Imam Malik stated that he who innovates something in Islam while deeming

it to be a good innovation has alleged that Muhammad (peace and

blessings be upon him) was unfaithful in disseminating his message as

Allah Almighty says: "This day are those who disbelieve in despair of

(ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I

perfected your religion for you and completed My favor unto you, and

have chosen for you Al-Islam as religion. Whosoever is forced by hunger,

not by will, to sin: (for him) Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

(Al-Ma'idah: 3)

Both those quotes already have an established meaning for "bid'ah" and do not set out to define the term.

Especially in the latter, it suggests that with the quote of the verse, there is a very specific meaning given to the term of bid'ah.

a

You wrote:

Both those quotes already have an established meaning for "bid'ah" and do not set out to define the term.

Especially in the latter, it suggests that with the quote of the verse, there is a very specific meaning given to the term of bid'ah.

Imaam Ash-Shaafi’i, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said:
“A Bid’ah is anything that has no basis in the Qur’aan,
Sunnah or sayings of any of the companions.”
Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “A
Bid’ah is any form of worship that did not exist (at the
time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and
his companions) then later it was innovated.”
Ibn Rajab, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “A
Bid’ah is any form of worship which has no basis in the
Sharee’ah which would warrant its legislation.”
 Ash-Shaatibi, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said:
“(A Bid’ah) is any matter which closely resembles the
Sharee’ah and is intended to be a way of worshipping
Allaah."
General rules to recognise Bid’ah:
Any act of worship is based on a fabricated Hadeeth is a
Bid'ah, like the prayer in the month of Rajab which is
called the prayer of Raghaa’ib.
Any act of worship which the Prophet sallallaahu
‘alayhi wa sallam did not perform, although there were
no preventing factors is a Bid’ah, like uttering the
intention before beginning the prayer, calling Adhaan for
any prayer other than the five obligatory ones or praying
after finishing Sa’y between mount Safaa and Marwah.
 Any habitual act performed with the intention of
pleasing Allaah which Islaam did not consider as an act
or worship is a Bid'ah, such as for example: wearing
coarse woollen clothes, continuous silence, refraining
from eating bread or meat, not drinking cold water or
standing in the sun.
Performing prohibitions acts with the intention of
pleasing Allaah is a Bid'ah, such as singing songs about
Him.
Moreover, all acts of worship must be performed in
exactly the same manner as the Prophet sallallaahu
‘alayhi wa sallam did them. This cannot be achieved
unless the following six conditions are fulfilled:
1. The act of worship must coincide with the
Sharee’ah in the reason for which it is done, or else
it would be rejected. Therefore, celebrating Al-
Mawlid is a Bid’ah because it is performed as a
rewardable act, despite the fact that it has not been
legislated.

the meaning is very clear to me and the scholars

Ego, tut tut.

It doesn't help your case when you mistate the positions of classical scholars by selective quoting. (I have noticed how sometimes you will put in a quote by a classical scholar, sometimes even an unrelated one, then place another unsubstiantiated opinion after it, almost indicating it is a part of the same text when its not. Obfuscation.)

"the scholars" or do you mean your favoured scholars? Lets not pretend that your view is universal. As you have obfuscated the views of Imam Shafi'i, lets get an actual quote on his views:

“Innovated matters in religion (min Al-Umur) are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and contravenes the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma‘ (consensus) – then that is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of [any and all good things [min al-khayr] and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And ‘Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadan: ‘ni’matu bida’at hadhihi‘ what a good innovation this is’ meaning it was innovated without having existed before and, even so, there was nothing in it that contradicted the above.”

Source: http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/1003 Translation provided there, not by me. According to the same page, Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has confirmed in his writings that "It is reported by Al-Bayhaqi with a Sahih chain".

Totally different to what you suggest and kind of shows how the places you quote have twisted the words of the classical scholars.

So please do not pretend that youre views are in accordance with Imam shafi'i - they are not. You take Imam shafi'is definition of Bid'ah (including hanasah) and then apply Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah's opinions on bid'ah (where his definition is different and for him the hanah bid'ah is not a bid'ah at all), causing confusion for you and for everyone else.

Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “A Bid’ah is any form of worship that did not exist (at the time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his companions) then later it was innovated.”

Fasting existed. Saw did salaah. So did other things. So, to see if you agree with this, I need to ask a question.

As the prophet stated in recorded hadith that he fasted on mondays because that was the day he was born, if I celebrate his mawlid by fasting on mondays too, do you approve support and encourage this action?

A yes or no answer will do.

You wrote:

Ego, tut tut.

It doesn't help your case when you mistate the positions of classical scholars by selective quoting. (I have noticed how sometimes you will put in a quote by a classical scholar, sometimes even an unrelated one, then place another unsubstiantiated opinion after it, almost indicating it is a part of the same text when its not. Obfuscation.)

"the scholars" or do you mean your favoured scholars? Lets not pretend that your view is universal. As you have obfuscated the views of Imam Shafi'i, lets get an actual quote on his views:

“Innovated matters in religion (min Al-Umur) are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and contravenes the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma‘ (consensus) – then that is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of [any and all good things [min al-khayr] and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And ‘Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadan: ‘ni’matu bida’at hadhihi‘ what a good innovation this is’ meaning it was innovated without having existed before and, even so, there was nothing in it that contradicted the above.”

Source: http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/1003 Translation provided there, not by me. According to the same page, Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has confirmed in his writings that "It is reported by Al-Bayhaqi with a Sahih chain".

Totally different to what you suggest and kind of shows how the places you quote have twisted the words of the classical scholars.

So please do not pretend that youre views are in accordance with Imam shafi'i - they are not. You take Imam shafi'is definition of Bid'ah (including hanasah) and then apply Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah's opinions on bid'ah (where his definition is different and for him the hanah bid'ah is not a bid'ah at all), causing confusion for you and for everyone else.

Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “A Bid’ah is any form of worship that did not exist (at the time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his companions) then later it was innovated.”

Fasting existed. Saw did salaah. So did other things. So, to see if you agree with this, I need to ask a question.

As the prophet stated in recorded hadith that he fasted on mondays because that was the day he was born, if I celebrate his mawlid by fasting on mondays too, do you approve support and encourage this action?

A yes or no answer will do.

 

direct refutation of imam shafi quote all sufis misinterpretate

http://www.bidah.com/articles/rouuz-the-notion-of-bidah-hasanah-good-inn...

We have to understand that there are two orientations as it relates to

how bidah is defined and how bidah is defined will affect the nature of

any scholars' speech on the subject. As for the first orientation then

they use the word bidah (بدعة) to

refer to every newly-arising thing which is not found in the Book and

the Sunnah, irrespective of whether it relates to worship (ibaadah) or

custom (aadah) and regardless of whether it is praiseworthy or

blameworthy. This understanding and usage of the term bidah is known

from Imam al-Shafi'i and his followers were influenced in this such as al-Izz bin Abd al-Salam,

al-Nawawi, Abu Shaamah, and likewise from the Malikis, al-Qarafi and

al-Zarqani, and from the Hanafis Ibn Abideen, and from the Hanbalis, Ibn

al-Jawzi. The other orientation is the one which states that bidah (بدعة) is applied only to religious matters and thus it can only ever be blameworthy and evil, and in this they are applying the Shariah meaning for the word bidah.

