This section is online for reference only. No new content will be added. no deletion either...
Go to Current Forums ...with millions of posts
     | Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 02:24 pm A very important conversation. We live in world where the distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims becomes irrelevent, something which flatly contradicts the very foundation of Islam. Are muslims conforming to the Western Values with or without knowledge. Can this be explianed in terms Human weaknesses, particularly not holding to one's ground, or is it a phenomenon which we can discern and subsequently rekindle our faith. I think it is both, the tremendous feelings of early Muslims who lived in atmosphere prophetic revelation can only be repeated by few devoted worshippers given the ever increasing temptations of Dunya, something which bothered even early Muslims as Mahdi put it eloquently " As the prophet dies and the generation which had known him and was directly influenced by him passes away, the miracles are forgotten and the impact of extraordinary feats start to decline...once the inner pulse vanishes... dynamic reality ceases to exist ... the regime is bound to degenerate to natural rule serving the lower impulses of whoever happens to be the stronger" Eventhough there has been and will always be a constant struggle between good and evil, muslims and Satan as above qoute implies, nevertheless the present degenaration of Muslim morals and ethics cannot be understood without making clear distinction between Muslims and unbelievers both in terms priority in this world and the ultimate goal, here after. None is better suited for this task than digging up the tremendous work of shaykhu Islam, the last great thinker of Islam,and the greatest social reformer of Islam since the Prophet Muhammed (SCW), Taqi Din Ibn Taymiyyah. This versatile genious stood midway between the prophet and our world which gives us huge advantage in understanding what went wrong from the Islamic community. Here is breif Boigraphy of one of the truly great thinkers of Islam. Taqi al-Din Ahmed bin Abdal-Halim was born in Harran on 22 January 1263 AD. He was born to family of renown scholars, His father Abd-al Halim and his grand father were both accomplished jurist. When he was barely seven when his family were forced to take refuge in Damascus from the invading Mongols. At an early stage Ibn Taymiyyah studied all disciplines of jurisprudences, traditions of the prophet, commentaries of the Qur'an, Mathematics, and philosophy, in every subject he was the first in his class. At the age of seventeen he was enrusted the huge responsibility of giving Fatwa(legal ruling),and by the age of thirty he was offered to the office of Chief Justice. He declined the offer since he knew it would limit his needed reforms. Ibn Taymiyyah was interested in nothing except spreading knowledge and inspiring action in accordence with it. It is worth to mention that the basis of all his reformative efforts were the Qur'an and the Sunnah, a characteristic which made for him many enemies, since Bid'a had already crept into the simple concept of islam. In terms of character he was very generous and kind hearted, especailly to the poor and the needy. He was always in contact with those groups,coming to their aid, giving Fatwa's on their behalf for the economic improvement, he held the state responsible in eradicating starvation. In all he was living example of someone who held tight the Sunnah of the prophet. As a social reformer Ibn Taymiyyah not only issued great number of influential Fatwas but whenever the circumstance demanded he become an activist,participating both political and public debates. Unlike most of great muslims of his time, Ibn taymiyyah was instrumental in defeating Mongols. He mobolized the community by declaring Jihad on Mongols, since he was the ultimate inspirer in the Islamic communities. No one in his time has ever attianed a greater influence in the public opinion than he, and he used it with amazing efficiency in defending his faith. He even issued a fatwa exempting the duty of fasting from those who were fighting and even those who stayed at home, something which indicates his accomplishment in Ijtihad. Ibn taymiyyah might have reasoned this way " If muslims are exempted from duty of fasting when they travel then defending the Towhid from the enemy in hot and difficult day would qualify as exemption of fasting. He was truly insperational both in terms of depth his reasoning and putting it into action. It is worth to mention that most of other great muslims and saints had fled to egypt. It is normal to expect someone who enjoyed such stature among muslim masses, like Ibn taymiyyah did, to be immune from state persecution, but to great disappointment Ibn Taymiyyah in the end died in prison. When Ibn Taymiyyah was taken away from his pen and paper in his last imprisonment he started writing his letters and booklets with coal. He never complained to anyone about his persecution. Only when all of the reading and writing tools were taken away from him did he say " Now they really have put me into prison." He died on 26 September 1328 ( 20 Dhu'l Qacdah 728 AH) Next Time his contribution. Preveiw. Ibn Taymiyyah fight gainst Greek logicians,philosophers. His fights agianst pantheistic Sufism His fights againts injustice, including the state. His breathtaking exposition of what is wrong with Christianity as religion; the greatest polemic work that ever directed by Muslim against Christianity. AND MUCH MORE OTHER INCLUDING: Did the West awe something to Ibn Taymiyyah, and what can we learn from him in order to take charge of our lives.
|
| | Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 03:04 pm Durgal Was't he one of the poineers of Islamic Adminstration?
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 11:03 am oh no! please. not another ibnu taymiyah overkilling from Durgal. God help us here. This is pure over-rating. Sir Durgal, Now we read ibnu taymiyah, when will you post al-ghazali as a topic?. We are freaking out and hopping foward seeing you posting the overkilling of al-ghazali sir. i guess your shahada should read " ash-hadu an laa ilaha ila ibnu taymiyah, wa ash-hadu anna al ghazali is another good guy that i follow blindly" rather than "ash-hadu an laa ilah ila alaah, wa ash-hadu anna maxamadu al rasuula laah" rather " alipapa
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 11:20 am Anigu Illaahay iyo nebi Maxamed baan faraqa haystaaye muxuu ahaa ninkan kale?
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 12:06 pm Durgal, You are truely a DuUrgal. You are a confused Wahhabi in the making. Ibn Taymiyyah as he passed away, guess what he passed to his student? Jubbah of Sayyiddina Shakh AbdulQadir Jillani. If as Somalis we are 95%+ Qaddirriyah, why are you bringing us down to Ibn Taymiyaah as our role model for Islam? I suggest you educate yourself on true Islamic tradition and stop tripping and promoting over Saudi, Wahabi propoganda. WA ALAYKUM WA SALAAM Mercano
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 02:39 pm People lets be rational little bit Do not miss the big picture" Moral lax of Muslims and their conforming to the non-Muslim practices. There reason why I chose Ibn Taymiyyah is Simple he spent all his life in defending Orthodox Islam from Bidcas,and he I lived 700 years after prophet Mohammed SWC. This enabled him to document what went wrong from Muslim community, when particular innovation started and why. Xoogasede I am not comparing him with the prophet rather I am showing how he held the true teachings of Islam, and how contributed Islam by defending it from Pantheistic Sufis of Arabi on one hand and Greek philosopher and their Arab Followers on the other.Islam which started as simple concept was attacked from different sides by those froces mentioned above,and thanks to Imam Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah We demolished them. Mercano, be rational. Ibn taymiyyah lived 600 years before Whahab, and it was these Wahabis who contorted Ibn taymiyyah teachings. Ibn Taymiyyah was member of Qadiriyyah and he got it from his grand father who recieved from Shiekh Abdul Qadir Jaylaani, and he never had anything but praise for the shiekh.
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 03:12 pm Durgal, I might have miss read your intentions. Since Wahabis claim that they are on the footsteps of Ibn-Taymiyah while distorting the Shaykhs teachings to suit there......? I am just playing a watchdog here. Your path is cleared by your praising of the Imam may Allah be pleased with him. Peace. Mercano
|
| | Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 07:19 pm Durgal, I spent quite sometime on reading your inputs on the various topics posted. You seem to have some especial mind and eagerness to encompass Islam. Piece of advice; Islam has no depths or heights, it encompasses your brain, for brain is limited, not the otherway round. Allah,SWT, has given you a heart,"QALBUL CABD BAYTUL RABB" also, "MA WASICANII ALRDHA WA SAMAWAAT, BAL WASICANII QALBUL CABD". Beware many cannot understand how you put together Ibn Tamiyyah and Ibn Carabi, or Ibn Tayamiyah and Imam Al-Gazalli. Some were affected by Wahabi publications in the west that curse Ibn Carabi, QSA, may Allah guide us all, as they promote Ibn Taymiyah. On the other hand although you know what many don't know about the history of Ibn-Taymiyah, there is another side of the Shaykh that you might not have encountered. That is the the part of his teaching that the Wahabbis affilliate themselves with. Namely, Tajseem. Totally unacceptable by Islam. Do not think that Islam is a religion of the dead in need of such individuals like you and me to keep it alive. Its realities is beyond that. When we look at the moon, it is the size of a quarter, but is it really? Thus, we're defective in our vision. Are we looking at Islam with those same eyes? What about the copper wire carrying electricity upon looking....? Prophet SAW, in a Hadith Qudsi said, "ITTAQU FIRA'SAL MU'MIN, INAHU YANDHURU BI NUURI LAAH...ilaa aakhurul xaddiith." These are points for your reflection and contempulation and you asked for them wether you remember or not. Islam is a living religion. Allah, SWT, has guaranteed that it shall be preserved and it shall prevail. On the other hand we, as Muslims, may Allah protect us. as Allah SWT said in holly quran, "WHEN YOU (US, MUSLIMS) TURN AWAY FROM ME I SHALL REPLACE YOU WITH OTHER NATIONS THAT SHALL BE BETTER THAN YOU". As the endless attributes of Allah, SWT, are continues tense, so are Islam's fountains. We need to harness our hearts through piety, Taqwah, as Allah SWT said in Holly Quran, "ITAQULLAHA YU CALIMAKUM". Those Macallim dugsi taught us everything we need to know. The west unfortunately is spiritually bankrubt. Remember that book, 'All I need to know, I learned it in Kindergarden." In our case by our Macallim dugsi. Wa Alaykum Wa Salam. Mercano.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 08:27 am Seems Somali sufis are trying to recognise each other. when will you reach the top of your Topah?? What is the place for women in sufism? I like but I was not allowed to become a mamber of it. I realised that Durgal is Sufi from the beggining. Anyways, I think i desagree with that he has a specail minds to encompass islam when he wrote'' critic or not Aidid left a legacy'' and his explaination of that legacy was that he left something good beheind. Bro Durgal, I did not forgiet you saying that and it was a pretty disappointing . I would never say thing like that one of bloody worlds that I may share a clan with. Sorry Dude, but could not help to get it out of my chest.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 09:06 am Muslimah, If you are looking for Siant you have the wrong man. I am normal guy expressing his views not his values. You misread what I wrote,please read the whole article, and then read under the same posting my next comment " lets put this nonsense to stop" then call me whatever you want I realy don't care. How do you know if I am Sufi?
