In recent times there has arisen a thought that has never befroe been propgated ever in the history of Islam. The essential
root of this thought seems to have a connection with Mutazili ideas and actually comes from a people who delve into modernity
of Islam. The following is an in depth description of the matter bi ithnillah
here is a stated of one of those who beleive in this concept about "itmaamul-Hujjah"
Itmamul Hujjah basically means something to the effect of consumation/completion/finality
of excuses. It is a concept related to the prophets of God. A certain group/nation is chosen to receive a prophet. They are
given the message, warned and given time to accept it. The Truth, at this point, is presented in the clearest light possible
without doubt. Those who reject it are punished, those who accept it are given God's support.
for other material regarding their idea they have formulated then below are their links
What is below is a discussion about the issue and how this newly formulated idea, indirectly was understood
by one who adopted this concept to say "There are no Kuffar in this day in age"
Repelling the Opression Against Islam That "There are no Kaafirs in This
Age" and that Takfeer is Abandoned (In Absolute Terms wihtout any Tafseel in it)
Rabbil Alameen, wa salatu wa salamu 'alaa ashraa fil anbiyaa i wal mursaleen, wa salatu wa salamu anabiyeena wa 'ala aalihi
wa sahbihi ajma'een, ama b'ad
Oh Brothers and Sisters in Islam, a great fitaan has come about in this time of ours
that unfortunately some of us has fallen into and I ask Allah to guide us to His straight way, which is the way that our prophet
has left us upon and the way that our companions have taken, and the way that their students had adopted from the companions,
which is unfortunately a way that many of us in these times do not seek guidance in or make it the desicive criterion between
the authentics of Islam from that which is alien to Islam.
Borthers and Sisters I must warn you, as I wish for my brother
what I wish for myself (to be wwarned from danger) that there has arisen a concept. A concept that has no place in both words
or the intended meanings of those words in the Book of Allah, in the prophetic sunnah, not even in tthe books of hadeeth.
It suffices plainly by stating that no muslim ever in the history of Islam, from the people of the sunnah ever propagated
such a concept. This concept is linguistically called "Itmaam ul-Hujjah" which means the completion of the decisive
Do to this concept, those who adopted it propagate that the decisive and clear criterion of truth and falsehood
(the clear bayyinah) has ended, yes ended with the death of our noble prophet salallahu alaihi wa salam. This means that anyone
who gives dawah of Islam to any one who is not a muslim and they reject, even due to kufr al-shakk, kufr al-juhood, and the
rest of various types of kufr still cannot be called a kaafir (one who rejects Islam), yes, still cannot be called a kaafir.
was this the creed of our righteous salaf nor those who followed them after their time. This in itself is sufficient enough
to abandon the matter. The actual pretext for their arguement is that since we give dawah to Islam to them, then it is just
"our version" of Islam wallahul-musta'an. There is no doubt that there are various dawahs that have crept into Islam that
was not from it like the dawah of the sufees, shia, brelvi, naqshbanee, habashi, deobandee, tableeghee, ikhwaanee, takfeeri
and whatever of the various deviated sects out there.
Yet do to this fact of reality they go beyond the bounds of the
reality and go on to say that Islam itself is not in its original purity as it was in the prophet's time.
I say or speak about this concept is because it is the leading root cause for blasphemous statements like "there are no kuffar
in our times" which is under the pretext of "our islam is not in its pure form no more" wa iyaadhubillah min adhaalik from
such an innovated rhetoric.
I will respond to some of these accusations that the members of this adopted concept
use to support their baseless claims.
We cannot perform takfeer on no one (muslim or not)
say in response not only is this complete absolution, it is not found anywhere in the book and sunnah. There is not an over
absolution in this regard. This both applies to Muslim and non muslim
stated Shaykh Abdul-Azeez
Aal ash-Shaykh on Iqaamatul-Hujjah Prior to Takfeer
Question: I know that the one who mocks anything from
the Sharee'ah of Allaah, or His Messenger, is upon great danger, reaching the level of kufr. So is it correct that I describe
the one who does that, that he is a Kaafir, or what? May Allaah reward you.
