Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Society Religion & Philosophy
21

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Maybe you do not know or simply did not understand what “toofane Bad Tameezi” is.

Graves/Shrines are not meant for this:

If you want more examples can be provided sir.

Its about drugs, and dance mixed with so called “religiosity”.

The great men who are buried at these places must have been proud of these acts right?

22

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Thanks for the reply

The sajda matter I am going to leave for now, I will In Sha Allah comment on it later. Basically there is actions very similar to sajda which are permissible, and at least I do not have any contradicting knowledge of their prohibition

Walking away backwards - can not be prohibited or at least I do not have the knowledge to prohibit
Tying knot around the grave(?) - can not be prohibited or at least I do not have the knowledge to prohibit

Having left out the matter of sajda for now. As far as I can see your objections are not worthy of being of upheld from what i can gather.

and there is religious doctrinal difference between you and the people you were photographing and Im guessing difference in financial and materialistic needs too. The central point of whether the saints can help is perhaps one of the issues of difference. I can confirm that the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah have taken the position that they can help

23

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

They are both examples of Haram mixing of men and women. Lewd and dancing. HERETICS

24

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

To expect the deceased to somehow help the living, and then to wonder how there's nothing wrong with that at all. Laa Hawla wala quwwata illa billa.

Those of us who are living are at an advantage because we still have the opportunity to earn Hasanat, and ask forgiveness for our sins, and do good, while the books of the deceased are sealed except for the good that they leave behind that others follow. The only One able to help anyone is Allah alone, not any other being dead or alive. Allah permits His creations to become a waseela for someone else, but it is Allah alone who we should ask for help, and it is Allah alone who blesses our affairs and puts barakah in all that we do.

The most well known sunnah of Rasool Allah (Peace and Blessings be upon him) was to seek comfort in Salah, and ask for help in Dua. This is the chain of barakah that we ought to follow because Rasool Allah (s.a.w.) provided us the sure way to success in the dunya and akhira.

I understand the devotion that some of us have for Awliya of Allah, and they should be revered and respected, their wisdom should be attained and shared with others, but to take any of them as a mediary is a slippery slope. That's really all I can think of saying, because I don't want to offend anyone whose beliefs vis a vis the topic may differ. The important thing that we should be thankful for is that we're all a family, a united body and an Ummah.

Allah knows best what our intentions are. May Allah strengthen our Imaan and increase us all in Taqwa and reliance upon Allah alone.

25

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Yes, that's my answer too. It's not about the degree of what's allowed and what's not of certain acts, it's about the motives behind the act. Intentionally or unintentionally people are seeking out someone else for their devotions. It is difficult for people to worship a ghaib entity, we've seen that over the ages and we've also seen how religions become more about the golden bull rather than any actual message. A lot of the shrines are of people who were learned people of Islam and I would feel like I was insulting their life's work by ignoring their message by revering their image instead.

Obviously I am of the belief that there is no intercession on the day of judgement. People have the clause of "Who can intercede with Him, except with His permission?" 2:255 to say otherwise. Only time will tell.

26

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

My Shaykh is of the opinion that doing sajood is haram and a mortal sin to anyone other than Allah (SWT), but it is not shirk, unless we can ascertain the intention and motivation of the act from the one doing it. He says, that it was the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) and Ibn Jawzi (RA) that any act of sujood to other than Allah (SWT) constitutes shirk, but the majority of the ulema reject this stating that they were mistaken, because there utilise a rule in Shari'ah and that is - that what was allowed to previous ummahs cannot be considered shirk - because Allah (SWT) would never allow shirk ... it can be made haram or something that was previously haram can be made halal ... but not shirk. Shirk is directly linked to the intent of the act - i.e. the outer form is not enough to determine shirk.

27

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

For clarification I do not profess to, and it seems brother vroom has also stated that the people in the videos posted by brother diwana are in fact heretical and nothing really to do with the authentic Sufis who do not compromise Shari’ah.

Here are some videos that I feel better represent the position of visiting the graves and the adab that we should have … please comment on these videos about how you feel they are being undertaken …

Another recent fitnah is that the Saudi officials turn everyone away from facing RasoolAllah (SAW) when doing the du’a … despite Imam Malik (RA) specifically making mention to face towards him (SAW) for du’a. (This does not include asking from him (SAW) that what should not be asked from him (SAW))

As can be seen King Abdullah is facing the Roza for his du’a in accordance with the tradition. :hehe: No one is turning him away!

