Al Salaf Al Salih
Vs
Ghulah Hazimiya
(Refuting lies against Salaf By Different Groups Of Ghulah)
Ibn Malik
@exposing_hazimiyah
Third Nullifier of islam : Whoever doesn’t make Takfeer upon the disbelievers,
or doubts in their Kuffr, or corrects their way or beliefs
This is the third Nullifier mentioned in “Nawaqid al-Islam”, and the Scholars
have unanimously agreed upon it, in entirety. And the criterion returns back
to affirming the texts and accepting the ruling of Allah, the Exalted and
Majestic, so whoever doesn’t make Takfeer upon whom Allah has made
Takfeer upon, then he has rejected Allah’s ruling and abstained from acting
upon it and denied His text and displayed arrogance to His command.
The Scholars have mentioned this principle in numerous matters, such as
whoever doesn’t make Takfeer upon the one that calls upon ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib
whoever doesn’t make Takfeer upon the Nusayriyyah, and whoever doesn’t
make Takfeer upon the Jews and Christians, and what’s similar to that.
The one who doesn’t understand the framework and criterion for this Nullifier
would fall into chain Takfeer, and this is what occurred with groups from the
Ghulaat, the most famous example being “al-Jama’ah al-Islamiyyah al-
Musallaha” in Algeria after it deviated. It (eventually lead them to) make
peace-treaties with the Tawagheet so it could branch out to fight
Mujahedeen.
The Ghulah of our time are biggest muqalideen Even more extreme in blind
following then Sufiyah,
They Follow any Abu Online who is making unrestricted takfir upon 3rd
Nullifier using the Mutashabiah (general & broad) Text of Salaf & Khalaf
Ghulah Don't Differentiate Between Matters which are clear & unclear &
rulings are based upon that while the salaf differentiate between these
two matters and give rulings according to it.
Ghulah Don't Differentiate between general ruling and ruling specifically
someone with kufr they balance everyone in same category
May Allah save us from misguidance after being guided
The Manat of the Third Nullifier is Kufr of Rejection & Opposing
Imām al-Barbahārī (Died 311H) says in Sharh as-Sunnah;
“We don’t take out anyone of ahlul-qibla from Islām until he opposes an
Āyah from the book of Allāh or opposes something from the
reports of Rasūlullāh (Saw) or prays to other than Allāh, or sacrifices to
other than Allāh, so if he does anything from that, it becomes
OBLIGATORY upon you to take him out of Islām.”
Now Lets Check the most common
general Text use by Ghulah to deceive
their followers in thinking that Takfir is
Asludeen (No Need Of Hujjjah) which is
not for them but against them
1. Al-Bukhari said:
I looked into the speech of the Majus and Jews and I never saw a people more
misguided in their Kufr than them and I'm dumbfounded at those who don't declare
takfir of them except whoever doesn't know their Kufr.
[Khalq Afaal al-Ebaad 1/33]
2. Abu Obaid al-Qasim bin Salam said:
I looked into the speech of the Majus and Jews and I never saw a people more
misguided in their Kufr than them and I'm dumbfounded at those who don't declare
takfir of them except whoever doesn't know their Kufr. whoever said that the Quran is
created then he's a kafir and whosoever doubts his disbelief is a disbeliever
[Majmu fatawa 12/509]
3.Aqeedah of Two Razis:
“And whoever claims that the Qurān is created he is a disbeliever in Allāh the All-Mighty
with a kufr that brings him out of the millah (religion). And whoever doubts in his kufr –
among those who understand – he is (also) a kāfir.”
[Sharh Usūl I’tiqād Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamā’ah by AlLālakāī]
4. Yahyā ibn Khalaf Abū Muhammad narrated said:
“Then I came to Kūfah and I met Abū Bakr ibn ‘Ayyāsh. So I asked him (about the one
who says the Qurān is created)? So he said: ‘(He is a) kāfir. And whoever does not say
that he is a kāfir, then he is (also) a kāfir.’ Then Abū Bakr said: ‘Does one doubt that the
Jew and the Christian both are disbelievers?! So whoever doubts regarding these that
they are kuffār, then he (himself) is a kāfir.And the one who says that the Qurān is
created is like them (i.e. the Jew and the Christian).’”
