[Qdcqxffs]

Being a hanafi, i believe there's a too much taqleedi jamood that has crept into madhabists and at times our bias is as clear as the blue sky. This approach makes you ignore reality and the ruling thats more closer to haqq.
As far as hanbalis are concerned, they've gone much deeper into these ashari/maturidi/athari debates which i feel was never needed. I know many of the deobandi scholars, let alone the laymen, who know absolutely nothing about this issue and i mean it. They know that there's a difference but no one delves deeper into it. No deobandi, atleast those who I know, heard this issue from a deo maulana but learnt if from internet esp salafi sites.

A sincere advice is that you keep your aqidah simple and straight. We have far bigger issues to deal with. We, with all our differences, need to stick together. As for fiqh that should totally be a non issue as those differences have existed for years.

[Qdcqxffs]

Abul Hassan Ali nadwi rahimahullah has written a good book on Shaykh ul Islam rahimahullah. You can read the portion dedicated to Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah in Shaykh Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi ra's monumental work "tareekh e dawat wa Azeemat" or you can read the portion directly here http://www.islamicbookstore.com/b8778.html

The book by Maulana Abu Bakr Ghazipuri ru was is just an ilzami jawab and nothing more. He held Ibn-e-tayymiah ru in high esteem. You can read his opinion in zamzam.

[UHlVExs7]

Assalamu alaykum

A sincere advice is that you keep your aqidah simple and straight. We have far bigger issues to deal with. We, with all our differences, need to stick together. As for fiqh that should totally be a non issue as those differences have existed for years. I agree.

Let us not create new theories to push everyone else into the 72 sects and win the race for 73rd sect.

[Qdcqxffs]

Abul Hassan Ali nadwi rahimahullah has written a good book on Shaykh ul Islam rahimahullah. You can read the portion dedicated to Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah in Shaykh Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi ra's monumental work "tareekh e dawat wa Azeemat" or you can read the portion directly here http://www.islamicbookstore.com/b8778.html

Dr.Sahab ap kahan ghayeb hain?

Woh aye SF pe Khuda ki qudrat,
Kabhi hum unki post ko kabhi SF ko dekhtay hain!

[BuyCheapest]

Dr.Sahab ap kahan ghayeb hain?

Woh aye SF pe Khuda ki qudrat,
Kabhi hum unki post ko kabhi SF ko dekhtay hain!

Lol dear brother. I was a bit busy with fulfilling my worldly duties. How are things at your side going on? I hope all is fine inshallah.

[Qdcqxffs]

Lol dear brother. I was a bit busy with fulfilling my worldly duties. How are things at your side going on? I hope all is fine inshallah.

Yes alhamdulillah everything's fine.
I have been inducted at an audit firm alhamdulillah.
First day tomorrow InshaAllah
Prayers requested.

[romalama]

Just becuase you label yourselves hanbalis and selectively use some quotes don't necessitate your association with hanbalism.
The whole la mamadhabi movement emerged using Ibn Taymiyya and his students ideas where they subjected their modern day followers to be all mujthahids by themselves able to make independent judgements outside the four madhabs. So the hanbalism is just a innovation within the hanbali madhab restricted to certain controversial lone individuals and then selective picking. In other words, the la madhabis can claim hanbalism because la madhabism is allegedly permitted within these lone innovated so called hanbali ideas.

I have no idea what you just said, in any regard I follow the Madhab and don't necessarily always follow the opinion of the Saudi Scholars or Ibn Taymiyyah (although it would be deemed permissible), for example I still pray with my hands below my navel even though most are of the opine that it should be on the botton of the chest.

I have never selectively used some quotes, however I have selectively used PEOPLE of the madhab, mostly ibn Qudaama, so if he is not Hanbali than yes I am also not hanbali.

If you'd like I can choose to quote even more hard core hanbalis, the likes of which you would have no problem with calling Mujassim, but where would that get me?

