Jazakallah Khair. This discussion is highly academic and non secetrian unlike a lot of content out there on TH-cam. Please keep producing more episodes.
MashaAllah I've been benefitting and loving every episode. May Allah bless these teachers. Keep up the great work We can learn a lot from how the teachers show respect to others whilst differing with them and how to have healthy discussions with opposing views
Awesome. ma sha3 Allah. great series. Related books in a single episode is a great idea. Shaykh Zeeshan's knowledge of all the different fields is impressive. It'd be great if there can be an episode on books with READY responses to allegations and misconceptions on Islam. May be consider covering websites on Islamic apologetics as well; which are all good / their approaches / which have it grounded in the classical tradition and which are not. That would be of immediate use to common Muslims. Hope you can consider this request as well. Keep up the good work.
@@ybadaoui638 who said anything g about proof? Read my comment I said it SAYS a lot . You wahabis madkhalis are always on a different level , look at you now comparing a war monger who loved to shoult kfuffar at everyone and kill them as he he thought he was judge jury and executioner and comparing him to the prophet ???? Are u that deluded they do not belong in the same category . Our prophet had revelation, wahab had a bloodthirst. Keep the 2 separated
Thats the problem. You're declaring someone to be qualified or unqualified based on the conclusion you already made. If they oppose the one you oppose, then they are qualified and of not, then they're not.
ورد في الإبانة الكبرى قال ابن بطة العُكْبَري - المتوفى سنة: ۳۸۷هـ -: "أصل الإيمان بالله الذي يجب على الخلق اعتقاده في إثبات الإيمان به ثلاثة أشياء: 1️⃣ أحدها: أن يعتقد العبد ربانیته؛ ليكون بذلك مبايناً لمذهب أهل التعطيل الذين لا يثبتون صانعاً. 2️⃣ الثاني: أن يعتقد وحدانيته؛ ليكون مباينا بذلك مذاهب أهل الشرك الذين أقروا بالصانع وأشركوا معه في العبادة غيره. 3️⃣ والثالث: أن يعتقده موصوفاً بالصفات التي لا يجوز إلا أن يكون موصوفاً بها من العلم والقدرة والحكمة وسائر ما وصف به نفسه في كتابه ... لأنا نجد الله تعالى قد خاطب عباده بدعائهم إلى اعتقاد كل واحدة في هذه الثلاث والإيمان بها، فأما دعاؤه إياهم إلى الإقرار بر بانيته ووحدانيته، فلسنا نذكر هذا هاهنا لطوله وسعة الكلام فيه، ولأن الجهمي يدعي لنفسه الإقرار بهما، وإن كان جحده للصفات قد أبطل دعواه لهما" الإبانة الكبرى (١٧٢/٦)
With regards to asrar rashid book on signs of the day of judgement, there are ahadith about the prediction of same gender marriage which he states it as weak, even though its meaning seems to be sahih as evident today. But I feel there is an apprehension from Indo-pak scholars not to interpret these ahadith including those from kitab-al-fitan which has implications towards covid19 pandemic. Maybe they're being ultra scrupulous or cautious of not misinterpreting. Allah knows best.
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته As I recall- in the podcast with Paul, Asrar Rashid actually talked about this Hadith you’re referring to. He doesn’t clarify it is weak, rather he mentions the sources it is from (and literally only quoting al-Ishaa’ah for that- not his own research) and then mentions- when asked about its authenticity by Paul - that it is authentic. Unfortunately- what exposed him is that only a cursory check is required to see that the narration is not even narrated by Daraqutni which is one of the sources mentioned. Furthermore, the authenticity which he “quotes” is not mentioned in the book, it’s his own words and he says it, despite the fact that Bayhaqi (the other source) for it calls it weak! It is this very lack of care for authenticity which is what we are pointing out. جزاك الله خيرا
@@mohammednadat6294 جزاک اللہ خیرا For your response. If we take the misdaq of the hadith on same sex marriage prediction, we can easily see it in real life.
@@zak2509 this point was already mentioned and responded to in the original episode. Please watch it again and understand what we’ve said properly this time. جزاك الله خيرا
Shaykh Umayris book as well as Basaam Zawaadi covered alot of points refuting Awni aqeedah. Yes it differs in the sense that unlike MIAW his work shows the mushrikeen of Quraysh had a defficient understanding of rububiya and not a complete understanding. But they showed that this idea that shirk is only if istiqlaal occurs is false. You can even ask chrsitians today do they take Jesus or the holy spirit as independent deites besides God they will say no. Second of the hadith states dua is ibaadah and duaa is an unconditional ibaadah given only to Allah. Doing duaa to other than Allah is shirk this idea of rejecting shirk in tawheed uloohiya ignores the sunnah. Also ar razi even mentioned in his tafsir of 2:22 "that there is not in existence any person who affirms that Allah has any partner in knowledge, power, wisdom and the likes, and that this has never been found to date, except for the Dualists who believe in a god of good and a god of evil". [Note here that al-Razi is saying that no one in history has ever claimed that others share with Allah in aspects of His Rububiya. The dualists he describes here are a perfect representation of shaykh Awni's theory of autonomous shirk (shirk bil-istiqlal). Why? Because the dualist are a type of mushrik who AFFIRMS a self existing diety with rububiyyah. Thus ar-Razi is confirming that most of the shirk of the mushriks rests beyond the bounds of holding another deity as an autonomous holder of rububiya (shirk bil-istiqlal.
Appreciate the feedback, but if you listen to the podcast you would note that we did discuss this point as there is a misunderstanding regarding the notion of istiqlaal. If you follow the definition of istiqlaal to include ta'thir then these objections will be clarified. This has been clarified in the podcast.
I think Mawlana Thanvi still had a slight takfiri mindset, if he was saying it leads can lead to shirkh. That can be said for any action a person does, for example the mushrikhs prostrsted to the idols, yet we prostrate to Allah in Salah. No-one will argue the action can lead to shirkh. Muslims and mushrikhs can have similar actions, but the differentia is the beliefs behind the actions.
@A L I S E L I M I that's not relatable, because we don't know their intention. Second point, which is more appropriate is that, sajdah to other than Allah isn't a measure of shirkh. If it was you would see it being prohibted by Allah. The shirkh was in their beliefs by associating equivalence in dhaat, siffat and afaal and then the extra shirkh was giving them the right of worship. Shirkh will always be shirkh and be prohibited in all forms. So if Sajdah was an act that wash shirkh or could lead to shirkh it would've been prohibited from the dawn of creation. However, we see the complete opposite. That's why I said the differentia is the beliefs they hold.
@SelimiAli that is absolutely incorrect because actions are by intentions. When a case goes to the Qazi, he will find out intent before judgement. You likely have it backwards since intentions and beliefs have a relationship to one another. Actions and beliefs are unrelated which is what you probably meant. Beliefs can make an action shirkh or not via intent, however actions can't make beliefs or intent shirkh.
