Some Statements of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah About the Soofeeyah

Some Statements of Shaykh ul-Islaam

Ibn Taymeeyah -Rahimullaah-About the Soofeeyah

By Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah -Rahimullaah-

Translated & Compiled by Abbas Abu Yahya

1. There was more Bida’ amongst those who came later than those who were amongst the foremost of the people.


Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah (d.728) -Rahimullaah- said :


‘This is because every time the people were closer to the time of the Messenger of Allah their Bida’ was less, and this type of Bida’ was (generally) in speech and statements.


Those who committed Bida’ were not from amongst the Tabi’een (those who followed the Companions) and those who followed them, rather it was people who worshipped Allaah by dancing and listening to music. Just as there were people at that time from the Khawarij (those who rebel against the Muslim leader), the Mutazilah and the Shia, there were also amongst them those who belied Qadr however, there were not amongst these people of Bida’ those who used Qadr as a justification for their actions.


Thereafter a lot of the Bida’ of action occurred amongst those people who came later, they were the ordinary (ignorant) worshippers and those who abstained from the Dunyaa, the poor people and the Soofeeyah. This Bida’ of actions was not generally present at the time of the Tabi’een and those who followed them, in contrast to the people of Bida’ and their innovated statements. Because this Bida’ of statements appeared at the time of the Companions and those who followed the Companions, due to this it was known, and at that time doubts regarding Bida’ were stronger and their people were more intelligent, as for the Bida’ of the people nowadays who abstain from the Duniya and the Soofeeyah then their people are more ignorant and further away from following the Messenger of Allaah.’


[Taken from ‘Majmoo’ Fatawa’ vol.19/275, ‘Mawqif Ibn Taymeeyah min as-Soofeeyah’ vol.1/240]




2. The Dislike of the Soofeeyah for Knowledge.


Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah -Rahimullaah- said:


‘As for the people who worship with Bida’, then the Shaytaan beautifies these acts of worship for them and makes them hate the paths of the Sharia’ until he makes them hate knowledge, the Qur’aan and Hadeeth. So they do not like to listen to the Qur’aan and Hadeeth nor do they like to remember it, and perhaps they are caused to hate books so they do not love books nor the one who has a book, whether it is a Mus’haf or a book of Hadeeth.


Just as an-Nasrabaadthi said, the Soofeeyah used to say: ‘How can you leave the knowledge of (al-Kharq- a type of clothing that is specific to the Soofeeyah) and take the knowledge of the Sharia’ and knowledge!’ He said: ‘I used to hide my writing materials from them but when I became older they were in need of my knowledge.’


As-Siree as–Saqtee mentioned that one of the Soofeeyah entered upon him and when he saw that he had a pen and ink he left and did not sit with him…..and many of the Soofeeyah frighten away those who mention the Qur’aan or the Sharia’, or if he has a book with him or if he writes.


This is because they feel that this type of person has in him something that oppresses his Tareeqah (path) so their Shayateen make them flee from knowledge, just as a Jew and a Christian causes his son to flee from listening to the speech of the Muslims so that he does not change his belief of his religion. Likewise, the people of Nuh would place their fingers in their ears and cover themselves up with their garments so that they could not hear his speech or see him.


Allaah Ta’ala said about the Mushrikeen:


{And those who disbelieve say: ‘Listen not to this Qur’aan, and make noise in the midst of its (recitation) that you may overcome.’}[Fussilat: 26]


And Allaah Ta’ala said:


{Then what is wrong with them (i.e. the disbelievers) that they turn away from (receiving) admonition? As if they were frightened (wild) donkeys} [al-Mudathir: 49-50]


And they are from those people who are most wanting to listen and hear Bida’, like the listening of musical instruments and they are the furthermost to listening to that which is from the Sharia’; like the listening of the Ayaat of Allaah -Ta’ala.’


[Taken from ‘Majmoo’ Fatawa’ vol. 10/412-413]




3. Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah spoke about the deviancy of Ahul-Kalaam (the people of theological rhetoric) and the Ahl-ul-Tassawuff (Soofeeyah) saying:


‘So every one of the two deviant groups have two aspects of corruption and evil.


One of which is:


Speech without knowledge- if they are the people of theological rhetoric


Action without knowledge – if they are the Soofeeyah


That is what has occurred from the Bida’ of theological rhetoric and the Bida’ in actions which oppose the Book and the Sunnah.