There is too much second guessing going on these days about the aqeedah people have … and their practices are being ridiculed based on appearance and not on what was traditionally done or not.

Regarding the “asking” from the awliya and Sahabah (RA) or prophets (AS) - since I follow the opinion that they are not DEAD, but have merely tasted death and are now alive in a way that we cannot see - it follows that we can ask from them anything that we would normally ask from them if they were alive, physical constraint applicable … we can send Salam to all people of the graves even if they are not awliya and we consider them DEAD, but in addition for such special that we may also ask them to do du’a for us, to grant us favour in intercession. We may use their name as intercession in our du’as to Allah (SWT). And these are the finer differences that I have had to overcome when adopting this way …

28

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

So shirk cannot be incurred unless shirk doer has a clear intention of doing shirk in his/her mind?

29

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Shirk is the act with intent of worship and appointing the Attributes of Allah (SWT) on other than Allah (SWT).

So if the outer form of an act has ambiguity of intent then the onlooker must provide the best opinion of their fellow human, until further information can be obtained.

30

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Shirk e khafi is a type of shirk where a person does shirk while he does not realize he is doing shirk. Or you think no such type of shirk exists?

31

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Not realising one is doing shirk does not contradict my statement ... please think carefully about what I have said ... It is possible for a person to be doing shirk without the intent of shirk (out of ignorance) ... it is not however possible for a person to be doing shirk when their intent is not worship or appointing Attributes of Allah (SWT) on other than Allah (SWT) - in other words when the intent of the act is respect.

Either way ... whether shirk is being done out of ignorance or shirk is not being done - the outer form alone is not enough to deem (for the onlooker) the person to be a mushrik - unless they acquire that information. Even for the person who is doing shirk unknowingly he must be taught against it, allowed to change, before deeming him one who has chosen shirk.

32

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

@psyah bro:

A lot of Hindus say they do not have intention of asking help from statues.

And some of these acts including but not limited to doing “sajda” to Qabr or “Asking people who are buried for help in various problems” is not a good practice.

This kind of mindset is much more common in SE Asia and most likely is from mixing with Hindus.

As to Awliayh, Prophets or Sahabas in general not considered dead needs more convincing evidence.

AFAIK or understand, Shaheed person and Issa AS are most commonly accepted as not being dead, despite being dead physically.

Only angels were asked to bow Human being but a Human is not to prostrate another human. Not even for the sake of showing respect. Since that will be considered mixing human with God.

33

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Your statement is shirk is the act with intent of worship and appointing the Attributes of Allah (SWT) on other than Allah (SWT).
A person not realising doing shirk implies shirk can be done without intent.

[QUOTE]
Either way ... whether shirk is being done out of ignorance or shirk is not being done - the outer form alone is not enough to deem (for the onlooker) the person to be a mushrik - unless they acquire that information. Even for the person who is doing shirk unknowingly he must be taught against it, allowed to change, before deeming him one who has chosen shirk.
[/QUOTE]

Labeling someone as mushrik or polytheist is separate subject. Talking in context of hadith which mentions the existence of that type of shirk.

34

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Peace brother ajazali

You are getting yourself in to a fix ... Let's start again ...

I said my Shaykh said, that the act of sujood is not shirk unless the intention of it can be ascertained. In other words the label of shirk cannot be applied to the one who does sujood. Then you went down the wrong path trying to see if a person who does not realise he is doing shirk is not doing shirk. I was not talking about that ...

Sujood is not shirk - it is an act that has an intent - that might be of worship or it might be of respect. If done in worship to other than Allah (SWT) then it is shirk, if done in respect it is wrong but not shirk.
Shirk whether it is done as knowingly association of partnership to Allah (SWT) or not it is still shirk. So one could intend to be worshiping another entity or give another entity other than Allah (SWT) a Divine Attribute then that is shirk, furthermore that person may be oblivious to the fact that it is wrong in Islam to do that, the shirk still applies. These are two different things.

