Update! Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation
Update 9.25.07: List of signatories missed in the first issuance, added below. .
In the Name of Allah, the Ever-Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy
All Praise is due to Allah, and may the salutations of Allah be upon the Beloved Messenger.
Alhamdulillah, a very blessed and important step was recently taken by a number of du`aat and students of knowledge in the Western world. This was done in order to achieve a more cooperative spirit and foster a greater degree of harmony amongst Sunni Muslims. A mention of this momentous event was made in another MM post here.
The attached ‘Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation’, signed by people of diverse theological backgrounds, all of whom have historically used the label of Ahl al-Sunnah (or ‘Sunni’ for short), is intended to be a guideline for mutual interaction (a modus vivendi of sorts), primarily for themselves, and also for those who might look to them for guidance.
Primarily, it states that:
- The fundamental issues of creed, as embodied in the famous Hadeeth of Jibreel, are simple, and it is not a requirement of Islam that every single Muslim be cognizant of the more abstruse issues of theology.
- The situation and times we live in warrants an even more concerted effort to achieve unity amongst Muslims, and avoid splintering to the greatest extent possible.
- Disputations of more complex issues of theology need to be conducted by people who are trained in these sciences, and not by lay-Muslims. Additionally, even when such discussions take place, they should be done in accordance with proper Islamic etiquette.
- No charges of takfeer should be labeled against other Sunni groups or scholars, and neither should the motives or character of those who profess alternate theologies within Sunni Islam be impugned due to their allegiance to that theology.
- Individual Muslims should, to the greatest extent possible, respect the local scholars of the community, and not engage in rash actions that might polarize the community or lead to further strife. There are proper ways of handling differences of opinion – even theological ones.
- Lay-Muslims, especially the youth (i.e., college level) should avoid getting passionately involved in intra-Sunni polemics, whether on campus or online, as this inevitably leads to the splintering of an already fragile local community.
- At an individual level, all Muslims should strive to come closer to Allah through increased acts of worship, and at a community level they should come together in order to counter any and all negative and false images of Islam.
The last paragraph is also an important disclaimer. All of the parties that have signed on to this document identify themselves as being from the tradition of Sunni Islam. And it is an undeniable historical reality that this label has been used by a number of diverse, and at times contradictory, theological groups, for the last thousand years of Islam. I personally have no qualms considering these groups within the broad fold of Sunni Islam. What combines these various strands (for example, the veneration of all of the Companions of the Prophet salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and a sincere attempt to understand and implement the Prophetic Sunnah as preserved in the Sunni canonical traditions such as the Saheehs al-Bukhari and Muslim, amongst other issues) is much greater than what disunites them, especially vis-à-vis other groups. That being said, there are indeed, as the document states, some serious and legitimate differences within these various strands. And it is my personal conviction that the purest theology is that of the first three generations of Islam; it is these generations that we should seek to emulate. The pious predecessors of these generations freed themselves from the dialectic theology known as the science of kalaam, and from the theological positions that were derived from this science. And this is something that I too hold to, and consider Sunni Islam at that pure and blessed stage to have been nothing other than the beliefs of these pious predecessors. It is important to stress, however, that the purpose of this pledge is not to vindicate or justify one ideology over another. These differences have existed within Sunni Islam (in the broad sense of the term) for the last twelve centuries, and the fact of the matter is that, barring some sort of Divine Intervention, it does not appear that these difference will leave us any time soon. Therefore there needs to be a more pragmatic and realistic attempt at cooperation, one that retains our traditionalisms and respects our historical traditions, yet at the same time takes into account the context of our current political and social situation.
No doubt there will be those who will find fault with this agreement. Some might read in phrases or ideas that are not present. Others will not be satisfied with the wording of the document, viewing it as either too liberal and encompassing, or too narrow and strict. But it is not meant to satisfy everyone, for that is not its purpose (and nor is it a feasible goal!). Rather, the document is nothing more than an expression of a shared conviction that all the signatories feel very strongly about. Those who disagree have the right to do so – it is not being forced on anyone. But it is hoped from those who look up to some of the signatories and take knowledge from them, that they might take an example from this collective stance and be more proactive with other groups and organizations. Having said that, there will always be extremisms on all sides, especially amongst over-zealous, under-experienced youth. What is desired, though, is that such extremism not find a voice amongst authentic and respected scholarship.
On a personal note, I am very happy that Allah blessed me to be a part of this process from its very inception. Although I am very passionate about the specific theological doctrines that I hold to be correct (and all those whom I’ve had the privilege to teach can attest to that), I believe that there is a time, a place, an audience and a methodology for dealing with such issues. And I also believe that such issues need to be put into perspective, taking into account our local, national, and international situation. Even if I disagree with some specific theological doctrines of other signatories, I am proud to call all of them my brothers in faith; I am always honored to be in their company; I am eager to further my relationship with them; I sense a genuine spirit of Islamic brotherhood whilst amongst them; I wish the best for them and their da`wah; I am desirous to benefit from their wisdom and knowledge; and I consider myself the least amongst them in piety and taqwa.
In this blessed month of Ramadhan, I pray that this pledge helps in bringing about a renewed sense of optimism, and fosters greater unity, amongst us all. No doubt other steps need to be taken, but insha Allah this is a blessed and necessary first step.
Yasir Qadhi
Download document - Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation (pdf)
Please also see AE’s background post
Co-signers include (MM’s on-board Islamic Specialists highlighted):
Abdelrahman Helbawi, Abdul Karim Khalil, Abdullah Adhami, Abdurraheem Green, Abdur-Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera, Abu Aaliyah Surkheel Sharif, Abu Eesa Niamatullah, Aisha Faleh AlThani,, Asma Mirza, Cheikhna B. Bayyah, Dawood Yasin, Ebadur Rahman, Faraz Rabbani, Fuad Nahdi, Gul Mohammad, Haitham al-Haddad, Hamza Yusuf, Hasan al-Banna, Ibrahim Osi-Efa, Jihad Hashim Brown, M. Abdul Latif Finch, M. Afifi al-Akiti, Mehdi Kader, Mokhtar Maghroui, Muhammad Alshareef, Muhammad Ash-Shaybani ,Muhammad ibn Adam, Omar Qureshi, S. Abdal-Hakim Jackson, Shamira Chothia Ahmed, Siddique Abdullah, Suhaib Webb, Tahir Anwar, Talal Al-Azem, Tanveer Hussain , Tawfique Chowdhury, Usama Canon, Usama Hasan, Walead Mosaad, Yahya Rhodus, Yasir Qadhi, and Zaid Shakir.
UPDATE to SIGNATORIES: The following names were missed from the original list of signatories and will be likely added in the next update: Yaser Birjas, Mohammed Faqih, Waleed Basyouni
Related:
- Join Facebook group here
- See AE’s background post
- See UmmZaid’s “Making Pledge More Than Words“
- Unity Based on Renewal & Guidance post on MM.
