as performing Salah (prayer) with the Kuffar, performing their funeral prayer, giving them authority or initiative over the affairs of the Muslimin, are due to reasons such as Mudahanah to the Kuffar, and if their isn’t definite evidence the individual is doing this because he is pleased with Kufr, he will not be made Takfir of. Just because most of those who perform these acts today do them while opening their hearts to Kufr, and doubting the Kufr of the Kuffar, it does not mean that all those who have done them within the past 1450 years of Islamic history are Kafir. However, as we had stated previously by different means, just because individuals today are in such a state this does not necessitate deepening in Bid’ah (innovation) and Dalalah (misguidance) by the production of groundless rules. One of the greatest illnesses of today is passing the judgment out of reaction, of Kufr on acts which are Munkar in the view of the Shari’ah. Whereas, the Ahkam of Iman and Kufr are not passed according to intellect or personal initiative or personal views, they are Ahkam which must be passed according to the Shari’ah and Sahih (sound) narrations.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Regarding acts that are evaluated as treating the Kuffar as Muslim

Some individuals who exceed the limits of Takfir fall into Ifrat by claiming those who perform Ibadaah (worship) such as Salah, sacrificial slaughtering etc., which are not permissible with the Kuffar, have performed acts of Kufr under the scope of al Wala which take one out of the fold of Islam. They claim these acts to be treating the Kuffar as Muslim and viewing them as a Muslim as their reason. Therefore those who perform these acts are made Takfir of by interpreting their actions as considering the Kuffar as Muslim, even if these individuals make Takfir of the Kuffar. Without doubt this is making Takfir with the requisite of a statement and does not exist in the Usuol of the Ahl-i Sunnah. In the sight of the Ahl-i Sunnah; ‘the requisite of a Madhhab is not the Mahdhab itself’. The individual is only responsible for his own Madhhab. He is not responsible with the outcome, meaning, or where the Madhhab leads. For this reason Kufr nor any other view can not be applied to the individual by saying things such as ‘what you say necessitates this’ or ‘the result of what you say means this’ or ‘what you say really means this’ etc. Now I’d like to post the statements of the scholars regarding this matter:

Ibn Hazm (rahimahullaah) stated: “It is wrong to make Takfir of people with the Ta'wil of their statements meaning or the remote meaning it necessitates. The reason is because it is similar to the slander done to a rival and making him to say something he has not said. Even if he has said something that could have a dangerous meaning, a paradoxical meaning will have been established. That which is paradoxical and not clear is not Kufr. On the contrary an individual accepting this paradox is good for his point of view because he will have avoided Kufr. Therefore that which is correct is that an individual is made Takfir upon the Dhahir (outwards) of his statement and his Aqidah (creed) he clearly expresses.  It will not benefit an individual to beautify his evil Aqidah with his statements.  However the Hukm (ruling) given regarding that individual will be built upon those statements.” (Ibn Hazm, al-Fasl, 3/294)

When Shaykh’ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was asked: ‘Is the implication of the Madhhab itself a Madhhab?’ He (rahimahullah) said:

No doubt things that ones Madhhab necessitate are not the Madhhab until he fulfills and accepts them. If he denied and rejected then making him responsible for indirect results what his Madhhab necessitates is a lie and a slander. If he does not accept and perform the indirect results of what he said or what he did then he is paradoxical. However this person, even though paradoxical, he may not accept the Kufr or things that may carry potential Kufr which are indirect results that is extracted from his statements. Some utter things while he is aware that he is not accepting the indirect results of his statements, he may not know that his statement leads to it. If the implication of the Madhhab was the Madhhab itself then those who claim that the Sifaat (of Allah) such as the Istiwa and others, are not Haqiqi (true) but they are Majaz (metaphoric) would all be Kafir. It is because the indirect result of such statement is that none of these Sifaat (attributes) are Haqiqi. However we know that, most of those who say so do not know the indirect result of their statements and moreover they imagine groundlessly that Haqiqat is nothing but the Haqiqat of the creation. They are ignorant concerning the Haqiqat and the Majaz and their descriptions of these terms are slander to the language and the Shari’ah. (Majmu al-Fatawa, 20/121)

Shaykh’ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah also said the following:

Indirect result of the statement of a person is of two types:

The First is: The indirect result of a true statement that he should favor. Since the indirect result of a truth is also the truth. If it is understood from his state that he will not refrain to accept it, when it is clarified for him then it is Ja’iz (permissible) to attribute it to him.