The Statements of Imaam al-Shafi'i

 
Deception Alert: The innovators present the statements of some of these scholars like al-Shafi'i and al-Izz bin Abd al-Salam to the people by citing them through Ibn Hajar

al-Asqalani's citation of them in Fath al-Bari (Kitab al-Tawhid), and

they have a particular deceptive purpose in mind for this: To make it

look as if Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani's view is one of total corroboration and acceptance, despite the fact that when we see the entire section, we see Ibn Hajar

al-Asqalani's clarification of the matter shows that his view and

definition of bidah (as defined by the Shariah) is one that agrees with

that of al-Shatibi and that of the Salaf in general. This will be covered in a separate subsequent part in this series inshaa'Allaah.
Al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Hajar

and Ibn Taymiyyah (and others) have cited the statements of al-Shafi'i,

so we can document them here for the record. Al-Bayhaqi relates in

Manaqib al-Shafi'i (1/469) with his isnad that Imam al-Shafi'i said:

 

المحدثات

من الأمور ضربان: أحدهما ما أحدث مما يخالف كتابا أو سنة أو أثرا أو

إجماعا، فهذه البدعة الضلالة، والثانية: ما أحدث من الخير لا خلاف فيه

لواحد من هذا، وهذه محدثة غير مذمومة

The

newly-invented matters are of two types: The first of them is that

which has been introduced from that which opposes [something from] the

book, or [something from] the sunnah, or a narration, or [a matter of]

consensus. This is the misguided innovation. And the second is that

which has been introduced of goodness and there is no opposition to

anyone of these things [qur'an, sunnah, athar, ijmaa']. This is the

newly-invented matter which is not blameworthy.

Ibn Hajar also mentions it in al-Fath (Maktabah Salafiyyah edition, 13/253):

 

قال

الشافعي "البدعة بدعتان: محمودة ومذمومة، فما وافق السنة فهو محمود وما

خالفها فهو مذموم" أخرجه أبو نعيم بمعناه من طريق إبراهيم بن الجنيد عن

الشافعي، وجاء عن الشافعي أيضا ما أخرجه البيهقي في مناقبه قال "المحدثات

ضربان ما أحدث يخالف كتابا أو سنة أو أثرا أو إجماعا فهذه بدعة الضلال، وما

أحدث من الخير لا يخالف شيئا من ذلك فهذه محدثة غير مذمومة

Al-Shafi'i said:

Bidah

is of two types: praiseworthy and blameworthy. Whatever is in

agreemenet with the Sunnah it is praiseworthy and whatever opposes it is

blameworthy.

Ibn Nu'aym related it with its meaning through

Ibrahim bin al-Junaid from al-Shafi'i. Also from al-Shafi'i is what

al-Bayhaqi related in his Manaqib, he said:

The

newly-invented matters are of two types: The first of them is that which

has been introduced from that which opposes [something from] the book,

or [something from] the sunnah, or a narration, or [a matter of]

consensus. This is the misguided innovation. And the second is that

which has been introduced of goodness and does not oppose any of these

things [qur'an, sunnah, athar, ijmaa']. This is the newly-invented

matter which is not blameworthy.

Understanding These Statements Correctly

We have already established in Part 1 from Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani

that whenever the term 'bidah' is used to refer to a praiseworthy

matter it is being employed with its broader linguistic meaning. Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Bari (Maktabah Salafiyyah print, 13/278)

 

وأما "

البدع " فهو جمع بدعة وهي كل شيء ليس له مثال تقدم فيشمل لغة ما يحمد ويذم ،

ويختص في عرف أهل الشرع بما يذم وإن وردت في المحمود فعلى معناها اللغوي

As for innovations (البدع), it is the plural of innovation (بدعة)

and it is everything which does not have any prior example.

Linguistically, [the word] encompasses what is both praiseworthy and

blameworthy. In the usage of the people of the legislation (i.e.

Scholars) it is specifically for what is blameworthy and if it is used in connection to what is praiseworthy, then it is upon its linguistic meaning.

This explanation leads us to the following diagram which makes things easier to visualize:

 

What al-Shafi'i is referring to goes beyond and outside of the scope of the Shariah

defnition of bidah, and this is established by the fact that his

followers (such as al-Izz bin Abd al-Salam) make it clear in their

particular classification of bidah that they enter matters which go

beyond affairs of worship and enter into wasaa'il (means) and masaalih

mursalah (matters of public interest). The statement of al-Izz bin Abd al-Salam

will be discussed in the next article, along with al-Shatibi's

clarification and rebuttal of it. The late Salafi Shaykh of Qatar, Ahmad

bin Hajar Aal Butami (d. 1423H), who is Shafi'i in fiqh, explains in

his book Tahdhir al-Muslimin anil-Ibtidaa' wal-Bida' fil-Din (Dar al-Imam al-Bukhari, 1428H, p. 114):

 

As for the saying of Imaam al-Shafi'i, "Bidah

is of two types: praiseworthy and blameworthy. Whatever is in

agreemenet with the Sunnah it is praiseworthy and whatever opposes the

Sunnah is blameworthy", the intent behind "praiseworthy innovation"

is what has been innovated of beneficial matters relating to worldly

affairs and [affairs of] habitation, livelihood such as the use of

radio, electricity, airplanes, cars and using the phone and what is

similar to that of good and beneficial inventions. This is because they

are not harmful (in and of themselves) and do not lead (in and of

themselves) to any evil that comes to the people, or to the performance

of what is haraam or destroying any foundation from the foundations of

the religion. And Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted, has permitted His

servants to invent whatever they wish to look after their worldly

interests, He, the Exalted said (وَافْعَلُوا الْخَيْرَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ), "And work good that you may be successful" (2:77).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu' al-Fatawa (20/163):

 

ومن هنا

يعرف ضلال من ابتدع طريقاً أو اعتقاداً زعم أن الايمان لا يتم إلا به، مع

العلم بأن الرسول لم يذكره، وما خالف النصوص فهو بدعة باتفاق المسلمين، وما

لم يعلم أنه خالفها فقد لا يسمى بدعة، قال الشافعي رحمه الله‏:‏ البدعة

بدعتان‏:‏ بدعة خالفت كتاباً وسنة وإجماعاً، وأثراً عن بعض ‏(‏أصحاب‏)‏

رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فهذه بدعة ضلالة، وبدعة لم تخالف شيئاً من

ذلك فهذه قد تكون حسنة لقول عمر‏:‏ ‏[‏نعمت البدعة هذه‏]‏ وهذا الكلام أو

نحوه رواه البيهقي بإسناده الصحيح في المدخل

And

from here, the misguidance of the one who innovated a path or belief

-claiming that faith cannot be completed except without it - becomes

known, alongside the knowledge that the Messenger did not mention it.

