The Excuse of Ignorance in Tawheed with ibn Taymiyah رحمة الله عليه
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июл 2024
- In this video, “The Excuse of Ignorance in Tawheed with Ibn Taymiyyah,” رحمة الله عليه we explore whether ignorance can be an excuse in matters of Tawheed and Usul al-Din or if such a person must be declared a Kafir immediately without looking at individual circumstances.
Additionally, we examine the assertion that anyone who does not perform Takfir on the person who unknowingly fell in some type of shirk is also a Kafir.
This video addresses numerous issues within the modern-day Salafi movement, particularly among some followers of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab, regarding the practice of Takfir without considering individual circumstances and cases. We analyze broad, general texts عام stating that “whoever does x is a Kafir” and their actual application to individuals. This detailed discussion includes quotes from prominent scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Hazm, and Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab. Furthermore, we challenge the claims of consensus (Ijma’) on this issue with evidence from earlier scholars who hold opposing views.
Anything correct in this video is from Allah, and any mistakes are from me and the Shaytan. Feel free to comment respectfully, but if comments are disrespectful, I block.
If anyone has evidence contrary to what I say in this video or any other videos, feel free to provide it. And If there is ever consensus against what I’ve said, I am the first to retract my statement if the consensus is valid.
لقد كنت اتبع علوم الطاقة واعمل اليوغا ولكن الحمد لله رب العالمين هداني ربي للاسلام العظيم ❤
هذه الأشياء خطيرة جداً ولله الحمد والشكر على الهداية
Mashallah I like how you tried to make this topic close and you highlighted that these topics needed series and very huge study and many topics related and this is the most important. The video for me can be a start of a videos talking about issues around this topic and things that can come in mind about them specially for people who know the Shubuhat شبهات the unclear matters related to them and who have experiences about them and people related to them and you cleared many things and referred to many things and even while you talking many things and evidences and discussions came to my mind because this topic is very very sensitive and dangerous and really needs someone who is well grounded in it and has no illusion of knowledge.
Many individuals sadly, they fall in the trap of Takfeer and Tabdee specifically in very complex and complicated situations and scenarios on specific individuals or groups or whoever and this is really something in today’s world we saw it many in last many years and has some roots in history of who did the same
As you already explained there is general judgement and there is judgement in specific individual and these are completely two different situations and if you don’t know how you differentiate then you may read some texts in scholars books or even in Quran and Sunnah and you think it means something when it is completely a different thing and needs someone who knows what really it is
I saw many people of do takfeer who don’t know about this and they use texts while not understanding if this text is general judgement حكم عام or individual judgment حكم معين ( individual takfeer تكفيير المعين ) so this can shift the whole picture! So this is how dangerous it is and this is just example, you already talked about giving excuses of ignorance and there are a lot of things related to this and you mentioned many things so well grounded person in knowledge of these matters must know “ conditions of takfeer and what stops or holds the takfeer شروط وموانع " and not only this and he needs and this extremely important to know " how to apply it تحقيق المناط " because knowing the person in reality and his reality is not an easy thing and needs clarity and fear of Allah when you apply it and no one can do it except who knows for certain and has enough certain knowledge of what to establish and as someone from Arabia and specifically from Hail حائل and you mentioned very important example the imams of the dawah of najd ائمة الدعوة النجديه, yes we will find many good theoretically well grounded knowledge that follow the salaf but we may find in their application of this knowledge differences on if what they did is right or wrong and even some knowledge we may find who will disagree or agree on something they said and there are knowledge in time of salaf or before the imams of najd who said something that may refute this so no one is holy and may Allah have mercy on all Muslims and forgive their mistakes if they were on what we think it is and there are many people who don’t understand that even in time of Shiekh Mohammed ibn abd alwahab who disagrees with him and many other scholars so I really think we need to be very careful of reading history of only one side story of one group that took throne in specific time and not hearing about the whole Muslim situations and positions disregarding who was far or close to the truth but just to tell there is more to the picture that makes us not over praise specific characters because some people from specific group of one land are the one who are having more authority in the land or close to people of authority more than other people who are from the land and may have rooted families to tribes that was the leadings in specific time so we need to not fall in the trap of conflicts that happened in specific place and time and not letting them confuse us or not let us read the history with really not cancelling some because the satisfaction of the other, justice is very important and sometimes not everything is clear so we need always to go back to the salaf and scholars before because they are so clear and they already clarify all what we need! So back to the point that it is not a must that someone is good in knowledge needs to be good in application of knowledge, please this is very important in applying takfeer or tabdee
I really liked how you explained many things like the matters which clear obvious ظاهره جليه and matters which hidden and more detailed الخفيه الدقيق which is most not clear to layman Muslim and many things you talked and I do agree that the series that you referred and what will come are very important to talk about more things related because there are situations that the human can not be excuses like some from the people of Fatrah for example اهل الفتره I mean there will not considered people of test in life after even if they was labelled in this life as original kafeer and the judgements of kufur been established on him in life for example if he denies The existence of Allah when the signs of universe…etc all over because they are in the position of establishing the argument قيام الحجه so I believe more to this topic will clear many many things related or comes to minds
Jazak Allah Khiar brother and if I say something bad from me too and if correct from Allah ❤️ bless you ❤️🌹
ماشاء الله ❤
Good background
It's sad that the most vocal proponents of Ibn Taymiyyah are those that do his teachings a disservice by misquoting and picking and choosing parts of his teachings to fit their own non-Ibn Taymiyyite way, especially politically, and they are a far cry from the erudition of Ibn Taymiyyah, so they reduce his teachings to a very narrow implementation that is not what Ibn Taymiyyah preached.
barakallaahu feek. Please be specific if you disagree with what has been written by m. bin abdul-wahhaab. Please be careful to distinguish between the primary sources of the shaykh as opposed to what is said by those who claim to be followers of the shaykh.
Of course, I mentioned the issue is mostly in the ones that came after. His works in general aren’t problematic although maybe some details could be tweaked to make sure people don’t get the wrong understanding such as this video I addressed
ruclips.net/video/tv8pRSjR3vI/видео.htmlsi=kD4P5Nh-isX6QzGu
Akhi.. you need to clarify that chain takfeer is only for the kaffir asli like allah and his messenger have made takfir on for example Jews and Christian’s and etc
Of course, I addressed it here: ruclips.net/video/tv8pRSjR3vI/видео.htmlsi=8P6hcW7oBN10MTso
In general, you're correct and another way is to say it only applies in areas that are not ijtehadi matters.
@@DaudBurke jazakallah khayr.. do you do any Arabic lessons?
Al azhar is not a safe place to study religious affairs,and the grave worshippers are kuffaar(one who associate partners with الله is a mushrik)
نعم
I make sure to only take from that salafi azhari Shiekhs. You’d be surprised just how many atharis are here and graduated from here. I skip the aqeedah classes.
Btw no professor my whole time here has told me to do any kind of shirk… I’m sure there are some crazy Sufis who I haven’t heard from, but it’s all on the down low…
@@DaudBurke بارك الله فيكم✨
@@aymenashraf4183 the asl is whoever says the shahadah his testimony is accepted and he is accepted as a muslim, we make takfeer of them when we know that he's nullified his islam. kufr amali and kufr i'tiqaadi, as for kufr amali then that is like the one who throws the mushaf on the floor or he insults Allaah, all you need to know for this person is he did he willingly do it, it doesn't matter does he believe it's allowed or not, because in these affairs it's not possible that someone could ever be jaahil of that whether they were in the desert or a new muslim everyone knows that. as for those affairs where it is possible that he genuinely didn't know then you can't rush to make takfeer before checking first. for example the hadith of the sahabi who was about to kill the man then he said his shahadah and he killed him anyways assuming almost 100% that he did it out of fear and was not sincere and still mushrik, the Prophet rebuked him and said did you check his heart because the kalimah is enough in the dhaahir to proclaim you as muslim, as for the one who doesn't believe it in his heart then that's not for you to say until you've established the proof on him.
