We are pleased to announce and share with the Authentic Answers viewers the completion of the full PDF scan of the Tafseer of Imam Ibn Baz.

May Allah reward Imam Ibn Baz for his tremendous efforts, as well as those who helped prepare it in a clear and beneficial format, and the brother who undertook the task of scanning it in full.

Deception of the Murjiʾah
⸻

The Murjiʾah use deceptive tactics to confuse people.
They use the same terms the scholars use — but with completely different meanings.
This is one of their satanic tricks.

They say:
“Ibn Taymiyyah and Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb allowed the excuse of ignorance.”

Yes — that is true.
But the difference between the two Imāms and the extreme Murjiʾah is massive.

According to the Imāms:
The excuse of ignorance means the person will not be punished eternally in the Hereafter if the proof had not reached him. Rather according to these scholars, the truly ignorant mushrik will be tested in the Akhirah by having a messenger sent to them.

According to the Extreme Murjiʾah:
The excuse of ignorance means the person who falls into major shirk is still considered a Muslim in this life.

Likewise, they twist the meaning of establishing the proof:

According to the Imāms:
Establishing the proof in clear matters is only needed to carry out the punishment — not to label him a disbeliever.

According to the Extreme Murjiʾah:
They claim the proof must be established just to even call him a kāfir — even if he worships other than Allah.

═════ ❁✦❁ ═════
YouTube Channel👇
https://m.youtube.com/@AuthenticAnswers

Telegram👇
https://t.me/AuthenticAnswers

WhatsApp 👇
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb7Q4A1JJhzYiIdkCB41

TikTok 👇
https://www.tiktok.com/@authenticanswers

Internet Archives 👇
https://archive.org/details/@authenticanswers

#excuse_of_ignorance #takfeer #shirk #kufr #murjiah

📖 TOPIC: Consensus (Ijma) That Worldly Rulings Are Based Only on What Is Outwardly Apparent From Statements and Actions — Suspending These Rulings Based on Assumed Inward States Is Misguidance and an Innovation

This consensus serves as a refutation against two extremes:

1. The Murji’ah, who suspend the ruling of outward kufr until inward denial is proven.

2. The Khawarij, who suspend the ruling of outward Islam until inward iman is proven.

Ahl al-Sunnah judge strictly by what is outwardly apparent.

They do not assume inward excuses such as ignorance, mistake, or coercion in order to affirm iman, nor do they assume inward kufr to suspend the ruling of Islam.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━

✍️ STATEMENT:
Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 AH), transmitting consensus, said:

وكلهم أجمعوا على أن أحكام الدنيا على الظاهر، والله يتولى السرائر

👉 (❗) “THEY ALL UNANIMOUSLY AGREED that worldly rulings are based upon what is outwardly apparent, while Allah alone takes charge of what lies within.”

📚 SOURCE:
Fath al-Bari bi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Salafiyyah ed.), vol. 12, p. 273
https://shamela.ws/book/1673/7260

═════ ❁✦❁ ═════
YouTube Channel👇
https://m.youtube.com/@AuthenticAnswers

Telegram👇
https://t.me/AuthenticAnswers

WhatsApp 👇
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb7Q4A1JJhzYiIdkCB41

TikTok 👇
https://www.tiktok.com/@authenticanswers

Internet Archives 👇
https://archive.org/details/@authenticanswers

#excuse_of_ignorance #takfeer #shirk #kufr #murjiah

#ʿUdhr_bil_Jahl

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah says:

“As for others besides these, some of them pray facing the grave, some prostrate to it, and some prostrate at the doorway of a structure built over the grave. Some even consider prostration to the one buried sufficient, substituting it for the five daily prayers — so they prostrate to this dead person and do not prostrate to the Creator. Sometimes, the one buried is believed to be righteous, though in reality he is not — and this is found in places like Egypt, al-Shām, al-ʿIrāq, and elsewhere.

Some of them ask from the dead what should only be asked from Allāh, saying: “Forgive me,” “Provide for me,” “Grant me victory,” and similar requests — just as a person says such things in his prayer to Allāh, exalted be He. These and similar matters are, without doubt, contrary to the religion of all the messengers, as anyone who knows the religion of Islām would understand. Indeed, they are a form of shirk that Allāh and His Messenger have forbidden — rather, it is the very shirk for which the Messenger ﷺ fought the mushrikīn.

If the people doing this are excused due to ignorance and the ḥujjah (proof) has not been established against them — as those who were not reached by a messenger are excused — then their judgment is with Allāh (In the hereafter). As He said: “We do not punish until We have sent a messenger” [al-Isrāʾ: 15].