And whatever opposes the texts, then it is an innovation by agreement of

the Muslims, and that which is not known to oppose [the texts], then it

is not always called 'bidah' (in the blameworthy Shariah sense). Al-Shafi'i (rahimahullaah) said:

Bidah

is of two types: A bidah that opposes [something from] the book, or

[something from] the sunnah, or [a matter of] consensus, or a narration

from some of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi

wasallam), this is the misguided innovation. And a bidah which does not

oppose any of these things [qur'an, sunnah, athar, ijmaa']. This is what

can be good (hasanah), due to the saying of Umar, "What an excellent

innovation this is".

This statement or what is similar to it has been related by al-Bayhaqi with in authentic chain of narration in al-Madkhal...

Al-Mubarakfuri wrote in Tuhfatul al-Ahwazi (7/366):

 

فقوله صلى

الله عليه وسلم كل بدعة ضلالة من جوامع الكلم لا يخرج عنه شيء وهو أصل

عظيم من أصول الدين وأما ما وقع في كلام السلف من استحسان بعض البدع فإنما

ذلك في البدع اللغوية لا الشرعية فمن ذلك قول عمر رضي الله عنه في التراويح

نعمت البدعة

For

his saying (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), "Every innovation is

misguidance" is from the concise, profound words (jawaami' al-kalim),

nothing exits from them, and it is a mighty foundation from the

foundations of the religion. As for whta occurs in the speech of some of

the Salaf of considering some of the innovations to be good, then that

is in relation to linguistic (usage of) bidah, not the Shariah (usage). From (the examples) of that is the saying of Umar (radiallaahu anhu) regarding the tarawih (prayer), "What an excellent innovation."

And Ibn Katheer said in his tafseer (Dar Tayyibah, 1422H, 1/398):

 

والبدعة

على قسمين تارة تكون بدعة شرعية كقوله فإن كل محدثة بدعة وكل بدعة ضلالة

وتارة تكون بدعة لغوية كقول أمير المؤمنين عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه عن

جمعه إياهم على صلاة التراويح واستمرارهم : نعمت البدعة هذه

And

bidah is of two types. Sometimes it can be a legislative innovation

(bidah shar'iyyah), such as his saying, "Every newly-invented matter is

an innovation and every innovation is misguidance" and sometimes it can

be a linguistic innovation (bidah lughawiyyah), such as the saying of

Amir al-Mu'minin Umar bin al-Khattaab, (radiallaahu anhu) about his

bringing them together for the tarawih prayer and their continuance upon that, "What an excellent innovation this is."

From what has preceded it should now be very clear that in the usage of

some of the Scholars, they employ the word bidah with its linguistic

meaning to include praiseworthy matters which either a) already have a specific precedent in the Shariah and are therefore not 'bidah' in the legislative (Shar'iyy) sense or b) matters which pertain to public interest (maslahah mursalah) which do not clash with the Shariah

but rather are in agreement with it and its objectives and are

considered praiseworthy (such as building schools). This should be kept

totally separate and distinct from the censured and condemned bidah in

matters of worship which can be innovation from all angles, in every

sense of the word (bidah haqiqiyyah) or from some angles only (bidah idafiyyah).

Or in other words: Every innovation in the arena of the acts of worship

which do not have any basis or foundation in the Book or the Sunnah or

from the rightly-guided Caliphs or Companions, in either their

foundations, or their details, then it is a blameworthy, repulsive

bidah in the Shariah.

Imam al-Shafi'i Did Not Permit Departure from the Sunnah

It is appropriate here to show that Imam al-Shafi'i was a follower of

the Sunnah and did not permit departure from the Sunnah into bidah, and

that al-Shafi'i's statements cited above are no proof whatsoever for

those people who claim attachment to him, but misunderstand his words

(regarding the linguistic use of the term 'bidah') and confuse them with

the bidah idafiyyah. The example that can be given here is what is cited by Ibn Hajar

in Fath al-Bari from al-Shafi'i in relation to touching the corners of

the kabah. In Kitab al-Hajj, al-Bukhari brings a chapter heading titled "On the one who does not touch except the two Yemeni corners" and in his commentary Ibn Hajar discusses the various narrations in this regard that pertain to Mu'awiyyah (radiallaahu anhu) touching all four corners and Ibn Abbaas

(radiallaahu anhu) advising him that only the two corners are to be

touched. Mu'awiyyah states, "There is nothing from the house (ka'bah)

that is abandoned." Ibn Hajar cites al-Shafi'i (see 3/473-474):

 

وأجاب

الشافعي عن قول من قال ليس شيء من البيت مهجورا بأنا لم ندع استلامهما هجرا

للبيت ، وكيف يهجره وهو يطوف به ، ولكنا نتبع السنة فعلا أو تركا ، ولو

كان ترك استلامهما هجرا لهما لكان ترك استلام ما بين الأركان هجرا لها ،

ولا قائل به

And

al-Shafi'i responded to the saying of the one who said, "There is

nothing from the house (ka'bah) that is abandoned" with (the response)

that: We have not left touching the (two corners) out of abandoning the

house, and how can a person be abandoning it when he is making tawaf

around it. Rather, we follow the Sunnah both in performance (fi'l) and abandonment (tark),

and if not touching them both constitutes abandoning them, then not

touching what is between the corners would also be abandonment of it,

yet there is no one expressing this [view].

Al-Shafi'i indicates this is the practice of the Messenger (alayhis salaam) - to only touch the two corners - and Ibn Hajar

says (3/474) that to kiss the first (the stone) and touch the second

(Yemeni corner) only (and not touch or kiss the other two) is the view

of the majority.

The point of evidence here is that upon the argument of the Innovators that "good innovation" is allowed so long as it has a basis in the Shariah

then why did al-Shafi'i show rejection against this because it can be

argued that since touching the other two corners is already established

in the Sunnah (so we now have a basis) why cannot we innovate and touch

the other two corners and none of this would clash with the Shariah and it would be "good innovation".

This is because they do not understand the statements of al-Shafi'i

correctly, who does not allow any innovation whatsoever in the matters

of worship because matters of worship are not the same as matters

included within the broader linguistic usage of the term 'bidah' (like

the masalih mursalah) which is how al-Shafi'i makes application of the

term 'bidah.'

In reality, what they are upon is the bidah idafiyyah

in matters of worship (ibadah) and they attempt to make it appear that

what they are upon of reprehensible innovation which has no evidence for

its particulars and details from the Sunnah is of the same category as

what is entered into a purely linguistic usage of the term 'bidah' by

some of the scholars. So their deception is clear walhamdulillaah. We

will make their deception even more clear in our series "Proof That The bidah idafiyyah is Evil and Rejected" (read series here).

Refer to that for more details which will highlight ever more clearly

their departure from the way of al-Shafi'i (and others they claim to be

following such as al-Izz bin Abd al-Salam).

You wrote:

Ego, tut tut.