- Blog Endorsers on MR’s page.
- Joining the conversation, agreements & disagreements (you should join too- if you have a post on your blog we missed, let us know): Waleed Basyouni, Abu Easa, Suhaib Webb, Yahya Birt, iMuslim, Umar, HAhmed, Danya, Abs, Munzareen, UmmZaid, Manas, Austrolabe, Hema, Hamdy, Jinnzaman, Ijtema, Muslimology, Nuralhuda, Yaqub, Margari Aziza, Haitham Hamdan, Seeker, Aaminah, Adnan, Ginny, Takumi, Oasis, AbdurRahman, Sis Shaykha, Islamcrunch, Shar’i Perspectives
More from this category
- MuslimMatters.org 5-Minutes Survey: Please Participate
- Open Thread Sunday 8/24/08
- One Million & Counting
- The Marriage Revolution: Tonight
More from this author
- An Exegesis of the Basmala
- ‘Nabiha My Love’ - But a Person is With the One Whom They Love
- The Arabic Qur’ān and Foreign Words
- The Role of Atomism in the Groups of Kalam
Subscribe to this author
mash Allah, may Allah bless you all, ustadh Yasir, ustadh Hamza Yusuf, and Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah.
this statement is something I’m personally happy to endorse and recognize, as a layman, the implications and responsibility of. Something I’ve waited a long time to hear and which would be welcome to a great number of mosques, which should be the houses of Allah and dhikr, not of ikhtilaf (argument) and fitna (evil chaos).
May Allah guide and help all of us to recognize those truths and bases for reasonable and honorable co-existence, and strengthen us to achieve those aims of daw’ah and internal bolstering of the community, ‘cleaning our own dirty laundry,’ which waited out the last decade as internecine quarrels sapped our collective energy.
As the Prophet said in a longer hadith: “You will suffer from ‘wahn’ (fatigue)… and this will have two roots, love of the dunya and trembling at death.” - and: “I don’t fear for you poverty, rather I fear for you wealth, that you will strike at each other’s necks in desire for this world (dunya).” aw qama qalahu
Co-Signed!
Calling all Muslim Bloggers. Does your blog support this pledge?
Brilliant.
During aqeedah 102 in NJ Sheikh Yasir Qadhi gave a pretty lengthy and passionate appeal to the students to the effect of this post. May Allah bless him for that, those wise words still resonate in my mind whenever I see the evil of asabiyah spring forth over and over in Islamic dialouges.
The problem existed for a while and then it became more apparent and alhamdulillah the leaders became more aware who are now undertaking concrete steps to minimize this evil. The pressure is on them to make this more than just PR and be sincere to this pledge so that it becomes visible to their students and a reflection of their teachings.
I think all institutions should have “disclaimers” in their classes as we had in NJ to give their students the broader perspective. May Allah help them in the good they undertake.
Maa shaa Allaah!
I just read this on Imaam Suhaibs Webb blog too
Baarak Allaahu feek
Alhamdulillah this is great news. May Allah accept this great declaration and may it be the means to bring everyone together in common purpose. Amin.
wa s-salam, Yahya Birt
One Sentence:
“Unique Array of Co-Signers”
Unique and beautiful.
May Allah make the statement and ITS EFFECT blessed and honorable in spirit and action
jazakumAllahkhair to all the Shayookh and Sh. Ibn al-Bayyah.
May Allah put His baraka in this humble effort. Ameen.
Yeah I remember your talk at LightuponLight Toronto shaykh and I remember your deep reply to my question on Islam’s future in the West. Alhamdulillah, good to see these precautions being taken.
Ma sha’ Allaah, this is extremely beautiful. May Allaah bless these actions and make them acceptable, and I hope this methodology of da’wa extends from the West to the East.
Wouldn’t that be miraculous?
This took real humility and courage. Alhamdulillah.
Salam
It’s about time!
mashaaAllah- and what a beautiful time for it, Ramadan..may Allah swt accept this pledge and unite all of us and bless the ummah and give us strength. Barak Allah feekum wa feena wa fil muslimeen. ameen.
may Allah grant us success
A bit unrelated here, but why don’t you come up with a post tipping Muslim bloggers?
At the risk of sounding like advertising, here is my weak effort-
http://wishsubmission.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/tips/
as-salamu `alaykum,
This is very nice, ma sha’ Allah, and may Allah reward all the signatories. However, aside from these prominent figures extending olive branches to each other in such a public manner, I hope they will also become just as accommodating (if not moreso) towards the common people with whom they are at ideological variance, insha’ Allah.
Let’s hope for the best, insha’ Allah. This is a positive step.
May Allah Bless the signatories, Bless this effort, and Unite all the Muslims in His Service, ameen!
so do all the mashaikh in the US know about this pledge?
I was looking for Sheikh Husain Abdul Sattar’s(sacredlearning.org) name and dint see it.
may Allah swt Guide us all to what is the truth and keep us firm upon it forever. Ameen
Verily only Allah swt knows, and we know not.
May Allah guide us all to His Path.
I’ve seen a few unity agreements in my time. Nothing of this size though.
Let’s see how this plays out.
May Allah shower all of us with His Blessings in this month and show all of us the Light of His Straight Path.
“And Allah, the One free of all defects, does not leave any time without a people who preserve this Sharee’ah, rebutting the people of falsehood and explaining the mistakes of those making errors.”
(Al-Muntaqan-Nafees min Talblees Iblees).
Yay.
Now can we go eat some butterscotch and chocolate Häagen-Dazs ice cream at 2am? I’m hungry!
There is not harmony, nor peace without respect. may Allah make this a simple yet strong step towards a true islamic community full of respect to all.
masha allah…
what a significant move and a needed one indeed…i hope allah swt shower his blessings upon this group…i also anticipate and hope this group of ulemaa to be the front line to defend islam and muslims in the west..
jazakum allah khair
in a general sense i feel cooperation is needed between all muslims and humans.
I see no reason for a special pleade to be signed in order to enjoin cooperation on righteousness.
Thus, i see no value in this signed document becuase it still causes confusion amongst the people. What exactly do you mean by ’sunni’… if it you mean ‘non-shia’ then make that as explicit as possible, because the ash’ari’s and maturidis are not sunni in the sense of ‘firqatun-najiyah’ unless that belief has changed amongst the ’salafi’ signatories…
wAllahu ‘alim
Asalaamu Alaaikum,
Indeed we do need to stop division between us…
But Insha’Allah I will read the actual document (pact), and take my time with my decision.
jazaakAllah Khair for the post Sheikh,
Wa’alaykum Asalaam
I see this document creating more splits, as time will tell. An obvious result of lack of communication (and cooperation amongst yourselves!).
More later, but let’s put this contract to acid test:
Yasir, are Ash’aris heretics?
A three or two letter answer would end the dilemma, iA. Not a paragraph, but just ‘yes’ or ‘no’ would suffice. JK
Abu Zubair,
To be honest I am amused and somewhat tickled by your constant prodding to get me to say what you want.
