[selayeffethy]

I've a question People of the Book Christians and Jews are Kafir?

[Seesspoxy]

Every non-Muslim is a kafir, hence any person belonging to ahl al-kitab is also a kafir. All the Sunni schools of thought hold this view.

[popsicesHoupe]

in one sense that is true

but in another it is very wrong to consider someone who has not yet been called to Islam

(and nor have they yet refused an invitation to it)

a kaffir.

[drgshmcm]

Every non-Muslim is a kafir, hence any person belonging to ahl al-kitab is also a kafir. All the Sunni schools of thought hold this view.

And which school of though disagree with this view?

[Dwnijzhd]

Don't oversimplify things. Kaffir is the general definition for all non Muslims, but there are variations within this and problems with using it like a paintbrush on the people of the world.

for example...

The Prophet (saws) said that a Christian (presumably a unitarian) who had never heard his (saws) name could go to Paradise. We can say that we don't think there are any of these ones that he was referring to left nowadays maybe, but can we call the ones he (saws) was referring to when he said this kaffirs? - they are certainly Ahlul Kitab though, however as they had not heard the name of Muhammad (saws) they may be a 'Muslim' in the broader sense (one in submission to Allah) without being a Muslim in the particular modern sense (following Muhammad (saws).

[ftqwhbvxlcfop]

Don't oversimplify things.

Kaffir is the general definition for all non Muslims, but there are variations within this and issues with using it like a paintbrush on the people of the world.

for example...

The Prophet (saws) said that a Christian (presumably a unitarian) who had never heard his (saws) name could go to Paradise.

We can say that we don't think there are any of these ones that he was referring to left nowadays maybe,

but can we call the ones he (saws) was referring to when he said this kaffirs?


this article is quite interesting http://www.mujahideenryder.net/pdf/W...sbelievers.pdf

When I was a Christian I believed in one God and that Jesus (pbuh) was not the son of God but his prophet.
Would that have made me a Kafir with those beliefs? and if so why?

[Blelidupgerie]

Also we cannot look at all kaffirs as being alike -

there is a great difference and crucial between the kaffirs who have been called and refused Islam

who are thus kaffirs in the truest sense of the world

- and the people who are not Muslims and may broadly be seen as kaffirs - but who have not been called to Islam (and who are thus saved according to some scholars, including the Asharis).

this article is quite interesting http://www.mujahideenryder.net/pdf/W...sbelievers.pdf

[Info-phone]

When I was a Christian I believed in one God and that Jesus (pbuh) was not the son of God but his prophet.
Would that have made me a Kafir with those beliefs? and if so why?

If you knew of Muhammad (saws) and rejected him yes.

If you had not heard of Muhammad (saws) and you had that view and you had no other kufr views, personally I would say that to use the term kafir about you would have been a slander upon you, not based upon my own ignorant view, but based upon what the Prophet (saws) himself said about the Christians who had not heard his name.

However, you should ask a learned and intelligent scholar on this issue if you want a certified authentic view (that said there is no guarantee that there isnt a range of opinions on the subject amongst the Ulema, but the only way to find out is to ask).

[Chiquita]

[QUOTE=AbdurRaheem2;810211]If you had not heard of Muhammad (saws) and you had that view and you had no other kufr views, personally I would say that to use the term kafir about you would have been a slander upon you, not based upon my own ignorant view, but based upon what the Prophet (saws) himself said about the Christians who had not heard his name./QUOTE]

As-salamu 'alaikum wa rahmatu Allahi wa barakatuh

Can you give us a source for this statement of the Prophet (pbuh) speaking of Christian who had not heard of him?

Jazakumu Allahu khaira

[BundEnhamma]

Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuh

Brother I'm sorry to say that I cannot remember. It is something I read in a book a long time ago that the Prophet (saws) said that a Christian (presumably a unitarian) who had never heard his (saws) name could go to Paradise (that is of course my paraphrasation of the meaning - not an exact reproduction of what I read, I think the actual wording was a sahaba asking a question about this subject and the Prophet (saws) responding 'not if he has heard my name').