It doesn't help your case when you mistate the positions of classical scholars by selective quoting. (I have noticed how sometimes you will put in a quote by a classical scholar, sometimes even an unrelated one, then place another unsubstiantiated opinion after it, almost indicating it is a part of the same text when its not. Obfuscation.)

"the scholars" or do you mean your favoured scholars? Lets not pretend that your view is universal. As you have obfuscated the views of Imam Shafi'i, lets get an actual quote on his views:

“Innovated matters in religion (min Al-Umur) are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and contravenes the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma‘ (consensus) – then that is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of [any and all good things [min al-khayr] and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And ‘Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadan: ‘ni’matu bida’at hadhihi‘ what a good innovation this is’ meaning it was innovated without having existed before and, even so, there was nothing in it that contradicted the above.”

Source: http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/1003 Translation provided there, not by me. According to the same page, Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has confirmed in his writings that "It is reported by Al-Bayhaqi with a Sahih chain".

Totally different to what you suggest and kind of shows how the places you quote have twisted the words of the classical scholars.

So please do not pretend that youre views are in accordance with Imam shafi'i - they are not. You take Imam shafi'is definition of Bid'ah (including hanasah) and then apply Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah's opinions on bid'ah (where his definition is different and for him the hanah bid'ah is not a bid'ah at all), causing confusion for you and for everyone else.

Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “A Bid’ah is any form of worship that did not exist (at the time of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his companions) then later it was innovated.”

Fasting existed. Saw did salaah. So did other things. So, to see if you agree with this, I need to ask a question.

As the prophet stated in recorded hadith that he fasted on mondays because that was the day he was born, if I celebrate his mawlid by fasting on mondays too, do you approve support and encourage this action?

A yes or no answer will do.

 

my favoured schoalrs are those of the past like 4 imams yours are who?

 

according to the hadith of muhammad saw he fasted on mondays because he was born that day so if you do fast on mondays for that reason then that is according to the sunnah and is correct

 

but fasting on the day of mawlid and celebrating is a different issue, fast mondays only is correct for that reason

 

so with this your answer was a simple yes or no answer here is yes for their is evidence to do this the hadith mentioned

so now if you go around saying fast mondays muhammad saw was born that day no problem although theirs a second reason why he fasted on that day so mention that aswell for he had 2 reasons missing one or the other will be incorrect

 

 

">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmpk9rln890]

 

">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkYeJaCdX8Y]

">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DufbpvfG-wU]

Caliph Umar said it was Bid'ah. Now you can ask youtube for an explanation or you can take the word of Amir ul mu'mineen Caliph Umar (ra)

The issue is that you are confused and (probably unintentionally) have obfuscated matters. Its surprising how some people read so much yet understand so little.

BECAUSE YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND THE TWO DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON BID'AH.

I agree Imam Shafi'i never told people to go against sunnah.

He simply classed new things that were not against sunnah as "hasanah".

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah refused to class them as bid'ah apart from the literal sense.

(now, you can deny the above, but you)

Those that went against Sunnah, Imam Shafi'i classed them as bid'ah sayyi'ah and Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah as bid'ah (as he did not class the others as bid'ah at all).

Now here is the thing when you confuse the two definitions and you miss understnading the unity of the two views, you end up like you are, all confused.

This is why you have even posted nonsense telling people to not do nafl ibadah - just ask yourself if you seriously believe that a person should not suddenly decide to read two nafl, because he hasnt checked if the prophet ever prayed them at that time?

No, your whole understanding is wrong. What both Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Shafi'i are against is new things WHICH CONTRADICT THE QUR'AN AND SUNNAH. So unless something was forbidden, it is allowed. Which is the basic islamic principle.

Caliph Umar called tarawih Bid'ah Hasanah. Imam shafi'i took that to show how there is a bid'ah hasanah. This shows that as it wasnt forbidden and did not go against qur'an and sunnah (and was a good thing) it was allowed (and a very good thing).

Now tarawih is an example of this. You think its "obvious", but that is only so because it was made so by Caliph Umar (ra).

In the same way, when the caliph of the prophet, the amir of the believers did actions, you cannot argue "but they were secular in nature" because we dont believe in such differences - but as they were in accordance with the principles of Islam, the qur'an and sunnah, they were considered allowed and a good thing.

Otherwise you get stuck with the caliph of the prophet adding a new tax that was not mentioned in the qur'an and sunnah, and you get Umar the 2nd changing tax rules where the old ones were defined in the qur'an and sunnah (the changes simply didnt contradict...).

In the same way, all the caliphs were chosen in different, novel unique ways - and electing a amir ul mu'mineen and caliph of the prophet is NOT a secular non-religious matter. All of these are allowed.

But if we follow your modernist ways, none of them would be. The only way you can stick to your ideas is to ignore the path of the sahabahs and the salaf.

Caliph Umar Called something bid'ah and called it hasanah. Imam Shafi'i, as I have shown above, accepted the existance of Bid'ah hasanah.

Now stop obfuscating the truth - we are not meant to decide who is the better debater, but try to understand the truth. If your only aim is to "win" an argument, then I am not (or more accurately, should not be) interested in that.

Please tell me you accept and encourage (as vigorously as you discourage other things) fasting on mondays , in accordance to the hadith of the prophet (saw). (ie because the prophet said he fasted on mondays because that was the day the prophet was born).

If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born.

If your answer is no, ask yourself if the knot in your stomach at the thought is ego/satan at work, because it certainly cannot be bid'ah (in any sense) when the prophet fasted and explained the reasons for his fasting.

I have made a new blog post to explain to you the quotes you have made previously about big scholars talking negatively about bid'ahs that were seen as good things.

"Jihadi" groups and Bid'ah

It should help you understand some of the words you have cut and paste from elsewhere. It explains the different definitions of bid'ah and what the scholars were referring to.

I did not post it on here as it was off topic.

Here I want you to answer the question that I have posted in the previous post.

Inshallah you will be acting on the hadith of the prophet tomorrow (monday) and fast for the reasons the prophet mentioned for him fasting on it.

Please also ask all your acquaintances to do so as vigorously as you promote (your understanding) of Islam on here.

You wrote:

Caliph Umar said it was Bid'ah. Now you can ask youtube for an explanation or you can take the word of Amir ul mu'mineen Caliph Umar (ra)

The issue is that you are confused and (probably unintentionally) have obfuscated matters. Its surprising how some people read so much yet understand so little.

it is not surprising  that those who read a little also have little or no understanding

Quote:

BECAUSE YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND THE TWO DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON BID'AH.

 

their was a difference of opinion between ali ra and muawiyyah ra but one wa right the other was wrong ali ra was ont he right, not all difference of opinion ahve rights some have right and wrong in this case one is right the others wrong

Quote:

I agree Imam Shafi'i never told people to go against sunnah.

He simply classed new things that were not against sunnah as "hasanah".

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah refused to class them as bid'ah apart from the literal sense.

(now, you can deny the above, but you)

Those that went against Sunnah, Imam Shafi'i classed them as bid'ah sayyi'ah and Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah as bid'ah (as he did not class the others as bid'ah at all).

