دار التوحيد Dâr'ul Tawhîd

Author Topic: WHAT SHALL BE OUR STANCE WITH REGARDS TO THE MUSHKIL STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS  (Read 1644 times)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي


WHAT SHALL BE OUR STANCE WITH REGARDS TO MUSHKIL (THE PROBLEMATIC) STATEMENTS OF ULAMAA (THE SCHOLARS)

بسم الله، الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلاة والسلام على خاتم الأنبياء وسيد المرسلين نبينا محمد وعلى آله وأصحابه، من الأولين والآخرين، أما بعد؛

Unfortunately we have recently been witnessing that some of the views and Fatawa (religious verdict) of the Ulama (pl., Alim; scholars) which are stated in their books treated as a matter of discussion. Moreover they are attempted to make an open season of discussion on the matters of the evident rulings of the Din (religion i.e., Islam) more than before. It is quite an eye catching fact that contemporary most of the discussions regarding the matters of Iman (faith) and Kufr (disbelief) take place in many environments that occur with regards to the statements of the Ulama and not the Nass (textual proof) of the Kitaab (the Book i.e., Qur’an) and the Sunnah.

So much so that almost all of the discussion about the matters of Takfir (excommunication), Jahl (ignorance), Muhakama bi’t Taghout (seeking the judgment of the Taghout) consists of crashing into the opinions (of scholars) with other opinions. As an example those who claim Jahl to be Udhr (an excuse) bring forth all the statements of the scholars which they deem to be on their favor on the other hand those who claim Jahl not to be Udhr bring forth all the statements of the scholars which they deem to be in their favor as well. However how little in number are those who take the matter to the Nass; Qur’an and the Sunnah!.. Once one says "how about this evident Nass..." the other side says "what about these statements of this scholar? Are we going go make Takfir of him?" then the opponents say this and that so and so forth the endless discussion continues in this manner.

In this field of barren Jadal (arguments); those who try to take the matter in hand in the right way while verifying all the evidences and to prove the truth of the matter are very little in number and those who approach both the statements of the scholars and the Nass in the Usoul (methodology) point of view to prove the truth of the matter with regards to Ilm (knowledge-wise) and Shari’ah are very little in number as well. It is because -in most cases- the intention behind such Jadal is not to reach and uncover Haqq (the truth).

Today those who argue concerning the matters of Aqidah (creed) are in most cases trying to legalize some Baatil (the false) due to being under the pressure of the Kuffar in daily life. We believe that the majority of those who claim to defend and support the Aqidah of Tawhid are in Shakk (uncertainty) and Shubha (doubt) due to witnessing that those who defend the Aqidah of Tawhid are very little in number. When the hardship of living Islam in Dar’ul Kufr (the Abode of Disbelief) added on top of Shakk and Shubha instead of questioning their lifestyles they try to find out a solution for the hardship.

This (i.e., discussions to be continued about the statements of the scholars) is sourced from the following Habith (malignant) doubt which gnaws many among the people: "Is this Aqidah really something that the Qur’an and the Sunnah commands? or; Is it a view that a few Takfiris of today innovated? Or a better possibility; Is it personal views of Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab? Do all the scholars of the past share the same Aqidah with us or do they believe different than us?"

Whereas if these people by submitting to the Muhkam (decisive) Nass of the Qur’an and Sunnah and the Muhkam opinions of the scholars and ponder upon the following Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), they would gain many Khayr (goodness):


بدأ الإسلام غريبًا، وسيعود غريبًا كما بدأ، فَطُوبي للغرباء‏

"Islam began as (something) strange, and will return (once again) as something strange, so Tuba is for Ghuraba (the strangers)." (Muslim, #146; Tirmidhi, #2629-2630; Ibn Ma'ajah, #3986-3988)

So in this humble work our aim is; to present -in a concise manner as much we can- what shall be the Usoul (the methodology) when one comes across with the Mushkil statements of the Ulama which seems to be contradicting with the general principles of Aqidah. Wallahu Musta’an (Allah is the One Whose Help is Sought)!..
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
Those who are familiar with the Usoul’ul Fiqh (Methodology of Islamic Jurisprudence) would know that; in order to explain and in order to guide those who are new in the field of Ijtihaad (deriving the laws of Shari’ah from its sources) namely candidates of Mujtahid (the doer of Ijtihaad; expert of Shari’ah i.e., Islamic law), how could Mujtahid derived and how could they Istinbat (inference) rulings from the Kitaab and the Sunnah, scholars of Usoul dealt with many matters. The Ulama of Usoul from Imam Shafii (whom is accepted to being the first Usoul scholar) to today classified the Nass of the Kitaab and the Sunnah as; Amm (general), Khass (particular), Muhkam (decisive), Mutashshabih (intricate), Mujmal (ambivalent), Mubayyan (explicit), Mutlaq (absolute), Mukayyad (restricted) etc., and also explained both the Martaba (level) of Dalalah (indication) of each Nass and their indications of the way to be Dalil (evidence) to the Shari rulings. They also declared that, those who have no knowledge of these matters can not derive rulings from the evidences.

It is known by the Taalib’ul Ilm (seeker of knowledge) that in the same manner there are clear, Khafi (obscure), Muhkam, Mutashshabih, Mutlaq and Mukayyad expressions in the statements of the Ulama as well. Such expression can be found –not only in the Nass but- in every written and verbal statement. The scholars of Usoul had made Istinbat of most these terms from the Arabic language, which the Qur’an had been revealed.

