Takfeer in the Unclear Matters...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/9b/c4/459bc4868eec8202d9b0ce9445e98c96.jpg

Very Important point about Takfīr in the Unclear Matters, Shaykh 'Alī al-Khudayr says both views in this issue are Correct:

❝Al-Majd (رحمه الله) said: "And what's correct is that every Bid'ah in which we made Takfīr upon the caller to it, then we make Tafsīq [i.e. Call a Fāsiq] the blind follower regarding it, such as whoever says that the Qur'ān is created, or that Allāh's knowledge is created, or that His Names are created, or that He won't be seen in the Hereafter, or He insults the Sahābah out of devoutness, or that Ēmān is solely belief in the heart and what's similar to that, so whoever knows about any of these Innovations, and calls to it and debates on behalf of it, then he is judged with Kufr, [Imām] Ahmad has mentioned this in several places" [End Quote].

And Shaykh Abā Butayn (رحمه الله) has mentioned the difference of opinion between these two views in "al-Durar" and "al-Intisār", and what's correct is joining between the two depending upon the different times, and Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) in the beginning of his Treatise "al-Tis'īniyyah", when he discussed with some Scholars from the people of desires and innovation during his time, and their arrogance became displayable to him, he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said to them while raising his voice, he said: "O Zanādiqah (heretics), and O Kuffār (disbelievers), and O Murtaddīn (apostates)", refer to Kashf al-Shubhatayn page 32.

And in the refutation against al-Bakrī, he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said to some of their Scholars and Judges: "According to me, you are ignorant and do not disbelieve" [End Quote] or something similar to that.

And Arrogance is two types:

1. Explicitly showing Arrogance.

2. A counterpart to the one showing Arrogance: And it is whoever's misconception isn't acceptable, and it has no share/place to be taken into consideration.❞

Sharh (explanation) of Shaykh al-'Allāmah 'Alī al-Khudayr (حفظه الله):

❝Al-Majd said❞: He is the Grandfather of Ibn Taymiyyah.

❝And what's correct is that every Bid'ah in which we made Takfīr upon the caller to it, then we make Tafsīq [i.e. Call a Fāsiq] the blind follower❞: This is according to the Hanābilah.

❝Such as whoever says that the Qur'ān is created❞: This is an example, whoever says that the Qur'ān is created, then the caller to it becomes a Kāfir, and the blind follower becomes a Fāsiq, this is upon the Madhab of the Hanābilah, as it was stated by al-Majd (رحمه الله).

❝Or that Allāh's knowledge is created❞: This is a second example, whoever says Allāh's knowledge is created, the one who calls to it becomes a Kāfir, and the blind follower becomes a Fāsiq.

❝Or that His Names are created, or that He won't be seen in the Hereafter❞: In this, the caller to it becomes a Kāfir, and the blind follower becomes a Fāsiq, this is the words of al-Majd (رحمه الله) who mentions it from the Hanābilah, and this is their Madhab in the Unclear Matters, however we will shortly come to [the issue] of punishments and scolding Inshā'Allāh.

❝Or He insults the Sahābah out of devoutness❞: Such as the Khawārij who insult them out of [mistaken] devoutness, unlike whoever insults the Sahābah out of rage/hatred, among those who insult the Sahābah out of hatred, such as the Secularists, Modernists, these people insult the Sahābah out of hatred and enmity, the Rāfidah insult them out of enmity, this is different (i.e. Clear Major Kufr, not Unclear Matter).

❝Or that Ēmān is solely belief in the heart and what's similar to that❞: The Jahmiyyâh, Māturūdiyyâh and Ashā'irah say that Ēmān is solely belief in the heart, and they do not stipulate speech (within Ēmān), as for Murji'at al-Fuqahā', they say it's the actions of the heart and speech of the tongue, but as for Ahlâl Sunnâh wal-Jamā'ah, then it is speech, action and belief in the heart, the actions of the heart and the limbs.

❝So whoever knows about any of these Innovations, and calls to it and debates on behalf of it, then he is judged with Kufr❞: This is the words of the Hanābilah, they say that whoever knows of these matters and calls towards it, and debates on behalf of it, is a Kāfir despite the fact that it's from the Unclear Matters.

❝Ahmad has mentioned this in several places❞: A person might say, how could a doubt arise right now, he would say the Madhab of the Hanābilah in the Unclear Matters is unlike how you have determined (i.e. What the Shaykh mentioned) in the Unclear Matters, (i.e.), that it's necessary to understand the Hujjah, and right here there's no stipulation of understanding the Hujjâh? He said, if he knows about it and calls towards it, this person is judged with Kufr, he's judged with Kufr, it was mentioned by Ahmad in several places.

❝And Shaykh Abā Butayn (رحمه الله) has mentioned the difference of opinion between these two views in "al-Durar" and "al-Intisār"❞: As for Ibn Taymiyyah, he views that he doesn't become a Kāfir in it, even if he was a caller to it and debated on behalf of it, Ibn Taymiyyah disagreed with his Grandfather (al-Majd) in this issue.

Ibn Taymiyyâh (رحمه الله) says No [he doesn't disbelieve] in the Unclear Matters, even if he calls towards it and debates, he isn't ruled with Kufr until he acts arrogantly [to the text], and these [other Scholars - i.e. Hanābilah] didn't stipulate 'Understanding the Hujjah'.

As for what is correct, the Tarjīh [saying what's most correct] will come to you, and what's correct according to us, is that both of them (i.e. Both views) are correct, however it is applied upon two separate times, as for a time where the Sunnâh is widespread and powerful, and it is Apparent and Strong, and that whoever says [anything] from these matters and calls towards it and debates (on behalf of it) is ruled with Kufr.

