Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
pink

Takfir Of Sunni `ulama On Shia Islam

Rate this question

Question

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

I want to raise up two different topics. They are closely related, so it should be possible to discuss them in one thread. In traditional Sunni Islam (that is, that which affirms the obligation of making taqlid to a madhhab etc.), the opinions of the `ulama vary. I am not interesting in the views of the salafists.

A Sunni brother sent me the following information (not his exact words):

Many `ulama from the Indo-Pak region, both Deobandi and Barawali, consider Shia Muslims to be kuffar, though some apply this ruling to Shia `ulama and not to the average everyday Shia Muslim. Opinions on this, even from among the Deobandis, are varied. Other Sunni `ulama, particularly those from the Arab world, hold Shia Muslims as innovators, but do not make takfir on them. Mufti Taqi Uthmani is among those `ulama (be it known, of course, that he is Indo-Pak and not Arabic), and so is Mawlana Tanhawi and several `ulama from Karachi.

Sh. Faraz Rabbani has indicated the latter position in his post "What is the status of the Shia according to Sunni Islam?[/utl] at Sunni Path. (See also his post "Working with Shias.")

Those among the Sunni `ulama who rule Shia Muslims to be kuffar list the following as among the factors that render us kuffar.

1. Qur'an: We are said to believe that the Qur'an is incomplete and has been distorted.

2. Sahaba: It is said that Shia Islam holds that most of the senior Sahaba became apostates.

3. Imamate: Shia Islam is said to regard the status of the A'immah as higher than that of the Anbiya.

To those are added the following:

1. Imamate: It is said that we believe that Imamate is a divine position, as is Nubuwwa; and that this belief implies that Sunni Muslims are kuffar. The A'immah are believe to possess more knowledge than the Anbiya. We are said to believe that they can raise the dead to life and that no knowledge of the heavens or earth is hidden from them.

2. Sahaba: It is said that Shia Muslims curse the sahaba.

3. Mut`ah: We believe it to be halal.

4. Taqiyyah: Shia Muslims are said to believe that it is permissible to lie.

That was a very summarised listing from of "The Unbridgeable Divide" by the United Ulama Council of South Africa. It is my understanding that these are all (individualy and collectvely) considered to be points by which we have left the fold of Islam. If I am wrong, please let me know. I wanted to discuss those points that are raised as what distinguishes us from Islam.

Other accusations that I have seen raised against us include that we believe in certain extra suras of the Qur'an such as Surah Wilayah, that we believe in the bada' of Allah, and that that we think it acceptable to lie about ourselves and our beliefs even when there is no danger to our lives and use that tactic to prosyletise amongst Sunni Muslims.

Does anyone know of other rulings from the `ulama of the (traditional) Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama`ah besides what I have found? Are any of these accusations true? Which ones are false? What are our true positions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Those among the Sunni `ulama who rule Shia Muslims to be kuffar list the following as among the factors that render us kuffar.

1. Qur'an: We are said to believe that the Qur'an is incomplete and has been distorted.

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

I would point out that Shia Islam maintains that the Qur'an is preserved from change/distortion.

Shaykh Saduq wrote in his Risalat al I`tiqadat,

ÅÚÊÞÇÏäÇ: Ãä ÇáÞÑÂä ÇáÐí ÃäÒáå Çááå ÊÚÇáì Úáì äÈíå ãÍãÏ Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå åæ ãÇ Èíä ÇáÏÝÊíä æåæ ãÇ Ýí ÃíÏí ÇáäÇÓ¡ áíÓ ÈÃßËÑ ãä Ðáß. æãÈáÛ ÓæÑå ÚäÏ ÇáäÇÓ ãÇÆÉ æÃÑÈÚ ÚÔÑ ÓæÑÉ. ... æãä äÓÈ ÅáíäÇ ÃäÇ äÞæá: Åäå ÃßËÑ ãä Ðáß Ýåæ ßÇÐÈ.å

The translation is

Our belief is that the Qur'an, which Allah revealed to His Prophet Muhammad, is (the same as) the one between the two boards (daffattyn). And it is that which is in the hands of the people, and is not greater in extent than that. The number of suras as generally accepted is one hundred and fourteen. ... And he who asserts that we say that it is greater in extent than this (the present text) is a liar.

