[Carol]

Assalam o alaykum,

Perennialism is one of the major fitna facing the Muslim Ummah in West. 'Ulama in the past have refuted this fitna and there is a need to counter this disease once more. Imam Sayyid Anwar Shah Kashmiri (may Allah have mercy on him) has quoted a fatwa of Imam Shihab al-Din Khaffaji al-Maliki (may Allah have mercy on him) in his magnum opus Ikfar al-Mulhidin from Nasim al-Riyad Sharh Shifa',

He writes,

“…One who does not call the people of other religions as kafir due to any reason: He says: Therefore (because of the uncertainty of takfir of those who misinterpret and distort clear-cut and unanimous nusus), we regard a person kafir who does not call the followers of other religion as kafir or hesitates to call them kafir, or doubts in their kufr, or thinks their religion is right, though he claims himself to be Muslim and calls other religions other than Islam as false, then also he is kafir who does not call the people of other religions as kafir; since this person opposes Islam by opposing to call kafir as kafir and this is belying and refuting religion. (In short, not calling any person not following Islam as kafir is tantamount to oppose and refute Islam, and that individual is kafir.)”

Scan:

[Fruriourl]

brother for providing us with this clear cut fatwa.

[Mynameishappy]

[Aminkaoo]

jazakallah for that brother, ive been looking for this fatwa from our ulama for months.

[vipBrooriErok]

much needed fatwa

[nvideoe]

“…One who does not call the people of other religions as kafir due to any reason: He says: Therefore (because of the uncertainty of takfir of those who misinterpret and distort clear-cut and unanimous nusus), we regard a person kafir who does not call the followers of other religion as kafir or hesitates to call them kafir, or doubts in their kufr, or thinks their religion is right, though he claims himself to be Muslim and calls other religions other than Islam as false, then also he is kafir who does not call the people of other religions as kafir; since this person opposes Islam by opposing to call kafir as kafir and this is belying and refuting religion. (In short, not calling any person not following Islam as kafir is tantamount to oppose and refute Islam, and that individual is kafir.)”

The 'Imam' has added a new pillar to Islam!

[Romarionsion]

for that. I was told, apparently mistakenly, that it was a terrible thing to call non-Muslims kaffir, in case they later reverted to Islam, and then the word I used for them would "bounce back" on me and I would be damned as a kaffir. I was also warned not to say "munafiq" about people who show nifaq, or I would be judged as a munafiq myself, may Allah protect us all from this. So, to clarify: my non-Muslim parents and neighbors are kaffir? How about "liberal" Muslims who don't deny Allah but who don't follow the teachings of the Quran, the fardh like salah, and who openly commit sins like drinking alcohol, what are they called? I think mushrik is for those who commit shirk (may Allah protect us), and munkir is for those who inkar (deny) - but deny what? anyone who can clarify these terms.

[phpfoxmods]

for that. I was told, apparently mistakenly, that it was a terrible thing to call non-Muslims kaffir, in case they later reverted to Islam, and then the word I used for them would "bounce back" on me and I would be damned as a kaffir.

Assalam o alaykum,

This so called argument is faulty. Then one shouldn't refer to a Muslim as a Muslim because he might leave Islam in the future.

How about "liberal" Muslims who don't deny Allah but who don't follow the teachings of the Quran, the fardh like salah, and who openly commit sins like drinking alcohol, what are they called?

As long as they don't deny any of the fundamentals of Islam, they will be considered Muslim regardless of how many sins they have committed. Committing a major sin doesn't take one outside the fold of Islam unless it is considered to be permissible (halal).

[newwebstar]

[I]Committing a major sin doesn't take one outside the fold of Islam unless it is considered to be permissible (halal).

So refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar takes you out of the fold (a theological position), but committing major sins doesn't take you out of the fold; so refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar is worst than major sins... What atrocious reasoning.

[XGoFivk7]

So refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar takes you out of the fold (a theological position), but committing major sins doesn't take you out of the fold; so refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar is worst than major sins... What atrocious reasoning.

Your ignorance is astounding. It is not a matter of refraining from calling non-Muslim kuffar, but refraining from BELIEVING that they are kuffar. Its a question of belief, not actions.

Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller has the following to say about the issue: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/amat.htm

...only Islam is valid or acceptable now that Allah has sent it to all men, for the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has said,

"By Him in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, any person of this Community, any Jew, or any Christian who hears of me and dies without believing in what I have been sent with will be an inhabitant of hell" (al-Baghawi: Sharh al-sunna 1.104).

