Why do we refer to ourselves as Māturīdīs?

By Rustam Mahdi
Translated by Mawlānā Suhail Akubat

The following is a translation of a short and basic Arabic article by Rustam Mahdi entitled “Why do we call ourselves Maturidis?”[1] A brief footnote has been added to clarify one particular issue which Salafis commonly use to claim that Hanafi ‘aqida is different from Maturidi ‘aqida.[2] – The Translator

It saddens us that a statement has begun to circulate amongst people, especially the salafis, that: ‘Why do you call yourselves Maturidis? Is the creed of Abu Hanifah not convincing enough for you that you have turned away from it and have turned towards that which Abu Mansur al-Maturidi was inclined to?’

The problem with many Salafis is that they assume that whatever they present is clear binding proof, and do not notice doors that have been opened which they have no ability to close. It saddens us that we observe attempts at denigration using questions such as these, which are cheap in the marketplace of academia, by those ascribed to learning; although we do not find it surprising that they are widespread on the tongues of uneducated laymen.

Hence I would like to mention – and Tawfiq is from Allah – that it is from a person’s academic character to evaluate substances and not mere terminologies. This is because variation and divergence in terminologies is of no consequence when they point to the same reality. Hence it is fine for a person who believes in the Din of Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) to refer to himself as “Muhammadi”, in attribution to him (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), or “Bakri”, in attribution to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, or “‘Umari” in attribution to ‘Umar b. al-Khattab, or ‘Uthmani in attribution to ‘Uthman b. Affan, or “‘Alawi” in attribution to ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (Allah be pleased with them). All of these terminologies indicate that the one being attributed is on the Din of these very individuals.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Muftī Khānpūrī: Clarity on the issue of photography

By Mufti Ahmad Khanpuri
Translated By: Mufti Saleem Khan

A great and terrible fitna of this time is picture taking. Nowadays the sickness of taking photos is very common in social gatherings, conferences and even in the Haramain Sharifayn. This fitna has become so common that no matter how much one tries to save himself from it, he cannot. This sin has become so common that people do not even consider it a sin anymore. This time of fitna has made the bad appear as good.

In Islam, aside from a dire need, photography is prohibited. In the hadith shareef, those that take photos have been severely condemned and upon such people is Allah’s curse. Such people will be severely punished on the Day of Judgment [Qiyamah]

Some people have a certain soft spot for pictures of the elders and pious people. Some also keep them close as a source of tabarruk. استغفر الله ، لاحول ولا قوة الا بالله

Remember! It is haram to take and possess photos regardless of whose photos they are and what tool was used to take them. Nowadays using mobile phone cameras has become extremely common. People use their phones to take pictures (of animate things) then send then to one another via WhatsApp. This is a major sin.

Now reverting to the issue at hand.

Continue reading

Did ʼAmīr Muʻāwiyah curse or order the cursing of ʻAlī

By Shaykh Mumtāz al-Ḥaqq Mālik
Edited byʻAbd Allāh al-Afrīqī 

Shīʻahs [and many amongst the Sunnī’s] are led to believe that ʼAmīr Muʻāwiyah (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu) started the despicable innovation of cursing and ordering the cursing of ʻAlī (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu) – Allāh forbid!

There is absolutely no authentic proof found in Sunnī sources to support this idea. This is purely a Shīʻah accusation against a noble Companion of Rasūl Allāh (ṣalla Allāhu ʻalay-hi wa-sallam), a scribe of revelation (way), the uncle of believers, ʼAmīr Muʻāwiyah (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu).

The only Ṣāḥīḥ narration in Sunnī literature is that by Saʻd ibn ʼAbī Waqqaṣ (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu), one of the ʻAsharah Mubasharah, as reported in aī Muslim. Shīʻahs often misquote this ḥadīth to prove their point. The actual ḥadīth is,

