How trustable are Fatwas? And how many are based on Politics instead of Islam?

[cooli3o]

Dumb this down for me. What are these two tawheeds, is someone accusing a group of muslims of it? If so who? What do salafis have to do with this? And how is this relevant to this thread?

very simply
salafi dawah splits tawheed into 2 categories
1 rubaybiyya Allahs lord ship, Allah is the only rabb
2. Uluhiyyah , Allah is the only ilaah worthy to be worshipped
these 2 categories are fine
only problem is salafi dawah says, most nations believed in number 1, but didn't believe in number 2.
I and adoonkaalle are saying, all nations did shirk of both number 1 and 2
very simply, I say, the quraysh and all of the disbelievers the prophets were sent to, worshipped some object or person, in order to benefit them or repell harm, this means they believed this object of worship is there rabb in some kind of way, because it is taking care of them or has the means to independently from Allah

salafi dawah says no, you can believe ony Allah is rabb, but worship someone else, and the quraysh and nations of the past all believed that Allah is their ONLY RABB and noone else but stil worshipped other Gods

We say this doesn't make sense, to worship something you must beleive in some sense it is your rabb, you can believe, Allah is rabb, and also some idol you worship, you can also believe Allah isn't rabb,
anything other than only believing Allah is your rabb is shirk, therefore all the quraysh and kuffar of the past and now, do shirk rubaybiyya in some form.



understand?

 

[Qeelbax]

very simply
salafi dawah splits tawheed into 2 categories
1 rubaybiyya Allahs lord ship, Allah is the only rabb
2. Uluhiyyah , Allah is the only ilaah worthy to be worshipped
these 2 categories are fine
only problem is salafi dawah says, most nations believed in number 1, but didn't believe in number 2.
I and adoonkaalle are saying, all nations did shirk of both number 1 and 2
very simply, I say, the quraysh and all of the disbelievers the prophets were sent to, worshipped some object or person, in order to benefit them or repell harm, this means they believed this object of worship is there rabb in some kind of way, because it is taking care of them or has the means to independently from Allah

salafi dawah says no, you can believe ony Allah is rabb, but worship someone else, and the quraysh and nations of the past all believed that Allah is their ONLY RABB and noone else but stil worshipped other Gods

We say this doesn't make sense, to worship something you must beleive in some sense it is your rabb, you can believe, Allah is rabb, and also some idol you worship, you can also believe Allah isn't rabb,
anything other than only believing Allah is your rabb is shirk, therefore all the quraysh and kuffar of the past and now, do shirk rubaybiyya in some form.



understand?

I understand. Najdis with another L. What books do you recommend?

 

[cooli3o]

I understand. Najdis with another L. What books do you recommend?

for what?
what Islamic science do u want to go into?

 

[Yibir_]

very simply
salafi dawah splits tawheed into 2 categories
1 rubaybiyya Allahs lord ship, Allah is the only rabb
2. Uluhiyyah , Allah is the only ilaah worthy to be worshipped
these 2 categories are fine
only problem is salafi dawah says, most nations believed in number 1, but didn't believe in number 2.
I and adoonkaalle are saying, all nations did shirk of both number 1 and 2
very simply, I say, the quraysh and all of the disbelievers the prophets were sent to, worshipped some object or person, in order to benefit them or repell harm, this means they believed this object of worship is there rabb in some kind of way, because it is taking care of them or has the means to independently from Allah

salafi dawah says no, you can believe ony Allah is rabb, but worship someone else, and the quraysh and nations of the past all believed that Allah is their ONLY RABB and noone else but stil worshipped other Gods

We say this doesn't make sense, to worship something you must beleive in some sense it is your rabb, you can believe, Allah is rabb, and also some idol you worship, you can also believe Allah isn't rabb,
anything other than only believing Allah is your rabb is shirk, therefore all the quraysh and kuffar of the past and now, do shirk rubaybiyya in some form.



understand?

*3- Tawhid al asmaa wa sifat
Cmon dude dont just copy and paste anothers talking points. The murky ambiguity of the debate should be self-evident by the fact that both hamza and alle quoted hadiths; the dishonest nature of the debate participant to then go and defend quburis is enough. Both pagans and quburis commit shirkh and by his definition neither are on tawhid and are upon kufr.

 

[cooli3o]

*3- Tawhid al asmaa wa sifat

yh that is a 3rd category that is not needed in this particular debate but yes you can mention that aswell

 

[Qeelbax]

for what?
what Islamic science do u want to go into?