[As-Sunnah by Al-Karmānī]
These are Kalimat Ul Huq Indeed but Ghulah
Intends falsehood by it
Saliheen differentiate between general rulings & specific rulings & they gave rulings based
upon how much the matter is clear like the kufr of jews Christians nusayriyah etc this from
clear matters upon which their is ijma.Saliheen don't do Unrestricted Takfir (3rd nullifier)
Now Lets check the more muhakam (Specific & clear text) It will prove
that rulings (3rd nullifier) based upon how much matter is clear & takir
established after hujjah & Upon adhir if the matter is clear :
1. Al-Qādhī Abū Ya’lah also mentioned the two narrations in his book “Ar-Riwāyatayn
wal-Waj’hayn” where he wrote:“Issue: The madhab doesn’t disagree in making takfīr
upon the mu’tazilah based upon the statements they make, such as claiming the
Qur’ānis created, negating seeing Allāh (in the Ākhirah), the creation create their own
actions (instead of Allāh), etc. Since the evidences havepointed towards that which is
not the place to show it here. Therefore, whoever refrains from making takfīr upon
them, does this refrainer become a kāfir or not? Al-Marrūthī, Ya’qūb and Abū Tālib
citedthat he doesn’t become a kāfir. He mentioned in the narration of Abū Tālib,
whoever says the Qur’ān is created, then he’s a kāfir. And whoever
doesn’t make takfīr upon the one who says the Qur’ān is created, then I do not make
takfīr upon him.Liikewise, al-Marrūthī cited from a group of people in Tartūs who make
takfīr upon whoever doesn’t make takfīr, so he said; I haven’t heard ofthis at all. And
this is in a fashion of emphasising having knowledge about anything concerning
making takfīr upon them. So it’s as if his madhab is that they are kuffār, i.e. the
Jahmiyyah, but whoever doesn’t make takfīr upon them is not a kāfir. So what’s
apparent from this is that he didn’t make takfīr upon them. Also with the case of Abū
Tālib’s citation, it has been said to him, the people on
the frontline make takfīr upon whoever doesn’t make takfīr...” [End Quote]
[Ar-Riwāyatayn wal-Waj’hayn” P.108]
2. As al-Khallāl narrated in as-Sunnah” (Narration1868) that Ya’qūb Ibn Bukhtān
asked Abā ‘Abdillāh about the one who claims the Qur’ān is
created, so Ahmad replied: I was reluctant to say he’s a kāfir, until I pondered and
analysed, so I saw the statement of Allāh :(Then whoever argues with you about it
after this knowledge (i.e. Qur’ān) has come to you."
Al-Khallāl also narrated (#1869) on the authority of Ibn ad-Dawraqī from Abī
‘Abdillāh that he said, we were reluctant to speak about this matter, then their
reality became clear to us, due to the statement of Allāh in His book, “Then
whoever argues with you about it.” [3:61]
And he narrated (#1847) on the authority of Hanbal, I heard Abā ‘Abdillāh say,
Allāh said in His book,
“And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection
so that he may hear the words of Allāh” [9:6], so Jibrīl heard it from Allāh, and the
prophet heard it from Jibrīl, and the companions of the prophet heard it from the
prophet and the Qur’ān is the speech of Allāh which is uncreated, we do not doubt
nor hesitate regarding this. Moreover, the names and attributes of Allāh
in the Qur’ān is from the knowledge of Allāh, and His attributes are from Him.
Therefore, whoever claims that the Qur’ān is created, then he is
a kāfir, as the Qur’ān is the uncreated speech of Allāh, it came from Him and it will
return to Him, and we were reluctant to speak about this matter, until these
people innovated what they have innovated, and mentioned what they mentioned,
they called the people towards what
they called them towards, so their reality became clear to us, which is disbelief in
the sight of Allāh the supreme.”
Ibn Abī Ya’lah mentioned in “Tabaqāt al-Hanābilah” (2/553): I read in the book of
Abū Bakr al-Khallāl that he said, I was informed by ‘Alī Ibn
al-Hussayn Ibn Hārūn, who said Muhammad Ibn Abī Hārūn al-Warrāq narrated to
me, who said I heard Ya’qūb Ibn Ibrāhīm ad-Dawraqī say, I
asked Ahmad Ibn Hanbal about the one who says the Qur’ān is created, so he
replied;I didn’t use to make takfīr upon them until I read verses from the Qur’ān, “If
you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge (i.e.
Qur’ān).” [2:120], and His statement, “after this knowledge (i.e. Qur’ān) has come to
you.” [3:61] and His statement, “He has sent it down with His knowledge.” [4:166],
so the Qur’ān is from the knowledge of Allāh, and whoever claims the
knowledge of Allāh is created (meaning Allāh was ignorant before creating his
knowledge), then he is a kāfir, and whoever says that he doesn’t
know whether the knowledge of Allāh is created or uncreated, then he is also a
kāfir and much worse than the one who says the Qur’ān is
created.
3. Ar-Rāzī mentioned in “al-Mah’sūl” (2/942),
“They differed in whether the Ijmā’ is established with the opposition of those
who are mistaken
from ahlul-qiblah in the matters of Usūl, so if we didn’t make takfīr upon them,
we took into account their statement, since they are from the believers, and
among the ummah the statement of those besides them is considered a
statement of “some” believers, therefore it wouldn’t be a hujjah.
And if we made takfīr upon them, the Ijmā’ is established without them,
however it’s not permissible to hold onto our own Ijmā’ in making takfīr upon
them in these matters, since it’s only established they are excluded from the
Ijmā’ after the confirmation of them falling into kufr
in these matters, so if we affirm their kufr regarding such matters by our own
Ijmā’ alone (a group of believers are making takfīr upon other
believers for opposing them), which necessitates circulation (of them making
takfīr back upon us).”
And the explainer of his book al-Qarāfī mentioned in “an-Nafā’is” (6/2844):
“The summary; Is that making takfīr upon them via our own Ijmā’ is a branch issue of
our Ijmā’ being considered a hujjah, and it would only
be a hujjah if those who oppose us are considered kuffār to begin with, wherein we
remain as being the whole ummah, and thus necessitates circulation.”
Refer to “At-Tah’sīl min al-Mah’sūl” (2/75) and “Al-Hāsilmkin al-Mah’sūl” (2/521)
The main point is that it’s necessary to observe and analyse this problem concerning
the Ijmā’ when we say, “That the Imāms agreed upon making takfīr upon whoever
doesn’t make takfīr upon the claimer of the Qur’ān being created”, since if there was an
issue concerning the establishment of the Ijmā’ in making takfīr upon the one who
claims the Qur’ān is created, then imagine the case in making takfīr upon the one who
doesn’t make takfīr upon him (such an Ijmā’ would be more deserving of being Bātil)
4. On the authority of Abī Sulaymān Dāwūd Ibn al-Husayn al-Bayhaqī,
he said it has reached me that Al-Hulwānī al-Hassan Ibn ‘Alī said, “I don’t
make takfīr upon the one who abstains from having an opinion
concerning the Qur’ān (being created or uncreated)”, so they
abandoned his knowledge.
Abū Sulaymān said, I asked Salamah Ibn Shabīb about the knowledge of
al-Hulwānī, so he replied; “It’s thrown in the garbage”, and Salamah
(Ibn Shabīb) further stated; “Whoever doesn’t testify the kufr of the
kāfir, then he is a kāfir.”
The relevant point from this narration is the commentary by Imām ath-
Thahabī رﺣﻤﮧ ﷲand his rebuke against Salamah Ibn Shabīb by saying,
“This is ghulu and kharijism from salamah”.