Now here is the thing when you confuse the two definitions and you miss understnading the unity of the two views, you end up like you are, all confused.

their are no 2 definition theirs only one, the other bidah as i said doesnt fit into this, such as reviving a sunnah, or creating a new weapon for jihad, or creating a new car buying a new car for a journey, flying a plain to hajj, these are not bidah in religion but linguistic bidah or  general bidah that is not part of the religion

obviously you need to buy yourself a arabic to english dictionary

 

he classed the as hasanah becuase they were sunnah hasanah, revival of the sunnah like the tarawih by umar ra or the jarir ra hadith in which muhammad saw told to give people zakah and classified that as hasanah revival of a sunnah or good act according to quran and hadith such as if i tell a person who never read quran to read quran this is hasanah not bidah, even if it is called bidah hasanah it means making that person do something new to him not new in religion for can quran bu bidah? no her eit means him doing a act of islam for the first time so for him its quran which is not new but him reading it is new act for him

so hasanah/sunnah hasanah

Quote:

This is why you have even posted nonsense telling people to not do nafl ibadah - just ask yourself if you seriously believe that a person should not suddenly decide to read two nafl, because he hasnt checked if the prophet ever prayed them at that time?

you havent learnt your lesson ahve you, twisting and lying and attributing posts to me i never made, show me where is said dont do nawfal or did i say  do nawfal and sunnah from hadith not the ones that are innvoated as they are not part of the religion no diffferent to fardh, yet you still use trickery and lie, i caught you out before in that mawlid statement which claimed i amde regarding somethign and tried to attribute it to something else and when i caught you out you lie and say you didnt know, and now you try this, typical sufi features you have in you, anyway regarding to your question let me rephrase it

if a person has no knowledge in how to do salah should he do it by guessing how its done or should he learn it first and then do it correctly

Quote:

No, your whole understanding is wrong. What both Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Shafi'i are against is new things WHICH CONTRADICT THE QUR'AN AND SUNNAH. So unless something was forbidden, it is allowed. Which is the basic islamic principle.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu' al-Fatawa (20/163):

 

ومن هنا

يعرف ضلال من ابتدع طريقاً أو اعتقاداً زعم أن الايمان لا يتم إلا به، مع

العلم بأن الرسول لم يذكره، وما خالف النصوص فهو بدعة باتفاق المسلمين، وما

لم يعلم أنه خالفها فقد لا يسمى بدعة، قال الشافعي رحمه الله‏:‏ البدعة

بدعتان‏:‏ بدعة خالفت كتاباً وسنة وإجماعاً، وأثراً عن بعض ‏(‏أصحاب‏)‏

رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فهذه بدعة ضلالة، وبدعة لم تخالف شيئاً من

ذلك فهذه قد تكون حسنة لقول عمر‏:‏ ‏[‏نعمت البدعة هذه‏]‏ وهذا الكلام أو

نحوه رواه البيهقي بإسناده الصحيح في المدخل

And

from here, the misguidance of the one who innovated a path or belief

-claiming that faith cannot be completed except without it - becomes

known, alongside the knowledge that the Messenger did not mention it.

And whatever opposes the texts, then it is an innovation by agreement of

the Muslims, and that which is not known to oppose [the texts], then it

is not always called 'bidah' (in the blameworthy Shariah sense). Al-Shafi'i (rahimahullaah) said:

Bidah

is of two types: A bidah that opposes [something from] the book, or

[something from] the sunnah, or [a matter of] consensus, or a narration

from some of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi

wasallam), this is the misguided innovation. And a bidah which does not

oppose any of these things [qur'an, sunnah, athar, ijmaa']. This is what

can be good (hasanah), due to the saying of Umar, "What an excellent

innovation this is".

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

Quote:

Caliph Umar called tarawih Bid'ah Hasanah. Imam shafi'i took that to show how there is a bid'ah hasanah. This shows that as it wasnt forbidden and did not go against qur'an and sunnah (and was a good thing) it was allowed (and a very good thing).

Now tarawih is an example of this. You think its "obvious", but that is only so because it was made so by Caliph Umar (ra).

In the same way, when the caliph of the prophet, the amir of the believers did actions, you cannot argue "but they were secular in nature" because we dont believe in such differences - but as they were in accordance with the principles of Islam, the qur'an and sunnah, they were considered allowed and a good thing.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

Quote:

Otherwise you get stuck with the caliph of the prophet adding a new tax that was not mentioned in the qur'an and sunnah, and you get Umar the 2nd changing tax rules where the old ones were defined in the qur'an and sunnah (the changes simply didnt contradict...).

no new tax were added umar ibn abdul aziz changed is one which muhammad saw set a minimum and maximum to which can be changed stated by ibn taymiyyah but a liar like you will ignore this for you are a follwoer of whims and desires , and new tax was based on quran and sunnah with evidence nto because the calipha suddenly felt like it again a liar like you would twist that aswell

Quote:

In the same way, all the caliphs were chosen in different, novel unique ways - and electing a amir ul mu'mineen and caliph of the prophet is NOT a secular non-religious matter. All of these are allowed.

all calihps were chosen by the quran and sunnah way, abu bakr ra after discussion by shura and nomination, umar ra abubakr ra asked the people you choose they requested him to do so he said umar ra but even after abubakr ra died people didnt jsut go with abubakr ra they again did the shura and decided on umar ra same with ali ra and uthman ra, and later hasan ra and then uma ribn abdul aziz who told the people its your choice you choose who you want the caipha to be and they said him obviously you need to do some reading not learn from some pir who learns in his dream

</p> <p>But if we follow your modernist ways, none of them would be. The only way you can stick to your ideas is to ignore the path of the sahabahs and the salaf. [quote]</p> <p>all my views are backed by classicals scholars your none by modern but a bunch of schoalrs of today or alter scholars or the twisting of hadith, so whos the modernist me or you</p> <p>for someone who doesnt even know salatul duha was performed by muhammad saw and is a bidah should keep their mouth shut in thigns which is far beyond their imagination</p> <p>[quote wrote:

Caliph Umar Called something bid'ah and called it hasanah. Imam Shafi'i, as I have shown above, accepted the existance of Bid'ah hasanah.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

 

again use your brain for once or is ibn taymiyyah wrong here aswell

Quote:

Now stop obfuscating the truth - we are not meant to decide who is the better debater, but try to understand the truth. If your only aim is to "win" an argument, then I am not (or more accurately, should not be) interested in that.

stop acting like your some hero from action movie, and making yourself look like the good guy, we dont need sympathy tones here, speak the truth by using evidence somehting you dont even know how to do the evidence proves whos right whos wrong, your twisting of posts and lying shows how much on the right you are "salatul duha is bidah"

</p> <p>Please tell me you accept and encourage (as vigorously as you discourage other things) fasting on mondays , in accordance to the hadith of the prophet (saw). (ie because the prophet said he fasted on mondays because that was the day the prophet was born).</p> <p>If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born. [quote]</p> <p>i already answered this</p> <p>yes</p> <p>It was narrated from Abu Qataadah al-Ansaari that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was<br /> asked about fasting on Mondays. He said: &ldquo;On that day I was born, and on it the Revelation came to me.&rdquo; Narrated by Muslim, 1162.</p> <p>[quote]</p> <p>If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this<br /> hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born. [quote wrote:

you dont need to do that, were not friends so dont act like it

Quote:

If your answer is no, ask yourself if the knot in your stomach at the thought is ego/satan at work, because it certainly cannot be bid'ah (in any sense) when the prophet fasted and explained the reasons for his fasting.

