The most correct view is from the fifth point in the article, briefly summed up as the following:
[QUOTE]
“The Imaam has a choice with the prisoners to kill, enslave, ransom or grant amnesty. So it is up to him to decide what is better for the benefit of the Muslims.”
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
“He - sallallahu ‘alayhi wa salam - used to grant amnesty to some, and kill some, and ransom some for money and others for other prisoners of the Muslims, and he did all that in accordance with the benefit of the Muslims.”
[/QUOTE]
just a meta comment here, most of this fellow's philosophy is rooted in ibn taymiya's writings, who is not a major (the 4) sunni imam, a bit of an upstart in comparison. his writings have been used for justification by those who have wreaked a great deal of havoc in the Muslim world over the ages.
just to inform people that this does not represent mainstream sunni thought.
i would highly recommend that you read commentaries on ibn tamiyya (spellings vary) by searching for him on google.
One of the indication of the principles and methods laid down by Hazrath Ali (a.s.) as to how Jehad should be carried on.
Hazrat Ali(a.s) said Never follow and kill those who run away from the battle or an encouter, life is dear to them, let them live as long as death permits them to live.
If they consider the south korean a legitimate target, why can't they be merciful and let him go? He begged for his life......yet......they didn't permit him to live.
If Islam can't be about insaniyat then what can it be?
**Tabari Vol. VI page 577, Roazath-ul-Safa Vol. 11 page 425, Abul Fida page 425 narrate in details the orders issued by Hazrath Ali to his officers and soldiers before the battle. As these orders give a clear indication of the principles and methods laid down by Hazrath Ali(a.s.) as to how Jehad (Holy Wars) should be carried on, I have brieffy copied them here:
I . Never begin a war yourself, God does not like blood-shed, fight only in defence.
Never be first to attack your enemy, repulse his attacks, but do it boldly, bravely and courageously.
While declaring yourself and your deeds (Rajuz, a custom amongst hand to hand combatants) never waste your time, and instead of speaking about yourself speak about God and the Holy prophet (A.S.)
Never follow and kill those who run away from the battle or an encounter, life is dear to them, let them live as long as death permits them to live.
Never kill wounded persons who cannot defend themselves.
Never strip naked a dead man for his coat of arms or dress.
Never cut nose or ears of dead men to humiliate them.
Never take to loot and arson.
Never molest or outrage the modesty of a woman.
Never hurt a woman even if she swears at you or hurts you.
Ravage - You are intelligent enough to know that every great person has his/her deriders; so why should **ibn Taymiyyah ** be spared? One thing is for sure, **ibn Taymiyyah ** is not infallible and nobody takes him to be as such.
Even if you were to google for Muhammad or Mohmmed you will find many sites deriding him in most despicable manner.
May I suggest that you try the following search link:
Just a small extract from the first site:
Shaykh al-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah)
Prepared by Abu Rumaysah
"He is the mujtahid and reformer of his age, Ahmad bin Abd al-Haleem bin Abd as-Salaam bin Abd Allaah bin Abu Qaasim ibn Taymiyyah al-Harraanee Taqi ad-Deen Abu al-Abbaas bin Shihaab ad-Deen. He rose the flag of the belief and understanding of Ahus Sunnah in his time, at a time when innovation, misguidance, and corruption was widespread, being preached by even some of the People of Knowledge that became well known in later times.
Due to ibn Taymiyyah’s firm stance against all that was false and corrupt he earned the envy and hatred of all those that he opposed - who were many - and as such had many lies heaped around him. The purpose of this section is to show this scholar in his true light and expose those lies heaped around him.
Al-Haafidh al-Bazzaar said, depicting the opponents of ibn Taymiyyah, “you would not see a scholar opposing him (ibn Taymiyyah), dissuading from him, filled with hatred for him, except that he was the most greedy of them in gathering the worldly goods, the most cunning of them in acquiring them, the most ostentatious of them, the most desirous for reputation…and the most prolific of them in having lies on his tongue.” ‘al-A`laam al-Uliyyah’ (pg. 82) of al-Bazzaar.]"
Ravage, dude read the article again, there are other scholars apart from Ibnu Taymiyyah who take this view. It is the majority view! And it's the view of al-Imaam ash-Shafi'i, Maalik ibn Anas and Ahmad from the 4 Major Imaams. So they are deviant just like ibn Taymiyyah? Who was actually from the Hanabilah.
Fear Allaah stop attacking the honour of a great Mujahid who has gone to the Mercy of Allaah. Don't you know, we shouldn't speak ill of the dead. He maybe in a grave full of light from the gardens of Paradise, and your attacking his honour, while Allaah maybe pleased with him.
