Heteredoxy

Alhamdulillah,

I have always wondered why the Subcontinenters of Asia, mainly the Deobandis, refrained from translating Sunan At-Tirmidhi. They translated Sunan Abu Dawud (Prof. Ahmad Hasan), Sunan An-Nasa’i As-Sughra (the smaller version translated by Muhammad Iqbal Siddiqi), Sahih Muslim and Mishkat Al-Masabih (at least a few volumes of it) by Abdul Hameed Siddiqi, Sunan Ibn Majah (Translated by M. Tufail Ansari) , Muwatta of Imam Malik (Translated by Muhammad Rahimuddin) and other smaller texts such as Riyad us Salihin and the 40 of Imam An-Nawawi. Yet, for some odd reason, no one ever took it upon themselves, at least to my knowledge, to translate one of the most valuable canonical works of hadith, Sunan At-Tirmidhi. For years I wondered as to why this fantastic tome, full of fiqh and hadith gradings would be ignored by the translators. I always made the excuse that it was simply because it was such a daunting task, though I never really beleived such an excuse.

Continued

The “salafi” commentator of Imam Al-Bayhaqi’s “Asmaa’i was-Sifaat” writes, “As for our Lord, we affirm that He possesses a Sura (form) .” In another place: “As for us, we affirm a sura (form) for Allah unlike other forms.”

Similar was said by the deviant Karramiyya of old, “Allah has a body unlike bodies.”¹ So what does Ahlus Sunnah say regarding Allah having a form? Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi said in his Dafa’ Ash-Shubah,
Continued

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. quoted by Adh-Dhahabi in his Siyar ‘Alam An Nubalaa’ [↩]

I have for some time utilized the labeling “Neo-Muqaatiliyyah” for the Mujassim pseudo-salafis of our tried era. They have embodied the same beliefs as Muqatil ibn Sulayman as we have shown elsewhere. Some claim, may Allah guide them and bless them with good, that I have innovated this term. Here I shall present the quote from Al-Hafith Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalani from his Tahthib At-Tahthib for all Muslims to see for themselves. Click the following scan to see for yourself:

Continued

If I were a Pseudo-Salafi…..

….I would have no choice but to believe that Najd is not in Iraq but in fact in Saudi Arabia. Using their simplistic methodology of “only” Quran & Sunnah, this post will show how relying solely on hadith from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, one has no choice but to accept that Najd is not in Iraq.
First of all, for those who are unaware of the subject matter , I would like to give you a little background as to why we should even bother debating this issue. The following hadith is from Sahih Bukhari:

Continued

 A brother, may Allah guide him and us, recently asserted that Musaa (’alayhis salaam) told Fir’awn that Allah was “up”, and this resulted in Fir’awn building a tower to reach the “heavens”. The aayaat from the Qur’an that he is referring to follow:

وقال فرعون يا أيها الملأ ما علمت لكم من إله غيري فأوقد لي يا هامان على الطين فاجعل لي صرحا لعلي أطلع إلى إله موسى وإني لأظنه من الكاذبين

Pharaoh said: “O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself: therefore, O Haman! light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay, and build me a lofty palace, that I may mount up to the god of Moses: but as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!” [28:38]

and also,

وَقَالَ فِرْعَوْنُ يَا هَامَانُ ابْنِ لِي صَرْحاً لَّعَلِّي أَبْلُغُ الْأَسْبَابَ

أَسْبَابَ السَّمَاوَاتِ فَأَطَّلِعَ إِلَى إِلَهِ مُوسَى وَإِنِّي لَأَظُنُّهُ كَاذِباً وَكَذَلِكَ زُيِّنَ لِفِرْعَوْنَ سُوءُ عَمَلِهِ وَصُدَّ عَنِ السَّبِيلِ وَمَا كَيْدُ فِرْعَوْنَ إِلَّفِي تَبَابٍ  

Pharaoh said: “O Haman! Build me a lofty palace, that I may attain the ways and means- The ways and means of (reaching) the heavens, and that I may mount up to the god of Moses: But as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a liar!” [Qur'an 40:36-37]

Continued

 We shall reproduce here a discussion presented by the Imam of the two Harams, Al-Juwayni - The Shaykh of Imam Al-Ghazzali, responding to the Karramiyyah, a group of anthropomorphists around 300 A.H, as well as the entire group of anthropomorphists that existed until his passing (rahimahullah). You will notice that many of the arguments he refutes are still, to this very day, utilized by the neo-Muqatilliyyah.

Continued

*Removed due to content plagiarism*

In a hadith found in the Sahih of Imam Al-Bukhari we find a hadith in the Book of Tafsir (commentary) under the chapter of Surat Muhammad, the first hadith that reads:

‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏خَالِدُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏سُلَيْمَانُ ‏ ‏قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي ‏ ‏مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ أَبِي مُزَرِّدٍ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏سَعِيدِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ‏ ‏رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ‏‏عَنْ النَّبِيِّ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏قَالَ خَلَقَ اللَّهُ الْخَلْقَ فَلَمَّا فَرَغَ مِنْهُ قَامَتْ الرَّحِمُ فَأَخَذَتْ بِحَقْوِ الرَّحْمَنِ فَقَالَ لَهُ ‏ ‏مَهْ ‏ ‏قَالَتْ هَذَا مَقَامُ الْعَائِذِ بِكَ مِنْ ‏ ‏الْقَطِيعَةِ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏ ‏أَلَا تَرْضَيْنَ أَنْ أَصِلَ مَنْ ‏ ‏وَصَلَكِ ‏ ‏وَأَقْطَعَ مَنْ قَطَعَكِ قَالَتْ بَلَى يَا رَبِّ قَالَ فَذَاكِ قَالَ ‏ ‏أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ ‏ ‏اقْرَءُوا إِنْ شِئْتُمْ