So he replied: Whoever mocks anything from
the relgion, or mocks Allaah the Sublime, or the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), then he is a kaafir, a murtadd,
due to his saying, the Exalted, "Say, is it in Allaah and His signs and His Messenger, that you were mocking? Do not make
excuses, you have already disbelieved after your faith..." (9:65-66).
This is the ruling upon the one who
mocks. However, to apply this ruling upon a specific person requires the establishment of the proof (iqaamat ul-hujjah), and
also knowledge of the fulfilment of the conditions (for this takfir) and the absence of any barriers (to it).
this is not for anyone except one who is a firmly established scholar, who is grounded in this issue of establishing the proof,
and also the conditions and barriers to takfir. And I love that I advise my brother Muslims and students of knowledge specifically
that they are cautious of falling into this matter (i.e. making takfir) since it causes errors, and causes the minds to go
astray, and let them entrust the affairs to those who are worthy of them."
From Majallut-ad-Da'wah, no. 1797 (21st
June 2001, p.40).
it is clear here that the issue of takfeer is rebuked in a general sense
and is not suppose to be practiced and then there is the exclusion of Islam "UNLESS added to this matter.
by the Imaamu-Zaahid, The Alamaah, the Faqeeh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-Uthaymeen
Question : What
are the conditions and requirements of making takfeer (passing a judgement that a Muslim has left the fold of Islaam and has
become a disbeliever), and what is the ruling regarding a person who commits an act of kufr (disbelief) in jest?
: “The ruling about making takfeer upon a Muslim is dependant upon two conditions:
Firstly: That the proof has been
established that this is a matter which is from disbelief (i.e. which can cause a person to become a disbeliever).
Then applying this ruling to one who does such an act, having knowledge that this action is an act of kufr (disbelief) and
intending it. However, as for the person who is ignorant, then he does not become a kaafir (disbeliever) by such an act -
due to the saying of Allaah - the Most High:
“Whosoever opposes the Messenger, even after guidance has been plainly
conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen and land
him in Hell; what an evil destination.” [Soorah-Nisaa’ 4:115]
And His saying:
“And AIlaah will never
misguide a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them as to what they should avoid.” [Soorah Tawbah
And His saying:
“And We never send punishment until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning).”
[Soorah al-Israa 17:15]
However, if such a person is one who has transgressed by intentionally turning away from learning
and seeking clarification, then he is not excused - such as the one who comes to know that such and such an action is an act
of kufr, but he does not try to confirm it, nor does he attempt to seek further clarification - then such a person will not
be excused in this case.
If, however, the person did not intentionally intend to commit kufr by such an action, then he
will not be judged as a kaafir (disbeliever) on the basis of that action. For example: Being compelled to commit kufr, whilst
the heart is at peace with eemaan (faith). Or the example of one who looses control over his thoughts and does not know what
he is saying - due to extreme joy, or other similar reasons. Such as the saying of the owner of the camel, so he lay under
a tree waiting for death; and then suddenly the camels reigns are caught by the tree, so he takes hold of them and says:
Allaah! You are my Slave and I am Your Lord,” [Related by Muslim (no.6611) from Anas radi-Allaahu ’anhu]
a grave mistake due to his extreme joy. However, as for the one who commits an act of disbelief in jest, then he becomes a
disbeliever, due to him intending disbelief - as the people of Knowledge have duly stipulated.
wa Rasa'il, 2/125-126).
So according to the dawah of the Itmaamis (those affected with
this concept) then there is no such thing or there could never occur any such matter as "when one receives plain and correct
guidance" because their banner that they hide under is "it is your version of guidance". This is instant nullification or
blocking that nothing of this type of scenario could ever exist in this world except for the time of the prophet. I mean by
this that in reality any muslim is virtually incapable (as incapable as we are in growing wings on our backs) to actually
peform or grant dawah on what Islam necessitates to anyone.
again by the same Alamaah
O Shaikh, may Allaah preserve you and take care of you – what is the meaning of the statement of Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn
Taymiyyah, "Takfir of a specific individual requires specific evidence (takfir ul-mu’ayyan yahtaju ila dalil mu’ayyan)"?