See also Tahrif al-Qur'an: A Study of Misconceptions Regarding Corruption of the Qur'anic Text by Muhammad Baqir Ansari.

2. Sahaba: It is said that Shia Islam holds that most of the senior Sahaba became apostates.
I say that this is also untrue, since we name several companions who we believe remained loyal to the Ahlul Bayt and do not make takfir on other just because they followed the khulafa.
3. Imamate: Shia Islam is said to regard the status of the A'immah as higher than that of the Anbiya.
This is somewhat true. It should be noted that we consider the station of Imamah to be higher than the station of Nubuwwa, that we consider some Anbiya to have been A'immah as well, and that we consider some Anbiya to be higher that the A'immah (as far as I know). And Prophet Muhammad, of course, is superior to anyone that ever lived or will ever live. Mufti Desai's point stands, though.
1. Imamate: ...this belief implies that Sunni Muslims are kuffar.
We do not consider Sunni Muslims to be kuffar, whether by inference or by direct takfir. I asked about a statement that I found in the Risalat al I`tiqadat of Sh Saduq that implied the kufr of Sunni muslims. The Mawlana who explained it to me said that Sh Saduq was using the word "kafir" to distinguish between the Shia and Sunni sects. He also said that if we regarded Sunni Muslims as kuffar, then we would consdier them to be najis. We do not consider them to be najis. We also permit intermarriage with Sunni Muslims and eat what they slaughter. This would not be possible if we held Sunni Muslims as kuffar.
We are said to believe that they can raise the dead to life and that no knowledge of the heavens or earth is hidden from them.
This makes me curious. Does anyone have information about these two points? All that I know right now is that the A'immah did not have automatic knkowledge of all of the unseen - only what Allah allowed them to know, and usually according to what they needed to know in order to guide the people of their respective times.
2. Sahaba: It is said that Shia Muslims curse the sahaba.
An unfortunate habit.
3. Mut`ah: We believe it to be halal.
Indeed.
4. Taqiyyah: Shia Muslims are said to believe that it is permissible to lie.
The Muslim is only permitted to lie when his life or limb is in danger. If someone is not holding a proverbia gun to my head, then any lie that I say is haram on me. Shia Muslims are not given permission to lie in order to assuage the concerns of those who oppose us; and we certainly cannot lie in order to proyletise. Why bother, if the new convert is going to have incorrect beliefs, anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I have been told that this fatwa was given after a 10 year long exchange of letters between the head of al-Azhar university in Cairo Egypt, and one of the Shia Imamiyyah Ithna Asheri scholars....

you can read each letter sent and received here..... all the letters were collected and published into a book.....

Al-Muraja'at

A Shi'i-Sunni dialogue

(also known as 'The Right Path')

by Sayyid 'Abd al-Husayn Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi

after an exchange of 110 letter the final letter form the sunni scholar was thus:

Jamadi al-«la 1, 1330

I bear witness that you, in the roots and branches of the faith, are followers of the Imams from the Messenger's progeny. You have clarified this matter and rendered it obvious, unveiled whatever was obscure thereof; so, to doubt you is madness, and to mistrust you is misguidance. I have scrutinized your letter and found it very pleasing. I verified it and was able to inhale its divine fragrance which nourished me with its sweet scent. Before knowing you, I used to be confused about your beliefs due to what I hear of allegations from scandal-mongers; now I have found it to be a lantern that dispels the darkness, and I am leaving you victorious, successful; so, how great is the blessing which Allah has bestowed upon me, and how great your benefit unto me! Praise to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, Wassalamo Alaikom.

this is the english version of the fatwa written

azhar-e.gif

al-Azhar University has since been said to have reversed this fatwa though i have never seen the reversal of this descision in official format (ie: with an official seal etc) so I do not have full knowledge as to whether the rumors are true. Even if there was never another fatwa given to reverse this one however, Al-Azhar university has since at least distanced itself from this fatwa. Though I personally feel that this was the only one that was ever given true consideration as to the reasoning behind the decision, but again this is a personal feeling as i feel any fatwa should be given with full knowledge and made honestly and truthfully regardless of whether or not the decision is a popular one, it seems the Ulema of the sunni anymore could care less for truth and simply make their decisions regarding us based on rhetoric rather than venture to find out our actual beliefs or the basis for them.

This may or may not answer your questions however, I do hope this helps you in some way.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
this is the english version of the Al Azhar fatwa written

azhar-e.gif

al-Azhar University has since been said to have reversed this fatwa though i have never seen the reversal of this descision in official format (ie: with an official seal etc) so I do not have full knowledge as to whether the rumors are true. Even if there was never another fatwa given to reverse this one however, Al-Azhar university has since at least distanced itself from this fatwa.

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

There never was a need for a refutation to be issued. The "fatwa" was never valid. Shia Islam is not a madhhab. It is not on an equal and interchangeable basis with any madhhab of Sunni Islam. If this were to be the case, then it would be possible for the Shia Muslim who believes in Imamate to use the fiqh of the Hanafi madhhab in order to offer salat. Obviously, this is not the case, since one folds the hands and says "amin" in salat according to the Hanafi madhhab. It would also be equally as possible for a Sunni Muslim to fast according to the fiqh of Shia Islam. Again, this is impossible, because Shia fiqh requires one to continue fasting until the redness ha gone from the sunset sky and considers the fast to be batl is one delays ghuls janabah until after fajr, whereas these are not the case in any of the madhahib of Sunni Islam. Even the `ulama of Shia Isolam and of Sunni Islam are in unanimous agreement that one follow the fiwh of the other. As one can see, our systems of fiqh are mututally exclusive. Furthermore, our belief systems are mutually exclusive. One cannot be a Sunni Muslim and believe that Imam `Ali, Imam Hassan, Imam Hussayn, Imam Sajjad, Imam Baqir, Imam Sadiq, etc. were the rightful successors of Prophet Muhammad and were superior to any other companion or person of their respective eras. Likewise, one cannot be a Shia Muslim and believe that Allah creates our actions. Shaltut really did not know what he was talking about. There is no such thing as the fifth madhhab. Shia Islam and Sunni Islam are two separate and distinct sects of Islam.

it seems the Ulema of the sunni anymore could care less for truth and simply make their decisions regarding us based on rhetoric rather than venture to find out our actual beliefs or the basis for them.

This is not true at all. The `ulama of Sunni Islam are generally sincere Muslims who strive towards iman to the best of their ability according to what they know. If what you said were true, it would imply that most Sunni `ulama are munafiqin, which, at the very least, sounds like an ugly form of gossip.

This may or may not answer your questions however, I do hope this helps you in some way.

I posed these questions in order to provoke some serious conversations about the issues by which Sunni `ulama make takfir on Shia Islam (i.e. we supposedly accuse the companions of apostacy, or we supposedly believe that the Qur'an has been distorted). I already know what I think about these issues, alhamdulillah. Thank you for your concern, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

im not a salafi and the answer to yr question lies in percentages. there are shia scholers who hold sunnis to be kaffir and sunni scholers who hold shia kaffir. If u do any research u will find they are in a minority. Most sunni and shia scholers do not make takfir. Look at the positive side and not what comes from a few fanatics. However we do have serious differences and most of these are not up for negotiation and never will be. However a muslim is a muslim and Allah is the judge. if any one tells u another is going to hell ask him to show u the keys to the gates of paradise. If he says he doesnt have them in his pockets(i assure u no one has them) then tell them to zip up no matter how long his beard is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
The al Azhar fatwa is a Sunni fatwa saying a Sunni can follow Jafar Fiqh if he pleases. That's all.

assalamu `alaykum

The Al Azhar fatwa is a useless piece of paper with wasted ink upon it. No Sunni `alim has taken it seriously. Not a single real fatwa issued by Sunni `ulama has confirmed it. Please see the following:

A Fifth Madhhab

Myth of a Ja`fari Madhhab

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29613]Al Azhar's Ruling on Ithna Asheri://http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/sho...on Ithna Asheri

If Shia Islam were another madhhab, then it would be acceptable for a Shia Muslim to do salat, wudu, siyyam, etc. according to the Hanafi, Maliki, etc. madhhab. It is not. There is not "fifth madhhab;" and we are not interchangeable with the four madhahib of Sunni Islam. And it certainly is not permissible for a Sunni Muslim to follow Shia fiqh. We need to get over it already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
assalamu `alaykum

The Al Azhar fatwa is a useless piece of paper with wasted ink upon it. No Sunni `alim has taken it seriously. Not a single real fatwa issued by Sunni `ulama has confirmed it.

If Shia Islam were another madhhab, then it would be acceptable for a Shia Muslim to do salat, wudu, siyyam, etc. according to the Hanafi, Maliki, etc. madhhab. It is not. There is not "fifth madhhab;" and we are not interchangeable with the four madhahib of Sunni Islam. And it certainly is not permissible for a Sunni Muslim to follow Shia fiqh. We need to get over it already.

I know that, but I was merely saying what the fatwa really meant, even if no one cares about it nor takes it seriously. I have a friend that does tho lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
assalamu `alaykum

The Al Azhar fatwa is a useless piece of paper with wasted ink upon it. No Sunni `alim has taken it seriously. Not a single real fatwa issued by Sunni `ulama has confirmed it. Please see the following:

The Sunni Integrals of Prayer

There are 14 integrals to prayer. An integral is what is a part of it and is not rescinded intentionally or out of forgetfulness. They are:

a. standing, obligatory prayers for someone who is able;

b. the opening Takbir;

c. reciting Al-Fatiha;

d. bowing;

e. straightening up from it;

f. prostrating on the seven limbs;

g. straightening up from it;

h. sitting between the two prostrations;

i. becoming motionless in them all;

j. the final tashahud

k. and sitting for it;

l. and praying upon the Prophet (Allah bless him and his family and give him peace) during it;

m. following this order;

n. the Taslim.

Obligatory Actions of Prayer

It has eight obligatory actions:

a. the Takbir other than the opening one;

b. saying “Sami` Allahu li man hamudah”;

c. saying “Rabanna wa lak al-hamd”;

d. saying “Subhan Allah” in the bowing

e. and saying it in prostration,

f. asking for forgiveness

Note: It is obligatory to do the above one single time, and a sunna to do so three times

g. the first tashahud,

h. and sitting for it.

Sunan and what invalidates the prayer

Everything else are sunnan.

One’s prayer is invalid if he:

1. omits a condition without an excuse, with the exception of the intention, since it is not rescinded under any circumstance,

2. or intentionally omits an integral or obligatory action

--contrary to the remainder.

Everything else are verbal sunan and actual sunan. The prostration of forgetfulness is not legislated for omitting them, and there is no harm if he does prostrate.

Therefore, contrary to what you have said, a sunni who follows our fiqh in prayer does not invalidate his prayer in anyway.... what a person is then doing is omitting a couple of things you all consider a sunna and not any obligatory part such as saying amin after al-Fatiha, or praying with your hands at your sides, (the maliki do this one anyway) everything we do not allow that you all do, are things you all do not consider to be wajib.......everything we do in our prayers are evidenced in sunni sources, namely the quran and your sunni ahadeeth. and this is the point to what i am saying, you are quick to say you all cannot in any way shape or form follow our fiqh but when you really study it yes you can..... does waiting a little longer to break your fast invalidate your fast? no, it does not..... you all simply allow for the breaking of it at an earlier time, so to say that you all cannot fast the same as we do is a wrong assumption because doing it in the manner in which we do it does not invalidate the fast according to your scholars......

this is what I am saying by jumping to judgments and simply becoming angry at the thought that anyone would choose to follow our fiqh... it seems much more based on emotion (such as reading just now your reaction here to my innocent comment your whole reaction to what i said seemed to have made you nothing but angry and there was truly no reason for such anger)

i understand we have differences but the differences we have in fiqh between our schools (yes i did say schools) does not seem to pose problems as we are able to prove our fiqh according to the quran and sunnah..(your books) ... if your ulema saw this and looked at it objectively then they would not have the problems they do.......

no i am not saying or indicating in any way that a shia could ever switch fiqh to any of the sunni schools because by doing so they would invalidate the salat by adding to it innovations created by men, but this was not the discussion, the discussion is, is our fiqh something that go against the fiqh of the sunnah? the answer to this question is actually no......

to be honest the only real differences lie in aqeeda and the only big differences there with any of the 4 schools is the question of imamate, and the question of will we physically see Allah in the jannah..... you all say yes we say no and this is not a large difference at all.....

therefore, the only real one is the issue of Imamate and from where should we take our reliigon from. This is the only difference and if this difference is recognized as the only real one between sunna and shia many of our hatred and prejudices might dissolve in honest, open, truthful dialog without all these preconceived ideas that are not in any way based on fact.

but then again we cant do that so long as you all get angry if someone mentions we might be muslim and base our fiqh on sources such as the quran and ahadeeth (which can even be confirmed in your ahadeeth) ........so perhaps you should "get over it already" and please excuse me for attempting at dialog with you..... i thought you were actually inviting it here.... my bad.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

Wa 'alaekum assalam.

A Sunni brother sent me the following information (not his exact words):

Many `ulama from the Indo-Pak region, both Deobandi and Barawali, consider Shia Muslims to be kuffar, though some apply this ruling to Shia `ulama and not to the average everyday Shia Muslim. Opinions on this, even from among the Deobandis, are varied. Other Sunni `ulama, particularly those from the Arab world, hold Shia Muslims as innovators, but do not make takfir on them. Mufti Taqi Uthmani is among those `ulama (be it known, of course, that he is Indo-Pak and not Arabic), and so is Mawlana Tanhawi and several `ulama from Karachi.

I could not comprehend which category does Taqi Usmani fall in - those calling us kaafir or innovators? Would you be kind enough to clarify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Wa 'alaekum assalam.

I could not comprehend which category does Taqi Usmani fall in - those calling us kaafir or innovators? Would you be kind enough to clarify?

My understanding based on what the brother who wrote me said is that Mufti Taki Uthmani considers us to be innovators but not necessarily kuffar (that is, individuals may be kuffar, but Ithna `Ashari Imami Shias are not intrinsically kuffar).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

assalamu `alaykum

Do you have the source of your information? I am able to look up the requirements (etc.) of salat according to the Hanafi madhhab. There are some differences between your list and mine.

a. standing, obligatory prayers for someone who is able;

b. the opening Takbir;

Between these two, the opening invocation is listed as an obligation. The opening invocation is not a surah, but a du`ah. Those who do salat according to Shia fiqh will ordinarily not recite this du`ah.

c. reciting Al-Fatiha;

d. bowing;

e. straightening up from it;

Here and in the list that I have, it is indicated that it is not obligatory in Sunni Islam (the Hanafi madhhab, at least) to recite a supplication while in ruk`uh. The Hanafi madhhab considers it to be an emphasised Sunnah, the inentional abandonmnt of which is strongly disliked. However, it is obligatory in Shia Islam to say at least "Subhanallah" while in ruk`uh. One who does salat according to Sunni fiqh would not have done it properly. The same is true of th recitation in sujud.

n. the Taslim.

The Sunni taslim involves two sayings of the salam. A person praying according to Shia fiqh would not have done it completely according to Sunni fiqh.

does waiting a little longer to break your fast invalidate your fast?

Eating and drinking early does break the fast, which one would be doing if he were following the Sunni fiqh.

it seems much more based on emotion..

Actually, it is based on the opinions of the `ulama of Sunni Islam and a comparison of the fiwh of Sunni Islam and Shia Islam.

(such as reading just now your reaction here to my innocent comment your whole reaction to what i said seemed to have made you nothing but angry and there was truly no reason for such anger)

I apologise. I did not intend to come across as angry. I only intended to be forceful in making my point.

if your ulema saw this and looked at it objectively then they would not have the problems they do

Brother, looking at something objectively is not the same as giving in and doing something according to the wishes of another. The `ulama of Sunni Islam (I am also a Shia Muslim) have analysed this issue using the best tools available to them. Imam Mahdi si not here to make things perfectly clear, and so it is only natural that differences will exist between Sunni and Shia Islam and that they will be backed by established scholarly methods that trace back to source-texts that have been long verified by each side, respectively. It is not for us to say that the `ulama of Sunni Islam are not learned just because they do not agree with us. In fact, they have devoted decades to intensive study of Islam, the source-texts in their original language, the chains of transmission, books upon books of fiqh, history, etc. Even with the differences between our sects, it is still easy to say that the average Sunni scholar would know more about Islam than the average layperson in Shia Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

again i think you completely missed this entire paragraph which i wrote so allow me to remind you of it since you did not bother to read my entire post......