[ “Tah’thīb at-Tah’thīb” (2/303)]
Since making takfīr upon the wāqif is unlike making takfīr upon the one who
claims the Qur’ān is created, and there’s no doubt that refraining
from making takfeer upon the waqif is a lighter matter according to the
scholars than not making takfīr upon the one who claims it’s created.
And this waqf could be a a waqf of ignorance (of the meaning and reality), so
the individual is to be taught and isn’t labelled an innovator
But
it could be a waqf of doubt and confusion, so he is called an innovator (until
Hujjah Established) , but isn’t made takfīr upon according to the scholars, and
it could be a waqf of caution and piety, and it could be a waqf of deception
and concealing one’s beliefs, so the individual would be tagged along with the
valley of the jahmiyyah.
Imām ath-Thahabī (( اﷲ رﺣﻤﻪalso said (in rejecting takfīr upon unclear
implications), “There’s no doubt that some scholars of nathr (i.e. scholars
of kalām theology) exaggerated in negation, rejection, distortion and trying
to eliminate any deficiency (from Allāh) according to their claim Which
made them fall into bid’ah or describing the creator with non-existent
attributes. Just like there is a group among the scholars of athar (i.e.
muhaddithīn) who went into exaggeration in affirmation, whilst accepting
the weak and munkar hadīths under the pretext of adopting the sunnah and
following the prophet, so an uproar occurred, and hatred took place, with
each side declaring the other innovators, and each side declaring the other
to be kuffār (i.e. one group calling others jahmiyyah mushrikīn & other
group labelling others with anthropomorphism). And we seek refuge in
Allāh from desires and arguing about the Dīn, and from making takfīr upon a
muwahhid muslim due to the lāzim (implication) of his statement, while he
runs away from such an implication, and he eliminates attributes of
dificiency from the Lord and
glorifies Him.”
5.Many Considered this to be minor kufr not major kufr to being unclear at that time
However, Holding the kufr in claiming the Qur’ān is created upon minor (kufr) is a Bātil
statement, in which the famous statements of the salaf
reject it, and there’s no need to get into details surrounding this point.
However, there’s a group of scholars, such as as-Sijzī, Qawwām as-Sunnah, al-Bayhaqī,
Ibn Qudāmah and Ibn Taymiyyah who mentioned the difference of opinion in what it’s
held upon, and that the opinion of the vast majority is that it’s held upon major kufr.
[Refer to “Risālat as-Sijzī ilā ahli zabīd” (page 153), “al-Hujjah fī bayān al-Mahajjah”
(2/552), “Hikāyat al-Munātharah fil-Qur’ān” (page 20),
and “Majmū’ al-Fatāwā” (12/486)]
And if this was the case, then it cannot be said that an-Nawawī and those who agreed with
him (who said it’s minor kufr) fell into kufr generally or individually, the same way it cannot be
said that whoever held the kufr of abandoning Salāh upon minor kufr has fell into kufr
generally or individually. However, if an-Nawawī said that the Qur’ān is created, then now it’s
possible to say he has fallen into kufr, due to the clear differentiation
between theory based knowledge and between implementing actions put in practice in the
likes of these matters.
And just to draw the difference between theory and practise, is that whoever said abandoning
salāh is not kufr, due to holding the reported Hadīths concerning it upon minor kufr, due to
doubts or indicative factors that appeared to him, then he doesn’t become a kāfir, just as the
Imāms aren’t made takfīr upon for adopting the opinion of not making takfīr upon abandoning
salāh.
Concerning making takfīr upon everyone who falls into kufr ta’wīl or making takfīr
upon unclear matters unrestrictedly, we do not know of anyone to attribute this too,
nor is it tied to the knowledge-based methodology, nor does it correspond with the
sīrah of the salaf (in how they applied takfīr), nor does it agree with the usūl of asmā’
and ahkām (the principles of applying islamic labels and rulings upon the people).
rather its the way Of Hururiya
Compiled By : Ibn Malik