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 09:48 am Bro, I read all your commont but the first one was nothing but to say that he was a valualbe man for Habargedir. so you did not consider the other things that he did to ohter somalis. so, i woner, if someone can be good because he was good for his clan. I read your next one and it was good and indeed good but I do not know if you repliced that for the first one. and there is nothing indicating you did so. If you did you must have changed your mind about the first one and as you said I should not expect a saint and I should put that as a mistake. How do I know you are sufi? are not you? I am not.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 12:41 pm A Muslimah This discusion is under Ibn Taymiyah not Aideed. Somali Sufis? What about you sister? Are you Salafi, Wahabi? Hopeless Operation Restore Quran Only? From your comments it seems that you have no idea what sufism is about. With all respect how could you want to join something that you do not know? And who are these people to be joined that would not accept you because you are a woman? In what manner, approach you wanted to join them? Your comments only confirm that Sufism was a reality without a name in the time of Prophet, Calayhi Afdhalu Salatu Wa Salaam, but today it is a name without realities. Tell those people about Rabi'ul Cadawiyah of Egypt. One of the greatest masters of Ilmul tasawuf, a lady. Endless numbers of scholars were produced by her teachings carrying the flag of Islam from East to West, in an ERA of no televisions, websites, etc. ..... when will you reach the top of your Topah?? .... Topah has no top to be reached except approached, that is why some carry long TUSBAX, while engaged in endless tasbiix. So sister target yourself accordingly. ...What is the place for women in sufism?..... Allah SWT trusted the soul to enter the fetus while in the womb of the mother not father! I bet you like that one. Sufis??? do say that. ....I like but I was not allowed to become a member.... Why not? If those that rejected you were people of Tasawuf, self purification, PERHAPS it was for the simple reason that you were not ready for. The science of Tasawuf requires an empty and clean container for heavenly asrar to be poured into. You would not pour honey into a container of motor oil. As you can now see about yourself, you attack Sufism because they would not let you into what YOU LIKED so Sister A Muslimah, please reflect. If they were not sincere, may Allah forgive them and guide them, for they would have to carry the burden it comes with. Above all we might have to redefine sufism before we start labeling one another and Allah knows best. Wa Minallahi Tawfiiq. Durgal Brother, you might not be a saint, but remember, LA TAQNATU MIN RAXMITILLAH... Sulaymanal Farsi was a Zurastarian, Majuus. Look what Allah SWT made him. Take my advice if it touched your inner heart. But do me a favor, do not post Ibn Taymiyah as a role model when you have endless others to chose from. As Somalis like the majority of traditional Muslims we are Sunni Muslims, Asharis, Shafi's and predominantly Qadriyah(Sufis????? why not? but authentic, Alhamdullilah) Ibn Taymiyah attacked Ashcaris and other Sunni mainstream Muslims of being Mutazili as he promoted ANTHROPOMORPHISM, assigning for Allah SWT position, direction and other limitations, Xaashah!!! We can open another page on this issue and I am willing to share facts that I have. Till then, Peace. Mercano
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 01:14 pm Wallee ninkan Mercano waa nin cilmiga ruugee yaan laysugu dhowaan haddii kale sida daadkuu idinla tegi doonaa!!!!!!! War ninyow cilmiga wax ma noo hambaynaysaa, yaa saaxiib?
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 03:04 pm Xoogsade War nin yahoo waa naga xishoodsiinaysa. Waa mahadsantahay calaa ayi xaal. Runtii aniga qasdi uma lehi in cilmi meeshan aan ka dhiibto. Sababta ugu wayna waxay tahay in cilmiga aniga aad iyo aad igu yaryahay. Tan kalene cilmi kaligiis haddi uu anfac leeyahay, shaydan buu wax u tari lahaa. Sababtaas ayaan markista oon halkan wax ku qoray QULUUBTI aan u tilmaamaa. "FAWQA KULLI CILMIN, DHII CALIIM." HOLY QORAN. Meaning above every knower there is one that knows more. Wa Alaykum Wa Salaam
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 06:30 pm Marcano, take it easy agian. Have you ever wondered why we are divided in everything, religion; Aqwaan and sufi, politics; Hawiye, Daarood, Isaaq. It is simple because we limit ourselves into one group, we never question and say who is right right and why. I am social scientist, and I don't really care either Whabi or Sufis, one thing matters to me, who is right and who is close to Sunnah of the prophet. Analyzing Muslims from social science point of view, I can clearly see why Islam is so weak in the world we live in today. I took the pains and the benefits of reading Islam's development in term of law, theology, adminstration, politics, and how that is related to pillars of Islam, and it is precisely this reason that I selected Ibn taymiyyah. He was the greatest Muslim social reformer since the Prophet Muhammed (SCW). I do not really appreciate your remarks "Those Macalim dugsi taught us every thing we need" It seems like you are happy with present condition of Muslims, and like you said if that is enough, then why muslims are so weak? Frankly, I don't think you see where I am headed with this article. The last time I read somebody accusing Ibn Taymiyyah Tajsiim or Anthoropomorphism,enacting human characteristics to non-human,in this case God, was when I read the breif biography of Shiekhul Islam on the last pages of Imam Nawaawi book "The reliance of the Travellers". This accusation, is compeletely false, it is like saying day is night. This is where literature reveiw skills become Gold. Imam Nawaawi probably was a boy when Ibn Taymiyyah died,so he could not have had an objective veiw about the Shiekhul Islam. In addition, there were anomosity between Shafici school jurists as group and our Hanbali jurist Ibn Taymiyyah. He silenced his critics in every subject of islamic law. Thus when he died it is most likely that those poeple had their revenge, including Imam Nawaawi. Read a much more objective boigraphy of the shiekh Islam by Ibn Kathir, another Shafici historian, and see if you find Tajsiim allegations. In this context it is not surprising that Western students of Islam have produced a much more objective and accurate picture of the shaykh, since they were only concerned his contributions and not what school he belonged to,or whether he was Sufi, or jurist. Marcano can you substantiate your allegations? can you find Tajsiim books which was written by Ibn Taymyyah.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 06:35 pm Well what " A muslimah " demonstrated is a classic example of what brought our country to it's knees, she some how found a point to differ or oppose durgal and in the process connected two topics which are not in anyway or shape related. I wonder how U can debate the blight of Somali clan warfare and the teachings of Ibn Tayimah in the same breath. If U disagree with a point it's not only wise but educational to digest and discuss that point not dig up a point which belongs to another debate. And on the subject of labeling one another, isn't that what Our Prophet the seal of all Prophets warned against us. The Ahadith mentions how on the eve of the last days of this world the Ummah of Muhammed(SAW) will divide to 73 branches while the Jews will be 71 and the Masiixi will be 72. Those days are here, all around the world the Muslims are labeling each other left and right, we seem to be interested in our own destruction before we even ponder what our enemy is doing to us. Let Allah(SWT) be the judge and leave ur fellow Muslims short-comings, after all we are all humans and have our flaws. Our enemy is laughing at us, enjoying the spectacle we are demonstrating, the view is too good to resist, that's why U have a around the clock networks covering the blight of the Ummah. Anyway I hope I didn't offend anyone I just wanted to point out few remarks that can fuel the flames of division. Till then fii amaani Laah.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 12:41 am Babilon “And on the subject of labeling one another, isn't that what Our Prophet the seal of all Prophets warned against us. The Ahadith mentions how on the eve of the last days of this world the Ummah of Muhammed(SAW) will divide to 73 branches while the Jews will be 71 and the Masiixi will be 72.” Prophet SAW said, AL FARQ BAYNA UMMATII, RAXMAH, differences among my nation is mercy. These differences can be means of broader gates for children of Adam to find Islam. Differences must be of constructive type in our case. Prophet PBUH did not advice us against the factions, firqs, as you put it. Rather, he said that it shall take place. ”Our enemy is laughing at us, enjoying the spectacle we are demonstrating, the view is too good to resist, that's why U have a around the clock networks covering the blight of the Ummah..” It says in Holy Quran, “MAKARU WA MAKURULLAHA, WALLAHU KHAYRUL MAAKIRIIN”. They plot, and Allah plots, Their plot becomes Allah’s plot for Allah is the best plotter. So Babilon relax. Insha’Allah it is all happening for the better. Remember, the incident when Sayyiddina Cumar, RA, first came to see the Prophet, PBUH, he came to kill him. Had you and I been there and witnessed, we would have cursed him. And had we cursed him, we would have cursed a Khalif of Khulufa’u Rashiddeen. All religions of today are bankrupt except Islam. If we are to discus the sciences of Islam, it will expose to many that have been cheated, the greatness, and limitless of this diin. So let it be. And may one day we pray behind Bill Clinton salatul Iid in the closed streets of Los Angels. In Allah’s mercy oceans that is not a big thing. We have Islam, nothing to be ashamed of. Others have partial and defective beliefs yet they are not ashamed!!!!!!!!! FI AMANILLAH Durgal, I would have taken it easy, had you titled this page otherwise. And I would have taken it easy AGAIN perhaps, if you did not state, ““He was the greatest Muslim social reformer since the Prophet Muhammed (SCW). …. Taqi Din Ibn Taymiyyah. This versatile genious stood midway between the prophet and our world which gives us huge advantage in understanding what went wrong from the Islamic community.” Instead of …………..since the last of Khulufa’u Rashiddiin, ..sinceTabicin or Tabici Taabiciin. Wadaayo Sideey kaa naqati? “I can clearly see why Islam is so weak in the world we live in today.” That is your claim, perhaps your view. Yes you can clearly see as the moon, the size of a quarter? Islam is not weak in the world. No. Strong and forever getting stronger. Is there a faster growing religion than Islam in this world? May be you meant Muslims are………!?! Ar wadaayo haddane sidee kaa noqote? “Marcano can you substantiate your allegations? can you find Tajsiim books which was written by Ibn Taymyyah.” IBN TAYMIYYA, AL-TACSIS FI AL-RADD CALAA ASAS AL-TAQDIS 1:568 Ibn Taymiyah wrote in his TACSIS, an attack on al-Razi for a book in refutation of anthropomorphists. ‘ HE CREATED ADAM BY TOUCHING HIM (MASISAN).’ p25 ‘IF HE SO WILLED, HE COULD HAVE SETTLED ON THE BACK OF A GNAT AND IT WOULD HAVE CARRIED HIM THANKS TO HIS POWER AND THE FAVOR OF HIS LORDSHIP, NOT TO MENTION THE MAGNIFICIENT THRONE.’ p75 This is a dangerous, ugly, astonishing combination of TAJSIIM, TAKYIF, and TAMTHIIL. In a word, the author’s premise for inferring that the object of his worship can settle on top of a gnat is his understanding that Allah physically settles on the Throne. One of the greatest indications of the Ibn Taymiyah’s anthropomophist views is that in advocating the interpretation of ISTAWA as ISTIQRAR or settling. ‘HE IS DISTINGUISHED FROM HIS CREATION AND ABOVE HIS THRONE WITH A PATENT DISTANCE IN BETWEEN THE TWO, WITH THE SEVEN HEAVENS BETWEEN HIM AND HIS CREATURES ON EARTH.’ p79 ‘IF THE LORD SITS ON THE CHAIR OR FOOT-STOOL (kursi), A KIND OF GROANING IS HEARD SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE NEW CAMEL SADDLE. THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE PRESSURE OF ALLAH’S ESSENCE ON TOP OF IT.’ p92 & p182 ‘THE CREATOR, GLORIFIED AND EXALTED IS HE, IS ABOVE THE WORLD AND HIS BEING ABOVE IS LITERAL, NOT IN THE SENSE OF DIGNITY OR RANK. IT MAY BE SAID OF THE PRECEDENCE OF A CERTAIN OBJECT OVER ANOTHER THAT IT IS WITH RESPECT TO DIGNITY OR RANK, OR THAT IT IS WITH RESPECT TO LOCATION. FOR EXAMPLE, RESPECTIVELY, THE PRECEDENCE OF THE LEARNED OVER THE IGNORANT AND THE PRECEDENCE OF THE IMAM OVER THE ONE PRAYING BEHIND HIM. ALLAH’S PRECEDENCE OVER THE WORLD IS NOT LIKE THAT, RATHER IT IS A LITERAL PRECEDENCE (i.e. in time). SIMILARLY, THE ELEVATION ABOVE THE WORLD COULD BE SAID TO BE WITH RESPECT TO DIGNITY OR RANK, AS FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IT IS SAID THE LEARNED IS ABOVE THE IGNORANT. BUT ALLAH’S ELEVATION OVER THE WORLD IS NOT LIKE THAT, RATHER HE IS ELEVATED OVER IT LITERALLY (i.e. in space). AND THIS IS THE KNOWN ELEVATION AND THE KNOWN PRECEDENCE.’ 1:111 IBN TAYMIYYA, AL-CAQIIDDA AL-WASITIYYA SALAFIYYA, ed. 1346/1927 Ibn Taymiyyah wrote this book as Ibn Uthamin’s Sharah al-caqiidda al-wasitiyya. ‘THE PHRASE “AND HE IS WITH YOU” DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE BLENDS INTO CREATION ……… NAY THE MOON…..ONE OF THE SMALLEST OF ALLAH’S CREATION, IS BOTH PLACED IN THE HEAVEN (mawduun fi al-samaa) AND PRESENT WITH THE TRAVELLER AND NON-TRAVELLER WHEREVER THEY MAY BE. AND THE EXALTED IS ABOVE (fawq) THE THRONE, AS A WATCHFUL GUARDIAN OF HIS CREATURES AND THEIR PROTECTOR WHO IS COGNIZANT OF THEM.’ p20 Ibn Taymiyyah admirers may claim that he represents the Sunni doctorine, but all know that none of the Sunnis ever compared ALLAH, SWT, to the moon, or ALLAH, SWT, knowledge to the moon’s rays. XAASHA!! Exalted is ALLAH, SWT, high above the fancies of those who offer such parallels for Him. I have more to refer to. Among them is Ibn Batuta’s Tuhfat al-nuzzar, who attended a Friday Khutbah given by Ibn Taymiyyah and he recorded in his book. As a consequence for having taken such strange positions, Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned by agreement of the Muslim scholars of Egypt and Syria, who wished to prevent the dissemination of his ideas. His imprisonment, it should be stressed, came as a result of the consensus of the scholars of his time and not, as it is claimed by his admirers, a massive conspiracy against him. He was not jailed by a tyrannical ruler, nor was he jailed due to the jealousy of his contemporaries, as is supposed today by those who claim to follow his teachings. It is feared that the authorities made him something of a martyr instead, and stimulatedintrest in his otherwise pedestrian observations on Devine attributes. “YAA AYUHALADIINA AAMANUU IJTANIBUU BI KHUTUBAATI SHAYDHAAN, INAHU LAKUM CADUWUN MUBIIN. INMAA YA’MURUKUM BI SUU’I WAL FAXSHAA’I WA AN TAQUULUU CALA LAHI MALAA TACLAMUUN.” Holy Quran, “O believers beware of the tricks of Satan, for he is open enemy to you. He orders you bad deeds, and to say about ALLAH what you do not know. Durgal, are you promoting us to be engaged in such pitfalls? Well it happened to the genius Imam, so where do we stand? What is our chance? Do not get me wrong. Just because I could not finish this side of the Imam, does not mean that I have no great things to say about him, his work and his contribution to Islam. We cannot head to where the blind leads the blind? Durgal. This should be enough for you. I hope I’ve shed some light on the issue brother. The ball is in your court. You may believe, you may reflect, as you like. I am just fulfilling duties, such that if others visit this site ‘cause of its title, what I have just posted should be enough, what I have said to you BEFORE about heart and brain should be enough. Bees are capable of extracting honey from flowers, yet if I give you this whole city of flowers, you cannot give me one spoonful of honey.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:08 pm Quick question what is your qualification? I am asking this question so that we make distinction between someone who studies islam traditionally as apposed to someone who went college and being exposed to critical thinking. When was Al tacsis written? Date. Are you reading Ibn Taymiyyah books by your own? think of this as context question. Before I answer these allegations your response is really crucial, and please be honest.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 05:52 pm This concludes our debate. Good bye agian. I swear to God this man is crazy, if not he should see a doctor. Marcano are you Ali papa? Please disregard what he said about the shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, which is nothing compared to his naked attack on the prophet Muhammed SCW. He denies one of the prophet's Hadiths "The prophet did not advice us agianst factions and firqas" Isn't this a clear contradiction of the prophet's warning agianst the 73 groups of muslim firqas. Look, if were sent here to disrupt something you should have been little bit more discreet. Alipapa, or Marcano whoever you are, you didn't have to go all this trouble and slender your religion to get my attention. Now get lost. My others veiwers, don't worry we should get back on track ASAP.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 07:22 pm Durgal, I think you need to look at this link to understand where your friend is coming from: http://sunnah.org/anthro/anthro5.htm
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 07:26 pm “..Quick question what is your qualification? I am asking this question so that we make distinction between someone who studies islam traditionally as apposed to someone who went college and being exposed to critical thinking…” That should be irrelevant, in this case, irrelevant, absolutely irrelevant. Your posting, etc. should remain universal as much as possible, free from my qualifications, other reader’s credentials or the like. You missed the whole point. You titled this page, “Ibn Taymiyyah.” Although I do sincerely and honestly believe that your objective was, “…social science point of view ..”, it is the personal and exaggerated remarks that you as an author made and the impact it can have on others. As you can retrace I never wanted to engage myself into this, which in my knowledge, is still at surface. There were two eras of Ibn Taymiyya’s scholarship. His early works and latter works. It is an Islamic tradition that you hide your brothers defects unless it poses a threat to the Diin, Ummah or Hummanity. These so-called allegations are facts engraved in our history but left mostly untranslated into western languages. “When was Al tacsis written? Date… Are you reading Ibn Taymiyyah books by your own?” I do not keep a library. It is not important to me. You can contact Dar-ar-Rahma, Egypt. They should have the following books by Ibn Taymiyya in Arabic. *al-Fatawi al-kubra *al-Tacsis *Majmuuca fatawa Ibn Taymiyya *al-Ziyara *Ilm as-suluk “Before I answer these allegations your response is really crucial, and please be honest.” You do not have to answer anything. Honesty? That you can count on me. I have nothing to personally benefit from this. I am just a simple man on the net with no real name, face and so on. What I have contributed here is free for anyone reading to keep, reject, research on, reflect or contemplate. You may close this or keep it open. Till then PEACE bro.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 08:03 pm Durgal Thanks for bringing the Hadith to my as well as other readers' attention. AstaghfuruLLah, on the haddith. And JazzakaLLahu Khayrran. Yes upon re-reading, I guess I slipped there. Please make corrections. Prophet PBUH did warn us about the going astray into the 70 and so firqas. I do not recall the point I was trying to make there. My rush was to respond to Durgal. However, the emphasis of the Haddith was, 'That such time shall come." confirmed by the other Haddith I quoted. Durgal, check with Forensec, Mercano & Ali Papa?? Do not go crazy. Remember that time is rizq minaLLah and should not be wasted. Good luck. My job is done.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 09:33 pm BRAVO MERCANO And say, Truth has come and falsehood has vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish. (17:81)