But if you wan to attack him, go ahead, it only reduces your good deeds on the Day of Judgement.
Just a few others who agree with that view is:
'Umar ibn al-Khattab
Abu Bakr
'Uthman
Ibn 'Umar
‘Ali bin Abi Talhah
Ibn ‘Abbaas
al-Hasan al-Basree
‘Ataa`
ath-Thawri
al-Awzaa’i
Abi ‘Ubayd
al-Qurtubi
The Messenger, Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Was-Salam killed ‘Uqbah bin Abi Mu’eet and an-Nidr bin al-Haarith on the day of Badr, and ransomed the rest of the captives. He granted amnesty to Thumaama bin Athaal al-Hanafi, whilst he was a prisoner, and took from Salamah bin al-Awka’ a female-slave, and freed by her some of the Muslims. A group of the people of Makkah entered on his (territory), so he took them, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa salam and granted them amnesty. He also granted amnesty to the slaves of (the tribe of) Hawaazin and all this is established from the Saheeh. This view is narrated by the people of Madeenah, ash-Shafi’ee, Abi ‘Ubayd, and at-Tahaawi stated that it is a mathhab of Abi Haneefah, but what was mentioned earlier is what is more known (about his view) on this matter, and with Allah ‘Azza wa Aall lies All Success.
Read the article again, all those people who are asking questions, because it is answered in the article.
Oh yeah and the following is the view of our beloved Imaam Abu Haneefah:-
[QUOTE]
al-Imaam as-Sarkhasi said in al-Mabsoot [10/137-138]: “And I asked him - Abu Haneefah - regarding a man who captures a man from the enemies, is it (permissible) for him to kill him, or must he bring him to the Imaam? He said: Whichever of those is good. And when Ummayah bin Khalf was killed after he was captured at Badr, the Messenger sallallahu ‘alayhi wa salam did not admonish those who killed him, but if he brings him to the Imaam it would be better, as it is a preservation of the significance (hurmah) of the Imaam, but the first (option) is better in showing harshness on the mushrikeen and weakening of them. So it is incumbent on him to choose what is better and more benefitial for the Muslims."
[/QUOTE]
at tawheed, I dont intend on getting into a sectarian dispute with you. I merely wanted to make the distinction between wahhabi and mainstream sunni faith, which as I understand it, recognises the four imams as the ones worth doing taqlid of. taqlid again, is a concept wahhabis reject, while oddly enough being for all practical purposes, in the taqlid of ibn taymiya.
i did not post a negative link about him, merely googled up results about him. as you can see theres both positive and negative ones.
he is revered for:
- introducing a very austere version of the religion rejecting anything that might be construed as bid'ah by any account
- having published an immense amount of books.
he is decried, mostly for :
introducing a very strict, literal,'jihadist' interpretation of Islam, at the same time lambasting people like Ghazali.
rejecting taqlid
rejecting sufism while embracing a sufi school himself (google taymiya, sufiism)
arguing for corporeality of Allah, insisting that he had hands knees legs etc.
The Wahabis have no problem with Taqleed of a particular Madhahab for the lay people.
What they stress though is what the Imaams of the past stressed, if a evidence is shown that contradicts the opinion of the Madhab they hold, they must take the Authentic opinion.
We allow Taqleed, providing the conditons of Taqleed are fulfiled.
So please stop lying upon the Wahabis.
As for your lies upon ibn Taymiyyah.. bring forth your proof from his works, where he said the stuff you attribute to him.
"Produce your proof if you are truthful." (Al-Baqarah 2:111)
Otherwise your a filthy lying maggot.
You people always lie upon him, I can't imagine how much good deeds he will get from his slanderers.
Wasn't there a Muslim who gave information about the approaching Muslims to the Makkans... i.e sort of colluded with them against the Muslims... but Prophet Muhammad forgave him?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
i did not post a negative link about him, merely googled up results about him.
[/QUOTE]
You called a bit of upstart and if that ain't negative then what is?
[QUOTE]
who is not a major (the 4) sunni imam, a bit of an upstart in comparison
[/QUOTE]
*Upstart: * one that claims more personal importance than is warranted
Here is what his Contemporaries or the ones who followed after him had to say about him.
*Al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee * said: "He is far greater than the likes of me to inform on his qualities. If I were made to swear (by Allaah) by the corner (of the Ka'bah) and the place (of Ibraaheem), I would swear that I have not seen with my two eyes the like of him and by Allaah, he himself has not seen his own like in knowledge."