The second is: Indirect result of ones false statement which there is no need to take him responsible for such indirect result of his statement. It is because in such condition he is –at the most- contradicting himself. It is constant that other than the Prophets every Alim (scholar) may fall into paradox. If it is understood from his state that he will not refrain to accept it, when it is clarified for him, then it can be attributed to him. However for the person whom from his state it is understood that he will not accept it when it is clarified from him that (the indirect result of) his statement is Fasid (null) then it is not Ja’iz to attribute it to him. It is because, even though he said something that he would be held responsible he is not aware of his statement being Fasid and the indirect results of it.

This explanation is the Ikhtiaf (disagreement) of the people concerning whether ‘the implication of the Madhhab is itself the Madhhab’ or not. This Ikhtilaaf is better for them than to be decided on one of it (i.e., the options). With this for the one who is content with the indirect results of his statement after it was clarified for him then it can be attributed to him. However if he is not content with the (indirect) results (of his statement) even if he is in contradiction, these can not be attributed to him. (Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu al-Fatawa, 29/25-26)

Abu Ishaq ash-Shatibi (d790H) stated in his book al-Itisam: “According to what we heard from the scholars surely the Madhhab of the Muhaqqiq Ahl Usuol is as such: ‘The Kufr which is established through meaning, is not like the Kufr established according to the Dhahir (apparent) of an individual.’ How could it be! Even a Kafir severely denies that meaning and rejects those who hold him responsible for it. He will not accept in anyway when he is explained which the Kufr meaning his statement necessitates.” (al-Itisam 2/292) Again he states:

“The view accepted by our scholars Maghrib and Jubbai and certainly which are relied on scholars is as such: What the Madhhab necessitates is not the Madhhab per se. For this reason when the necessary meaning of his statement is explained to an individual he will surely reject this.” (al-Itisam, 2/292)

Sakhawi narrates the view of his master ibn Hajar: “The one whose statement is clearly Kufr or when the owner accepts when the necessary meaning of his statement is explained to be Kufr he will be given the Hukm of Kufr. However if he rejects the meaning his statement necessitates even if his statement necessitates Kufr he will not be given the Hukm of Kufr.” (as-Sahawi, Fath’ul Mughis, 1/334)

We would like to mention the statements of Shawkani where he says:

“To make Takfir with that which something necessitates is among the greatest mistakes. If the individual who wants to danger his Din resorts to this method he will have committed the murder of his own Nafs (self).” (as-Sayl’ul Jarrar, 4/580)

There are many more statements from the scholars regarding this matter. That which we have narrated is more than enough for those with intellect. The one who verifies the narrations of the scholars regarding this matter will see that those misguided groups of today and many other groups act upon nothing other than Takfir with what the Madhhab necessitates or Takfir by interpretation, whereas an individual can only be given the Hukm of Takfir due to his Aqidah (belief).

An Aqidah can not be applied to an individual by interpreting his statements or actions. Certainly that which we mention is regarding statements that are obscure and statements which carry other possibilities. The one who utters and acts upon clear Kufr which lifts the essence of Iman or ones who deny the clear Ahkam of Din which is known by necessity, will be made Takfir of regardless of their purpose and intention. The Ahl-i Sunnah will never interpret the statements and actions of individuals and apply a view to them which they do not claim; moreover they would never apply the Hukm of Takfir on them with such interpretation. As long as the individual does not doubt the Kufr of the Kuffar, even if his actions are terrible, his actions can not be interpreted and a belief which he does not carry can not be attributed to him. It can not be said to one ‘your act means you call him Muslim’ and through interpretation with what the Madhhab necessitates Takfir can not be applied to an individual who does not pass judgment on the Kuffar as Muslim; this is going overboard and Dhulm.

As mentioned in ash-Shifa of Qadi ‘Iyad and in other works the Ahkam of of Iman and Kufr are only taken from Allah and His Rasul, and there is no room for intellectual comparisons. Let alone, do those who extract evidence from Nass (text) have the licence and authority to do so? What knowledge do they have, that they extract evidence with the feat of a Mujtahid (qualified scholar to exercise Ijtihad; striving, juridical endeavor and competence to infer expert legal rulings from foundational proofs within or without a particular school of law)? While only those who have the licence of Ijtihad to extract Hukm from Ayaat and Ahadith can do so. Unless it is as such, those who try to explain the Qur’an without any Ilm have been threatened with Fire.