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 04:59 am And this http://sunnah.org/anthro/anthro2.htm
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 06:25 am Anononomous Thank you. You hit the nail by the head. Poisonous You are a true researcher. Thank you. Allah bless the web. Had I have known of the site, my life would have been easier with Durgal's....COPY & PASTE you know what I mean? I only had access to the same author's book along with the biography it comes with. Thanks again. AlhamduLLilah it is over. Peace
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 08:10 am Babilon and Mercino, Thank but no thanks. I did not say the way you reversed my statement. I said I do not think, Durgal does not have a special mind to encompose islam. And I gave my example about that. I did not say lets talk about that. Do not you understand the difference between the two. Moreover, I beleave in that your knowledge of islam should be applied under any thread. No, matter, if we are talking about Aidiid or us. And I think, Babilon, run to the conclusion that i am a kind of trauble maker. My point was not that at all, and I think you should realise that whenever you wrote something , you would have critics. I was not by any means here to argue with Durgal, but at least remind his that was a misktake. I beleave that Islam will bring peace to Somalia but with a lot of care by our educated brothers and sisters. I feel Durgal, could be one of them if he takes care things that not to say and the most important to clean that from heart( if it came from heart). Durgal, Bro, I did not mean to say anything bad but I as a muslim who can be weak also felt that I should remind you that your Islamic knowlegde should be consistence with your writings. I think, as you may realised your answer satisfied me.And I pray that I did not say anything to hurt you. Mercano, I am not a sufi but unlike what you said I have a lot of knowlegde about that. My husband used to be.
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 09:46 am Muslimah Thanks. Point well taken. I am not Ali Papa or Babilon. I do recall runing into comments by Alipapa posted under other headings directed to Durgal, as I was trying to know more about your comments directed to Durgal, as a sufi, and his linking of Imam Al-Gazali, Ibn Arabi and Ibn Taymiyya. I also detected Durgal's potential as you did. Unfortunately, it seems that I pushed him little too far to the extent he told me to get lost. I did warn him indirectly, however, he would not quit. As in your case, I have to admit that I had to poke you to keep things in context so to safeguard this topic from derailing into other than its heading. Please forgive me. As for me I am a student in Ilmul Tasawuf and an authorized Daacii trained to call people regardless for their belief and background to their Lord's servanthood. Along the years, AlhamduLLilah Allah SWT has blessed me to give shahada, under my teachers guidance and directions, to over 300 people in Nothern America. By trade I am an Engineer and I never took a course in critical thinking or the like. Rather, I took one class in technical report writing and the basically required college English. May Allah bless you all and forgive me.
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 01:14 pm This discussion has taken the wrong detour, but let me refocus it, since I was the one who started it. We were talking about Musim's moral lax and the need to identify the major causes of that: the erosion of the fundementals of quranic and sunnah values, by adhering to various sects, which never existed even the third century of Islam. Like every great teacher Ibn taymiyyah spoke out these secondary and irrelevent loyalties.He put huge emphasis on what prophet Muhammed (SCW) did,and what our Salafs did. As result of that Ibn Taymiyyah made enemies, including some of the jurist who were jelous not only of his intellectual supremacy but his firmness on what thought was right. In addition, Ibn Taymiyyah also criticized Sufi sects, who adhered to popular religions. These varoius sects turned up side down the simple concept of Islam which the prophet (SCW)stressed " Wactasimuu bixabli laahi jamiican walaa tafaraquu." Before I conclude this discusion and move to Ibn Taymiyyah's contribution to Islam and in general to mankind, I would like to clarify these lies which, Alipap/marcano brought up by putting it in a bigger context. This is not a discussion about Sufis and non-Sufis and while I acknowledge the division between the two, I have to say that real Ulema such as the Sufi master Shaykh Abdi al-Qadir Jaylani and shiekhul Islam Imam Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah were one and the same. Though they lived centuries apart they did not disagree on single thing, since they both held tight the Sunnah of the prophet. In addition, they shared outspokenness in enjoining what is right and fair and forbidding what is wrong and unfair. There are certian myths about sufism that needs to be clarified such as shaykh Abdi al-Qadir founding Qaadiriya order. There is nothing that indicates that the Shaykh founded this order, in other words there are no historical facts that support this popular misconception. Qaadiriyyah order came into existence decades after the death of the Shaykh. There should be no confusion however that the Shaykh gave Sufi cloaks to his followers just as recieved one from his great Teacher Shaykh Hammid Dabbass. In short, Qaadiriyyah as order was not around when Shaykh Abdi al Qadir was alive. For further discission on this see Professor Spencer Trimmingham's The Sufi Orders in Islam.(1971,pp 40) Shaykh abdulqaadir was Hanbali by madhab not Shaafaci as many Qaadiriyahh claim. Even though shaykh Abdi al-Qaadir Jilaani reached the highest form of Cilmul macrifa, he always tested this knowledge against the sunnah and the Qur'an, and it was for this reason that he was able to outsmart Shaytaan. In one incident the shaykh himself remembers while he was wandering around the deserts of Baghdad the Iblis himself piad a visit, telling the shaykh that he was from God and that the were certain things that the shaykh was permitted to do from that day on which no one else was premitted before. Shiekh Abdulqadir Immedaitely remembered one of the Qur'anic verses that contradicted this offer, he wasted no time in rebuking Iblis. Shaykh Abdulqaadir later recalls this as his last encounter with Iblis temptations. The lesson that we learn from here is two fold, for one, there are varoius unfounded claims that are being made on the behalf of the shaykh just as whahabi's would like to generalize Ibn Taymiyyah criticism on certian groups of the Sufis to encompass it all Sufis. In contrast to these claims, both these great men were mirror reflection of the prophetic sunnah, though in different forms. The second lesson is really much of common sense, the need of developing new ways of distinguishing good people from bad people. What group someone belongs to should be irrelevent. In the end the focus should be the pig picture, not betty arguments. Any improvement that is made from this area will determine how far islamic Umah goes against seas of confusions. Finally, I would like to present an educated veiw about these allegations of Anthropomorphism against Ibn Taymiyyah. Simple note however, we should keep in mind their historical context, after all he lived in thirteenth century. The first allegation of Anthropomorphism arose when some poeple in the city of Hamat in Syria in 698/1298 asked Ibn Taymiyyah to write on the questions of attributes of Allah and he wrote treaties known al Hamawiyyah al-Kubra. However, his enemies saw this treaty as Tashbih and they requested ibn Taymiyyah arrest, but Amir who was open minded set up council of respected jurists to investigate the matter. In this trail Ibn Taymiyyah was questioned thoroughly, and in the end the council concluded that Hamawiyyah al-Kubra was consistence with sunnuh and Qur'an. For details of this trails see Islamic Philosophy and Theology by Montgomery Watt (1985,pp143), Al Uqud pp132-37. Similarly when Ibn Taymiyyah wrote al-Wasitiyyah treaty he was falsely accused, again two trails were held which lasted more than three sessions each, all the prominant adversaries of Ibn taymiyyah were brought in to question him,in the end however he breathtakenly silenced all of his critics. Agian,this respected council of jurist dismissed all allegations and concluded that Ibn Taymiyyah was in line with sunnah and the Qur'an. At the end of this trail Ibn Taymiyyah critics understood that they were not going to get him legally, so some other venue must be sought. Either the use of their pens or their influence on particular rulers to put him in jail. This explains the endless arrests, including his final imprinsonment on which he deid. For further discussion see Marlin Swarz's translation of this treaty " A Seventh Century(AH) Suni Creed" I hope muslims would start looking peyond sects, so that the ultimate search for knowlegde becomes revitalization of our moral value and furthering the common good. I am motivated by attianment of that goal, not by getting respect from someone, or "Winning a discussion" I'll see you the weekend. "Ibn Taymiyyah take on Christianity.
