₦airaland Forum

^
As I said, this is not a topic that interests me at this time. I'm diverted at something else for now. Maybe I may come around to contribute further.

One thing however is clear, the issue of tawasul is NOT aqeeda but figh. This is what is agreed upon. It's later generation i:e 20th century scholars from that region that portrayed it matter of aqeeda and call people mushrik. Ibn wahabi stance was that it's figh masalah.

The three steps of tawasul you posted earlier, no one denies that but it comes with question marks i:e using ones good deeds. This is where sufis stepped in. There is more to this.

I also noticed that you seem to reject virtues of the person of nabi in dua is undesirable. Humm....this is misguidance. The presence of nabi (p) amongst his sahaba was virtuous and will continue to function. This is what is coined in yoruba as "ola anobi". There is difference BTW saying Ola anobi and calling on him.

lexiconkabir:
where did i ignore the ahadeeth that talked about the station Allaah promised the prophet(on the day of jugdement)??!!

Not this. Never mind.



Anyways, read this.


Myth 10: Sheikh Abdul Wahhab made takfeer of those who made tawassul by the righteous


Taken from Sayyid Muhammad bin 'Alawi al-Maliki's excellent book "Mafahim Yajib An Tusahhah (Notions that Must be Corrected)", pg. 141:

Shaykh Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab said: "Sulayman bin Sahim has fabricated on me statements which I never said, nor have they ever came to my mind. and from amongst it: that I do takfir of those who perform Tawassul by the righteous, and that I do takfir of [al-Imam] al-Busayri because he said: "O most gracious of the creation", and that I burn Dala'il al-Khayrat.

"And my reply to this issue: Glory be to Allah! This is awful slander!" ["Rasa'il al-Shaykh Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab", the eleventh epistle, pg. 64.]


On the preceding page, he expresses his opinion on Tawassul by saying: "The correct position according to us is the statement of the majority, that is it is makruh. Therefore, we do not detest those who perform it, and there is no detestation with regards to the issues of ijtihad. However, we do detest those who invoke the created objects in a much more serious manner than he who calls upon Allah but really intends by that the grave [of a righteous person], praying near the shrine of Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani or his likes and requests therein protection from sorrow and assistance in ones yearnings and the giving of sustenance. So where is [the seriousness of] this act in comparison to he who calls upon Allah, bearing their religion to Him in sincerity, not calling upon anyone save Allah, but he says in his Du'a: I ask you by your Prophet or by the Messengers or by your righteous slaves, or he goes to a known grave [of a saint] and prays therein, but does not call upon anyone save Allah, bearing their religion to Him in sincerity..."

[Fatawa al-Shaykh Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab, the third section pg. 68, printed by The University of Muhammad bin Sa'ud during Shaykh Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab week]


Anyways, this subject never interest me one bit. I came across it many times.

lexiconkabir:
no waseela from him as he is right now in the state of barzakh, so he cant respond to you, but certainly we will get waseela from him on jugdment day, that is the station Allaah promised him(sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam).

Certainly. But why do you ignore ALL glaring ahadith in this regard?. How about sending Salams on him and his soul restores and he responds? (hadith).

@lexicon, do you agree that Waseela (i:e Tawasul) of the prophet(saw) subsists after he passed?.

Also, I hope you realized that Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdulwahab (ra) retracted his position on tawasul?

Matter of fact, it seems he NEVER denied using righteous saints in waseela. {note, i dislike using 'saint'. Waliy is more appropriate)

Finally, waseela or not, we all can agree it is NOT mandatory but recommended. The BEST of waseela is using nabi himself. Those who denied this in the past were taught severe lesson by Allah. Allah knows what He revealed. I am aware some people are overboard. There is a hadith where nabi(SAW) is reported to have said his life is good for us and his death is good for us.

You free to quote that

This thing is really sad. I see this make lots of waves on Facebook. Dont know why politicians mysteriously silent on this issue. Their voices recently were hypocritical. Both sides of the conflict are guilty. May Allah punish aggressors with severe possible punishments.

