Multaqa Ahl al-Hadeeth > 'Aqeedah & Refutation of

Deviant Sects
Misuse of 12:106 by Salafis
User CP

FAQ

Members List

View First Unread

Calendar

New Posts

Thread Tools

Welcome, SaifAlIslam.
You last visited: 12-26-2016 at 07:15
AM
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 68.
Search

Quick Links

Search this Thread

Log Out

Display Modes

#1
12-24-2016, 12:31 AM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Misuse of 12:106 by Salafis

Salafis like probably Bassam and whoever else tried to hack out my previous thread, don't actually want
those who disagree with them to inform of their side of the ayat. You see they say "message me privately"
and try to censor you when you present the majority view of pagan aqaid.
Do you actually think they are ok with you listening to all views?
12:106 doesn't in any way prove the existence of people Allah calls pagans and are also *muwahidoon in
Rubbubiyah*. Not in the slightest. Just because someone says Allah is the creator and sustainer of the
heavens and the earth does not mean they deny he has children who He fathered(thus sharing in His
essence) and also thus sharing in His authority(because the children of the King are also royalty.)

#2
12-24-2016, 12:42 AM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Quote:
The fact, however, remains that they affirmed Allaah's Lordship in general and believed that He is the
Creator and Owner of everything including the deities they used to worship, and this was a proof
against them regarding worshipping Him alone. The Lord of The Worlds who created all things and
owns that which they worship besides Him is the one who truly deserves to be worshipped. After all,
how can something created, owned, and is under His Lordship be worshipped with the Him, the One
Who Created him and Owns him?
This is a quote that is absolutely false. Pagans said Allah fathered (waladAllah.) Is fathering a child(who
would be of your own essence) creating a child?
"Affirming Allah's Lordship in general" doesn't actually mean anything.
From Ismail Ibrahim, who used to comment here
Quote:
"The Mushriks of Makkah had a general belief in Tawhid Rububiyyah for Allah, but lacked in certain
aspects of it"
In other words, you numpty, they were Mushriks in Rububiyyah. Period.
Don't dupe the masses and claim they had 75% Tawhid in Rububiyyah. The remaining 25% in which
they did Shirk is more than enough to cancel out the 75%.
If a person worships Allah for 9 days out of 10, and on the tenth day he worships what he thinks is a
demigod, like Buddha, who in his right mind would claim "He has 90% belief in Tawhid of
Uluhiyyah"!? Rather, he would be considered 100% Mushrik.
So why on earth do Salafis have a problem saying that the Kuffar Makkah were 100% Mushriks in
Rububiyyah? Shirk annihilates whatever Tawhid one may have.
Add.: Many Salafis claim the Mushriks of Makkah fully believed in the Rububiyyah of Allah, but they
only worshipped the idols, making them Mushriks only in Uluhiyyah. This is patently false - a casual
reading of the Quran should confirm the Mushriks in front of the Prophet (peace be upon him) were
major Mushriks in Rububiyyah too.
Ignore is insult of "numpty" and take the rest of it.
Pagan Arabs were obviously committing MAJOR shirk in Rubbubiya!

#3
12-24-2016, 03:43 AM
Muwahhid1

Does this ayah tell us mushrikeen didn't believe in Tawhid Ruboobiyyah ?

Join Date: Jan 2011

Posts: 185

Has he made the gods [only] one God? Indeed, this is a curious thing." (38:5)
__________________
Beware of writing something that will be against you on the Day of Judgment. Always ask yourself why
am I posting to this particular thread and what if I just do not post, what will happen and what change will
it brings forth! Try not to socilize alot with people and focus on improving yourself. Set for yourself a
daily portion of dhikr or Quran to do. Do a good deed that no one will ever know about but Allah and
save this hidden deed, even if it is small, in hope it will save you from the fire.