Otherwise, they deserve the worldly and eternal punishment that others like them among the mushrikīn deserve. Allāh said: “So do not set up rivals to Allāh while you know” [al-Baqarah: 22].

And in the ḥadīth: “Indeed, shirk in this ummah is more hidden than the crawling of ants.”

Those who truly believe in the Messenger — when it becomes clear to one of them the reality of what the Messenger brought, and it becomes clear to him that he had fallen into shirk — then he repents to Allāh and renews his Islām, embracing Islām again in repentance from that shirk.”

[Qāʿidah ʿAẓīmah fī al-Farq bayna ʿIbādāt Ahl al-Islām wa-al-Īmān wa-ʿIbādāt Ahl al-Shirk wa-al-Nifāq p.69-70]

i say: Ibn Taymiyyah affirms the person here fell into shirk, (and the one who commits shirk is a mushrik) who needs to renew his islam.

The Correct Method of Seeking Knowledge — The Ruling on Following a Madhhab in Furūʿ, and the Way of the Salaf and the Imāms of Tawḥīd in Taqlīd and Following the Evidence.

Statement:
Al-Mufti al-Shaykh al-ʿAllāmah ʿAbd Allāh Abā Buṭayn (d. 1282 AH) said:

So it is said: Taqlīd (blind following) is of three types:

The first: Taqlīd after the establishment of the ḥujjah (proof) and the appearance of the evidence, while opposing the saying of the one being followed.
This is not allowed as Imām al-Shāfiʿī said:

“The Muslims have agreed that whoever the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ becomes clear to him, it is not permissible for him to leave it for the saying of anyone else among the people.”

The second type: Taqlīd while having the ability to derive rulings and research the evidence، meaning he is qualified for that. This too is blameworthy because he has the ability and means to know the proof.

The third type: The permissible taqlīd, and it is of two types:

One of them: The one from the general people who have no knowledge of ḥadīth or fiqh, and have no familiarity with the speech of the scholars for such people, taqlīd is allowed without difference of opinion. So if an incident happens to one of them, he asks someone he knows to be a just scholar or sees him qualified for giving fatwā and teaching.

Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn (Ibn Taymiyyah) also conditioned that he should be widely known to be qualified for giving fatwā.

The second type: The one who has studied some sciences, and has learned a madhhab from among the madhāhib, and has become familiar with some books of the later scholars of the madhhab such as al-Iqnāʿ or al-Muntahā according to the Ḥanābilah but he falls short in recognizing the proof and distinguishing the stronger view from the weaker one. Then taqlīd is also allowed for him, since he is only obliged to do what he is capable of, as Allāh says:

“Allāh does not burden a soul beyond its capacity.”
[al-Baqarah: 286]

The statements of the scholars allowing taqlīd for this type are many, based on the saying of Allāh:

“Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know.”
[al-Naḥl: 43]

And the saying of the Prophet ﷺ:

“Should they not have asked when they didn’t know? The cure for ignorance is asking.”

However, such a person should not rush to give fatwā to others. If necessity calls for him to issue a fatwā, it should only transmit the position of the Imām whose madhhab he follows not his own fatwā. This was said by a group of the scholars of the madhhab. And he should fear Allāh as much as he can.

If he has strong understanding and perception, such that when he looks into disputed issues and sees the evidence of each side, and he has sharpness and insight by which he can recognize what is stronger and what is weaker in what he sees — then he acts upon what appears stronger to him.

So if the student of knowledge follows one of the four madhāhib, then sees a proof that contradicts the madhhab of his Imām and that proof was acted upon by one of the Imāms of the madhāhib, and he does not know of any opposition to it and he opposes his madhhab and follows the Imām who acted upon the proof:

Then he is correct. In fact, this is what is required of him. And this is not considered going outside of taqlīd, for he is doing taqlīd of that other Imām. So he places an Imām against an Imām, and the proof remains without opposition.

Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn (may Allāh have mercy on him) said:

“Whoever follows an Imām, then opposes him in some issues due to the strength of the proof, or because one of them is more knowledgeable and God-fearing — then he has done well.”

Source:
Majmūʿ Fatāwā wa-Rasāʾil al-Shaykh al-ʿAllāmah ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Abā Buṭayn, pages 221–222.

═════ ❁✦❁ ═════
YouTube Channel👇
https://m.youtube.com/@AuthenticAnswers

Telegram👇
https://t.me/AuthenticAnswers

WhatsApp 👇
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb7Q4A1JJhzYiIdkCB41

TikTok 👇
https://www.tiktok.com/@authenticanswers

Internet Archives 👇
https://archive.org/details/@authenticanswers

#quotes #ulama_najd