Fiqh

 

[cooli3o]

Fiqh

you want to follow salfi fiqh or shafici fiqh?
shafici you can start with mati abi shujaa'

 

[Qeelbax]

you want to follow salfi fiqh

or shafici fiqh?
shafici you can start with mati abi shujaa'

I learn from both Imam Shafici and Imam Malik

 

[Yibir_]

I understand. Najdis with another L. What books do you recommend?

You’re thread really made the kid think huh, wasted an hour of my day and my food went cold 🫠

I have a dream!
I have a dream that all sufis are upon tawhid!
I have a dream that shias stop calling upon ali!
I have a dream that sectarianism in islam is no more!
I have a dream…

 

[Qeelbax]

You’re thread really made the kid think huh, wasted an hour of my day and my food went cold 🫠

I have a dream!
I have a dream that all sufis are upon tawhid!
I have a dream that shias stop calling upon ali!
I have a dream that sectarianism in islam is no more!
I have a dream…

 

[Yibir_]

Mashallah, allhamudlillah, astargfurallah!
I have seen the evidences

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

How is that Shirk in Rububiyyah? They threatened the prophet with their idols by for example saying: O Mohamed the curse of our idols will happen to you". The Kayfiyah of their threatening of the prophet ﷺ is not clear from this ayah. I don't see Shirk in Rububiyyah there. The Mushrikeen generally believed their idols are loved by Allah which is why they said we worship them hoping hoping to bring us closer to Allah. And I wasn't even arguing for all Mushrikeen having Tawheed Al Rububiyyah, most of them definitely committed shirk in both lordship and Ibadah.

This can be again applied to Qadiyans and non-Mushrikeen kuffar, Why are these people(Kafirs) who always acknowledged Allah's lordship and never committed Shirk asked who their Rabb is? This is absurd logic you should abandon it.


I looked at many tafseers of these ayah noone said اتحدت من دون الله أولياء means protectors

{ وَالَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ } أي: يتولونهم بعبادتهم ودعائهم، [معتذرين] عن أنفسهم وقائلين: { مَا نَعْبُدُهُمْ إِلَّا لِيُقَرِّبُونَا إِلَى اللَّهِ زُلْفَى } أي: لترفع حوائجنا للّه، وتشفع لنا عنده، وإلا، فنحن نعلم أنها، لا تخلق، ولا ترزق، ولا تملك من الأمر شيئا.
​

That is they make them their walis by worshipping them.

You worship something that is close fo your heart.

AL Baqhawi

( والذين اتخذوا من دونه ) أي : من دون الله ، ) ( أولياء ) يعني : الأصنام ، ( ما نعبدهم ) أي قالوا :

Awliya meaning Idols.



I said mocking استهزاء and جحود aren't humans capable of this

Many tyrants were described in the Quran as عنيد one who denies the truth even though deep down in his heart he knows its Haqq.


Absolutely he is kafir and Mushrik no one denies that but the point is he hasn't committed Shirk in Rububiyyah whilst worshipping other than Allah(the sun in this case)

The mushriks threatened the prophet ﷺ with their gods because he called them to only worship Allah believing that the action of the prophet ﷺ will lead him to being cursed by their gods. The ability of these gods to be able to harm the prophet ﷺ via curse what is this ?

1. An attribute of Lordship
2. Part of uluhiyyah

Go & read the hadith about question of the grave and how the kafir will not be able to answer that question. Kufr like shirk negates the beliefs a person has, meaning all the good deeds, beliefs etc are rendered null & void. This is why qadiyaanis beliefs about Allah's Lordship will not suffice them due to their kufr which ultimately negates whatever beliefs they had of Allah.

Christians, jews etc all affirm some attributes of Rububiyyah to Allah alone but will this suffice them no as it's been negated either by their shirk & kufr that they've committed. Once shirk and kufr take place any prior beliefs, actions etc are rendered useless.

It's ONLY muslims who've tawheed rububiyyah not mushriks or kafirs etc, do you think a person who dies as a murtad will be able to answer that question correctly ? waa maya the same applies to the qadiyanis


Salafi theology claims that affirming tawheed rububiyyah doesn't make a person a muslim yet we're asked about it in the grave. Furthermore the meaning of Rabb in that question includes uluhiyyah but salafi creed says otherwise. Now my point was to bring attention the blatant contradiction between what is being claimed in salafi creed and what the nusus say regarding the significance of tawheed rububiyyah and the connection it has to worship.

Why didn't you look at what tabari says in 6:14 regarding what it means to take a wali other than Allah.

That is they make them their walis by worshipping them.

