1. Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen did not understand Tawheed.
2. Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen did not disbelieve in the Taghut.
3. Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen rejected what is known by necessity in the Deen.
So these are the three biggest misconceptions among those who make Takfeer upon the “‘Athir”, so let us go through each point.
First misconception: “Whoever said that a Mushrik is a Muwahhid did not understand Tawheed.” This principle necessitates that whoever calls a Muwahhid a Mushrik, then he is a Kaafir, or else it would be a Ruling without proof, the one who stated this must make Tawbah. This necessitates making Takfeer upon ‘Umar ibnul Khattāb because he called the Muwahhid Hātib ibn Abī Balta’ah a Kaafir. So, he either adheres to making Takfeer upon ‘Umar, or he repents to Allah from this false principle, where no Hujjah or Proof has ever been sent down by Allah regarding it.
From this, whoever makes Takfeer upon a Muslim with an acceptable Ta’weel, he does not disbelieve because of that Ta’weel, and whoever makes a Kaafir enter into Islām with an acceptable Ta’weel, he does not disbelieve because of Ta’weel. And whoever differentiates between the two cases must bring forth proof. And from the characteristics of the people of bid’ah is differentiating between two similar matters.
Whoever calls a Mushrik a Muwahhid, did not call him a Muwahhid
because he was doing Shirk. Rather, he called him a Muwahhid based upon
the principle, which is his utterance of the Shahadatayn, or that he
follows his parents or the land (he belongs too), or his acting upon the
clear signs of Islām which is exclusive to the Muslimīn. He ruled upon
him with Islam, based upon his affiliation to Islām which he was
previously on, and he dissociates from whoever does Shirk, and he did
not call him a Mushrik is because of his poor understanding regarding
the preventions of Takfeer, and the preventions of Takfeer have unclear
details attached to it. A person does not become a disbeliever if he
mixes it up, except after it is explained to him. Did anyone who makes Takfeer upon the drunk if he performs Shirk, make Takfeer upon whoever
does not make Takfeer upon the drunk person, because he believes that the
state of being drunk is a preventive factor of Takfeer?
Second misconception: “Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen did not disbelieve in the Taghut.” Now is the description of Kuffr bit-Taghut upon one level? (Believing in the falsehood of its worship, abandoning it, having hatred to it, performing Takfeer on its people, and having enmity).
Whoever says “Yes”, this necessitates making Takfeer upon whoever does not have enmity to the Mushrikeen, even if he was weak or oppressed, and no one has ever stated this. Whoever says showing enmity has Tafseel (details), we would say, yes, and likewise Takfeer has a Tafseel, among those who reject the Qur’anic texts, and among those who confused themselves in understanding certain aspects of the preventions of Takfeer and it has not been made clear to him. This is just as Shaykh Sulaymān ibn ‘Abdullāh said regarding the one who refrained from performing Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen, “If he had doubts regarding their Kuffr, or is ignorant about their Kuffr, if you show him the proofs from the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saws) regarding their Kuffr, then if he has doubts after that or is hesitant, he is a Kaafir according to the consensus of the Scholars, regarding the one that doubts the Kuffr of a Kaafir, then he is a Kaafir.” [Kitab Awthaq ‘Urah al-Imaan]
There is no proof from the Qur’an and Authentic Sunnah regarding the one that makes Takfeer upon him in all cases. So how did you make Tafsīl regarding enmity, but not make Tafseel regarding Takfeer? And among the characteristics of the people of bid’ah is differentiating between two similar matters.
Third misconception: “Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen has denied something which is known from the Deen by necessity.” If the preventions of Takfeer were from the matters to be known by necessity in the Deen, there would not have been a difference of opinion in understanding it among many of its types such as, “Intoxication, the child, and ignorance.” Infact, many of those who are affiliated amongst the people of knowledge have fell into mistakes, such as the Muhadditheen, Hufaadh, Fuqaha, Usuliyeen and other than them. The matters known by necessity are known by the Scholars and the laymen, and these preventions of Takfeer are not known by many of the Scholars, let alone the Laymen.
So the preventions of Takfeer are either:
1. Agreed upon that it is from the preventions of Takfeer, by consensus of the laymen, like “Compulsion.”
2. Agreed upon that it is not from the preventions of Takfeer, by consensus of the Scholars, like “Ignorance in the Foundation of the Deen.”
3. Differed upon that it is from the preventions of Takfeer, like, “The child and intoxication.”
So there is a difference of opinion in understanding some of the preventions of Takfeer, so how can we consider the issue is clear, or among the most clearest of clarity? Shaykhukl Islam ibn Taymiyyah said, “And Takfeer is from the severe warnings, even if the statement was in denial of what the Prophet (saws) said, however the man could be new to Islām or he might have lived in a desert far away, and the likes of him are not performed Takfeer upon from his denial of what he denied, until the Hujjah is applied upon him – And the man might not have heard those texts, or he might have heard it, but it is not authentic according to him, or that he opposed it with another opposing text, which necessitates interpreting it, even if he was mistaken.”
So the preventions of Takfeer are many among its unclear Tafseelat (details). Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said in his speech while he was condemning ahlul kalaam (those who study theology) in Majmū’ Fatāwā 4/54, “And if this was from among the unclear statements, then it could be said he is mistaken and misguided from it, the Hujjah which declares its individual a Kaafir has not been applied. However if that occurs among several groups from them in the Clear Matters which is known by the Scholars and laymen among the Muslimeen that it is from the Deen of the Muslimeen, infact the Jews and Christians know that Muhammad (saws) was sent with it, whoever opposes it disbelieves.”