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 03:31 pm Poisonous, thanks for busting him up, great job. He is all over the place, he is like on mission to disrupt the whole thing. He says I am sorry about the Hadiith,and then he is COPYING from other people? If I were him I would go away for along time.
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 05:32 pm Durgal. If in your opinion this discussion has taken the wrong detour you should look at yourself. You seem to keep making cartoon claims and combinations without an authority. You are simply blinded by your so called ‘social scientist, reformist, modernist, Islamist, ist, ist, ist, add also communist, capitalist, ist, ist, ist. LET ME MAKE ONE THING VERY CLEAR BROTHER, IN ISLAM THERE IS NO “IST”. You are in the west and Allah knows best, you are LOST, FULLY LOST. If you have a socialist remark to make, you may cut and paste western history, for it is most suitable for. …..gigsaw puzzle historians and their endless books. If you attempt this in Islam, brother you will be disappointed. If you want to incorporate Islamic Characters in your work you must go to Islamic sources and refrain from imposing your exaggerated and personal defective views. You want to say that Imam Nawawi was too young to have an opinion on Ibn Taymiyah, yet, you Durgal FROM 21ST CENTURY, can give a more accurate and exclusive opinion on Ibn Taymiyya. What kind of foolishness is this? And now you have all these corrections to make about the history of Shakh AbdulQadir Jilani. Under what authority? Those western historians are your references? No wonder why you see Islam as weak. If western universities have real record and knowledge of Islam, like their peers in the history they would convert. If you are to focus on what you say you want to focus, then stay focused. Only you are forcing this discussion to take wrong tour. It is not about wining a discussion, etc. You want to use Ibn Taymiyya, no problem, excellent example, but do not make such remarks and praising over KhulufauRashiddiin, Taabiciin and Tabicu Taabiciin particularly when SOME OF HIS WORKS WERE CONDEMNED BY CULUMAS. Give his place. But when you title this page nothing other than his name and you immediately attach those remarks you catch my attention. Now let me give you an idea about under what qualifications and authority I am coming against you. Yes, its traditional… Mercano is the one from Marka in Italian. For your information in Marka, there is the flag of Shaykh CabdulQaadir Jilaani and other relics of the Shakh entrusted to Shakh Xasan Yuusuf by his Shaykh, Shakh Nuur Xusayn of Beleddul Karim, through the late Maclin Shiiqey of Baqdaad (a village in Shabeelaha Hoose, not Ciraaq). Shaykh Nuur Xussayn inherited from Shaykh Aways Axmed………….the silsilah goes to Imamu Tariqah Sh. C/Jilani, Sh. Abu Saciid Makhzuumi, Abul Xasan Cali Xankari, …. Habiib Cajami,…Xdr. Imaam Xuseyn, Xdr. Sayiddina Cali RA, Nabi SAW. Such is known in Islam as Isnad, chain of transmission of knowledge. Each one not only lived and studied under the other, but has been tested, proven to be responsible and accordingly inherited literally and in writing. These are Rijaallalah, they have the history and the knowledge, not you. They have reached maqamatul Macriifa wa Cilmul Xaqaaiq, because they have proven to be trustworthy be it in history, or other sciences. So relax history is in good hands. Above is the example of the Ayyah you quoted, “WACTASIMUU BI XABLILLAHI JAMIICAN………” Grap on to the uncut cable of Allah SWT, and do not separate. The example of a cable is not an example of everyone holding one spot, but rather as in the silsilah, I gave you above, transmission of knowledge, power, true history, etc., from the source, Allah SWT, and it should be uncut. Subxannallah, that you mentioned this Ayyah. Truly INNA LAAHA SAMIICUN BASIIR. So my dear brother let this be enough of mucjizah to you. It is in the realm of this Ayyah that I warn you. INNA FII THAALIKA LA AYAATIN LI QAWMIN YACQILUUN. As Annonomous quoted the Ayyah, let it be. Truth has come. Durgal I hope this time you get the point. Stop being a knuckle head.
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 05:47 pm Durgal Open another page under another title. I hope this is not someonelse claiming to be you. All of a sudden you sound very childish. Are you hurt? Did I step on your ego? What happened to all that, 'It is not wining a discusion, etc.' That page poisonous found is a heavenly sign for you and others. Did you ever think, that upon YOU starting this topic under Ibn Taymiyya would lead everyone to the exposure of Ibn Taymiyya. You seem to be quite content about what you have accomplished. Yet it defeats your purpose, if all this exitement is about ..... Anyways as the Ayyah goes, "MAKARU WA MAKURULLAHA WALLAHU KHAYRUL MAAKIRIIN."
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 07:45 pm Mercano, <<Had I have known of the site, my life would have been easier...>> Not only did you know about the site but also you copied from it word for word, letter for letter and putting it up as your own. Let us see. You wrote (or Pasted):<<Ibn Taymiyyah admirers may claim that he represents the Sunni doctorine, but all know that none of the Sunnis ever compared ALLAH, SWT, to the moon, or ALLAH, SWT, knowledge to the moon’s rays. *XAASHA!!* Exalted is ALLAH, SWT, high above the fancies of those who offer such parallels for Him.>> But at Sunnah.org it is written:<<Ibn Taymiyya's admirers may claim that he represents the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna, but we all know that none of the Ahl al-Sunna ever compared Allah to the moon, or Allah's knowledge to the moon's rays. Exalted is Allah high above the fancies of those who give such examples for Him.>> Mercano Pasted << If He so willed, He could have settled on the back of a gnat and it would have carried Him thanks to His power and the favor of His lordship, not to mention the magnificient Throne.">> From the Sunnah.org piece: <<He created Adam by touching him (masisan)."p. 75: "If He so willed, He could have settled on the back of a gnat and it would have carried Him thanks to His power and the favor of His lordship, not to mention the magnificient Throne.">> Mecano wrote (or Pasted) <<This is a dangerous, ugly, astonishing combination of TAJSIIM, TAKYIF, and TAMTHIIL. In a word, the author’s premise for inferring that the object of his worship can settle on top of a gnat is his understanding that Allah physically settles on the Throne. One of the greatest indications of the Ibn Taymiyah’s anthropomophist views is that in advocating the interpretation of ISTAWA as ISTIQRAR or settling.>> In Sunnah.org it is written: <<This is a risible, ugly, astonishing combination of tajsim, takyif, tashbih, and tamthil. In a word, the author's premiss for inferring that the object of his worship can settle on top of a gnat is his understanding that Allah physically settles on the Throne. One of the greatest indications of Ibn Taymiyya's anthropomorphist views is that in advocating the interpretation of istiwa' as istiqrar or settling -- absolutely condemned by the Salaf, as we mentioned -- he does not hesitate to reproduce the above statement verbatim. It is ironic that he does so in his Ta'sis, an attack on al-Razi for a book the latter wrote in refutation of anthropomorphists>> Mercano: <<As a consequence for having taken such strange positions, Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned by agreement of the Muslim scholars of Egypt and Syria, who wished to prevent the dissemination of his ideas. His imprisonment, it should be stressed, came as a result of the consensus of the scholars of his time and not, as it is claimed by his admirers, a massive conspiracy against him. He was not jailed by a tyrannical ruler, nor was he jailed due to the jealousy of his contemporaries, as is supposed today by those who claim to follow his teachings. It is feared that the authorities made him something of a martyr instead, and stimulatedintrest in his otherwise pedestrian observations on Devine attributes.>> Sunnah.org: << In consequence of such strange positions, Ibn Taymiyya was imprisoned by agreement of the Muslim scholars of Egypt and Syria who wished to prevent the dissemination of his ideas. His imprisonment, it should be stressed, came as a result of the consensus of the scholars of his time and not, as it is falsely claimed by his admirers, a massive conspiracy against him. Nor was he put in jail by a tyrannical ruler, nor due to the jealousy of his contemporaries, as is postulated today by some of those who claim to follow his teachings. One fears the authorities made him something of a martyr instead, and thus stimulated interest in his otherwise pedestrian observations touching on Divine attributes.>> And on and on and on…..word for word! Last word: a thief, even if caught red handed will always plead NOT GUILTY. It is for the court (of forums opinion) to consign him to where he belongs – jail (him messages should never receive response)
|
