DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi

**RogHammon** · 06-13-2011, 06:37 AM

A doubt is hardly a claim. It is a doubt. If I say 'I doubt that X is Y' am I stating that 'X is not Y' or that 'I have doubts with regards to whether X is Y or not?' The answer is clear. A claim would be 'Ibn Taymiyyah would not approve of any of the current tariqahs in existence.'

Okay fine, present your reasons for doubts from the work of Ibn Taymiyyah.

Ibn Taymiyyah

was in favor solely of matters legislated in the Sunnah; this is clear from his own writings, as well as the writings of Hanbalis before and after him. I don't really see why I have to cite this, it's pretty common knowledge. Now, you've just proved my point you are making claims, you have bought zilch forward from the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah, so without further ado, please post, iv even posted you a link to his Majmu', so get cracking. I dont care what you deem as common knowledge.

Yes, but what kind of dhikr gatherings are being spoken about and what sort of dhikr is being undertaken? This is not referred to in the question. Is it unision dhikr in which everyone recites dhikrs at once? Is it after the prayer? What kind of dhikr gathering is it? If this is not spoken, then it can simply be used as a proof for his opinion regarding every sort of dhikr gathering, when 'dhikr gathering' can include everything from people getting together to seek ilm to people clapping and dancing according to some (not that I'm including you in this definition). Again a fine example of you not paying attention to what i bought forward.

Firstly if you read the question carefully then you would know what type of dhikr majlis it is referring to. For your benefit i will relay it:

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d..._no=22&ID=1727

Question:

وسئل عن رجل ينكر على أهل الذكر يقول لهم : هذا الذكر بدعة وجهركم في الذكر بدعة وهم يفتتحون بالقرآن ويختتمون ثم يدعون للمسلمين الأحياء والأموات ويجمعون التسبيح والتحميد والتهليل والتكبير والحوقلة ويصلون على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والمنكر يعمل السماع مرات بالتصفيق ويبطل الذكر في وقت عمل السماع "

Answer:

فأجاب : الاجتماع لذكر الله واستماع كتابه والدعاء عمل صالح وهو من أفضل القربات والعبادات في الأوقات ففي الصحيح عن [ ص: 521 ] النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : { إن لله ملائكة سياحين في الأرض فإذا مروا بقوم يذكرون الله تنادوا هلموا إلى حاجتكم } وذكر الحديث وفيه { وجدناهم يسبحونك ويحمدونك } لكن ينبغي أن يكون هذا أحيانا في بعض الأوقات والأمكنة فلا يجعل سنة راتبة يحافظ عليها إلا ما سن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المداومة عليه في الجماعات ؟ من الصلوات الخمس في الجماعات ومن الجمعات والأعياد ونحو ذلك

Please pay attention to the question, for that you will realise in what context the answer was given.

Yes, please continue. If you can find specific statements regarding matters that are legislated and approved of by Ibn Taymiyyah, that will be good. Im not here to prove to what is legislatesd and what is not, my point is to prove that Ibn Taymiyyah himself was a Sufi and acted like one.

However, I'm aware that he rejected Bay'ah in the way that it is commonly done now. Is this not the case? What Sufi order does not use Bay'ah, or absolute obedience to a Shaikh? How can he reject Bay'ah where this is the pinnacle of what Sufism and Tasawwuf in which Ibn Taymiyyah constantly praises? if i remember correctly he had the cloak of Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir Jilani. Anyway for your claim that your aware that Ibn Taymiyyah rejected Bay'ah then please put forward from his Majmu' some statements. I want to see you quoting something from his books now please.

And a correction, there is NO such thing as absolute obedience to a Shaykh.

Fantastic! The question is, how do you use the word 'singing,' and the word 'dancing,' because groups such as the Shadhili Tariqah do things which could be characterized on one hand as 'singing' or 'dancing' depending on one's definition of the term, and the question as to whether or not Ibn Taymiyyah would have approved of that is very clearly in one direction. Your seriously wasting my time, In Hanafi Madh-hab there is no Dancing, No Singing, No Music and following the position of my Madh-hab is important than following a Shaykh of tasawwuf that allows Music, singing and dancing. I for one cannot answer what other Schools have to say.