With all due respect to you akhi, I must also say I find it ridiculous and somewhat insulting that you - who apparently are completely unaware of the theology that I’ve taught directly to over four thousand students in the U.K., U.S.A, Canada and Australia (and all blessings are due to Allah alone), not to mention to countless thousands of others via Islamic satellite stations, and who apparently also seems to have forgotten all the published works that I’ve written - that you now come and wish to ‘test’ my theology. Had you been aware of my dawah, or even bothered to once again look at any work of mine (none of which I’ve withdrawn from or rescinded), I don’t think you’d be asking these questions.
The theology that I hold dearly to is as clear as the light of day - its in ALL my works, and very apparent in the classes I teach. The last of these classes, for your infrormation, dealt with the topic of Asma wa al-Sifaat upon the methodology of the earliest generations, and a detailed refutation of the beliefs of the modern mutakalimun, from their usool and furu’. It explained *why* the Asharis and Maturides held the doctrines they did, where they came from, and how to correct their misunderstandings. It was taught to over six hundred and fifty students in Toronto. To the best of my knowledge, there exists no material like it in English. (Some of the comments above are from those who attended that very class.)
If you are unaware of my dawah then you have no need or right to make assumptions or issue public challenges.
I suppose the main difference between us is what I perceive to be your sensationalist and melodramatic style. There are gentler and wiser ways of preaching the truth. Perhaps another difference is that even if I believe that group to be incorrect in some aspects of its theology, I am not as harsh upon them as I perceive you to be. The current situation that we live in dictates this. I just don’t see any wisdom in charging forth and labeling the way you do. I believe there are wiser and subtler ways of expressing the truth. And, if you read the very comments I wrote in my post above, and in this one, it is extremely clear what my position is.
But, if you wish to purposely not connect the dots and cause fitna, then words better than mine can also be distorted, but only by a specific group of people.
In any case, you may assume and label as you please. The message I have given is clear to those who are sincere. Hence, I see no point in continuing this discussion from my side.
Wa salaam
Yasir
I’d like to know who the 2 sisters are: Sr Aisha and Sr Asma?
Yasir, please do not make this personal. No one is insulting anyone. I was not testing your theology. Read my previous comment. I was testing the document you signed (and it failed the acid test). It wasn’t to find out what you believe, as that is al-hamdulillah very clear. It was only to find out whether you are still able to express those views unhindered as a result of your signature; or whether being signatory now prevents you from stating those beliefs openly and explicitly. I am not challenging your da’wah, because I never had anything against you personally or even what you teach. And not everyone who disagrees with you is necessarily, unwise, melodramatic, ill-intentioned, bent on making fitna. No one is distorting your words or even attempting to. (Don’t you remember only recently, I was the only one defending your lecture against a barrage of criticisms?:) ) No one is here to label you or anyone else, and I believe we are all sincere here.
Cut out the personal stuff, dear brother. I have been personally attacked openly quite a few times, only months or weeks before there was ever a talk about this pact. But I couldn’t care less if the critic isn’t brave enough to tell me straight to my face. You should be glad that I am always forthright with these issues and I state how I feel in my heart leaving nothing to be said in private to anyone else. Others obviously have a different way of dealing with things.
Back to the previous question; the question is merely about classification and categorisation, and not about labelling Ash’aris as heretics with the intention to insult them. Just like the Kuffar are called kuffar, since this a shar’i-Quranic terminology to refer to all the non-Muslims. Ahl al-Bid’a, or ‘heretics’, as you well know, is another shar’i terminology to refer to all those who are not Sunnis. It is only to do with classification and has nothing to do with sensationalism as you suggested.
And if you insist that the term ‘heretics’ is too sensationalist, how about describing the Ash’aris as non-Sunnis? Just as many of us describe the kuffar simply as non-Muslims in order not to offend them? Does your contract allow you to state the truth you believe in, in its most inoffensive form?
This is the question that needs answering.
Regarding AE’s comment on his blog: ‘As for those who haven’t signed it yet: there is no conspiracy theory and no-one has been left out’.
This is false. All those whom I have spoken to so far from the students of knowledge from Makkah, Madina and England (and at least one I know of in the US) were never asked to sign this, or in the cases that they were informed about it, they declined to sign. The problem is that amongst all the brothers, I seem to be the most vocal of them all with respect to these issues, whereas everyone else agrees with me in private yet fails to support me publicly giving various excuses. I am sure Yasir can tell you all about it since he was one of those who would pat me on the back, only a couple of years ago, for debating with these ‘elders’ on a certain list.
Once again, I would like to emphasise, in case I am misunderstood again, I am all for cooperation with the UFOs, not to mention our Ash’aris brothers in faith. My issue, (rather, our issue), here is not cooperation, because as I had imagined, and as it was suggested by AE, it is all about belittling the differences between Sunnis and heretics and considering them all Sunnis. The contract only confirmed our fears. Proof? Brother Yasir’s inability to state explicitly what he believes. To be honest, even if he could state ‘yes, they are non-Sunnis’ that would be more than enough to dispel the misunderstanding this vague contract has produced. But his silence speaks volumes, not to mention that it runs contrary to the pact he has with Allah:
“when Allah took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture, [saying], “You must make it clear to the people and not conceal it.” But they threw it away behind their backs and exchanged it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased.”
Whatever the case, there is no reason to run away from a dialogue. Surely, if people are so willing to have a dialogue and show brotherly love and respect to those whom they consider to be heretics in private, they can show more brotherhood, love, consideration, unity and cooperation towards those whom they consider to be their true Sunni brothers privately and publicly.
Assalamualaikum,
I would like to second the concerns raised by Yasir in his post above, not about Abu Zubair since I don’t know much about him, however about many of our *salafi* brothers and sisters who have expressed concern about why I am a signatory to this document as well.
It seems that there is some sort of self-righteous attitude amongst many of our brothers and sisters and some sort of thought that they are perhaps the last vanguards of a pure and pristine dawah and we who have graduated some time ago, have some how forgotten the lessons we had learnt in our days in Medinah. This I find really offensive and if not purely arrogant.
I would like these chaps to come down to the grass roots dawah that we are involved in, touching the lives of thousands of students in three continents around the world like AlKauthar is doing (and all praise is to Allah alone) and learn from the ground that which their cosy homes and coushy keyboards and tit for tat tussles on mailing lists will not teach.
In my days working as a doctor in training these days, I have learnt an important lesson. I have learnt firsthand that theory is something and by Allah, practise and reality at the patient’s bed is something else. There is a different sence of urgency, a different perception of reality, a different feeling of ability and a different feeling of prepardeness to work to help the Ummah. I think a person in his intern/house officer years learns nearly 10 times more than he does in theory years. There is no one to humble a doctor more, then a patient and his disease. I dare say this is the same for Islamic dawah as well. I would urge these brothers and overzealous sisters to come down to the grass roots individual dawah and humble themselves. Be involved in this global way in the dawah scene which I and many of the signatories to the document are involved in and then comment.