the last words I said, when someone throws the mushaf willingly or curses Allaah then noone can say he's a muwahhid in his baatin, because if that were true then he wouldn't be punished so the one who does such an act then we know he's kaafir. so those affairs that are clear and everyone knows them in that place for example in saudi the people know you can't slaughter to other than Allaah seeking nearness to them then if someone was to say I didn't know then he's not excused because it's not possible he didn't know so we know for sure he's kaafir in his baatin in this case. as for in india or in morocco where people don't know this and it's very possible that someone genuinely didn't know this then you can't make takfeer of him until you teach him and explain to him then if he continues you know he's kaafir 100%. the one who enters islam and says the shahadatayn he does not exit it except by yaqeen which is certainty, there is no doubt this man is kaafir. as for the one who throws the mushaf or curses Allaah then noone can ever say he's a kaafir in his dhaahir but muslim muwahhid in his baatin
Could you create a mini curriculum for what one needs to know before entering Al Azhar in the Islamic sciences?
The Placement Exams: Getting Into Al-Azhar
ruclips.net/video/feDAHyUntKY/видео.html
This a pretty close answer
Udhr bi Al-Jahl for kufr in the shahada what he denies and what he confirms it is a kufr bida where the first shart of the shahadah ie el ilm(knowledge the negation of jahl) is denied, learn the shurut and erkan of the shahada. "So know,that there is no إِلَٰهَ except Allah.."47 :19
but not only el ilm which is connected with each rukn(kufr bi taghut and iman in Allah) and shart. Udhr bi Al-Jahl in the shahada he denies other shart to ; jeqin / certanety, ihlas the negation of schirk, al qabul /acceptance. this bida is kufr at the highest level
People of Udhr bi Al-Jahl in the shahada they denie directly these two conditions whether they wanted it or not; (1)ihlas the negation of schirk, and the shart of (2)Ilm the opposite of jahl. This bida is kufr at the highest level and it is so stupid that you see even the followers of that aqeedah do not follow to the end what they call, so most of them do not excus the juhal from the jahud, Nasara, the followers of false "prophets" like Gulam, Musajleme(if they worshiped them it would be even worse in Kufr), the juhal of extreme batinis, the juhal of the shia who worship Zuljana the horse of Husejn, Sufis who ascribe "divinity" to themselves...
From the strange and absurd things of this people is that they do not justify(what is correct) those who accept the 2 kufar Musaylem and Ghulam as "messengers", but they justify(in theory) with jehl those who worship them from the juhal.
Kufr is kufr and whoever does it is a kafir, assuming the conditions of takleef are met.
Most of what you spouting is just nonsense that no person of the people that excuse people for ignorance claim. And لازم القول ليس قوله على افتراض انك تعرف لوازم على وجه سليم ولست كذلك
Burke, " that no person of the people that excuse people for ignorance claim", because they are not consistent in what they say and call(which is the nature of Ahlul Kufr), so they justify shirk and kufr in the shahada selectively, according to their wishes, even justify often worse infidels than the Nassar(especially the so-called "Unitarian") and Yehud, if they falsely attribute themselves to the din, as if it is some factor, even Musaylema and his team of juhal attributed themselves to deen(wrongly), but your people do not justify(which is correct) them for some reason, they(there may be exceptions) don't see Udhr bi Al-Jahl when it comes to the second shahada, but when it is the first shahada which is even more important, ,you people even justify those who worship flora(speaking of nonsense), like you and many from your predecessor from whom you picked up this idea to make Udhr for tree worshippers(seeing how you interpret the hadisذَاتُ أَنْوَاطٍ ).
Kufr is not the same kufr, the kufr of the so-called "atheist" and agnostic, which is also from kufr in Tawhid and shahada hes rukn and shurut and the kufr of a person who denies some regulationt on which ijma is based about food is not the same, because the first is kufr in the shahada hes rukn and shurut who ar aslu deen. Ther is no justifying for them(the agnostic and so called "atheist) even if those juhal ascribe themselves to the deen, and there are such people, especially in post-communist Balkan countries, they even get angry if you tell them that they are not "Muslims" I met them in person.