But if the time was a time where ignorance is widespread, a time period of ignorance such as the era of Ibn Taymiyyah, the era of A'immat al-Da'wah, then for these people, No, it's different.

❝And what's correct is joining between the two depending upon the different times❞: Therefore, what's correct, we stated what's correct (according to us), we made a mistake in this word, and we must not say "us", I apologise, what I intended to say was "What's correct according to me in this issue", and we are nothing for us to say "according to us", and so that you all know, a person should not say "according to us" as a means of exaltation, this is a caution for you and me.

Therefore, I say what's correct according to me in this issue is that it differs depending upon the two times, as for the time of Imām Ahmad, because the Sunnah became predominant after the Sunnah was spread and became powerful, and the time of Imām Mālik, the time of Ibn 'Omar (etc), there's a difference, if the time was a time where the Sunnâh is powerful and exalted and apparent and widespread, then in this case, No [excuse], as it was mentioned by al-Majd (رحمه الله), and as it was said by [Imām] Ahmad (رحمه الله).

And if the time was a time where ignorance has the upper-hand, [like] the time of Ibn Taymiyyah and A'immat al-Da'wah, so this must require a person to act arrogantly [in order for him to disbelieve], I hope that you have understood this issue.

❝And what's correct❞: This is my preference between the two matters.

❝And Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) in the beginning of his Treatise "al-Tis'īniyyah", when he discussed with some Scholars from the people of desires and innovation during his time, and their arrogance became displayable to him, he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said to them while raising his voice, he said: "O Zanādiqah (heretics), and O Kuffār (disbelievers), and O Murtaddīn (apostates)"❞:

This is Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله), we brought this text so that no one can say that Ibn Taymiyyah didn't make Takfīr upon the people of desires and innovation, No [that's not the case whatsoever], he made Takfīr upon some of them, for when got imprisoned in Egypt and discussing with some of them, and the discussion prolonged, and he received (questions) and gave (responses), he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said to them "Yā Kuffār (O disbelievers), Yā Zanādiqah (O heretics), Yā Murtaddīn (O apostates)", this is referring to specific individuals, he's addressing specific individuals (Mu'ayyîneen), "Yā" is calling to them.

And these [people he made Takfīr upon] were a group from the Ashā'irah who were Judges, they imprisoned him and debated him, and he debated them and wrote to him, and they wrote to him, so when their arrogance became displayable, and that they understood the Hujjâh, however they showed arrogance, he performed Takfīr upon them.

So whoever displays arrogance (to the text), enough we're finished, if a person displays arrogance in the Unclear Matters, he becomes a Kāfir.

And here we said in the Unclear Matters, he doesn't become a Kāfir until he understands the Hujjah and the Misconception is removed, then he displays arrogance, so if arrogance is shown, arrogance is clear from him, because this issue is Ijtihādiyyah, so he doesn't become a Kāfir, because the people may differ, so if his arrogance is displayed to you, his arrogance might not be displayed for someone else, the issue is Ijtihādiyyah.

If you see a man from the people of innovation, and it's clear to you that he is dipped with hypocrisy and that he's a Munāfiq, and that he's a person of whims who argues arrogantly, not following the Haqq, if you have evidence for that, so whenever his arrogance is displayed to you, he becomes a Kāfir, you have the right to make Takfīr upon him, because right now, that's enough, he has acted arrogantly, the prevention removed the misconception, and the issue is not that he has a misconception with him, rather he displayed arrogance.

If we brought this text, I say it once more, and it is available in "al-Tis'īniyyah", al-Fātawah al-Kubrah by Ibn Taymiyyah, he addressed people and made Takfīr upon them individually, he gave them 3 titles, "Zanādiqah, Kuffār, Murtaddīn"

How many types remain with us? One remains, he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said this to people who were from the Ashā'irah.

So that it isn't said that Ibn Taymiyyah(رحمه الله) didn't perform Takfīr upon the Ashā'irah, rather he made Takfīr upon the specific individuals from them once their arrogance was shown.

❝And in the refutation against al-Bakrī, he (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said to some of their Scholars and Judges: "According to me, you are ignorant and do not disbelieve" [End Quote] or something similar to that❞:

Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) in the refutation against the Bakriyyīn, he said to their Scholars and Judges, according to me, you do not disbelieve because you are ignorant, these [people] didn't display arrogance, but those before them did display arrogance, therefore Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) differentiates in the issue, and he doesn't perform Takfīr [upon anyone] in the Unclear Matters, except if he displays arrogance, and displaying arrogance is a proof that he doesn't have a misconception, rather he has arrogance.

As for a person who you feel that he wants goodness, and strives for goodness, and strives to learn what Allāh and His Messenger want, this [person] isn't called Arrogant, but as for a person who you can feel from him and know about his arrogance, if it's ambiguous to you, you should be careful (stay safe), so (if) you say "I don't know if he's Arrogant or not", in this situation, you should remain on the safe side in withholding from performing Takfīr.

❝A counterpart to the one showing Arrogance: And it is whoever's misconception isn't acceptable, and it has no share/place to be taken into consideration.❞: This [person] is considered arrogant in the Unclear Matters.

Explicitly Showing Arrogance.

And a counterpart to the one showing Arrogance is the one who throws at you a misconception, however it has no share/place to be taken into consideration.

[Sharh Kitāb al-Haqā'iq Fī-Tawhīd by Shaykh al-'Allāmah 'Alī al-Khudayr (حفظه الله)]

INSHA'ALLAH TO FURTHER READ SIMILAR ARTICLES, CLICK: