Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
RULING ON PERFORMING THE MARRIAGE (NIKAH) IN THE MOSQUE
✍️- Shaykh Abu Ahmad Kaleemuddin Yusuf Madani
(Islamic University of Madinah)
There is no authentic (Sahih) Hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) available in this regard that encourages us to perform the Nikah in the mosque, or points towards any specific virtue of doing so.
Although there is a Hadith that commands performing the Nikah in the mosque, that Hadith is weak (Da'if), and therefore cannot be used as a valid legal argument (Istidlal).
There is a difference of opinion among the scholars regarding performing the Nikah in the mosque:
The Hanafis, Shafi'is, and Hanbalis consider performing the Nikah in the mosque to be recommended (Mustahabb).
Accordingly, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) states that since Nikah is an act of worship, it is recommended to conduct it in the mosque.
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) expressed the same view.
(Al-Fatawa al-Kubra 3/123, I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in 3/102, Mirqat al-Mafatih 5/2072, At-Taysir bi-Sharh al-Jami' as-Saghir 1/176, Dalil al-Falihin 8/520)
The Malikis consider performing the Nikah in the mosque to be permissible (Ja'iz).
Hattab al-Ru'ayni al-Maliki (may Allah have mercy on him) states that an explicit view from the people of knowledge regarding it being recommended is not found, but it is valid to the extent of permissibility.
(Mawahib al-Jalil 3/408)
Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) states that there is no evidence establishing the recommendation (Istihbab) of performing Nikah in the mosque.
If a Nikah happens to take place in a mosque by coincidence, there is no harm. However, making a formal arrangement, inviting people specifically for it, and viewing it as recommended (Mustahabb) has no supporting evidence.
(Liqa' al-Bab al-Maftuh 17/67)
A person asked Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him):
"Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on them) consider performing Nikah in the mosque to be Mustahabb, whereas you call it an innovation (Bid'ah). Why is that?"
The Shaykh replied: "Did Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah or Ibn al-Qayyim present any proof for performing Nikah in the mosque?" The questioner said: "No." The Shaykh responded: "Then it is an innovation (Bid'ah)."
(Al-Kanz al-Thamin, p. 144)
The Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta (Saudi Arabia) stated: Performing Nikah in the mosque is not a Sunnah; the Hadith narrated in this regard is weak (Da'if).
(Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Da'imah – First Collection 18/113)
The Permanent Committee was asked:
"Is maintaining consistency and strict adherence to conducting marriages in mosques a Sunnah or an innovation (Bid'ah)?"
Answer: Islamic law has granted flexibility regarding conducting marriages in mosques or elsewhere. However, there is no authentic evidence indicating that performing Nikah in the mosque is a Sunnah.
Therefore, whoever strictly adheres to and habitually insists on performing Nikah in the mosque, it becomes an innovation (Bid me'ah).
(Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Da'imah 18/110)
In another place, the Permanent Committee states: Habitually insisting on performing Nikah in the mosque and treating it as a Sunnah is an innovation (Bid'ah).
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever introduces into this affair of ours that which is not part of it, it will be rejected."
(Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Da'imah 18/111)
Shaykh al-Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: "Is performing Nikah in the mosque a Sunnah?"
He replied: "It is not a Sunnah; rather, it is an innovation (Bid'ah)."
(Tasjilat Mutafarriqah, Tape 49, 43:58)
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani said :
"The sign of the Jahmiyyah is that they call Ahl al-Sunnah 'Mushabbihah'
(those who declare Allah to be like the creation)."
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
The Salafis Were the First to Warn Against ISIS and al-Qaeda: Do Not Associate the Terrorism of the Khawārij with Salafiyyah!
Shaykh Abdurrahman Al-Umaysan حفظه الله
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Our shaykh Khalid al Mushayqih (salafi madkhali scholar) has refuted this type of behaviour. Alhamdulillah
On top of this, this girl is attributing this behaviour of taking pictures with kafir men to “Dawah”. How are these people not innovators and people of desires? Audhubillah
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
The Response to the Arguments of Those Who Affirm TAQLID (Blind Following) -----By Imam Ibn Al Qayyim:
Imam Ibn Al Qayyim said:
The people of evidence said: How strange it is for you, O community of blind followers, who bear witness against yourselves, while the testimony of the people of knowledge is that they are neither from its people nor counted among its family? How have you nullified your school of thought with your own evidence? What is left for the blind follower, and what is left for reasoning through evidence?
Where is the status of the blind follower relative to the status of the reasoning scholar? And whatever you mentioned of proofs were nothing but borrowed clothes that you stripped from the owner of the proof, only to adorn yourselves with them among the people! And you were in that resembling those who do not give what they were not given, speaking of knowledge by what you bore witness against yourselves that you have missed it.
That is the garment of falsehood that you put on, and the status that you usurped from its people, so tell us: Have you turned to blind following as a guide for you to it, and its proof points to you?
Thus, you descended to reasoning without an origin, and you were remote from blind following, or you took its path by agreement and searched without evidence? Which of the two divisions you have departed from is necessary, and whichever of them it is, the corruption of the school of blind following becomes inevitable, and returning to the school of evidence becomes mandatory. We address you in the language of evidence, saying: We are not of the people of this path; and if we address you in the language of blind following, then there is no meaning to whatever evidence you have established.
The most astonishing thing is that every faction among the sects—and every nation among the nations that claims it is upon the truth, except for the sect of blind following, for they do not claim that; even if they claimed it, they would be witnesses against themselves that they are falsifiers—are witnesses to themselves that they did not believe those statements due to a proof that led them to it, nor a demonstration that pointed them to it. Rather, their path is pure blind following, and the blind follower does not know the truth from falsehood, nor the current state from the idle.
Even more astonishing than this is that they assert in their books the invalidity of blind following and its prohibition, and that it is not permissible to issue a ruling in the religion of Allah. If the ruler stipulated that he should rule according to a specific school of thought, his condition would not be valid, nor his appointment; among them are those who corrected the appointment and nullified the condition.
Similarly, the fatwa-giver is forbidden from issuing fatwas based on what he does not know to be correct by the consensus of the people, and the blind follower has no knowledge of the correctness or corruption of a statement, for the path to that is blocked. Then each of them knows about himself that his blind following of his leader does not depart from his statement, and he leaves aside everything that opposes him from a book, a Sunnah, a statement of a companion, or the statement of someone who is more knowledgeable than his leader or his peer. This is among the most astonishing things!
Also, we know by necessity that in the era of the Companions, no man took a single man among them to blindly follow him in all his statements without omitting anything, while casting aside the statements of everyone else.
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
This statement of @UstAbdulrahman needs to be clarified.
It's too vague! It can be interpreted in many different ways.
Unite with who and upon what?!
And is this call to unity in this manner from the way of the Salaf?!
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Addressing the Church Killings in Jordan: The Grave Crime of Betraying and Killing Those Granted Safety and Protection!
Shaykh Abdurrahman Al-Umaysan حفظه الله
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Imām Abul-Fidāʾ ʿImādud-Dīn Ismāʿīl Ibn ʿUmar Ibn Kathīr Al-Qurashī Ad-Dimashqī Ash-Shāfiʿī Al-Atharī رحمه الله said:
The Jahmiyyah (and likewise the Ashʿariyyah) use as evidence for interpreting Al-Istiwāʾ ʿalā al-ʿArsh (ascending over the Throne) to mean Al-Istīlāʾ (conquering
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Umar Khalid Is A Communist,Apostate, Atheist, Kafir (Disbeliever ) !!!
Whoever doubts his disbelief after the establishment of proof is also a disbeliever....
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
THE RULERS DO NOT IMPLEMENT THE SHARIAH COMPLETELY, SO THEY ARE DISBELEVERS!?
DO YOU IMPLEMENT SHARIAH IN YOUR HOME? SO WHAT ARE YOU THEN!
🎤- Shaykh Abu Zaid Zameer :
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
We need less “debaters”, more Ulama. Be students of knowledge. Follow the steps of the ulama who are upon the way of the salaf, not the steps of these so called “debaters”.
Can debates be good?
Absolutely, if it is within correct conditions. Such as it not being for views…
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Kafir @Haqiqatjou insults a black Muslim Sunni (Salafi) brother by saying he doesn’t know who his father is. Our brother put him in his place nonetheless. Don’t ever forget Daniel’s blatant racism when he is a filthy majoosi, cousin of the hindu Indian.
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
I posted al-Barbaharee saying those affirming Imaan increases/decreases are not Murjia
Khawarij all had mid replies trying to refute the Salaf sharing random scans they got from discord
This ignorance of what Irja’ is, is proof if they call you Murji youre probably a Salafi
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
al-Barbaharee said whoever says Imaan increases and decreases has freed himself from the begging of Irja to the end of it
Abdullah ibn Mubarak implied that it was impossible to be a Murji if you say actions are apart of Imaan
Those calling individuals Murjia for -
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Or maybe when you have a methodology that consistently leads you to split from the scholars over every minor issue, surely eventually youd realise the root issue is your misunderstanding on certain masa’il and not that every Salafi scholar on the planet is “unclear” bar a few that the average Salafi dont even know the names of and nobody from the lajnah recognises. And thats why its not “oppression” but rather a full circle, as the ulama you attack and warn from have continued to benefit the ummah while you yourself have started to warn against those whom you used to take their warnings against the ulama. Fuad Zintani, Arafat etc.
But to keep it simple then the brothers tweet i replied to is that the ummah has numerous issues and one of them isn’t COVID debates
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymīn said:
“...And if the two of them (the couple) adopt that (i.e., the opinion of the validity of marriage without a walī) on the belief that the one who holds this opinion is one of the Imāms of the Muslims and one of the scholars of the Muslims, then they are not compelled to adopt the other opinion (requiring a walī), because this is a matter of khilāf (disagreement) among the scholars, and the opinion of some of the scholars is not a proof against the opinion of others.”
📚 Liqā’āt wa-Fatāwā al-Aqalliyyāt al-Muslimah.
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qādir al-Jīlānī stated:
“As for when a thing is among those matters concerning which the jurists have differed and in which ijtihād is permissible, such as a layman drinking nabīdh while following (making taqlīd of) Abū Hanīfah, may Allāh have mercy on him, or marrying a woman without a guardian (walī) according to what is known of his madhhab, then it is not for anyone who is upon the madhhab of Imām Ahmad and al-Shāfi‘ī, may Allāh have mercy on them both, to object to him, because Imām Ahmad said in the narration of al-Marwazī: “A jurist ought not to impose his madhhab upon the people, nor be harsh with them.” If this is established, then objection is only required in cases of violating consensus (ijmā‘), not in matters that are disputed.”
📚 al-Ghunyah, 249-250.
May Allāh grant such people understanding.
Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq retweeted
ALLAH’S DIRECTION (JIHAH)
Imam al-Qurtubi:
Indeed the Salaf did not speak with the rejection of jihah (direction), rather they affirmed it as is mentioned by the book of Allah and narrations of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.
And none of the righteous Salaf denied that Allah is above His throne in reality. But it is not possible to comprehend this reality, as imam Malik said: al-Istawā is known—meaning in the language of the Arabs [this refutes those who claim the Salaf made tafweedh al-ma’ana]—but the howness of His rising is unknown, and asking about the howness is bid’ah.
And istawā in the language of the Arabs means ‘uluww and istiqrār.