Answer: You know, may Allaah bless you, that the (Shari’ah) rulings are sometimes associated with a description
(wasf) and sometimes associated with an individual. For example we say, ‘Every believer is from the people of Paradise’.
This is a general statement which is associated with a description, every believer is in Paradise and every disbeliever is
in the Fire. However, do we say in the case of a specific individual, so and so is from Paradise? Do you say about this specific
individual, so and so is from the people of Fire?
Hence, there is a difference between that which is associated with a
description and that which is associated with an individual. When a person utters a statement of disbelief or commits an act
of kufr, then we do not declare him to be a disbeliever until we look at what motivated him to do that.
Then, we behave
with him (i.e. pass a ruling over him) based upon what his (specific) situation demands.
A man is compelled to prostrate
to an idol, so he prostrates. And another is compelled to utter a statement of kufr, so he says it. Have both of these men
disbelieved? No. Because Allaah has said,
Whoever disbelieved in All‚h after his belief, except him who is forced thereto
and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from All‚h, and theirs
will be a great torment. [Nahl 16:106]
So His statement "Whoever disbelieves in Allaah after having faith" is inclusive
of the one who disbelieves by words or deeds. So this man who prostrated to an idol under compulsion and the man who uttered
a statement of disbelief under compulsion, is his action one of kufr or not? Yes, his action is one of kufr. But is he a kafir?
No. This is because, there exists a preventative barrier that restrains from takfir, and that is compulsion.
[there is the case of] the man who exceeded in transgression against his own soul and who said to his family, ‘When
I die, burn me and scatter my ashes into the sea’. He did this thinking that he will be saved from the punishment of
Allaah by it. Then his family did what he had ordered them. And Allaah – the Mighty and Majestic – gathered his
ashes together and brought him back and asked him ‘Why did you do it?’ He replied, ‘My Lord, I feared Your
punishment’. And so Allaah forgave him. [Bukhari, Kitab ut-Tawhid].
The act of this man is one of kufr, why? Because
he doubted in the power of Allaah, and doubted that Allaah is able to bring him together again and punish him. However, since
the reason behind this act of his was his fear of the punishment of Allaah – the Mighty and Majestic – Allaah
Hence, the meaning of the words of Shaikh ul-Islam – may Allaah have mercy upon him – it is said:
the disbelief that is associated with a description, then judgement can be made by it in all circumstances, [such as] whoever
disbelieves in Allaah will be in the Fire, whoever prostrates to an idol is a disbeliever, whoever says that there is another
deity alongside Allaah is a disbeliever [and so on]. However, with respect to a specific individual, you must not make a judgement
against him until you investigate; he could be ignorant and not know, or he could have made an interpretation (ta’wil)
[that is incorrect], or there could be a situation in which he was made to utter words without actually intending them.
Prophet – may the prayers and peace be upon him – informed us that Allaah rejoices more with the repentance of
his servant than [the rejoicing of] a man who has lost his camel in the desert, seeking to find it but to no avail, so he
despairs of finding it again. Then he rests under a tree and awaits death. And then he finds that the camel is tied to the
tree by its reigns, so he takes it by the reigns and says out of extreme joy, ‘O Allaah you are my servant and I am
your Lord.’ [Muslim]. This word here is a word of kufr since he claimed Lordship (rububiyyah) for himself and claimed
Allaah is a servant. However, he did not actually intend this, but he was made to err on account of his great excitement and
joy, and as the Prophet – may prayers and peace be upon him – said, ‘Allaah will not take him to account’.
Liqaa ul-Baab al-Maftooh (v36. No 1020)
The Imaam al Haafidh Ibnul-Qayyim al-Jauziyyah
And as for kufr it is of two types:
Kufr akbar (major kufr) and kufr asghar (minor
So kufr akbar - this necessitates eternity in the Hellfire.
And the (kufr) asghar: Necessitates the fulfilment
of the threat (of Hellfire) without eternally abiding in it. As occurs in the saying of the Exalted - and it used to be from
what was recited and then it was abrogated :
"And do not detest/hate your fathers, for that is disbelief from you"
his (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) saying in the hadeeth:
"There are two matters in my ummah, by which (my) Ummah falls
into kufr: Reviling the genealogy and wailing/lamenting (over the dead)"
And his saying in the Sunan:
comes to a women from her anus has disbelieved in what was revealed upon Muhammad" and in another hadeeth: "Whoever comes
to a sorcerer or a diviner and believes in what he says has disbelieved in what Allaah revealed upon Muhammad"
"Do not become disbelievers after me, striking the necks of one another".