Far as I am concern, for this so called "Arab spring" to be dragging to this level since 2011, it means the current events unfolding may eventually lead to prophecies of nabi Muhammad(SAW) emerging from Syria.

Scholar8200:
In order not to waste time, why not answer my question that brought you here?

Well for the points you raised:

1. That's because the Gentiles are not under a Theocracy(hence we do not enforce judgment on offenders, the Govt does) however, Israel was. Besides, Jesus taught that the Law (notice that the Sermon on the Mount dwelt on the moral aspect ALONE) categorised the one that fantasized on women and those involved in the very act of adultery as the same, whence the justice in stoning when you are just as guilty? Only a conscience-less person would attempt that.The real essence of the Law when truly interpreted was to bring man to God as the ONLY one that could justify man before Him.

Bolded has lots of implications. I think thats what Christians mean by "let he without sin cast stone". Who is without sin?. If govt is to apply this to act of terrorism, then, govt would not be able to enact law for terrorism bcus themselves are terror. Or bcus police are human (sinful) they should not arrest crime offenders. The list goes on and on. So your so illogical.

Fact is, Christians have abandoned God's Law. Jesus NEVER EVER abolished Old Laws.

lexiconkabir:
why is the OT no longer a source for Christianity today?

Good question

Scholar8200:
Of course all songs promoting lewdness and crime are condemned. My question was as it concerns lexiconkabir saying that all songs (sans differentiation) and use of musical instrument were condemned.

In any case, I believe your positions are clear. However, I would have liked one that shares that belief with lexiconkabir(on grounds he/she considers authentic) to answer that question.

Well, over to him.

^
I endorse the above. It's in-line with my earlier posts

Scholar8200:
Yet another question inspired by lexiconkabirr's fp thread:

Since Muslims believe God gave David the psalms which emphatically admonishes the use of singing and use of musical instruments (even Jesus sang a hymn and God gave Moses a song to teach Israel), why the sudden prohibition of music?
Besides, if all music has satan as its source, who then isnpired David?

Islam DEFINITELY does not endorse this modern music. You can at least say these songs are inspIred by shaytan. I'm not talking about those you highlighted above. You can NEVER compare the one above with Rihanna, Wizkid, Maria, 50 cent you name them. The later involve sexual lyrics, adult contents....you name it.

The later is what I believe Islam condemned.

tintingz:
Empir.ee,

Microphone is not a musical instrument but an instrument used when producing music.

Thanks

FriendChoice:
Am not here to answer your questions. Am here to tell you mic was not a musical appliance to which you claim. After exposing you. The truth is now clear to you, but your head is too big to accept it.. Then you now proceed to show of shame

So basically am done here. Don't have time to address much nonsense from you. When you cannot answer this, then you move to this. when it's proven you lied as you always did, you jump to this.

Imagine asking foolish question is mic Haram. Who said mic is an act of worship in Islam. is the bed you're sleeping on Haram? Bye idiot .

Again, I have not insulted you. I was trying to get you to reason. "mic is haram, bed is haram" etc...if that's what your mind says about me, you got it wrong.

I wont elaborate further. You can think anything you want. Even "musical instruments" are in parenthesis. Not Allah's word or the prophet's(p). It is basically opinion that varies amongst scholars for centuries. I rather just leave you alone until someone reasonable comes around. I have made my point clear.

FriendChoice:
[s][/s]

think outside the box for a moment.

FriendChoice:
Now you're not concern on it definition after you defined it as musical instrument and insisted it is. Just because of your ego not to accept the truth or what. Don't look at the person telling you the truth, but look at the truth itself.

Mic remain an instrument but does not remain a musical instrument. Period.

Microphone was not originated for Musical purpose in the first place. Its originally invented to transduce a sound. Just because many people used it does not make it musical instrument. So don't say the sheik is using musical appliance.