Being something I read a long time ago and just took for granted, assuming that it would be easy to find its origin if asked, I repeated it lightly, but when you asked me to source it I realized that I hadn't got a clue and looking through hadith books and internet searching didn't help me either (I can't even remember whether I read it in a seerah book or a hadith book).

Happily the following Hadith quote from this article http://www.mujahideenryder.net/pdf/W...sbelievers.pdf conveys basically same meaning but from the inverse direction.

'By the One in whose Hand is Muhammad’s soul, no one from this community (ummah), whether Jewish or Christian, will hear of me and then die without having believed except that he is apportioned among the denizens of the Inferno.' (from Sahih Muslim)

the clear implication being that if the Jewish or Christian had not heard of him (saws) before they died then (InshaAllah) they may possibly be amongst the people of Paradise....

__________________________________________________ ___________________________

and these quotes cover this issue...

'The divine mercy, however, will also embrace many of the bygone nations, even though most of them will be exposed to the Fire, either slightly—for a moment or for an hour—or a greater period of time, so that one may apply to them the expression “the denizens of the Fire.” I would even go as far as to say that most of the Christians among the Europeans and Turks in this time of ours will be embraced by the same mercy, if God most high wills. I mean specifically those who are among the remote inhabitants of Europe and Central Asia whom the call of Islam has not reached [will be embraced by this divine mercy].

Christians can be divided into three classes. One comprises those whom the name of Muhammad (saws) has never reached at all: they are excused [for their disbelief].

The second category comprises those who have heard his name and description, and [have heard] of his miracles. These people live alongside Muslims and interact with them or actually live among them. They are the disbelieving deniers (kuffar mulhidoon).

The third category is the class comprising those in between the other two. The name of Muhammad s has indeed reached their ears, but they do not know his true description and his character. Instead, they heard from the time they were young that a deceitful liar named Muhammad s claimed to be a prophet, in the same way our own children hear that a liar named al-Muqanna' claimed to be a prophet. As far as I am concerned, such people are [excused] like those in the first category, for while they have heard of his name, they heard the opposite of his true qualities. And hearing such things would never arouse one’s desire to find out [who he was]. (quoted from Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali, Majmuuat rasaail al Ghazali (Darul Kutub al Ilmiyyah Beirut, 1994, p 96.)

Shaykh Abd al-KarÏm Tataan and Shaykh Muhammad Adiib al-Kilanii, concur with Imam al-Ghazali on the matter:

In the hadith in which the Prophet s said, “By the One in whose Hand lies my soul, anyone, whether Jew or Christian, who hears of me from this community and dies without believing in me is from the denizens of the Fire.” According to the scholars, there are three factors involved here:

A person hears of the Prophet (SAWS), and this includes his message and the proofs of its veracity. A person refuses to believe in what was given to the Prophet (saws). A person dies in that state.

Hence, a person who never heard of the Prophet (saws), such as someone living in a far off place, and [who] was not made aware of the truthfulness of his claims, is not accountable.…

And some scholars submitted that if the message arrives to someone in a distorted or false and unappealing form filled with the errors of those who lead others astray, then the ruling of such a person is the same as though the message never arrived to him, unless he is able to see through the smokescreen of lies but still turns away. (quoted from Shaykh Abd al-KarÏm Tataan and Shaykh Muhammad AdÏb al-Kilani, Sharh Jawharat al-tawhid, Darl al Bashar, Damascus 1994, 1:146.)

__________________________________________________ _________________________

Indeed I now suspect it is possible that I may be very, very wrong to think that the Christian who is on real monotheism and who has not heard the name of Muhammad (saws) would classify both as an Ahlul Kitab and as one who it would not be appropriate to call a Kafir.

I guess it boils down to are they judged by Allah as being the same as the Ahlul Kitab in the time before Muhammad (saws) - which is what I originally assumed - or are they judged as being like ignoramuses who will be forgiven due to their ignorance in the time of Muhammad (saws).

Obviously in the first case then it would be wrong to call them kaffirs, but in the second case it would obviously be correct to call them such. Which is correct? - I don't know.

__________________________________________________ ______________________

I guess its one of those 'time to go ask a scholar' moments