بِسْم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Imam Adh-Dhahabi said, "It was declared authentic that Imam Daraqutnee said, 'There is nothing that I despise more than علم الكلام.
Adh-Dhahabi went on to say: I say that the man never ever became involved in علم الكلام or argumentative speech nor became engrossed in that; rather he was Salafi"
Imam Adh-Dhahabi
He was Muhmmed Ibn Dhahabi. He was also called Ash-Shafi'i, because he's from that Madh'hab. He was born in Damascus in 1264 and was a Muhadith as well as Islamic Historian. He began the study of Hadith at the age of 18 by traveling to Allepo, Nablus, Cairo, Alexandria, Jerusalem, the Hijaz, and elsewhere.
After that, he returned to Damascus where he taught and authored many works, and achieved the distinction as a major critic and expert of الجرح و التعديل. He was a leading scholar in that field and was the foremost authority in the readings of the Qur'an.
What's interesting to note is that more than 100 of his teachers were women. Among them, his main teacher, and most important was Zaynab bint Umar AlKindi. She herself was one of the noted Hadith scholars in Damascus and Ba'labak. Imam Adh-Dhahabi wrote her sayings and learnt the beginning of Sahih AlBukhari as well as the beginning of the Book of Nikah from her, and said that she was without parallel in the time which she lived. His father, maternal uncle, and many others narrated Hadiths from her.
Imam Adh-Dhahabi himself authored more than 100 works. Among his students was Ibn Hajr, who is known for his commentary on Sahih AlBukhari, and Ibn Nasir, one of the major Hadith scholars. And the most important point to note is that he was a student of Ibn Taymiya, just like Ibn Kathir was.
In the latter part of his life, around two years before his death, he lost his eyesight. He left behind three children.
Ibn Uthaymeen goes on to say:
Examples of such Scholars
-> Fakhr al-Din Al-Razi
He was born in 1149 in Iran and died in 1209 in Afghanistan. He was from Persia and was of the mainstream scholars of the Sunnah, a theologian, and philosopher. He also wrote about medicine, physics, astrology, literature, and law. In the latter part of his life, he was known to have said, "Oh, if only I had not become involved in scholastic philosophy". And then he cried.
-> Abu Ma'ali al-Juwayni
He was born in 999, and was of Arab lineage. He was a leading scholar of علم الكلام and philosophy, but his real expertise was أصول الفقه, and he wrote books which are incomparable to this day.
At the last stage of his life, he came to know that the true essence of Islam is in the words, deeds, says, and points followed by the righteous Salaf, and the companions of the Prophet ﷺ. He adopted their methods and openly and boldly became their follower. He is quoted to have said, "Do not occupy yourself with Kalaam, if I had known where it would take me, I would not have occupied myself with it. You are witnesses that I am denouncing and abolishing the topic of the contradiction of the Prophet ﷺ"
And he said, "I witness that I refute any distortions that do not comply with the explicit and implicit attitudes of the righteous predecessors"
Ibn Uthaymeen quotes Ibn Taymiya as saying that those who are most feared to fall into misguidance are the moderates from the scholars of scholastic philosophy, because they fall into it and think they're safe. Those who enter it learn falsehood and corruption.
Also, it's generally agreed that the title "علم الكلام" came from the major issue which created turmoil in the Ummah about whether the Qur'an is كلام الله (Allah's word) or not.
The philosophical movement and sect of علم الكلام took the position that it was the created word of Allah, and were able to influence the Caliph of that era, who studied under one of their scholars. Then they tried to force this position on the Ummah, to the point that scholars who refused to tow this line and take an open position that the Qur'an is the created word of Allah would be executed.
Some were known to indirectly escape from this, because the Qur'an would be put in front of them, and they would be asked if it was created or uncreated. They would put their hand on top of the Qur'an and say it is created (while referring to their hand).
