The Hanafis at it again: Al-Fiqh Al-Islami of Shaykh Muhammad Nadwi
The Hanafis of the west have done it again. Another thorn in the side of the Hanbali-leaning, though not clinging, pseudo-salafis in fiqh. I predicted Jun 1st of 2007 that the Hanafis would be forced to print manuals in law and creed in order to save their youth from the “dark side” and its sith-like attacks upon their noble madh-hab. Al-Fiqh Al-Islami is a wonderful masterpiece on fiqh, providing the student with a plethora of proofs. Many of the proofs presented in the manual have went untranslated prior to this release. Basically the manual begins with the foundational principles of the Madh-hab (legal guild): Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijma’, Qiyas.
After going over the beginning basics, the author proceeds by taking the student through a history of the development of the school, of course linking it to the Sahabah and the earliest tabi’in in Kufah. He then goes into Taharah and its rulings, Salah – a definite read for the Hanafi student of our time, and continues with the rulings regarding the Janazah. A negative of the book is that the proofs are not in our deen’s lingua franca, so memorization may be difficult unless you have the works referenced, which most Western-Hanafis do not, and if they did have all the references they really wouldn’t even need this translation. The work is another addition to the latest surge of Western-Hanafism fighting back with intellectual print. I reckon that this book will be utilized for the western students in many deobandi schools across America. For now you can get the book at Al-Rashad Bookstore, or atleast see some of the pages and the general quality of the print. I recommend every western-Hanafi purchase the book and add it to their growing library on Hanafi fiqh. It is a wonderful work for the beginner, that much is certain.
May Allah bless our beloved Sayyid Muhammad, his family, and his followers Amin!
Ameen!
This is wicked sick! Alhamdulillah, Hanafis are stepping up their game.
Salam
We have some material, including a full hanafi fiqh text with commentary on:
http://www.daralhadith.blogspot.com
ws
Wa’alaykum Salam,
Ya I know. We have already added your website to our blog roll. What more advertising could you want?
I agree the book is a thorn in the side of those retarted salafies who attack Hanafi fiq. But the Shaykh himself is mashAllah a promoter and defender of the creed of Ibn Taymiyah. So, would be safe in some terms, to label him a Hanafi Salafi
.
Ibn Taymiyyah was an Asha’ri
so don’t get your hopes up mi amigo. Ibn Hajr reported that he repented, and this was the general acceptance of the scholars of his time, hence their refrain from takfir of him for his aristotelian beliefs. Of course our pseudo-salafi opponents are skeptical of such tawbah, but many ulama’ of his time were not skeptical! Feel free to read the articles and quotes on it yourself at http://al-razi.net/
Whatever the case, the Western Hanafis are hitting back and it is beautiful to see the demise of their anti-madh-hab/taqlid da’wah.
as-salaamu alaykum,
Im still doubtfull akhi abul layth that he repented. It seems a bit fishy. After all he did die in prison didnt he? If he repented wouldnt he be released? Didnt he give asharis 3 years to find evidence for their aqeedah from the salaf? Unless perhaps someone came with that Im not sure he would have retracted. Allaahu alim.
Well according to the research done by some he repented in egypt.The whole 3 years for the asha’ris to come up with proof is ridiculous.
Its fine if you don’t accept it. I think the quotes from scholars of his time suffice to bear witness to such.
Wasalam mu alaikum wr wb. Bro I have read it before. If we take things like that into account then; Fakir deen ar Razi repented, Imam Ghazali repented, and so did Imam al haramain. But, this beside I al hamdulillah have the opportunity to study with the shaykh. AND he promotes and defends the books of Ibn Taymiyah and actually has spoken why he disagrees with Asharis. Also he promotes Izzideen’s edition of aqeedah Tahwiyyah.
Abu Eemaan, I did not promote this man’s beliefs, I promoted his FIQH book.
Juwayni – the report of supposed “repentance” – though the statement does not say that at all – comes through Hamdhani of whom the scholars deemed unreliable. Ibn Tahir mentions that this man had a vendetta against him anyhow. If the report had been witnessed by more than him, then maybe we would give it some credit. But it doesn’t and is unreliable. Good research has been done regarding him by Sidi Haddad: http://sunnah.org/history/Scholars/ibn_aljuwayni.htm
Fakhr-ad-din Ar-Razi: No proof he abandoned the ways of the noble Asha’ira, at all. Feel free to provide such.
Ghazzali – The fact that you would even mention the Ghazzali issue is laughable and void of substance. Not wasting my time on it.
Both Hafith Ibn Hajr and القاضي شهاب الدين النويري affirmed its authenticity, as well as others. Suffice to say that these two men are not liars, nor deemed untrustworthy in narration, unlike the example of Hamdhani and Imam Juwayni.
The quote of Ibn Hajr quoting Barzaali reads:
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
شهد من يضع خطه آخره أنه لما عقد مجلس لتقي الدين أحمد بن تيمية الحراني الحنبلي بحضرة المقر الأشرف العالي المولوي الأميري الكبيري العالمي العادلي السيفي ملك الأمراء سلار الملكي الناصري نائب السلطنة المعظمة أسبغ الله ظله ، وحضر فيه جماعة من السادة العلماء الفضلاء أهل الفتيا بالديار المصرية بسبب ما نقل عنه ووجد بخطه الذي عرف به قبل ذلك من الأمور المتعلقة باعتقاده أن الله تعالى يتكلم بصوت ، وأن الاستواء على حقيقته ، وغير ذلك مما هو مخالف لأهل الحق ، انتهى المجلس بعد أن جرت فيه مباحث معه ليرجع عن اعتقاده في ذلك ، إلى أن قال بحضرة شهود : ( أنا أشعري ) ورفع كتاب الأشعرية على رأسه ، وأشهد عليه بما كتب خطا وصورته :
(( الحمد لله ، الذي أعتقده أن القرآن معنى قائم بذات الله ، وهو صفة من صفات ذاته القديمة الأزلية ، وهو غير مخلوق ، وليس بحرف ولا صوت ، كتبه أحمد بن تيمية .
والذي أعتقده من قوله : ( الرحمن على العرش استوى ) أنه على ما قاله الجماعة ، أنه ليس على حقيقته وظاهره ، ولا أعلم كنه المراد منه ، بل لا يعلم ذلك إلا الله تعالى ، كتبه أحمد بن تيمية .
والقول في النزول كالقول في الاستواء ، أقول فيه ما أقول فيه ، ولا أعلم كنه المراد به بل لا يعلم ذلك إلا الله تعالى ، وليس على حقيقته وظاهره ، كتبه أحمد بن تيمية ، وذلك في يوم الأحد خامس عشرين شهر ربيع الأول سنة سبع وسبعمائة ))
هذا صورة ما كتبه بخطه ، وأشهد عليه أيضا أنه تاب إلى الله تعالى مما ينافي هذا الاعتقاد في المسائل الأربع المذكورة بخطه ، وتلفظ بالشهادتين المعظمتين ، وأشهد عليه بالطواعية والاختيار في ذلك كله بقلعة الجبل المحروسة من الديار المصرية حرسها الله تعالى بتاريخ يوم الأحد الخامس والعشرين من شهر ربيع الأول سنة سبع وسبعمائة ، وشهد عليه في هذا المحضر جماعة من الأعيان المقنتين والعدول ، وأفرج عنه واستقر بالقاهرة
The main gist and points were translated by others so I will simply reproduce it here:
An enquiry [of his position] was conducted with several scholars [in Cairo] and a written statement was written against him, in which he said: “I am Ash`ari,” and his handwriting is found with what he wrote verbatim, namely: “I believe that the Qur’an is a meaning which exists in Allah’s Essence (mi`na qaa’imun bi dhaat Allaah), and it is an Attribute from the pre-eternal Attributes of His Essence (wa huwa Sifatun min Sifaati dhaatihi al-qadeema), and that it is uncreated (wa huwa ghayru makhlooq), and that it does not consist in the letter nor the voice (wa laysa bi Harfin wa la Sawt), and that His saying: “The Merciful established Himself over the Throne” is not taken according to its external meaning (laysa `ala zaahirihi), and I don’t know in what consists its meaning, nay only Allah knows it, and one speaks of His “descent” in the same way as one speaks of His “establishement” (wa al-qawlu fi al-nuzooli kal-qawli fi al-istiwaa’).”