The second is:


The people of theological rhetoric abandon actions and as for the Soofeeyah then they abandon statements and theological rhetoric.


As for the Ahl-ul-Sunnah their speech and their actions both inwardly and outwardly are with knowledge. And both their speech and actions are connected, and they are the Muslims in truth. They remain upon the straight path, the path of whom Allah has blessed and not the path of those whom incur the anger of Allaah, nor the path of those who are misguided.


As for the deviants of the people of theological rhetoric then they have the resemblance of the Jews, and as for the deviant of the people of the Soofeeyah then they have the resemblance of the Christians, this is why the people of theological rhetoric were overcome with the science of ciphering (using systems and symbols for extracting rules), and what indicates to that from knowledge and belief.


And what overcame the Soofeeyah was whisperings and along with that which rouses them into (al-Wajd) a state where the heart becomes empty.’


[Taken from ‘Majmoo’ Fatawa’ vol.2/41-42 ‘Mawqif Ibn Taymeeyah min as-Soofeeyah’ vol.1/ 245]




Source:http://followingthesunnah.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/some-statements-of-shaykh-ul-islaam-ibn-taymeeyah-about-the-soofeeyah/

Following the authentic Hadeeth and to leave every statement that opposes it

Following the authentic Hadeeth and to

leave every statement that opposes it

Narrations of the Salaf

Translated by

Abbas Abu Yahya

1. From Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattaan (d. 198 A.H.) who said:


‘Do not look at the Hadeeth, but look at the Isnaad to see if the Isnaad is saheeh, otherwise do not be deceived by the Hadeeth if the Isnaad is not authentic.’


[From: ‘Siyaar ‘Alaam an-Nubala’ 9/188]






2. From Umar bin AbdulAzeez (d. around 100 A.H.) that he wrote to some people:


‘No one can have an opinion against the Sunnah which was established by the Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam.’


[From ‘Jamia Bayyan al-Ilm’ 1/781]






3. From Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 A.H.) who said:


‘Every ones statement can be taken or left except for the inmate of this grave -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam.’


[From: ‘Siyaar ‘Alaam an-Nubala’ 8/93]




4. From Uthmaan who said:


‘A man came to Maalik and asked him about an issue. So Maalik said to him: ‘The Messenger of -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- said such and such’. The man said to him ‘Do you hold that view?’ Imam Malik said:


فَلْيَحْذَرِ الَّذِينَ يُخَالِفُونَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِ أَنْ تُصِيبَهُمْ فِتْنَةٌ أَوْ يُصِيبَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ


<< And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment (i.e. his Sunnah) (among the sects) beware, lest some Fitnah befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.>> [Noor: 63]’


[From ‘Hileyat Al-Awaaliyah’ 6/326]






5. From Maalik ibn Anas (d. 179 A.H.) who said:


‘The Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- established Sunnan, following them is following the Book of Allaah, and it is completion of obedience to Allaah, and strength upon the Deen of Allaah. It is not permissible for anyone to change it, nor to look into that which opposes the Sunnah. Whosoever seeks guidance by it, then he is guided.’


[From: ‘Siyaar ‘Alaam an-Nubala’ 8/98]






6. From Yahya bin Yahya at-Tameemi (d. 226 A.H.) who said:


‘I heard Abu Yusuf saying: Everything that I have given a verdict about, then indeed I take it back except for that which is in agreement with the Book and the Sunnah.’


[From: ‘Siyaar ‘Alaam an-Nubala’ 8/537]






7. From ar-Rabia’ who said: ‘I heard Shaafi’ee saying:


‘If you find in my book that which opposes the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam, then take the Sunnah and leave that which I said.’


[From: ‘Siyaar ‘Alaam an-Nubala’ 10/34]






8. From Maalik ibn Anas (d. 179 A.H.) who said:


‘Indeed I am a human, I can make mistakes, and I can be correct, so look into my opinion, everything that is in agreement with the Book and the Sunnah, then take it, and everything that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah then leave it.’


[From ‘Jamia’ Bayyan al-Ilm’ 1/775]






9. From Sufyan who said:


‘Learn a lot of Ahadeeth, indeed they are weapons.’


[From ‘Hileyat Al-Awaaliyah’ 6/362]






10. Abul Hasan Shabwayhi said:


‘Whoever wants knowledge about the grave then he should adhere to the Athaar, and whoever wants knowledge of bread then he should adhere to opinions.


