Archive

Archive for the ‘Ahmed Ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullah)’ Category

Position of the Scholars on beard

November 2, 2015 1 comment

 

All the ‘ulama’ (scholars) of as-Salaf us-Salih (the Righteous early Muslims), including the Four Imams, agree that shaving the beard is haram (prohibited). They consider shaving it an impermissible mutilation, as has been reported from Umar Bin Abdul Aziz – [At-Tarikh by Ibn Asakir].

They considered the man who shaved his beard effeminate. Many of them would not accept his testimony or allow him to lead the prayers.

 

THE HANAFIS

According to the Hanafis:

“It is prohibited for a man to cut his beard … as for cutting it shorter than a fist-length – as is done by some people from the west and by the effeminate men – no one permits this. And as for shaving it completely, it is the doing of the Indian Jews and the Persian Magians” [Persian Magians-Followers of an old religion, possibly the same as the “Zoroastrians”]

[Ad-Durr ul-Mukhtar].

 

Ibn-Abidayn said:

“It is prohibited for a man to cut his beard.”

(Radd ul-Muhtar [2:418])

 

THE MALIKIS

According to the Malikis:

“Shaving the beard is prohibited, as is cutting it if it causes a (clear) mutilation. But if it becomes oversized, and if cutting it would not appear as a mutilation, then it may be cut; but that would be disliked and contrary to that which is better.”

[Sharh ur-Risalah by Abu al-Hasan, and the commentary on it by al-Adwi]

 

 

Al-`Adwi said:

“It has been reported from Malik that he hated shaving anything under the jaws, until he said, ‘It is from the doing of the Magians.’ And it is prohibited to remove the hair of the beard.”

 

[Sharh ur-Risalah by Abu al-Hasan, and the commentary on it by al-Adwi (2:411)]

 

Ibn Abd al-Barr said:

“It is prohibited to shave the beard, and it is not done except by effeminate men.”

 

[At-Tamhid]

 

THE SHAFI’IS

As for the Shafi’is, al-Imam ash-Shafi’i has expressed that it is prohibited to shave the beard

[al-Umm].

 

Also, al-Athru’i said,

“The correct position is that it is prohibited to totally shave the beard without a (medical) problem with it.”

[Sharh ul-Ubab].

 

 

THE HANBALIS

The Hanbali’s agree without exception that it is prohibited to shave the beard.

[Al-Insaf, Sharh ul-Muntaha, etc.].

 

Ibn Taymiyyah stated:

“It is prohibited to shave the beard.”

 [Al-Ikhtiyarat ul-Ilmiyyah (p.6)]

 

As-Saffarini said:

“It is agreed in our mathhab that it is prohibited to shave the beard.”

[Ghitha ul-Albab (1:376)].

 

IBN HAZM

Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi said:

“All of the scholars agree that shaving the beard is a form of mutilation, and is prohibited.”

[Maratib ul-Ijma’ (p.157), and al-Muhalla (2:189)]

 

 

IBN TAYMIYYAH

Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said:

“Because of the authentic hadiths, it is prohibited to shave the beard, and no one has ever permitted it.”

 

[From the book: The beard betwee Salaf and Khalaf, page 2-4 by Sh. Muhammed al-Jibaly]

 

 

 

The Light of Paradise


 

Ibn Kathir in his commentary on the aayah:

And they will have therein their sustenance, morning and evening. Such is the Paradise, which We shall give as an inheritance to those of Our slave who have been al-Muttaqoon [pious and righteous]” [19:62-63] said,

“This means something approximate to the times of day and night, it does not mean that there will be a day and night there. They will know the passing of time by the changes in the light”

[Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 4/471]

 

al-Qurtubee said,

“The scholars said there is no night and day in Paradise, rather they will be in eternal everlasting light. They will know when night comes because curtains or screens will be put up and doors will be closed, and they will know when day comes because the curtains or screens will be taken down and the doors will be opened. This was mentioned by Abul-Faraj ibn al-Jawzee”

[al-Qurtubee, at-Tadhkirah, p. 504

 

On the same subject, Ibn Taymiyyah said,

“There is no sun and moon in Paradise, and no day or night, but they will know morning and evening from a light that shines from the direction of the Throne”

[Majmu’ Fataawa Shaikh al-Islaam, 4/312]

 

[Source: al-Jannah wa an-Naar by Dr. Umar Sulaiman al-Ashqar, pg 69]

 

Is hadd punishment for apostasy or similar crimes to be implemented only by the sultan (ruler) or his deputy? Sh. Ibn Taymiyyah

January 11, 2015 4 comments

 

Regarding the query that hudood punishment can only be carried out by the ruler or his deputy. Then Shaikh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah [rahimahullah] said:

 

1 – The master may carry out the hadd punishment on his slave, based on the evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Carry out the hadd punishments on those whom your right hands possess.”

[Narrated by Ahmad (736) and others; classed as hasan by al-Arna’oot because of corroborating evidence. Al-Albaani was inclined to the view that these are the words of ‘Ali, as stated in al-Irwa’ (2325).]

 

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“If the slave woman of one of you commits zina, let him carry out the hadd punishment on her.”