@elprofesor8571 No, it wasn't. If it was an expression of shirkh, then it would be haram for all ummahs. Expressions of shirkh aren't allowed for anyone of any ummah ever. You need to stop with these outlandish claims. Salaam
The idea of permissibility of using daeef Hadith in fadayel promoted because, in the fadayel the main act is already proven by the strict evidence’s of Shariah, so a daeef Hadith, which holds a general act which is strong epistemologically to be attributed to the prophet, could be used while adding some benefits or details so a certain proven act. There is a big debate if an daeef Hadith encourages something even minor act, which is generally not proven by other evidences of Shariah, can be used or not. But why this is matters? Because Muslim scholars tried to demonstrate that a source which is doubtful cannot be used in shaping Aqida,fiqh, perceptions and strategies of Muslims. Otherwise that will be dangerous. So this kind source only can give complementary details to a proven narrative. For example prayer in Jamaat is proven as a encouraging act, some daeef Hadith comes and said for example, praying in jamaah will make a house for you in Jannah. Okay, acceptable. One daeef Hadith is saying praying a nafl prayer in a selective time is better, then it is debatable, because it’s giving some new information even it is minor and nafl prayer is good in general, but it pointing out a particular nafl prayer at a particular time, that is debatable. Then if daeef Hadith comes and say, Whoever don’t pray salah in jammah,his prayer is invalid. It is not acceptable anyway. Because it is daeef and can’t hold prohibition type fiqh rulings. So if we understand the perspective of the ulama, then using daeef Hadith about end of time, is also risky. Because it holds future predictions of the prophet, it holds narrative,perspective and belief, so it can’t be justified by using week sources. Also sometimes it gives strategies and taklif which is cannot be done by daeef Hadith. Sometimes it gives stories which is khilaf adat, khilaf adat is not a normal things, so in order believe about some abnormal phenomena and narrative which is claimed to be sayings of the prophet you one must give strong evidence, daeef Hadith isn’t the strong evidence. Also it puts risking prophets Hadiths to shown as false, for example, someone preached a daeef Hadith about end of the time, and it didn’t happened when it supposed to, it will misrepresent the prophetic Hadith,although it was daeef and falsely attributed to him.
Nobody asks a dead for something Even if he believes that Allah has given him the capability to give something Except he believes that even in this case Allah has shared his rububiyya. So his conclusions do not seem right…
Deoband and affiliated madrasahs do not have anyone in the science of Hadith that can grade Hadith! Instead they rely on sheikh Shuaib Arnaoot publicly and Sheikh Naasir uddeen Albani secretly رحمه الله. Sheikhul hadith in Deobandi context today is just someone who teaches the dawrah Hadith in the last year of Darul uloom! I’m a Hanbali but I’m not a wahhabi but I am a strict Athary and I accept the splitting of tawheed into 3 branches NOT 2 althoughthere is another taqseem mentionedby him tawheed Qasd/ Talab and Tawheedul Ma'rifah wal ithbaat the last of the two is Tawheedul ruboobiyya and asmaa wa sifaat and Tawheed Asmaa was Sifaat is the third and most commented on by Ibn Taymiya and the taqseem he mentions more. however I do not believe that the kuffar of Quraish had perfect tawheed raboobiyya because they only asserted it in some aspects NOT ALL as the Wahhabis claim ! I also accept tawassul as does Imam Shawkaani whos books and fiqh I also transmit. In my opinion there is no need for the salafi movement because the Hanbali school already represents this flexibility in fiqh and because you will not find any position the salafis are advocating except that it’s a narration from Imam Ahmad رحمه الله. Imam Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Alqayyim رحمهما الله are stars of the Hanbali mathab and are innocent of Wahabi ignorance! Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taymiya is great but he’s wrong on tawassul and the fact that he stood alone in this during his time shows this because all the big scholars of Hadith and fiqh like Syooti and subki and Ibn Hajar haithami and all the scholars and imams before his time and during it… Wahhabism is dangerous!
In which world do you live? Deoband dont have master's of hadith?...if you dont have knowledge thats your problem....shaikh younus jaunpuri rahimullah is regarded as a great master of hadith by even saudi salafis Zakaria al kandhalwi Anwar shah kashmiri Rasheed al gangohi Qasim an nanotavi Saeed palanpuri Taqi usmani Ataullah shah bukhari Ashraf ali thanvi Shah Waliullah the founding father is regarded as greatest muhadith from india even by ghayr muqalliden Deoband have more then1200 sharah of sihah al sittah and 4000 above Qur'anic tafseer There is no book of hadith which is not graded or commented by hadith school of deoband Main issue with deoband is thst they dont value albani or arnaut modren day takhreez It is belief of deoband school that classification of sahee and daeef by salaf is billion times better then albani or Arnout so they completly reject it And deoband consider ibn taimiya and ibn qayyum as a part of ahl sunna
@@sharikwaseem8028 i said Today not the past!!! Where are the books of investigation on the asaaneed and the rulings upon the narrations???? There aren't any!!!! Oh theres إعلاء السنن where the author bends and twist the science of hadith to prove the Hanafi school!! Sheikh yunus رحمه الله doesn't have any such books in Arabic and just because you venerate him doesn't mean hes a master of Hadith verification!!! I used to live in Blackburn I know Deoband very very well snd i never said its all bad but you got all riled up because your sectarianism blinds you!!! Show me one tahqeeq of the four sunnan where theres a ruling upon every hadith??? You cant find one!!!! A sharh is not a tahqeeq!!! Yes Deoband has some amazing sharhs of those you mentioned!!
@@sharikwaseem8028 your problem is you think asaaneed only come from India!!! I narrate all the asaaneed of Deoband but i also narrate all of Imam Shawkaanis Asaaneed for most of the books of Islam in every science something Deoband DOESN'T HAVE!!! THEY CAN'T teach you الكافية and give you an Ijazah and sanad to the author!!! You rant on about Salafis!!! IM NOT A SALAFI SND I MADE THAT CLEAR!!! I also narrate the asaaneed of Morocco via the Kattaani family and I narrate the asaaneed of yemen through so many in shafi fiqh....
@@sharikwaseem8028 you are not the only ones to narrate from Shah Waliyyullah رحمه الله because the brailvis also do as do I through Sheikh Nazzer hussain Dahlawi!!! You are blind!!!
Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Abil-Izz are not the first to affirm the splitting of the branches of Tawheed into 3 because Imam Abu Hanifa رحمه الله indicated to this taqseem in fiqhud Akbar where he says: والله تعالى يُدْعَى من أعلى لا من أسفل (هذا إثبات العلو توحيد الأسماء والصفات) لأن الأسفل ليس من وصف الربوبية والألوهية في شيء…انتهى الطبري وابن منده made this taqseem before them as also ابن البطة العكبري ت:٣٨٧ and The famous scholar of Balagha الجرجاني in his famous book التعريفات split tawheed into three. The fact is that there’s no dispute to be had in coining terminology as long as it’s done correctly according to mantiq and Arabic لا مشاحة في الاصطلاح
@@n.a.1397 yes that is their big problem! The fact that bidah and the principles of ascertaining what constitutes bidah are legitimately differed upon because no one is obligated to implement Imam Shaatibi’s definitions in الاعتصام. They are misguided but you’re right they are obligated to be consistent in their تبديع which they aren’t doing with this taqseem, yes I understand what you mean thanks 👍
Read an article on the Internet titled "Analyses of The Methodological Differences Between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun in Hadith Criticism" About:This paper focuses on the difference in methodology between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun on Hadith discourse. Hadith is commonly referred to as words, actions, and tacit approval of the prophet Muhammad .ﷺ A muhaddith means someone who is highly knowledgeable and possesses mastery in the field of Hadith. An Usuliy on the other hand refers to scholars who have expertise on matters related to Usul al-Fiqh, namely the principle of Islamic jurisprudence. Differences of opinions between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun are thought to have significant methodological variances in hadith criticism. Few modern scholars claimed the differences were absent since the Usuliyyun merely followed the Muhaddithun in matters of critics of Hadith. This opinion is nevertheless contrasted by other group scholars. Therefore, this study examined both paradigms on the methodological issues over the criticism of Hadith and analyzed their various views. For this purpose, analytical and critical methodologies were used in addition to the descriptive methodology. Classic books of sciences of Hadith such as Fath al-Mughith and the Muqaddimah 'Ulum al-Hadith were analyzed for this purpose. As for Usul al-Fiqh, works like Raudat al-Naẓir and Nihayat al-Sul were scrutinized accordingly. This study demonstrated differences indeed existed between these two factions in matters related to criticism of hadith, both theoretically and practically.
Your claim that deoband didn't have muhaddithun is false. Also most of the major works are still written in arabic by the deobandis nobody says its a dead language. The subcontinent also has a rich culture of hadeeth studies having many phd thesis and works written that are masterpieces, unfortunately they are mostly in urdu and i agree that arabic should become the standard again yes. -see an article on the Internet titled (shaykh al islam) "allamah zahid kawtharis praise of indian ulamas contribution to hadith" -Sheikh yunus jaunpuris work are avalible in arabic, his commentary on bukhari is also in arabic and is no ordinary one, look up an article on the Internet titled "ten salient features of the arabic commentary of sahih bukhari by shaykh muhammad yunus jownpuri" -Look up an article of wikip£dia titled "deobandi hadeeth studies" to have a glimpse of the academic endeavours by the scholars of deoband in different hadith fields. Deoband had some of the greatest muhaddithun also, more recently shaykh yunus jaunpuri and in the past the unparalleled allamah anwar shah kashmiri, read about him, the deobandis are of the view that he was of a status that he could grade hadeeth since he was a hafiz, yes, in modern history i belive we haven't had any hafiz muhaddithun, to the point shaykh al islam allamah zahid al-Kawthari said: “After the shaykh, the imam, Ibn al-Humam, there appeared none equal to him [i.e. ‘Allamah Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri] in eliciting rare points of discussion from hadiths - and this is a long period of time!” (al-Tasrih bi ma Tawatara fi Nuzul al-Masih, p. 26) وقال شيخنا المحقق الكوثري: لم يات بعد الشيخ الامام ابن الهمام مثله فى استثارة الابحاث النادرة من ثنايا الاحايث وهذه برهة طويلة من الدهر Allamah anwar shah kashmiri is famous for his photographic memory and the fact that he never got tired of reading, that's a deadly combination, a recipe for a true giant as he was. He read thousands of books and would remember even something he just skimmed through 30 years ago for example, not to mention he was a faqih mutakallim, a sufi shaykh, and a mujahid if need be (his main teacher shaykh al hind was also an actual mujahid and activist against the British) subhanallah this is how the scholars of deoband were/are Many scholars called him "khatimul muhaddithin" meaning the last of muhaddithin. May allah have mercy on him.
If some scholars that i mentioned are muhaddith according to my definition then why does allamaha zahid kawthari called them the best muhaddithun the ummah has seen in generations? Go read the article titled "allamah zahid kawtharis praise for the contribution of indian scholars to hadith"
Here is a list of non salafi scholars that hold the position istigathah is shirk - Ibn ‘Aqīl al-Ḥanbalī (d. 513 A.H.) - Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn at-Toribishtī (d. 661 A.H.) - Imam Abū Shāmah Al-Maqdisī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 665 A.H.) - Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Al-Qarāfī al-Mālikī (d. 684 A.H.) - Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 A.H.) & Other Ḥanbalī Scholars - Imam Ibn Kathīr ash-Shāf‘ī (d. 774 A.H.) - Ibn an-Naḥās ash-Shāf‘ī (d. 814 A.H.) - Imam Taqiyyuddīn Al-Maqrīzī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 845 A.H.) - Imam Badr ad-dīn Al-Ahdal aṣ-Ṣūfī al-Ash‘arī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 855 A.H) - Imam Qāsim b. Quṭlūbughā (d. 879 A.H.) & Other Ḥanafī Scholars - Imam Muḥammad al-Birikiwī al-Ḥanafī (d. 981 A.H.) - Imam Ibn Ṭāhir Al-Fattanī al-Ḥanafī (d. 986 A.H.) - Imam Zayn ad-Dīn al-Ma‘barī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 987 A.H.) - Imam Aḥmad b. ‘Abdul Aḥad As-Sirhindī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1034 A.H.) - Imam Aḥmad b. ‘Abdul Qādir ar-Rūmī Al-Ḥanafī (d. 1041 A.H.) - Al-Allāmah Ḍiyā’ ad-Dīn Ṣāliḥ b. Mahdī Al-Kawkabānī (d. 1108 A.H.) - Imam Son‘ Allah al-Ḥalabī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1120 A.H.) - Imam Dāwūd al-Qārisī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1169 A.H.) - Imam Ad-Dahlawī (d. 1176 A.H.) - Imam Thanā’ullah Al-‘Uthmānī Al-Pānībuttī Al-Ḥanafī (1225 A.H.) - Imam ash-Shawkānī (d. 1255 A.H.) - Imam Al-Ālūsī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1270 A.H.) - Al-Bakrī ad-Dimyāṭī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 1310 A.H.) - ‘Abdullah al-Ghumārī (d. 1413 A.H.) Non-“Wahhabi” Quotes on Venerating the Dead by Bassam Zawadi
I can’t see the quotes that are being used, but if the claim is that these scholars said istighathah is shirk, I’m pretty sure its not just seeking help. Therefore, the question would be asked ‘when’ does istighathah become shirk? As mentioned in the podcast, Ml Thanawi had concern with such statements from scholars as a lot of them were vague and open-ended. Therefore, it is important that tahrir is done of the statements for them to coincide with set principles (should also be noted that the quotes I assume he is referring to, actually differ with each other as to why and when it is shirk). For example, the list states Shah Wali Allah as saying istighathah as shirk, but Shah Wali Allah’s definition of shirk has been quoted at length by both Ml Thanawi and Sh Hatim, therefore one would interpret his statement in light of the principles he has highlighted.