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبَّادٍ، – وَتَقَارَبَا فِي اللَّفْظِ – قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا حَاتِمٌ، – وَهُوَ ابْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ – عَنْ بُكَيْرِ بْنِ مِسْمَارٍ، عَنْ عَامِرِ بْنِ سَعْدِ بْنِ أَبِي وَقَّاصٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، قَالَ أَمَرَ مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ أَبِي سُفْيَانَ سَعْدًا فَقَالَ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَنْ تَسُبَّ أَبَا التُّرَابِ فَقَالَ أَمَّا مَا ذَكَرْتُ ثَلاَثًا قَالَهُنَّ لَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَلَنْ أَسُبَّهُ لأَنْ تَكُونَ لِي وَاحِدَةٌ مِنْهُنَّ أَحَبُّ إِلَىَّ مِنْ حُمْرِ النَّعَمِ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ لَهُ خَلَّفَهُ فِي بَعْضِ مَغَازِيهِ فَقَالَ لَهُ عَلِيٌّ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ خَلَّفْتَنِي مَعَ النِّسَاءِ وَالصِّبْيَانِ فَقَالَ لَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏”‏ أَمَا تَرْضَى أَنْ تَكُونَ مِنِّي بِمَنْزِلَةِ هَارُونَ مِنْ مُوسَى إِلاَّ أَنَّهُ لاَ نُبُوَّةَ بَعْدِي ‏”‏ ‏.‏ وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ يَوْمَ خَيْبَرَ ‏”‏ لأُعْطِيَنَّ الرَّايَةَ رَجُلاً يُحِبُّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيُحِبُّهُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَتَطَاوَلْنَا لَهَا فَقَالَ ‏”‏ ادْعُوا لِي عَلِيًّا ‏”‏ ‏.‏ فَأُتِيَ بِهِ أَرْمَدَ فَبَصَقَ فِي عَيْنِهِ وَدَفَعَ الرَّايَةَ إِلَيْهِ فَفَتَحَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَة{‏ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ‏}‏ دَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَلِيًّا وَفَاطِمَةَ وَحَسَنًا وَحُسَيْنًا فَقَالَ ‏”‏ اللَّهُمَّ هَؤُلاَءِ أَهْلِي ‏”‏ ‏.‏

Saʻd ibn ʼAbī Waqqaṣ (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu) said, “Muʻāwiyah ibn ʼAbī Sufyān said (to him) , “What prevents you from making sabb of ʼAbū Turāb (ʻAlī (raḍiya -llāhu ʻanhu))?” So He (Saʻd) said, “Because I remember three things Rasūl Allāh (ṣalla Allāhu ʻalay-hi wa-sallam) said about him. So I will never make sabb of him. Even one of those things would have been more dear to me than red camels…” to the end. (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)

Continue reading

Concerning Imām Abū Ḥanīfa’s title of al-Imām al-Aʻẓam

By Mawlana Hisham Dawood

Hereunder are comments of great luminaries of Islam who have referred to Imam Abū Hanīfah (rahimahu Allah) with honorable titles, including Al Imām Al A‘zam:

1). Makkī ibn Ibrahim (d. ca 215 a.h.[1]) said[2],

كان أعلم أهل زمانه

He (Abū Hanīfah) was the most knowledgeable of his time

2). ‘Abdullah ibn Mubārak (d.181 a.h.[3]) composed a poem[4],

لقد زان البلاد ومن عليها – إمام المسلمين أبو حينفة…

Indeed the Imam of the Muslims, Abū Hanīfah, has beautified the lands and their inhabitants…

3). Imam Abu Al Hasan Al Ash‘arī (d. ca 330 a.h.[5]) says[6],

…وحاشى الإمام الأعظم أبو حنيفة رضي الله عنه من هذا القول

…And Al Imam Al A‘zam Abū Hanīfah is far from this accusation.

4). Imam Al Dabūsī (d.430[7]) discussing a principle says[8],

وعند الإمام الأعظم أبي حنيفة رحمه الله تدخل الأولى ولا تدخل الثانية

…And according to Al Imam Al A‘zamAbū Hanīfah (rahimahu Allah) the first applies and not the second.