It was narrated from Abu Qataadah al-Ansaari that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was
asked about fasting on Mondays. He said: “On that day I was born, and on it the Revelation came to me.” Narrated by Muslim, 1162.

 

i believe i made this clear form my very first post either you didnt read it or missed it

 

blocking my username whats the point im still posting, and its no loss to me to you it is, for when i get my quotation coding wrong you have to suffer not me with what happened above

You wrote:

I have made a new blog post to explain to you the quotes you have made previously about big scholars talking negatively about bid'ahs that were seen as good things.

"Jihadi" groups and Bid'ah

It should help you understand some of the words you have cut and paste from elsewhere. It explains the different definitions of bid'ah and what the scholars were referring to.

I did not post it on here as it was off topic.

Here I want you to answer the question that I have posted in the previous post.

Inshallah you will be acting on the hadith of the prophet tomorrow (monday) and fast for the reasons the prophet mentioned for him fasting on it.

Please also ask all your acquaintances to do so as vigorously as you promote (your understanding) of Islam on here.

 

when a article has no reference you know theirs something wrong

in regards to suicide bombing, suicide bombing like the bali bombing incident is harram so are the ones in bus train etc

however suicide bombing in the battlefiled only against the soldiers of the enemy is a different matter, allah knows best if thats right or not

killing civilians muslim or not is wrong and harram for the rule of jihad is not kill women children and those not involved in the battle or war

abualabbasassaffah7 wrote:

blocking my username whats the point im still posting, and its no loss to me to you it is, for when i get my quotation coding wrong you have to suffer not me with what happened above

Lol!
Admin you should just unblock him

abualabbasassaffah7][quote=You wrote:

Caliph Umar said it was Bid'ah. Now you can ask youtube for an explanation or you can take the word of Amir ul mu'mineen Caliph Umar (ra)

The issue is that you are confused and (probably unintentionally) have obfuscated matters. Its surprising how some people read so much yet understand so little.

it is not surprising  that those who read a little also have little or no understanding

Quote:

BECAUSE YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND THE TWO DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON BID'AH.

 

their was a difference of opinion between ali ra and muawiyyah ra but one wa right the other was wrong ali ra was ont he right, not all difference of opinion ahve rights some have right and wrong in this case one is right the others wrong

Quote:

I agree Imam Shafi'i never told people to go against sunnah.

He simply classed new things that were not against sunnah as "hasanah".

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah refused to class them as bid'ah apart from the literal sense.

(now, you can deny the above, but you)

Those that went against Sunnah, Imam Shafi'i classed them as bid'ah sayyi'ah and Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah as bid'ah (as he did not class the others as bid'ah at all).

Now here is the thing when you confuse the two definitions and you miss understnading the unity of the two views, you end up like you are, all confused.

their are no 2 definition theirs only one, the other bidah as i said doesnt fit into this, such as reviving a sunnah, or creating a new weapon for jihad, or creating a new car buying a new car for a journey, flying a plain to hajj, these are not bidah in religion but linguistic bidah or  general bidah that is not part of the religion

obviously you need to buy yourself a arabic to english dictionary

 

he classed the as hasanah becuase they were sunnah hasanah, revival of the sunnah like the tarawih by umar ra or the jarir ra hadith in which muhammad saw told to give people zakah and classified that as hasanah revival of a sunnah or good act according to quran and hadith such as if i tell a person who never read quran to read quran this is hasanah not bidah, even if it is called bidah hasanah it means making that person do something new to him not new in religion for can quran bu bidah? no her eit means him doing a act of islam for the first time so for him its quran which is not new but him reading it is new act for him

so hasanah/sunnah hasanah

Quote:

This is why you have even posted nonsense telling people to not do nafl ibadah - just ask yourself if you seriously believe that a person should not suddenly decide to read two nafl, because he hasnt checked if the prophet ever prayed them at that time?

you havent learnt your lesson ahve you, twisting and lying and attributing posts to me i never made, show me where is said dont do nawfal or did i say  do nawfal and sunnah from hadith not the ones that are innvoated as they are not part of the religion no diffferent to fardh, yet you still use trickery and lie, i caught you out before in that mawlid statement which claimed i amde regarding somethign and tried to attribute it to something else and when i caught you out you lie and say you didnt know, and now you try this, typical sufi features you have in you, anyway regarding to your question let me rephrase it

if a person has no knowledge in how to do salah should he do it by guessing how its done or should he learn it first and then do it correctly

Quote:

No, your whole understanding is wrong. What both Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Shafi'i are against is new things WHICH CONTRADICT THE QUR'AN AND SUNNAH. So unless something was forbidden, it is allowed. Which is the basic islamic principle.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu' al-Fatawa (20/163):

 

ومن هنا 

يعرف ضلال من ابتدع طريقاً أو اعتقاداً زعم أن الايمان لا يتم إلا به، مع

العلم بأن الرسول لم يذكره، وما خالف النصوص فهو بدعة باتفاق المسلمين، وما

لم يعلم أنه خالفها فقد لا يسمى بدعة، قال الشافعي رحمه الله‏:‏ البدعة

بدعتان‏:‏ بدعة خالفت كتاباً وسنة وإجماعاً، وأثراً عن بعض ‏(‏أصحاب‏)‏

رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فهذه بدعة ضلالة، وبدعة لم تخالف شيئاً من

ذلك فهذه قد تكون حسنة لقول عمر‏:‏ ‏[‏نعمت البدعة هذه‏]‏ وهذا الكلام أو

نحوه رواه البيهقي بإسناده الصحيح في المدخل

And

from here, the misguidance of the one who innovated a path or belief

-claiming that faith cannot be completed except without it - becomes

known, alongside the knowledge that the Messenger did not mention it.

And whatever opposes the texts, then it is an innovation by agreement of

the Muslims, and that which is not known to oppose [the texts], then it

is not always called 'bidah' (in the blameworthy Shariah sense). Al-Shafi'i (rahimahullaah) said:

Bidah

is of two types: A bidah that opposes [something from] the book, or

[something from] the sunnah, or [a matter of] consensus, or a narration

from some of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi

wasallam), this is the misguided innovation. And a bidah which does not

oppose any of these things [qur'an, sunnah, athar, ijmaa']. This is what

can be good (hasanah), due to the saying of Umar, "What an excellent

innovation this is".

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

Quote:

Caliph Umar called tarawih Bid'ah Hasanah. Imam shafi'i took that to show how there is a bid'ah hasanah. This shows that as it wasnt forbidden and did not go against qur'an and sunnah (and was a good thing) it was allowed (and a very good thing).