It is good and well that they are involved in some dawah here and there, perhaps a website here or there, perhaps a tv program here or there, or perhaps a trip to the lands of the non-Muslims in the Summer to teach a course here and there (and may Allah increase them in their ability to do more) - my problem is not that they are doing this little since everyone’s circumstances are different. However, the problem is that they have somehow appeased themselves that they are doing enough to give them a good idea of whats happening on the ground - but they have no idea of how the world of the Muslim ummah presents to I, Yasir and the rest of the signatories on the document who travel for dawah widely and see the Muslim world in a very different light. Atleast have respect, if not then empathy and if not then atleast have shame. If not, then do as you wish.
As far as I am concerned, I am convinced that the state of dawah that we are in, with our religion being insulted at every second article and our Prophet at every second cartoon editorial, the very future existence of muslims minorities at question and our own muslim countries being erroded day by day through the silent work of missionaries - it then falls upon the able, to unite in a manner and upon a platform that is possible to unite on, to present a more cohensive front to the intellectual, political and media onslaught on our way of life and our values and ideals. For too long we have been reactionary, now is the time to be proactive.
Tawfique Chowdhury
I know this may seem a silly thing to ask in the face of the seriousness of this issue, but… who exactly is br. Abu Zubair/ al-Harrani?
Br Tawfique: whilst you stated that this comment as not directed to me, I would like to respond.
I appreciate and fully agree with your main point about the importance of grass roots da’wah and in co-operating with not only Asharis, or those signatories to the pact, by HTs, Deobandis, Tablighis, Mu’tazila (modernists), even the Shi’a and indeed non-Muslims, in the defence of Muslims and Islam. Those who are aware, will know that I continually encourage and support such efforts. I believe I am better aware of many of these issues (with regards to civil liberties at least) than many other of our ‘Salafi’ brothers, more forthcoming in my support for such efforts, and in touch with brothers who are dedicating their time to this, and co-operating with all Muslims and non-Muslims alike in this regard. It pains me often to be here and feel I am prevented from opportunities of doing this work, and engaging in the way that you, Yasir or many others do - for that reason I have been very eager to return and participate in all this work, and far more than that.
However, what I fail to understand is why there is a conflict in the above and holding firm to our beliefs and principles; why is it not possible for us to co-operate with other Muslims or non-Muslims, without diluting our principles, or being prevented from openly and explicitly stating our beliefs? ‘Salafi’ Muslims have worked for example with HTs (Asharis) and even Shi’a in the UK (e.g. the Unity March in 2005) but never claimed that they were also from Ahlus-Sunnah (in its specific sense). In fact, their beliefs were never even discussed. Ibn Taymiyyah fought alongside the Asha’irah in the defence of Islam, against the invading Tatar, yet this did not stop him from writing works against the Asharis before and after the invasion. Why should the two be mutually exclusive? This is the crux of our disagreement.
Finally, I do understand why you consider it offensive or arrogant for people who are distant from the reality you are facing, to say that you have forgotten what you’ve studied in Madinah etc etc. But I would remind you that both you and Yasir, whilst in Madinah, said the same thing about others engaged in da’wah in the West, saying that they were not firmly grounded in knowledge and had never studied properly - and I personally at the time felt that was arrogant myself. I have never looked at these issues in terms of who has studied, or under whom, to what extent - I examined the validity of their arguments. Moreover, it should also be considered that there are brothers in the West, engaged in similar work, who do not agree with the pact and would not be signatories to it.
Abu Zubair, if you would like to maintain respect for your brothers, then carry on this discussion offline.
It is very clear you are jumping the band wagon and have not yet clarified with us properly and you seem to be reading through the lines and clealry misunderstanding Yasir’s post. Calm down. You are welcome to email your concerns and speak to me and I am more than willing to clarify things to you from our perspective.
I am not willing and will not carry on an online tussle with anyone.
Tawfique
From Ibn Uthaimeen rahimahullah, in his book: The book of knowledge, he says:
“From among the most important disciplines which are obligatory for the student of knowledge to possess is verification. Verification in transmitting news and verification in passing judgement. So, if information is transmitted, then it is imperative to verify it’s authenticity from the one whom it is being transmitted. So, if information is transmitted then it is imperative to verify it’s authenticity from the one whom it is being transmitted. If its is authenticated, and a religious verdict is issued, then quite possibly the information you have heard may be based upon a principle which you are unaware of, leading you to pass judgement that the religious verdict is a mistake whilst in reality it is not a mistake!
So what is the remedy for such a situation?
The remedy is that you must call the one to whom this news is attributed and say to him: “such and such has been transmitted on your authority, is this correct?” Then, discuss the issue with him. It could be that your disagreement and subsequent alienation of him was due to what you heard which was alarming, because you do not know the reason for that which has been transmitted.
It is said: “if the reason is known, then there is not alarm.” So, it is imperative to firstly verify the information and religious verdict, thereafter, call the one from whom it is being transmitted and ask him: “has this been authenticated or not?” Then discuss it with him; Either it will be that he is upon the truth and that which is correct, so you turn to it, or that which you are upon is the truth so he will turn to it.
…
Also tathabbut is an important matter because the transmitters sometimes have evil intentions. They deliberately transmit that which aims to discredit the transmission; sometimes they do not have evil intentions, but nevertheless they understand a matter contrary to that which was intended. Because of this it is obligatory to seek tathabbut. So if the chain of narration serves to verify that which is transmitted, you arrive at a level of discussion with the one from whom it is being transmitted, before you pass judgement on the statement that it is a mistake or not. This is because it may quite possibly become clear to you after the discussion, that the truth is really with the one from whom the statement is transmitted.
In conclusion if a statement is transmitted on the authority of such-and-such and you feel it is wrong, then follow the following three steps, in order:
1 – Verify the authenticity of the narration;
2 – Look into the issue to ascertain the correct ruling, and if it is correct then support and uphold the position of the one from whom the narration is transmitted. However, if you find it is wrong, then proceed to step 3;
3 – Telephone the one from whom the narration is transmitted and discuss the issue with him calmly and respectfully.
Dear brother Tawfeeq, it seems you have made a number of assumptions here. Questioning the public statements the brothers have made and signed is not akin to disrespecting them. I have not joined any bandwagon, and if I have, then I am, indeed, the driver.
The matter should have been dealt with in private if it was kept private. But we broke away from our private dialogues when we decided to do things by ourselves without consultation, and hence, this came as a surprise to us all. Besides, my first comments were only in response to AE’s post. Yasir then mentioned the agreement. And now agreement is there for us all to read. It is authentically attributed to you all and in many places the meaning is clear and other places, vague. But that’s besides the point, for we have not even begun to discuss the treaty, yet.