As for aqeeda, then again the whole basis is based on Ibn taymiyyas ideas. Lets remove them from the hanbali picture and use the rest of the well known hanbalis to formulate the aqeeda of hanbalism. We will be in better agreement. And finally it is these so called hanbalis who are intolerant. How wahhabism and al saud alliance wiped out any opposition including their own hanbali traditionalists of Arabia is well known. So let these hanbalis first allow people of other madhabs to preach first before expecting some kindness I've never quoted Ibn Taymiyyah the entire time I'v been on SF, and only have defended him. Rather I've always quoted other non-controversial scholars of the Madhab.

In fact, I mainly rely on Ibn Qudaama to present the truth, and if not him, those who agree with him in the Madhab.

Thank you.

[hereiamguy]

WS,

The main intention of this thread was not to provoke a discussion or debate. These issues have been several times discussed and i am sure that one can find a huge literature related to these issues with a few clicks. My understanding of it is that though we desire to see the things in a historic order but they almost never are. Our understandings have evolved with time relative to our social circumstances when it comes to the understanding of Islam. The madhab which you follow now has gone through the same evolution. If the texts were so much in order and the principals of Aqedah and fiqh were so universal , we would have never seen a Deobandi barelvi split as in pen both are Ashari/Maturidi Hanafis.

As far as the Aqeedah and Fiqh of the present day Salafis is concerned , it is inline with the historic Hanbali Madhab. There might be a few rulings which might be in contradiction with the classical hanbali literature like Al Mughni for example but the ruling can be justified from other works and opinions of the Hanbali scholars. Same is true for the Hanafi madhab. As a test case , you can mention any opinion of the present day Salafis related to Aqeedah and Fiqh and i will try to show you the similar opinion in the classical Hanbali texts.

the deobandi/barelvi split does not undermine the written principles of the ahnaf.

here is the text case:
why do the salafis do rafa yadain after third rakat while hanbalis dont?

again you are missing the point however. it is not the aqeedah or fiqh it is the usool of the salafis that is wrong. judgin every ruling by a sahih hadith. which madhab has declared that to be their usool?

[hereiamguy]

Dr.Sahab ap kahan ghayeb hain?

Woh aye SF pe Khuda ki qudrat,
Kabhi hum unki post ko kabhi SF ko dekhtay hain!

kabhi hum unki post ko kabhi General forum ko dekhtay hain

: p

[BuyCheapest]

the deobandi/barelvi split does not undermine the written principles of the ahnaf.

here is the text case:
why do the salafis do rafa yadain after third rakat while hanbalis dont?

again you are missing the point however. it is not the aqeedah or fiqh it is the usool of the salafis that is wrong. judgin every ruling by a sahih hadith. which madhab has declared that to be their usool?

The Salafis don't do Rafal yadain after the third Raka'at rather they do it after standing from the Tashahud of the second raka'at before beginning the third Raka'at. Here is the Sharah of Umdat al ahkaam of Imam Abdal Ghani al maqdasi al hanbali rahimahullah in which he has given the same opinion. Refer to page 31 here http://www.islamlecture.com/documents/salaat1.pdf

[BuyCheapest]

again you are missing the point however. it is not the aqeedah or fiqh it is the usool of the salafis that is wrong. judgin every ruling by a sahih hadith. which madhab has declared that to be their usool?

Get hold of Ad-durr Al Baheyah of Imam Shawkani ra which has been recently translated to urdu under the title "Fiqh al hadees" to know about the usool of Salafees.

[romalama]

I'm a revert, and still haven't settled completely into one Madhab (there is not really a "prominent" Madhab in my area, it depends on the Masjid you attend... even then it's very mixed), but am definitely walking most closely with Hanbali. I do appreciate seeing posts of Hanbali SF members.

There is a lot of resources now a days concerning the Hanbali Madhab online, a lot of books are being translated, and you can also find explanations done by students who speak English. Follow that which makes you feel best, I'v been on the receiving end of trying to be convinced of following a Madhab that I didn't want to, and I know it doesn't feel good. This thread is not to try to push people to follow the Hanbali fiqh, even though I have nothing against that either.