Now tarawih is an example of this. You think its "obvious", but that is only so because it was made so by Caliph Umar (ra).

In the same way, when the caliph of the prophet, the amir of the believers did actions, you cannot argue "but they were secular in nature" because we dont believe in such differences - but as they were in accordance with the principles of Islam, the qur'an and sunnah, they were considered allowed and a good thing.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

Quote:

Otherwise you get stuck with the caliph of the prophet adding a new tax that was not mentioned in the qur'an and sunnah, and you get Umar the 2nd changing tax rules where the old ones were defined in the qur'an and sunnah (the changes simply didnt contradict...).

no new tax were added umar ibn abdul aziz changed is one which muhammad saw set a minimum and maximum to which can be changed stated by ibn taymiyyah but a liar like you will ignore this for you are a follwoer of whims and desires , and new tax was based on quran and sunnah with evidence nto because the calipha suddenly felt like it again a liar like you would twist that aswell

Quote:

In the same way, all the caliphs were chosen in different, novel unique ways - and electing a amir ul mu'mineen and caliph of the prophet is NOT a secular non-religious matter. All of these are allowed.

all calihps were chosen by the quran and sunnah way, abu bakr ra after discussion by shura and nomination, umar ra abubakr ra asked the people you choose they requested him to do so he said umar ra but even after abubakr ra died people didnt jsut go with abubakr ra they again did the shura and decided on umar ra same with ali ra and uthman ra, and later hasan ra and then uma ribn abdul aziz who told the people its your choice you choose who you want the caipha to be and they said him obviously you need to do some reading not learn from some pir who learns in his dream

</p> <p>But if we follow your modernist ways, none of them would be. The only way you can stick to your ideas is to ignore the path of the sahabahs and the salaf. [quote]</p> <p>all my views are backed by classicals scholars your none by modern but a bunch of schoalrs of today or alter scholars or the twisting of hadith, so whos the modernist me or you</p> <p>for someone who doesnt even know salatul duha was performed by muhammad saw and is a bidah should keep their mouth shut in thigns which is far beyond their imagination</p> <p>[quote wrote:

Caliph Umar Called something bid'ah and called it hasanah. Imam Shafi'i, as I have shown above, accepted the existance of Bid'ah hasanah.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible: 

With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee’ah was established (and would not change after that). When ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.” So what he did was Sunnah but he said, “What a good innovation this is,” because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar’i sense.”  

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235

 

again use your brain for once or is ibn taymiyyah wrong here aswell

Quote:

Now stop obfuscating the truth - we are not meant to decide who is the better debater, but try to understand the truth. If your only aim is to "win" an argument, then I am not (or more accurately, should not be) interested in that.

stop acting like your some hero from action movie, and making yourself look like the good guy, we dont need sympathy tones here, speak the truth by using evidence somehting you dont even know how to do the evidence proves whos right whos wrong, your twisting of posts and lying shows how much on the right you are "salatul duha is bidah"

</p> <p>Please tell me you accept and encourage (as vigorously as you discourage other things) fasting on mondays , in accordance to the hadith of the prophet (saw). (ie because the prophet said he fasted on mondays because that was the day the prophet was born).</p> <p>If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born. [quote wrote:

i already answered this

yes

It was narrated from Abu Qataadah al-Ansaari that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was

asked about fasting on Mondays. He said: “On that day I was born, and on it the Revelation came to me.” Narrated by Muslim, 1162.

Quote:

If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this

hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born.

Quote:

you dont need to do that, were not friends so dont act like it

Quote:

If your answer is no, ask yourself if the knot in your stomach at the thought is ego/satan at work, because it certainly cannot be bid'ah (in any sense) when the prophet fasted and explained the reasons for his fasting.

It was narrated from Abu Qataadah al-Ansaari that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was

asked about fasting on Mondays. He said: “On that day I was born, and on it the Revelation came to me.” Narrated by Muslim, 1162.

 

i believe i made this clear form my very first post either you didnt read it or missed it

 

If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this

site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this

hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born.

Quote:

you dont need to do that, were not friends so dont act like it

 

i sounded harsh in that post, now that i told you my view do what ever you want with that post so long as you dont twist it about

TPOS wrote:

abualabbasassaffah7 wrote:

blocking my username whats the point im still posting, and its no loss to me to you it is, for when i get my quotation coding wrong you have to suffer not me with what happened above

Lol!

Admin you should just unblock him

I didnt block him. Ive unblocked him previously and I cant keep doing that. whoever blocked him should take action.

he classed the as hasanah becuase they were sunnah hasanah, revival of the sunnah like the tarawih by umar ra or the jarir ra hadith in which muhammad saw told to give people zakah and classified that as hasanah revival of a sunnah or good act according to quran and hadith

So when Hadhrat Umar (ra) started the nightly congregation, no one was praying it? If that was the case, then it wouldnt have been revived. It was augmentated into a formality when Caliph Umar (ra) saw how many people prayed it.

no new tax were added umar ibn abdul aziz changed is one which muhammad saw set a minimum and maximum to which can be changed stated by ibn taymiyyah but a liar like you will ignore this for you are a follwoer of whims and desires , and new tax was based on quran and sunnah with evidence nto because the calipha suddenly felt like it again a liar like you would twist that aswell

Spicy.

Umar ibn Abdul aziz did not introduce a new tax. But Caliph Umar (ra), the 2nd Caliph did.

Caliph Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz  changed the rates for a different tax. Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah came centuries later and his ruling I presume is what you would call retrospective - applying to what has already been agreed, adding his interpretation. You see, I can argue about the change in code not being against the qur'an and sunnah. But your view is more rigid and any change requires clear evidence otherwise for your way, it is not allowed.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible

That doesnt change the facts. That you do not consider it bid'ah doesn't change that Caliph Umar called it one. You can scream til your face is red but you cant change that. Caliph Umar (ra) did not say "I am reviving an old sunnah".

If you go to that semantic argument, we shall return to the earlier discussion on the hadith about starting a good new practice, where you wanted the hadith to use precisely the word bid'ah (which it didn't) instead of covering the same topic.

all calihps were chosen by the quran and sunnah way, abu bakr ra after discussion by shura and nomination, umar ra abubakr ra asked the people you choose they requested him to do so he said umar ra but even after abubakr ra died people didnt jsut go with abubakr ra they again did the shura and decided on umar ra same with ali ra and uthman ra, and later hasan ra and then uma ribn abdul aziz who told the people its your choice you choose who you want the caipha to be and they said him obviously you need to do some reading not learn from some pir who learns in his dream

I want to know which revisionist books you have been reading. I assume in them Hadhrat Abu Bakr (ra) also did not have to calm down Hadhrat Umar (ra) reminding him that the prophet was mortal but God wasn't. Please actually go read about what happened.

abualabbasassaffah7 wrote:

If you say yes, I will ask you to show this in all your posts on this

site. I would like atleast one post of yours encouraging following this

hadith where the prophet specifies that he fasted on mondays and specified because it was the day he was born.