[From ‘Tadreeb ar-Rawee’ 2/565]

From Vile Manners: Passing Gas in Public

From Vile Manners: Passing Gas in Public

Allaah the Mighty and Majestic says: 

وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُمْ بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ مِنَ الْعَالَمِينَ أَئِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الرِّجَالَ وَتَقْطَعُونَ السَّبِيلَ وَتَأْتُونَ فِي نَادِيكُمُ الْمُنْكَرَ

“And remember when Loot said to his people: ‘Indeed you bring a lewd act which none from the ‘Aalameen has preceded you in. You come to men (for sex) instead of women and you rob the wayfarer and you practice Munkar (vileness) in your gatherings.’” (Al-‘Ankaboot 29:28-29)

On the authority of Yazeed ibn Bakr Al-Laythee who said: “Al-Qaasim ibn Muhammad was asked about the statement of Allaah: ‘…and you practice Munkar in your gatherings.’ ‘What was that Munkar?’ He said: ‘They used to mutually pass gas in gatherings; one of them passing gas over the other. And the word: النادي means the gathering.”[1]

Al-Bukhaaree[2] and Muslim[3] narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullaah ibn Zam’ah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet ﷺ admonished them for laughing at flatulence. He said:

لم يضحك أحدكم مما يفعل؟

“Why would one of you laugh at that which he himself does?”

An-Nawawee (may Allaah have mercy upon him) said: “In it (the Hadeeth) is the prohibition of laughing at flatulence one hears from another. Rather, it is proper that one should not pay any attention to it and continue in his speech and that which was occupying him without turning one’s head or other than it; and be as if he had not heard it. In it as well is good etiquettes and manners of association.”

Translated by Raha Batts

---

[1] Tafseer ibn Aboo Haatim 11/425

[2] Al-Bukhaaree 4942

[3] Muslim 2855

A woman back-biting her husband after a fight

A woman back-biting her husband after a fight

The third question of Fatwa no. 20721

Q 3: A man sometimes picks a fight with his wife and she becomes angry. When she sits with her children, she starts saying things about her husband and her family, since man in his anger may utter what he does not understand. Is this considered Ghibah (backbiting) and insult to her husband? Please, advise. May Allah reward you!

A: If this woman says about her husband what he hates, it will be considered forbidden backbiting under the Shari`ah (Islamic law). Therefore, she must sincerely repent to Allah and hope for His reward for the fights triggered between her husband and her. She should be patient and kind to her husband, and not reveal the disputes with her husband to her children or anybody else. Revealing such things constitutes countering evil with evil, thus widening dispute. This also instigates the children against their father and may cause quarrels with their father, sever relations and become undutiful to him.

(Part No. 26; Page No. 23)

May Allah grant us success! May peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and Companions!

Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta'

Member	Member	Deputy Chairman	Chairman
Bakr Abu Zayd	Salih Al-Fawzan	`Abdul-`Aziz Al Al-Shaykh	`Abdul-`Aziz ibn `Abdullah ibn Baz

http://alifta.com

Corruption of Children

Corruption of Children

 

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

“How many people have caused misery to their own children, the apples of their eyes, in this world and in the Hereafter, by neglecting them, not disciplining them, encouraging them to follow their whims and desires, thinking that they were honouring them when they were in fact humiliating them, that they were being merciful to them when in fact they were wronging them. They have not benefited from having a child, and they have made the child lose his share in this world and in the Hereafter. If you think about the corruption of children you will see that in most cases it is because of the parents.”

[Tuhfat al-Mawlood, p. 146]

Indeed the believer in this Dunyaa is like a stranger...

Indeed the believer in this Dunyaa

is like a stranger...

From al-Hasan al-Basari who said:


‘Indeed the believer in this Dunyaa is like a stranger, he does not surrender to the humiliation of the Dunyaa, nor does he compete with the people of the Dunyaa for the honour of this Dunyaa.


The people according to him are relaxing, while his soul according to himself is busy (with the Hereafter). As a result Toobah (a tree in Paradise) is for the slave of Allaah who earns goodness and submits a virtuous action for a day when he will be poor and in need. (i.e. the Day of Judgment.)