*Al-Haafidh al-Mizzee * said: "I have not seen the like of him and nor have seen the like of himself. I have not seen one more knowledgeable of the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger and more compliant to it than him."
Al-lmaam Ibn Daqeeq al-'Eed said: "When I met Ibn Taymiyyah, I saw a person who had all the types of knowledge between his eyes: he would take of it what he desired and leave of it what he desired."
Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalaanee , may Allaah have mercy upon him, mentioned in the context of refuting the one who opposed that Ibn Taymiyyah be termed 'Shaykhul-lslaam': "The acclaim of Taqiyy ad-Deen is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-Islaam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from equity."
Shaykh Kamaal ad-Deen Ibn az-Zamlakaanee , who debated with Ibn Taymiyyah on more than one occasion, said: "Whenever he was questioned on a particular field of knowledge, the one who witnessed and heard (the answer) concluded that he had no knowledge of any other field and that no one possessed such as his knowledge. The jurists of all groups, whenever they sat with him, they would benefit from him regarding their own schools of thought in areas they previously were unaware of. It is not known that he debated anyone whereby the discussion carne to a standstill or that whenever he spoke on about a particular field of knowledge - whether it be related to the sciences of the Sharee'ah or else - that he would not then excel the specialists of that field and those who are affiliated to it."
*Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer * said "...It was rare for him to he hear something and not memorise it and he occupied himself with the sciences. He was intelligent and had committed much to memory and thus, became an Imaam in tafseer and what pertained to it. He had (comprehensive) knowledge of fiqh; it was said that he had more knowledgeable of the fiqh of the madhabs then the followers of those very same madhabs in his time and other times. He was fully aware of the different opinions of the scholars. He was a scholar in Usool, the branches of the religion, grammar, the language and other textual and intellectual sciences. He was never overcome in a sitting and no noble (scholar) would speak to him on a particular science except that he thought that this science was the specialty of Ibn Taymiyyah and he would see him as being well-versed in it and having perfected it.. As for hadeeth then he was the carrier of its flag, a haafidh in hadeeth, and able to distinguish the weak from the strong, fully acquainted with the narrators and being proficient in this..."
There are more but these should suffice and all the above mentioned are the 'heavyweights' of the their time.
I said I never posted a negative link about him, the only link i posted was a googling under his name.
As far as testimonials go, click on the second link in the google search results page (starting with www.sunnah.org..) and go through the EXHAUSTIVE references of sunni ulema, including his own student, who have challenged taymiyah’s position as an aalim worth following.
He remains a much contested figure, and by and large, his admirers are restricted to wahhabis.
As for at-tawheed, evidently you dont know much about your own hero. please, go through the search results and you will see that he was decried even in his own age for insisting against the majority that Allah had legs and even descended to earth by demonstrating the phenomenon, stepping down the minbar. He rejected taqlid and ijma, you may once again go through the link I’ve posted. Please actually do some research before getting so worked up.
He did not reject Taqleed. Read my post above about Taqleed.
Dude, what is Soofism? The Soofees who make Du’aa to other than Allaah? The ones who say Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta’aala is a pig and a rat? A’udhubillah!
I think you have confused yourself. As many people do, concerning the term “Soofee” and who they are.
Which Soofees are you talking about dude?
The first type:
The Zaahid Soofees who had the correct 'Aqeedah and did not commit Shirk with Allaah Ta’aala. The ones who freed themsleves from the Worldy Life, only seeking the Pleasure of Allaah. They would only Worship, through acts which were sanctioned by the Sunnah, every other Act of Worship, not sanctioned by the Sunnah, they rejected it severely and were harsh upon the adherents to these Innovations.
And the other type of Soofees are the ones we reject. The ones who make themselves out to be from the Zaahideen, but are committing Shirk and Kufr. They have no Knowledge on 'Aqeedah of the Sahabah and their Students and just follow their Desires.
Read this work of Ibn Taymiyyah, which totally refutes, your stupid, ignorant, blind following slander of him:
What do you mean by etc? What else did he affirm? Where did he affrim the knees?
The question you should be asking yourself is, what were his proofs for doing that. I tell you one amazing thing about the works of Ibn Taymiyyah, when he takes an opinion, he gives the proof from the Quraan and Sunnah and the sayings of the Scholars before him regarding this opinion. Stating if there were any differences, if there were, he will say this was the stronger opinion, and then he will give proof as to why.
We affirm for Allah Ta’alaa what He and His Messenger have affirmed withoutTakyeef, Tamtheel, Ta’weel etc.