#4
12-24-2016, 04:02 AM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muwahhid1
Does this ayah tell us mushrikeen didn't believe in Tawhid Ruboobiyyah ?
Has he made the gods [only] one God? Indeed, this is a curious thing." (38:5)
Perhaps these two demonstrate the ones Allah accuses of shirk had tawheed in Rubbubiya but only shirk
in Uluhiyya

But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for
Him sons and daughters without knowledge. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.




[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a
companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.

#5
12-24-2016, 05:12 AM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

I mean they would consider Allah a lot more powerful than other pagan religions because they descended
from Ibrahim AS. But unlike Jews who fell into shirk from time to time, Arabs adopted shirk and just
stuck with it.

They even had Hajj from the time of Ibrahim AS.

#6
12-24-2016, 12:45 PM
Um Abdullah M.
Moderator of Aqeedah Forum

Join Date: Jun 2007

Posts: 3,913

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muwahhid1
Does this ayah tell us mushrikeen didn't believe in Tawhid Ruboobiyyah ?
Has he made the gods [only] one God? Indeed, this is a curious thing." (38:5)
"gods" in the ayah is "aliha" (plural form of "ilah") .. "ilah" in Arabic means "that which is worshiped" ..
so if someone worshiped an animal for example, that animal would become his "ilha" even if the person
does not believe that the animal is a Rab .. so it is not about Rububiyah but uloohiyah. They are objecting
to the idea that they should worship only Allah, and have no other ilahs except Allah.

#7
12-24-2016, 01:38 PM
Um Abdullah M.
Moderator of Aqeedah Forum

Join Date: Jun 2007

Posts: 3,913

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus(nickname)
Salafis like probably Bassam and whoever else tried to hack out my previous thread, don't actually
want those who disagree with them to inform of their side of the ayat. You see they say "message me
privately" and try to censor you when you present the majority view of pagan aqaid.
The only one whom you say "hacked out your previous thread" is me, and I did not say to you "message
me privately". I put my reply to you in the other thread.

Quote:

12:106 doesn't in any way prove the existence of people Allah calls pagans and are also *muwahidoon
in Rubbubiyah*.
I don't remember seeing any Salafi scholar saying "Muwahidoon in Rububiyyah" .. they say that Pagan
Arabs affirm Tawheed Rububiyyah meaning in the basis and major aspects of Rububiyyah and not in
every aspect, as I explained before. They believe that Allah is "The Rabb" .. they don't believe their idols
are Rabbs, but they did ascribe to them or some of them some attributes of Rububiyah.
They called their idols "ilahs" and not "Rabbs".
And proof of this is that Allah used their belief in Allah's Rububiyyah to call them to worshiping Him
Alone. If they had believed that there was another Rab who creates and owns them, there would be no
meaning in Allah pointing to their belief in His Rububiyyah to worship Him alone, because then they
would say that there is another Rabb with Allah so he deserves the worship they are doing to that other
Rabb.
And again, You can disagree with them using the term "Tawheed" in describing pagan Arab beliefs
regarding Rububiyyah, but you cannot accuse them of having incorrect aqeedah/beliefs in this matter,
because they do Not say nor believe that Arab pagans committed no shirk at all in Rububiyah.

Quote:
Just because someone says Allah is the creator and sustainer of the heavens and the earth does not mean
they deny he has children who He fathered(thus sharing in His essence) and also thus sharing in His
authority(because the children of the King are also royalty.)
Do you have proof that whom they claim are Allah's offspring (Exalted be Allah) share Allah's Essence
(Exalted be Allah) or have the same authority as Him? Logic alone is not proof in Islam especially for
matters related to creed. And when it comes to mushriks, their shirk itself is not logical, so don't expect
their beliefs regarding those whom they call "offspring" to be logical.
In a sahih narration it mentions that the pagan Arabs confirmed that Allah is the one who Owns them and
Owns those whom they ascribe with him as partners.
The polytheists would make talbiya and say: 'Here I am! No partners do You have except a partner
belonging to You. Him and all that he owns You Own.' They would say this while going around the
House (Ka'bah)" Sahih Muslim
They did not attribute Ownership to anyone else, not even to whom they believe are Allah's children
(Exalted be Allah), so unless you have clear proof that they attribute Allah's act of creation, provision,
sustaining of the universe or ownership of creation, to those whom they claim are Allah's offspring
(Exalted be Allah), your claim has no meaning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus(nickname)
This is a quote that is absolutely false. Pagans said Allah fathered (waladAllah.) Is fathering a

child(who would be of your own essence) creating a child?

Tawheed Rububiyyah means: Ascription of all Acts of Allah (may He be Glorified and Exalted) to none
but Him Alone. And claiming that Allah has offspring (Exalted be He) does not fit into this definition.
"Fathering" is not from the acts of Allah to begin with. So as long as you don't have proof that they share
Allah's Attributes of Rububiyyah, your claim has no meaning.

Quote:
So why on earth do Salafis have a problem saying that the Kuffar Makkah were 100% Mushriks in
Rububiyyah? Shirk annihilates whatever Tawhid one may have.
Because they are not 100% mushriks in Rububiyyah, at least not in general, there will obviously be
individuals who are different in some beliefs.
If you said they are "not muwahidoon in Rububiyah" or that they are "mushriks in Rububiyyah", then I
would agree. But saying 100% is not true. Remove 100% then it would be true since they did commit
shirk in some aspects of Rububiyyah and not all of it.
While in Uluhiyah they committed full shirk because it is about one thing which is worship, and they
worshiped others with Allah. While in Rububiyyah, it is about Allah's Actions, and the pagan of Makkah
did not associate partners in every action of Allah, but in some or many, while in some of the major ones
like creation and ownership, they only ascribed to Allah. That is why their idols are called "ilahs" and not
"Rabbs".

Quote:
Add.: Many Salafis claim the Mushriks of Makkah fully believed in the Rububiyyah of Allah, but they
only worshipped the idols, making them Mushriks only in Uluhiyyah. This is patently false - a casual
reading of the Quran should confirm the Mushriks in front of the Prophet (peace be upon him) were
major Mushriks in Rububiyyah too.
Who do you mean by "salafis" here? Scholars or students or laypeople?
The view of students and laypeople mean nothing .. whom from the major scholars of Salafiyah claimed
that the Mushriks of Makah committed no shirk in Rububiyyah at all?
__________________
.
Beliefs of the Pious Salaf Website
Alukah in English
Blogs:
1. Topics & Replies

2. Islam Teachings
3. LearnDeen
Explanation of Aqidah Tahawiyyah by Ibn Abi Al-Izz Hanafi
Huda Channel

#8
12-24-2016, 07:52 PM
SaifAlIslam

Join Date: May 2016

Posts: 66

Salam alayqum, Sister to say they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is to say they were Muwahid in
belief of Rububiyyah. And this statement can be seen here:
"Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not know
from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of "alilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah. [Ref: Fath Al
Majeed Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76]
The disbelievers whom the Messenger fought affirmed Tawheed ar-Rububiyah (Oneness of Allah's
Lordship), yet their affirmation of Tawheed ar-Rububiyah did not enter them into Islam and did not
sanctify their blood or wealth. [Ref: Explanation Of Four Fundamental Principles, by Shaykh Salih Ibn
Al Fawzan, Page 30, Published by: QSEP]
With regards to polytheists believing their idols were not Rabb, thats an evil Sunnah which has originated
from you. The matter is established against you:
Quote:
Lat, Uzza, And Manat As Lords Beside Allah (subhanahu wa taala):
Allah (subhanahu wa taala) states: And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets
for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto
God? [Ref: 3:80] What else did those people believe about the angels apart from believing them to be
lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa taala)? This question is answered in the following vers of Quran it
reveals they believed these angels were daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa taala): Has then your
Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto Himself daughters in the
guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying! [Ref: 17:40] Have you seen Lat and
Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male ######, and for Him, the female?
[Ref: 53:19/21] It was the polytheists of Arabia who believed Allah (subhanahu wa taala) had three
daughters. This establishes the polytheists of Arabia believed Lat, Uzza, Manat to be Lords beside Allah
(subhanahu wa taala) because the polytheists believed these three are angels and hence daughters of
Allah (subhanahu wa taala) and proof of them taking these daughter-angels as Lords is in the

following verse: And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for]
would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God? [Ref: 3:80] And
in response to their attribution of angel-daughters as lord partners of Allah (subhanahu wa taala),
Allah (subhanahu wa taala) states: But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He
has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above
what they describe. [Ref: 6:100] And in another verse questions how they have come to know if the
angels were female in the following verse: And they have made the angels, who are servants of the
Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will
be questioned. [Ref: 43:16] Indicating the entire philosophy of polytheism is made-up and has no
foundation other then their own desires.

-------------------There are many other things I want to address but I would be wasting very valuable time with you.
Firstly, because you're lost cause, nothing will/can change your end, and secondly, you have the almighty
power of delete with your side. It does away with all arguments, wush of the magic delete button and you
destroy all that opposes your belief, it vanishes from illusionary existance.

#9
12-25-2016, 12:35 PM
Um Abdullah M.
Moderator of Aqeedah Forum

Join Date: Jun 2007

Posts: 3,913

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaifAlIslam
Salam alayqum, Sister to say they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is to say they were Muwahid in
belief of Rububiyyah.

wa alaykum assalam
I really dislike having to repeat what I said over and over.
I already explained what Salafi scholars meant by the Pagans of Makkah affirming Tahweed Rububiyyah;
and no, their meaning behind it would not fit the word "muwahidoon" because it is not complete in every
aspect of Lordship.
Quote:
With regards to polytheists believing their idols were not Rabb, thats an evil Sunnah which has
originated from you. The matter is established against you:

As for the ayah (3:80) : {Nor would he order you to take angels and Prophets for lords. Would he order
you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's Will?} .. If you check the tafsir of this ayah, you
will see that the verse is speaking about the Jews and Christians, and that the reason behind the
revelation of this verse is that a group from the Jews came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam)
and asked him if he is calling them to worship him like the Christians worship Jesus (alayhi
assalam); and Allah revealed this ayah.
And my question still stands, where did Allah or His Messenger -sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- say that the
pagans of Makkah believed that the Angels or anyone else they claimed are the offspring of Allah
(Exalted is He) share authority with Allah and have major attributes of Rububiyyah like creating,,
ownership ..etc.?
Allah using the pagan Arab's belief in His Lordship (Rububiyah), Him being the sole Creator, Owner and
Sustainer of the Universe, against them in their worshiping of others besides Him, is proof that they did
not believe that those idols they worshiped, nor the angels, were Rabbs like Allah.
The Pagans of Makkah attributing some attributes of Rububiyyah like benefit and harm, does not mean
they believed they were Rabbs.
-------------------Quote:
and secondly, you have the almighty power of delete with your side. It does away with all arguments,
wush of the magic delete button and you destroy all that opposes your belief, it vanishes from
illusionary existance.
If you follow the rules it won't be deleted .. if you ask in a form of question and wanting to understand
what we believe and why, then it won't be deleted. But to post in a form of argument and arguing, then it
can end up deleted.
And your accusation is false, if I delete every view that opposes us like you claim, I would have deleted
this whole thread and not bothered to reply.
Now from this point on, if you have questions and want to know something regarding our belief and
its proof, then feel free to post, but no more posts arguing the subject, because it will be a debate,
and debates in matters of aqeedah are not allowed.
__________________
.
Beliefs of the Pious Salaf Website
Alukah in English
Blogs:
1. Topics & Replies
2. Islam Teachings
3. LearnDeen

Explanation of Aqidah Tahawiyyah by Ibn Abi Al-Izz Hanafi

Huda Channel

#10
12-25-2016, 01:54 PM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Quote:
Originally Posted by Um Abdullah M.
"gods" in the ayah is "aliha" (plural form of "ilah") .. "ilah" in Arabic means "that which is worshiped"
.. so if someone worshiped an animal for example, that animal would become his "ilha" even if the
person does not believe that the animal is a Rab .. so it is not about Rububiyah but uloohiyah. They are
objecting to the idea that they should worship only Allah, and have no other ilahs except Allah.
Worship is ibadah...ibadah is enslaving oneself..if you enslave yourself to something, you take that thing
as a Master/Rabb...

