Best Islamic Websites

[Warsame101]

www.load-islam.com (portal)

www.islamicboard.com (forum)

[Sadaam_Mariixman.]

http://www.islamqa.com

[sadeboi]

Islamicity.com

[Warsame101]

Fake Sadaam, that site is authentic too. It is ran by the late Imam ibn Baz (RH)'s devoted student.

[Naaima]

Salam alaikum

islamic.dk

http://www.sunnipath.com/ (the best one so far )

[Warsame101]

Naaima, Sunnipath is a website that has some benefical content but also hosts misguided content. Their creed is based on the Asharite school.

Stick to this websites for basic Islamic info:
www.load-islam.com
www.islamweb.net

[Naaima]

Salam alaikum bro

okay walal umm to be honest i am tired of all these scholars walahi, i'm almost lost in it ..hanafi, shafi'i, maliki,hanbali scholars.. why not call our self just a MUSLIM..don't we follow the same kutab karim ..don't we get the answers from the same kutab kariim

and thanks for the links, isnahalh i will check it out sooner or later!

[Warsame101]

[quote="Naaima"]Salam alaikum bro

okay walal umm to be honest i am tired of all these scholars walahi, i'm almost lost in it ..hanafi, shafi'i, maliki,hanbali scholars.. why not call our self just a MUSLIM..don't we follow the same kutab karim ..don't we get the answers from the same kutab kariim [/quote]

That is correct, you are a Muslim and it is forbidden for a layman to adopt the ascriptive terms of the madhaaib. Anythis, this is a complex topic and I do not want to bore you with it.

Just follow the scholars that are known to be trustworthy and sound in the fundamental creed.

[Naaima]

[quote="Warsame101"]
Just follow the scholars that are known to be trustworthy and sound in the fundamental creed.[/quote]

okay!, i follow hanafi madhab, since it's the largest of the four schools

[Warsame101]

[quote="Naaima"][quote="Warsame101"]
Just follow the scholars that are known to be trustworthy and sound in the fundamental creed.[/quote]

okay!, i follow hanafi madhab, since it's the largest of the four schools[/quote]


Naaima, An 'ami (layman) has no madhhab according to the majority of the scholars. He is allowed to ask any trustworthy mufti and make taqlid of him hence they used to say, the madhhab of the layman is the madhhab of his mufti. A layman can adopt a madhhab if he wishes to become a talibul-'ilm and study Fiqh. So if you are particulary studying the Hanafi maddhab with trusthworthy Hanafi scholars, then you cannot claim to be following this Fiqh.


The famous Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim (RH) said regarding whether a common person can follow a madhhab, he replied:

"Indeed the common person cannot have a madhhab, even if he thinks that he does, since the common person has no madhhab at all. This is because the madhhab will be either for the one who is able to research to a certain level and understand evidence and also know about the other madhhabs or for the one who has read a book concerning the details of that madhhab and knows the ruling and sayings of his Imam. As for the one who is unable to do any of that but merely says, "I am a Shafi ..." or "I am Hanbali ..." etc., then he does not become that just by saying so, just as would be the case if he said, "I am a religious scholar ..." or "I am a scholar of grammar ..." or "I am a writer ..." then he does not become that just by saying so. This is further clarified by the fact that the one who says, "I am a Shafi¡ ... or a Maliki ... or a Hanafi ..." claiming that he follows that Imam and his way, would only be truthful if he were to follow his way in acquiring knowledge, understanding and extraction of proof. As for this one, with his ignorance and being far from the manners of the Imam and his knowledge and way, how can it be correct for him to ascribe himself to him except with mere claims and empty words having no meaning?! How can the common person have a madhhab? Even if it could be imagined, it would still not be obligatory upon him or anyone else to ever have to follow the madhhab of a certain man from the ummah, to the extent that he accepts all his sayings and rejects everyone else's sayings."
Source:A'laam ul-Muwaqqeen

[Padishah]

Little children speaking without knowledge.