It was written by Ahmad ibn Taymiyya and they witnessed over him that he had repented of his own free will from all that contravened the above. This took place on the 25th of Rabee` al-awwal of the year 707 and it was witnessed by a huge array of scholars and others.
—-
I have also read that Imam Ash-Shawkaani also affirmed it in البدر الطالع .
Now on a different note:
I don’t agree with Ibn Taymiyyah on many things, yet I still look to his opinions in fiqh. It is possible he did not repent, but I would like to believe he did as is reported by Ibn Hajr. I don’t agree with the creed of Ibn Abdul Barr, yet I look to his works in hadith literature. I don’t agree with Ibn Uthaymeen, yet I enjoy reading his commentaries of Hanbali works. I also have read a couple of small treatises he did on hadith as that is his actual forte.
The bottom line is, the work we presented above is a fiqh work. It is not a work on creed or else you would not have seen me mentioning it.
A question then is bro. Why was he not released and why did such repentence not reflect in his students. Such as Ibn Qayyim?
As for the “Release” then you have not read the quote at all and reading it answers your question as to the timing.
Look at the date it was signed: 707. When did he die? Now that should answer your question.
salam
just to add about ibn Taymiyyah may Allah have mercy on him, indeed he did repent
if you got Damascus you can even visit his grave and ask those who know their history about him
the scholars jailed ibn taymiyyah due to certain events that occured and he passed away in prison, where people would come to visit him and take admonishement before his death
however due to what preceded from him and remains in books published and dug up today, scholars warn the lay people and quite vehemently as some of you may have experienced so they dont think that so and so is a trustworthy scholar and hence accept what is written in a book attributed to him
one must be careful in this reagrd…an example is Al-Zamakhshari who as mu’tazilite but his books are in circulation and even relied upon by some scholars.
if one studied with scholars and masters the basics of the deen no deviant group can ever have any effect on him/her by permission of Allah
this requires only some effort like taking a year out of studies..people can do it for travel and tourism and adventure and we cant do it to be firm on our deen?
May Allah guide and bless and protect
wasalaam
As-Salamu `alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,
hehe Abul Layth, you are very funny brother…
read here the refutation about Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahuAllah) being a Ash`ary
http://www.hdrmut.net/vb/showpost.php?p=1052915782&postcount=2
Assalaam Alaikum brothers,
Not wanting to get into the debate over Ibn Taymiyyah (rh), I do want to say that I really commend brother Abu Layth’s attitude towards learning Islam, Masha’Allah. We need more muslims like that, who dont let the faults of scholars in some areas of the Deen become an impediment from learning from them in other areas.
so what is the conclusion about ibn tamia and ash’ary?
i heard ibn kathir RA said something like , all the bad stuff about ibn tamia was cooked up and added into his books by hypocrites and he never had such beliefs.
Well ‘Irfan, “Bad” is a subjective term that needs further elucidation. The pseudo-salafis will claim all sorts of things as will the Sunnis, and the reality of the matter is, Ibn Taymiyyah is a man like you and I. The Sunni ‘Alaa-ud-Din Al-Bukhari made takfir of Ibn Taymiyyah (as well as Ibn Al Arabi), should we then battle that out to? Ibn Taymiyyah As-Saghir is imperfect, and is not a Hujjah in the law or Islam. So what he says really does not matter in the bigger picture.
That being said, I ask Allah to forgive him and us for any sins we commit, and pardon him and us for errors in ijtihaad Amin!