So these practices, such as singing and hadrahs (practiced by the Qadiri Tariqah as can be very simply seen and the Shadhili Tariqah) and seeking help from the dead, or making pilgrimages to tombs- all of this you are against? I'm certain on the latter two and the first one. Yes the position of my Madh-hab Music and Singing is Haraam.

I feel i need to type the following in capitals.

[1] NOT ALL PRACTICE HADRAH.

[2] NOT ALL SING

[3] NOT ALL ASK FROM THE DEAD

[4] NOT ALL MAKE PILGRIMS TO TOMBS.

SO WOULD YOU NOW SAY THERE ARE SOME SUFIS THAT IBN TAYMIYYAH WAS REFERRING TO ALIVE TODAY?

Very well, I see what you're saying. The question is, how exactly is the translation slanted? For example, the term 'awliya' can be translated in a lot of ways, but the author chose to translate it as 'saints.' This sort of thing can be easily used to create a slant one way or the other in any given article. Your missing the point, historically in the Islamic world, Awliyaa refers to the saints so technically speaking there is NO slanty translation. even Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says in his Aqeedah Wasithiyah:

http://www.resaltalislam.org/userfro...MarkIndex=22&0

ومن أصول أهل السنة : التصديق بكرامات الأولياء

Who is he referring to as Marvels of the Awliya? the Wali whom the Prophet

said: "La Nikah Illa Bi-Waliyy", obviously not.

Are you absolutely certain of that? I can't quite imagine that calling such an individual 'Shaykh al-Akbar' would have no effect whatsoever on their approach to matters. And yes, Ibn Taymiyyah initially praised Futuhat, but he later took back his praises after he read Fusus. This is also well known. Your missing the point according to Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah there was problem in Ibn al-'Arabis Aqeedah, NOT in his Tasawwuf!!!!!!!

This is what he said:

وإنما كنت قديما ممن يحسن الظن بابن عربي ويعظمه مارأيت في كتبه من الفوائد مثل كلامه في كثير من الفتوحات و الكنة و المحكم و المربوط و الدرة الفاخرة ومطالع النجوم ونحو ذلك ولم نكن بعد اطلعنا على حقيقة مقصوده ولم نطالع الفصوص ونحو ذلك وكنا مع إخواننا في الله نطلب الحق ونتبعه ونكشف حقيقة الطريق فلما تبين الأمر عرفنا مايجب علينا ." انتهى .

مجموع الرسائل و المسائل " ابن تيمية الحراني [1/179].
دار الكتب العلمية ط: الثانية. بدون تاريخ

As for the science, it is doubtlessly a reality, but the question is, how does one define the science? It is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali and Ibn Qudama and the other great Hanbali shaykhs were all in favor of purifying intentions and the like, this can easily be seen in their voluminous works on the subjects; such as Towards the Hereafter, Diseases of the Heart and their Cures, The way to Patience and Gratitude, and similar. If we define the science that way, then sure, fine. again you are making the claims regarding Ibn Taymiyyah, look yeah, you keep making claims without any substance, either post something to back your words from the works of Ibn Taymiyyah or dont reply.

But what about the practices? Are the practices in line with what Ibn Taymiyyah espoused? Because despite the excellent links you've posted which have clarified that Ibn Taymiyyah was in favor of dhikr gatherings (but how are dhikr gatherings defined) and reciting much dhikr (nobody is not in favor of reciting much dhikr unless they're barking mad), there are numerous practices (such as bay'ah of the sort that Sufi sheikhs practice) which he clearly disapproved of. Top part i answered above, and second part bolded is hawaa without substance.

For that matter, if all of these matters can be proved from the Shari'ah in a direct sense (the application was mentioned, yes, that is definitely proven without a doubt), then why is it that the learned Maulana did not argue in that manner; instead arguing that the practices which are done are equivalent to technological inventions? Look many people have different way of tackling things. And that is the least of your worries, you should worry about backing up your unstabstantiated claims regarding Ibn Taymiyyah, which i am waiting for.