The same Qur'an you read, some people use it to do magic and evil shirk. That does not and will never make Qur'an a magic book.


Likewise mic was introduce to convey sound and which ever sound be it music, songs, adhan, preaching etc, the main function is still existing. This does not means the sheik is using musical instrument. If it means, then musicians are using religious instrument to sing also.

Similarly: Television was invented to transmit audio visual. Whether Lectures, Movies, etc anything and also for playing games.

To a person who like movies: Its a film watching appliance.

To a kid: its a cartoon box or gaming instrument.

mic is forbidden or not?

FriendChoice:
I am following this topic since yesterday and I did not come to say music is halal or Haram. I followed the topic to learn by post of educated people who give proofs to justify. While I have already listen to Mufti Menk view. I want to see other scholars view.

I have also listen to Shahidi Sheik Ja'afar Mahmud Adam (Rahimahullau) views.

I have also heard of Hasssan (R.D) who sing to make unbelievers agree (But his is singing without music)

The prophet usually said "Qum waruhul qudusi....). Stand and pure soul (Jibril A.s ) is with you.

I have also heard lexiconkabir views. Looking for more views.

Views with proofs not your own views that has k-leg. Example if this that do this so that is also this that.

I have spoken. Quran says "Idle talks" is forbidden. Hadith says by elaborating music. There is no contradiction. Hadith simply is saying music of no benefits, in another word music with haram lyrics are forbidden. Not just saying "music is haram". You seem to have problem understanding anytime. That's your issue. Saying simply "music is haram means whether it is mere vocal or not, it is haram altogether. Get the point now. That's what my posts clarified. if you still have problems after this, na u sabi

FriendChoice:
You have lied not you have spoken.


A microphone is a hardware peripheral originally invented by Emile Berliner in 1877 that allows computer users to input audio into their computers. The picture is an example of Blue Microphones Yeti USB Microphone - Silver Edition and an example of a high-quality computer microphone.

http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/m/micrphon.htm

I am not concerned about its definition. I am ONLY saying it is used by ALL. Hence, if it is forbidden, then, it is across the board. Just like TV. We can't say it haram. rather we say it depends on what it is used for. It remains TV whether it is used for po.rn or give dawatul islamiyah. Same goes with mic. It remains instrument. period.

FriendChoice:
To God Almighty who made me I did not watch the video you posted not even a click on the link as I type right now (10:28-10:31). Which of my post shows that. Please point it out. I did not post a single comment of my own opinion on whether its Halal or Haram. I only posted what I heard from mufti.

I hate this character you're displaying.

Now, watch it and tell me it is haram oor halal. It is only few seconds clip.

FriendChoice:
No. Its simply an instrument for converting sound waves into electrical energy variations which may then be amplified, transmitted, or recorded.

To Musician: is a musical instrument

To Politician: Its political instrument

To religious people: its a preaching instrument

shaking my head. I have spoken

adeolabilkis002:
Pls I need a cheap rav4 jeep.where can I get good and cheap onez

this?

FriendChoice:
Sir. What is mine? That you're addressing? What did I say on music, could you point. Stop being silly.

I dont think I have thrown any insult at you. Your post shows you believe that MUSIC is haram period (regardless). Now that I posted video of your favorites, you try to stay neutral. Stand your ground akhi.

FriendChoice:
They use it. Pastors use it worldwide or not. Lecturers use it world wide or not. Advertisers use it world wide or not. Politician use it world wide or not.

They all use it for different purpose. Right or Wrong?


Let's take drum as musical instrument: Its only used to provide musical sound world wide. State it other function.


Keep denying the Truth.

I have no idea what you just said and I dont know what "truth" you claimed I denied. My point is simple. If mic is not musical instrument yet used worldwide by musicians, for call to salat, by pastors etc. It is musical instrument for different purposes. It is still musical instrument. Why the twist?.

FriendChoice:
According to Mufti Menk. Some scholars believe music to be makruh. While others take it Haram.

But non of the scholars believe the music of today to be halal. The music of today only invites premarital affairs.

i am not gonna address Mufti Menk position. I will address yours. MUSIC is broad statement and you just can't lump them together. My earlier posts break it down. It is natural instinct to sing and dance. If MUSIC (period) is haram, then, I guess this is halal, right?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO2zmKIUJ2g

You can just dance without dancing to music or beats. Otherwise, folks may think you are mojnun.

FriendChoice:
Microphone was not a musical instrument. The fact people used it to sing does not make it a musical instrument.

A microphone , colloquially nicknamed mic or mike ( /ˈmaɪk/ ), is a transducer that converts sound into an electrical signal.

Which ever sound whether talking, singing, drumming, crying as far as it has sound.

Musicians worldwide use it or not?. Keep deceiving yourself

Now To Music


1. The kind of music referred to as malahi(prominent in Arab world) are abhorred and prohibited. This kind of music is simply for entertainment for dance, frivolous enjoyment and the like.



2. Those kinds of music from the duff and similar drums (under the category of ma'azif) are unequivocally permissible. Of course, the songs attached to it must be permissible as outlined above. Further the use of the drums are unequivocally permissible for festivals and weddings and joyous times.



3. The critical difference of opinion is regarding different kinds of musical instruments; it is incorrect to suggest that all musical instruments are held to be prohibited in Islam. The fact is that the major prohibition of music is because at the time of the Prophet, they very often were used in the context of malahi - (1) above, hence easily claimed that it is prohibited in all circumstances. But this is not the case. As such (and the same for singing with or without music):

i) If the music is part of glorifying Allah and His Messenger, this is held to be permissible by the majority of Scholars;

ii) If the music is for entertainment and pastime, it is prohibited;

iii) If the music is for soothing and serenity of the mind which helps one to remember Allah, as long as it does not remove one from obeying Allah or one's rights and responsibilities, there is a significant difference of opinion, and is best to minimise such involvement if not avoided. If you saw someone listening to such a musical matter, do not place judgment on them nor force your opinion on others regarding this category.



In conclusion, avoid all singing, music, gatherings of entertainment, except for gatherings of melodious remembrance of Allah and His Messenger. And, be cautious if singing and music which are of spiritually happiness (not material) and also leads one to remember Allah and only listen sparingly if one could not avoid it at all.

In sha Allah that gives you a practical set of guidelines and the scope of impressibility as well as definite prohibitions and as such help you to live your life better in the presence of Allah Ta'ala.


Wallahu Alam

My first post are deeply developed sciences. The points below are the summaries of rulings based on such a thorough understanding of the Shari'ah, rather than those who simply claim to quote a verse or a Hadith as proof. Further, it is also important to note that music and singing are essentially two different things, not mutually exclusive but certainly not dependent of each other. In other words, one does not have to have music to sing, but at the same time they are both musical matters.

In regards to the question itself, the matter can be broken down into the following categories of assessment, each holding its own ruling and differences of opinion.


Let's start from those matters unanimously agreed upon to be prohibited.


i. The kinds of singing which are unequivocally prohibited are those which contain the celebration of the material world and includes sexual connotation and that which is also inappropriate in speaking, e.g., swearing, sexually expletive language, and the like. In Fiqh this is usually referred to as Tarab. Almost all Hollywood (and Bollywood...) songs will fit in here.



ii. The kinds of singing which are also unequivocally prohibited, are those that remove a person away from the worship and appropriate presence with Allah, e.g., leading a person to be involved with cross-gender mixing, lazing around (rather than taking a short break to relax from exhaustion. In such cases, as we will see below, there is permission to listen to musical matters that glorify Allah and praise the Prophet), ignoring one's rights and responsibilities, and the like.



iii. Those kinds of singing which are unequivocally permitted are those which glorify Allah and praise the Prophet. Much can be said about this, but it will be a whole book! So in summary, this is usually taken to be permissible as a respite rather than the norm of "iPod in the ear 24/7". It is also permissible to have such appropriate singing of happiness (rather than directly about Allah and His Messenger) that soothe the heart in a Halal manner for festivals and weddings. These kinds of singing are usually referred to as inshad and sama'.




iv. Those kinds of singing which are general, and are neither prohibited nor specifically about goodness and happiness (but may be e.g., about politics or environment, etc), the majority of Scholars hold that it is permissible only in its context rather than a habit to listen and enjoy. If it is habituated and leads an individual to ignore their rights and responsibilities, then it is not permitted. Almost all Hollywood and Bollywood songs fit in here.




Note: The above writings are gleaned but are also fairly interpolated by me in form of typo error, parenthesis and or additional statement but did not change original article by the author.

This is not going to be about ego. It is simple fact. I know and understand medieval scholars opinions on this subject. I held that view as well. It perfectly suited whatever going on in those days and at that time. But to simply say "music is haram" complicates reality on the ground.

Base on analysis from islamqa, there are lots of implications they did not consider. For instance, Sheikh Salahudin Akindele was giving lecture on this issue. I watched him on YouTube. People are criticizing him for the fact that he consider every musical instruments haram. Commentors said microphone in front of him is also haram then. Did he not think before he classified ALL to be haram?. Understand that these things did not exist in the time of nabi, sahaba and medieval time. Microphone is musical instrument too yet, we use it to proclaim adhan.


Above ^ is just diversion. Let me now face front.

Plappvillemoi:
Stories. You have been initiated with lying spirit

One Arab for Two Blacks

Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported: There came a slave and pledg- ed allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man)
Sahih Muslim 10:3901

Muhammad was a case to black people then.

Type of reply you deserve

Plappvillemoi:
No He did not. You have not provide a source to back up your claim. Muslims are capable of manipulating blacks.
But not all fall for thier manipulation.

can u at least reason intelligently? . You saw clearly I posted link from NL and I'm not the one u should hold responsible. I already achieved my purpose

Trust tintingz, him no go carry last . Anyways, this is a complex topic for centuries. It is not ABC approach. The question of music is a complex one and there are valid differences of opinion surrounding it. As a quick introductory statement, we as Muslims must realize that understand the Fiqh (Legal Ruling) of any matter is not as simple as quoting a Qur'anic verse or pointing to a Hadeeth. In fact, the Companions, and definitely the two generations following them (Tabi'een and Tabi' Tabi'een) refrained from quoting from the Sunnah or the Qur'an without proper analysis of many many issues, e.g., linguistic proofs, context of revelation as well as a narration of the Prophet (upon whom be peace and blessings of Allah), absolute and qualified narrations, universality and particularity of verses and narrations, etc.

Will be back later In Sha Allah

^

'At-qiyya' was explained to you last year by Abuamam. Wasting of time reversing that now. I also wrote about christian lies.

https://www.nairaland.com/2189813/beware-christians-evangelism-use-deceptions

Seun:
Reference the book on every post, not in the end. Link to the google books page or amazon page. The recent cut and paste trend must end.

You trying to frustrate him now?. Let him get it all out. We following......

Op, just keep each post simple to read cuss they will be here now to say "it is to long". That's why they fail exams anyways.

Parrisbookaddict and true2god are busy with Muhammad elsewhere right now.

true2god:
[s]Let the Arabs keep fooling you. Saudi Arabia outlawed slavery in 1962 after being forced to do so by President J.F.Kennedy (a supposed kafir). 99% of saudi slaves were blacks and they were following the sunnah of their criminal prophet Mohammed (peace be upon me):

Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah's Apostle was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah's Apostle said, "Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!"
Sahih Bukhari 8:73:182, See also:Sahih Bukhari 8:73:229

Stop fooling yourself, use your brain bro.[/s]

kettle calling pot black. Christians slave trade is written in BOLD PRINT. Too late for you now to come up with fictitious tales.

Slavery existed before prophet muhammad. Why didn't your jesus and the apostles abolish it before muhammad (p)