So the moment they aren't worshipping them like when they're asleep, working etc are they no longer their walis ? The order in 39:3 begins by stating that those who take walis other than Allah say meaning their belief in ascribing a wali to other than Allah precedes their worship not the other way around

Sxb the word wali doesn't mean idols baqhawi is explaining who is being referred to ie the deities that the mushriks have affirmed wali to their idols who were their gods. Wali means protector, guardian, supporter, friend etc not an idol

I said mocking استهزاء and جحود aren't humans capable of this

Many tyrants were described in the Quran as عنيد one who denies the truth even though deep down in his heart he knows its Haqq.


Absolutely he is kafir and Mushrik no one denies that but the point is he hasn't committed Shirk in Rububiyyah whilst worshipping other than Allah(the sun in this case)

let's review the question you asked me

Hamzza said:
If I supplicate to the Sun day and night in a way to mock Allah without believing it can bring benefit or harm to me isn't that Shirk in Ibadah only?

In that question you're asking whether supplicating to the sun to in a way to mock Allah is guilty of shirk ibadah. I responded back stating no person supplicates to anything let alone the sun for the sake of it without an underlying reason. The reason you give is to mock Allah now i ask you how is this worship ?


The entire point of supplicating to the sun was to mock Allah meaning it was a pretence ie no form of worship took place at all. How can you worship something that you don't believe deservers your worship or even intended to worship ? can we call an atheist who performs the actions of salah a worshipper of Allah

Are you a worshipper of Allah ONLY when you're carrying out acts of worship eg when you're working, training doing exams etc do you stop being a worshipper of Allah ?

It's your belief that you have about Allah that leads you to worship Him, He is Your Rabb when you carry out physical acts of worship, when you're asleep, working etc. This status will not change unless there's a change in belief regarding Allah's Lordship.

 

[cooli3o]

I learn from both Imam Shafici and Imam Malik

start from one madhab first, since somalis are shafici I would start with shafici fiqh, I would study this book first

Matn Abi Chouja' (Ghayah al-Ikhtisar) - Fiqh Shafi'i (Anwar al-Azhar)

Matn Abi Chouja' (Ghayah al-Ikhtisar) - Fiqh Shafi'i (Anwar al-Azhar) - مختصر أبي شجاع - متن الغاية والتقريب أو غاية الاختصار

www.sifatusafwa.com

masjid imam nawawi youtube channel is explaining this book so far.

watch this section for shaficii fiqh

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

I'm not familiar with Sheikh Ibn Baz رحمه الله teachings, even if we were to assume it's wrong why is it problematic? I mean no one is claiming the Mushrikeen were Muslims and are going to the Jannah. It changes nothing and I can quote scholars from centuries before Ibn Baz saying the same thing.

For example, he is Al Shehrastani an Ashari scholar from the 11th century saying no human aqil believes an idol he created in his hand can create or sustain him, thence affirming Tawheed of lordship to all humanity

وإلا فنعلم قطعا أن عاقلا ما لا ينحت جسما بيده ويصوره صورة ثم يعتقد أنه إلهه وخالقه، وإله الكل وخالق الكل، إذ كان وجوده مسبوقا بوجود صانعه، وشكله يحدث بصنعة ناحته


The whole point of discussion was "you can commit Shirk in Ibadah while still having tawheed in Rububiyyah" and you still haven't disproved that.


You can also commit Shirk in Rububiyyah without committing shirk in Ibadah

A simple example is:


Believing the actions of the Kuffar(G7) can cause apocalypse(Qiyamah) or save the planet from destruction. This is clearly a shirk in Rububiyyah without Ibada(worship).

Allah created this word and made it perfect for us he only knows when the rains will come and draughts will, he only knows الساعة.

What do you mean if we're to assume if it's wrong ? what bin baz stated in that fatwa clearly goes against the nusus sxb. Christians believe Jesus is their Lord sxb even the average muslim knows this they worship him in the same way we worship Allah. For him to say that they took him as just an intercessors is just plain wrong sxb there's no way to defend such statements.

If major scholars within the najdi dawah are making such blunders regarding the xtians whose beliefs and doctrines is known to most muslims what about the pagans of old who believed & worshipped multiple gods ?

Please go & cite 1 scholar before miaw that stated that xtians aren't guilty of shirk rububiyyah

The point of contention is why are mushrikeen labelled as such, najdi dawah says because they're guilty of shirk uluhiyyah but not shirk rububiyyah while we say they were guilty of shirk in all categories.


Even more absurd is the claim that shirk doesn't negate tawheed completely ie claiming that a person can have tawheed rububiyyah after committing shirk rububiyyah. How come the shirk they commit in uluhiyyah doesn't negate their tawheed rububiyyah.