06-13-2011, 06:37 AM	#32
RogHammon Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 598 Senior Member	A doubt is hardly a claim. It is a doubt. If I say 'I doubt that X is Y' am I stating that 'X is not Y' or that 'I have doubts with regards to whether X is Y or not?' The answer is clear. A claim would be 'Ibn Taymiyyah would not approve of any of the current tariqahs in existence.' Okay fine, present your reasons for doubts from the work of Ibn Taymiyyah. Ibn Taymiyyah was in favor solely of matters legislated in the Sunnah; this is clear from his own writings, as well as the writings of Hanbalis before and after him. I don't really see why I have to cite this, it's pretty common knowledge. Now, you've just proved my point you are making claims, you have bought zilch forward from the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah, so without further ado, please post, iv even posted you a link to his Majmu', so get cracking. I dont care what you deem as common knowledge. Yes, but what kind of dhikr gatherings are being spoken about and what sort of dhikr is being undertaken? This is not referred to in the question. Is it unision dhikr in which everyone recites dhikrs at once? Is it after the prayer? What kind of dhikr gathering is it? If this is not spoken, then it can simply be used as a proof for his opinion regarding every sort of dhikr gathering, when 'dhikr gathering' can include everything from people getting together to seek ilm to people clapping and dancing according to some (not that I'm including you in this definition). Again a fine example of you not paying attention to what i bought forward. Firstly if you read the question carefully then you would know what type of dhikr majlis it is referring to. For your benefit i will relay it: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d..._no=22&ID=1727 Question: وسئل عن رجل ينكر على أهل الذكر يقول لهم : هذا الذكر بدعة وجهركم في الذكر بدعة وهم يفتتحون بالقرآن ويختتمون ثم يدعون للمسلمين الأحياء والأموات ويجمعون التسبيح والتحميد والتهليل والتكبير والحوقلة ويصلون على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والمنكر يعمل السماع مرات بالتصفيق ويبطل الذكر في وقت عمل السماع " Answer: فأجاب : الاجتماع لذكر الله واستماع كتابه والدعاء عمل صالح وهو من أفضل القربات والعبادات في الأوقات ففي الصحيح عن [ ص: 521 ] النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : { إن لله ملائكة سياحين في الأرض فإذا مروا بقوم يذكرون الله تنادوا هلموا إلى حاجتكم } وذكر الحديث وفيه { وجدناهم يسبحونك ويحمدونك } لكن ينبغي أن يكون هذا أحيانا في بعض الأوقات والأمكنة فلا يجعل سنة راتبة يحافظ عليها إلا ما سن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المداومة عليه في الجماعات ؟ من الصلوات الخمس في الجماعات ومن الجمعات والأعياد ونحو ذلك Please pay attention to the question, for that you will realise in what context the answer was given. Yes, please continue. If you can find specific statements regarding matters that are legislated and approved of by Ibn Taymiyyah, that will be good. Im not here to prove to what is legislatesd and what is not, my point is to prove that Ibn Taymiyyah himself was a Sufi and acted like one. However, I'm aware that he rejected Bay'ah in the way that it is commonly done now. Is this not the case? What Sufi order does not use Bay'ah, or absolute obedience to a Shaikh? How can he reject Bay'ah where this is the pinnacle of what Sufism and Tasawwuf in which Ibn Taymiyyah constantly praises? if i remember correctly he had the cloak of Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir Jilani. Anyway for your claim that your aware that Ibn Taymiyyah rejected Bay'ah then please put forward from his Majmu' some statements. I want to see you quoting something from his books now please. And a correction, there is NO such thing as absolute obedience to a Shaykh. Fantastic! The question is, how do you use the word 'singing,' and the word 'dancing,' because groups such as the Shadhili Tariqah do things which could be characterized on one hand as 'singing' or 'dancing' depending on one's definition of the term, and the question as to whether or not Ibn Taymiyyah would have approved of that is very clearly in one direction. Your seriously wasting my time, In Hanafi Madh-hab there is no Dancing, No Singing, No