[Zuhd by Ahmad 333/Muhasib an-Nafs by Ibn Abi Dunyaa 78]

No Remaining For the Dunyaa

No Remaining For the Dunyaa

From al-Hasan al-Basari who used to say, when a person who was attached to the Dunyaa was mentioned:


‘ I swear by Allaah, he did not remain for the Dunyaa, nor did the Dunyaa remain for him, nor did he secure himself from its trials nor from its evil nor from its account, rather he left the Dunyaa in rags (a shroud).’


[al-Hileeyah – 2/144]

Clarification of Doubts Concerning the Life of Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab

Clarification of Doubts Concerning

the Life of Shaykhul-Islaam

Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab

A response to the Soofee lies claiming that Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ’Abdul-Wahhaab (d.1206H) had a connection to the British and that he was responsible for the downfall of the Ottoman Khilaafah.


Some of the enemies of the Salafee Da‘wah have claimed that Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab broke away from the Ottoman Caliphate, and thus departed from majority in disobedience.




Ibn Afaaliq describes the tawheed of the followers of the Salafee Da‘wah as such:




"As for their tawheed, then it includes going against Muslims…and this is disbelief and not tawheed ."


Addressing them, ‘Umar al-Mahjoob said:




"…and you have fallen into disobedience."




Ibn ‘Aabideen in his commentary described the followers of this da‘wah as Khawaarij, and that was under the chapter of " The wrong-doers (al-Bughaat)", and they are the ones who go against the obedience of the Imaam without a true (proof). [1]


Dahlaan claims that the followers of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab:


"…have departed the majority." [2]




Az-Zahaawee as well, claims that they are notorious for:


"…deserting the obedience of Ameerul-Mu’mineen".




Many of the enemies of the da‘wah described the Shaykh and his followers as Khawaarij, because one of the attributes of Khawaarij is that they go against the Imaam of Muslims, and they become disobedient as soon as they observe some sins of this Imaam that are far below Major Disbelief.




And this is illustrated with what al-Amlee claims. He says:




"The Khawaarij have made the fighting of the Kings of Muslims and going against them permissible… So did the Wahhaabiyyah."


The author of the book "A summary of the History of Arabs" includes a chapter in his book titled "The Uprising of the Wahhaabiyyah against the obedience".




‘Abdul-Qadeem claim that the upcoming of Wahhaabism was one of the reasons behind the fall of the Caliphate, he says:


"The Wahhaabiyyah founded a state within the Islaamic State under the leadership if Muhammad Ibn Sa‘ood and then his son ‘Abdul-‘Azeez. England supported them with weapons and money, and based on ideology they have thrust forward to conquer Islaamic lands that were under the control of the Sultaan, in other words they have raised the sword in the face of the Caliph and killed the Islaamic Army, the army of Ameerul-Mu’mineen (Leader of the Faithful) by means of instigation and support from the English."




And before starting to answer the claim of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab’s revolt against the Caliph, it is appropriate to mention what the Shaykh believed of the creed that necessitates the obedience to the Imaam of Muslims, regardless of whether they are dutiful or wrong-doers, unless they order a disobedience of Allaah, for obedience (to them) is only for things that are good.




The Shaykh says in his letter to the people of Qaseem:


"And I believe in the obligation of submitting and being obedient to the Imaams of Muslims, the dutiful of them as well as the wrong-doers of them, as long as they don't order a disobedience of Allaah, and the person who is responsible for Khilaafah; he whom the people have gathered around and accepted, and he who has forced his way to become Caliph as well, his obedience is obligatory and revolting against him is unlawful (haraam)."




He also says:


"The third source: To make our gathering complete we have to listen to and obey those who rule us, even if it was an Abyssinian slave, and Allaah has explained this to us fully in various forms of explanations, legislative and destined, and then this foundation became to be unknown to a lot of those who claim to have knowledge, never mind practicing it."


In answering such claims, an integral question needs to be answered: Was Najd, the home of this movement, under the control of the Ottoman Khilaafah?




Dr. Saalih al-‘Ubood answers:


" In general, Najd did not witness the sovereignty of the Ottomans, for their power did not reach it, nor their governors, nor at any time preceding the lifetime of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab did a Turkish flag rise in it. What proves this reality is reading through the managerial divisions of the Ottomans. A treatise by Yameen ‘Alee Afandee (who was the treasurer of the Haqqaanee book in the year (1018H), corresponding to 1609) titled "The laws of the Ottoman/ the contents of the book of Deewaan", reveals that starting with the eleventh Hijree century, the Ottoman Khilaafah split into thirty two distinct divisions (iyala), fourteen of each are Arabic, and Najd is not included in those, except for al-Ihsaa, if we were to consider it to be part of Najd.."