That statement that you bring from the ashari scholar isn't relevant & most importantly you're super imposing your beliefs unto to him. The pagans of old used to make some of their idols of dates, we've people worshipping animals believing them to their gods like the hindus. People throughout history have worshipped various object as their deities from inanimate object to animate beings while being rationally sane laakin this never stopped them at all.

Believing the actions of the Kuffar(G7) can cause apocalypse(Qiyamah) or save the planet from destruction. This is clearly a shirk in Rububiyyah without Ibada(worship).

What are you on about sxb, this is just ridiculous, now you're claiming that people are taking countries as their lords, tell us why are they not worshipping them if they believe they can cause qiyama ? sxb i suggest you take your time in reviewing what i've stated so far instead of rejecting them outright

 

[cooli3o]

What do you mean if we're to assume if it's wrong ? what bin baz stated in that fatwa clearly goes against the nusus sxb. Christians believe Jesus is their Lord sxb even the average muslim knows this they worship him in the same way we worship Allah. For him to say that they took him as just an intercessors is just plain wrong sxb there's no way to defend such statements.

it actually goes against the statement in the Quran

3:80
وَلَا يَأْمُرَكُمْ أَن تَتَّخِذُوا۟ ٱلْمَلَـٰٓئِكَةَ وَٱلنَّبِيِّـۧنَ أَرْبَابًا ۗ أَيَأْمُرُكُم بِٱلْكُفْرِ بَعْدَ إِذْ أَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ ٨٠

And he would never ask you to take angels and prophets as lords. Would he ask you to disbelieve after you have submitted?
— Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran


this verse or should i say the beginning part of the surah was talking about the delegation of najraan which were Christians. this verse is referring to people who take their Prophets and angels as Gods
Jews said Uzair was the son of Allah, Christians took Issaa AS as the son of Allah
Quraysh took angels as Gods
number one they all worshipped them number 2 the verse referred to them as arbaab further proving our point

 

[cooli3o]

What do you mean if we're to assume if it's wrong ? what bin baz stated in that fatwa clearly goes against the nusus sxb. Christians believe Jesus is their Lord sxb even the average muslim knows this they worship him in the same way we worship Allah. For him to say that they took him as just an intercessors is just plain wrong sxb there's no way to defend such statements.

If major scholars within the najdi dawah are making such blunders regarding the xtians whose beliefs and doctrines is known to most muslims what about the pagans of old who believed & worshipped multiple gods ?

Please go & cite 1 scholar before miaw that stated that xtians aren't guilty of shirk rububiyyah

The point of contention is why are mushrikeen labelled as such, najdi dawah says because they're guilty of shirk uluhiyyah but not shirk rububiyyah while we say they were guilty of shirk in all categories.


Even more absurd is the claim that shirk doesn't negate tawheed completely ie claiming that a person can have tawheed rububiyyah after committing shirk rububiyyah. How come the shirk they commit in uluhiyyah doesn't negate their tawheed rububiyyah.

That statement that you bring from the ashari scholar isn't relevant & most importantly you're super imposing your beliefs unto to him. The pagans of old used to make some of their idols of dates, we've people worshipping animals believing them to their gods like the hindus. People throughout history have worshipped various object as their deities from inanimate object to animate beings while being rationally sane laakin this never stopped them at all.





What are you on about sxb, this is just ridiculous, now you're claiming that people are taking countries as their lords, tell us why are they not worshipping them if they believe they can cause qiyama ? sxb i suggest you take your time in reviewing what i've stated so far instead of rejecting them outright

We are getting too caught up in sematantics, the best way to drive home the point is with a single example

Can I worship an object, and believe it has not got some attributes of a rabb.

Stick to this one example, if hamzaa cannot prove us wrong then we proved it to him

also hamzaa thinks you can do kufr without commiting shirk which is a plain mistake, even ibn baaz and salafi scholars disagree with this, this has nothing to do with salafi just in general in the deen kufr and shirk are interchangable, if you do kufr u do shirk

if you disbelieve in Allah you by necessity have to believe something else, that is a fact, anything else you believe is shirk.
kufr is like negation and shirk like affirmation
if you negate Allah you affirm something else.
but that hasnt got anything to do with our conversation

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Practice of religion is not limited to just external aesthetics, it must incorporate the inner workings of the nafs (ego) as well. I like kitab-at-tawheed very much, the linguistic semantics around the “vohaabi” trinity was something I’ve only just encountered and as a consequence I removed myself from the debate because I am simply ignorant on the topic. I stand wholeheartedly by the contents of the book and I see no meaningful issues with it: God is one, no partners, no ruqya, no magic (taweez/togasho), no intercession etc… - a no nonsense book of prompts steering you away from shirk.