Ibn Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma ajmain) narrated: that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:


عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «مَنْ قَالَ فِي القُرْآنِ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ فَلْيَتَبَوَّأْ مَقْعَدَهُ مِنَ النَّارِ» : «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ

"Whoever says (something) about the Qur'an without knowledge, then let him take his seat in the Fire." (Tirmidhi, #2950 graded it Hasan Sahih)

If the individuals mentioned in this Risalah are originally Muslim, the Qadi (judge) and Mufti who have the license for Ijtihad (conviction) and Fatwa (religiously verdict) will evaluate the condition of the individual and will judge him personally. If he is a Kafir they will pass judgment that he is a Kafir, if he is Muslim they will judge him to be a Muslim. In cases as such since there can be ambiguity passing judgment would not be the job of the layman but the job of the scholars. The judgments passed by the ignorant and their supposed Fatawa (pl., Fatwa; verdicts) by their ignorance bravery do not concern us. If the individuals mentioned in this Risalah are Kafir in essence than there is no need to speak of them. If they are Muslim then until a licensed individual passes judgement on them, their Hukm of Islam will continue. However, the pure Ahl-i Tawhid are distant from entering into such relations with those outwardly Muslim individuals who have such relationships with the Kuffar. Those who enter into such relations with the Kuffar and try to excuse themselves because it is not Kufr do nothing more then prove their Nifaq (hypocrisy). The reason is because these are not actions acted upon by those who truly love Allah and His Rasul and hate the Kuffar. What falls upon us is to act upon the Usul of the Ahl-i Sunnah and be cautious from falling into Ifrat and Tafrit. As the actions not being Kufr doesn’t necessitate them to be permissible, them not being permissible doesn’t necessitate them to extract one from Din. We seek refuge with Allah from such ignorance.

Before we leave you alone with our Risalah we would like to caution you. The matters taken in hand here are matters which take place under the scope of al-Wala w’al Baraa which is a principle of Tawhid and they are matters which must be understood with its right after one has a certain understanding and has fulfilled prerequisites regarding the Shari’ah of Islam. For this reason the intended general audience of this Risalah is not the layperson, or the Mubtadi (innovator) who is newly learning about the Din al Islam. It is recommended that individuals as such read basic material regarding Aqidah and especially summarized texts regarding the matter of al-Wala instead of this Risalah. Examples of such summarized texts are the texts from the Najd scholars such as Hamd ibn Atiq and Sulayman ibn Abdillah regarding al-Wala.

We request from our Lord that He accept this work from us as a script of Tawbah (repentance) and make it a means for us to reach the happiness of Akhirah (hereafter).

May our Lord destine us to distance ourselves from the Kuffar rightfully and to openly display enmity towards them! Amin. Wa'l hamdulillahi Rabb'il A'lamin.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La-ilaha Illallah (there is no -true- god -to be worshiped- but Allah) and thus be successful."

Uswat'ul Hasana

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 142
Shaykh’ul Islam Ibnu Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said:

وكل قول ينفرد به المتأخر عن المتقدمين، ولم يسبقه إليه أحد منهم، فإنه يكون خطأ كما قال الإمام أحمد بن حنبل‏‏

"All statements that had been said by the Mutaakhirrin (latter ones) differing from the Mutaqaddimin (predecessors) and that had not been previously mentioned by any other, is a mistake. As Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah) said:

‏إياك أن تتكلم في مسألة ليس لك فيها إمام‏

"Refrain from speaking about a matter without an Imam!.." (Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majma’ul Fatawa, 21/291)

Ummah

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 673
  • O people! Respond (with obedience) to Allah's Call
Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:

إِنَّ النَّاسَ دَخَلُوا فِي دِينِ اللهِ أَفْوَاجًا، وَسَيَخْرُجُونَ مِنْهُ أَفْوَاجًا

"Verily, the people have entered into the religion of Allah in crowds and they will also leave it in crowds." (Ahmad, Musnad)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
584 Views
Last post 14.06.2015, 07:46:22 PM
by Fahm'us Salaf
0 Replies
528 Views
Last post 14.06.2015, 10:51:20 PM
by Fahm'us Salaf