Either way, it's good to see you here, I'm also a revert. May Allah make things easy for you in your search for knowledge.

[TubOppomo]

There is a lot of resources now a days concerning the Hanbali Madhab online, a lot of books are being translated, and you can also find explanations done by students who speak English. Follow that which makes you feel best, I'v been on the receiving end of trying to be convinced of following a Madhab that I didn't want to, and I know it doesn't feel good. This thread is not to try to push people to follow the Hanbali fiqh, even though I have nothing against that either.

Either way, it's good to see you here, I'm also a revert. May Allah make things easy for you in your search for knowledge.

Brother , but the question is who is translating these books ???

Real Hanbali's ?

OR

The Hanbali Madhab which has been hijacked by so called najdi / La madhabies w.e you call them

[romalama]

Brother , but the question is who is translating these books ???

Real Hanbali's ?

OR

The Hanbali Madhab which has been hijacked by Wahabies / La madhabies w.e you call them

You know nothing about the Hanbali Madhab nor it's Usool, so your opinion concerning what has been hijacked or not hijacked means nothing, and this is only from a FIQHI standpoint.

Being a "Wahhabi" has zero effect on whether or not one follows the Hanbali Madhab, in Fact both Ibn Abdul Wahhab and His sons testified to following the Hanbali Madhab.

As for "Laa madhabis" I don't see why they would translate from a Madhab, if they are "Laa Madhabis"..

I do have friends that don't follow a Madhab, and all I call them are Muslims. I know they wouldn't translate from the Madhab because they don't know Arabic.

So the question is, what (according to you) is a "Real" Hanbali?

[TubOppomo]

You know nothing about the Hanbali Madhab nor it's Usool, so your opinion concerning what has been hijacked or not hijacked means nothing, and this is only from a FIQHI standpoint.

Being a "Wahhabi" has zero effect on whether or not one follows the Hanbali Madhab, in Fact both Ibn Abdul Wahhab and His sons testified to following the Hanbali Madhab.

As for "Laa madhabis" I don't see why they would translate from a Madhab, if they are "Laa Madhabis"..

I do have friends that don't follow a Madhab, and all I call them are Muslims. I know they wouldn't translate from the Madhab because they don't know Arabic.

So the question is, what (according to you) is a "Real" Hanbali?

The followers of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (ra)

Not those who go on attacking Imam Abu Hanifa ra , or telling the hanafi's why do tie your hands below the navel , why 20 rakah taraweeh it should be 8 .

all this is happening in the name of Hanbali Madhab.

Brother may be you are not aware but many salafi of sub continent do this and in the name of hanbali madhab.

[Podborodok]

:

It was said my blog is too "Salafi" but what exactly is the meaning of Salafi here? I follow a Madhab, I also respect and follow the scholars of Saudi in regards to the Madhab, I also quote and respect the scholars of the Hanbali Madhab in regards to Aqeedah and Fiqh, So I'm asking sincerely what is the problem with my blog that forces the Mods to delete links to it?*

The Saudi hanbalis in general are considered Salafis... While you might not claim to be salafi you argue with their tongue... which doesn't surprise us because you are influenced by the people who are at the origins of Salafism...

In our eyes... Salafism is a cult who aim is eradicate the world of Asharism, maturidism, Sufism all of which we consider core aspects of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah... And this new attempt of salafism to hide under the disguise of Hanbalism (which is how we look at you...) is yet another attempt of Ahlul Bidah to try and eradicate Ahlus Sunnah from the world...

Because the Salafis have failed at convincing the Muslim world that madhabs are not needed.... So now the present themselves as
Hanbalis.... To make it appear that they are just like us... *

We are not easily deceived by this new attempt of the salafis to hide under the disguise as Hanbalis because they are traditional Hanbalis in Syria, Palestine, Lebenon, and Egypt who truly embrace the Asharis and Maturidis and we embrace them...