I don’t hold that position. They are both guilty of it, interesting way of constructing the argument I may add; attack an ambiguous concept with the overarching goal of defending grave worshipers. I recused myself of the debate for lack of knowledge on hadith, I saw the implicit as you focused on the semantics of the word instead of the context in which it was written, I’m glad my suspicions were proven true.

Tawhid, the unappealing zelatory of its followers in the way they apply the externals of the deen and the hatred of kalam and more broadly intellectual inquiry.
Again I’m not salafi, the nature of the discourse and their opponents makes me sympathise with them.
Semantics, you can both provide hadiths to hold up your claims and like I’ve stated I recuse myself from debating a topic that is 1) ambiguous 2) I am ignorant on (hadith). I applaud your subtle subterfudge in this discussion.
I’ll simplify my position:
-monotheism good
-pagans/(some) sufis/shias/christians/jews= affirm and deny god via speech/actions = shirk
*(Some) ibn arabi’s/ghazali’s concept unity of being [created by god]can achieve the same if not a better (?) outcome when compared with the neo-platonic/babylonian/magian/eygptian methods which are applied in tariqas. We can dance around this fact but the line of questioning must be discursive and non pertinent.

You claim to be ignorant while agreeing with what najdi theology teaches, accuse me of defending grave worship. Do you see where this is headed ? that theology you subscribe to is forcing you to hold positions that leads you to accuse muslims of shirk even though you claim to lack sufficient knowledge about the discussion at hand ?

There's a very big problem in your understanding of tawheed, shirk & worship when you won't affirm tawheed rububiyyah to a fellow muslim who believes in Allah alone simply because they're sufi while you will affirm tawheed rububiyyah to pagans who believe & worship multiple gods.

Ask yourself why it easy for you claim outright sufis are guilty of shirk rububiyyah but you didn't do the same for pagans ? what forced you to say that ? you only retracted after i called you out for it

I've laid out my critique of najdi theological claims regarding their understanding of tawheed, detailing what is wrong with it, if you've questions about it please free to ask questions take your time as i know that it's alot to take in.

 

[cooli3o]

There's a very big problem in your understanding of tawheed, shirk & worship when you won't affirm tawheed rububiyyah to a fellow muslim who believes in Allah alone simply because they're sufi while you will affirm tawheed rububiyyah to pagans who believe & worship multiple gods.

Ask yourself why it easy for you claim outright sufis are guilty of shirk rububiyyah but you didn't do the same for pagans ? what forced you to say that ? you only retracted after i called you out for it

I've laid out my critique of najdi theological claims regarding their understanding of tawheed, detailing what is wrong with it, if you've questions about it please free to ask questions take your time as i know that it's alot to take in.

what makes less sense is they believe these suufis "worship" these graves to get closer to Allah by means of respecting venerating and asking them to make dua for them to get closer to Allah and they are out of the fold of Islam

But they think the quraysh who apprantly did the exact same thing with their idols believe in tawheeed rubyabiya

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Dumb this down for me. What are these two tawheeds, is someone accusing a group of muslims of it? If so who? What do salafis have to do with this? And how is this relevant to this thread?

Basically it was a discussion about the salafi understanding of tawheed where they claim that pagans, jews, christians etc all have affirmed tawheed rububiyyah. Going back & forth trying to explain why this understanding was wrong.

As muslims we believe that our worship of Allah is directly tied to Him our Rabb, but in salafi theology this relationship between Allah's Lordship & His worship is separated from each other such that a person can believe that Allah is their Only Rabb but nonetheless ends up worshipping other gods besides Him.

If you believe there's no other Rabb other than Allah you wouldn't worship anyone else but somehow in salafi understanding this is possible when we ask how they're not able to offer any convincing answers.


The founder of najdi dawah MIAW believed for instance that xtians who've taken Jesus as their Lord weren't guilty of shirk of Lordship despite them believing that Jesus is their Lord.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

what makes less sense is they believe these suufis "worship" these graves to get closer to Allah by means of respecting venerating and asking them to make dua for them to get closer to Allah and they are out of the fold of Islam

But they think the quraysh who apprantly did the exact same thing with their idols believe in tawheeed rubyabiya

It's nothing more than a contradiction, affirming tawheed rububiyyah to pagans creates another problem. That is how come the shirk they commit in uluhiyyah doesn't negate tawheed completely ie all categories of tawheed. After all shirk negates tawheed completely so how is it possible to retain any form of tawheed after committing shirk ?