In addition to this, because the Awam (lay people) can only learn most of the rulings of the Din from the Ulama; they should pay attention to such detail so that they do not fall into a mistake. Details of all of these terms can be found in the books of Usoul. However in order to make our intention understandable, we are going to give a few examples which are directly related with the topic Inshallah.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
The First Example: Mushtarak (Homonym) Lafdh (Wordings)

These are the utterances that defines more than one meaning.  When such utterances are come across even though its wide spread meaning would be chosen, if there is Qarina (presumption) which indicates any meaning other than its Dhahir meaning then attention would be given to the possibility that it may refer to other meanings it carries. The greatest Qarina regarding the Dhahir meaning of the word which was not meant is its Dhahir meaning contradicting the Nass of the Kitaab and the Sunnah. As it was mentioned in the Sahih Hadith:


سِبَابُ الْمُسْلِمِ فُسُوقٌ، وَقِتَالُهُ كُفْرٌ

"To abuse a Muslim is Fisq (wicked) and to fight him is Kufr." (Bukhari, #48, #6044, #7076; Muslim, #64; Tirmidhi, #1983; Nasa'i, #122; Ibn Majaah, #3939; Ahmad, Musnad, 1/385, 1/411)

Every person who has his share from Ilm would easily know that Kufr in this Hadith does not mean Kufr’ul Akbar (Major Kufr) which takes one out of fold of Islam. Since other Nass indicates killing a Muslim to be amongst the Kabair (Major Sin) which does not take one out of fold of Islam. Rather the Kufr in this Hadith is the Kufr’ul Asgar (Minor Kufr) which does not take one out of fold of Islam. One of the greatest difference of Ahl’us Sunnah from the other groups of Bid’ah (innovation) in Usoul is their acceptance of Kufr Duna Kufr (Kufr less than Kufr; Minor Kufr), Shirk Duna Shirk (Shirk less than Shirk), Dhulm Duna Dhulm (Dhulm less than Dhulm; Minor Oppression), Fisq Duna Fisq (Fisq less than Fisq; Minor Corruption) and Jaahiliyyah Duna Jaahiliyyah (Ignorance less than ignorance). Scholars as well use such words -by submitting to the Nass- related with sins which do not take one out of fold of Islam. Likewise the term Taghout is used -with its lexical meaning- regarding the Muslimin who go beyond the set limits, cross the limits and overstep boundaries and also oppress. One who knows all of these should verify; with which meaning the scholar intended.

Similar to this is the usage of the Nass related to Shirk’ul Akbar (Major Shirk) regarding the matters of Shirk’ul Asgar (Minor Shirk) due to the severity of threat. Like regarding the Ayah:


فَلاَ تَجْعَلُواْ لِلّهِ أَندَاداً وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

"Then set not up rivals unto Allah when ye know (the truth)." (al-Baqarah 2/22)

which refers to Shirk’ul Akbar, Ibn Abbaas (radiyallahu anhuma ajmain) said the following after reciting it:

"It (i.e., Shirk in the Ayah) is to fall into it to say, even casually, to your friend: By Allah, by your life, O friend!"1

Hudhayfah (radiyallahu anh) tore the garment (which he claimed protected him against fever) to pieces recalling the verse:


وَمَا يُؤْمِنُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ بِاللّهِ إِلاَّ وَهُم مُّشْرِكُونَ

"And most of them believe not in Allah without associating (others as partners) with Him!" (Yusuf 12/106)2

However all of those who have their share of Ilm would know that things as such which the Sahaba condemned are amongst the Shirk’ul Asgar which do not take one out of fold of Islam. Therefore such usage by the scholars both from the Salaf and the Khalaf due to Taghliz (to avoid); words sound like they are giving the ruling of Kufr to the matters which are not Kufr in reality and then they are not declaring the doer with Kufr amazed many and caused them to deem that scholars do not make Takfir of a person who performs Kufr. In the same manner the scholars use of the terms Muhakama bi’t Taghout or seeking the judgment of Jaahiliyyah for the Muslimin who turn away from the judgment of Allah due to following their own desire and not declaring him to be Kafir, due to this many deem that the one who seeks the judgment of Taghout would not be a Kafir.

The seeker of truth would verify the meaning of the term –whether or not it has any other meaning other then its Dhahir meaning- which seems problematic in the books of the scholars. If there are possibilities then the statement which includes such word that possibility has  another meaning than its Dhahir meaning looses its feature of being Dalil (evidence) by itself and it needs an additional Qarina to be considered as a Dalil. Since there is a known principle in Usoul’ul Fiqh: "When there is possibility Istidlaal becomes invalid." Whoever tries to attribute a view to a scholar with his statements which carry the possibility to have more than one meaning then he is either a Jaahil (ignorant) who does not know Usoul or he is someone who tries to manipulate the truth deliberately.

Whereas even possibilities need to be lifted before attributing a view or giving ruling to any one in the society let alone attributing a view to a scholar or the Nass of the Kitaab and the Sunnah. Such that it must be established that the utterance is completely related with the matter that we are investigating and there is no other possibility for it to be carrying another meaning. Otherwise it will not fit for a Taalib’ul Ilm to rule with a statement which may have two, three or even more than three meanings and this is an indication which exposes him being either a Jaahil or having concealed thoughts.