And this is the explanation
of Ibn ‘Abbaas and the generality of the Companions regarding the speech of Allaah:
And whoever does not judge
by what Allaah has revealed, then they are the disbelievers (5:44)
Ibn Abbaas said: "It is not the kufr that takes
one out of the religion. Rather when he does it then it is [an act of] disbelief, and he is not like the one who disbelieves
in Allaah and the Last Day" and Taawoos said the same and Ataa said: "It is disbelief less than disbelief, oppression less
than oppression and rebellion less than rebellion"
And amongst them are those who interpreted the verse to mean the
one who abandons the rule of Allaah while opposing and rejecting it (jahidan lahu) and this is the saying of Ikrimah! And
this is a defective saying, since just the mere denial (juhud) of it is disbelief, regardless of whether he ruled by it or
And amongst them are those who explained it to mean abandoning ruling by all of what Allaah revealed, he said,
and who enters into this the judgement of Tawhid and Islam! This is the interpretation of Abdul-Aziz al-Kinani, and this too
is far from what is correct!! Since the threat (contained in the verse) is for the negation of ruling by the revealed legislation,
and this can apply to abandoning all of the legislation of just some of it.
And amongst them are those who explained
it to mean to rule in opposition to the text, deliberately, without being ignorant of it and nor due to error in understanding
or interpreting it. Al-Baghawee quoted this from the scholars generally.
And amongst them are those explained to refer
to the Ahl ul-Kitaab. And this is the saying of Qataadah, Dahhaak and others. And this is far (from what is correct) - and
it is in opposition to the apparent wording - so it is not to be inclined towards.
And amongst them are those who explained
it to mean the kufr that takes one out of the religion!
And what is correct is that judging by other than what Allaah
has revealed is both types of kufr (disbelief) - kufr asghar (the minor disbelief) and kufr akbar (the major disbelief) -
and [which of the two it is] depends on the condition of the ruler. If he believes in the obligation of judging by what Allaah
has revealed n this situation but turned away from it - out of disobedience - and while acknowledging that he is deserving
of punishment then this is kufr asghar. And if he (i’taqada) believes that it is not obligatory and that he has a choice
in the matter - along with his firm belief that it is the judgement of Allaah - then this is kufr akbar - and if he was ignorant
in the matter or made an error then he is one who errs (mukhtee’) and his ruling is as the same for those who err (i.e.
In the last paragraph what was stated for the ruler is also applied
to the ruled (the average muslim since the ayaah "Whoever" in "Whoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed" is in
arabic "man" and is left upon its general implication to mean anyone.)
So here he mentions that there are two type
of kufr, one that does not exit from the fold, and one that does. Whoever performed kufr or uttered kufr is in one of these
two categories, and the result of this (which of the two he falls in) depends on the condition of the one in question.
and Sisters, it is clear from the above proofs that no one from this ummah exclusively made a prohibition of takfeer in its
total absolute form.
Islam is not in its pure form anymore
by which falsehood is reached is the utterance of this statement.