5). Al Mawsilī (d.683[9]) mentions him in the foreword of Al Mukhtār[10],

فَقَدْ رَغِبَ إِلَيَّ مَنْ وَجَبَ جَوَابُهُ عَلَيَّ أَنْ أَجْمَعَ لَهُ مُخْتَصَرًا فِي الْفِقْهِ عَلَى مَذْهَبِ الْإِمَامِ الْأَعْظَمِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ النُّعْمَانِ

…So someone whose compliance is necessary upon me requested that I compile for him a brief book in fiqh based on the madh-hab of Al Imam Al A‘zam Abū Hanīfah

Continue reading

al-Nānautawī: Why modern sciences were excluded from the syllabus of Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband

By Sayyid Mahbūb Rizwī
Translated by Prof. Murtaz Ḥusayn F. Qurayshī

On seeing the syllabus of Dār al-Ulūm Deoband, the question arises: ‘Why were the modern sciences, which had already reached India at the time this syllabus was compiled, not included in it?’ The reason for this non-inclusion, according to Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nānautawī, was that these subjects were being taught in the government schools that had been established in the country at various places and everyone could take advantage of these. On the contrary, the old (sacred) sciences were in a state of abandonment and there was not even an inferior arrangement for teaching these. Moreover, in this syllabus itself attention had been paid to the creation of so much ability in the student that he might acquire knowledge of other sciences through self-study. This question had also cropped up at the inception of the Dār al-Ulūm itself; on the convocation of 1290 AH Mawlānā Nānautawī threw full light on this question. He said:

“For the education of all the rational and traditional sciences and to acquire competency therein, this madrasah and the madrasah at Saharanpur (Maẓāhir Ulūm) are, no doubt, an excellent provision; and if it please Allah, the alumni here, provided they complete the curriculum, can easily and quickly acquire the remaining ancient and modern sciences by dint of the power of their ability. The reason therefore is that in these madrasahs, the greatest objective, besides the religious education, is the attainment of the power of ability. We did not rest content with only the religious sciences but as per the old system, have also provided subjects that develop intelligence, an excellent result of which in the former times was that great savants and polymaths possessing prodigious abilities were produced in legions amongst the followers of Islam. Hence, we understand with certainty that though the students here may not have succeeded with some of the modern arts and sciences, the ability of theirs may prove sufficient like a perfect teacher for their education. In other schools, though, due to the teaching of some modern subjects, the students thereof may have acquired some new acquaintance of those subjects which the students here may be wanting in, the latter, in fact, in the eyes of the just, would be considered, by virtue of their ability, superior to the former in these subjects also.

Continue reading

Concerning obedience to a Shaykh in worldly and spiritual matters

Mawlana Khalil Johnson

A Shaykh is a spiritual guide; someone who gives advice pertaining to how one  can improve his connection with Allāh ﷻ. It is up to the Murīd (The treader of the path of piety under the guidance of a Shaykh)to have the discipline of implementing that advice accordingly. Their advices do not constitute a binding, religious decree in itself.

It is for this reason that the Qurān rebukes Ahl-e-Kitāb (The people of the book, Jews and Christians) for having taken their Rabbis and Priests as Gods besides Allāh ﷻ. They would regard their obedience to be necessary in the absolute sense of the word. Whatever they said, would become law, even turning Halāl (Permissible) into Harām (Impermissible) and vice versa.[i]

The advices of a Shaykh can be broadly classified into two categories. One pertaining to worldly matters and one pertaining to spiritual matters. For both of these categories, we can find clear narrations from which one can deduce that it is not a religious requirement in itself to implement those advices.

In a narration on the authority of Imām Muslim, Hadhrat Talha, Radiallahu ‘Anhu stated that he and Nabī Karīm were passing by a group of people who were tending to the tops of date palms (fecundating them). Nabī Karīm enquired from those around him as to what they are doing. The companions replied that they were busy with cross polinating the date palms, the male with the female date palms. Nabī Karīm then expressed his personal opinion that he doesn’t see any benefit in that. The fecundators came to know of the remark and subsequently they stopped cross polinating the other date palms. Consequently, the produce from the next year was poor. The fecundators complained about this to which Nabī Karīm ﷺ remarked: “If this practice was of benefit to them, then let them do accordingly. I only expressed an opinion, therefore don’t take me to account for my personal opinions. However, if I mention something to you explicitly about Allāh ﷻ, then hold fast on to it, for verily it is impossible for me to utter anything but truth related to Allāh.[ii]

Continue reading

Concerning Tawḥīd al-Ḥākimiyyah

By Mawlana Ismaeel Bassa

“Tauheed-Ul-Haakimiyyah” is a newly invented term used as a political tool to negate following the law of the land and to enforce the laws of Shariah.[1] “Taaghoot” refers to anything that is worshiped besides Allah which includes the law of the land.[2]

There is a great misconception in the Muslim world today regarding whether or not a Muslim should obey the law of the land or the divine law of Allah.