I only wanted to put this pact to acid test and it failed. If it wasn’t for the fact that this public agreement is confusing so many brothers, I would not have gone public.
If you remember, I did not go public about Usama’s support for TR’s call on moratorium, because he himself did not go public. Here the matter has become public, of which I am a member, and we would all like to know the shara’i basis for all this. We all deserve to know what’s going on.
If you are only willing to clarify privately for whatever reasons, that is entirely your decision and I respect that. But I do not see why it must be done privately after all the affects it has had.
The questions/concerns that Abu Zubair has posed are on my mind and those of many other muslims throughout the world, and I believe that the signatories are at a responsibility to answer them.
Muhammad
The ahl-hadith link has been moved into the post. Before criticizing pacts and the students of knowledge who signed it, let’s consider the situation of our own dawah, our laziness and our lack of interest in knowledge, and I am specifically talking about youth in my area. You know who you are
-Amad
Br. al-Harrani, why don’t you read Sh. Yasir’s disclaimer again in the post above. I think the ‘clarification’ you are seeking is quite obvious in what he states there…
There are two ways of correcting the wrong aqeedah, either by criticizing the wrong or by clarifying what is correct.
2+2=5
either you can say 5 is the wrong answer or without criticizing the wrong answer, you can say: the correct answer is 4, and prove that 4 is the correct answer, people themselves will realize that 5 was the ‘wrong’ answer!
wAllahu t’ala ‘alam
A dear friend, Shaykh Haitham commented on the multaqa forums,
“You will see how harsh some of the Salafi signatories will get towards their Salafi brothers in debating the adequecy of this pledge. While the opposite will be true about their attitude towards people of Bid’ah.”
Actually, I am disinclined to be too concerned with the concern quoted because the signatories have a track record that speaks for itself in terms of how they deal with brothers, the kindness and mutual respect that they show to others, etc. It is in fact out of this spirit that they became signatories. On the other hand, what I am more concerned about is how those who felt that they were left out (either by their own choice or by the choice of the formulators) and their followers will treat the signatories. Would this become a new basis for wala wal bara now? Would the signatories now become the new sub-set of Ahl-bidah “closest to us”?
Another question I’d like to raise is that in terms of reaching out to thousands, to actually be effective in dawah, who else is there besides the signatories that is doing more? Of course, there are a few exceptions… there are other AlMaghrib teachers too who are effective and have widespread appeal (like Sh. Waleed, Sh. Yaser Birjas, etc.). But if you honestly step back, those with the most dawah impact these days are those with their names on the document. Is it a coincidence that kindness and establishing the correct methodology in lieu of “destroying” the incorrect one has more appeal and has a greater chance of success? If one thinks of these things in reasonable metrics, I believe the answer is clear. You can keep banging the drums of refutations, yet if the only ones who are reading it and “hooraying” it are ALREADY part of your click, where is the benefit?
Finally, I am not sure why this document has to change anything between the non-signatories and the signatories. Just do the things that everyone has been doing. The “cooperation” has ALREADY been going on, with or without the treaty… all the treaty does is to trickle it down to the level of the laymen polemics— to shut those futile arguments down. May Allah purify our intentions and make the best for our akhira appear the best in our duniya.
P.S. I could not log into the multaqa forum, so if any of the readers can post this on my behalf there, that’d be great.
who is abu zubairrr /al-harrini - if somebody doesnt mind clarifying it pls
Well for one thing, Abu Zubair al-Harrini is part of hanbalis.com which is a wikipedia type of site for the Hanbali madhab.
His comments are very intereseting. You can also find more opinions similar to his on the pledge posted on the Islamic Awakening Forums.
salaam,
“The ahl-hadith link has been moved into the post.”
I am a little confused, do you mean out of the post?
“Before criticizing pacts and the students of knowledge who signed it, let’s consider the situation of our own dawah, our laziness and our lack of interest in knowledge, and I am specifically talking about youth in my area. You know who you are”
Irrelevant to the point that was made.
Look up in the post under joining the conversation. -MM
first note - our ‘on board’ shuyookh such as sh. tawfique have recommended for this discussion to go private, you can email info//at//muslim matters . o r g if you need.
secondly, with that said i wanted to address this question, not speaking on sh. yasir’s behalf but quoting something that he said in the almaghrib light upon light class that i feel is an answer to this question,
he said there’s a “general” ahlus sunnah, meaning not shia, or extreme sufi groups, etc. then there is the ’specific’ of ahlus sunnah which is the pure aqeedah of the first 3 generations. ash’aris are within the general fold of ahlus sunnah, but not the specific.
i think people need to read the original post above, its not a copy paste as is being found on all the other websites, here’s some quotes from above in sh. yasir’s posts that i think address this issue,
“I personally have no qualms considering these groups within the broad fold of Sunni Islam. ”
and,
“And it is my personal conviction that the purest theology is that of the first three generations of Islam; it is these generations that we should seek to emulate. The pious predecessors of these generations freed themselves from the dialectic theology known as the science of kalaam, and from the theological positions that were derived from this science. And this is something that I too hold to, and consider Sunni Islam at that pure and blessed stage to have been nothing other than the beliefs of these pious predecessors.”
and,
“The last of these classes, for your inforrmation, dealt with the topic of Asma wa al-Sifaat upon the methodology of the earliest generations, and a detailed refutation of the beliefs of the modern mutakalimun, from their usool and furu’. It explained *why* the Asharis and Maturides held the doctrines they did, where they came from, and how to correct their misunderstandings .”
this is basically the same thing that has been taught for a while now (light upon light is being taught for over a year now), as sh. yasir said.
anyway.. thats it for me on this one, i think everyone needs to just step back and actually read everything and let it digest before jumping to conclusions… now.. back to that whole ramadan thing
Asalaamu Alaaikum Wa Rahmatullah,
Here are my Thoughts on the Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation
Posted at the MM blog:
http://muslimmatters.org/2007/09/22/pledge-of-mutual-respect-and-cooperation/
After giving this some consideration…insha’Allah me and my blog will sign on. I see that this is an effort for cooperation, and unity & respect between both sides. Neither side will “drop” or “integrate” their beliefs, but will just cooperate with each other, and fight/stand together in public, against those who are trying to defame islam, and will insha’Allah also continue their respetive debates/arguments in private…by those who are qualified to do so. As a young Muslim living in the west, who does not count herself amongst the knowledgeable (not even close), i really liked this part of the agreement:
“- Urge our brothers and sisters in faith to concentrate on enriching their lives by
deepening their practice of Islam through properly learning the basics of the faith,
adopting a consistent regimen of Qur’anic recitation, endeavoring to remember and
invoke Allah in the morning and evening, learning the basics of jurisprudence, attempting
to engage in voluntary fasting as much as possible, studying the Prophetic biography on a
consistent basis, studying the etiquettes that guide our interactions with our fellow
Muslims, and the performance of other beneficial religious acts, to the extent practical for
their circumstances;”
I can speak for myself that i and many others around me have engaged into far too much useless bickering between this person and that group, while at the same time failing to see how low our imaan is/was, and how little our acts of worship were. This is I believe a very important reminder you posted in the “pact”. We need to engage in these things FIRST and foremost before we go running off into debates. You also mentioned that we should leave the debates/discussions to the knowledgeable amongst us. I agree to this as well. I also agree with that we need to stop takfir (or atleast leave it up to those who are knowledgeable enough (and who are in the position) to label a person or group as kaffir/kuffar.