True- it is true that various dawahs have entered
in Islam that marred the overall overview of Islam
False- Islam is not in its pure form anymore
The actual utterance
of this statement has several implication that I personally beleive and hope that the people who utter it dont mean, nevertheless
it is still misguidance by which Allah's refuge is sought
This statement implies that because
the various dawahs that has been innovatedly incorperated into Islam, then by default this also distorted the actual entity
of the message of Islam itself. I think that this is why they stand on the absolute pretext that "no one can give the decisive
guidance or message of Islam" since they render each and every person's dawah (even if it just be limited to the explicit
hadeeths about Islam like the hadeeth "what is Islam, what is emaan, what is ihsaan") to be "thats your version of the message
This goes against A. Allah as He Himself promised the preservation of this religion no matter how much the
people of falsehood (form the muslims or not) hate it
B. Goes against the prophet who said "there
will never cease to be a group in my ummah who remaings upon the truth, victorious over their advesaries and who repel refute
the false claims of the ignorant and dispel the fabrications of the liars"
C. The companions upon ijmaa who have agreed that "following the path of the beleivers leads to success"
and the beleivers meaning them like in the ayaah
“And whosoever opposes the Messenger
after the guidance has been made clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers; We will turn him to what
he has turned himself to, and burn him in Hell. What an evil abode.” [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:115]
D. the beleifs of the Mujtahid Imaams, from the salaf and t hose who followed their way in that the deen of
Islam has been Sent down by Allah and revealed throuhg the prophet, and understood and implemented by the companions and preserved
by their students and their students. This was the fulfillment of Allah when He promised that "and no falsehood shall enter
What this statement also implies, knowingly or not, is that
since Islam is not in it's pure form, then we as muslims are incapable of giving the correct dawah of Islam to the kuffar
or those who have not received the message.
Outside of the very fact that this idea leads to nullifcation of the 4
points mentioned above in "implication 1" this idea is actually insinuating that we muslims, all of us, the entire umah, is
not upon the Islam that was revealed to Muhamamd by Allah, and laid down by the prophet, and explained by the companions and
established by the tabi'een.
This implies that we, as muslims, who attribute ourselves to Islam, have actually fallen
into the ayaah
“And whosoever opposes the Messenger after the guidance has
been made clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers; We will turn him to what he has turned himself
to, and burn him in Hell. What an evil abode.” [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:115]
is because we are not, according to them, following the path of the beleivers, because the correct Islam was their Islam,
and since Islam is distorted in our times now, then no muslim is upon their islam, and thus has fallen into this ayaah.
in itself is shown to be baseless in the 4 points I gave out in "implication 1"
It is ironically amazing that these
people affected by this thought warn us that we fall into takfeer and condemning each other, but yet we are ourselves condemned
automatically for nothing, on a matter that is not our fault.
also implies the denial or negation of the very fact that "We have not punished any nation before you until We have sent a
messenger to them"
The Imaams of this nation have explained that messengers of the message is not limited to justthe
prophet or messenger. Example of this is
But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they
make you (O Muhammad SAW) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions,
and accept (them) with full submission. (Chapter #4, Verse #65)
This ayaah is forever a
hujjah upon the ummah of Muhamamd till the Day of Judgement. To limit Muhamamd to be the person that he was "his own self"
is incorrect because the intended meaning is whoever goes to Allah which they will find His decisions in the quraan or the
Messenger, which is the sunnah that he brought.
Yet on the day of Judgement, according to their concept, if america
doesnt accept islam or Britian or the other disbeleiving nations, they will not go to hellfire because they did not receive
the perfect message that was with the prophet only (an accusation made by them)
So He the Most High says along with
this message "In order that they may have no excuse againist Allah"
So our creed, the muslim creed, is that no nation
shall be punished for a matter that they did not have knowledge of. But once they have received an iota of this knowledge
as in the prophet's statement "give dawah even if it be a single ayaah", they
will not have any excuse against Allah if they denied the message, which is a matter that they reject due to their concept
and Allah's refuge is sought.
Now we come to some statements of one who was infected with this concept
|As i said, "If someone was to sincerely believe that Islam allowed such an act"... due to some far fetched opinion,
then what? It is a must to correct understanding, however it is not your place to decide who is a kaffir or not. I dont recall
Allah giving that authority to Ibn Kathir (r.h) either. I see that you havent learn much from your short spell at UI. Did
you read what i wrote in the link? There is no such thing as a kaffir in this age. How can you have rejectors
when the truth isnt in a perfect form, like it was when the Prophet (pbuh) was around?|
The greatest of both falsehood and ignorance was propagated in this statement by which I seek
refuge from Allah from such an abomination and that He the Most High guides the maker of this statement to His straight way.
that takes one out of Islam is not limited to the mere scenario of not beleiving that the arguement they have is in the quraan.