This hadith was also reported by Muslim in his Sahih by `Abd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf, and others. It is a rigorously authenticated (sahih) evidence that clarifies the word of Allah in surat Al 'Imran

"Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam will never have it accepted from him, and shall be of those who have truly failed in the next life" (Qur'an 3:85)

and many other verses and hadiths. That Islam is the only remaining valid or acceptable religion is necessarily known as part of our religion, and to believe anything other than this is unbelief (kufr) that places a person outside of Islam, as Imam Nawawi notes:

"Someone who does not believe that whoever follows another religion besides Islam is an unbeliever (like Christians), or doubts that such a person is an unbeliever, or considers their sect to be valid, is himself an unbeliever (kafir) even if he manifests Islam and believes in it" (Rawda al-talibin, 10.70).

This is not only the position of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence represented by Nawawi, but is also the recorded position of all three other Sunni schools: Hanafi (Ibn 'Abidin: Radd al-muhtar 3.287), Maliki (al-Dardir: al-Sharh al-saghir, 4.435), and Hanbali (al-Bahuti: Kashshaf al-qina', 6.170). Those who know fiqh literature will note that each of these works is the foremost fatwa resource in its school. The scholars of Sacred Law are unanimous about the abrogation of all other religions by Islam because it is the position of Islam itself.

[JonatonM]

for that. I was told, apparently mistakenly, that it was a terrible thing to call non-Muslims kaffir, in case they later reverted to Islam, and then the word I used for them would "bounce back" on me and I would be damned as a kaffir. I was also warned not to say "munafiq" about people who show nifaq, or I would be judged as a munafiq myself, may Allah protect us all from this. So, to clarify: my non-Muslim parents and neighbors are kaffir? How about "liberal" Muslims who don't deny Allah but who don't follow the teachings of the Quran, the fardh like salah, and who openly commit sins like drinking alcohol, what are they called? I think mushrik is for those who commit shirk (may Allah protect us), and munkir is for those who inkar (deny) - but deny what? anyone who can clarify these terms.

I know this misconception too, as far as I experienced it seems to be advocated by a certain group called "nur cemat" which has its origins in Turkey. So far, I heard it only from followers of this group.

They also misguide their followers into basically believing that shaving the beard is okay, they propagate a shi'a dua book, etc.. There is number of problems with this group.

(The above statements are based on the experiences which I have made with many of their followers in different cities in Germany. (It was not just one guy))

There is nothing wrong with stating the facts and realities:

• Someone who denies Islam or a part of it is a kafir - very clear.
• The Christians and Jews are kuffar.
• The Ahlu Kitab (above) are kuffar.
• The Quranites (Hadith rejectors) are kuffar.
• The Atheists, Communists etc. are kuffar.
• The Qadianis (Ahmadiyya) are kuffar.
• Those fighting against Islam are kuffar.
• Those fighting with the crusaders against Islam are kuffar.

Also read
http://askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?a...8dc21dda25cb7a
http://askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?a...36bbc8fd53d7a1
http://askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?a...3f0a07c9f6e967
http://askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?a...f94fe7a1dc3672

Sister kayra, I would advise you to buy a book called "The Reliance of the Traveler".
It is a Shafi'i fiqh book, but it contains many essentially useful texts/explanations/articles about topics which are common to all madhhabs and relevant for the common Muslim. (It is available on Amazon) The author, Shaykh Nuh Keller, is a reconvert to Islam who studied Islam and is now an internationally acknowledged scholar and shaykh of Tasawwuf. He follows the Shafi'i madhhab and Shadhili tariqa. May Allah protect him and reward his precious work done for this deen. Amin.

The belief of Ahlu-Sunnah wal Jama'ah concerning this issue is basically:
As long as the person does not deem it allowed (halal) to do a prohibited deed (e.g drink alcohol) he/she will still be a Muslim. But in this case he/she will be an open sinner (fasiq).

A Munafiq is someone with nifaq, i.e. someone who conceals his kufr.
A Mushrik is someone who does shirk, i.e. associating partners with Allah.

Kufr could be approximately translated as "covering the truth", i.e. it means denial.
Kuffar is the plural of kafir.

May Allah Most High protect us from these evils and keep our Iman at safety. Amin.

And Allah knows best!

[everlastinge]

So refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar takes you out of the fold (a theological position), but committing major sins doesn't take you out of the fold; so refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar is worst than major sins... What atrocious reasoning.

You seem to have a seriously poor understanding of the post. One is an unbeliever because he deems an other religion besides Islam as VALID. This is a part of belief like believing in the fire and heaven.

Your reasoning would be better if you compared it to those who deem a major sin halal. They are unbelievers too.

[ElenaEvgeevna]

Your ignorance is astounding. It is not a matter of refraining from calling non-Muslim kuffar, but refraining from BELIEVING that they are kuffar.

Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller has the following to say about the issue: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/amat.htm

May be you should re-read the fatwa (I underlined the part you missed):

“…One who does not call the people of other religions as kafir due to any reason: He says: Therefore (because of the uncertainty of takfir of those who misinterpret and distort clear-cut and unanimous nusus), we regard a person kafir who does not call the followers of other religion as kafir or hesitates to call them kafir, or doubts in their kufr, or thinks their religion is right, though he claims himself to be Muslim and calls other religions other than Islam as false, then also he is kafir who does not call the people of other religions as kafir; since this person opposes Islam by opposing to call kafir as kafir and this is belying and refuting religion. (In short, not calling any person not following Islam as kafir is tantamount to oppose and refute Islam, and that individual is kafir.)”

In any event I have no interest in arguing this point since it is not even intelligently formulated... This is what I've referred to elsewhere as ''ideological Islam,'' a kind of caricature of the Islamic tradition.

Also, I cannot respond to the points raised by Sh. Nuh because the last time I did I had my post removed by the moderators. Suffice it to say that while I deeply respect Sh. Nuh, I find his aping of Imam Nawawi's position on this score to be somewhat disconcerting.

[Xtatotvk]

This is interesting, there was another thread where a member – I believe it was Marco – argued that Islam predates Buddhism because from the Islamic perspective Islam is the primordial religion, which in its simplest term means submission to the one God. Therefore Adam, Abraham and Moses are considered Muslims. Based on that, it strikes me as a little rich for modern day Muslims to retroactively designate pre-Islamic prophets Muslim with ease, so that some sort of pedigree can be maintained, and then at the same time be so restrictive on who is defined as a Muslim today.

[tretcheenia]

So refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar takes you out of the fold (a theological position), but committing major sins doesn't take you out of the fold; so refraining from calling non-Muslims kuffar is worst than major sins... What atrocious reasoning.

i find it atrocious that you will hesitate to label a group kafir that have been labeled kafir in the Quran. this means your iman in Quran is not intact.

[BorBitExatini]

Also, I cannot respond to the points raised by Sh. Nuh because the last time I did I had my post removed by the moderators. Suffice it to say that while I deeply respect Sh. Nuh, I find his aping of Imam Nawawi's position on this score to be somewhat disconcerting.

Whatever. The position upheld by Shaykh Nuh is not only the position of Imam Nawawi or the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence, but the recorded position of all the Sunni schools. This in itself is sufficient proof of its veracity in my eyes.

[poispanna]

…and Shaykh Nuh on the Shadhili website site recommends books on Islam written by Perennialists (Chittick) and non-muslims (Arberry). Curious.

[TineSeign]

…and Shaykh Nuh on the Shadhili website site recommends books on Islam written by Perennialists (Chittick) and non-muslims (Arberry). Curious.

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.

There is a famous tafsir of Quran which was written by somebody who adhered to the mu'tazila sect, nevertheless his tafsir is studied because of the work's quality while the deviant beliefs of the author are disregarded and ignored.

Nothing curious, as long as a book provides accurate information of Islam and doesn't propagate deviant beliefs there should be no harm in reading it.

Maybe some of the students of knowledge could remember the name of the author as I don't remember anymore.

[Agitoligflise]

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.

There is a famous tafsir of Quran which was written by somebody who adhered to the mu'tazila sect, nevertheless his tafsir is studied because of the work's quality while the deviant beliefs of the author are disregarded and ignored.

Nothing curious, as long as a book provides accurate information of Islam and doesn't propagate deviant beliefs there should be no harm in reading it.

Maybe some of the students of knowledge could remember the name of the author as I don't remember anymore.

al-Zamakhshari is the name of the Mu'tazilite scholar.

People of intelligence can benefit even from works of people with some deviance in their beliefs. It is best to only do so under the guidance of scholars though if one isn't firm in Islamic knowledge.

The books that Sheikh Nuh recommended were translations, and Chittick and Arberry are competent translators. It isn't like he recommended works in which they were espousing their personal philosophy of Islam.

[JonatonM]

The books that Sheikh Nuh recommended were translations, and Chittick and Arberry are competent translators. It isn't like he recommended works in which they were espousing their personal philosophy of Islam. Chittick’s book is a translation with commentary and Shaykh Nuh gushed over Arberry’s translation when there exists many respected English translations by Muslims. In fact, translating the Quran is not simply translation is it? Considering the nature of Quranic Arabic and the skill it requires when rendering it into English( while attempting to maintain rhythmic flow), competence strikes me as a rather limited word to use in regards to Arberry. He is a respected Scholar of Islam and would be called Kuffar by many of you. Anyway, question: if someone like an Arberry helps to strengthen the Islam of many Muslims but is not a Muslim, is his fate the same as someone who is not sympathetic to Islam at all?