The last part was very crucial as well, we should fight this campaign against Islam together.
Insha’Allah this agreement is succesful,
May Allah guide the astray and deviant amongst us, whoever they might be, May Allah clear our heart of any shirk, nifaaq, or kufr and May Allah guide us all to that Path which pleases Him MOST, AMEEN
jazaakAllahum Khair Sheikh Yasir, and all the Shayookh who signed. I hope that this agreement works for the better.
Wa’alaykum Asalaam wa Rahmatullah
Ya Ikhwan,
I think we need to chill out and calm it down a little and really CONTEMPLATE and THINK and CONTEMPLATE of what is going on.
Going on in the world, where you are, the state we are all in before we start spitting fire.
Please, do not let us dismantle something that has been intended for good immediately, BEFORE we understand the “why’s” and the “can we even do this?”. We MUST understand these issues (Shariah implications as well as the societal) before jumping to conclusions.
As so many of our Ulema have advised the students of knowledge (and on relative terms speaking that is a FRACTION of the population demographic on this blog) to NOT be hasty… DO NOT BE HASTY.
This comment is not to the signers but to us…the general masses. The laymens…the one’s WITHOUT knowledge compared to others. The ones (and I speak for myself 1st) who need to humble themselves a little more insha’Allah. Especially in this month.
If anybody wants to talk real crazy then email them privately…or call them or whatever. Don’t make it a spectacular event where 100’s can read and spread.
May Allah protect us from fitna and increase us in good.
Astaghfirullah I meant to say: we should fight, rather inform, and teach these people, (and all Americans & other Western people) who are making campaigns against islam or who have misconceptions about islam….together.
Ma’Salaama
Salams,
just a quick question: does anyone know if Sh. Waleed Basyouni, Abdul Bary Yahya, Dr. Bilal Philips, and Dr. Jafer Sheikh Idris were asked to sign this pledge?
Unfortunately Zaytuna institute , is moving away from a traditionalist ash’aree institution, to a modernist secular institution. Just give it some years and you will begin to see ideas like multiple religions all lead to ALLAH concepts being thrown at us. If you examine the tapes coming out when they were young to the tapes nowadays , you can see a big ideological change in them. The tapes nowadays you will rarely hear a quote from the Qur’an, but you will hear hundreds of ideas from this political scientist to that Philosopher. Now when I listen to their tapes, my faith starts going down.
Recently the founder of zaytuna institute went to meet the Dalai Lama along with the President of ISNA, in order to seek solutions for Islam’s negative image in the west. Instead of turning to the ulama they are turning to Buddhism. I found this quite shocking and repulsive. http://www.isna.net/index.php?backPI…35&tt_news=704
“Yusuf said the challenges before the world demand that people of all faiths reach out to others.”
“The essence of pain and suffering in this world is ignorance,” said Yusuf, co-founder of the Hayward-based Zaytuna Institute, an Islamic think tank. “We can no longer ignore each other as faith-based communities.”
In light of all of this, I found it was a move , which would hurt Islam more then uplift it.
Ibn Abdullah, I was told that Sh. Waleed did too, though the person was not sure. So, I am seeking confirmation from him directly. w/s
SrAnonymous: Asma Mirza is the president of MSA National. I don’t know about the other sister.
I’ll refrain from saying anything else about this discussion.
Salafiyya,
I don’t agree with that assessment. Zaytuna Institute has become an internationally renowned institution of learning. Their ‘Ulema have also become leaders and the manner in which they give dawah is going to be different from the local Imam.
I also don’t agree with your basic assumption that Western and Islamic traditions are incompatible in every single regards. While we have mutually exclusive understanding of theology and jurisprudence, there are some areas of overlap and Zaytuna focuses on those issues.
Try being less reactionary, inshaAllah.
Brother al-Harrani,
I’m unclear about what you found unclear in the pact. Could you expand a bit and point out specifically what you found unclear?
Also, can you please define what makes one a heretic, as defined by your acid test?
Thanks!
Siraaj
As-Salamu ‘Alaykum
May Allah preserve you brother Al-Harani. I enjoyed reading your comments brother jazakallahu khayral jazaa’.
I would like to comment on this by saying that is very sad that people like Muhamad Ash-Shareef, yasir Qadhi and Tawfique choudry would sign along with this, as they in my mind and the minds of many other people have only been good for the sunni da’wa over the years.
As has been mentioned before, no one is against co-operation with non muslims so obviously they wouldnt be against working with sects such as the asha’ira and their likes.
The problem, however, is when we start to legitimize the suniness (for lack of a better word) of other sects who if we are honest we belive that their kind will be in the fire .
I don’t see this pact of co-operation helping anyone except the asha’ira on that list. Sunni islam was never harmed by the outlandish statements, distortions and lies of the Asha’irah and their companions from the non-sunni’s. On the contrary this only helped the sunni’s in explaining to the people their mistakes and guiding people away from them.
So by making a pact like this and using words such as sunni to describe some of the signatory’s then this is indeed unwise and as i have said gives some of the signatory’s some legitimacy in what they call to.
Secondly, i would like to say that this type of thing would have been a very good idea if it was done between sunni’s themselves, as many sunni’s are disunited on many petty issues which are explained away by words such as ‘manhaj’ and other silly things.
It would have been more productive and fruitful insha Allah if such a pact was done with sunni organizations across U.K and U.S.
This is pretty much what i wanted to say and i hope i dont offend any of my brothers and sisters with this honesty.
Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.
Imam SIraj Wahaj should sign the pledge..since he has great fan following =)
assalamu alikum
Did the sincere people who helped craft and signed this pledge think about when to release this pledge to general public? Why was this issue raised during this month? Highly disappointed with the timing, especially when it is being admitted that it will criticized and hence emotionally charged debates will be carried out. This couldn’t have waited three more weeks?!
The duty of students of knowledge is to refer back to the ulama and to connect people with the ulama.
The tullaabul ilm should not take matters in their own hands.Instead, they should have presented the matter to THEIR TEACHERS before signing the”pact”.
Any pact giving legitimacy to the ashaaira , matureediya, hulooliya, qubooriya will only weaken the dawah towards sunnah. It will only confuse the beginners.
Let us OPENLY declare and defend and PROPAGATE our aqeedah. After all , aqeedah is not a private thing; it is some thing upon which we base our wala and bara and our hubb and bugd.
Cooperation is good. Giving legitimacy to ahlul bid’ah is not.
Shaykh Haitham Hamdan and abuz zubair’s observations contain valid points. Instead of addressing them with knowledge based clarifications, we should not give emotional replies and should not speak about “ground realities”.
asalamalikum
Abu Rayhaan:
Sorry akhi, what is in your minds and in others minds does not constitute a proof or evidence. I don’t know what you are trying to say in the last line but if you mean they have been good for the dawah only for a few years, it is not only inaccurate but also not a good premise to dismiss a good argument.
I am not sure who “we” is and why you think “they” need “our” legitimization. Do you believe all the great scholars with ash’ari tendency will be in the fire? Do you imply that asha’riya are from the kuffar? What exactly are you saying?
Sure go ahead… the two efforts are not exclusive of each other. I am not sure why this pledge somehow detracts from other noble goals. Go ahead, you and other brothers, and work on uniting the “manhajis” too. We’ll help inshallah as you need. I am sure all these shayookh on “our” side will be signatories to that too. As for the rest of your comment, most of what you have stated is from Sh. Haytham in its flavor, so I think it is important we clear our own thoughts first before letting others make our conclusions for us.
Ibrahim
SubhanAllah, the timing was a “gift” in Ramadan… because the message is one of peace and kindness. The one who needs to be criticized is not the one who puts forward the message of mercy between believers, but rather the one who disrupts it.
You dear brother, sound very TROIDish/ SPsh, sorry to make that leap. Please do tell me if I am off the mark. If that is the case, who are the few and the proud left in the ever-shrinking circle of “accepted scholars”? And why does it matter what Yasir/Tawfique/etc. do, because they are already “off the manhaj” anyway? If you aren’t with the grand click, then the preceding doesn’t apply to you though the style is clearly adopted.
wallahualam
salam aleykum…
subhan allah…the way this forum is going is totally negative..i suggest the brothers and sisters to refrain from posting their comments until they review what they have to say atleast 10 times…its only fair so you dont create any anomosity or false accusations…
may allah swt guide us all
?
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah
just to clarify, the sister above ’salafiya’ is not me (I didnt read many of the posts clearly, but I just don’t want anyone to be confused, even though I doubt anyone even noticed)
In regards to the pact, I dunno about it nor do I know what I should follow so I’m just not going to disagree/agree with it just yet. Doubt it would make a difference anyways.
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah
Asalamu ‘Alaykum
Amad,
I can see that you feel emotional about this and insha Allah if we leave emotions out of this then it would be better.
amad said:
“Sorry akhi, what is in your minds and in others minds does not constitute a proof or evidence. I don’t know what you are trying to say in the last line but if you mean they have been good for the dawah only for a few years, it is not only inaccurate but also not a good premise to dismiss a good argument.”
Thank you for trying to clarify dear brother.
Yes, this is not what i intended by my statement. What i intended was that the aforementioned people have been excellent for sunni da’wa in the west for many years so it was sad to see people which such records signing something like this.
Amad said:
“I am not sure who “we” is and why you think “they” need “our” legitimization. Do you believe all the great scholars with ash’ari tendency will be in the fire? Do you imply that asha’riya are from the kuffar? What exactly are you saying?”
‘we’ refers to the sunni’s , and i believe that they need our legitimization because the asha’ri theology is an illegitimate creed that has no standing in the religion of islam.
No, i don’t belive that all of the great scholars that had slight asha’ari TENDENCIES, as you so justly and correctly put it, will be in the fire.
No, Im not implying that the asha’irah are from the disbelievers.
Amad said:
” As for the rest of your comment, most of what you have stated is from Sh. Haytham in its flavor, so I think it is important we clear our own thoughts first before letting others make our conclusions for us.”
Im not sure what you mean by letting shaykh haythem make my mind up for me, seeing as he supposedly signed this so it would seem that he agreed with it. insha Allah if you could explain that to me. jazakallahu khayr
I will insha Allah try to get in contact with shaykh Haythem al-hadad to see his understanding of this pact.
before i end this message i would like to clarify something because i can imagine some more of the same old tirades throwing accusations of ‘arrogance’ or people being seekers of ’sectarianism’.
Lets make it clear that some of those signatory’s such as Yasir Qadhi and Tawfique choudry believe that the Asha’irah are beyond the pale of sunni islam and that the asha’irah will be from those who will be in the fire.
This fact is as clear as the sun at the time of dhuhr in the saharah desert.
To me and many other brothers this pact just looks like a gaging order.
wallahu ‘alam.
Ha, it’s good to know some things will never change. Salafis will be salafis, and we’ll always find someone to pick a fight with online, even during Ramadan
Just of curiosity - Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani’s Sunniness? Yay or nay? Why or why not? I’m expanding my horizons, and I’d like to hear the full spectrum of hardcore salafiyyah’s gavels come smashing down with a verdict.
Siraaj
To amad:
As salaamu ‘alaykum.
Iam not from from SP/TROID. may Allaah correct them and us.
Sorry if I sounded like them.
Iam speaking about referring back to THEIR (Yasir qadi’s, Tawfeeq chaudry’s) TEACHERS.
Please read the second paragraph of my first post.
jazaakallaahu khayra.
Shaykh Yasir: You should’ve said Audhu billahi min ash-Shaytaan ar-Rajim at the start of this MM post.
salafiya: I’m sorry if you think Islam is the ONLY path. It isn’t. Other paths existed, now Islam is the only true one. Fragments of the Divine Truth are there in Buddhism or and there is no harm in learning from it with a strong base in Islam. Everything is there in Islam…but there are somethings about this deen you will only come to fully appreciate, if you look at it through the eyes of a totally different world-view. The universal religion can only be fully understood in a universal view.
This discussion is simply about semantics now. Perhaps a simple name change would solve the issue?
If there was an option to follow better scholars than these men and women, than perhaps this discussion would be relevant. Should we follow the followers or follow the leaders?
May Allah protect the Muslims.
Assalaamu alaykum,
I’m sorry my dear brothers and sisters, but I do not see how this pact ‘legitimizes’ the ash’aa^irah. All it says is that the more intricate differences should be left for a certain setting (i.e. the classroom).
Also, my understanding of the term ‘Sunni’, as used in the above pact, was only in contradistinction to Shi’ism. i.e. in the broad sense of the word. I don’t see why everyone feels it is being used in the specific sense (i.e. the Saved Sect, Ahl usSunnah wa alJamaa’ah).
I don’t think the Ash’ari signatories are ready to say at all that the ‘Salafi’ creed is the creed of the Saved Sect. And I think it has been made quite clear that the ‘Salafi’ signatories are not saying that Ash’arism is the creed of the Saved Sect. Allah knows best.