Music and following the position of my Madh-hab is important than following a Shaykh of tasawwuf that allows Music, singing and dancing. I for one cannot answer what other Schools have to say. So these practices, such as singing and hadrahs (practiced by the Qadiri Tariqah as can be very simply seen and the Shadhili Tariqah) and seeking help from the dead, or making pilgrimages to tombs- all of this you are against? I'm certain on the latter two and the first one. Yes the position of my Madh-hab Music and Singing is Haraam. I feel i need to type the following in capitals. [1] NOT ALL PRACTICE HADRAH. [2] NOT ALL SING [3] NOT ALL ASK FROM THE DEAD [4] NOT ALL MAKE PILGRIMS TO TOMBS. SO WOULD YOU NOW SAY THERE ARE SOME SUFIS THAT IBN TAYMIYYAH WAS REFERRING TO ALIVE TODAY? Very well, I see what you're saying. The question is, how exactly is the translation slanted? For example, the term 'awliya' can be translated in a lot of ways, but the author chose to translate it as 'saints.' This sort of thing can be easily used to create a slant one way or the other in any given article. Your missing the point, historically in the Islamic world, Awliyaa refers to the saints so technically speaking there is NO slanty translation. even Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says in his Aqeedah Wasithiyah: http://www.resaltalislam.org/userfro...MarkIndex=22&0 ومن أصول أهل السنة : التصديق بكرامات الأولياء Who is he referring to as Marvels of the Awliya? the Wali whom the Prophet said: "La Nikah Illa Bi-Waliyy", obviously not. Are you absolutely certain of that? I can't quite imagine that calling such an individual 'Shaykh al-Akbar' would have no effect whatsoever on their approach to matters. And yes, Ibn Taymiyyah initially praised Futuhat, but he later took back his praises after he read Fusus. This is also well known. Your missing the point according to Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah there was problem in Ibn al-'Arabis Aqeedah, NOT in his Tasawwuf!!!!!!! This is what he said: وإنما كنت قديما ممن يحسن الظن بابن عربي ويعظمه مارأيت في كتبه من الفوائد مثل كلامه في كثير من الفتوحات و الكنة و المحكم و المربوط و الدرة الفاخرة ومطالع النجوم ونحو ذلك ولم نكن بعد اطلعنا على حقيقة مقصوده ولم نطالع الفصوص ونحو ذلك وكنا مع إخواننا في الله نطلب الحق ونتبعه ونكشف حقيقة الطريق فلما تبين الأمر عرفنا مايجب علينا ." انتهى . مجموع الرسائل و المسائل " ابن تيمية الحراني [1/179]. دار الكتب العلمية ط: الثانية. بدون تاريخ As for the science, it is doubtlessly a reality, but the question is, how does one define the science? It is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali and Ibn Qudama and the other great Hanbali shaykhs were all in favor of purifying intentions and the like, this can easily be seen in their voluminous works on the subjects; such as Towards the Hereafter, Diseases of the Heart and their Cures, The way to Patience and Gratitude, and similar. If we define the science that way, then sure, fine. again you are making the claims regarding Ibn Taymiyyah, look yeah, you keep making claims without any substance, either post something to back your words from the works of Ibn Taymiyyah or dont reply. But what about the practices? Are the practices in line with what Ibn Taymiyyah espoused? Because despite the excellent links you've posted which have clarified that Ibn Taymiyyah was in favor of dhikr gatherings (but how are dhikr gatherings defined) and reciting much dhikr (nobody is not in favor of reciting much dhikr unless they're barking mad), there are numerous practices (such as bay'ah of the sort that Sufi sheikhs practice) which he clearly disapproved of. Top part i answered above, and second part bolded is hawaa without substance. For that matter, if all of these matters can be proved from the Shari'ah in a direct sense (the application was mentioned, yes, that is definitely proven without a doubt), then why is it that the learned Maulana did not argue in that manner; instead arguing that the practices which are done are equivalent to technological inventions? Look many people have different way of tackling things. And that is the least of your worries, you should worry about backing up your unstabstantiated claims regarding Ibn Taymiyyah, which i am waiting for.
	Quote