why is this thread hijacked? clip
btw examples of khulafih rashideen is sunnah according to a hadith ...it does not say ALL sahaba or maybe i am missing something
yes, that's what I meant, the khulafah rashideen; Jazak Allah khayr for correcting
Its funny how conveniently flexible definitions and words are when it comes to proving the value of the shaikhan and how they could do no wrong.
clip Go learn the difference between lingusitic and sharee definition of bid'ah instead of beating around the bush.
clip
brother AllahkaBanda
Firstly, I'm not making up the ruling that all bid'a may not be classed as going astray because it is in this 'linguisitic' sense some people verily whole fiqh areas have used to justify that not all bid'a are bad. They go on to argue that bid'a is permissible of two types:
[quote="psyah, post:17, topic:198439"]
1) When something is done to facilitate worship so long as it is not considered like a Sunnah/Mustahab or Fard.
what is the evidence for this, Qur'an/Sunnah/practice of the Salaf? Any sharee' bid'ah is leading to hell fire whether it is considered as sunnah/mustahabb/fard.
2) When something new is introduced to provide a new form of the same thing outside worship. Surely to take a bus from Mina to Muzdallifah is a bid'a but using ijtihad people have factored out its permissibility.
Sharee' bid'ah has to do with act of ibaadah; anything outside of worhsip is not sharee' bid'ah! What you're reffering to here is lingustic bid'ah which got nothing to do with sharee' bid'ah. This argument shows how badly they are sturggling.
Other fiqh schools do not call 2) bid'a at all, but they still insist that 1) is bid'a and reprehensible.
because 2) is not sharee' bid'ah so why would they call it a bid'ah in Islam!? for 1) I would like to see what the madaahab say and please don't quote me latar scholars.
It is not necessarily an issue of 'aqeedah as everyone is in agreement that 'dhikr' is a requirement in Islam it is the method of how that dhikr is done which is under contention. There are some references used which are indeed weak that support the practice of collective dhikr. Some schools allow weak hadith to form a ruling for 'amal but others do not. These are valid differences in opinion.
it is an aqeedah issue issue because we believe that we worship Allah Ta'ala how He and His Messenger (sal-allahu 'alayhi wa salam) has told us. As you mentioned, the disagreement is not whether we do dhikr; the disagreement lies how to do dhikr. If this "how" is not found in sharee'ah, then doing dhikr using this "how" is sharee' bid'ah.
btw, the scholars' difference over whether to accept weak ahadith is among the ashabul hadith not madaahab. Those who say that weak ahadith could be accpted in matters of ibaadah and 'aml, they placed some conditions on them. If those conditions are fulfilled then a person can take them. I agree that some of the latar scholars of Ahlus Sunnah are very harsh/extreme in this matter.
I am just living my Islamic life trying very hard to reconcile difference and doing that what increases my iman and puts khushoh in my worship. If I feel something is doing that and there are scholars in place to sanction the actions then I take the step that I am required to make. May Allah (SWT) show me the truth and guide me to what Pleases Him. And for us all. Ameen.
ameen to du'as and may Allah Ta'ala make things easier for us and set our affairs, ameen