[Narrated by Abu Dawood (4470); there is a similar report in al-Saheehayn.]

 

I do not know of anyone among the fuqaha’ of hadeeth who disagreed with the view that he should carry out hadd punishments on her, such as the hadd punishments for zina, slander and drinking; there is no difference of opinion among the Muslims concerning the fact that he may carry out disciplinary punishments (ta’zeer) on him. But they differed as to whether he may carry out punishments of execution or amputation on him, such as executing him for apostasy or for reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or cutting off his hand for stealing.

 

Two reports were narrated from Imam Ahmad concerning this. The first says that it is permissible, which is the view narrated from al-Shaafa’i, and the second says that it is not permissible, like one of the two views of the companions of al-Shaafa’i. This is also the view of Maalik. And it was narrated in a saheeh report from Ibn ‘Umar that he cut off the hand of a slave of his who stole, and it is narrated in a saheeh report from Hafsah that she executed a slave woman of hers who admitted to practising witchcraft, and that was based on the opinion of Ibn ‘Umar. So the hadeeth is evidence for those who say that it is permissible for the master to carry out the hadd punishment on his slave on the basis of his knowledge, in all cases.

 

 

2 – The most that can be said about that is that he [one acting without the permission of ruler] is transgressing the position of the ruler, and the ruler may pardon the one who carried out a hadd punishment that must be carried out without referring the matter to him.

 

3 – Although this was a hadd punishment, it also comes under the heading of killing a harbi (a non-Muslim in a state of war against Islam), and it is permissible for anyone to kill a harbi.

 

4 – Similar things happened at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), such as:

#the hypocrite who was killed by ‘Umar without the permission of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), when the hypocrite did not agree with the ruling of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Then Qur’aan was revealed approving ‘Umar’s action.

 

# And there was the daughter of Marwaan who was killed by that man, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called him the supporter of Allaah and His Messenger.

That is because the one whose execution becomes necessary because of his plot to corrupt the religion is not like one who is executed because of his sin of zina and the like.

End quote from al-Saarim al-Maslool (285-286).

Taken from: Islamqa

 

The reality of Tawakkul (reliance)


 

The reality of Tawakkul is:

for the heart to rely on Allaah, along with taking the correct means, with complete certainty that Allaah the Exalted is the Provider, Creator, and the Giver and Taker of life. Also, that there is no deity worthy of worship besides Him the Exalted and no Lord except Him.

 

 

Tawakkul is broader than Isti`aanah (seeking help) because Isti`aanah is for a person to ask Allaah the Exalted for His Help in a particular matter; it is a branch of Tawakkul. One relies on Allaah the Exalted in seeking His Help in their affairs. Also, Tawakkul is broader in that it has to do with relying on Allaah the Exalted in bringing about beneficial things and driving harmful things away, as well as other issues.

 

Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:

“Tawakkul comprises of reliance on Allaah, in order for Him to help the person do what they are ordered to do, as well as reliance on Allaah in giving the person what they cannot achieve. Isti`aanah (seeking help) is in actions, and Tawakkul is broader than that. Tawakkul is also in bringing about good things and driving harmful things away, as Allaah the Exalted Says:

{If only they had been satisfied with what Allaah and His Messenger gave them and said: ‘Sufficient for us is Allaah; Allaah will give us of His bounty, and [so will] His Messenger; indeed, we are desirous toward Allaah,’ [it would have been better for them].} [Quran 9:59]”

Majmoo’ Al-Fataawa (8/177)

 

Therefore, Tawakkul occurs in obtaining beneficial things and pushing harmful things away, and Isti`aanah is only needed in worship. Therefore, Tawakkul is broader than Isti`aanah, and Allaah the Exalted has combined both principles when He Says (what means):

{It is You we worship and You we ask for help.} [Quran 1:5]

Therefore, worship is for Him, help is sought from Him, and reliance is on Him Alone, without any partners.

 

If things occur opposite to what you hope, then thank Allaah and do not fear anything. If you leave and submit your matters to Allaah, and constantly turn back to Allaah and rely on Him, then Allaah the Exalted will grant you victory and will help you.

 

[Reliance on Allah, by Shaikh Salih al-Munajjid, page 9-10]

 

Ibn Taymiyyah Concerning Predestination (Qadar)

August 27, 2014 1 comment

 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah  (may Allah have mercy on him and reward him greatly) said:

“The viewpoint of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa ‘ah on this issue is that which is indicated by the Qur’an and Sunnah, and that which was followed by the Sahaba (Companions), the Muhaajiroon (Emigrants to Madeenah) and Ansaar (Helpers, Muslim residents of Madeenah), and those who followed them in truth. This view is that Allah is the Creator and Sovereign of all things, which includes all independent entities and their attributes, such as people’s deeds and other things.

 

Whatever He wills happens, and whatever He does not will does not happen. Nothing can happen except by His will and decree. Nothing is beyond Him if He wills it; rather, He is the One Who is Able to do all things, and He does not will anything but He is able to do it. Allah knows what has happened and what is yet to come; if it is not to happen, He knows how it would have been if it had happened. This includes people’s actions and other things. Allah, the Exalted, decreed the decrees of His creation before He created them; He decreed their lifespans, their provision and their deeds, and wrote that down, and He wrote down their ultimate destiny, who will be blessed and who will be doomed.