We do not know and can not comprehend the reality of the Attributes of Allaah but we believe in them, the way Allaah and His Messenger described them, without adding to them, subtracting them, explaining them, denying them, likening them to the creation, etc!!
And this is what the Sahabah affirmed. And this is what ibn Taymiyyah affirmed. We affirm that Allaah has a Shin (related by al-Bukharee in Kitab at-Tawheed Number 532), and all His other Attributes, as reported in the Quraan and the Authentic Ahadeethbut we do not ask HOW…
Everything Ibn Taymiyyah says in his 'Aqeedah books, has consistency from the Ijmaa’ of the Pious Predecessors.
Actually in his time, the evil scholars rose against him about his 'Aqeedah books, and he told them,
Look, I give each of you three years, go and research, for three years, and for these three years, I will stay here, in the prison, and you go out, all of you, research thoroughly, and if you find even one statement from the Sahabah the Tabi’oon or any of the pious aa’immah or any of their famous students, I will take it out of my book…
Imagine that - The big challenge - Three Years - They couldn’t find a single thing, that was not affirmed by the Worthy Scholars of the Past.
Dude, I know about this great Mujahid, and who he was and what he done. I have a lot of his books and Fataawa, in the 'Arabee and not some misquoted translations by liars.
I am asking you to bring forth proof from his books as to where he said:
Allaah has knees.
He rejects the PERMISSABLE Taqleed. Bearing in mind, he was a Hanbaalee himself. He ascribed himself to that Madhab.
Which Ijmaa’ he rejects.
Bring the Isnaad for his so-called demonstration of how Allaah, The Most Mighty and The Majestic, comes down to the lowest Heaven in the last third of the night.
(I think I know what your going to bring, but go ahead, let’s see the joke).
: )
Oh, yeah, don’t bring some Mushrik, modern day, Soofiyyah hate filled links, who take narrations, from any old Tom, Dick or Harry, even if he was a Mushrik believing in another Lord besides the One and True Rubb, they would take his Narrations - We are Ahlus Sunnah, we only accept the Narrations from the Worthy People.
The links you give are full of falsehood.
They said Ibn Taymiyyah was mostly self-taught…
LOL.
Dude, he had over 200 teachers!
Even his enemies from his time, after he died, affirmed that the Ummah never had a man like ibn Taymiyyah since 500 years.
May Allaah grant the Imam, the Highest Abode in Paradise. His works are amazing, and he is one of the few people whose works, when they are read, just increase your Eemaan sky high and gives you so much clarity.
May Allaah destroy the filthy, lying, evil contemporary Soofiyya of this age, who lie upon him, distort his works, misquote him and curse him.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah Sallallaahu 'Alayhi Was-Sallam said:
Allah said:
Whosoever shows enmity to someone devoted to Me, I shall be at war with him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask [something] of Me, I would surely give it to him, and were he to ask Me for refuge, I would surely grant him it. I do not hesitate about anything as much as I hesitate about [seizing] the soul of My faithful servant: he hates death and I hate to disappoint him.
Dude, I bear witness that I dont give a flying ****.
[quote]
We affirm that Allaah has a Shin
[/quote]
i honestly do not know how to respond. and no genius, in case you think your verbose and ostentatious post leaves me breathlessly browbeaten, please put yourself in my position and try to read through that eyesore of an exposition. i assure you, you would be rewarded highly from the Holyness should you get beyond the third italicized word, that is if His Holyness rewards insufferable, demented masochism.
Now, that bit above did catch my eye. Therefore atleast you admit that ibn taymiya et al make the case for anthromorphism? Given that other sects disagree, you would accept that this is a valid critique (read carefully: critique, not criticism). Others I guess included rejecting taqleed. You yourself say that you basically take from ulema what you think makes sense according to your interpretation of quran/sunnah. Thats very nice, but it isnt taqleed. Conceptually the following scenerio could/is also admissible: making your own interpretation about everything and rejecting all opinions of the imams as conflicting with the sunnah/Quran.
Anyway, bottomline, I dont care to argue about which sect is right and which is wrong. I find wahhabi teachings very unsavoury. No, this does not fling me from the Ummah, nor should you foam at the mouth that anyone might think that ibn taymiya was ten bulbs short of a bright shining beacon powered by ten bulbs. My only purpose when posting abt the aforementioned hasti was to make other posters aware that you represent a very distinct segment of Muslims, and your views should not automatically be considered 'mainstream'.
[QUOTE]
AT bro, I thought idol worship was haraam?
[/QUOTE]
It is Haraam.
You thought right.
And your point is what?
[QUOTE]
Now, that bit above did catch my eye. Therefore atleast you admit that ibn taymiya et al make the case for anthromorphism?
[/QUOTE]
Dude, read the post again. WE ONLY AFFIRM FOR ALLAAH WHAT HE AND HIS MESSENGER AFFIRMED. WE DO NOT LIKEN THE ATTRIBUTES OF ALLAAH TO THE CREATION. WE DO NOT DENY THEM. WE ACCEPT THEM AS HOW THEY HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED WITHOUT GOING ANY FURTHER. WE STOP WHERE THE COMPANIONS STOPPED.
UNDERSTAND?!
Now are you going to say Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ash-Shafi’I, Malik ibn Anas, Abu Haneefah and the Companions were all misguided because they affirmed for Allaah what He has affirmed for Himself and what His Messenger affirmed.
So, the point is:
You say ibn Taymiyyah is misguided because of this.
Then, this means ALL of the Companions and the Tabi’een and their famous students are all misguided. Because they all affirmed for Allaah His Attributes.
[QUOTE]
Given that other sects disagree, you would accept that this is a valid critique (read carefully: critique, not criticism).
[/QUOTE]
We do not care what other sects say. We only follow the Religion upon the understanding of the Companions and those who followed them exactly in Faith. So what ever the Companions had a unanimous agreement upon, we take that as proof and stick to it, no matter how much the Innovators try to corrupt our Beliefs.
[QUOTE]
Others I guess included rejecting taqleed.
[/QUOTE]
Again the challenge still stands for you to provide us with proof where ibn Taymiyyah rejects Taqleed.
[QUOTE]
You yourself say that you basically take from ulema what you think makes sense according to your interpretation of quran/sunnah. Thats very nice, but it isnt taqleed.
[/QUOTE]
What is Taqleed then, ravage?
What is Taqleed according to the Scholars of Islaam including the four Imaams, Abu Haneefah, Malik ibn Anas, Muhammad ibn ‘Idrees and Abu ‘Abdillaah Ahmad ibnu Hanbal?
Tell me what is the Islamic definition of Taqleed given by the Scholars.
: )
[QUOTE]
Conceptually the following scenerio could/is also admissible: making your own interpretation about everything and rejecting all opinions of the imams as conflicting with the sunnah/Quran.
[/QUOTE]
Nope. Not really. Your understanding is wrong and you are mistaken.
We follow the Quraan and Sunnah upon the understanding of the Pious Predecessors. We take from ALL of them. We do not limit ourselves to one Imaam or one Madhab as if that is the only source for the Religion.
No, rather, we investigate what all of the Scholars have said.
We do not believe in biased partisanship, we do not say, this Imaam is the only correct Imaam and his Madhab is the only correct one.
Again, I told you in a previous post, we allow Taqleed for a lay person.
But if that opinion this lay Muslim has taken from a particular Madhab, and then it is proved wrong with Authentic Proof, it is obligatory upon that person to leave the incorrect opinion of his Madhab and take the correct opinion even if it lies with other than his Madhab.
And, indeed it was al-Imaam Abu Haneefah, who said it was Haraam for any person to take their opinions without knowing the proof for the opinion!
Please answer the questions this time around, instead of avoiding them.
May Allaah help both, you and me, in adhering to the Truth.
[QUOTE]
Anyway, bottomline, I dont care to argue about which sect is right and which is wrong. I find wahhabi teachings very unsavoury. No, this does not fling me from the Ummah, nor should you foam at the mouth that anyone might think that ibn taymiya was ten bulbs short of a bright shining beacon powered by ten bulbs.
[/QUOTE]
Again, you insult a great man out of your blatant ignorance.
I’ve asked you to provide proof for your claims, but you have proved yourself to be a liar. : )
Your insults do not affect Ibn Taymiyyah. His Reward is only with Allaah Alone - And same with yours. Your Reckoning is with Allaah Alone and He will take you to account for your lies and slander. Prepare your answers!
[QUOTE]
My only purpose when posting abt the aforementioned hasti was to make other posters aware that you represent a very distinct segment of Muslims, and your views should not automatically be considered 'mainstream'
[/QUOTE]
What does “hasti” mean?? I take it, it is another insult?? Allaah Knows Best.
“My views” are taken from the correct understanding of the correct scholars. Again, you have not proved how our understanding is wrong. Which of our “views” goes against the understanding of the Companions and their Students?
Enlighten us.
Surely you must have some kind of proof, because you are spitting slander and accusations without a thought, but yet no proof. So please bring forth the Proof.
I'm going away, so I won't be posting for a while.