SalafiTalk.Net » Affairs of Manhaj
» SHAIKH MUHAMMAD amaan AL-jaamee
Search ===>

Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 6Part 7Part 8Part 9 • Part 10 • Part 11 • Part 12

   Reply to this Discussion Start new discussion << previous || next >> 
Posted By Topic: SHAIKH MUHAMMAD amaan AL-jaamee

book mark this topic Printer-friendly Version  send this discussion to a friend  new posts last

10-30-2002 @ 12:00 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Posts: 133
Joined: Sep 2002
ON  Sayyid Qutb
Translator is unknown

said in answer to the question:
"Noble Shaikh, a man who fell into many innovations - such as the saying that "the Qur?aan was ?made? by Allah - not made by man". And who says that Moosaa was the example of a man who was of excitable and emotional nature..."

The Shaikh said: "Halt at the first question, - what did he say: "Excitable?" - "The first question: Is it permissible to say that the Qur?aan was made by Allah and not by man. This is very serious speech, it will confuse the innocent/naive folk. Since a simple student, if he hears that the Qur?aan is made by Allah - then he will understand that what is being spoken of is the Word of Allah. So the word ?made? (Sun?) means that it is made and created by Allah - Allah made it and made all of the creation, and is the Creator of all of the creation - and that He is the One Who made, i.e. created the Qur?aan.

This is Kufr in Allah, since the Qur?aan is not made - rather it is the speech of Allah. Allah - the Most High - says: "And if any of the Mushriks seek your protection, O Muhammad, then grant him your protection so that he may hear the Speech of Allah - which you recite to him" [at-Tawbah:6]

So the Speech which the Mushriks and other than the Mushriks heard form Allah Messenger, sallallaahu ?alaihi wa salaam, is this Qur?aan - what is between the two covers of the Mushaf. So the saying that the Qur?aan is made by Allah is a great mistake and is misleading for the people.

And he says that Moosaa is an example of an emotional and excitable man by nature - Moosaa - Who? The one whom Allah spoke to directly, one of the Messengers, one of the most prominent Messengers of firm resolve - slighting them is Kufr and Apostasy. Whoever slights a single Prophet has slighted all of the Prophets and committed Kufr, and whoever denies the Messengership of a single Messenger or the Prophethood of a single Prophet - then he committed Kufr; since disbelieving in a single one of them is to disbelieve in them all. This is the speech of the secularists who give no value to Allah or the Messenger of Allah, or the Books of Allah.

If this speech is written in books then the questioner should - after completing these questions referring to devilish things - he should mention to us that book so that we can warn about it. That is the second question, read what comes after it. ....(it is read)...

The second question from the questions about these insolent sayings is: He says that the person holds that saying of Wahdatul - Wujood.

Do you know the meaning of ?Wahdatul - Wujood?? If all of those present were students of knowledge then we would not need to explain ?Wahdatul - Wujood?. But this sound [i.e. the microphone, etc.] may reach those who do not know the meaning of ?Wahdatul - Wujood?, we have to explain the meaning of ?Wahdatul - Wujood?. The meaning of ?Wahdatul - Wujood? is that all existence is a single essence - i.e. it is not to be said: Creator and creation, Lord and those He is Lord over, all in existence is a single essence - all in existence is one. This was the religion of Ibn ?Arabee at-Taa-ee - not the well known Ibn Arabee who was from Ahlus-Sunnah, insha?Allah and from the scholars of the Maalikees. But rather, Ibn ?Arabee the evil one - the disavowed nobody - who came - as Shaikhul - Islaam said - with Unbelief which the Unbelievers of Quraish did not bring, since he claimed he was Allah - one and the same, and that all existence is a single thing. He Creator and the creation are the same - this is ?Wahdatul - Wujood?. Whoever believes in ?Wahdatul - Wujood? is an Apostate even if he wears is flowing robe. Yes, read that which comes after ....

And the questioned mentions that the writer makes accusations against ?Uthmaan - radiyallaahu ?anhu -, so perhaps he has the poison of the Shee?ah - and this is a lesser disease compared to what has preceded and to what is known from him - he has mentioned the writer and mentioned the name of the book; and the questioner says that he attacks ?Uthmaan many times in his book ?al-?Adaalah al-Ijtimaa?iyyah? * [pp. 141, 142, 155, 159, 160, 161, 163, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176 : 9th edition, 1403H, Daarush - Shurooq.]