no i am not saying or indicating in any way that a shia could ever switch fiqh to any of the sunni schools because by doing so they would invalidate the salat by adding to it innovations created by men, but this was not the discussion, the discussion is, is our fiqh something that go against the fiqh of the sunnah? the answer to this question is actually no......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
again i think you completely missed this entire paragraph which i wrote so allow me to remind you of it since you did not bother to read my entire post.
is our fiqh something that go against the fiqh of the sunnah? the answer to this question is actually no.

assalamu `alaykum

When you said, "our fiqh something that go against the fiqh of the sunnah," did you mean "our fiqh something that go against the fiqh of "Sunni Islam"? If so, then the answer would be yes.

Shia Islam affirms the validity of the mut`ah. Sunni Islam considers it to be haram. Shia Islam does not require witnesses in a marriage. Sunni Islam does; and a marriage performed according to Shia fiqh would be batil in Sunni fiqh. Shia fiqh calls for the wiping of the feet in wudu. This is insufficient for Sunni Islam, which requires one to wash the feet. In a Shia ghusl, one pours water over his body top to bottom, right to left. Sunni Islam adds that one must wash out the nose and mouth, so our ghusl is not valid in their fiqh. The Hanafi madhhab of Sunni Islam requires that one wait until a shadow has increased to at least as long as the object itself before praying `asr. If one prays `asr according to the timing of Shia Islam, his salat would be considered batil in Sunni Islam because the time had not yet set in.

This is why we are two distinct sects, and not interchangeable madhahib. We do not accept the fiqh of Sunni Islam; and Sunni Islam does not accept the fiqh of Shia Islam. The `ulama of the madhahib of Sunni Islam are in agreement on this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

For me, the most disappointing accusation that Sunnis make against Shia Muslims is regarding taqiyyah. Many Sunni Muslims believe that we have allowed ourselves to lie even when we are not in danger so that our beliefs will be more fair-seeming to Sunni Muslims. Some say that we have practically made taqiyyah wajob on ourselves.

For example, one of the beliefs ascribed to us, distortion of the Qur'an, is said to be covered up with some of the writings of our modern `ulama; and any of us who discuss the matter in public are allowed to lie in order to claim that we believe the Qur'an to be intact.

Another belief ascribed to us is the hatred and emnity towards those companions who did not follow the Imamah of Imam `Ali; and anything that we say about not cursing them, not considering them to be kuffar, etc. is to be taken to be a form of taqiyyah.

Basically, it feels as if Sunni Muslims have allowed thmselves to think that if we say something that sounds ugly to them, or if they find anything ugly in our books or claimed to have come fom our books, it is true; and we are not lying. However, if we say something that sounds acceptable, then we must be lying. If a book of ours contains information that is pleasing, then it was written under the guise of taqiyyah. It realy feels as if the taqiyyah mythology has become a basis for Sunni Muslims to assume at will that we are lying about whatever they want to believe that we are lying according to their convenience.

I think that this is a very disappointing and a very hurtful basis of interaction between the two sects of Islam.

What I have read and heard about taqiyyah is that is only becomes halal when our lives or limbs are in danger; and that our `ulama cannot use it at all. This is the standard that I have applied to myself. I do not even know how I would react if someone had a gun to my head. I have become accustomed to declaring my beliefs as they are, even when I fear that the other person might make fun of me or say or do something abusive towards me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

The position of Sunni's is well established to be the shia muslims are within Islam, they are ahl bidah but ultimatly the people of paradise, inshallah wa Allahu alim. It is makruh to follow them in namaz but prefered then doing namaz alone. Alewi, Bekteshi, Ismaili, Druze, Nasiryyah are not accepted by Sunnis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Imam al-Bukhari has stated:

"Imam Abu Hanifa was a Murji'i"

[Al-Ta'rikh al-Kabir, under the 'Biography of Numan ibn Thabit']

Imam al-Bukhari also writes:

"When Sufyan ath-Thawri [a great scholar of Islam] heard news about the death of Imam Abu Hanifa, he said: 'Praise beto Allah that such a man had died as he was gradually destroying Islam. There could not be a worse person born in Islam' "

[Ta'rikh Saghir, Biography of Imam Abu Hanifa]

Imam al-Bukhari was so convinced by his tutor, that he never mentioned or used Imam Abu Hanifa as a reference for his book Sahih al-Bukhari, although whenever he did mention Imam Abu Hanifa he referred to him as 'Kufi' (nicknamed from his homeland - Kufa).