| | Wednesday, January 24, 2001 - 10:10 pm It is very easy to indulge in name-calling but Let us examine sufism understanding of Tawhid. The Qur’anic concept of Tawhid (monotheism) is that there is only one God -- Allah. All those characteristics which can only be associated with God must not be attributed to anyone else. The Qur’an says: Declare [O Prophet] that God is One! He is the rock. He is neither anyone’s father nor anyone’s son. And none is equal to Him.[112:1-3] Therefore, the whole world is His creation: He is above all, and there is nothing like Him. It is the correct belief in God which enlightens the heart and solves the riddle this universe is. Every creation points out to the fact that there must be a Creator and therefore reflects God: Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. [24:35] In Sufism, however, Tawhid, is expressed as ‘only Absolute Reality is absolutely real’. To the Sufi, this concept of Tawhid is different from pantheism (regarded un-Islamic by almost all the Muslim scholars), for the Sufistic Tawhid is not ‘everything is God’: it is ‘God is everything’, or, more ostensibly, ‘there is nothing except God’. The result is that in Sufism, Tawhid expressed as la ilaha illallah (there is no God but Allah) is the Tawhid of the ordinary, whereas the Tawhid of the elect is la mawjuda illallah (there is nothing but Allah). This means that whatever we see does not have any significance, for it does not exist in reality. It is only relatively real. What does exist in reality is God. Ibn ‘Arabi writes in his book Fususu’l-Hikam: Although, apparently Creation is distinct from the Creator, in reality the Creator is but Creation and Creation is but the Creator. All these are from one reality. Nay, it is but He who is the Only Reality, and it is He Who manifests Himself in all these realities. This concept is called Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being): the idea is that a knife and a sword, for example, are called by their respective names and are treated as distinct and separate items. But when their ‘essence’ steel moves wara u’l-wara (‘beyond the beyond’, that is beyond all forms and shapes), it is called steel. Similarly, God is considered as the Ultimate Reality, which is transcendent (beyond shape and form) but in essence immanent in Creation. In the words of Sha Muhammad Isma‘il (‘Abaqat, ‘abaqah 20, al-isha#rah u’l-awwal): For all Creation, Ma bihitta ‘yun is only one Definite being. Another version of this concept is Wahdatu’l-Shahud (Unity of Appearance), according to which, God is the only Reality, and everything else is illusion. This version is again the same concept expressed in a different way. According to Sha Muhammad Isma‘il (‘Abaqa#t, ‘abaqah 20, al-isharahu’l-awwal): ...deep analysis will show that there is no difference except that owing to the difference in their stages and in their ways of reaching Lahut, they [the proponents of the two versions] have adopted varying styles to express their opinions. Such beliefs often result in a strong tendency to regard a man’s physical self as a ‘form’ and to consider this form as an obstruction in his going warau’l-wara (beyond the beyond) and in reaching the Ultimate Reality. Theosophical (to be more precise, existential) realisation of this Reality through self-denial and self-control becomes the ultimate goal of life, whereas according to the Qur’an, the purpose of man's life is worship and servitude to God (51-56) and the purpose of religion is the purification of his soul to enable him to do just that (62:2). In Sufism, therefore, purification of the soul becomes the ultimate target of the Sufi’s life rather than becoming the outcome of following the dictates of Islam. For this purification, rituals and methods other than those recommended or demanded by Islam are often prescribed with such authority and adhered to with such pertinacity that they virtually amount to innovation in religion. That which is a means to an end becomes the end in itself: man's humility, which in Islam leads to servitude, becomes a source of his pride in Sufism; servitude, which makes him a humble servant of his Master, makes him the Master. According to Sufism, perfect awareness of the Absolute Reality results in the Sufi's being absolutely unaware of Creation and of his own self; to be more precise, it results in his being aware of the fact that in reality there is no existence of Creation and even of his own self. This concept often leads to great imbalance; in negating his ego, the Sufi ends up worshipping it; in negating Creation, he negates life itself. Absolute negation of the self is impracticable, absolute negation of Creation impractical. No Man born of a woman can conceive nothingness for himself, unless he is deranged enough not to perceive anything at all. Life is not insignificant. Nor is consciousness. And every one of us knows this. Life still brings laughter, death still summons tears. Intellect is still honoured, lack of consciousness is still regarded as insanity. A man thinks and therefore is. When he thinks, he knows -- consciously or otherwise -- that it is `he' who is thinking. Therefore, if he thinks or believes that he does not exist -- that only God exists --, then he will usually end up thinking or believing that it is ‘he’ who is actually God. But God he cannot be. For the best of men -- the messengers of God --, even in their greatness, always remained in want of their Lord's mercy for the most minor of their needs: Allahumma inni lima anzalta ilayya min khayrin faqir Lord! verily I am needy for anything you may bestow upon me out of good. [A prayer of Moses (sws); see the Qur’a#n 28:24] Allahumma inni ‘abduka, ibn ‘bdika, ibn amatika, nasiyati biyadik.... Lord! verily I am your slave, the son of your bondman, the son of your bondwoman, my forelock is in your hands. [that is I am completely in your power].... [A bedtime prayer of the Prophet (sws)]. Even a messenger of God is a servant of his Master. To him God is the Master whom he loves with all his heart and all his mind and all his soul. To the Sufi, however, God is the beloved whose love leads him to realise the Ultimate Reality -- and thus makes him the Master (though the Sufi will sometimes deny this. However, as long as ‘he’ believes -- consciously or otherwise -- that nothing expect God exists, he will usually be thinking of himself as the Deity). The usual result of this shift in the object is that in addition to the spiritual exercises and rituals recommended or prescribed by Islam to enable man to worship and serve God, the Sufi virtually makes many other exercises and rituals obligatory, which often leave him with very little energy and motivation to do God's bidding where it is actually required. And since the Sufi has a philosophical foundation for this shift from the balance required by Islam, he usually ends up being a slave of his own desires. Vis-a-vis the society as a whole, the object of an individual’s life as envisaged by Sufism is impractical ad absurdum, as realisation of the object by all would mean negation of Creation by all and therefore negation of society, whereas realisation of the object of a man’s life as envisaged by Islam would result in the creation of a truly harmonious society. Worshipping and serving God entail responsibility towards society. One’s affiliation with society is not negated as such in Islam as a goal for achieving self-purification, just as none of the blessings of God is negated for this purpose, howsoever trivial it may appear to be. Only when such negation becomes necessary for preventing a greater injustice to the society or to one's own self does Islam allow -- and in some cases demand -- that an individual deny the privileges he has and negate his affiliation with his society. In Sufism, however, there seems to be a strong tendency to regard asceticism as highly desirable per se. If nothing else, there is at least an abnormal emphasis on the negation of worldly life: Ibn ‘Ata Allah writes: The source of every disobedience, indifference, and passion is self-satisfaction. The source of every obedience, vigilance, and virtue is dissatisfaction with one’s self. (Tr. Cryil Glasse, The Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam, second edition, London: Stacey International, 1991, p. 378). Al Ghazali says in a al-Munqidh mina‘l-Dalal: Then I turned my attention to the Way of the Sufis. I knew that it could not be traversed to the end without both doctrine and practice, and that the gist of the doctrine lies in overcoming the appetites of the flesh and getting rid of its evil dispositions and vile qualities, so that the heart may be cleared of all but God.... When I considered the intention of my teaching, I perceived that instead of doing it for God's sake alone I had no motive but the desire for glory and reputation. I realised that I stood on the edge of a precipice and would fall into Hellfire unless I set about to mend my ways... Conscious of my helplessness and having surrendered my will entirely, I took refuge with God as a man in sore trouble who has no resource left. God answered my prayer and made it easy for me to turn my back on reputation and wealth and wife and children and friends. (Tr. Cyril Glasse, The Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam, second edition, London: Stacey International, 1991. p. 379) Is this abnormal inclination towards asceticism deliberate? Is it obligatory or merely desirable? -- these questions may be debatable. However, one thing is certain. As far as the concept of perfect awareness of the Absolute Reality is concerned, it inevitably leads to the conceptual negation of Creation and therefore of society. Perhaps because of the impracticability and impracticality of their ideas, the Sufis have usually regarded it desirable per se not to reveal their inner thoughts about Tawhid (and when they do reveal them, the style they use makes their language unintelligible to most people), whereas the Prophet (sws) was told to communicate his message clearly as part of his mission (the Qur’an 5:67): Know therefore that the ultimate of all disciples of Mystic intuition is this Tawhid, and the secrets of this discipline and cannot be written in any book because, according to a saying of ‘Arifin [those who have achieved awareness], exposing the secrets of Divinity amounts to infidelity. [al-Ghazali, Ihya ‘Ulumi’l-Din, Vol. 4. p. 641]
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 05:16 am JB, you have copy-and-pasted from Asif Iftikhar's articles about 'Tawhid in Islam': http://www.understanding-islam.com/articles/views/tis.htm and http://www.brain.net.pk/~dsera/tis.htm You have plagriased copy-righted articles...I intend to ask SomaliNet authorities to take the necessary action...