@@imamzakariyaacademy A few points: With regards the quotes academically we should assess them first otherwise we would have to assume all of them meant Istiqlal and this would be built on the assumption that this belief is new and possibly the assumption that this opinion is unique to Salafis wahabis etc. The whole reason of these quotes is to show otherwise. For a more critical review of some of Hatim al Awnis views mentioned in this book read Bassam Zawadis “can istiqlalis define ibadah easily?” These quotes can be found in his article “non wahabi quotes on venerating the dead”. One shouldn’t assume all of these quotes must mean the belief of istiqlal. Especially if they didn’t define it with that condition (grey area?). I would also ask where this qa’idah Ashraf ali al Thanwi brings for something to be possible is from? As in who in the past mentioned this principle in this context? Here are some quotes: Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Al-Qarāfī al-Mālikī (d. 684 A.H.): تعظم حماقة الداعي وتجرؤه فيسأل هللا تعالى أن يفوض إليه من أمور العالم ما هو مختص بالقدرة واإلرادة الربانية من اإليجاد واإلعدام والقضاء النافذ المحتم وقد دل القاطع العقلي على استحالة ثبوت ذلك لغير هللا تعالى فيكون طلب ذلك طلبا للشركة مع هللا تعالى في الملك وهو كفر وقد وقع ذلك لجماعة من جهال الصوفية فيقولون فّلن أعطي كلمة كن ويسألون أن يعطوا كلمة كن التي في قوله تعالى إنما أمرنا لشيء إذا أردناه أن نقول له كن فيكون وما يعلمون معنى هذه الكلمة في كّلم هللا تعالى وال يعلمون ما معنى إعطائها إن صح أنها أعطيت وهذه أغوار بعيدة الروم على العلماء المحصلين فضّل عن الصوفية المتخرصين فيهلكون من حيث ال يشعرون ويعتقدون أنهم إلى هللا تعالى متقربون وهم عنه متباعدون عصمنا هللا تعالى من الفتن وأسبابها والجهاالت وشبهها Here he is speaking clearly about Allah giving powers to the mayyit and that Sufis have fallen into this.
Unfortunately again a very weak and biased review on MbAW's dawah and a pick and choose method. A Awni view of Ibn Taymiyyah and MbAW 'Awni's book has been refuted very strongly by Shaykh Turkumani in his book: حقيقة التوحيد العبادة
Appreciate the feedback. This is a review of Bunzel’s book, if you believe that the da’wah of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab was presented incorrectly, please read Bunzel’s book and provide a critique. You can explain what was misquoted or half-quoted. If you can bring a good case, we will be happy to share your critique. The book by Haqiqat Tawhid al-‘Ibadah was published before this book of Sh Hatim under review. And from my reading of Sh Turkumani’s book, he was mainly refuting a point by Sh Hatim about the mutakallimun’s position on the meaning of ilah and ibn Taymiyyah’s critique of them. Although a point which can be discussed, the current book of Sh Hatim under review does not discuss this point. Also, majority of the arguments are not mentioned in the book of Sh Turkumani, therefore I did not mention it.
You used hatim al awni the reject who cticises the beloved and noble companion muwaiwhya رضي الله عنه, this hatim al awni reject who has no problem with happily sitting with shia who curse the mothers of the believers رضي الله عنهن,the you use a reaserch of a kaffir when has the kuffar every been reliable to take testimony from and yet you are here taking from a kaffir who has the audacity to try to soeak about Islam. إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ (55 Indeed the worst creation in the sight of Allah are the disbelivers so they dont believe. Surah Al anfaal 55@@imamzakariyaacademy
There are deobandi schokars who strongly disagree with Awni's book. Also, the interpretation of istiqlal and the meaning of the words of Ashraf Ali has been differed upon. And even though it might not be technically shirk, it is still has mushabaha with shirk and takfir can be done.
Also, the belief behind istighatha is not discussed. There are those who believe in istighatha with the intention the one who is called upon is constantly hearing and seeing and has tasarruf etc. Istighatha should properly defined before discussing.
Who has differed over the interpretation of Ml Ashraf Ali Thanawi's words? If you read the risalah, he very clearly highlights his principles. If you have an alternative interpretation of his risalah, please provide the relevant passages and this other explanation. Also, is the resemblance to shirk the dhabita for takfir? Or is it holding beliefs that have been clearly negated by the Sharia?
“Anyone who hates imam Muhammad ibn abdelwahhab is either a mushrik who loves shirk or a jaahil no in between”-shamsi from dusdawah …I didn’t watch this video cause its long so idk if you guys are gonna praise him (miaw) or refute him but just wanted to put this out there…Salamualaykum
You used hatim al awni the reject who cticises the beloved and noble companion muwaiwhya رضي الله عنه, this hatim al awni reject who has no problem with happily sitting with shia who curse the mothers of the believers رضي الله عنهن,the you use a reaserch of a kaffir when has the kuffar every been reliable to take testimony from and yet you are here taking from a kaffir who has the audacity to try to soeak about Islam. إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ (55 Indeed the worst creation in the sight of Allah are the disbelivers so they dont believe. Surah Al anfaal 55
What a strange comment. Assuming what you said about Hatim Awni is correct, how does it change the accuracy of his arguments on this topic. And this isn't accepting the testimony of a kafir, the kafir has done research which is referenced. So, a person can easily check his references to see if he's accurate. In a nutshell, you can't respond so decided to attack personalities rather than the arguments الحكمة ضالة المؤمن
Mashallah, these just keep on getting better, probably one of the best academic podcasts in English on TH-cam...
👍
Masha'Allah, Maulana Zeeshan's knowledge is amazing ❤
MashaAllah. Indeed. May Allah grant him barakah in his knowledge, health, wealth and life.
Excellent podcast ما شاء الله 👌
Very balanced and fair review of the book as always by Maulana Zeeshan.
May Allah bless and preserve him!
Jazakallah Khair. This discussion is highly academic and non secetrian unlike a lot of content out there on TH-cam. Please keep producing more episodes.
JazakAllah Khair for your feedback. More episodes coming soon InshaAllah
@@imamzakariyaacademyAlhamdulillah great to hear.
What is Mawlana Zeeshans full name? Fascinating speaker. I want to look up more material from him. Allah bless your noble efforts
Zeeshan Chaudri
This discussion was intellectually stimulating. Thumbs up
MashaAllah I've been benefitting and loving every episode. May Allah bless these teachers. Keep up the great work
We can learn a lot from how the teachers show respect to others whilst differing with them and how to have healthy discussions with opposing views
1:08 book discussion.
1:33 main arguments of the book
Awesome. ma sha3 Allah. great series. Related books in a single episode is a great idea. Shaykh Zeeshan's knowledge of all the different fields is impressive. It'd be great if there can be an episode on books with READY responses to allegations and misconceptions on Islam. May be consider covering websites on Islamic apologetics as well; which are all good / their approaches / which have it grounded in the classical tradition and which are not. That would be of immediate use to common Muslims. Hope you can consider this request as well. Keep up the good work.
finally 🎉
👍
Fascinating! Who’s the speakers
Mawlana Dr Zeeshan and Ustadh Muhammad Nadat.
MashaAllah, excellent podcast may Allah reward both the Shuyookh Ameen.
Ameen. JazakAllah. 👍
Excellent podcast MA
👍 👍
His own brother and father were against him and did not support him , says a lot brotherss
How is that a prove as itself? Abu Lahab was the uncle of the Prophet, peace be Upon him, and didn't support him as well
@@ybadaoui638 who said anything g about proof? Read my comment I said it SAYS a lot . You wahabis madkhalis are always on a different level , look at you now comparing a war monger who loved to shoult kfuffar at everyone and kill them as he he thought he was judge jury and executioner and comparing him to the prophet ???? Are u that deluded they do not belong in the same category . Our prophet had revelation, wahab had a bloodthirst. Keep the 2 separated
@@ybadaoui638his father and brother were muslims and scholars.
@@ybadaoui638 they were non-muslim and unqualified, the guys opposing abdul Wahhab were qualified and Muslims
Thats the problem.
You're declaring someone to be qualified or unqualified based on the conclusion you already made. If they oppose the one you oppose, then they are qualified and of not, then they're not.
I hope someone translates the book by Shaykh Hatim
What is the English name of the book by Mawlana Zafar Uthmani?
Salam, please sort the podcast playlist into the order of episodes, jzk.
Done
Another awnist W
ورد في الإبانة الكبرى
قال ابن بطة العُكْبَري - المتوفى سنة: ۳۸۷هـ -: "أصل الإيمان بالله الذي يجب على الخلق اعتقاده في إثبات الإيمان به ثلاثة أشياء:
1️⃣ أحدها: أن يعتقد العبد ربانیته؛ ليكون بذلك مبايناً لمذهب أهل التعطيل الذين لا يثبتون صانعاً.
2️⃣ الثاني: أن يعتقد وحدانيته؛ ليكون مباينا بذلك مذاهب أهل الشرك الذين أقروا بالصانع وأشركوا معه في العبادة غيره.
3️⃣ والثالث: أن يعتقده موصوفاً بالصفات التي لا يجوز إلا أن يكون موصوفاً بها من العلم والقدرة والحكمة وسائر ما وصف به نفسه في كتابه ... لأنا نجد الله تعالى قد خاطب عباده بدعائهم إلى اعتقاد كل واحدة في هذه الثلاث والإيمان بها، فأما دعاؤه إياهم إلى الإقرار بر بانيته ووحدانيته، فلسنا نذكر هذا هاهنا لطوله وسعة الكلام فيه، ولأن الجهمي يدعي لنفسه الإقرار بهما، وإن كان جحده للصفات قد أبطل دعواه لهما"
الإبانة الكبرى (١٧٢/٦)
مؤلفه مجسم وضاع كذّاب متهم .
🕋💫💫
👍
I found 1:23:00 hugely beneficial
👍
With regards to asrar rashid book on signs of the day of judgement, there are ahadith about the prediction of same gender marriage which he states it as weak, even though its meaning seems to be sahih as evident today.
But I feel there is an apprehension from Indo-pak scholars not to interpret these ahadith including those from kitab-al-fitan which has implications towards covid19 pandemic. Maybe they're being ultra scrupulous or cautious of not misinterpreting. Allah knows best.
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
As I recall- in the podcast with Paul, Asrar Rashid actually talked about this Hadith you’re referring to. He doesn’t clarify it is weak, rather he mentions the sources it is from (and literally only quoting al-Ishaa’ah for that- not his own research) and then mentions- when asked about its authenticity by Paul - that it is authentic.
Unfortunately- what exposed him is that only a cursory check is required to see that the narration is not even narrated by Daraqutni which is one of the sources mentioned. Furthermore, the authenticity which he “quotes” is not mentioned in the book, it’s his own words and he says it, despite the fact that Bayhaqi (the other source) for it calls it weak!
It is this very lack of care for authenticity which is what we are pointing out.
جزاك الله خيرا
@@mohammednadat6294
جزاک اللہ خیرا
For your response. If we take the misdaq of the hadith on same sex marriage prediction, we can easily see it in real life.
@@zak2509 this point was already mentioned and responded to in the original episode. Please watch it again and understand what we’ve said properly this time.
جزاك الله خيرا
👍👍
JazakAllah for your feedback
Shaykh Umayris book as well as Basaam Zawaadi covered alot of points refuting Awni aqeedah. Yes it differs in the sense that unlike MIAW his work shows the mushrikeen of Quraysh had a defficient understanding of rububiya and not a complete understanding. But they showed that this idea that shirk is only if istiqlaal occurs is false. You can even ask chrsitians today do they take Jesus or the holy spirit as independent deites besides God they will say no. Second of the hadith states dua is ibaadah and duaa is an unconditional ibaadah given only to Allah. Doing duaa to other than Allah is shirk this idea of rejecting shirk in tawheed uloohiya ignores the sunnah. Also ar razi even mentioned in his tafsir of 2:22
"that there is not in existence any person who affirms that Allah has any partner in knowledge, power, wisdom and the likes, and that this has never been found to date, except for the Dualists who believe in a god of good and a god of evil".
[Note here that al-Razi is saying that no one in history has ever claimed that others share with Allah in aspects of His Rububiya. The dualists he describes here are a perfect representation of shaykh Awni's theory of autonomous shirk (shirk bil-istiqlal). Why? Because the dualist are a type of mushrik who AFFIRMS a self existing diety with rububiyyah. Thus ar-Razi is confirming that most of the shirk of the mushriks rests beyond the bounds of holding another deity as an autonomous holder of rububiya (shirk bil-istiqlal.
Appreciate the feedback, but if you listen to the podcast you would note that we did discuss this point as there is a misunderstanding regarding the notion of istiqlaal. If you follow the definition of istiqlaal to include ta'thir then these objections will be clarified. This has been clarified in the podcast.
molana sab have you read molana Mohammad manzoor nomani (ra) book shaik Mohammad bin Abdul Wahab and ulama haq of hindustan ???.
Yes, it's something discussed in my PhD and wrote a separate paper on. insha'Allah plan to discuss it in a future episode
But what about ordinary dua when someone asks to change his /her taqdeer for the better? Is this not "influencing Allah swa"?
Not taweed but being a good subject of sauds
In Saudi, people hate sh hatim because he made music halal and he is very soft with shisim
Everyone makes mistakes, and everyone has haters
@@mshafi4180 very true brother we all make mistakes but I don’t like soft scholars who hide the truth
@@Iamfsaly haha it's not about soft or hard. lol it's about truth, whoever has more evidence in his argument wins. don't be blind
@@danishzahurr trust me I’m not, he is the mufti of the sultans 😂 unfortunately I don’t follow mufti of the sultans
Hatim who? Hatim alawny?
JOIN THE TELEGRAM CHANNEL
t.me/+IdvBaZlbrwxmYTBk
I think Mawlana Thanvi still had a slight takfiri mindset, if he was saying it leads can lead to shirkh. That can be said for any action a person does, for example the mushrikhs prostrsted to the idols, yet we prostrate to Allah in Salah. No-one will argue the action can lead to shirkh. Muslims and mushrikhs can have similar actions, but the differentia is the beliefs behind the actions.
Anyway, I look forward to reading the book
@A L I S E L I M I that's not relatable, because we don't know their intention. Second point, which is more appropriate is that, sajdah to other than Allah isn't a measure of shirkh. If it was you would see it being prohibted by Allah. The shirkh was in their beliefs by associating equivalence in dhaat, siffat and afaal and then the extra shirkh was giving them the right of worship. Shirkh will always be shirkh and be prohibited in all forms. So if Sajdah was an act that wash shirkh or could lead to shirkh it would've been prohibited from the dawn of creation. However, we see the complete opposite. That's why I said the differentia is the beliefs they hold.