Quote:

you dont need to do that, were not friends so dont act like it

 

i sounded harsh in that post, now that i told you my view do what ever you want with that post so long as you dont twist it about

 

erm...

i believe i made this clear form my very first post either you didnt read it or missed it

I must have missed it. Please repeat your views (not a cut and paste from elsewhere, because i suspect you will cut and paste and if you cut and paste what I suppose you will, I find that cut and paste very flawed).

You]</p> <blockquote><p>he classed the as hasanah becuase they were sunnah hasanah, revival of the sunnah like the tarawih by umar ra or the jarir ra hadith in which muhammad saw told to give people zakah and classified that as hasanah revival of a sunnah or good act according to quran and hadith</p></blockquote> <p>So when Hadhrat Umar (ra) started the nightly congregation, no one was praying it? If that was the case, then it wouldnt have been revived. It was augmentated into a formality when Caliph Umar (ra) saw how many people prayed it. [quote]</p> <p>yes their again you are acting blind and then the readers think im beign rude to you what they dont see is you acting the way i say in all my posts in my previous posts i mustve posted this a 100 times by now</p> <p>It was narrated that &lsquo;Abd al-Rahmaan ibn &lsquo;Abd al-Qaari&rsquo; said: <strong>I went out with &lsquo;Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) one night in Ramadaan to the mosque, and the people were scattered, with one man praying by himself and another with a group of men following his prayer.</strong> &lsquo;Umar said: &ldquo;I think that if I gather them behind one reader, it will be better.&rdquo; Then he decided to unite them behind Ubayy ibn Ka&rsquo;b. Then I went out with him on another night, and the people were praying behind their reader. &lsquo;Umar said: &ldquo;What a good innovation this is. But the prayer that they forget about and sleep is better than the one they are offering.&rdquo; Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1906.&nbsp;</p> <p>Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted &lsquo;Umar&rsquo;s words &ldquo;What a good innovation this is&rdquo; as meaning that innovation (bid&rsquo;ah) is permissible:&nbsp;</p> <p>With regard to qiyaam in Ramadaan, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) introduced this to his ummah, and he led them in prayer for a number of nights, because at his time they used to pray in congregation and individually. But he did not persist in leading them in one congregation, lest that be made obligatory for them. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, sharee&rsquo;ah was established (and would not change after that). When &lsquo;Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph, he united them behind one imam, Ubayy ibn Ka&rsquo;b, who united the people in one congregation on the orders of &lsquo;Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). &lsquo;Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) was one of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: &ldquo;I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me; cling tightly to it.&rdquo; So what he did was Sunnah but he said, &ldquo;What a good innovation this is,&rdquo; because it was an innovation in the linguistic sense, as they were doing something that they had not done during the life of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), i.e., gathering to do this, but it is Sunnah in the shar&rsquo;i sense.&rdquo; &nbsp;</p> <p>Majmoo&rsquo; al-Fataawa, 22/234, 235</p> <p>[quote wrote:

no new tax were added umar ibn abdul aziz changed is one which muhammad saw set a minimum and maximum to which can be changed stated by ibn taymiyyah but a liar like you will ignore this for you are a follwoer of whims and desires , and new tax was based on quran and sunnah with evidence nto because the calipha suddenly felt like it again a liar like you would twist that aswell

Spicy.

Umar ibn Abdul aziz did not introduce a new tax. But Caliph Umar (ra), the 2nd Caliph did.

Caliph Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz  changed the rates for a different tax. Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah came centuries later and his ruling I presume is what you would call retrospective - applying to what has already been agreed, adding his interpretation. You see, I can argue about the change in code not being against the qur'an and sunnah. But your view is more rigid and any change requires clear evidence otherwise for your way, it is not allowed.

when ibn taymiyyah made hisf atwa it was based on quran and sunnah, what are you saying uamr ibn abdul aziz was so ignorant that he wasnt even aware this? the 6th khulafa rashideen doesnt even know the evidence of quran and sunnah regarding tax the basic thing a calipha needs to know, so umar ibn abdul aziz is the calipha and he doesnt even know the hadith regarding how to pray salah but ibn taymiyyah knew of this and pointed it out, if ibn taymiyyah kenw of it naturally umar ibn abdul aziz the calipha and more knowledgable person to now know this shows your understanding of things

Quote:

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, when refuting the view of those who quoted ‘Umar’s words “What a good innovation this is” as meaning that innovation (bid’ah) is permissible

That doesnt change the facts. That you do not consider it bid'ah doesn't change that Caliph Umar called it one. You can scream til your face is red but you cant change that. Caliph Umar (ra) did not say "I am reviving an old sunnah". 

and if you scream your face to whatever sufis look like when they chat hu hu hu then it wont change the fact that this was done by muhamamd saw even before umar ra, so for the sake of argument if a person tries to use this excuse then its muhammad saw we follow not umar ra for sahaba ra can make mistakes but muhammad saw regarding religion cannot, so again who dow e go back to umar ra statement or muhammad saw who did tarawih and stopped but told the people to carry on but he wil ldo it at home because he doesnt want it to be made obligatory, so again muhammad saw allowed light beating in this ummah to children wives but he didnt do it so tarawih is no different he allwoed it done in jamaah but he didnt lead because of the reason stated so now are the people whoa re using light beating going against muhammad saw?

Quote:

If you go to that semantic argument, we shall return to the earlier discussion on the hadith about starting a good new practice, where you wanted the hadith to use precisely the word bid'ah (which it didn't) instead of covering the same topic. 

yes the hadith didnt even contain the word bidah and yet you attributed bidah to the hadith so who is lying and who isnt

Quote:

all calihps were chosen by the quran and sunnah way, abu bakr ra after discussion by shura and nomination, umar ra abubakr ra asked the people you choose they requested him to do so he said umar ra but even after abubakr ra died people didnt jsut go with abubakr ra they again did the shura and decided on umar ra same with ali ra and uthman ra, and later hasan ra and then uma ribn abdul aziz who told the people its your choice you choose who you want the caipha to be and they said him obviously you need to do some reading not learn from some pir who learns in his dream

I want to know which revisionist books you have been reading. I assume in them Hadhrat Abu Bakr (ra) also did not have to calm down Hadhrat Umar (ra) reminding him that the prophet was mortal but God wasn't. Please actually go read about what happened.

ibn kathirs khalifah rashideen, imam suyutis khalifah book, as sallabis 4 calihpa series which is based upon the books mentioned and the hadith and narration they used you got a problem with that

when abu bakr ra did that action he wasnt a calipha nor was he chosen as a calipha at that point they then discussed the amtter of caliphate and after dealing with it they then burried muhamamd saw, did you know that or you never even read it but simply taking the little things you read in articles or lectures of your teachers

dont teach me to read for the discussion proves who actually reads and who doesnt when you post the same posts regarding thigns i already posted before and ask the same questions over and over again despite this

so how much ahve you beenr eading here or were you sleepwalking when replying