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 07:33 am What's your point?? Poisonous. Are you willing to tackle the issues or are you just poisonous to the muslim mind?. more than Half the Material in this Board is cut and Paste. The more important question is do you agree with the post? or do you dis agree with? If disagree with it. Please explain why? You are going to tell the authorities of somalinet LoL. ooh am scared now! Please don't send me to prison? Please Bro. Buy the way I write a lot of the stuff I post and I also copy and paste some of my material. If you like to know which ones are mine just ask bro
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 02:22 pm JB You got it all wrong bro. Poisonous is a she not a he. Stop callig her bro.You must not be a somali.poisonouis means summey. poison is female. iam waytin markano to say something.
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 02:53 pm Poisonious or sumey girl whats yuor problem? you hav something to say or what? all this guys copy. why you dont bust durgal you now he is copying. he is hawiye or u want to mary the guy? huh.
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 03:10 pm Anonymous???? What do you mean im not somali. I am somali but my somali is not perfect. Besides the somali language does not have a "P". What does summey mean?, not that i care. Are you the same person as poisonous? Why are you changing the topic? What do you have to say about the concept of Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being)?. I use to attend a sufi circle and the brothers there believed that Allah and the creation were one and the same!! They supported the statements of sufi "masters" who said "I am ALLAH". This is when i decided to leave the sufi group. Most somalis dont know that this is the essence of sufism. Even Imam Ghazali say in his famous BOOK Ihya ‘Ulumi’l-Din: Know therefore that the ultimate of all disciples of Mystic intuition is this Tawhid, and the secrets of this discipline and cannot be written in any book because, according to a saying of ‘Arifin [those who have achieved awareness], exposing the secrets of Divinity amounts to infidelity. [al-Ghazali, Ihya ‘Ulumi’l-Din, Vol. 4. p. 641]. Are you a sufi supporter? will you support this? or do you'll reject it. This is the heart of the issue. Not so and so copied from such and such a page. If i could i would sent this post to a million people to warn them about the EVILS of sufism. Anyone who claims to be ALLAH should be killed. Alhamdulilah two my knowledge two sufi "saint" were killed because they said that. Let us talk about the issues and stop with the name calling.
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 04:47 pm Poisonous, you are trully an intellectual who understands the merits of being honest, after all if everyone is allowed to do what these people did, then why would anyone go to a library, stay up all night and spend endless hours for typing. If they are smart they would see you as their friend becuase you are pushing them to think, and write for their own. The benefit of this is that we are going to start to evaluate issues on the basis of what is right and what is wrong. Isn't this what Poisonous is doing right now? What is that has to do with what group he belongs to? Isn't this a classic example of what I was saying " the need to move away from groups and see things on what they are". Even early muslims saw qouting someone without naming him as sin. We live in a civilized soceity and we should act accordingly.
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 05:09 pm poisonoius; well done!! stealing others work is a crime. thanks again. Keep on busting those bastards. Durgal, I never been marcano in a single day. Don't you afraid of me and think anyone who challenge you is alipapa. Now tell me when you will be posting imaamul xaamid al-ghazali as a topic?. Alipapa
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 06:19 pm Am sorry to say this but you guys have missed the whole point. I did not get my article from the sight mentioned above, I found it on the Islamic section of this discussion board (see current, Dress code, identity and young Muslims girls ). It was posted on the 24th. Durgal I don't know you but I advice you to be careful about declaring things as a sin. This is not a thesis Board. Rather it is a casual discussion board. If some one claims an article is his work then that is wrong! On the other hand if no such claim has been made? why are you'll so eager to make the claim for them and then accuse fellow Muslims? You have gone one step too far. Islam Ask that we give one another the benefit of the doubt but here we have a sorts of allegations being made. Is this an effort to ignore the topic at hand? IBN taymiyyah is hated by the sufis because he exposed them for what they were. Im not sure if poisonous is a true intellectual or not. I've not seen much of his/her writing. I do know that classical Muslim scholars looked down on Intellectuals. I hope you meant it as a compliment. So once again I ask you so called "buster" Do you'll stand behind Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being)?
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 07:30 am Everybody and ALL THE ANONOMOUSEES As durgal said be rational and take it easy. This page was opened by Durgal. You have to respect it and refrain from a detour or hijack of the topic as a respect to your brother Durgal and give him the benefit of doubt that his intention is constructive. It is not difficult to target and crush Durgal and disrupt as Durgal is accusing me. Not at all. As you can see it only took US 2 years or less to really distroy our country that many have given their lives to construct. In other words it takes one hundred years for a Barda tree yet it only takes couple hours of chainsaw to bring it down. Anonomous 2, I do not know what you want to hear from me. As I said, I am just a simple man on the net....So with all respect, save your breath. Poisonous The work you did is not geniousness. But if that is the credit you are looking for take it. I just hope that Anonomous is not right for a bit about you. Then that would make you cheap and senselessly directed. Contribute to help not to disrupt. You called me a thief. That was an unnecesary insult that only goes to a screen name, Mercano. If you go back and read what I said, " bless the web. Had I have known of the site, my life would have been easier with Durgal's....COPY & PASTE you know what I mean? I only had access to the same author's book along with the biography it comes with." I also wrote,"I do not keep a library. It is not important to me. You can contact Dar-ar-Rahma, Egypt. They should have the following books by Ibn Taymiyya in Arabic. *al-Fatawi al-kubra *al-Tacsis *Majmuuca fatawa Ibn Taymiyya *al-Ziyara *Ilm as-suluk The author's book for your information is, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ISLAMIC BELIEF, BY SHAYKH MUHAMMED HISHAM KABBANI, KAZI PUBLICATIONS, CHICAGO, 1998, 2ND EDITION; PAGES 54 THRU 94 is all about Ibn Taymiyyah and I only selected the less offending portions. May Allah bless Shaykh Kabbani and his work. Durgal is going to non-muslim sources, I went to an authentic and living Muslim author whose works are found in English. So quit disturbing and making false accusations. What you did is 2 things, 1. In todays IT anyone can do what you did in less than 5 minutes, under search and match through all files of www and a click and browse. What intelligence is Durgal talking about, research, yes, take that credit. 2. Now, thanks to you, if Durgal choses to continue with his .... all I have to do is e-mail to the author and his staff at assunah.org, in less than a day I assure you I shall have the copyright. They must have posted it to be known. So you facilitate for me to post the entire Ibn Taymiyya by an Caalim, not "ist" on this page. When people come to this page they will find the whole text. I do not know how that makes you intelligent. You guys are not reading what I have been writing. You guys are unable to extract value from simple info. Durgal If you still have not got my point, i.e. title of this page as well as how you combine diverse scholars and unfairly raise the comparatively wrong one over the rest. You have now invited a LOOSE CANNON "JB" and his demand for a response to an oceanic new question. I want to see how one can give back your topic and page to you. I am sorry to say that you are truely blinded by being a knuckle head. You do not listen, hear, heed or reflect. Take it in a positive way and do something about it. ONCE AGAIN TAKE BACK CONTROLL OVER YOUR TOPIC. Go back and read everything I have written. Above all I am satisfied with the fact that now you are bringing out Shaykh A/Jilani QSA, from beneath the shades of Ibn Taymiyya. JB I am sorry that I called you a LOOSE CANON above, because you ARE. Years ago I ran into a group of so-called sufi in new Mexico while I was there for a 3 day Islamic gathering (pow wow). This group were also based there. The laeder's name is Adnan, a middle eastern CHRISTIAN who runs a sufi workshop. In the workshop, an oriental belly dancer by the name of Dunya performs. Some attendees talked about how they smoke hashiish, etc. When we asked them about Islam, they said they were not Muslims. When we mentioned to them about Tasawuf, they said, "Oh, we are Western Sufis." That is why I noted earlier, Sufism was a reality in the time of Prophet PBUH, but today it is a name without reality. For Poisonous, that saying I also borrowed from the same Shaykh Kabbani's book save yourself the so-called "bust". Prophet, PBUH, said that Wisdom is a lost treasure whoever finds it gets to keep it. Now it is unfair for me to get engaged with your question as much as I love to share with you. However, you need to distinguish between Atributes and Zaat, Essence. NO one can speak of Zaat, No. Atributes or Sifah, yes, one may speak about. Also do not quote wrong, 'If someone said, Annal Haqq. That one did not say, I am Allah.' You must first know the difference. In my opinion, you did the right thing with that group. In short there is an old saying, 'My leg is not my body, but it is part of my body.' Please do not take this out of context as in the case of those sufi brothers. I am only mentioning this with respect to Zaat, and Attributes, not us and other objects, Xaasha!. May Allah bless you all and forgive me. Peace.