So we must fear Allah regarding the issue of Takfeer , and not perform Takfeer except if one falls into a Nullifier which we have evidences from Allah, and ensuring that our actions are not in response based upon the laxation of the Murjiah in Takfeer, so that we may be taken over by laxation. Allahul musta’an.
By Shaykh Abū ‘Abdur Rahmān ‘Ubaydah Al-Athbajī
Second misconception: “Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen did not disbelieve in the Taghut.” Now is the description of Kuffr bit-Taghut upon one level? (Believing in the falsehood of its worship, abandoning it, having hatred to it, performing Takfeer on its people, and having enmity).
Whoever says “Yes”, this necessitates making Takfeer upon whoever does not have enmity to the Mushrikeen, even if he was weak or oppressed, and no one has ever stated this. Whoever says showing enmity has Tafseel (details), we would say, yes, and likewise Takfeer has a Tafseel, among those who reject the Qur’anic texts, and among those who confused themselves in understanding certain aspects of the preventions of Takfeer and it has not been made clear to him. This is just as Shaykh Sulaymān ibn ‘Abdullāh said regarding the one who refrained from performing Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen, “If he had doubts regarding their Kuffr, or is ignorant about their Kuffr, if you show him the proofs from the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saws) regarding their Kuffr, then if he has doubts after that or is hesitant, he is a Kaafir according to the consensus of the Scholars, regarding the one that doubts the Kuffr of a Kaafir, then he is a Kaafir.” [Kitab Awthaq ‘Urah al-Imaan]
There is no proof from the Qur’an and Authentic Sunnah regarding the one that makes Takfeer upon him in all cases. So how did you make Tafsīl regarding enmity, but not make Tafseel regarding Takfeer? And among the characteristics of the people of bid’ah is differentiating between two similar matters.
Third misconception: “Whoever does not perform Takfeer upon the Mushrikeen has denied something which is known from the Deen by necessity.” If the preventions of Takfeer were from the matters to be known by necessity in the Deen, there would not have been a difference of opinion in understanding it among many of its types such as, “Intoxication, the child, and ignorance.” Infact, many of those who are affiliated amongst the people of knowledge have fell into mistakes, such as the Muhadditheen, Hufaadh, Fuqaha, Usuliyeen and other than them. The matters known by necessity are known by the Scholars and the laymen, and these preventions of Takfeer are not known by many of the Scholars, let alone the Laymen.
So the preventions of Takfeer are either:
1. Agreed upon that it is from the preventions of Takfeer, by consensus of the laymen, like “Compulsion.”
2. Agreed upon that it is not from the preventions of Takfeer, by consensus of the Scholars, like “Ignorance in the Foundation of the Deen.”
3. Differed upon that it is from the preventions of Takfeer, like, “The child and intoxication.”
So there is a difference of opinion in understanding some of the preventions of Takfeer, so how can we consider the issue is clear, or among the most clearest of clarity? Shaykhukl Islam ibn Taymiyyah said, “And Takfeer is from the severe warnings, even if the statement was in denial of what the Prophet (saws) said, however the man could be new to Islām or he might have lived in a desert far away, and the likes of him are not performed Takfeer upon from his denial of what he denied, until the Hujjah is applied upon him – And the man might not have heard those texts, or he might have heard it, but it is not authentic according to him, or that he opposed it with another opposing text, which necessitates interpreting it, even if he was mistaken.”
So the preventions of Takfeer are many among its unclear Tafseelat (details). Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said in his speech while he was condemning ahlul kalaam (those who study theology) in Majmū’ Fatāwā 4/54, “And if this was from among the unclear statements, then it could be said he is mistaken and misguided from it, the Hujjah which declares its individual a Kaafir has not been applied. However if that occurs among several groups from them in the Clear Matters which is known by the Scholars and laymen among the Muslimeen that it is from the Deen of the Muslimeen, infact the Jews and Christians know that Muhammad (saws) was sent with it, whoever opposes it disbelieves.”
So we must fear Allah regarding the issue of Takfeer , and not perform Takfeer except if one falls into a Nullifier which we have evidences from Allah, and ensuring that our actions are not in response based upon the laxation of the Murjiah in Takfeer, so that we may be taken over by laxation. Allahul musta’an.
By Shaykh Abū ‘Abdur Rahmān ‘Ubaydah Al-Athbajī
INSHA'ALLAH
CLICK BELOW TO READ SIMILAR ARTICLES:
- Principles of Takfeer
- Confusions about Takfeer !?!
- The Framework of Apostasy - Takfeer!!!
- Why do we make Takfeer (calling someone Kaffir) on "them"...?
- Explanation of: 'and we do not do Takfeer of anyone due to a sin, as long as he does not do Istihlaal.'
- Consequences Of NOT Making TAKFEER !!!
- Can we make Takfeer on Scholars?
- Ignoring matters of Takfeer...?
- Takfeer - Doubt the Kuffr of the Kaafir..?
- Fought and declared a Kaafir... REASONS?
- Those who abstain from Takfeer and warn from that...
No comments:
Post a Comment