Footnotes:


Quote
1- Shaykh’ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab (rahimahullah) narrated from Ibn Hatim that he related that in regard to this verse (i.e., al-Baqarah 2/22), Ibn Abbaas (radiyallahu anhuma ajmain) said:
 
"Andad constitutes Shirk. It is a crime less detectable than the crawling of ants on a black surface at night. It is to fall into it to say, even casually, to your friend: By Allah, by your life, O friend! Or: By my life! etc; or: Where it not for our little dog! Or: The ducks in our yard, the thieves would have broken through (the house)! Or Were it not for Allah and you, O Friend! etc. Do not mention anybody with Allah, if you want to avoid Shirk." (Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab, Kitab'ut Tawhid allazi huwa Haqqullahi Ala'l Abid)

2- Shaykh’ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab (rahimahullah) said:

"That the Hadith of Hudhayfah (radiyallahu anh) is evidence that the companions recoursed to the verses dealing with Shirk’ul Akbar to condemn the lesser (Shirk’ul Asgar), as Ibn Abbas (radiyallahu anh) had done when he recoursed to the verse from Surat’ul Baqarah." (Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab, Kitab'ut Tawhid allazi huwa Haqqullahi Ala'l Abid)
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
The Second Example: Presenting Mutashhabih to Muhkam

Allah Ta’ala stated:


هُوَ الَّذِيَ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ في قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاء الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاء تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلاَّ اللّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ الألْبَابِ

Which means:

"He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations -They are the substance of the Book- and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed." (Al-i Imran 3/7)

Hafidh Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) said the following in the Tafsir (explanation) of the Ayah:

"Allah states that in the Qur'an, there are Ayat that are Muhkamat, entirely clear and plain, and these are Umm’ul Kitaab (the foundations of the Book) which the way of Dalalat (indication), being evidence are plain for everyone. And there are Ayat in the Qur'an that are Mutashabihat not entirely clear for many, or some people. So those who refer to the Muhkam Ayat to understand the Mutashabih Ayat, will have acquired the correct guidance, and vice verse. This is why Allah said:


هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَـبِ "They are the foundations of the Book"

meaning, they are the basis of the Qur'an, and should be referred to for clarification, when warranted:


وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَـبِهَـتٌ "And others not entirely clear"

as they have several meanings, some that agree with the Muhkam and some that carry other literal indications, although these meaning might not be desired.

The Muhkamat are the Ayat that explain the abrogating rulings, the allowed, prohibited, laws, limits, obligations and rulings that should be believed in and implemented. As for the Mutashabihat Ayat, they include the abrogated Ayat, parables, oaths, and what should be believed in, but not implemented.

Regarding both Muhkam and Mustashhabih there is Ikhtilaaf (disagreement) and narrated various views from the scholars of Salaf.

On the authority of Ali ibn Abu Talha that Abdullah ibn Abbaas (radiyallahu anhuma ajmain) said: "Muhkam Ayaat are; Nasikh (the abrogating) Ayaat, Halaal (permissible) and Haraam (impermissible), punishments and Fard (obligatory) and the Ayaat that command to do something and inform to perform accordingly."

It was narrated from Ikrima, Mujahid, Qatada, Dahhak, Muqatil ibn Hayyan, Rabi ibn Anas and Suddi that they said: "Muhkam are the ones that are performed accordingly."

It was narrated from ibn Abbaas (radiyallahu anhuma ajmain) that he said: "Muhkam Ayaat are:


…قُلْ تَعَالَوْاْ أَتْلُ مَا حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ أَلاَّ تُشْرِكُواْ بِهِ شَيْئاً

"Say: Come, I will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from: Join not anything with Him..." (an-An’am 6/151)

and the rest of the Ayah and:


…وَقَضَى رَبُّكَ أَلاَّ تَعْبُدُواْ إِلاَّ إِيَّاهُ

"Thy Lord hath decreed that ye worship none but Him..." (al-Isra 17/23)

and the rest of the Ayah.

This was narrated by Ibn Abi Hatim from Sa’id ibn Ju’bayr. Again Ibn Abi Hatim said: It was narrated from my father (…) from Ishaq ibn Suwayd that Yahya ibn Ma’mar and Abu Fahita had Ikhtilaaf regarding the Ayah:


هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَـبِ "They are the foundations of the Book"

Abu Fahita said that: "They are the Huruf’ul Muqatta’at (the disjointed letters in Qur'an) however Yahya ibn Ma’mar said: "They are the Fard, commands and prohibitions, Halaal and Haraam."

Ibn Lahi’a narrated from (...) that Sa’id ibn Ju’bayr said: "They called as
أُمُّ الْكِتَـبِ "the foundations of the Book" it is because they had written in all of the Samawi (heavenly) religions (originated from Allah)."

Muqatil ibn Hayyan said: "They called as
أُمُّ الْكِتَـبِ "the foundations of the Book" it is because there is none left who are displeased with among those who submit to the religion of truth."

For Mutashahbih the following were narrated (from the Salaf):

Ibn Abbaas (radiyallahu anh) said the following in the narration of Ali ibn Abu Talha: "These are Mansukh (the abrogated) Ayaat, ones before and after the Qur’an, proverbs and oaths, things that one put his Iman but does not perform accordingly."

Muqatil ibn Hayyan said: "They are the Huruf’ul Muqatta’at (the disjointed letters in Qur'an) at the beginning of some Surat (chapters)."

Ibn Kathir continued and stated:

"Therefore, Allah Ta’ala said:


فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فى قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ "So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation"

meaning, those who are misguided and deviate from truth to falsehood:


فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَـبَهَ مِنْهُ "they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof"

meaning, they refer to the Mutashabih in the Qur’an, because they are able to alter its meanings to conform with their false interpretation since the wordings of the Mutashabihat encompass such a wide area of meanings. As for the Muhkam Ayat, they cannot be altered because they are clear and, thus, constitute unequivocal proof against the misguided people. This is why Allah said:


ابْتِغَآءَ الْفِتْنَةِ "seeking Fitnah (trial)"

meaning, they seek to misguide their following by pretending to prove their innovation by relying on the Qur'an -the Mutashabih of it- but, this is Hujjah (proof) against and not for them.