The main thing I gleaned from the pact is not to promote futile ‘laymen’ debates, nor to make takfir on individuals; however, I don’t think at all that the pact is saying that we cannot call kufr for what it is. Praying to dead people is major shirk that nullifies one’s Islam; period. I don’t think any of the ‘Salafi’ signatories are going to be any less shy about this fact; they simply are agreeing to refrain from applying the label of ‘kafir’ to specific people. Allah knows best.
So it seems quite clear to me that there is no ‘legitimization’ of any groups going on in this pact. Allah a’lam, perhaps brothers are seeing something that isn’t really there…
If I am mistaken about my perception of this pact, then our respect shuyookh who are involved in the drafting and/or signing of the pact are free to correct me.
wassalaam
As salamu ‘alaykum Shaykh Yasir,
We have endorsed this pledge here - http://islamcrunch.com/archives/pledging-for-sunni-muslim-unity/
Fi AmanAllah.
@ Abu Ameerah:
Yeah…Team Work Makes The Dream Work!!!
FULL ON!!!
“???”
Typically anything written can be interpreted by Shaytaan to mean a number of things…both good or bad. I highly doubt the shaykhs are disputing amongst each other here. If anything, I believe they are clarifying.
Give yo brothers 70 excuses !
P.S. Use more of these
^What I meant to say was that I could be pointing out something a brother missed…only to have the brother tell me I am accusing him.
90% of communication is non-verbal–all we got is 10% here. So shaytaan can play his tricks.
Ramadhan is supposed to be a month of love
http://calltoislam.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=382&Itemid=35
Br. Jalal & Abu Rayhaan, jazakumAllahkhair for the clarifications.
I would like to add a few important points here (and I think I speak for all or most of us here at MM):
1) Acceptance of the pledge in itself is not a criterion for any loyalties or the opposite. Although I asked the question of others, I will state that there is no wala wal bara associated with what one feels of the pledge.
2) I can understand and can appreciate that brothers will have issues in a bit here and a bit there of the pledge or more than bits. It is difficult to overcome what we have become used to accepting as the “norm” and making the leap of faith in accepting those under a common umbrella against whom our hearts have come to distrust. Obviously most of us have not had the personal counsel of one ore more of the signatories in order to better understand motivations and objectives like myself and other MM staff have had the privilege of.
3) Whether you agree with the pledge or not should not change our relationships for the worse. The purpose was to increase brotherhood, not tensions. So, if you don’t like it, leave it, and do not let the Shaytaan build in your hearts anything against the people that you respected and trusted before. If the signatories are right, then their reward is immense and double. If they are wrong, they are still rewarded, so who are we to blame them for wrongdoing. Blame-games of course are not the same as healthy discussions, sincere questions and honest clarifications.
Let’s leave our emotions with the food in the fridge and treat each other with the utmost respect. And I will be the first to say that I apologize if I was too sharp in any of my comments.
One more thing… I have hinted at this before, but in my humble opinion, the pledge brings the moderate elements of all sides together on a platform of cooperation. There is a reason why the Kabbanis and their ilk were not invited (this answers someone’s jabs at me)… similarly there is a reason why many of the super-salafis were kept out. The former would have clearly loved to be part of this to earn legitimacy which they have for the most part lost, while the latter probably would have kept to their little shrinking circle of scholars.
Sunni doesn’t mean that one should employ the analogy of the progressive definition of Muslims (i.e. everyone is a Muslim who says he is a Muslim even if Qadiyani). Labels mean nothing if most of the practice is not within the mainstream fold of “Sunnism”.
But for the most part, we don’t have to worry about this. Extremism is always on the fringe, if we stay in the middle, we won’t much deal with it.
AA,
Dear Brs. & Srs.,
I would like to briefly do the following comments:
1. Imam Azam Abu Hanifa died at 150 A.H, he was from atbai al-tabi’in, his two students, Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad al-Sahibani were teachers of Imam al-Shafi’i, so hanafism is begun and estblished by scholars before sShafi’ism, and also before Hanbalism, since Ahm. b. Hanbal died at the date of 204 A.H. Therefore if there is some madhabs to be qualified as Salafis, from Salaf, Abu Hanifa and his mazhab have to be included in that, as opposed what I feel is not done by some. If you exclude Hnafis from Islam, then you may be excluding almost one third of Ummah.
2. Sufism: This term is so soft, has a lot of meanings depending on locality, practices, cultures etc. But there is taqwa, there is zikr, there is tazkia etc. In Quran, in hadith, not all sufis worship to graves, thinking that Muslims worship graves is very daring accusatory stand, since Muslims read Surah al-Ihklass and believe in tawhid. We must be carefull not to be literalist always, in Quran there are majazs (methaphors). In many cases ulama of Ummah saw some tariqahs good and fitting to Shari’a and haqiqah. There is no guaqrantee that only saudi understanding Islam is correct. Even in Saudi Arabia there are many different local scholars who are not officially favored, can not speak. They have very different aproach to Islam as opposed to officially favored ones. There are many gems hidden and pushed to the corners of nisyan,every where includiong Saudi Arabia, I believe. sir.
3. Slafism: Salaf is niot defined in Qura’an, neither in Hadith, it is not madhhab, not aqida and not amali. It is a genaral principle. The ones who follow the early and pure Islam may be qualified with it. But Wahhabism is different. Wahhabism, as opposed to what Abdul Wahhab scholarly wrote and taught, that was scholarly approach, no prblem, buty as political term it is a political context mixed with Islamic affiliaiton, Wahhabism developed at 18th century as opposed to Ottoman Khilafa, and ended up to Saudi Kindgdom with the cooperation of English, and Western powers, remember Lawrence of Arabia. The result of which is today’s Muslim world is sufferuing headles, untyless, divider and ruled, don’t forget sir, today is yesterday’s child. So nomatter what it may mean Salafism must not be contaminatedd by poltical kingdom conspring against umah’s khilafa. Of course Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn al-al-qayyim and the likes were great scholarsof tjheior time, no body must monopolize them for their own interest as opposed to Ummah’s. It is known by specialized scholars that how many times some sentecse from the books of Ibn Taymiyya and may be others too are omitted for political interterst and printed in later editions.
Humbly and Respectfully.
Yusuf
As we unite, they dis-unite…
Assalaamu Alaykum,
I have read the treaty, and read the comments above.
I would just like to make a few observations:
I don’t think that those who disagree with this pledge should be labelled, implicitly or explicitly, as over-zealous, unlearned, extremist, and so on.
This creates a barrier to constructive diaglogue, forces an ‘us and them’ situation.
I don’t think our beloved (and I truely mean that) students of knowledge who are posting here should fall into this trap of ‘we know better’. The truth can come from the mouth of a layman, as well as a scholar.
We should allow - and maybe promote? - discussions on this treaty. Not doing so will stir up more ill-feelings towards the proponents of this treaty.
Now with regards to the treaty itself:
I think some fundamental issues of this treaty need to be clarified from the original text, and then evaluated.
Who benefits from this treaty? And how so?
And in reality, will all parties see this ben