 
So they (Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa ‘ah) believe that He created all things, that He is Able to do all things, that His will encompasses all that exists, and that He knew and decided and wrote all things before they came into being. “

Majmoo ‘ al-Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, 8/449.

 

He [rahimahullah] also said:

“The Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and aaimmah (the leading scholars) of this ummah are agreed that people are commanded to do that which Allah has commanded them, and are forbidden to do that which Allah has forbidden. They are agreed on their belief in His promise and His warning, which are spoken of in the Qur’an and Sunnah.
They are agreed that there is no justification for anyone with regard to neglecting any obligatory duty or committing any forbidden act; but Allah has perfect evidence against His slaves. “

Majmoo ‘ al-Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, 8/452.

 

Read: “If the people one day want revival, then Al-Qadar (Divine Predestination) has no choice but to answer.”

 

 

“Among the things that are agreed upon by the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and aaimmah (the leading scholars) of this ummah is their belief in Divine will and Predestination (al-Qadaa ‘ wal-Qadar), and that Allah is the Creator of all things. What He wills happens, and what He does not will does not happen. Allah sends astray whomsoever He wills, and He guides whomsoever He wills. They also believe that people have their own will and freedom to choose, so they do by their own will and power that which Allah enables them to do, but they point out that people do not will anything except that which Allah wills. “

Majmoo ‘ al-Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, 8/459.

 

[Taken from: Divine will and Predestination by Umar Sulaiman al-Ashqar, page 122-124]

 

Do Souls Die?


 

Ibn Taymiyyah [rahimahullah] said:

“Souls are no doubt created, but they do not cease to exist. Their death occurs when they are separated from the body, and at the second Trumpet-blast the souls will return to the bodies. “

[Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 4/279]

 

The commentator on at-Tahaawiyyah also discussed this matter, and said:

“The people differed as to whether the soul dies or not.

One group said, it dies because it is a nafs, and every nafs will taste death … If the angels will die, then it is more appropriate that the human soul will die too.

 

Others said that the souls will not die, because they were created to abide forever; what dies is the body. They said, this is proven by the ahaadeeth which indicate that the souls will be blessed or tormented after they depart (from the bodies), until Allah returns them to their bodies.

 

The correct view is to say that the death of the nafs is when it is separated from its body and departs from it. If this is what is meant by its death, then it will taste death. But if it is meant that it will cease to exist altogether, then it does not die in this sense, rather it will abide after it has been created, either in bliss or in torment. .. Allah tells us that the people of Paradise

“will never taste death therein except the first death of this world” [Qur’an 44: 56]

and that is the death which means the separation of the soul from the body.”

[Sharh at-Tahaawiyyah, p. 446]

[The minor resurrection, page-134]

Shah Wali-Allah ad-Dihlawi on Ibn Taymiyyah [rahimahullah]

March 25, 2014 5 comments

 

Makhdum Muhammad Mu’in Sindhi, author of Darasat al-Labib, wrote to Shah Wall Allah, seeking his opinion about some of the views of Ibn Taymiyyah.

 

Shah Wali Allah on Ibn Taymiyyah

 

Shah Wall Allah wrote in reply:

 

My approach about all Muslim religious thinkers is that they are ‘uduul, that is, they possess correct faith and proper conduct. This is as the Prophet has said: ‘In every age people with piety and faith will represent [interpret] the religion [a].’ They may believe in certain things on which there may not be unanimity, but if such matters of their belief are not against the clear Qur’anic injunctions, the sunnah of the Prophet and the consensus of the community {ijma’), [criticism of them is not justified].

 

Our assessment of Ibn Taymiyyah after full investigation is that he was a scholar of the ‘Book of God’ and had full command over its etymological and juristic implications. He remembered by heart the traditions of the Prophet and accounts of elders (salaf) and understood well their etymological and juristic purpose and meaning. He was a recognized scholar of syntax (nahw) and semantics (lughat).

 

He was an authority on the Hanbalite jurisprudence and its principles and branches. He excelled in intelligence and brilliance. He argued in defence of ahl al-Sunnah with great eloquence and force.

 

No innovation or irreligious act is reported about him. Only certain matters on which he was harassed by his contemporaries have been reported to us. But there is not a single matter on which he is without his defence based on the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

 

So it is difficult to find a man in the whole world who possesses the qualities of Ibn Taymiyyah. No one can come anywhere near him in the force of his speech and writing. People who harassed him [and got him thrown in prison] did not possess even one-tenth of his scholarly excellence … In this matter the differences of the ‘ulama’ resemble the differences of the Companions of the Prophet and it is necessary to abstain from making any comments on such matters.’

 

[Maktubat-i Shah Wali Allah (Ahmadi Press, Delhi), 26-9]

 

[a] I was unable to find the saying attributed to Prophet Muhammed sallallahu alaihi wasallam. If anyone finds of similar sort, please do message me at: tawheedmovement.com@gmail.com

%d bloggers like this: