Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-5

 

The next part of the book that we’re going to talk about is that the author he says, and again we’re going over “Kashf ash-Shubuhat” by Muhammad ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhab, he says:

“So, if you know this, or if you know that the person can disbelieve can leave Islam, with a word that comes off of his tongue, and he might say it, and he’s ignorant about it, but he would not be given the excuse of ignorance, or he would not be excused due to his ignorance on this topic, or he may say something or he believes it’s actually bringing him closer to Allah, just as the Mushrikin, or the polytheists, or the people of Shirk do, then you should know, or that you’ll have a good understanding of what Allah mentioned about the people of Musa, despite their righteousness, and despite their knowledge, they came to him and they said [in the Qur’an], “We bought the Children of Israel across the sea and they came upon a people devoted to some of their idols, they said “O Musa, make for us an Ilah (God), as they have Aliha (Gods).” He said, “Verily, you are a people who are ignorant.” [7:138]

So, then the author continues, he says:
“– then after all of this your eagerness for and your great fear of what will deliver you from all of this and what is similar to it will greatly increase.”

If you understand this, meaning if you understand the fact that someone can disbelieve or leave Islam just by a statement they say on their tongue without knowing the greatness or severity of what they’re saying, then at that point your fear and your zeal for Islam or for knowledge would increase and your zeal to have knowledge about that, which would keep you safe from this matter and the likes of it would increase and would be great.

So, this section here, there’s a number of points that we can talk about, the first one, and it’s the one I’ll probably focus on a bit more is when the author said that the person can disbelieve by a statement that he says. So, there’s two points here that I’ll talk about in this topic. The first is, the fact that someone can disbelieve with a statement and the second one is that he can disbelieve with a statement, while not knowing exactly what it means or not actually being completely aware of the severity of what he’s saying. So, there’s two points to this section.

So, the first point is that someone can disbelieve with a statement that they say. So, this is matter of consensus amongst Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah. Imam as-Shafi’i mentioned that it was a consensus that Iman is, statements, and actions and it’s in the heart or beliefs, and that none of them would benefit a person without the other. So, meaning that if someone has belief in their heart, yet it’s not on their tongue, meaning they haven’t professed to “La ilaha ila Allah”, even if they believe in their heart, this wouldn’t benefit them. Likewise, if someone says “La ilaha ila Allah” in their tongue, but they don’t act upon it, or they don’t believe it in their heart, then this would also not benefit them. Also, like we talked about many times before and I gave many examples, if someone does many good deeds, many acts of worship, if they don’t believe it in their heart, in Islam and they don’t profess to “La ilaha ila Allah”, so that they entered Islam to begin with, then this would also not benefit them.

So, based upon this, what Imam ash-Shafi’i narrated the consensus on this topic, and Imam al-Bukhari mentioned that he met 1000 scholars in the different towns that he went to, and all of them agreed that Iman is statements and actions. Then likewise, there’s a consensus among Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah, that disbelief or kufr is also statements and actions, meaning that it can be on your tongue, it can be in your heart and it can be on your body. Meaning, someone may leave Islam due to something that they believe, someone may leave Islam due to something that they say, and someone may leave Islam due to something they do, so it’s possible to actually leave Islam in all these ways as well. So, just like it’s required for a person to be a Muslim that they have belief in their heart, that they say statements on their tongue meaning the Shahadah, and that they perform actions of Islam, likewise the opposite, so it’s possible that someone could leave Islam in the same way. So, this is what the author is mentioning, when he says it’s possible for someone to disbelieve or to leave Islam with a statement that they say on their tongue, and the evidence for this from the Qur’an is many.

So, first of all, any evidence in the Qur’an that would indicate that statements are required for a person to be a Muslim, they would prove the opposite as well; that someone can disbelieve because it’s not possible for us to say a statement can be something good, but it can’t be something bad, and likewise it’s not possible for us to say that a statement can be required for a person to be Muslim, but it actually couldn’t take him out of Islam. So, if he said the complete opposite of what makes you a Muslim, if he said the complete opposite then it wouldn’t take you out of Islam, and this is a matter of consensus as well amongst Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah, and the classical books of ‘Aqidah discuss this at length, “Ash-Shari’ah” by Al-Ajurri and “Sharh Usul al-I’tiqad Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah”, by Al-Lalaka’I, and many other books as well.

And Allah mentioned examples of this in the Qur’an, particularly in Surah Tawbah, when Allah said,

“You have disbelieved after your Iman.” [9:66]

When Allah said,

“Is it that you mock Allah and His Ayat and His Messenger? Don’t give any excuses, you have disbelieved after your Iman.” [9:65-66]

So, here clearly Allah is mentioning that the thing, what the people did was that they mocked. Mocking is clearly something on the tongue, and despite then, when Allah mentioned this about them, at the end He said, “Don’t give any excuses, you have disbelieved after your Iman.” So, Allah mentioned that the reason that they disbelieved was this statement and He described the results of this statements as being the reason that these people had left Islam and if we look at the Tafsir of this verse, and there’s many narrations on it, some are weak, some are Hasan. In general, what we know about the reason these verses were revealed is that some of the Companions at the time were travelling and as a means to break to monotony of the travel, and keep themselves busy, they began to joke and tell stories. So, they made a statement about the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (saws) and the Qur’an specifically of them, so meaning the scholars and those who were the reciters and the memorisers of the Qur’an, and they said that “we don’t see anyone to be more cowardice or have more cowardice when it comes to fighting, nor to have larger bellies.” Meaning they were saying they were lazy or they would eat, and all they cared out was these things. So, Allah revealed this verse.

So, making fun of the Sahabah in the time of the Prophet (saws), particularly making fun of the Qur’an, they were making fun and they were insulting the ones who were carrying the knowledge on behalf of the Prophet (saws) or carrying the knowledge from the Prophet (saws). So, we see from this that people nowadays may say something much greater than this, but think that it has no effect. But if we look to this verse, Allah says “Don’t even give any excuses, you’ve disbelieved after your Iman.” So, there was no excuse for this even, and if we look to what the excuses that they did give the Prophet (saws), they said, we were only saying it out of joking, so they didn’t actually believe it, so this is what Allah revealed.

So, the benefit we can take from this, is that the Prophet (saws) didn’t tell them, “no, you actually believed this”, he accepted what they said, he accepted that they didn’t actually believe this, they didn’t believe in this mocking and these insults they were saying to the Prophet (saws), but they did leave Islam obviously because Allah clearly judged and He said, “You’ve disbelieved after your Iman.” So, this proves that the statement was the cause of their disbelief, they didn’t actually believe it in their heart, and they were saying it as a joke, but despite this it wasn’t an excuse that didn’t benefit them.

So, what would we say about someone who says a statement that insults Allah or the Messenger (saws) or Islam as a whole, or the Qur’an and they actually believe it. If just saying the statement would take you out of Islam, what about someone who actually believes it, and what about someone who makes du’a to other than Allah, and they actually have the belief behind this statement as well. So, we know that any statement that contradicts or that goes against the basis of Islam, that goes against the very meaning of “La ilaha ila Allah”, just to not worship anyone except Allah, any statement that would contradict this meaning making du’a to other than Allah, anything like this, then this would be something that would take the person out of Islam.

So, just a point to mention here then, is kind of the widespread idea about this topic nowadays is that, someone will say something, and maybe a Muslim will rebuke them to they’ll censor them, or they’ll make inkaar (disbelief out of denial) on them for what they’ve said. Or, the person will do something and the Muslim will come and say this as well, and you’ll hear people, instead of rushing to the side of the Muslim, or  rushing to the side of the brother who has ghayrah for his Din, they’ll rush to the other side and say, “You don’t know what was in his heart”, and how often do we hear this all the time; “you don’t know what was in his heart”, “Brother, Iman is in the heart, we don’t know what he’s thinking, maybe he didn’t know…”

So, first of all, there’s the obvious problem here that why is this always the excuse and rushing to defend is always going to the side of the people who are doing something wrong. So, that’s a problem in and of itself that needs its own discussion, but what we need to understand is that the whole statement of “Brother, Iman is in the heart”, yes it’s in the heart, but it’s also on the tongue, and it’s also on the body. Just like, disbelief can take place in the heart, and disbelief can take place on the tongue, and disbelief can take place on the body.

So, this idea and this misconception is kind of the widespread accepted idea and if you go to the Muslim countries, this is kind of the widespread idea spread amongst the general people, and even amongst those people who attribute themselves to knowledge. You often hear this statement as well, that “you don’t know what was in his heart”, and “how do you know what he believed”, and “Maybe he didn’t believe it”, or “Maybe he didn’t make it halal…”, and it always comes back to this idea of the heart being the soul place that Iman can place, and the soul place where disbelief can also take place, and everything else is either completely disregarded, or it’s taken into account but it doesn’t have much weight as whatever takes place in the heart.

The reason for this is, if we look to where does this idea come from, this idea of Iman being only in the heart and not being on the tongue and not being on the body, and the opposite as well, disbelief being in the heart, and not in the body, and not on the tongue, this goes back to the concept of ‘Irja. Or the concept that, it’s the group of the Murji’ah, and there different groups but the point is that they take away actions from being part of Iman, or part of kufr, and they take away statements from being part of Iman and apart of kufr as well.

The funny thing is that this book we’re reading now, the Murji’ah today, this is one of the main books that they talk about all the time and they say, “we’re going to study Kashf ash-Shubuhat, and we’re going to go through it, and we’re going to learn all the benefits from it, and we’re going to figure it out etc.” Throughout the book, the whole book is essentially a refutation of all of their ideology. The whole thing is talking about making du’a to other than Allah, insulting Allah, insulting the Prophet (saws), calling on the Salihin, calling on the different dead people, and going to the graves and all these types of things, and how someone can leave Islam through this. Actually, if we look to the final approximately last page, between 1 and 3 pages of the book depending on which one you have, the whole thing is a refutation of the Murji’ah and the ‘Irja of the people that make these claims, specifically if we look towards the end of the book which we don’t need to get ahead of ourselves, but when the author mentions, when Allah said, about the disbelievers, when they perform there disbelief and refuse to enter into Islam, Allah said,

“That is because they chose the life of the dunya over the Akhirah.” [16:107]

So, if we look at this verse, we see that, the point is that Allah is saying, the reason they didn’t enter Islam wasn’t because they didn’t believe in it, wasn’t because they hated it, wasn’t because they found something better, it was because they chose the life of the dunya over the Akhirah. So, what bigger evidence do we need from the Qur’an, and what clear evidence do we need from the Qur’an, that is idea that disbelief can’t take place except in the heart, or that in order for someone to disbelieve, it’s a condition, that they disbelieve in their heart. This is a complete refutation of this, so this is just kind of a discussion on the first part of what the author mentioned.

The second part, is that he said, that the person could say something while he’s ignorant of the issue, so this comes back to a topic that the scholars refer to as “al-‘Udhr bil-Jahl”, or the excuse of ignorance or the excuse of misconceptions or ta’wil when it comes to performing acts of disbelief or statements of disbelief, so what does this mean?

This means that if you see a person go to a grave, whether they’re a Sufi, or they’re from the Rafidah, or Shi’a or whatever group they are, they go to grave or they go to shrine and they make du’a to either the person in the grave or whatever the case may be. Do we then say this person could possibly have an excuse for what they’re doing? Do we say we have to check, did they actually know that this was wrong?

So, this is what it comes down to, if we look to the words of the Imams of the Najdi da’wah, the vast majority of them don’t give any excuse for these types of things, and likewise Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim, if we look at some of their words, they indicate that they wouldn’t give an excuse to this type of thing. Some of their words would indicate otherwise, but in the end, what it comes down to, and the thing that everyone is agreed upon from Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah is that ignorance isn’t always an excuse. Some never give it, some only give it for certain issues, but the general or the consensus that everyone is agreed upon is this idea that regardless of what the person does, and regardless of what the person says, you can never judge on them that they’ve left Islam, you can never say that what they’re doing is kufr, until you establish the proof against them for this issue. And what does this come back to?

This comes back to, how can someone say “La ilaha ila Allah”, which is what we talked about for the last three weeks, of what the meaning of “La ilaha ila Allah” is, and the ease of understanding it in its most basic form, maybe some won’t understand every point of it, and everything that it entails, but just the basic understanding that if you’re saying “nothing is worthy of worship except Allah”, and then you go and worship something other than Allah, have you actually understood this? Either you haven’t understood it, so is your Islam valid to begin with, or you have understood the meaning and then that’s proof that you did know what you’re doing and you did know what was wrong, because you entered Islam, you professed to “La ilaha ila Allah”, you professed that “nothing deserves to be worshipped except Allah”, then you go and worship something other than Allah, there’s a gap here, which is the gap? Is it that you knew what you meant and just decided to do it anyway and if that’s the case, then you have no excuse, or you didn’t know what it meant and did you really enter Islam to begin with?

Obviously, both of these are clear, you wouldn’t be Muslim in either case. The only time when it would be an excuse is if the person actually doesn’t know that the act they’re performing is an act of worship. So, this is the time when it would come to be something that is an excuse, so, they understand “La ilaha ila Allah”, they say “La ilaha ila Allah”, they don’t even know they’re worshipping other than Allah. This would when it would be an excuse, because if you say to them, can somebody be worshipped other than Allah, they’ll say “no, of course not, I’m a Muslim, I don’t accept this for anyone to do and I would never let anyone call to this”, or anything like this, then if you tell them this is an act of worship and they don’t even know that it is.

So, this is when the excuse of ignorance would come into play that’s agreed upon. So, this idea that regardless of where the person lives, regardless of what knowledge we know they have, that we always give this excuse and we say the person didn’t know, this is absolutely a false concept and it comes down to, that sometimes there would be an excuse, and sometimes it wouldn’t be an excuse.

This comes back to again what we talked about two or three weeks ago, the story or the tafsir of Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas in Sahih al-Bukhari, when he mentioned about the people of Nuh, and he said that, he described when Allah mentions in the Qur’an about Wadd, and Suwa’, and Yaghuth and Ya’uq and Nasr, Ibn ‘Abbas is saying, how did this come about, how did these people begin to be worshipped and where these idols come from, because Ibn ‘Abbas mentions that there were ten generations between Adam and Nuh, all of them were upon Tawhid.

So, obviously we know Allah created Adam and he was upon Tawhid, and he taught his family and his children Tawhid, and there were ten generations upon Tawhid, then Allah had to send Nuh, for what reason? When his people went too far and they went into extremism with regards to the Salihin and the righteous people amongst them. So, these people Wadd and Suwa’, and these people I mentioned, they were Salihin from the people of Nuh or they were righteous people amongst them, when they died, the Shaytan came to them and said, why don’t you make idols that would commemorate them and would remind you about their Salah and their righteousness, so they did this. Then, when Ibn ‘Abbas says, “Then when the knowledge was forgotten, they worshipped them”, and then Allah had to send Nuh to teach these people.

So, we see here that if we were to say they didn’t know, Ibn ‘Abbas himself is saying when the knowledge was gone, they started to do this. So, we would by necessity have to say that every person from the people of Nuh had an excuse, and it wasn’t upon Nuh to even call them disbelievers and even when Nuh was sent to his people, he was sent to a Muslim people, this is what this would necessitate us to say.

Likewise, what we talked about before, we know that the Quraysh, claimed to be upon the religion  of Ibrahim, so they were claiming to be upon the religion of a Prophet that was actually a Prophet and was actually sent amongst them, amongst that area, and they worshipped Allah with some acts of worship, and they had some correct beliefs about Allah, that He was the Creator, and the Sustainer and so on. But they also performed Shirk, so if we were going to say that this idea that any ignorance or any excuse, or any ignorance can be used as an excuse, then it’s possible for someone to come and say, the Quraysh had an excuse and the Prophet (saws) wasn’t sent to a disbelieving people, because they said, we’re following Ibrahim, and we’re worshipping Allah, and we’re believing in Him, and they had some misconceptions, but someone could argue that it was based upon ignorance.

So, you see here the danger of this claim that disbelief is only in the heart. Obviously, it’s not and the evidences for this are mutawatir. You know there’s no dispute about this amongst Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah and likewise, the idea of giving an absolute or unrestricted idea or concept that ignorance is always an excuse regardless of what the person does.

The last point that I want to mention comes back to what the people say about when it comes to statement that “Iman is in the heart”, or “you don’t know what in his heart” and that type of thing. Again like we said, yes Iman is in the heart, there’s no dispute about that, the only people who dispute this is the Qaramiyyah, who are attributed to the Murji’ah, and they say in the dunya, we knew that he didn’t believe in his heart, if he said “La ilaha ila Allah”, with his tongue, we would still treat him as a Muslim, and again even if they say, in the hereafter, he would be a disbeliever. So, there’s no dispute amongst anyone that belief in the heart is a condition for a person to be a Muslim.

The only people who dispute is the Murji’ah, and some of them say that, “saying La ilaha ila Allah is a condition to be a Muslim.” Meaning, if someone believed in their heart, but didn’t say La ilaha ila Allah, they wouldn’t have entered Islam. Others go even further and they say, all you have to have is in your heart, but saying La ilaha ila Allah is evidence that you’ve entered Islam. So, you could actually be a Muslim, and never say La ilaha ila Allah on your tongue, but you just couldn’t be treated as one in the dunya, because we have no way of knowing that you’re Muslim if someone doesn’t say La ilaha ila Allah.

So, you see the ridiculousness of these claims, things that any child would be able to look at this and say that someone doesn’t say “La ilaha ila Allah”, in order to be a Muslim you need to say “La ilaha ila Allah”, but this person is still a Muslim. It’s a ridiculous claim, and no one who has some intellect or some intelligence would accept this kind of statement, and likewise when it comes to actions. Someone to say that you can only disbelieve in your heart, like we said, this is a consensus against this idea amongst Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah.

So, what do we say when someone says, well we don’t know what’s in someone’s heart, of course we don’t know what’s in his heart, who knows what’s in the hearts? Nobody, only Allah knows what’s in the hearts. So, does this mean that everything that Islam came with, with regards to judging on someone that they’ve left Islam, or someone entering into Islam and all of these concepts are thrown out the window because human beings don’t know what’s in the heart. Of course not, because then we’re accusing the Shari’ah of having defects and we’re accusing the Shari’ah of being incomplete or imperfect because we’re saying, Allah mentioned all these Ahkam in the Qur’an, and the Prophet (saws) mentioned all these Ahkam in the Sunnah, but they’re pointless, because we need to know what’s in the hearts. Or do we say, Allah in the Qur’an and the Prophet (saws) in the Sunnah, gave us ways in dealing with people that don’t require knowing what’s in the heart, so we’re accepting all of these Ahkam, and all of these things that came in the Shari’ah, and we’re accepting the other ones as well, and we’re reconciling between them.

So, of course we don’t know what’s in the hearts, but what do we get in place of knowing what’s in the heart? The Prophet (saws) said, “Indeed, there’s a piece of flesh in the body, that if it is righteous or it’s good, then the whole body would be good, and if it’s bad, then the whole body would be bad, indeed that is the heart.” [Narrated in al-Bukhari]

So, here the Prophet (saws) is telling us, there’s part of your body, that if it’s good, everything would be good, and if it’s bad, everything would be bad. So, the Prophet (saws) is giving us the means of not knowing what is in the heart, but having evidence of what’s in the heart based upon what? Based upon the outside. So, if someone swears on Allah, do we know it’s in his heart? No, do we need to know? Of course not, because first of all, the Prophet (saws) is telling us, if the outside is bad, it’s most likely, the inside is bad, the inside is bad. If the outside is good, the inside is good. What are the exceptions to this?

We talked about last week, the hypocrites, the outside is “La ilaha ila Allah”, and praying and fasting and performing Jihad, and making Hajj, and so on, there insides are completely rotten. They disbelieve in their heart, and they’re in the lowest part of the Fire. This is one exception, the other exception is when Allah said about the people who are forced into doing something bad, that they’re compelled or that they’re coerced into doing something that they didn’t want to do, which is the issue of Ikrah or the issue of coercion. So, if someone is coerced at gunpoint or at knife-point or their children are threatened, or whatever else the issue is, and they do something wrong, then we say this is an exception to the rule, we don’t say that he’s inside was bad because his outside was bad. What’s the reason? Is it just because we feel like saying that, no it’s because, he’s saying “Yes I swore at Allah, the reason was that this person threatened my children.”

There’s the excuse, there’s the thing that makes the exception to this general rule. But this other idea that regardless of what happens, we always say that, if the person swears at Allah, and throws the Qur’an in the garbage and never prayed in his life, and kills Muslimin and so on, we come in the end and say we don’t know what’s in his heart. First of all, at this point, yes we do because the Prophet (saws) told us, that this amount of evidence, would prove that there’s something wrong inside. Do we know if he believed that it was good or not? No, we don’t need to, we know that the inside is rotten or there’s something wrong with it. And likewise, even if we don’t know that, we don’t need to know that, we judge on the outside.

Just lastly, I’ll mention the misconception on this topic, in which one of the Companions came to the Prophet (saws) and he mentioned that he was in battle, and he went to kill the Mushrikin, so when he raised his sword, the Mushrik said “La ilaha ila Allah”, so the Sahabi killed him. So, he came to the Prophet (saws)  and told him what happened, and the Prophet (saws) said, “Did you kill him when he said La ilaha ila Allah?”, so the Sahabi replied and said, he only said this out of fear of being killed, so the Prophet (saws), did you break open his chest to know whether it’s settled or not, meaning did you break open his chest to know whether his heart actually believed in “La ilaha ila Allah”, or not. So, this hadith is widespread, or used in a widespread manner for people to say you don’t know what it’s in the heart so you can’t judge.

If we look at this hadith in a correct way, what did the Prophet (saws) rebuke him for? Did he rebuke, or make inkaar, or get angry at the Sahabi because he didn’t judge what was on the inside? Or did he do the opposite? The Sahabi, what did he do? He made a claim for what was in his heart, he said he only did it for this reason, the Prophet (saws) said, did you open it up to know what it said, so you had something on the outside, that was indicating one thing, and you made your own excuse as to what was on the inside, and you went on that or you made your own claim about what was on the inside, and you went on that. That was the thing the Prophet (saws)  was clearly making inkaar on or clearly was rebuking him for.

So, why does it then come to the opposite somehow, people would use this, so if the outside is bad, then the inside we can’t judge on, and they use this hadith, and the opposite as well, they say that if the outside is good, then they’ll use this hadith to say that you don’t know what it’s in the heart either. It doesn’t work that way, it’s either this way or that way, it’s either that you judge on the outside or you judge on the inside, it isn’t that we always judge whatever’s the opposite of the bad, because it’s going to give people more excuses to do, whatever they want and to do whatever they please, and to always use this excuse that “you don’t know what’s in my heart”.

So, this understanding, somehow nowadays, the groups of ‘Irja, and the groups of the Murji’ah use this hadith as a basis for their whole ideology. Yet, Ahlus Sunnah, if you look to their books, particularly that relates to Iman, or what they call “al-Asma’i al-Ahkam”, or the issues of labels or rulings, or if you look to the books of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim and the Imams of the Najdi da’wah and so on, they actually use this hadith in the complete opposite manner, they use it in the correct manner. That the Prophet (saws) was rebuking or criticising the Sahabi for not judging what was apparent to him, so this is what we should take from it, we shouldn’t always think that we only go by what’s in the heart.

So insha’Allah we’ll stop there, we didn’t get too far in the book but I wanted to mention this concept because it is a very important concept and the misunderstandings with regards to it are widespread all over the world and people who use these misconceptions, have the outward appearance of being very pious, and being very “Mul’tazim”, very following of Islam and that. So, it’s easier for people to fall into this, so I wanted to mention this and kind of refute or discuss some of the misconceptions or some of the ways this is a completely false idea, but really this whole topic would come in a topic of “Mu’samal Iman” or the reality of Iman, which if Allah wills we can have a series on that. But we’ll stop there and next week we’ll continue with this same section, but we’ll get furthermore into what the author has said. Wallahul A’lam.

----------------------

IMPORTANT NOTE:

Shaykh Haytham Sayfaddīn fell into an error and Irjā’ when he said the one who is ignorant of something being an act of worship can be excused by ignorance.

Even though his position is better than the Murji’ah who stipulate “understanding the hujjah” in all matters of major Kufr, irregardless of the place and time (unlike Shaykh Haytham and Shaykh ‘Alwān who say Hujjah is established if he’s able to seek knowledge, such as one living among Muslims).

However, it’s important to clarify that this is the same position as Shaykh Sulaymān al-‘Alwān, and he fell into Irjā’ and falsehood on this issue.

There’s absolutely no excuse of ignorance in worshipping other than Allāh, and those that exaggerate in separating between general and specific are at times excusing kuffār the Jahmiyyah and Murji’ah of the past wouldn’t even excuse, wallāhul-musta’ān.

Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid #5 [Transcribed] - By Shaykh Haytham Sayfaddeen

TO BE CONTINUED INSHA'ALLAH...

TO READ MORE, CLICK:

• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-1
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-2
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-3
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-4
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-6
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-7
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-8 
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-9
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-10
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-11
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-12
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-13
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-14
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-15
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-16
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-17
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-18
• Kashf ash-Shubuhat fit-Tawhid, PART-19 (LAST)