When Ahmed Ibn Hanbal's turn came he stood his ground and said that the Qur'an is uncreated and the word of Allah. They couldn't execute him because he was too popular and had many followers, so they jailed, tortured, and beat him for a period of time. Eventually, the later Caliph took him out and put him in an honorable position in the society, and cancelled the whole movement. Ahmed Ibn Hanbal's stand was really the turning point for the dominant view of the Muslim Ummah. He's also reported to have said, "No one looks into كلام unless there's corruption in his heart." and would prohibit people sitting with them saying, "They should not sit with them even if they were defending the Sunnah". This is how dangerous their speech is.
And there are more quotes from other leading scholars:
Imam Abu Hanifa forbade his students from engaging in علم الكلام, saying that those who practiced it are retarded individuals.
Imam Malik referred to them as being the detested, and that it was detestable to go into it. And that whoever seeks knowledge through علم الكلام would deviate.
Imam Ash-Shafi'i said that no knowledge of Islam can begin with the books of علم الكلام, as كلام is not knowledge. It's better for a man to spend his whole life doing whatever Allah prohibited (save Shirk) than to spend his life involved in كلام.
And the people who are in the most dangerous position are those with moderate stands. Because those who delve in it deeply and know all of its inner workings, like the likes of Fakhr AlDin Al-Razi, and AlJuwayni, knew it was falsehood, so they could get out of it. But the person who doesn't look into it deeply, and just listens to things which are nice and interesting, doesn't realize that he has fallen into something that is deviant, so he'll automatically become misguided and misguide others.
Deviancies with علم الكلام
#1 - The first major problem with علم الكلام that makes it particularly dangerous, is that it is related to the essence of the Lord; the Names and Attributes of Allah. Going astray in this area is different from going astray in Fiqh. Correcting it becomes very difficult.
Take Christians for example. They believe that Allah is three in one; that He exists as the father, the son, and the holy spirit. If this concept were to be put in practical terms, where Jesus is praying, the question comes as who he's praying to. It's so obvious that it's wrong, but they're lost and can't see it.
Those who are educated and have looked into it know it's false. Leading Christian Theologians in the UK wrote a book called, "The Myth of God Incarnate". But the average priest who has only studied on an intermediate level what has been fed to him in his seminary doesn't have that depth of knowledge. He's halfway there and thinks he's right; what we call half-baked. They don't have enough knowledge, think they understand, and become misguiders of others.
#2 - The second major problem with علم الكلام is that it nullifies the divinely revealed texts and the statements of the Prophet ﷺ. Because what do you do when you enter a field and find Hadiths which contradict what you promote? The only thing left for you to say is that they're not authentic.
You hear the echo of this until today by the Asha'irah (who are like the children of the Mu'tazilites) which is based partially on the Qur'an and Sunnah and partially on philosophy.
E.g. They say that they don't take أحاديث الأحد (which are Hadiths that don't have 10 or more narrators at every level of the chain) in Aqeedah. And this has become a common basis for denying elements of the Deen.
A well known group that follows this route is "Hizb ut-Tahrir" founded by Taqiudeen al-Nabhani who denied the punishment of the grave, the coming of Eesa عليه السلام, etc. And these are all issues pertaining to Aqeedah.
The claim that you can't use أحاديث الأحد in Aqeedah is a philosophical argument. If you look at the practices of the Prophet ﷺ and his companions, you'll find that when they were in prayer an emissary came to them telling them that the Qibla had changed, and they all turned towards the south. They didn't say that they needed 9 more people to convey the message to them.
#3 - The third major problem is that they give precedence to the intellect over revelation. Everything is looked at from an intellectual, logical perspective. And the danger of that is expressed in the statement of Ali Ibn Abi Talib, when he said, "If the religion was to be based on intellect, logic, and reason, it would make more sense to wipe the bottom of the socks than the top. But I saw the Prophet ﷺ wipe the top and not the bottom"
The Deen is based on reason and logic, but not on all aspects. And the place for logic and reason is after revelation; after accepting what Allah and His Messenger ﷺ said, will we use our minds in terms of applying it. And this is where we get Fiqh.