Whilst it is our desire as Muslims that our constitutions are legislated in accordance to the divine laws of Allah, it is however unfortunate that Muslims are struggling in trying to implement such laws. Majority of the countries of the world are non-Muslim countries in which many Muslims reside. At the same time, Muslims are forced to follow the law of the land of their respective countries.

As Muslims we are bound to follow the laws of Shariah and the laws of the land. Allah mentions in the Quraan:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ

O you who have Imaan! Obey Allah, obey the Rasool (messenger of Allah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and those in command amongst you (Nisaa’ 4-59)

It clear from the above verse that firstly the laws of Allah and his Rasool Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam should be obeyed. Thereafter the Laws of those that are in command should be obeyed. There remains no issue as long as the laws of those who are in command conforms to laws of Shariah. Muslim minorities living in non-Muslim countries should address the respective authorities of their countries to facilitate their concerns as Muslims or use other avenues that will accommodate their Deeni necessities.

Continue reading

Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah on Sufis and Taṣawwuf

By Shaykh Abu Humayd

The following is an excerpt from the passages of Majmu’ al-Fatawa Li-Ibni Taymiyyah (Rahimahullah).

The following is to educate people on what is Tasawwuf and Sufism; because many misconception have been floating around lately ‘refuting’ Sufis and Tasawwuf by those (funnily enough) who hold Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah in very high esteem.  Enough mis-information has been passed around the globe trying to taint Tasawwuf but Insha-Allah in the words of a Shaykh al-Islam (according to them) would the tainting of Tasawwuf be repudiated, Insha-Allah.

To commence:

مجموع فتاوى ابن تيمية

تقي الدين ابن تيمية

مجموع فتاوى ابن تيمية » الآداب والتصوف » كتاب التصوف » أهل الصفة

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=1093&idto=1112&bk_no=22&ID=651

أي الصوفي ـ في الحقيقة نوع من الصديقين فهو الصديق الذي اختص بالزهد والعبادة

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says:

“And the Sufi is in reality a kind of Siddiq [Truthful One], that Siddiq who specialized in Zuhd [Asceticism] and ‘Ibadah [Worship].”

Continue reading

Kashf and Ilham of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah

Foreword: Many of the current day Salafiyyah viciously oppose karamat (miracles) of the awliya’ mentioned in books and narrated by people, etc. The following article is taken from a biography on Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (Allah have mercy on him) by his contemporary, Imam Hafidh Abu Hafs ‘Umar bin ‘Ali al-Bazzar which he entitled al-A’lam al-‘Aliyyah fi Manaqib Ibn Taymiyyah. It has been translated into English as The Lofty Virtues of Ibn Taymiyyah Abu Sabaaya. The article expounds on some of the miracles of Shaykh al-Islam. The stories related concern the true quality given by Allah to his chosen ones and that is of kashf and ilham. Shaykh al-Islam possessed these qualities as is evident in the stories mentioned. This is not only a slap on the face of the current day Salafiyyah who deem kashf and ilham of the awliya’ as shirk but also re-affirms the position of Ibn Taymiyyah as a Shaykh al-Islam of the Ahl ‘l-Sunnah.

Imam Hafiz Abu Hafs ‘Umar bin ‘Ali al-Bazzar writes:

Many trustworthy individuals narrated to me various miracles that they witnessed from him, and I will mention some of them here, beginning with two that I personally witnessed.

Continue reading

Clarification on the Futuh al-Sham of Imam al-Waqidi

By Mufti Husain Kadodia

Hadrat,

From your reply I see the need to specify what the point of contention is.

The book under discussion is not the “Futuh as-Sham” originally au

thored by al-Waqidi. That, insha Allah, was a reliable source of history, like Waqidi’s other works. This book is unfortunately mafqud,

with no sign of it anywhere in the world.
Thus, the discussion has nothing to do with Waqidi’s reliability.

Our discussion is focused on the book in print, titled “Futuh as-Sham” and attributed to al-Waqidi. It is also translated as “Conquests of the Sahabah”.

Continue reading