Dr. ‘Abdullaah al-‘Uthaymeen says:


"Prior to the upcoming of the call of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab, Najd was not under the direct dominion of Ottomans, nor did it witness any sovereignty from within. Banee Jabr, Banee Khaalid, and the Shareefs were not sovereign, and civil strife between the tribes of Najd was the norm."




Dr. Aajil al-Nashmee says:


"The Khilaafah did not pay attention to Najd and the neighbouring territories. This policy may be attributed to the vastness of Najd, on one side, and on the other side the presence of the tribal fragmentation."




What proves that the position of the Shaykh was fine, and that the Shaykh did not hesitate as to the fact that his movement is not related to the Khilaafah is the letter sent to Faadil al-Mazeed, the ruler of the Syrian desert:




" This thing that they have disapproved of me, that they hated me for and created enmity between me and them for; if they ask any scholar in Syria or Yemen and others, they will say this is the truth and it is the religion of Allaah and His Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). However, I cannot make it public in my area because the state does not approve of it, and Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab managed to because the ruler in his area did not disapprove of it, rather when he knew the truth he followed it."




As for "Zuloom's" claim that the movement of the Shaykh was one of the reasons behind the fall of the Khilaafah, and that the English helped the Wahhaabees to achieve this cause, then Muhammad Mahdee al-Istanboolee answers this flat allegation:




"It was incumbent on this author to support his view with proofs, and in the past the poet said: If the allegations were not based on their proofs/with texts, then it is a proof of foolishness.




To the contrary, History reveals that those English were opposed to this movement from the beginning, fearing a re-awakening of the Islaamic World."




Al-Istanboolee also says:


"It is strange, both amusing and saddening, that this author accuses the movement of the Shaykh of being one of the causes behind the fall of the Ottoman Khilaafah. It is needless to say that this movement was founded in the year 1811, and the Khilaafah was destroyed in the year 1922."


And what proves that the English were against the Wahhaabee movement is that they have sent Captain Forster Saddler to congratulate Ibraaheem Pasha on the victory he gained over the Wahhaabiyyah- referring to the war in Dar‘iyyah-, and to confirm also how inclined he is to cooperate with the British Act against the Wahhaabee piracy in the Arabian Gulf (The most aggressive attacks/ kidnapping of the Royal British vessels that roamed in the Gulf and the Indian Ocean carrying the treasures of India to the empress was carried by well known Wahhaabee centres on the Gulf coast- which until as recent as the fifties was referred to on international maps as the pirates coast- such as Sharjah and Raasul-Khaymah.)




Moreover this letter stated clearly the intention of the British government to create an agreement with Ibraaheem Pasha with the goal of annihilating the Wahhaabee control.




Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Mandthoor an-Nawmaanee says:


"The English have used the position in India that opposed Shaykh Muhammd Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab in order to throw anybody who opposed them with the label "Wahhaabee" And as such the English called the scholars of Deoband, India - Wahhaabiyyah due to their open opposition to the English"




Rather the priest Zuimer mentioned that the Wahhaabiyyah in India do not expose their beliefs because call for Jihaad against the English was ascribed to them.




Footnotes:


[1] Haashiyah Ibn-‘Aabideen (4/262).


[2] ad-Durarus-Sunniyyah fir-Radd ‘alal-Wahhaabiyyah (pg. 23)




source:http://www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=212&Itemid=415

At the Crossroads of Gratitude

At the Crossroads of Gratitude

It is reported that Al-Hasan Al-Basrî – Allâh have mercy on him – said:


It has reached me that when Allâh the Mighty and Majestic blesses a people and gives them some good he asks them to be grateful. If they are grateful, He is all-able to give them more. But if they are ungrateful, He is all-able to turn His blessings into a punishment.

Al-Bayhaqî, Shu’ab Al-Imân article 4536.


Source: http://www.sayingsofthesalaf.net/

”..But Ahlul Sunnah die and their legacies remain..”

 ”..But Ahlul Sunnah die and their legacies remain..”