So intellect has a place, and Islam does not tell you to turn it off, unlike what the Christians tell you to do. They tell you 1+1+1=1. Islam encourages us to use intellect, but in its proper context.
Nowadays we have the modernist movement, which follows the same principles. If a Hadith doesn't agree with their understanding, they reject it.
You have, for example, a prayer area in Toronto which is used by homosexual and lesbian Muslims. Men and women pray next to each other. A woman gives the Khutbah. And they try to argue intellectually and give you all types of logical explanations on how Islam is not really against homosexuality, and only extreme people are against it. But this is something clear. We all know the Islamic position on it.
The most common argument for homosexuals is that they were born that way, so surely God is just and kind that He wouldn't create them like that and then punish them from it. And this is being fed to our children in the schools in the west.
If you just stop and think for a minute; if we say they have inclinations from birth, then other people have other inclinations too. People engage in acts with animals, and call it beastiality. They can say, "I was born that way" as well. And scientist say that people who steal, beat others up, murder, etc. are genetically inclined to. So where do we draw the line?
The bottom line is that we're not animals. Yes, people might have inclinations, and Shaytan might be putting things into their heads, but we have a choice. You can have the inclination towards something, but you can stop yourself from doing it. Whereas animals, when they feel inclined towards something, there's nothing to stop them. They don't think about the consequences.
So their arguments are weak and go against natural human order and society. And that's why you find in most religions, homosexuality is something prohibited and evil. Even in the bible, it clearly states that they are to be executed.
Fundamental Principles of علم الكلام
1) That which the intellect affirms and approves. They affirm based on the guidance of the intellect. If the intellect says, it makes sense.
So they'll look at the descriptions or attributes of Allah in the Qur'an and Sunnah and accept those which go along with their logic.
2) What the intellect rejects. It's obligatory to be rejected without hesitation, because the intellect rejects it.
E.g. The Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ, where he says:
"If a housefly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease.” (Al-Bukhari)
Also, in Ibn Majah “One of the fly’s wings carries poison while the other carries antidote. When it falls in the food, dip it, for the sake of Allah, for verily He (Allah) makes the poison (take effect) first and He makes the cure come last.”
The modern intellectual has been taught since he was young that the fly is a carrier of diseases. So why in the world would you dunk the fly in the drink when it's full of diseases? Our intellect has taught us that this is something awful to do. But we never learnt that there's a cure in the fly. And because of this many people deny the Hadith.
It's not inconceivable that a fly has both the disease and cure. We have trees that cause a physical reaction and yet there's a cure in them. The cure for scorpion bites is taken from the scorpion itself. Just because science hasn't proved it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Lack of knowledge isn't knowledge.
Ibn Uthaymeen poses the question of whose intellect are they referring to? Different people have a different way of view things; one thing may appear logical to me, and not to you.
The sound intellect is the one which accepts what Allah revealed. How can you accept what came from humans which negate a text from Allah?
3) That which the intellect neither accepts nor rejects.
So they say that for something to be affirmed, it's conditional that the intellect approves of it. Accordingly, that which the intellect neither accepts nor rejects, is the same as rejection.
On the other hand, there are those among them who hold that for an attribute to be accepted, it's only conditional that the intellect doesn't reject it. The majority took this perspective.
And the small minority say to remain neutral if the intellect neither affirms nor reject.
There's no basis for these rules in revelation, and they went astray, and misguided others. They became confused due to them, doubtful, and perplexed.
That's why those who have the greatest doubts are the scholars of scholastic philosophy. At the time of death they wondered about Allah's essence. They died in a state of doubt.
But if a person is on the path of the Salaf us-Saalih, then all his affairs become easy. Doubts won't enter his mind, nor will he hesitate to utter لا اله الا الله before leaving this world.
Comments
Post a Comment