So, my question: We use Sahih of Bukhari and at the same time say that madhab of Hanafi is one the 4 right way. But, if Hanifa was murji, so Bukhari is right. But, if Hanifa was not murji and Bukhari is not right, so his word against Imam Hanifa go back to himself.

How can we say that these two great Imams are both true? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Salam. Im new to forums so my reply might end up to the wrong person. i just wanted to say it is bogus to ever say that No Sunni alim or salafi alim agreed with the Sunni Shia unity fatwa given in Egypt Al Azhar back in 1959. There was another Fatwa given in Jordan in 2005 which was attended by 200 scholars from around the world which included Sunni, Shia, Zaidi and even Ibadi Scholars. Even Tony Blair in 2006, his last speech given on Islam, which could be found in BBC news mentioned the event and the number of scholars attended. I havent got the exact link for the fatwa but it could be found on the internet. However below Ive given the text to the 2005 Fatwa. Also I visited Al Azhar in 2008 and spoke to an alim there regarding Sheikh Mahmud Shaltut, 1959 Fatwa on Sunni Shia Unity. He recognised Mahmud Shaltut straightaway yet didnt know the Fatwa. But did promise me he will check it up. Because there are many different scholars in Al Azhar and many fatawas too. However Mahmud Shlatut was the Grand Mufti of Al Azhar at the time. If anybody argues that it was just one scholar that gave the fatwa, then 2005 fatwa was with the agreement of several countries and 200 scholars from all groups. Below is the fatwa which could also be found in The Muslim News website

Muslim unity – joint statement of the Muslim scholars.

We publish a joint declaration by Muslim scholars of various schools of thought on the unity of Muslims. Even though it is over a year old, it is all the more important to reiterate it in the current climate of increase in sectarianism in the Muslim world.

Amman Statement

Statement issued by the International Islamic Conference held in Amman, Jordan , under the title: ‘True Islam and its role in modern society’. 4 – 6 July 2005.

‘In accordance with the fatwas issued by the Grand Imam Shaykh al-Azhar, the Grand Ayatullah Al-Sayyid Ali Al-Sistani, the Grand Mufti of Egypt, the Respectable Shi’i clerics (both Ja’fari and Zaydi), the Respectable Grand Mufti of the Sultanate of Oman, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Grand Council for Religious Affairs of Turkey, the Respectable Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Respectable Members of its National Fatwa Committee, and the Respectable Shaykh Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi;

And in accordance with what was mentioned in the speech of His Hashemite Majesty King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan during the opening session of our conference;

And in accordance with our own knowledge in sincerity to Allah the Bounteous;

And in accordance with what was presented in this our conference by way of research papers and studies, and by way of the discussions that transpired in it;

We, the undersigned, hereby express our approval and affirmation of what appears below:

1) Whosoever is an adherent of one of the four Sunni Schools of Jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali), the Ja’fari (Shi’i) School of Jurisprudence, the Zaydi School of Jurisprudence, the Ibadi School of Jurisprudence, or the Thahiri School of Jurisprudence is a Muslim. Declaring that person an apostate is impossible. Verily his (or her) blood, honour, and property are sacrosanct. Moreover, in accordance with what appeared in the fatwa of the Honourable and Respectable Shaykh al-Azhar, it is not possible to declare whosoever subscribes to the Ash’ari creed or whoever practices true Sufism an apostate. Likewise, it is not possible to declare whosoever subscribes to true Salafi thought an apostate. Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any necessary article of religion.