The questioner mentions - and the responsibility for truthfulness is upon the questioner - that the author of this book ?al-?Adaalah al-Ijtimaa?iyyah? (Social Justice) causes doubt about Paradise and the Fire. So if he brings doubt about Paradise and the Fire and matters of the Hidden and the Unseen like them - then this means that he was suffering from the poison of the modernists (?Aqlaanee), and I do not know him to have been a modernist. Modernists are something other than those who depend upon intellect, and attributes are many these days.

The scholars of ?Kalaam? [theological rhetoric] are called the ?people of intellect? (al-?Aql) and ?the companions of intellectual affairs?. Then the ?Aqlaaniyyah? that has appeared and has been taken up as its base today the United States (of America) - then all the ahaadeeth that pertain to matters of the Hidden and the Unseen - then to the modernists the fact that the isnaad of the ahaadeeth is authentic (saheeh) is not enough. Rather the principle which they follow is that they tell the authentic ahaadeeth - and particularly those which speak of the Dajjaal, the Mahdee, Paradise and the Fire - and say that they must be judged according to the intellect. The intellects of who? He intellects of the modernists, not - common folk like ourselves? Then whatever the intellects of the modernists accept then it is to be accepted, otherwise it will be rejected.

The first of the modernists and their leader - who rejected all the ahaadeeth, after living in France for a long time and who the returned to the Islamic East - as they say - he said: I went to Europe and found an Islaam without there being any Muslims. Islaam that has taken form. Then I went back to the lands of the Muslims and found Muslims without Islaam, meaning that we are Muslims without Islaam, and that over there in Europe here was Islaam which had taken form without any Muslims".

O youth, you do not live in a remote desert today - the world is open - what is there in Europe except for intoxicants, evils and sins? But the simple-minded say: They do not break appointments, and they do not play around with prices, and if they see a seller selling that which others sell for ten - and he sells it for eight, then they disapprove of that...

Do you know who is the one who said this, and his followers consider this to be genius. Genius of the ?greater imaam? the ?great imaam? Muhammad ?Abduh - the one whose speech this is and he was the leader of the modernists present today and the founder of the modernists school. He is the one who denied these things, and this author which the questioner is referring to is just a student who studied under the students of Muhammad ?Abduh. So let us be clear and frank in order to free ourselves from responsibility - the modernists have books which are widely circulated today, and they wage a fierce war against Islaam - with regard to both the fundamentals and the details of the Religion, using the claim that the ahaadeeth must be checked against the intellect - even though the book and the author are known, and as they say - when the cause becomes known amazement passes away.

So our advice for our youth is that they should suffice - due to their age and level of knowledge and their level - they should suffice with the well known books, whose authors are well known for correctness of their ?Aqeedah and Manhaj - until they mature, and it is not fitting that they should read everything that comes into their hands, since it is the case that with regard to some of those modernists then many people, many writers and many students of knowledge may have a favourable opinion of them and thus fall victim to this favourable opinion of them. So because we have books that are sound with regard to the ?Aqeedah of their authors - then you have no need to read these other books. My advice to you are this level is that you restrict yourselves to the sound books, then that you expand when you proceed in age and knowledge, and success is granted by Allah - and may Allah extol and send peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his true followers and companions." * [Questions and Answers in ?al-Masjid an-Nabawee? : 22/6/1404H.

And he said: "The book ?az-zilaal? of Sayyid Qutb is a tafseer that is not a tafseer based upon narrations, not a tafseer from the language. Rather it is a composition containing a confused mixture of the ideas of the Ash?arees, the ideas of ?Wahdatul - Wujood? and the ideas of the Soofees - and he was an Ash?aree - about which there is not dispute.

So I advise small students not to read the book ?az-Zilaal?, just as I advise the greater students - from the students of knowledge - to read it in order to make clear to lesser students the futility contained in it - as advice to them." *

Source: [A lecture: Answers to questions about the manhaj of Ahlus - Sunnah wal - Jamaa?ah in calling to Allah. Cassette no. 1. Jeddah 4/1413H]

Aboo Shaahir as-Salafee

TawhidFirst | Aqidah | AboveTheThrone | Asharis
Madkhalis | Takfiris | Maturidis | Dajjaal
Islam Against Extremism | Manhaj
Ibn Taymiyyah | Bidah
Quick Way to Learn Arabic Alphabet

main page | contact us
Copyright 2001 - SalafiTalk.Net
Madinah Dates Gold Silver Investments