There were so many pictures to choose from, but he decided to pick the one with the ladies, of course.

I messaged my teacher as we were supposed to have a lesson now, and he replies saying that he’ll need 15 more minutes and then proceeds to send this picture! 😅🤎🤍

May Allāh preserve them all.

The following are 2 very crucial skills that Muslims will require when navigating the modern world and working with the knowledge and information being put out, especially in the context of Dīn:

1️⃣) Having a deep understanding of Islām as a comprehensive worldview and being able to effectively identify what is in-line with the Dīn and what is not.
———————————————————

This is something many people today struggle with, due to the lack of proper Islamic education, and the widespread influence of foreign ideologies pushed into our communities by external factors.

I can confidently say that nothing will truly change until this is fixed and regardless of whether or not you’re ready to acknowledge this, it is the core reason for our current state.

As Muslims, we have our own conception of morality (al-taḥsīn wal-taqbīḥ), and our own definition of success and progress. A liberal or progressivist understands those terms very differently, and that is because of their philosophy and worldview.

We aren’t supposed to understand these terms through the lens of any worldview other than Islām. But that is what has been happening for decades now and it has ruined us.

2️⃣) Being able to identify the worldview and ideological sentiments of an individual through their own words.
———————————————————

This is more important today than ever before due to the overwhelming amount of ideological influence that has bled into our communities. Certain figures are spreading their ideological influence, deliberately or non-deliberately. The only way one can pick up on ideological rhetoric is through understanding what the person intends by their words.

Language is key. It is how we communicate and express ourselves. To those who have studied any primer of manṭiq, you are all familiar with:

‎الإنسان حيوان ناطق
al-Insān ḥaywān nāṭiq

This roughly translates to:
A human is a rational/talking animal.

Words (alfādh) carry meanings (maʿānī), and therefore, every word has significance. But what we have witnessed over the decades is a deliberate attempt to destroy language, which in turn, destroys the path to rational thought and coherent communication.

Many words have become subject to ideological tampering and distortion. Many of them have become buzzwords for specific belief systems and worldviews of their respective ideology. These ideologies essentially hijack words that have inherently positive connotations, and by doing that, they are implicitly (or explicitly) labelling anyone who disagrees with their ideology as someone who is in opposition to this seemingly positive word, and is therefore advocating for the antithesis of that word (i.e. progression/regression, liberalism/fascism, feminism/misogyny).

Therefore, it is absolutely imperative that Muslims are able to recognize these terms and the way they are used within context to understand what exactly is being pushed, where an individual leans ideologically, and the worldview they are operating under.

If someone has both 1 and 2, they will be able to see through just about any ideological rhetoric they come across. If we emphasized these in our communities, and integrated them into our curriculums, we would have some very formidable Ṭullāb al-ʿIlm and Muslims would be invulnerable to these tactics of the enemies of Islām.

Regarding the Term 'Kayfiyyah' and Its Usage Among Scholars

Historically, some scholars of Kalām have employed the term 'Kayfiyyah' when discussing Allāh, while many others have explicitly rejected its application. This raises an intriguing question: how can scholars assert that Kayfiyyah, translated as modality, is impossible for Allāh and anthropomorphism, yet also claim that only Allāh knows His Kayfiyyah?

The reality is that the term 'Kayfiyyah' has various usages. It can refer to the modality and state of a thing, but it can also denote its reality, quiddity, and quality/description.

Below are two significant quotes. The first is by Imām Bāqillānī, elucidating the different intended meanings of this term. Following that is a quote by Qadhi Abu Bakr Ibn al-'Arabi demonstrating that even Kalām scholars would affirm that only Allāh knows the Kayfiyyah, clearly intending reality or description, and not anthropomorphic meanings.

Imām Bāqillānī writes:

"If it is asked, 'How is He?' It is said, if by Kayfiyyah you mean composition, form, and genus, then He has no form or genus that we can describe. And if by your question, 'How is He?' you mean upon which description is He? [Then we say] He is living, knowing, powerful, hearing, and seeing."

— Tamhīd al-Awā'il, 300

Qadhi Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi writes:

"It may also be that it is not interpreted, as Mālik and others have said: that istiwā’ is known, meaning its source in the language, and the Kayfiyyah that Allāh intended from the meanings that are possible is unknown. So, who can determine it?"

— ‘Āridat al-Ahwadhī li-Ibn al-‘Arabī [2/236]

The hatred scholars in the past generation like Sh. Abu Ghuddah and Sh. Sabuni received were due to their lifelong denial to submit to tyrants who practice dhulm against Muslims.

The hatred which Mufti Taqi and Sh. Qaradaghi are receiving is just a continuation of the same reason.

The term “Islamophobia” is nonsense.

1 - It is ideologically rooted in liberalism and secularism.
2 - It gives the impression that Muslims are weak, self-victimizing, and desperate for acceptance.
3 - Use of the term is an implicit acceptance of the morality and secular worldview of the kuffār.
4 - The term implies that it is wrong for kuffār to fear Islām.

I really shouldn’t need to elaborate further on any of these points.