@SelimiAli that is absolutely incorrect because actions are by intentions. When a case goes to the Qazi, he will find out intent before judgement. You likely have it backwards since intentions and beliefs have a relationship to one another. Actions and beliefs are unrelated which is what you probably meant. Beliefs can make an action shirkh or not via intent, however actions can't make beliefs or intent shirkh.
@@yourstruly5706sajdah was made haram for this ummah because it is an expression of shirk. Now the intention is no longer relevant in this matter.
@elprofesor8571 No, it wasn't. If it was an expression of shirkh, then it would be haram for all ummahs. Expressions of shirkh aren't allowed for anyone of any ummah ever. You need to stop with these outlandish claims. Salaam
When it comes to the end of times, daif hadith are fine to use. Its not forged.
This has been discussed in the previous podcast
The idea of permissibility of using daeef Hadith in fadayel promoted because, in the fadayel the main act is already proven by the strict evidence’s of Shariah, so a daeef Hadith, which holds a general act which is strong epistemologically to be attributed to the prophet, could be used while adding some benefits or details so a certain proven act. There is a big debate if an daeef Hadith encourages something even minor act, which is generally not proven by other evidences of Shariah, can be used or not. But why this is matters? Because Muslim scholars tried to demonstrate that a source which is doubtful cannot be used in shaping Aqida,fiqh, perceptions and strategies of Muslims. Otherwise that will be dangerous. So this kind source only can give complementary details to a proven narrative. For example prayer in Jamaat is proven as a encouraging act, some daeef Hadith comes and said for example, praying in jamaah will make a house for you in Jannah. Okay, acceptable. One daeef Hadith is saying praying a nafl prayer in a selective time is better, then it is debatable, because it’s giving some new information even it is minor and nafl prayer is good in general, but it pointing out a particular nafl prayer at a particular time, that is debatable. Then if daeef Hadith comes and say, Whoever don’t pray salah in jammah,his prayer is invalid. It is not acceptable anyway. Because it is daeef and can’t hold prohibition type fiqh rulings. So if we understand the perspective of the ulama, then using daeef Hadith about end of time, is also risky. Because it holds future predictions of the prophet, it holds narrative,perspective and belief, so it can’t be justified by using week sources. Also sometimes it gives strategies and taklif which is cannot be done by daeef Hadith. Sometimes it gives stories which is khilaf adat, khilaf adat is not a normal things, so in order believe about some abnormal phenomena and narrative which is claimed to be sayings of the prophet you one must give strong evidence, daeef Hadith isn’t the strong evidence. Also it puts risking prophets Hadiths to shown as false, for example, someone preached a daeef Hadith about end of the time, and it didn’t happened when it supposed to, it will misrepresent the prophetic Hadith,although it was daeef and falsely attributed to him.
Nobody asks a dead for something Even if he believes that Allah has given him the capability to give something Except he believes that even in this case Allah has shared his rububiyya. So his conclusions do not seem right…
May Allah have mercy upon the Sheikh!!
Deoband and affiliated madrasahs do not have anyone in the science of Hadith that can grade Hadith! Instead they rely on sheikh Shuaib Arnaoot publicly and Sheikh Naasir uddeen Albani secretly رحمه الله. Sheikhul hadith in Deobandi context today is just someone who teaches the dawrah Hadith in the last year of Darul uloom!
I’m a Hanbali but I’m not a wahhabi but I am a strict Athary and I accept the splitting of tawheed into 3 branches NOT 2 althoughthere is another taqseem mentionedby him tawheed Qasd/ Talab and Tawheedul Ma'rifah wal ithbaat the last of the two is Tawheedul ruboobiyya and asmaa wa sifaat and Tawheed Asmaa was Sifaat is the third and most commented on by Ibn Taymiya and the taqseem he mentions more.
however I do not believe that the kuffar of Quraish had perfect tawheed raboobiyya because they only asserted it in some aspects NOT ALL as the Wahhabis claim ! I also accept tawassul as does Imam Shawkaani whos books and fiqh I also transmit. In my opinion there is no need for the salafi movement because the Hanbali school already represents this flexibility in fiqh and because you will not find any position the salafis are advocating except that it’s a narration from Imam Ahmad رحمه الله.
Imam Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Alqayyim رحمهما الله are stars of the Hanbali mathab and are innocent of Wahabi ignorance! Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taymiya is great but he’s wrong on tawassul and the fact that he stood alone in this during his time shows this because all the big scholars of Hadith and fiqh like Syooti and subki and Ibn Hajar haithami and all the scholars and imams before his time and during it… Wahhabism is dangerous!
In which world do you live? Deoband dont have master's of hadith?...if you dont have knowledge thats your problem....shaikh younus jaunpuri rahimullah is regarded as a great master of hadith by even saudi salafis
Zakaria al kandhalwi
Anwar shah kashmiri
Rasheed al gangohi
Qasim an nanotavi
Saeed palanpuri
Taqi usmani
Ataullah shah bukhari
Ashraf ali thanvi
Shah Waliullah the founding father is regarded as greatest muhadith from india even by ghayr muqalliden
Deoband have more then1200 sharah of sihah al sittah and 4000 above Qur'anic tafseer
There is no book of hadith which is not graded or commented by hadith school of deoband
Main issue with deoband is thst they dont value albani or arnaut modren day takhreez
It is belief of deoband school that classification of sahee and daeef by salaf is billion times better then albani or Arnout so they completly reject it
And deoband consider ibn taimiya and ibn qayyum as a part of ahl sunna
@@sharikwaseem8028 i said Today not the past!!!
Where are the books of investigation on the asaaneed and the rulings upon the narrations????
There aren't any!!!!
Oh theres إعلاء السنن where the author bends and twist the science of hadith to prove the Hanafi school!!
Sheikh yunus رحمه الله doesn't have any such books in Arabic and just because you venerate him doesn't mean hes a master of Hadith verification!!!
I used to live in Blackburn I know Deoband very very well snd i never said its all bad but you got all riled up because your sectarianism blinds you!!!
Show me one tahqeeq of the four sunnan where theres a ruling upon every hadith??? You cant find one!!!!
A sharh is not a tahqeeq!!!
Yes Deoband has some amazing sharhs of those you mentioned!!
@@sharikwaseem8028 show me just one ha ha ha
I have ALL THE DARSI BOOKS AND SO I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS BAATIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@@sharikwaseem8028 your problem is you think asaaneed only come from India!!! I narrate all the asaaneed of Deoband but i also narrate all of Imam Shawkaanis Asaaneed for most of the books of Islam in every science something Deoband DOESN'T HAVE!!! THEY CAN'T teach you الكافية and give you an Ijazah and sanad to the author!!!
You rant on about Salafis!!! IM NOT A SALAFI SND I MADE THAT CLEAR!!!
I also narrate the asaaneed of Morocco via the Kattaani family and I narrate the asaaneed of yemen through so many in shafi fiqh....
@@sharikwaseem8028 you are not the only ones to narrate from Shah Waliyyullah رحمه الله because the brailvis also do as do I through Sheikh Nazzer hussain Dahlawi!!!
You are blind!!!
Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Abil-Izz are not the first to affirm the splitting of the branches of Tawheed into 3 because Imam Abu Hanifa رحمه الله indicated to this taqseem in fiqhud Akbar where he says:
والله تعالى يُدْعَى من أعلى لا من أسفل (هذا إثبات العلو توحيد الأسماء والصفات) لأن الأسفل ليس من وصف الربوبية والألوهية في شيء…انتهى
الطبري وابن منده made this taqseem before them as also ابن البطة العكبري ت:٣٨٧
and The famous scholar of Balagha الجرجاني in his famous book التعريفات
split tawheed into three.
The fact is that there’s no dispute to be had in coining terminology as long as it’s done correctly according to mantiq and Arabic لا مشاحة في الاصطلاح
That's not point. The point is that the bidah-police come up with new rules and paradigms, but call scholars for innovators.
@@n.a.1397 yes that is their big problem! The fact that bidah and the principles of ascertaining what constitutes bidah are legitimately differed upon because no one is obligated to implement Imam Shaatibi’s definitions in الاعتصام. They are misguided but you’re right they are obligated to be consistent in their تبديع which they aren’t doing with this taqseem, yes I understand what you mean thanks 👍
Read an article on the Internet titled "Analyses of The Methodological Differences Between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun in Hadith Criticism"
About:This paper focuses on the difference in methodology between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun on Hadith discourse. Hadith is commonly referred to as words, actions, and tacit approval of the prophet Muhammad .ﷺ A muhaddith means someone who is highly knowledgeable and possesses mastery in the field of Hadith. An Usuliy on the other hand refers to scholars who have expertise on matters related to Usul al-Fiqh, namely the principle of Islamic jurisprudence. Differences of opinions between Muhaddithun and Usuliyyun are thought to have significant methodological variances in hadith criticism. Few modern scholars claimed the differences were absent since the Usuliyyun merely followed the Muhaddithun in matters of critics of Hadith. This opinion is nevertheless contrasted by other group scholars. Therefore, this study examined both paradigms on the methodological issues over the criticism of Hadith and analyzed their various views. For this purpose, analytical and critical methodologies were used in addition to the descriptive methodology. Classic books of sciences of Hadith such as Fath al-Mughith and the Muqaddimah 'Ulum al-Hadith were analyzed for this purpose. As for Usul al-Fiqh, works like Raudat al-Naẓir and Nihayat al-Sul were scrutinized accordingly. This study demonstrated differences indeed existed between these two factions in matters related to criticism of hadith, both theoretically and practically.
Your claim that deoband didn't have muhaddithun is false. Also most of the major works are still written in arabic by the deobandis nobody says its a dead language. The subcontinent also has a rich culture of hadeeth studies having many phd thesis and works written that are masterpieces, unfortunately they are mostly in urdu and i agree that arabic should become the standard again yes.
-see an article on the Internet titled (shaykh al islam) "allamah zahid kawtharis praise of indian ulamas contribution to hadith"
-Sheikh yunus jaunpuris work are avalible in arabic, his commentary on bukhari is also in arabic and is no ordinary one, look up an article on the Internet titled "ten salient features of the arabic commentary of sahih bukhari by shaykh muhammad yunus jownpuri"
-Look up an article of wikip£dia titled "deobandi hadeeth studies" to have a glimpse of the academic endeavours by the scholars of deoband in different hadith fields.
Deoband had some of the greatest muhaddithun also, more recently shaykh yunus jaunpuri and in the past the unparalleled allamah anwar shah kashmiri, read about him, the deobandis are of the view that he was of a status that he could grade hadeeth since he was a hafiz, yes, in modern history i belive we haven't had any hafiz muhaddithun, to the point shaykh al islam allamah zahid al-Kawthari said: “After the shaykh, the imam, Ibn al-Humam, there appeared none equal to him [i.e. ‘Allamah Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri] in eliciting rare points of discussion from hadiths - and this is a long period of time!” (al-Tasrih bi ma Tawatara fi Nuzul al-Masih, p. 26)
وقال شيخنا المحقق الكوثري: لم يات بعد الشيخ الامام ابن الهمام مثله فى استثارة الابحاث النادرة من ثنايا الاحايث وهذه برهة طويلة من الدهر
Allamah anwar shah kashmiri is famous for his photographic memory and the fact that he never got tired of reading, that's a deadly combination, a recipe for a true giant as he was.
He read thousands of books and would remember even something he just skimmed through 30 years ago for example, not to mention he was a faqih mutakallim, a sufi shaykh, and a mujahid if need be (his main teacher shaykh al hind was also an actual mujahid and activist against the British) subhanallah this is how the scholars of deoband were/are
Many scholars called him "khatimul muhaddithin" meaning the last of muhaddithin. May allah have mercy on him.
If some scholars that i mentioned are muhaddith according to my definition then why does allamaha zahid kawthari called them the best muhaddithun the ummah has seen in generations? Go read the article titled "allamah zahid kawtharis praise for the contribution of indian scholars to hadith"
Here is a list of non salafi scholars that hold the position istigathah is shirk
- Ibn ‘Aqīl al-Ḥanbalī (d. 513 A.H.)
- Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn at-Toribishtī (d. 661 A.H.)
- Imam Abū Shāmah Al-Maqdisī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 665 A.H.)
- Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Al-Qarāfī al-Mālikī (d. 684 A.H.)
- Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 A.H.) & Other Ḥanbalī Scholars
- Imam Ibn Kathīr ash-Shāf‘ī (d. 774 A.H.)
- Ibn an-Naḥās ash-Shāf‘ī (d. 814 A.H.)
- Imam Taqiyyuddīn Al-Maqrīzī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 845 A.H.)
- Imam Badr ad-dīn Al-Ahdal aṣ-Ṣūfī al-Ash‘arī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 855 A.H)
- Imam Qāsim b. Quṭlūbughā (d. 879 A.H.) & Other Ḥanafī Scholars
- Imam Muḥammad al-Birikiwī al-Ḥanafī (d. 981 A.H.)
- Imam Ibn Ṭāhir Al-Fattanī al-Ḥanafī (d. 986 A.H.)
- Imam Zayn ad-Dīn al-Ma‘barī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 987 A.H.)
- Imam Aḥmad b. ‘Abdul Aḥad As-Sirhindī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1034 A.H.)
- Imam Aḥmad b. ‘Abdul Qādir ar-Rūmī Al-Ḥanafī (d. 1041 A.H.)
- Al-Allāmah Ḍiyā’ ad-Dīn Ṣāliḥ b. Mahdī Al-Kawkabānī (d. 1108 A.H.)
- Imam Son‘ Allah al-Ḥalabī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1120 A.H.)
- Imam Dāwūd al-Qārisī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1169 A.H.)
- Imam Ad-Dahlawī (d. 1176 A.H.)
- Imam Thanā’ullah Al-‘Uthmānī Al-Pānībuttī Al-Ḥanafī (1225 A.H.)
- Imam ash-Shawkānī (d. 1255 A.H.)
- Imam Al-Ālūsī al-Ḥanafī (d. 1270 A.H.)
- Al-Bakrī ad-Dimyāṭī ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 1310 A.H.)
- ‘Abdullah al-Ghumārī (d. 1413 A.H.)
Non-“Wahhabi” Quotes on Venerating the Dead
by
Bassam Zawadi
bassam zawadi got utterly throttled by Tahir Muhammad and Salman Awan
unsurprisingly he misquoted ibn aqil here. pretty pathetic but unsurprising from someone like Bassam
For arguments sake let's go past this one quote what about the rest?
I can’t see the quotes that are being used, but if the claim is that these scholars said istighathah is shirk, I’m pretty sure its not just seeking help. Therefore, the question would be asked ‘when’ does istighathah become shirk? As mentioned in the podcast, Ml Thanawi had concern with such statements from scholars as a lot of them were vague and open-ended. Therefore, it is important that tahrir is done of the statements for them to coincide with set principles (should also be noted that the quotes I assume he is referring to, actually differ with each other as to why and when it is shirk). For example, the list states Shah Wali Allah as saying istighathah as shirk, but Shah Wali Allah’s definition of shirk has been quoted at length by both Ml Thanawi and Sh Hatim, therefore one would interpret his statement in light of the principles he has highlighted.
@@imamzakariyaacademy A few points:
With regards the quotes academically we should assess them first otherwise we would have to assume all of them meant Istiqlal and this would be built on the assumption that this belief is new and possibly the assumption that this opinion is unique to Salafis wahabis etc. The whole reason of these quotes is to show otherwise. For a more critical review of some of Hatim al Awnis views mentioned in this book read Bassam Zawadis “can istiqlalis define ibadah easily?”
These quotes can be found in his article “non wahabi quotes on venerating the dead”.
One shouldn’t assume all of these quotes must mean the belief of istiqlal. Especially if they didn’t define it with that condition (grey area?).
I would also ask where this qa’idah Ashraf ali al Thanwi brings for something to be possible is from? As in who in the past mentioned this principle in this context?
Here are some quotes:
Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Al-Qarāfī al-Mālikī (d. 684 A.H.):
تعظم حماقة الداعي وتجرؤه فيسأل هللا تعالى أن يفوض إليه من أمور العالم ما هو مختص بالقدرة واإلرادة الربانية من
اإليجاد واإلعدام والقضاء النافذ المحتم وقد دل القاطع العقلي على استحالة ثبوت ذلك لغير هللا تعالى فيكون طلب ذلك
طلبا للشركة مع هللا تعالى في الملك وهو كفر وقد وقع ذلك لجماعة من جهال الصوفية فيقولون فّلن أعطي كلمة كن
ويسألون أن يعطوا كلمة كن التي في قوله تعالى إنما أمرنا لشيء إذا أردناه أن نقول له كن فيكون وما يعلمون معنى هذه
الكلمة في كّلم هللا تعالى وال يعلمون ما معنى إعطائها إن صح أنها أعطيت وهذه أغوار بعيدة الروم على العلماء
المحصلين فضّل عن الصوفية المتخرصين فيهلكون من حيث ال يشعرون ويعتقدون أنهم إلى هللا تعالى متقربون وهم
عنه متباعدون عصمنا هللا تعالى من الفتن وأسبابها والجهاالت وشبهها
Here he is speaking clearly about Allah giving powers to the mayyit and that Sufis have fallen into this.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Unfortunately again a very weak and biased review on MbAW's dawah and a pick and choose method. A Awni view of Ibn Taymiyyah and MbAW
'Awni's book has been refuted very strongly by Shaykh Turkumani in his book:
حقيقة التوحيد العبادة
Appreciate the feedback.
This is a review of Bunzel’s book, if you believe that the da’wah of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab was presented incorrectly, please read Bunzel’s book and provide a critique. You can explain what was misquoted or half-quoted. If you can bring a good case, we will be happy to share your critique.
The book by Haqiqat Tawhid al-‘Ibadah was published before this book of Sh Hatim under review. And from my reading of Sh Turkumani’s book, he was mainly refuting a point by Sh Hatim about the mutakallimun’s position on the meaning of ilah and ibn Taymiyyah’s critique of them. Although a point which can be discussed, the current book of Sh Hatim under review does not discuss this point. Also, majority of the arguments are not mentioned in the book of Sh Turkumani, therefore I did not mention it.
You used hatim al awni the reject who cticises the beloved and noble companion muwaiwhya رضي الله عنه, this hatim al awni reject who has no problem with happily sitting with shia who curse the mothers of the believers رضي الله عنهن,the you use a reaserch of a kaffir when has the kuffar every been reliable to take testimony from and yet you are here taking from a kaffir who has the audacity to try to soeak about Islam.
إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ (55
Indeed the worst creation in the sight of Allah are the disbelivers so they dont believe.
Surah Al anfaal 55@@imamzakariyaacademy
There are deobandi schokars who strongly disagree with Awni's book. Also, the interpretation of istiqlal and the meaning of the words of Ashraf Ali has been differed upon. And even though it might not be technically shirk, it is still has mushabaha with shirk and takfir can be done.
Also, the belief behind istighatha is not discussed. There are those who believe in istighatha with the intention the one who is called upon is constantly hearing and seeing and has tasarruf etc. Istighatha should properly defined before discussing.
Who has differed over the interpretation of Ml Ashraf Ali Thanawi's words? If you read the risalah, he very clearly highlights his principles. If you have an alternative interpretation of his risalah, please provide the relevant passages and this other explanation. Also, is the resemblance to shirk the dhabita for takfir? Or is it holding beliefs that have been clearly negated by the Sharia?
As for istighatha, then if the usul of istiqlaal and ta'thir is understood, then istighatha which is shirk becomes clear.
😂😂😂 the arabic in you logo is so wrong. At least learn arabic smh
Auto generated logo. Will be amended.
😂😂😂 The English in “your” comment is so wrong. At least learn English smh
“Anyone who hates imam Muhammad ibn abdelwahhab is either a mushrik who loves shirk or a jaahil no in between”-shamsi from dusdawah …I didn’t watch this video cause its long so idk if you guys are gonna praise him (miaw) or refute him but just wanted to put this out there…Salamualaykum
Hahaa 😂😂😂
I understand brother Shamsi said this, but do you actually agree with this statement?
@@mshafi4180 na’am alhamdulilah
The greatest muslim scholars in the hanbali madhab of his time refuted him and youre quoting shamsi 💀💀
@@kiyopon4439 ashari sufi qubooris you mean?
You used hatim al awni the reject who cticises the beloved and noble companion muwaiwhya رضي الله عنه, this hatim al awni reject who has no problem with happily sitting with shia who curse the mothers of the believers رضي الله عنهن,the you use a reaserch of a kaffir when has the kuffar every been reliable to take testimony from and yet you are here taking from a kaffir who has the audacity to try to soeak about Islam.
إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ (55
Indeed the worst creation in the sight of Allah are the disbelivers so they dont believe.
Surah Al anfaal 55
What a strange comment. Assuming what you said about Hatim Awni is correct, how does it change the accuracy of his arguments on this topic.
And this isn't accepting the testimony of a kafir, the kafir has done research which is referenced. So, a person can easily check his references to see if he's accurate.
In a nutshell, you can't respond so decided to attack personalities rather than the arguments
الحكمة ضالة المؤمن
@@unkn0wnserv3r Perfectly said.