Abu Bakr Bin ‘Abbaas said:

“Whomsoever sits in the company of others, they will sit in his company, but ahlul Sunnah die and their legacies remain and ahlul bid’ah die and their “legacies” die along with them”.

Majmoo’ Al Fataawa, 13/173.

The Ruling Concerning Performing a Cesarean Section

The Ruling Concerning Performing a Cesarean Section

This issue occurs in o­ne of four situations:

1. That the mother is alive and the baby is alive:  In which case it is not permissible to do any surgical operation except under necessity such as when delivery becomes difficult, etc.  This is because it is not permissible to perform operation when there is no need, as the body is a trust that must be cared for by every person.  He must not do anything that threatens it except for a more useful goal, because the operation may harm the child. 2. That both mother and child are dead:  Here, it is not permissible to perform the operation for there is no benefit in it.

3. That the mother is alive while the child is dead:  Here it is permissible to perform operation to remove it.  Because, obviously – and Allah knows best – it will not be removed except by an operation.     

•  If there is a fear for the mother with the operation, it is not permissible to perform the operation as the fear of the harm prevents doing what may benefit.     
•  If the possibility of harm is very low, and the child may continue to remain in her womb, then there is no problem with the operation, because the continued existence of the baby in her womb prevents her from pregnancy.

4. That the mother is dead while the baby is alive:  Hanbali scholars have stated that it is forbidden to operate in order to remove the child.  Their reason for this ruling is that is involves mutilation and a transgression upon an honour that is existent for the sake of a life supposed to be existent, except where part of the child has started coming out, in which case it is allowed to operate to bring out the rest.  They said, ‘it is allowed for a midwife to pounce o­n it so as to force it out’.Ibnul-Qayyim stated in his book – I’laa, al-Muwaaqqi’een [3/413] – that is was said to Imam Ahmad that Sufyaan was asked concerning a woman who died with a baby moving in her womb, that he said: “I don’t see anything wrong with slitting her stomach to remove it.”  o­n hearing this, Ahmad said:  ‘Evil indeed is what he said.’  And he continued to repeat that, saying ‘Subhaanallah – glory be to Allah, ‘Evil indeed is what he said.’I say [the author], the reasoning of our scholars, which is that this involves mutilation, implies that it should be permissible in these days since the operation does not involve any mutilation.     

•  Based o­n this, the correct view is that of Sufyaan, which is that it is compulsory (Waajib) to operate if there is a high probability of the baby’s safety,     
•  Or strongly encouraged (Mustahab), if it is likely that he survives,     
•  And permissible (Mubaah), where there is a low chance of its survival.This is so because of many reasons:

One: Because it is based o­n that which was forbidden by our scholars, their reason no longer existent as, o­nce the stomach is incised and then stitched back, after removing the baby, there is no mutilation.

Two: The honour of the living is greater than that of the dead.  So, if we were to assume that incising her stomach involves dishonouring her, then doing that is less than dishonouring the living (baby which is exposed to death).

Three: The baby is a living and honourable human being exposed to death, and operating to remove it involves saving a human soul from death, which is compulsory, as the benefit can be achieved without any harm.

Four: That our scholars have permitted operating the case of a child who is half into the world, to remove the rest – based o­n the reason that his life is known (for sure), whereas before it comes out its life is o­nly imaginary – implies that there shouldn’t be a difference between the two situations, before or after it has started coming out, so long as we are sure of its life.

Five: The benefit in it outweighs the harm and it is well known that Islam either compels Muslims or encourages them (to do things) whenever their benefit is higher than their harm; For there is no doubt that incising the stomach of a dead, pregnant woman, to save her baby is a benefit that outweighs the harm in it.  Hence, the thing boils down to either being compulsory  or encouraged, or (at worst) permissible, according to the level of hope in saving the life of the child, or otherwise.

[Ibn Uthaymeen, Al Muntaqaa min Faraa’id al-Fawaa’id]Al Ahkaam wal Fataawaa as Shar’iyyah li Katheerin minal Massailit Tibbiyyah(Guidelines and Fataawa Related to Sickness and Medical Practice, pgs. 69-71).

Seeking Refuge in Allaah from the Snatching of Shaytan at Time of Death

Seeking Refuge in Allaah from the

Snatching of Shaytan at Time of Death 

Student of knowledge Abu Yusuf Khalifa (hafidhahullaah) relayed this du'aa the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) made. 

The Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said:

Wa Aoodhubika an ya takhabaTani ash-Shaytan 'indal Mawt (I seek refuge in you (Allaah) from Shaytan snatching me at the time of death.)

Sunan Abu Dawud (authentic).

Taken from: http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=11&Topic=11453

A Neglected Sunnah: Invoking Allaah to Reward Someone You have Spoken ill to

Invoking Allaah to Reward Someone

You have Spoken ill to

Allaahumma fa Ayyummaa mu`minin sababtuhu faj'al dhaalika lahu Qurbatan ilaika Yawmal-Qiyaamati 

(Oh Allaah, whomever of the believers I have abused, give him the reward of a sacrificial slaughter for it on the Day of Resurrection.)

(Al-Bukharee; Fat-H al-Baari 11/171; Muslim 4/2007 - the wording in Muslim is: 'make it a purification for him and a source of mercy.')


Source: Hisnul Muslim (Fortress of the Muslim)

Taken from: http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=11&Topic=12286

The justice of ‘Alī b. Abī Tālib

 The justice of ‘Alī b. Abī Tālib

may Allah be pleased with him

During his Caliphate, ‘Alī b. Abī Tālib – Allah be pleased with him – saw some armor of his with a Christian.

He decided to take the matter up legally, so he took the dispute to Shurayh (the Judge). ‘Alī said, “This is my armor, and I have not sold it nor given it away.”

Shurayh said to the Christian, “What have you to say about what the Amīr of the Believers claims?” The Christian replied, “It is my armor, although I do not regard the Amīr of the Believers to be a liar.” Shurayh then turned to ‘Alī, “O Amīr of the Believers, do you have any proof (of ownership)?” ‘Alī laughed and said, “Shurayh is correct, I have no proof.”

So Shurayh judged that the armor was the Christian’s.

The Christian took it and began to walk away but then returned. He proclaimed, “As for me, I testify that this is the judgment of the Prophets – the Amīr of the Believers himself takes me to his judge and the judge rules against him! I bear witness that there is no deity deserving worship but Allāh and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allāh. By Allāh, the armor is yours o Amīr of the Believers. I followed the army when you were on your way to the Battle of Siffīn and the armor came out of your equipment.” ‘Alī said, “If you have accepted Islām the armor is yours.” And then he put him in his horse.

Al-Sha’bī (the reporter of this incident) said, “I was later informed by those who saw this man that he fought the Khawārij (alongside ‘Alī) at the battle of Nahrawān.” 

Ibn Kathīr, Al-Bidāyah wa Al-Nihāyah Vol.8 p5

Ibn al Qayyim:A Summary of the Lessons and Benefits of Prayer

A Summary of the Lessons and Benefits of Prayer*1

From Ibnul Qayyim’s The Path to Guidance, Chapter Nine, pp 89-92 ,


Translated by: Aboo ‘Iyaad Amjad Rafiq




(1) That Allaah, the Exalted, wipes away sins by the five prayers.


(2) That the five prayers are an expiation for what occurs between them, if major sins are avoided.


(3) That sins burn and destroy a person, and thus it is necessary to extinguish that with the prayers.


(4) That the Muslim reaches the level of the truthful and the martyrs on account of his prayers, charity and fasting.


(5) The superiority of prayer*2 over other actions.


(6) That Allaah, the Exalted, bestowed a favor upon that Companion by entering him into Paradise before his brother who died as a martyr because he prayed more than he.


(7) That the prayer is light which illuminates the path of the servant in this world and the Hereafter.


(8) That an abundance of prostrations and prayers is the way to accompany the Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) in Paradise.


(9) That a two-rak’ah prayer is more loved by the dead person than the world and whatever is in it.


(10) That emptying the heart for Allaah in the prayer puts a person in the same condition as the day when his mother gave birth to him.


(11) That should a person enter the Fire, refuge is sought from that, the angels will remove him from it and will recognise him by the marks of prostration.*3


(12) That the prayer participates in undoing the knots which Satan places at the top of one’s head.


(13) That the night prayer is the most excellent prayer after the obligatory prayers.


(14) That the one who prays at night obtains a reward which most of mankind do not.


(15) Gratitude is shown to Allaah with the (obligatory) prayer and night prayer.