For instance, Christians might claim that Isa is divine because of the Ayah (in the Qur'an states that he is Ruhullah i.e., soul of Allah and His Word, which He gave to Maryam), all the while ignoring Allah's statements:


إِنْ هُوَ إِلاَّ عَبْدٌ أَنْعَمْنَا عَلَيْهِ

"He (i.e., Isa), ﴾was not more than a servant. We granted Our favor to him." (az-Zukhruf 43/59) and;

إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسَى عِندَ اللَّهِ كَمَثَلِ ءَادَمَ خَلَقَهُ مِن تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ

"Verily, the likeness of Isa before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: ‘Be!’ and he was."  (Al-i Imran 3/59)

There are other (Muhkam) Ayaat that clearly assert that Isa (alayhi salam) is but one of Allah's creatures and that he is the servant and Messenger of Allah, among other Messengers.

Allah's statement:


وَابْتِغَآءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ "And seeking for its Ta'wil"

to alter them (i.e., Mutashhabiha) as they desire.

Imam Ahmad recorded that A'ishah (radiyallahu anha) said: "Rasulullah (sallallah alayhi wa sallam) recited:


هُوَ الَّذِى أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَـبَ مِنْهُ آيَـتٌ مُّحْكَمَـتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَـبِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَـبِهَـتٌ

"It is He Who has sent down to you the Book. In it are verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book; and others not entirely clear." until,

أُوْلُواْ الأَلْبَـبِ "men of understanding"

and said:


فَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الَّذِين يُجَادِلُونَ فِيهِ، فَهُمُ الَّذِينَ عَنَى اللهُ، فَاحْذَرُوهُم

"When you see those who argue in Qur’an (using the Mutashabihat), then they are those whom Allah meant. Therefore, beware of them."

Bukhari recorded a similar Hadith in the Tafsir of this Ayah (Al-i Imran 3/7), as did Muslim in the book of Qadar (the Divine Will) in his Sahih, and Abu Dawud in the Sunnah section of his Sunan, from A'ishah (radiyallahu anha): "Rasulullah (sallallah alayhi wa sallam) recited this Ayah:


هُوَ الَّذِى أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَـبَ مِنْهُ آيَـتٌ مُّحْكَمَـتٌ

"It is He Who has sent down to you the Book. In it are verses that are entirely clear." until:

وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ الأَلْبَـبِ

"And none receive admonition except men of understanding."

He (sallallah alayhi wa sallam) then said:


فَإِذَا رَأَيْتِ الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ؛ فَأُولئِكَ الَّذِينَ سَمَّى اللهُ، فَاحْذَرُوهُم

"When you see those who follow what is not so clear of the Qur'an, then they are those whom Allah described, so beware of them."

This is the wording recorded by Bukhari." (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir)

Quotation from Ibn Kathir ends here. Qurtubi said:

"Muhkam is Asl (the fundamental principle) which all the Far’i (secondary) matters referred back to it. Mutashhabih is its Far."

As it is understood from the explanations of the scholars that it is a crystal clear issue the Mutashhabih would always be presented to the Muhkam. However the Muhkam never present to the Mutashhabih. Ahl’uz Zaygh and Dalalah (the People of Divergence and Deviation) of today however –as their connotes from the past used to do- leave the Muhkam and look forward to the Ta’wil (interpretation) of  the Mutashhabih (going Baatin from Dhahir).

As it was clearly mentioned in the Qur’an in many occasions that Shirk will never be forgiven (an-Nisa 4/48; an-Nisa 4/116), every person who performs Shirk will go to Jahannam (Hell-fire) everlasting (al-Ma’idah 5/72), those who acquire any other fake god as Ilah for himself is Kafir (al-Mu’minun 23/117) and also in the Ahadith (pl., Hadith) it was mentioned repeatedly that the blood and wealth of those who do not reject the Taghout who is worshiped instead of Allah, will continue to be permissible to be taken, the one who died upon Shirk will go to Jahannam. We witness many leave all these Muhkam Nass and cling to the Mutashhabihat such as the Hadith of Dhat’ul Anwaat, Hadith of the man who ordered to be burned and his ashes to be scattered around various places in which there are many different views and possibilities of Ta’wil claims that those who perform Shirk would be given the Hukm (ruling) of Muslim due to his Jahl (ignorance) or Ta’wil. This is also the situation of those who leave the Muhkam statements of the Ulama and cling to the Mutashhabihat statements in which there are various possibilities.

Surely the first step to be taken is to differentiate the Muhkam Nass from the Mutashhabihat. Many people of today who lost their track raised the degree of the Muhkam Nass as the Mutashhabihat and vice verse. They are those –as mentioned in the Ayah- in whose hearts there is a deviation who had not understand the Din.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
The Necessity of Abandoning the Dhahiri Logic

These two examples regarding the Usoul’ul Fiqh that we presented above, is sufficient for the one who has intellect in order to comprehend the matter. All of these indicate the necessity of abandoning the Dhahiri logic regarding both the Nass of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and also the statements of the Ulama.

The description of Dhahir (probable legal significance) in the book ‘Waraqat’ which is related with Usoul’ul Fiqh, is that which can be interpreted in two ways, where one (interpretation) is more preponderant than the other. The author of Waraqat, Imam al-Juwayni (478H) described the Nass, which is the opposite of Dhahir as follows:


والنص ما لا يحتمل إلا معنى واحداً

"Nass (the unequivocal) is that which can not be interpreted except for one single meaning."

The commentator of Waraqat, Jalal ad-Din al-Mahalli gives the sentence; ‘I saw a lion today’ as an example for Dhahir. Did the person mean the lion that we all know, or did he mean a courageous man? Both possibilities are at hand. But if there is evidence that, it is the animal lion that was meant, for example if he said: ‘Today I saw a lion which has a mane and tale’ etc., then it becomes evident that it is the lion that we know. Otherwise the word lion continues to be a word of two possibilities.

Although Dhahir is the weakest degree of portent; it is Waajib (obligatory) to perform according to the Dhahir; meaning whatever is easily understood from the definite and certain Lafdh (utterance). However if there is evidence which indicates to abandon the Dhahir and there is a possibility for Ta’wil (interpretation) meaning; if there is evidence which indicates the abandonment of the Dhahir meaning and something else is intended then it would not be Waajib to perform according to the Dhahir. This is what most of the people of Usoul agreed upon. For more information one may refer back to the Usoul’ul Fiqh books; both the classics and the contemporary ones. Since this is not our topic we are not going to delve deep into it.

We can summarize this principle as: "Unless there is evidence which indicates it is the opposite, sticking to the Dhahir of the statements while giving consideration that it may carry a second possibility."

When one does not keep loyal to this principle and the Usoul, the door to many deviations in both fields of I’tiqadi and Fiqhi would be opened. Thus so many groups in history deviated due to clinging to the Dhahir of the Kitab (book i.e., Qur’an), Sunnah and Athar (narrations) and views of the Salaf’us Salihin (the Pious Predecessors) or due to being infected with the disease of Ta’wil by unnecessarily abandoning the Dhahir of the Sharri Nass. Whereas, the Ahl’us Sunnah; were saved from Ifrat (taking it to the extreme) and Tafrit (neglecting its true meaning) in the matters of Din (religion) due to following the moderate way.

For instance, one of the reasons that the Khawaarij deviated was their clinging to the Dhahir of the Ayah:


وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ

"If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are unbelievers." (al-Mai’dah 5/44)
 
and they (i.e., Khawaarij) deem that everyone who opposes to the Hukm of Allah to be Kafir. Likewise, as we have mentioned above, they have clinked on to the Dhahir of the Ahadith (pl., Hadith) which addressed those who perform Kabair (Major Sin) to Kufr and they made Takfir of everyone who performed Kabair.

Both the Mushabbiha and the Mujassima sects understood the Sifaat (attributes) of Allah such as Istiwa (Allah’s rising over the Throne in a manner that befits Him), Yad (hand), Wajh (face) etc., same as attributes of human beings, on the other hand those who tried to answer them amongst the Ahl Ta’wil (People of Allegorical Interpretation) and Ahl Ta’til (People of Negation of the Meaning or Function of Allah's Attributes) made Ta’wil in a manner that they completely negated the Sifaat of Allah (Ta’ala). Such as those who say; Istiwa is Istila (dominion, conquer).

The reasons for the deviation of these sects with regards to taking or abandoning the Dhahir of the Nass are; taking whatever is in their favor and leaving other Nass and not investigating the issue in all aspects also one of the greatest reason is, taking the Nass in consideration without the Fahm (comprehension) and understanding of the Salaf and with their own Ra’y (view/opinion).
 
We shall do the following in order to be saved from deviation and those who deviated in such matters; take in consideration both the Nass and the views of the Ulama as a whole and not separately, take the Mushkil (difficult/problematic) statements to the clear and Muhkam (i.e., have only one meaning according to the rules of the Arabic language or else the meaning of the statement is clearly known) Nass of the Kitab, Sunnah and to the clear statements of the Ulama of Salaf and Khalaf (later ones), those who follow their steps amongst the Khalaf. This is what suits to the Talib’il Ilm (student/seeker of knowledge) and the seeker of the Haqq (truth).

Other than this, without going deep into the details of the issue, without investigating, without compiling all of the Nass and the Qawl (view/utterance) concerning the matter, without looking for the explanations of the Ulama; delivering a statement simply looking at the Dhahir of the Nass or the statement shows the Jahl (ignorance) of the person or rather his concealed thought.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
Some other principles that we must know before giving a Hukm to the Mushkil statements of the Ulama are:

In Islam the Dalil are Kitaab, Sunnah, Ijma and Qiyas (analogy). The statement of an Alim is not a Sharri Dalil itself. When Ijma of the Ulama determined then statement of Alim will become a Dalil. There is even Ikhtilaaf regarding the statement of Sahaba let alone Alim. Accepting the Qawl (saying) of the Sahaba as Dalil is related with the possibility that it has a base from Rasululah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam). These are things that are Malum (known) in Usoul. Even before the Usoul, these are among things to be known by Dharurah (necessity) in the Din since no one other than Allah and His Rasul (Messenger) has the authority to dictate Hukm (a ruling). Accepting any individuals saying as a Mujarrad (absolute) Dalil in the Din even if he was Alim, is following the steps of the Jews and the Nasara (Christians) who take their Ahbar (Rabbis, Priests) and Ruhban (Anchorites, Monks) to be their Rabb (Lords) besides Allah as Allah Ta’ala stated:


اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُواْ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُواْ إِلَـهاً وَاحِداً لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

"They take their Ahbar (Rabbis, Priests) and Ruhban (Anchorites, Monks) to be their Rabb (Lords) beside Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One God. there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)." (at-Tawbah 9/31)

Rabi ibn Anas said: "I asked Abu’l Aliya: How was the (fake) Rububiyyah (Lordship) in Bani Isra’il (Israelites)? He told me that: Rububiyyah in them was: Bani Isra’il saw in the Book of Allah things that Allah commands and prohibits them then they would say: We can not get ahead of our scholars. We will accept whatever they command us and avoid whatever they prohibit us. We will accept everything that they command us. Therefore they abandoned what the Book of Allah says and accepted what people say." This was recorded by Ibn Jarir at-Tabari, in the Tafsir of the Ayah.

Shaykh Ishaq ibn Abd’ur Rahman an-Najdi said: "One of the things among that is known by necessity in Islam is; Kitaab, Sunnah and Ijma being the sole authority in the matters of Usoul’ud Din (fundamentals of Religion). This is what the Sahaba was upon. In such matters any specified scholar has no authority. For whom this principle becomes firm as he does not doubt regarding it, obscure matters in the books of the Ulama becomes easy for him. Since there is no one Masum (innocent) other than the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam)." (al-Majmuat’ul Mahmudiyyah, 25)

It is unthinkable and unimaginable for a true scholar to state something intentionally opposing the Book of Allah. However even if the Dhahir of his statement opposes the Book of Allah and there is no way to make Ta’wil of it then his statement will be abandoned and his state will be endorsed to Allah.

Of course this is only valid when his statement opposes the Dhahir fundamentals of the Din of Islam. However this is something that does not exist. No one among the Rabbani scholars who is esteemed by the Ummah stated such a thing; a statement that opposes the fundamentals of Tawhid in a manner that there is no explanation of it. And it has not been determined yet.

It does not mean that the Mushkil statements of the Ulama can not be explained because some of the Talib’ul Ilm who have little knowledge can not explain them. However Ulama use a terminology that other scholars can understand which are understandable and clear for those who have the knowledge of it. For those Awam who do not know the terminology and do not know in what manner the scholars discuss the matters, it becomes Mushkil for them. It is because individuals from the Awam in general are inclined to take the Dhahir meanings of the terms and they do not think that there could be some precision in the statements of the Ulama.

As an example, let’s take the matter of ignorance being an excuse in hand. The one who worships other than Allah, is a Mushrik even if he is Jaahil. He can never be a Muslim in such state this is a matter that all the Ulama made Ijmaa upon and it is among the clear and from among the Muhkam rulings of the Din. In this regards Ibn Qayyim (rahimahullah) said the following:

"Islam is; actualizing the oneness of Allah, worshiping Him solely, not associating anything to Him, and having Iman (faith) in Allah and His Rasul (Messenger) and subjection to things which the Rasul had brought along. The slave who does not actualize these is not Muslim. If this individual who does not actualize these is not a stubborn (meaning the one who rejects knowingly) Kafir then he is an ignorant Kafir.

As a result, people of this rank who are evaluated as ignorant, even though they do not persist against the truth, they go through Kufr because of their ignorance. Not being stubborn does not prevent them from being Kafir. It is because Kafir is the one who rejects the Oneness of Allah and denies the prophet of Allah; by persistence, by ignorance or by Taqlid (imitating) those who are stubborn. Those Muqallid (blind followers) of the stubborn individuals go through Kufr because of following the stubborn ones although they do not persist. It is Fard (obligatory) upon a slave to believe that those who do not submit to Islam are Kafir."
(Ibn Qayyim, Tariq’ul Hijratayn wa Bab'us Saadatayn, 17th degree, 411)

Allamah Ibn Qayyim stated this in his book "Tariq’ul Hijratayn" in the chapter that he deals with the ranks of Mukallaf in the Akhirah (Hereafter) under the 17th degree in which he deals with the ignorant Kuffar. At the beginning of his words said:

"Surely the Islamic Ummah made Ittifaq upon their being Kafir even though their being ignorant, blind followers of their leaders."

Even though it is a clear matter, many deviated people of today and also in the past; while bringing some obscure statements from the Ulama they try to Takhsis (allocate) the open Nass of Kitaab and Sunnah and the Ijma of the Ummah regarding the performer of Shirk not being a Muslim. Due to bringing an exception to the Muhkam rulings of the Din with the statement of a scholar, they become amongst those who take their religious leaders as Lords other than Allah. If they clinged to the fundamentals of the Din and tried to comprehend the real intention of the scholar to begin with, they would not have fallen into such mistake. The reason is, not a single statement of a scholar can be found which state that the one who performs Shirk is a Muslim.

When it comes to the statements regarding ignorance being an excuse; they are either, statements concerning the Khafi (obscure) matters which are not related with Shirk or statements concerning the punishment that can not be established to those Ahl’ul Fatrah (the People of Interval; having no access to Divine Messages) to whom Hujjah (proof) had not reached both in the Dunya (worldly life) and the Akhirah. It is normal for them to have doubts, for those who do not know in what manner the Ulama discuss such matters, and also for those whom the fundamentals of the religion have not settled in them. The real problem here is the attitude of those who have a level of knowledge to discuss such matters in which they bring all the Mutashshabih statements of the Ulama to the Awam without giving any details or explanations for the Mushkil. They even know themselves that in that which they present to the Awam there is much precision in the statements of Ulama. Allah is sufficient to reckon!..

Dawud ibn Jarjis is one of the best examples for the typical porter of knowledge who claimed that Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim and even Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab excuses the ignorant and gave the ruling of Muslim to them by interpreting some of their statements. Many Ulama of the Najd refuted him. One of them is Abd’ul Latif Al’ush Shaykh whom refuted Dawud al-Iraqi in his book "Minhaj’ut Tasis":


وأما العراقي وإخوانه المبطلون، فشبهوا بأن الشيخ لا يكفر الجاهل، وأنه يقول: هو معذور، وأجملوا القول ولم يفصلوا، وجعلوا هذه الشبهة ترساً يدفعون به الآيات القرآنية والأحاديث النبوية

"Regarding Iraqi and his deviated brothers, they doubted that the Shaykh does not declare Takfir over the Jaahil (ignorant) and that he excuses him. They took the Mujmal of the statement and did not delve into details and they made these statements of doubts a shield against the Ayaat of Qur’an and the Ahadith of the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam)." (Minhat’ut Tasis, 228)

As seen by taking a statement of a scholar without verifying it, without investigating its details and bringing it as a Dalil for a specific matter, causes many Baatil as an end result. Grandson of Shaykh’ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab, Abd’ul Latif ibn Abd’ur Rahman stated his abovementioned statement right after he explained the statements of the Ulama which Dawud took as a shield and Abd’ul Latif ibn Abd’ur Rahman proved the truth with the clear words of the same scholars. The calamity that occurs when an ignorant person tries to explain a statement of a scholar and also blessings that occurs when referring it back to a scholar is manifest!.. The Dawud ibn Jarjis of today also follow the same path!..