Big difference between a jaahil from the kuffar asliyyeen and a jaahil from the person who ascribes to Islam and does something of shirk or believes something of kufr. Both of them in the akhirah we leave their case to Allaah and we don't say either of them are going to the hellfire or to jannah as we don't know if the proof was established on either of them. as for the kaafir asli then we treat him as a kaafir because he never claimed to be muslim so how can you give him those ahkaam and as for the jaahil mushrik that ascribes to islam then he is treated based on him saying the shahadatayn unless there comes a proof that the proof was established upon him and he rejected, in that case he's treated as an apostate. the reality is the khilaaf is in treating him in the dunya is he treated as a kaafir or as a muslim, and the correct view is as a muslim. if someone is jaahil and says the shahadatayn then he's not kaafir asli. in that case if he falls into a nullifier of islam he's an apostate or he stays as a misguided muslim until the proof is established.
There is no apostate that will be tested on the Day of Judgement.
the proof he's treated as a muslim is the Prophet saying "I have been commanded to fight them until they say la illaha illa Allaah", after that the blood and wealth is haraam unless like I said you can prove he is an apostate by establishing the proof on him then he rejects it, before that you keep the name of islam because noone leaves Islam until yaqeen. and saying "i'm pretty sure he knew" is not enough. unless it's in one of those matters that it's impossible he didn't know like cursing Allaah. noone is ignorant of the fact that cursing Allaah is not allowed, so udhr bil jahl for them is not accepted. same with the qadiyani, it's impossible that the hujjah has not been established on those because the matter is so clear, but if there was a community of qadiyanis completely cut off from the world and they never heard the proof then in that specific case we would establish the proof on them before takfeer just as ibn Hazm said.
noone's ever said "don't make takfeer of the kaafir". that's not the mas'alah. the mas'alah is when is this general hukm applied on this specific individual.
the proof for what I'm saying is Imam Ahmed and the khalifah Mu'tasim and Wathiq. and the fitnah that happened where people were killed because they didn't say the Qur'an was created, with all that, Imam Ahmed clearly debated them and he showed them the proofs. and with all that, he still said jihaad is obligatory behind them. if he treated them as dhaahir kuffar but he left their reality to Allaah then he would never have said this. like I said the one who says the shahadatayn is only treated as a dhaahir kaafir mushrik if you can prove he is like that in his baatin, and this is only done after iqamatil hujjah. even the Najdi ulama don't disagree, they only say that the one who does shirk is treated as a mushrik in his dhaahir and as for his baatin then we leave his affair to Allaah, so the issue is in dhaahir, is the jaahil mushrik that ascribes to islam and says the shahadatayn, is he treated as a mushrik or is he treated as a muslim. the correct opinion is as a muslim until you can prove he is mushrik in reality and that's only done after you establish the proof on him, because noone says someone left islam except with certainty
Akhi when you mention “Salafis” who are you referring too? Because I’m Salafi and I agree with all your points regarding hujjah before labelling someone a kaffir even in matters of Tawheed. Those takfiris are NOT salafis akhi.
How can you claim to be Salafi yet require iqamah al-hujjah before takfier for issues or Tawheed? It isn't the position of the major Salafi scholars. Shaykh Ibn Baz, who is the most prominent Salafi scholar of this era says it is completely wrong to believe in iqamah al-hujjah before takfier for issues of Tawheed, and he says whoever believes such a thing is completely misguided, and that this belief is a mukaffir itself.
Also, regarding the term takfiri, the majority of scholars have said this term is incorrect to begin with. The scholars that do use it (Salah al-Luhaydan and Salah al-Fawzan) have both said it refers to somebody who makes takfier on somebody who has not commited an act that is a mukaffir to begin with.
Are you one of those salafis that rejects the major Salafi scholars when it comes to takfier and chooses to follow the mistakes of lesser scholars?
@@BanuMudarcan you provide the statements from Sheikh Ibn Baz that says someone who establishes hujjah before making takfir is severely misguided?
@@BanuMudarfor every claim you made provide the evidence. People tend to mix general and specific rulings. Quote me their fatawa on these matters and let’s see if you understood them, or I am misunderstanding them.
@@BanuMudaralso what are your thoughts on the Muslim who says that the Christian’s and Jews are our brothers? Is this person a kafir if he makes this statement?
Yea, you see what I mean ^^^ many that claim the name differ in this regard.