Al Hamdullah....

[hereiamguy]

The Salafis don't do Rafal yadain after the third Raka'at rather they do it after standing from the Tashahud of the second raka'at before beginning the third Raka'at. Here is the Sharah of Umdat al ahkaam of Imam Abdal Ghani al maqdasi al hanbali rahimahullah in which he has given the same opinion. Refer to page 31 here http://www.islamlecture.com/documents/salaat1.pdf

that is what i meant. standing up after second rakat.

i read in zad al mustaqni the opposite.
and in this sharah you mention the commentator (not the author) is quoting single ahadith to prove 'his' point.which is particular sign of salafi editing. and also note the 'author' states that standing up for third rakat should be accompanied by takbir. he does not mention raising of hands. on the contrary your commentator states at the bottom:
"NOTE
Not all these takbirrat were accompanied by raising the hands. The hands are only raised in
four places based on other authentic hadith. "
thats his added opinion.

other points of difference are:
- hanbali fiqh says that surah faitha recitation is not obligatory on muqtadi. in sirri prayers it is mustahab for the muqtadi tor recite while in jahri he must remain silent when imam is reciting.
- poitning of finger in tashahhud: hanbalis keep it pointed throughout ash'hadu...till they start durood. salafis keep pointing up and down in small jerks throughout the sitting in final rakah.

some rebuttals for those two please.

my point however remains the same: salafi usool was never accepted by the ummah. it is their usool which is the problem. they are intolerant because of that very usool. this usool provided deviancy in their aqeedah in fiqh.

[romalama]

The Saudi hanbalis in general are considered Salafis... While you might not claim to be salafi you argue with their tongue... which doesn't surprise us because you are influenced by the people who are at the origins of Salafism...

In our eyes... Salafism is a cult who aim is eradicate the world of Asharism, maturidism, Sufism all of which we consider core aspects of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah... And this new attempt of salafism to hide under the disguise of Hanbalism (which is how we look at you...) is yet another attempt of Ahlul Bidah to try and eradicate Ahlus Sunnah from the world...

Because the Salafis have failed at convincing the Muslim world that madhabs are not needed.... So now the present themselves as
Hanbalis.... To make it appear that they are just like us... *

We are not easily deceived by this new attempt of the salafis to hide under the disguise as Hanbalis because they are traditional Hanbalis in Syria, Palestine, Lebenon, and Egypt who truly embrace the Asharis and Maturidis and we embrace them...

Al Hamdullah....

Too much talk and not enough knowledge.

What is your definition of Salafi that I deny?

Look at me however you want, I really don't care... The point is I have not said anything except that someone BEFORE ibn Taymiyah from the HANAABILAH have said.

The scholars of Najd have never told or tried to convince anyone to not follow Madhabs. Even if they don't consider it Fardh for the LAYMAN to do so, this has nothing to do with "Salafi" it has to do with the Usool of the Hanbali madhab.


If your defintion of True Hanbali is that they "Embrace" the Asharis/Maturidis, then I still say you know nothing about Ibn Qudaama, and this is why I said you are talking too much without knowledge.

There are many Saudi Scholars, and I'm not saying that all of them follow the Hanbali Madhab, however the ones on my blog generally do, and that was the point in my original post.

[hereiamguy]

Get hold of Ad-durr Al Baheyah of Imam Shawkani ra which has been recently translated to urdu under the title "Fiqh al hadees" to know about the usool of Salafees.

is it any different from what ive stated?
if it is then why doesnt it show any different on their fatawa?

[hereiamguy]

Brother , but the question is who is translating these books ???

Real Hanbali's ?

OR

The Hanbali Madhab which has been hijacked by Wahabies / La madhabies w.e you call them

the hanbali books are all salafi edited. edited according to their unacceptable usool. to sister amna 4: adopt the madhab of your neighbourhood/locality so that you get access to scholars in flesh