دار التوحيد Dr'ul Tawhd

Author Topic: IS IZHR (MANIFESTATION) OF DN FROM ASLUD DN?  (Read 1044 times)

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
IS IZHR (MANIFESTATION) OF DN FROM ASLUD DN?
« on: 31.05.2018, 03:44:19 AM »

Is Izhr (manifestation) of Dn From Aslud Dn?

Quote from: Question October 17, 2017,  23:37
Salamalaykum,

People say:

If you see takfeer from asluddeen then you must do takfeer and enmity openly. It is because scholars of Najd see takfeer from asluddin and they see takfeer and enmity must be done openly.

Can you explain this, how should this be understood?

Muhammad b. Abdul Wahhab states:

Bases of Islam covers two points.

The first:

Worshiping Allah jalla jalaluhu who has no partner and calling people to it, showing friendship to those who accept it and making takfeer of those who abandon it.

The Second:

Worshiping only Allah and avoiding shirk, having enmity towards those who are in shirk, making takfeer of them and being harsh in this. There is no leniency in this. It is because real tawheed is only achieved in this way.

They say, if the statement of the shaykh is that takfeer is asluddeen then enmity towards them is also asluddeen then how could this be asl, manifesting din also must be aslduddeen but they say there is Tafsilat because of this it is not easy to say takfeer is asluddeen.

And surah al kafirun in it there is takfeer yes they say then saying this is also asluddeen because Allah says qul in the beginning. They say in this there is Tafsilat.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La Ilaha Illallh (there is no -true- deity -worthy of worship- except Allh) so that you are successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Re: IS IZHR (MANIFESTATION) OF DN FROM ASLUD DN?
« Reply #1 on: 31.05.2018, 04:43:36 AM »

Wa alaykum. Bismillahirrahmnirrahm,

Before responding, we would like to advise you the following matters:

In order to comprehend which matters fall under Aslud Dn (The essence of Religion) Imn (faith) must be understood and belief in its Asl is necessary. The One who knows the boundaries of Imn and Kufr (disbelief) consequently would know which matters fall under Aslud Dn meaning Aslul Imn and what would negate Aslud Dn. The method of attaining this is, reading continuously, pondering upon what is read and most importantly correcting the Niyyah (intent), seeking Ilm (sacred knowledge) for the sake of Allh sincerely.

It is a matter of fact that -which can not be denied- those who start attaining Ilm without Ikhls (sincerity) would increase their Dallah (deviation) and not their Hidyah (guidance). This is the state of those who you quoted from and most of the people of our era. These types of people read books of the Ulam in a Fasd (corrupt) manner and are able to interpret them in a manner that does not apply. Once the intent is not to learn the Haqq (truth) and live accordingly but to water down the Haqq, and then this would obviously result in extracting non-applicable meanings from the statements of scholars as a result of turning and twisting them. May Allh guide these people and their likes to Sirtul Mustaqm (Straight Path). (mn!)

The other important matter that we would like to advise you concerning the topic is as follows, Dall (evidence) regarding the matters of Imn and Kufr is not the statement of so and so scholar in his such and such book rather Dall is the Kitbullh (Book of Allh; Qurn), the Sunnah (of Raslullh) and the Ijm (consensus) of the Salaf (predecessors). The implication is since we do not perform Istidll (conviction) only from the statement of Shaykhul Islm Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb (Rahimahullh) or any other scholar, it is not proper for our opponents to expect from us to change our Aqdah in this matter due to it being a complicated, intricately detailed statement.

The Statement of the Shaykh Muhammad (Rahimahullh) is one of the tens of statements of its likes which declares the principle that is found in the Dawah (call) of every Messenger from the era of Nh (Alayhis Salm) to our era- regarding Barah (keeping distant) from the Mushrikn. What is called as Declaring Takfr of Mushrikn is one of the Rukn (pillar) an inseparable part of being distant from the Mushrikn. Since the one who becomes brothers with the Mushrikn in Dn (religion) can not claim that he is being distant from them. It is because we have religious Walyah (guardianship, friendship) with every Muslim even if it is minimal-.

When an individual reviles another Muslim even if he calls him a Mubtadi (innovator in Dn) or a Fsiq (evildoer) he still has Walyah with him until he declares Takfr upon him. He can not claim that he cut off his Walyah with him. This is the reason the one -who does not declare Takfr upon Mushrikn- does not enter into the Dn of Islm. Since he does not cut off Walyah relationship with the Mushrikn and consequently he does not keep distant from them. There is no need to water down the issue which is simple and open- with such nonsense.
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La Ilaha Illallh (there is no -true- deity -worthy of worship- except Allh) so that you are successful."

Julaybib

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
  • O Lord truly I'm in need of any good that You send
Re: IS IZHR (MANIFESTATION) OF DN FROM ASLUD DN?
« Reply #2 on: 31.05.2018, 04:54:48 AM »

As for the statement of the Shaykh (Rahimahullh); the intent of the Shaykh (Rahimahullh) with enmity is minimum Barah. Likewise, the intent of the Shaykh (Rahimahullh) with friendship is the bare minimum Walyah that takes place between Muslimn. An individual who does not actualize the bare minimum Barah and enmity towards the Kuffr that is sourced from Dn, who does not declare Takfr against them, who does not show hatred towards their Itiqd (creed) can not be Muslim. Likewise, an individual who does not actualize the bare minimum Walyah, friendship, brother-hood that is sourced from Dn, who does not have love towards them that is sourced from Dn can not be Muslim. This is the Asl of Imn and its bare-minimum.

The individual will then add upon it as much as his Imns perfection. Bughd (hatred) towards the Mushrikn and love towards the Muslimn will be perfected according to the perfection of ones Imn. The One who does not manifest his Dn towards the Mushrikn while having Bughd towards them is a sinner. However, it can not be said that he is Kfir due to it, there is no Dall for such ruling. Shaykh Sulaymn bin Abdillh (Rahimahullh) responded to a question that was directed to him in the following manner,


وأما قول السائل: فإن كان ما يقدر من نفسه أن يتلفظ بكفرهم وسبهم، ما حكمه؟
فالجواب: لا يخلو ذلك عن أن يكون شاكاً في كفرهم أو جاهلاً به، أو يقر بأنهم كفرة هم وأشباههم، ولكن لا يقدر على مواجهتهم وتكفيرهم، أو يقول: غيرهم كفار، لا أقول إنهم كفار; فإن كان شاكاً في كفرهم أو جاهلاً بكفرهم، بينت له الأدلة من كتاب الله، وسنة رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم على كفرهم، فإن شك بعد ذلك أو تردد، فإنه كافر بإجماع العلماء: على أن من شك في كفر الكافر، فهو كافر.
وإن كان يقرّ بكفرهم، ولا يقدر على مواجهتهم بتكفيرهم، فهو مداهن لهم، ويدخل في قوله تعالى: {وَدُّوا لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ} [سورة القلم آية: 9] ، وله حكم أمثاله من أهل الذنوب. وإن كان يقول: أقول غيرهم كفار، ولا أقول هم كفار، فهذا حكم منه بإسلامهم، إذ لا واسطة بين الكفر والإسلام، فإن لم يكونوا كفاراً فهم مسلمون; وحينئذ فمن سمى الكفر إسلاماً، أو سمى الكفار مسلمين، فهو كافر، فيكون هذا كافراً.

As for saying of the questioner; what is the Hukm (ruling) if he does not find power/ability in himself to state their Kufr and revile them?

Response: This does not occur without having Shakk (doubt) concerning their Kufr and being ignorant of their Kufr or he affirms them and their likes being Kafir however he is unable to (declare) Takfr upon their faces. Alternatively, he says, Other than them are Kafir, I do not say that they are Kafir. If he is doubtful/in doubt concerning their Kufr or he is ignorant of their Kufr, then his Kufr will be explained to him with evidences from Kitbullah, Sunnah of His Rasl (Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam). If he doubts after this or hesitates then he is Kfir with Ijm of Ulam. Whoever doubts the Kufr of the Kfir is Kfir himself.

If they affirm their Kufr, but not able to (declare) Takfr upon their faces then he performs Mudhana (adulation; flattery, hypocrisy, deceit, compromising ones principles i.e., to give up the Din in order to obtain what is worldly) to them and included into the statement of Allh Tal,


وَدُّوا لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ
Their desire is that thou shouldst be pliant: so would they be pliant. (al-Qalam 68/9)

His Hukm is the same as his likes among the people of sinners. If he says, I say other than them are Kfir and I do not say that they are Kfir then this is his Hukm regarding their Islam. There is no medium between Kufr and Islm. If it happens that, they are not Kfir then they are Muslim. At that time, whoever named Kufr as Islm or named Kuffr as Muslim then he himself is Kfir, this occurs as being Kfir. (ad-Durarus Saniyyah, 8/160-161)

As clearly seen, there are degrees of having enmity towards Kuffr. Whoever neglects these degrees, he will take on the ruling according to the degree he neglects. It is correct that it is Fardh (obligatory) to manifest Dn however, the one who neglects it, becomes a sinner and not a Kfir.