2) There exists more in common between the various Schools of Jurisprudence than there is difference. The adherents to the eight Schools of Jurisprudence are in agreement as regards the basic Islamic principles. All believe in Allah the Mighty and Sublime, the One and the Unique; that the Noble Qur’an is the Revealed Word of Allah; and that our Prophet Muhammad, may Blessings and Peace be upon him, is a Prophet and Messenger unto all mankind. All are in agreement about the five pillars of Islam: the two testaments of faith (shahadatayn), the ritual prayer (salat), almsgiving (zakat), fasting the month of Ramadan (sawm), and the Hajj to the Sacred House of Allah. All are also in agreement about the foundations of belief: belief in Allah, His Angels, His Scriptures, His Messengers, and in the Day of Judgement, in Divine providence - good and evil. Disagreement between the ‘ulama’ is only with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu’) and not the principles and fundamentals (usul). Disagreement with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu’) is a mercy. Long ago it was said that variance in opinion among ‘ulama’ “is a good affair”.

3) Acknowledgement of the Schools of Jurisprudence within Islam means adhering to a fundamental methodology in the issuance of fatwas. No one may issue a fatwa without the requisite personal qualifications which each School of Jurisprudence defines. No one may issue a fatwa without adhering to the methodology of the Schools of Jurisprudence. No one may claim to do absolute Ijtihad and create a new School of Jurisprudence or to issue unacceptable fatwas that take Muslims out of the principles and certainties of the Shari’ah and what has been established in respect of its Schools of Jurisprudence.

4) The essence of the Amman Message, which was issued on the Blessed Night of Power (Laylatul Qadr) in the year 1425 H. and which was read aloud in Masjid al-Hashimiyyin, is adherence to the Schools of Jurisprudence and their fundamental methodology. Acknowledging the Schools of Jurisprudence and affirming discussion and engagement between them ensures fairness, moderation, mutual forgiveness, compassion, and engaging in dialogue with others.

5) We call for casting aside disagreement between Muslims and unifying their words and stances; reaffirming their mutual respect for each other; fortifying mutual affinity among their peoples and states; strengthening the ties of brotherhood which unite them in the mutual love of Allah. And we call upon Muslims to not permit discord and outside interference between them.

Allah the Sublime says: “The believers are but a single brotherhood: so make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers. And fear Allah, that you may receive Mercy.” (Al-Hujurat, 49:10)

Praise be to Allah alone.

There is a suggestion that an appendix be added to the Final Statement of the Conference which includes the two following important recommendations:

- Participants in the International Islamic Conference, while meeting in Amman, the Capital of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, close to the Holy Aqsa Mosque and occupied Palestinian territories, underline the necessity of exerting all possible efforts for the protection of the Holy Aqsa Mosque against the dangers and encroachments it is exposed to. This can only be done through putting an end to occupation and through the liberation of holy places.

- Participants stress the necessity of consolidation of the meanings of liberty and respect of opinion and opinion of the other side (s) in our Muslim Worlds.’

Back to the front page

Editorial

Editorial

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

Messages for

The Muslim News

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

no brother the "sunni" person who told you this is misinformed,we donot call shia people kafir as long as a muslim believes in the kalima(shia verson extention of hazrat ali nothing wrong with that) salah,fasting,hajj,zakat etc is muslim,also believe in Allah and prophets,and respect their families.

person lacks knowledge as there are 30 sects in shia only one sect called ghulaat reject the quran saying companions altered it,and believe angel gabriel made mistake by not giving prophethood to hazrat ali ra.and they further believe that hazrat ali is Allah reincarnated they are kafir. qadiani are kafir as they reject prophet muhammad pbuh as the final prophet.

if anybody calls somene a kafir they need to produce fatawa religeous ruling stating there reasons and to this day shia are not labelled kafir.im researching on dobandis now they are also called tableeghi jimaat they also consider us sunnis polytheist,kafir hypocrite etc bcos we "supposedly" grave worship lol.

deobandis only formed recently when they broke off the sunni school of thought in pakistan from place called deoband they believe any muslim which goes to mazars and graves of saints in pakistan are infact kafir (astagfirullah) hence we have to read the kalimah again hence the movement "tableeghi jimaat".

important to note "tableegh" was done by prophet muhammad pbuh and his companions to kafir and not muslims, these people have introduced a new bid'ah which is bad as they are doing tableegh to muslims. dont take seriously what these idiots say there views are extreme donot be fooled by them they are wolves in sheeps clothing us sunnis from pakistan know first hand what they believe and how they decieve the uneducated masses in pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×