Just because a munaffiq beleives that his arguement is supported by the quraan has no weight at all on the mere fact
that His kufr is a nullifier of Islam. Subhanallah Im in a state of shock that one who beleives in Allah and the last day
could ever formulate these words in their minds and actually allow these thoughts to find way on the net wallahul-musta'an.
truth will always be in its perfect form. The prophet said "its night is like its day and no one deviates from it except that
he is destroyed" whcih are the words that stand till the day of judgement, and not words that the foolish people make to last
only during the lifetime of the prophet wa iyaadhubillahi mina dhaalika.
The addition of distorted forms of Islam is
not an automatic nullification or the distortion of the correct Islam. If such an ignoramous from the muslims were to beleive
this then our deen has not been saved from corruption like our Lord revealed that He would, AND our deen would be as flawed
as the christians and jews by which allah would have still needed to send another revelation and perfect that and protect
it from corruption and I aks Allah to guide us away form this falsehood Ameen.
It was also errornously said
|Incorrect. He isnt a rejector of the Message of Islam, he is a rejector of YOUR VERSION, or YOUR EXPLANATION
of the Message of Islam. Remember that. I dont recall anyone saying that you get revelation, therefore you cant possibly convey
the Message as the Prophet (pbuh) could. So if someone rejects what you say, they dont reject Islam. I hope we are on agreement
with that. |
1. The message only becomes "that person's message" of Islam if, AND ONLY IF, such a one comes
with a matter foreign to the book and the sunnah. Otherwise in the generaltiy it is still the complete and clear bayyinah
and the message of Islam.
2. One who speaks with giving authentic information of Islam is not to be labeled or called,
or given the attribute that such a one is receiving revelation. Just because someone claims they are giving the correct dawah
of Islam (which can happen as our deen is not lost as advocated by you people), is not equal or tantamount to the claim that
they are receiving revelation. This understanding of how to give dawah is foreign to the understanding of our predecessors
and was not with them or the Imaams of the sunnah who followed their way.
3. Just because no one posses the qualities
of the prophet's form of dawah like his distinctive righteous character, his facial light or radiance, his manners, is not
by default a nullification of the actual precision or authenticness of Islam in one's dawah of Islam.
so overall akhee,
no one from the people of the sunnah can ever agree with you in this as this goes against the whole of the religion regarding
In it not our place to decide who a kaafir is or not
all I would like to ask where on earth or where did such a person derive this claim from.
1. Judging one to be a kaafir
or not is not equal or tantamount as judging one to be in the fire or paradise
Unfortunately these people affected
by this rhetoric mistakenly attribute the legitamate and valid takfeer (based on conditions) to automatically be rendered
as judging people, and this is incorrect and none of the people oft he sunnah or the righteous predecessors ever claimed such
labeling is not judgement in the sense of one's akhiraa (afterlife) such a judgeing is condemned by the consensus
of the muslis, but labeling based on the worldy matters is not and intertwining them ot be the same is incorrect and shows
that such a one has not wosdom or any knowledge at all in understanding the implications of the does and dont's of the religion
from its basic matters.
So we, as muslims, ask these people, what do you mean by "it is not our right to judge"? If
they mean to judge someone to be in the fire or not, then they are correct 100 percent and there is no disagreement in this.
If they mean that it is not our right to label for the worldy sake then all the matters that pertaineind to inheritance
in the quraan, the dhimmi tax, marraige matters, food matters, can not be implemented and Allah and His messenger failed to
reveal a decisive and CLEAR criterion due to the fact that labeling is forbidden in its absolute form (by them)
top of this we say that you are not suppose to combine both of them and lump them up as if labelling is automatically condemning
one to the fire or not.
Another profund blunder in this doctrine of their's is the nationalizing of establishing the proof
of Islam on people. They say that anyone not from the blood of Bani Isma'eel cannot establish the hujjah of Islam upon the
recipient of the message, but if one is from bani Isma'eel , then one is able to do so,
Of course, it is readily visible that the implication of this idea implies that the "hujjah' of Allah
Tabaraku wa ta'ala cannot be established except based on tribal affiliation
Allah's refuge is sought from these concepts that have no basis in Islam and Allah is Azeezul-Hakeem
wa bi Hamdik, ash haadu an lla ilaha illa ant, wa stagh firooka wa atubu elaik
asalamu alaikum warahmatullah