The Ash'arite and Maturidite schools of Creed have been the Creeds of the overwhelming number of Muslima, and Scholars for the ladt 1200 years. For a bunch of anthropomorphist literalist 'reformers' to classify this as 'wrong' is hilarious in the extreme.

As for the Madhahib, they are indispensible part of Islam. Early in the History of Islam, when sectarianism was on the rise, and people argued incessantly on the correctness of the plethora of Hadith, these four men created rigorous and lasting methadologies for reconciling the apprant contradictions found between different Hadith's, and Qurani'c verses and Hadith, methadologies that have lasted for the last 1200 years. Subsequent scholars updated and expanded their schools Fiqh by following these methadologies, which has made Sunni Islam almost uniform in practice.

Only ignorant little idiots would even utter such stupid comments like:

'hanafi, shafi'i, maliki,hanbali scholars.. why not call our self just a MUSLIM..don't we follow the same kutab karim'

forgetting that all followers of these madh-habs ARE Muslim, call themselves MUSLIM, and differentiate themselves only in their approach to fiqh.

[Naaima]

Salam alaikum

thanks walal, i think it is the best if i go to a local mosque and ask a local imam all my questions about the madhab

[Naaima]

[quote="Padishah"]

Only ignorant little idiots would even utter such stupid comments like:[/quote]

there is no stupid question or comment on the road to knowledge..but there are stupid answers from stupid morons

[Padishah]

Then there are the nonsensical comments of the mentally weak, who consider inane comments to be thoughtful questions, and detailed asnwers to be no more useful than inane chatter.

[Warsame101]

Padishah, that is funny considering that most ignoramuses who flaunt these concepts are the same ones who are arabic-illiterate and continously absorb the english-translated heretical garbage of the 'converted' Western scholars namely Keller and co.

The Asharite and Maturide creeds have under-gone several stages. To even assume that it has been the same un-altered creed by the past-scholars is foolish.

The creed of the salaf (first generations) and the four imaams and that is to affirm them what's stated in the textual proof without negating its literal meaning (dhahir), but negating tashbih (anthropomorphism), tahrif (distorting the meaning of the Attribute like the Asharites) and ta’til (denying the as-Sifat). We assign the kayfiya (nature) to Allah.

The early Asharites held most of same the views held by their predecessors (i.e. salaf) in regards to the names and attributes of Allah but the later Asharites have adopted heritical concepts as their creeds such as the Quran being "created". According to the majority of the scholars, Asharites are divided between the early and the Kullabite Asharites.

And as for the claim that the "majority" of the heavy-weight scholars belonged to these two schools, then you are clearly mistaken.

Where did al-Marrudhi mentioned that he was an Asharite or al-Khallal or Ibn Hamid or al-Qadhi or Abu Ya'la or Imam Ibn Qudama or Sheikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah or Ibn Muflih or Imam Ibn al-Qayyim or the famous Imam Ibn Katheer or the Muhadith al-Dhahabi or al-Hajr or an-Nawawi and the countless other sound scholars who were un-influenced by these two schools.

The Asharites were always a minority to afraid to speak up their mind. You can read Ibn Hajar's rebuttal to al-Bayhaqi who was an Ashari. al-Bayhaqi held the view that Allah speaks without a Voice even though the predecessors including the muhadith Imam al-Bukhari held this view (i.e. Allah having a Voice).

al-Ghazzali recanted his heretical beliefs prior to his death when he died with the Sahih Bukhari on his chest.

In the 7th century after Hijrah, Ibn Asakir wrote that the Asharites were a minority. That means for first 5 centuries (excluding the first 3 centuries), they were regarded as a heretical sect, banned by the scholars and barred from attending the study circles.

Moreover, the majority argument is a self-defeating argument considering that according to the Islamic sources, the truth lies with the strangers which is usually the minority.