‏فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِنْ تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَنْ تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَتُقَطِّعُوا أَرْحَامَكُمْ ‏

Translation:

Narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (’alayhis salaam) said, “Allah created the creation and upon finishing, the Rahim (womb) got up and took hold of the loins of Ar-Rahman (i.e. The Merciful - Allah). Allah said to it, ‘What is wrong?’ The womb said, ‘I seek refuge with you from Al-Qatee’ah (i.e. the one who severs the ties of the family). Allah said, ‘Would you be pleased if I bestow my favors on him who keeps your ties, and withhold My favors from he who severs your ties? The womb responded, ‘Certainly Oh Lord!’ Allah said, “That is granted!” Abu Hurayrah said, ‘If you want you can recite [the verse] ‘Would you then if given authority, do mischief in the land and cut the ties of kinship (arhaamukum)?’ [47:22]

Continued

Recently, a Muslim brother who goes by the name “Marc” wrote a disgruntled comment to my harsh critique of the westerner Eteraz. I have, for sometime now, wanted to get a message out. I wasn’t really sure of how I could solidify my thesis, but thanks to this response from the disgruntled brother, I have been given the chance to elaborate as well as get the message that has lingered deep in my mind, for what seems to be ages, out to those readers of Seekingilm.com. Let me first say that what I am about to say is perfectly observable to you all, if you only open your hearts and minds to see. Secondly, I do not know Marc or Eteraz personally, and I am certain if I met them I would treat them the same as any person I meet, kindly. I have no PERSONAL hard feelings toward any of these two individuals. However, I do have baraa’ for Eteraz and his allied cronies. I also disagree, respectively, with Marc as well. I will not, however, be going into a tit-for-tat with either of them. What I intend to do here is to expound on a much greater worry than what Marc tries to forward in his post. It is a worry that haunts this Ummah, and was foretold by prophecy by the wise tongue of our beloved Sayyid Rasulullah (’alayhis salaam).

Continued

 

Muqaatil ibn Sulayman ibn Basheer Al-Azdi, is an author of Tafsir and a liar Mujassim. Ibn Hajr states about him in his Taqrib, “He [was a] liar…he delved into tajseem (saying Allah has limbs etc).”¹

 Is-haaq ibn Ibrahim reports from Abu Haneefah that he said,  “Two depraved opinions have reached us from East, those of Jahm [ibn Safwan] (d. 128/745), the nullifier of the divine attributes (Mu’attil), and those of Muqatil [ibn Sulayman al-Balkhi (d. c.a. 150/767)], the likener of Allah to His creation (mushabbih).” ²

Continued

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. #6868 [↩]
2. Dhahabi, Siyar a‘lam al-nubala’ [Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Risala, 1401/1984], 7.202, also see Ibn Hajr’s Tahtheeb At-Tahtheeb entry number 7981 published by Daar Ihyaa’ [↩]

After much deliberation I have decided to compile examples from our vibrant and rich Islamic history of Sunni Orthodox Fuqaha’, Muhaddithin, Mufassireen, and Muhaqqiqeen taking knowledge from religious heretics and deviants (Ahlul-Bida’ah). Before delving into this issue let me first state my supposition. Based upon the material within this article, I have strong conviction that some of the earliest Imams of Islam were semi-tolerant of ikhtilaaf (legal disagreement), even in some issues of ‘Aqidah. It seems to me, and ultimate knowledge is with Allah, that some of the Salaf (earliest generations of the Islamic Nation) were not radically hostile towards deviants that they believed had the excuse of personal ijtihaad and ta’weel. As you will see, many of the erudite scholars of Islam took prophetic narrations (hadith) as well as other Islamic Sciences from men they believed to be deviant. There are, however, levels of deviance. For example, as mentioned by Imam Ibn Hajr in his personal gloss of Nukhbat-Al-Fikr, if the bida’ah (deviance) in the one imparting the narrations (or knowledge) is not Kufriyyah (that which removes one from the yolk of Islam), then his narrations are acceptable. This is, however, only one opinion. Some scholars argue that if the scholar called to his bida’ah it is not permitted to take from him. Yet others allowed that. The recent Imam and Haafith Shu’ayb Al Arnaa’ut stated that the opinion of taking from the deviant who does not call the people to his bida’ah is what is the just (or balanced) stance¹.  Though this may be the most “just” stance, Imam Shu’ayb Al Arnaa’ut states:

“…The two Shaykhs (i.e. Bukhaari and Muslim) reported from many who delved into Bida’ah, like the Khawaarij, the Shi’ah, the Qadariyyah, and their likes, and from them there were those who called to their madh-hab (guild).”² 

Continued

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. Refer to his Introduction to Tahrir Taqrib [↩]
2. Actually Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr wrote an entire chapter on those who the two Shaykhs report from that waded in Bida’ah in his Hadi As-Saari [↩]