Furthermore, in which part of his statement does the Shaykh (Rahimahullh) state that manifesting Dn is from Aslud Dn? It is correct that in his statements enmity towards Kuffr is mentioned however, enmity in this concept refers to what we explained above. Shaykhul Islm Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb (Rahimahullh) stated the following in
Aslu Dnil Islm

أصل دين الإسلام، وقاعدته: أمران؛ الأول: الأمر بعبادة الله وحده لا شريك له؛ والتحريض على ذلك، والموالاة فيه، وتكفير من تركه الثاني: الإنذار عن الشرك في عبادة الله، والتغليظ في ذلك، والمعاداة فيه، وتكفير من فعله

Aslu Dnil Islm (The essence of the Religion of Islm) and its Qidah (principles) consist of two directives:

The first directive: The order of worshiping Allh Tal alone Who has no partners, the encouragement (call) to this, the Muwalt (collaboration) based on it and declaring Takfr on he who forsakes it.

The second (directive): The warning against Shirk in Ibadh (worship) to Allh, being harsh in it, basing enmity on it and declaring Takfr on he who acts upon it.


Shaykh (Rahimahullh) then lists the types of those who oppose Aslud Dn,


والمخالفون في ذلك أنواع؛ فأشدهم مخالفة: من خالف في الجميع؛ ومن الناس من عبد الله وحده، ولم ينكر الشرك، ولم يعاد أهله: ومنهم: من عاداهم، ولم يكفرهم ومنهم: من لم يحب التوحيد، ولم يبغضه ومنهم: من كفرهم، وزعم أنه مسبة للصالحين ومنهم: من لم يبغض الشرك، ولم يحبه ومنهم: من لم يعرف الشرك، ولم ينكره ومنهم: من لم يعرف التوحيد، ولم ينكره
ومنهم: - وهو أشد الأنواع خطراً من عمل بالتوحيد، لكن لم يعرف قدره، ولم يبغض من تركه، ولم يكفرهم ومنهم: من ترك الشرك، وكرهه، ولم يعرف قدره، ولم يعاد أهله، ولم يكفرهم؛ وهؤلاء: قد خالفوا ما جاءت به الأنبياء، من دين الله سبحانه وتعالى

Those in opposition to it are of numerous varieties:

1- The worst variety among them -with regards to being in opposition- is the one who opposes all of it.

2- Among the people are those who worshiped Allh alone, however neither rejected the Shirk nor showed enmity towards its people.

3- Among them are those who showed enmity towards the Mushrikn however did not declare Takfr upon them.

4- Among them are those who neither loved the Tawhd nor he hated it.

5- Among them are those who declared Takfr upon them (i.e. People of Tawhd) and alleged Tawhd is cursing the Slihin (pl. Slih; righteous ones).

6- Among them are those who neither hated Shirk nor loved it.

7- Among them are those who neither recognized Shirk nor rejected it.

8- Among them are those who neither recognized Tawhd nor rejected it.

9- Among them -and it is the most treacherous type are those- who acted upon Tawhd however did not recognize (comprehend) its value and neither shows Bughdh (hatred) towards those who forsake Tawhd nor declares Takfr upon them.

10- Among them are those who forsaken Shirk and disliked it however neither recognized (comprehended) the value (true nature) of Shirk nor showed enmity towards its people and did not declare Takfr upon them.

These have opposed what the Anbiy (pl. Nab; the prophets) came with from the Dn (religion) of Allh Subhnahu wa Tal.

Wallhu 'lam (and Allh knows the best)!
(ad-Durar'us Saniyya, 2/22)

Quotation from Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb (Rahimahullh) ends here.

Refer back to
Explanation of Aslu Dnil Islm by Abd'ur Rahmn bin Hasn bin Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb (Rahimahullh)

As seen all of the above listed groups have a common factor namely, neither of them fulfilled the Asl of Barah from the Mushrikn. The list does not contain any group that fulfilled the Asl of Barah and enmity but declared Takfr upon them due to not manifesting Dn. Whereas Takfr is established upon all of the above listed groups because (1) they do not fulfill the Asl of enmity towards the Mushrikn and (2) do not declare Takfr upon the Mushrikn.

As for the claims regarding Sratul Kfirn; this Srah (chapter of Qurn) indicates that declaring the Kufr of the Kuffr is among the Wjib (obligatory) issues of Dn. However, there is no Dall indicating manifestation of Dn being among Aslud Dn, and that it is Kufr to neglect manifesting Dn. Sratul Kfirn was revealed during the era of Makkah when relations between the Muslimn and the Mushrikn became very tough. Even before this Srah had been revealed, having enmity towards the Kuffr and declaring Takfr upon them was and still is among Aslud Dn.

Furthermore, having enmity towards the Kuffr and declaring Takfr of them did not became from Aslud Dn with the revealing of Sratul Kfirn. Having enmity towards the Kuffr and declaring Takfr upon them did not became among Aslud Dn with neither of the revelation of Sratul Kfirn nor of Sratul Mumtahinah or of Sratul Baqarah! Rather this is as it is since the beginning of time. It is because both having enmity towards the Kuffr and declaring Takfr upon them is within the statement of L-ilha Illllh (there is no true- god deserves to be worshipped- but Allh)!

Rejecting false- gods besides Allh Tal necessitates rejecting those who worship these fake gods. The Ayah and Srah were revealed in order to confirm this Haqqah (truth). While affirming Tawhd Sratul Kfirn commands to manifest enmity towards the Kuffr. However, neither every person who opposes the command of Allh Tal becomes Kfir can be said nor every person who opposes the command of Allh Tal violets Aslud Dn can be said. Whoever rejects the fact that is informed in Sratul Kfirn -namely everyone who worships besides Allh is Kfir- is Kfir however; the one who accepts this fact but does not manifest his enmity towards Kuffr is a sinner.

At this point after all these explanations, the question that must be directed to the opponent is as follows, What type of Tafslt (detailed explanation) can there be in declaration Takfr upon the one who does not have enmity towards the Aqdah of Kuffr, who has Walyah (friendship, ally, lover, associate) with them, who sees the Kuffr as his Muslim brothers? You must re-direct this question to them. If there is such a thing as Tafslt in this matter then let them explain it. Most likely, they will mumble that Istidll can not be performed with such statements of scholars, scholars stated Umm (general) statements etc. etc...

So we respond to them saying, this Dn was not revealed to Muhammad bin Abdil Wahhb (Rahimahullh). This Dn is prevalent since the time of dam (Alayhis Salm). It is upon you to explain according to the mutual call of all the Prophets and Messengers, from the Nafy (negation) and Isbt (confirmation) point of view how an individual would remain Muslim while calling the Mushrikn as Muslim? Do you think and believe that during the era of Raslullh (Sallallhu Alayhi wa Sallam) more over in our age, that anyone could become Muslim while not declaring Takfr upon the Mushrikn, the Magians, the Jews and the Christians?

They most likely would say nothing other than the following in response, that the Tafslt in the matter is; the Asl (origin) of the Mushrikn and the Kuffr of the past was upon Kufr whereas the Asl of the people of today is either upon Islm or Kuffr who attribute themselves to Islm. In this case it will be asked, what the Dall is for differentiating between those Kuffr in Asl and the Kuffr who attribute themselves to Islm in terms of declaring Takfr upon them. They would have no response for this question. In short, when they are questioned about the matter that they claim having Tafslt, it evidently becomes clear that it is nothing but demagogy. Wallhu ’lam!
قولوا "لا إله إلا الله" تفلحوا

"Say, La Ilaha Illallh (there is no -true- deity -worthy of worship- except Allh) so that you are successful."

Izhr'ud Dn

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 458
  • فَفِرُّوا إِلَى اللَّهِ
    • Darultawhid
Re: IS IZHR (MANIFESTATION) OF DN FROM ASLUD DN?
« Reply #3 on: 19.02.2021, 02:40:11 PM »
Bismillh.

You may read our response regarding the statement of Shaykh Sulaymn bin Abdillh Rahimahullh at the following link:

CLARIFICATION ON OBSCURE STATEMENTS OF THE SCHOLARS REGARDING SILSILAH TAKFIR
Shaykh'ul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah Rahimahullh stated,

والعالم يعرف الجاهل؛ لأنه كان جاهلا، والجاهل لا يعرف العالم لأنه لم يكن عالما

"The lim (scholar) recognizes the Jhil (ignorant) since he was once a Jhil. The Jhil does not recognize the lim since he has never been an lim." (Shaykh'ul Islm Ibnu Taymiyyah, Majm'ul Fatw, 13/235)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
400 Views
Last post 18.05.2019, 04:39:02 AM
by Izhr'ud Dn