(16) That the prayer most loved by Allaah is the prayer of Daawood (‘alaihisallaam) which is to pray for a third of the night and to sleep for two-thirds of the night.*4


(17) That as Allaah has bestowed a favor upon His servant by the hour during the night in which the supplication is answered, it is befitting for the Muslim to aspire to it and seek to find it so that he is given the good of this world and the Hereafter.


(18) That the night prayer is an evidence for righteousness and taqwaa, and it expiates the sins and prevents one from falling into them.


(19) That Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, covers the husband and wife – who help each other in performing the night prayer – with His Mercy. If one of them refuses, the other sprinkles water on his or her face.


(20) That two units of prayer at night make a person amongst the men who remember Allaah often or the women who remember Allaah often.


(21) That Allaah is amazed by the man who gets up from his sleep, leaving his bedsheet, his wife and his love for her in order to perform prayer. Allaah laughs because of him and informs the angels about him.


(22) That there is no jealousy or competition except with regard to two men, one of whom prays at night reciting the Qur’aan which Allaah has bestowed upon him.


(23) That whoever recited ten aayaat in the night (in prayer) will not be written amongst the heedless, a Qintaar of reward will be written for him and Allaah, the Exalted, will say to him, “Recite and rise by one degree with every aayah,” until he comes to the last aayah he knows. Allaah favors him by giving him eternity.


(24) That whoever prays at night with a hundred aayaat is written amongst the devout worshippers, and whoever prays with a thousand aayaat is written amongst the Muqantareen, and whoever prays with two-hundred aayaat is written amongst the devout worshippers and sincere ones.


(25) That the one who walks to the prayer (in the mosque) is raised in ranks and has his sins removed, both while he goes to the mosque and when he returns from it.


(26) That for every step he takes, he receives ten good deeds.


(27) That the Muslim is written amongst the worshippers from the time he leaves the house till he returns to it.


(28) That the one receiving the greatest reward for the prayer is the one who walks the furthest towards it and then the one further than him (from the mosque).


(29) That one step which a servant takes to the prayer in congregation is counted as an act of charity for him.


(30) That taking many steps towards the mosque is from ar-Ribaat (guarding the frontiers)


(31) That every time a servant leaves for the mosque in the morning or the evening, Allaah prepares for him a feast in Paradise.


(32) That Allaah makes the light of those who walk throught the darkness to the mosques complete and perfect on the Day of Judgement.


(33) That the reward for the one who leaves his house in a state of purity for the obligatory prayer is like the reward of the pilgrim in the state of ihraam.


(34) That the one who leaves for the mosque has a guarantee from Allaah that He should provide sustenance for him and suffice him (in his affairs).


(35) That the one who walks for the prayer in congregation, after having beautified his ablution and travels to visit Allaah, the Exalted, is bestowed with a great favor in that Allaah honors those of his servants who visit Him, and Allaah’s honoring of them is increasing their faith [Eemaan], showing benevolence to them, rewarding them, raising their ranks, removing their difficulties and making their hearts content and happy.


(36) The obligation to pray in congregation.


(37) That the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) did not make a concession for the old blind man by allowing him to leave the congregational prayer. How then can those who are fit and well be allowed a concession?


(38) That whoever abandons the congregational prayer has been threatened with heedlessness and having a seal placed on his heart.


(39) That staying away from the congregational prayer is a sign of hypocrisy.


(40) The extreme striving of the Companions (radiallaahu ‘anhum) for attending the congregational prayer inspite of difficult circumstances. Some of the Salaf used to say:

The prayer is from the Hereafter, so when you enter it you leave the world.

Footnotes:


*1 Summarised from Hussain’s al-’Awaa’ishah’s As-Salaat, wa Atharuhaa fee Ziyaadatil-Eemaan wa Tahdheeb in-Nafs.


*2 Its condition is that the creed ['aqeedah] of the person is correct, sound and in accordance with that of the Pious Predecessors of this Ummah.


*3 The condition for being removed from the fire due to the intercession of the angels (and others) is that a person should be from the People of Tawheed. Intercession is only for the People of Tawheed.


*4 Due to his (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) saying: “…He used to sleep half the night, then prayer for a third and then go to sleep for a sixth of it.” When a half is added to a sixth, they give two-thirds.


source: http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=11&Topic=8520
http://salaf-us-saalih.com/2010/12/17/a-summary-of-the-lessons-and-benefits-of-prayer-ibnul-qayyim/#more-1807