It must not be forgotten that the best way of explaining a statement of a scholar is referring back to his own statements/written works. It is because the one who would explain a statement of a scholar the best is he himself. If the result can not be obtained by referring back to his own statements then referring back to statements of his own students is the safest way. To comprehend the statements of Ibn Taymiyyah one shall refer it to the statements of Ibn Qayyim. Likewise to comprehend the statements of Muhammad ibn Abd’il Wahhab one shall refer back to the Ulama of Najd who received Ijazah (the authorization) from his own circle of Ilm. Even though it can not be proved that the certain truth regarding a statement of a scholar is the explanation of his own student, it is clear that it will be closer to truth then the explanations of others. If the result can not be obtained by referring back to the statements of his own students then one shall investigate how other scholars dealt with and discussed the matter. This will be of help to comprehend it.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
Those which we mentioned up to now indicate; the majority of such Mushkil occur due to the attempts of ignorant people trying to explain statements of scholars without following the guidelines of Usoul. The reason for this is the abandoning of the Ijazah system and the illness of attaining Ilm from books to be widespread. The main pinnacle of attaining Ilm is learning from a competent Shaykh. The Sahaba took the Ilm from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) by the way of Sam’ (hearing) and Ilm reached us in the same manner through a chain. However after some time passed especially after written books became widespread this Silsilah (chain) of Ilm and the chain of Riwayah (narration) has begun to tear.

Anyone who looks into the biographies of the scholars would see the following features in the lives of the scholars: "He studied Fiqh under so and so Shaykh, he attained Ilm under so and so Shaykh, and he took Hadith from so and so Shaykh…" Likewise in the books of the scholars, one would come across statements such as: "He read Bukhari to so and so Shaykh and memorized such book while attaining Ilm from so and so Shaykh…" The Usoul of attaining Ilm was not like today; buying a book from the bookstore and reading it at home alone then becomes a scholar. This is not the case at all. In the book "Hilyatu Talib’il Ilm" the following was stated regarding the matter:

"There is almost a consensus from the scholars upon this, except for a very few who were isolated in their opinion (that it is unnecessary to have a Shaykh), such as Ali ibn Ridwaan al-Misri at-Tabib (‘the doctor’, died 453H), and he was refuted by the scholars of his day and age also those who came after them. Dhahabi said in his biography:

"...and he did not have a Shaykh, rather he engaged himself in taking from the books, and he wrote a book about acquiring a skill by reading from the books, and that it is more prosperous for the learner, and this is wrong." (Dhahabi, Siyar A'lam’un Nubala, 18/105; Sharh’ul Ihya, 1/66; Bughyat’ul Wu'aat, 1/131,286; Shadharaat’udh Dhahab, 5/11; Qaadı lyaad, al-Ghunyah, 16-17)

And as-Safadi al-Wafi wrote an extensive refutation on what he said, which was mentioned by az-Zubaydi in his Sharh’ul Ihyaa along with a number of other scholars, all putting forward a number of arguments; amongst them that which Ibn Batlaan put forward in his refutation in (which he said):

"(...) The sixth point: There are things that exist in the book that divert from knowledge, and they are non-existent in the teacher, and it is due to distortion that occurs due to the resemblance of the letters, in addition to the non-existence of the pronunciation, and the mistakes that occur due to: straying of the eyes, lack of experience in I’raab (i.e., implementing the rules of Arabic grammar), corruption of the existing book, handwriting that cannot be read, or reading that which is not written, not knowing the Madhhab of the author, poor quality of the scripts, poor transcription, lack of stopping at the correct punctuation, mixing up terminology of different subjects and using the terminology of one subject in context of another, and the existence of Greek terminology (that) the writer did not take from the (Arabic) language. All of the things mentioned obstruct knowledge, and the learner is relieved of them when he reads to the teacher. If the situation is such, then reading to the scholars is more advantageous and virtuous than personal study, and this is what we wanted to explain..."

as-Safadi said: "For this reason the scholars said: Do not take knowledge from a person who acquires it from the scripts, and do not take the Qur'an from a person who has recited the Qur'an from the Mushaf. Meaning: Do not recite the Qur'an to a person who just read it from the Mushaf (without reciting it to a Shaykh), or Hadith etc., from a person who acquired (Hadith) by reading from the scripts..." (Sharh’ul Ihyaa, 1/66)

Ibn Khaldun researched this topic very well in his (famous) Muqadimah (i.e., Foreword). It was said by some (in poetry):


"And whosoever does not read the books to the scholars
Then his certainty in difficult issues is conjecture."
(Muqaddimah, 4/1245)"

[All of these narrations quoted from Bakr Abu Zayd (may Allah give him Hidayah; guidence) from his book Hilyat’u Talib’il Ilm (the Adornment of the Seeker of the Knowledge)]

Because it is unattainable to reach the Rabbani scholars, the seekers of knowledge are left alone face to face with the books. Today, those who memorize books by way of Ijazah are only the scholars of palace who are under the pressure of the Tawaghit (pl., Taghout) who abandon Islamic principles to serve the interests of their paymasters. And this is the case today. The majority of us and our opponents –unfortunately- are among those who learn the Ilm from books, none of us should have the courage to explain the statements of the scholars. Even if we are in a situation that we learn Ilm from the books by necessity, we should be cautious regarding making explanations of the statements of scholars due to knowing that the state we are in is something temporary and knowing it is an attribute that the Taalib’ul Ilm should not have. Both we and our opponents shall refrain from explaining the statements of scholars since none of us are competent in the field. If it is necessity to explain the statements of the scholars then we should make a note that it is a possibility that we come to conclusion and we shall not rule it as an absolute conclusion and we shall not present it as an absolute truth.