‘Allāmah Zāhid al-Kawtharī writes in his article Ḥijāb al-Mar’ah (“The Ḥijāb of a Woman”):

“The one who speaks pretentiously about (the validity of) a woman’s judgeship in some cases does not comprehend that her ruling’s validity in them, according to some jurists, is coupled with her falling into sin. This is similar to how rulings in some cases involving legal stratagems are valid despite the one employing them being sinful. Thus, if a woman were to be appointed as a judge unjustly and beyond rightful limits, her judgment would be valid in some cases according to some jurists, while she would still be falling into sin by assuming the role of judge. This is akin to the validity of rulings in some cases involving legal stratagems being coupled with sin. Whoever imagines that the validity of a ruling negates sin has strayed far from understanding.” (Maqālāt al-Kawtharī, al-Maktabah al-Tawfīqiyyah, p.231)

Read More Here: https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/1094/anaf-madhhab-on-woman-acting

__
Join the Ahlus Sunnah Forum Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AhlusSunnahForum

Some of the reactions to this post show just how brainwashed a lot of you are and how weak your understanding of language truly is. This is precisely what I posted about a couple days ago 👇🏻.

https://t.me/Simsimiyyah/530

Spreading terms and slogans with ideologically loaded language is an extremely effective way to cause mass confusion and cognitive dissonance within any group. Combine this with decades of carefully planned and well-funded psy-op propaganda and we get our current circumstances. It is nothing short of brainwashing.

Go do some research on where the slogan “Islām means peace” actually came from. Not only is it not true, but it was pushed for a very specific reason, and judging by how the vast majority of Muslims in the west now think, it did exactly what they wanted it to do.

After noting that a woman may not be a ruler in Islām, Egyptian Shāfi‘ī scholar Abu ‘l-‘Abbās Aḥmad al-Qalqashandī (756 – 821 AH) explains:

“The reasoning behind this is that the ruler cannot do without mixing with men and consulting with them in matters, whereas such a thing is prohibited for women.” (Ma’āthir al-Ināfah fī Ma‘ālim al-Khilāfah, ‘Ālam al-Kutub, 1:32)

Read More Here: https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/975/prohibition-ikhtilat-mixing-men-women

__
Join the Ahlus Sunnah Forum Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AhlusSunnahForum

‘Alā’ al-Dīn al-Ḥaṣkafī states in al-Durr al-Mukhtār:

“According to (Ibn Nujaym’s) al-Ashbāh wa ‘l-Naẓā’ir, under the rulings of females, Ibn al-Humām in al-Musāyarah favoured the view that it is possible for a female to be a prophet (nabiyyah) but not a messenger (rasūlah) given the situation of women is grounded in concealment.”

Ibn ‘Ābidīn, following al-Ṭaḥṭāwī, comments:

“Meaning, a messenger (rasūl) needs to mix with males (mukhālaṭāt al-dhukūr) in teaching and establishing proofs against them and so on, which can only occur from males. The possibility (of a prophet being female however) does not necessitate (it) having occurred. According to Bad’ al-Amālī, a prophet has never been female.” (Radd al-Muḥtār, Dār al-Thaqāfah wa ‘l-Turāth, 16:581)

Note: Ibn al-Humām attributes the view that a prophet can be female to some Ẓāhirīs and Ḥadīth scholars. Although he characterises one explanation supporting this view as "not far-fetched," it remains unclear whether he personally endorsed it. (al-Musāyarah, 124, 126–7) Thus, some commentators have questioned whether this attribution to Ibn al-Humām is accurate.

Read More Here: https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/975/prohibition-ikhtilat-mixing-men-women

__
Join the Ahlus Sunnah Forum Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AhlusSunnahForum

Was Shifā’ bint ‘Abdillāh (raḍiyAllāhu ‘anhā) in Charge of the Market Under ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (raḍiyAllāhu ‘anh)?

By Mufti Zameelur Rahman

A common talking point amongst deformists seeking to promote gender mixing (ikhtilāṭ) and women assuming positions of authority over men is an alleged incident involving the eminent female companion Shifā’ bint ‘Abdillāh (raḍiyAllāhu ‘anhā). It is claimed she was put in charge of the market by ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (raḍiyAllāhu ‘anh).

But what is the reality of this claim?

Read Here: https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/1095/shif-bint-abdill-charge-market

__
Join the Ahlus Sunnah Forum Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AhlusSunnahForum

Muftī Zameelur Rahman constantly putting out gold! ❤️

Can’t help but notice this trend where they pick and choose when they want to argue for “nuance and new ijtihādāt”, and when they want to be “ardent defenders of traditionalism”.

“Such was the religious life of the Arabians before the advent of Islam. The role that the religions prevalent played was so marginal, in fact it was next to nothing. The polytheists, who faked Abrahamism, were so far detached from its precepts, and totally oblivious of its immanent good manners. They plunged into disobedience and ungodliness, and developed certain peculiar religious superstitions that managed to leave a serious impact on the religious and socio-political life in the whole of Arabia.

Judaism turned into abominable hypocrisy in league with hegemony. Rabbis turned into lords to the exclusion of the Lord. They got involved in the practice of dictatorial subjection of people and calling their subordinates to account for the least word or idea. Their sole target turned into acquisition of wealth and power even if it were at the risk of losing their religion, or the emergence of atheism and disbelief.

Christianity likewise opened its doors wide to polytheism, and got too difficult to comprehend as a heavenly religion. As a religious practice, it developed a sort of peculiar medley of man and God. It exercised no bearing whatsoever on the souls of the Arabs who professed it simply because it was alien to their style of life and did not have the least relationship with their practical life.

People of other religions were similar to the polytheists with respect to their inclinations, dogmas, customs and traditions.”

— The Sealed Nectar, Pg.42