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 02:24 pm Mercano: Lets leave the name calling out of this and focus on the topic. You know very well that it's hard to have a discussion about Ibn Tayamiya and avoid the issue of sufism. I don't think that I've changed the topic at all. Durgal Stated in his first post that he intends to talk about Ibn Taymiyah's fight against sufism. I have not demanded anything from anyone bro, I was interested here a sufi's perspective or support of Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being). I will be honest and say that I've not read all of the messages on this page. I don't know who said what or any other details. From the little that I did read it seems that you've claimed to have authored the material that you've posted. This is All beside the point. From what you've written to me I'm still confused about where you stand on Wahdatu’l-Wajud. You've not said its wrong or shirk. Your anecdote about western sufis is nice, even interesting but irrelevant. Your claim about sufism being a reality at the time of the rasool is romantic but lacks evidence. Islam and the Sharia were a reality. Sufism and all the bidda it encompasses was not a reality. Allah Promised us that this deen is protected and the Prophet conveyed it and passed it on to us. If I was to accept your claim that sufism was a reality and not mentioned or talked about in the hadith, I would have to think that either a part of islam is lost! or that the Rasool (PBUH) was not forth coming with the revelation?? Sufism is Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being) and Wahdatu’l-Wajud (Unity of Being) is Sufism. It funny that you correct me by saying the sufis Say "Annal Haqq" or "I am Al Haqq". Like that is any better or different. Allah is Al Haqq and Ar Rahman and not the Sufi Masters!
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 02:38 pm Ibn Hajar al-Haytami on Ibn Taymiyya Al-Haytami wrote in his Fatawa Hadithiyya: Ibn Taymiyya is a servant which Allah forsook, misguided, blinded, deafened, and debased. That is the declaration of the imams who have exposed the corruption of his positions and the mendacity of his sayings. Whoever wishes to pursue this must read the words of the Mujtahid Imaam Abu al-Hasan (Taqi al-Din) al-Subki, of his son Taj al-Din Subki, of the Imaam al-`Izz ibn Jama`a and others of the Shafi`i, Maliki, and Hanafi shaykhs... It must be considered that he is a misguided and misguiding innovator (mubtadi` dall mudill) and an ignorant who brought evil (jahilun ghalun) whom Allah treated with His justice. May He protect us from the likes of his path, doctrine, and actions!... Know that he has differed from people on questions about which Taj al-Din Ibn al-Subki and others warned us. Among the things Ibn Taymiyya said which violate the scholarly consensus are: that whoso violates the consensus commits neither disbelief (kufr) nor grave transgression (fisq); that our Lord is subject to created events (mahallun li al-hawadith) - glorified, exalted, and sanctified is He far above what the depraved ascribe to Him! that He is complex or made of parts (murakkab), His Entity standing in need similarly to the way the whole stands in need of the parts, elevated is He and sanctified above that! that the Qur'an is created in Allah's Entity (muhdath fi dhatillah), elevated is He above that! that the world is of a pre-eternal nature and exists with Allah since pre-eternity as an "ever-abiding created object" (makhluqan da'iman), thus making it necessarily existent in His Entity (mujaban bi al-dhat) and not acting deliberately [GH1] (la fa`ilan bi al-ikhtyar), elevated is He above that! [1] his suggestions of Allah's corporeality, direction, displacement, (al-jismiyya wa al-jiha wa al-intiqal), and that He fits the size of the Throne, being neither bigger nor smaller, exalted is He from such a hideous invention and wide-open disbelief, and may He forsake all his followers, and may all his beliefs be scattered and lost! his saying that the fire shall go out (al-nar tafni), [2] and that Prophets are not sinless (al-anbiya' ghayr ma`sumin), and that the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- has no special status before Allah (la jaha lahu) and must not be used as a means (la yutawassalu bihi), [3] and that the undertaking of travel (al-safar) to the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- in order to perform his visitation is a sin, for which it is unlawful to shorten the prayers, [4] and that it is forbidden to ask for his intercession in view of the Day of Need, and that the words (alfaz) of the Torah and the Gospel were not substituted, but their meanings (ma`ani) were. Some said: "Whoever looks at his books does not attribute to him most of these positions, except that whereby he holds the view that Allah has a direction, and that he authored a book to establish this, and forces the proof upon the people who follow this school of thought that they are believers in Allah's corporeality (jismiyya), dimensionality (muhadhat), and settledness (istiqrar)." That is, it may be that at times he used to assert these proofs and that they were consequently attributed to him in particular. But whoever attributed this to him from among the imams of Islam upon whose greatness, leadership, religion, trustworthiness, fairness, acceptance, insight, and meticulousness there is agreement - then they do not say anything except what has been duly established with added precautions and repeated inquiry. This is especially true when a Muslim is attributed a view which necessitates his disbelief, apostasy, misguidance, and execution. Therefore if it is true of him that he is a disbeliever and an innovator, then Allah will deal with him with His justice, and other than that He will forgive us and him. Notes [1] This is mentioned about Ibn Taymiyya also by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:411). This doctrine was refuted by Muhammad ibn Isma`il al-San`ani in his Risala Sharifa fi ma Yata`allaqu bi Kam al-Baqi Min `Umr al-Dunya? (Precious Treatise Concerning the Remaining Age of the World"  ed. al-Wasabi al-Mathani. (San`a': Maktaba Dar al-Quds, 1992). [2] This doctrine was refuted by Muhammad ibn Isma`il al-San`ani in his Raf` al-Astar li-Ibtal Adilla al-Qa'ilin bi-Fana al-Nar ("Exposing the Nullity of the Proofs of Those Who Claim That the Fire Shall Pass Away" , ed. Albani (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 1984). [3] This is explicitly contradicted by the vast majority of scholars, including Ibn Taymiyya's own students Ibn al-Qayyim (cf. al-Nuniyya, section on tawassul) and al-Dhahabi, as well as al-Shawkani and countless others. See the volume on tawassul in Shaykh Hisham Kabbani's Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine. [4] Ibn Hajar says in Fath al-Bari about Ibn Taymiyya's prohibition to travel in order to visit the Prophet: "This is one of the ugliest matters ever reported from Ibn Taymiyya." In his notes on Fath al-Bari (1989 ed. 3:66) the late "Salafi" scholar Bin Baz comments: "This was not an ugly thing but a correct thing for Ibn Taymiyya to say."
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 02:42 pm Loo! Poisonous. Loo! Durgal. This is Ibn Taymiyya. This what umma say about him. Loo
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 04:04 pm I must say that I felt a measure of disappointment that the brilliant arguments and criticism presented by Mercano(or Markaawi lol) were not his own but rather the unattributed scholarship of another author. All the same I must say that I am very much impressed by the man's deep and abiding convictions, the strength and orthodoxy of his faith and the breadth of his reading and knowledge. There is a tremendous debate going on here and I must say I am enjoying it. Well done Markaawi and Duurgal and all the rest.
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 09:05 pm Xoogsade, Welcome back and thanks for the sweet and sour comments. JB My dear brother, what is happening now is exactly what I advised brother Durgal about. He titled this page, "Ibn Taymiyya", while he supposedly planned on addressing social sience issues. Then he indiscriminately mentioned diverse scholars in a single breath. He claimed, he does not care about sufism and non-sufism, rather we were hijacking or disrupting his topic, page. Only if you read all the materials above will you understand where I am coming from. I appologize for the name calling and accusasions. Nevertheless, I was just trying to give due respect to the brother and in the process I hurt him or discouraged him. But you know what? I think you posted a far more important topic and demonstrated a sincere question on an important issue towards understanding the science of Tasawuf. Unfortunately up here we were actualy talking about, this symbol is 1, that one is 2, 3, 4, etc., recognising numbers. That is it. However, you are now asking about Wahdat'l Wujud, in other words you are asking about derivations for Schoenuger's equation, in a place we are talking about recognizing numbers. Anyways, I am travelling and shall be back after the weekend. I shall be more than happy to discuss. I see that you are committed in an educational, professional and respectable discusion. Anonymous3 What is your big rush? Wa MinAllahi Tawfiq
|
| | Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 06:04 pm Marcano stop making claims. I don't answer because I chose not to, no one can hurt me or discourage me. If the discussion gets out hand and issue are turned to personal fueds, then there is no point in continuing further. Sometimes differences are not issues but how people percieve given facts or evidence. The latter can not be overcome in one or two discussions. Good luck for your search of knowledge.
|
| | Monday, January 29, 2001 - 05:41 pm Durgal thank you, and good luck for your search of wisdom. " Wamaa utiytu'lcilma ilaa qaliilan", Verily I have not given KNOWLEDGE except very little. "ALLAH gives WISDOM whom He wishes, whosoever He has given WISDOM, Verily He has given him a great thing. -HOLLY QURAN Such is the parable of wisdom & knowledge as revealed by ALLAH SWT, through His Noble Prophet, Calahi Afthalu Salaatu Wa Salaam.
|