There are 3 elements here - (A) The Act itself, (B) The Intent behind the act, (C) The Understanding of that Act-Intent combination in relation to some criteria

Example 1)

A Muslim calls on Sayyiduna Muhammad (SAW) to forgive him his sins unaware of his wrong... This is shirk, why?
A) Calling on RasoolAllah (SAW) - this is the act - there is no inherent problem in doing this.
B) The intent of asking Sayyiduna Muhammad for forgiveness is wrong - shirk
C) The knowledge of doing this is not with the person - but his shirk still applies

Example 2)

A Muslim prostrates to someone out of respect and not out of worship
A) The act of prostration is not the issue, because this act is not specifically linked to a definite intent
B) The intent is to respect
C) The knowledge of shirk may be with this person or not with this person - because B) does not Attribute any Sifat or offer any worship to this article

So you are saying so long as the intent of B is wrong then it does not matter whether he realises this or not it is shirk - I agree
But I am saying B is not being done with that intent.

My point holds ... above you are using the word "shirk" - whereas I am defining the word "shirk" which is where the discrepancy is coming.
Of course if a person is doing shirk knowingly or unknowingly it is still shirk ... but I am saying first ascertain that what is being done is shirk or not.

35

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

If a Hindu believes that an idol symbolises God - i.e. puts a form around God then that is kufr. If he worships or asks help (in those matters that only God can provide) from other than God then that is shirk. It is simple … If he believes in many gods - then that is kufr - since God is One. If he believes that others can be worshipped then that is shirk. If he believes God has family that deserve worship - that is shirk.

If a Hindu says he does not intend to ask help from the statues - what is the rest of that sentence? … But … “he does end up asking them for help? yes or no” … Because the idea of worshipping an intermediary is shirk … whether he realises it or not … So it does not conflict with what I have said.

36

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Peace brother psyah

Ok, you agree that doing shirk knowingly or unknowingly is still shirk.

For sajood out of respect, seems like it does no matter what a person is doing, his act cannot be called a shirk if he claim his is doing it out of respect?

and can you please give an example of doing shirk unknowingly?

37

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Dear ajazali … yes ofcourse, please see Example 1 above post #34](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=34)

38

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

OK. :)

Most common criticism against the sajda for ghair-Allah is based on
**
Sajdah by itself is form of worship.**

Regardless of intention, the posture assumed in sajdah is prohibited for anyone other than Allah.

Sajdah is not required to show respect to anyone except Allah.

I think this definition exercise of haram, versus kufr **versus **shirk,... does not change the fact that "shaksiyat Parasti" is the beginning of many many problems and particularly among People from SE Asia and Muslims.

By saying oh it is not shirk but haram does not make it acceptable, right?

There is so much exploitation, deception, crimes, unislamic acts, which are associated with this kind of mindset of shakhsiyat parasti and making an Aalim/Sufi Qabar a place of 'worship'. These are the places where women and men get exploited by crooks.

39

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

Salam Alaikum Psyah

I disagree with this example. Disagree with point B specifically

If a person Calls upon RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam to forgive his sins or to ask forgiveness it is not necessarily Shirk. Since there is this possibility that it was not Shirk the Islamic Fatwa must remain that it is not Shirk

Having said, like everything else, Only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala can forgive sins. Merely Asking RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam to forgive sins is not shirk. For it to be Shirk it must be accompanied by other elements which infringe upon Tawheed. Like for example dependency. If a person was to ask RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam to forgive sins thinking that RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam was able to do this 'independently' then that would be shirk. However if a person was to ask RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam as a way to gain, be informed, of the Judgement of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala then that would be tawheed. This also includs situations where a person may feel Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala may not forgive them directly, but will Allow RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam to forgive them on His behalf (a bit like Intercession out of Hellfire).

The point is that the situation described in the example is insufficient to declare Shirk. For it to be Shirk it has to be done with a certain belief of equality in an Attribute, or for it to be not given by Allah (independently gained)

ps There is other points made by other posters on page 2 which i feel i must reply to. In Sha Allah in time

40

Re: Split: Religion vis a vis Shrine/Buildings/graves

The first thing those who regard Sajda to ghairullah as Shirk is that it was allowed once upon a time

The tazeemi Sajda was and is proof that Allah Subhnahu wa Ta'ala only considers an action as Shirk Al-Akbar when done with a khaas Mana (with certain belief)

Also it was forbidden for us in our SHARIAH only, the animals in their good fortune would still prostrate to RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam without being forbidden to do so, Sahaba asked to prostrate to RasoolAllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Ahlihi wa Sallam on multiple occasions!

We shouldn't Hate Tazeemi Sajda but concede that it is forbidden for us