It was narrated from Imam Malik that he said: "Each Ilm is asked from their competent." Since this is a must for worldly sciences then it shall be implemented to the religiously sciences first as a principle. Even the Kuffar do not pay attention to those non-qualified people who try to explain books of justice, medicine, and engineering when it is not their field of experience. However today may ignorant deduct many results which cause to abolish the rulings of Islam from the books that only the experts can write a Sharh for. Giving trust to those who are not competent is one of the signs of Qiyamah.

In recent years it gained popularity for many to deduct rulings from Sharh’us Siyar’il Kabir of Sarahsi which is an attempt to bring exceptions to the Muhkam Nass of Qur’an regarding the matters of Muhakama bi’t Taghout, or being a soldier of the Taghout. However this book is not for the ignorant, Awam nor those who are not expert in that field. For having well directed comments of it one should study that book with a competent Shaykh through Ijazah. Even if we –for a second- accept that studying it with a competent Shaykh through Ijazah is not a condition, beforehand commenting on it one should at least know the Islamic Fiqh and Hanafi Fiqh concerning the matter in order to comprehend what the scholar meant with his statement that is subject to discuss. This book and similar of it become a hand book to perform Takhsis of the clear Nass of the Book and the Sunnah for those who do not even know the rulings of Taharah (purification), who do not even recite the Qur’an. We take refuge from this to Allah.
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

Fahm'us Salaf

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
  • انصار الملة الحنيفية حماة الشرعة المحمدي
Lastly; it should not be neglected that the only book in the world that has been protected is the Qur’an. At the same time the books of scholars are not protected due to the mistakes of the scholars,  or intentionallay/unintentioanlly mistakes of those who narrated from the author or falsifications. For this reason it is not a dealing of those who has intellect to explain all of the rulings of the Din according to a (Mutashhabih) statement of a scholar. The best method to verify the meaning of a statement of a scholar is to appeal it to the Kitaab, Sunnah and the Ijmaa. Since Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:

إِنَّ أُمَّتِي لَنْ تَجْتَمِعَ عَلَى ضَلاَلَةٍ
"My Ummah (nation) will not unite on Dalalah (misguidance)." (Ibn Majaah, Hadith no: 3950; Abu Dawud, Hadith no: 4253; Tirmidhi, Hadith no: 216; Darimi, Hadith no:8)

All of these explanations are both warning and Nasiha (advice). It is a warning to the Ahl Baatil (the People of Falsehood) who attempts to falsify the clear rulings of Din by explaining some obscure statements of the scholars and it is a Nasiha for those who try to explain the statement of the scholar in order to defend the truth.

As we mentioned above both parties shall not speak in the fields that they are not competent in and everyone shall know their limits in the terms of Ilm and shall not see themselves as competent to comment the statement of a scholar. We shall narrate the statements of the scholars after verifying them and let others know all the possibilities regarding its possible meaning. Without having absolute proofs we shall not say that “explanation of such statement is this” or “this statement does not belongs to such scholar it is a falsification” or “this scholar turned from such view of his”. It is because all of these statements are among the statements that include rulings regarding a matter of Ilm, and such rulings are not fit for people who have not even become Taalib’l Ilm. These are among the things that even the Kuffar who have a level of Ilm to laugh at.

Even if it was for the sake of defending truth, we should abandon such prejudgments. Otherwise one would fall into such comical state of the Sufis when they are unable to defend statements that are presented in the books of their religious leaders then start saying: “This book does not belong to the Shaykh”, “Jews falsified this statement of Shaykh in his book”. Even if there are such possibilities for the books of scholars, all of these possibilities should be investigated by the experts of that field in an objective manner. Statements of the ignorant which are uttered by partisanship –either way- have no value.

These are the principles we remember to mention regarding being a referral to appeal when one comes across a statement of a scholar in which there is a Mushkil meaning opposing the principles of Tawhid in the Dhahir. Wallahu A’lam (and Allah knows)!..

Walhamdulillahi Rabbi’l A’lamin (Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds)!..
Whosoever desires الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah (honour, power and glory) then to Allah belong all الْعِزَّةَ al-Izzah [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshiping Allah (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ al-Kalim al-Tayyib (the goodly words), and الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ al-Amal al-Saalih (the righteous deeds) exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds). (Fatir 35/10)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
1600 Views
Last post 07.12.2017, 03:25:40 PM
by Ummah
0 Replies
1779 Views
Last post 12.07.2015, 04:57:52 AM
by Ummah
4 Replies
1346 Views
Last post 18.05.2017, 09:17:20 AM
by Julaybib
2 Replies
1127 Views
Last post 02.02.2020, 01:26:48 AM
by Izhâr'ud Dîn
5 Replies
1486 Views
Last post 05.01.2020, 12:48:13 AM
by Izhâr'ud Dîn
3 Replies
1102 Views
Last post 10.09.2017, 12:45:38 PM
by Ummah
1 Replies
830 Views
Last post 15.07.2016, 05:06:58 AM
by Julaybib
3 Replies
944 Views
Last post 11.08.2017, 02:40:20 AM
by Julaybib
1 Replies
673 Views
Last post 27.11.2017, 06:46:42 PM
by Ummah
3 Replies
773 Views
Last post 09.04.2018, 02:06:54 AM
by Ummah