#11
12-25-2016, 02:05 PM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Quote:
Originally Posted by Um Abdullah M.
The only one whom you say "hacked out your previous thread" is me, and I did not say to you "message
me privately". I put my reply to you in the other thread.
Ok, you censored, Bassam did the message me privately.
Quote:
They believe that Allah is "The Rabb" .. they don't believe their idols are Rabbs, but they did ascribe to
them or some of them some attributes of Rububiyah.
Ascribing any share of Rubbubiyah to other than Allah is absolutely shirk in Rubbubiyah without a doubt
and it is taking other than Allah as a Rabb and ilah.

As an example to help you understand, although the above should have been clear cut enough, if I say "he
is the King" I don't negate royalty from other than Him. If I think He has a wife or kids, then I believe in a
queen and princes and princesses which means divine royalty is shared with other than Allah.

Quote:
Do you have proof that whom they claim are Allah's offspring (Exalted be Allah) share Allah's Essence
(Exalted be Allah) or have the same authority as Him? Logic alone is not proof in Islam especially for
matters related to creed. And when it comes to mushriks, their shirk itself is not logical, so don't expect
their beliefs regarding those whom they call "offspring" to be logical.
Sister....this is where I really need you to pray to Allah and listen to me.
You don't need logic or mantiq for this.
You don't need kalam.
You don't need anything but to take the ayat on their apparent
If someone says Allah fathered an angel child with some female jinn concubine, this is absolutely
without a doubt ascribing Rubbubiya to the child....because that is what you are saying when you
say someone fathers a child with a female...that the child originates from his essence. That's right
their explicitly in waladAllah. No logic or mantiq or kalam or any of that.
[Now surely it is of their own lie that they say:
" Allah has begotten," and indeed, they are liars.


]
-they went further and claimed the mothers of those daughters were from the jinn!! SubhanAllah!!!

(And they have invented a kinship between Him and the Jinn,) Mujahid said, "The idolaters said that the
angels were the daughters of Allah. Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, said, `Then who are their
mothers' They said, `The daughters of the leaders of the Jinn.''' Qatadah and Ibn Zayd also said this.
(Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Adheem by Ibn Kathir)
Quote:
Tawheed Rububiyyah means: Ascription of all Acts of Allah (may He be Glorified and Exalted) to none
but Him Alone. And claiming that Allah has offspring (Exalted be He) does not fit into this definition.
"Fathering" is not from the acts of Allah to begin with. So as long as you don't have proof that they
share Allah's Attributes of Rububiyyah, your claim has no meaning.

I'm sorry but this is patent nonsense. Rubbubiyah is not limited to the acts of Allah aza wa jal. It
includes His sifaat and essence. So if someone were to claim other than Allah is al-Aleem, this is shirk
in Rubbubiyah.
Quote:
In a sahih narration it mentions that the pagan Arabs confirmed that Allah is the one who Owns them
and Owns those whom they ascribe with him as partners.
The polytheists would make talbiya and say: 'Here I am! No partners do You have except a partner
belonging to You. Him and all that he owns You Own.' They would say this while going around the
House (Ka'bah)" Sahih Muslim
This quote of yours does not negate in the slightest that they attributed istiqlal to their gods. It's not proof
at all for any of your claims. I'll share with you a response Gaspard had to Bassam earlier
The pagans believed that Allah had partners in His kingdom. That much you affirm but you try to hide
behind the fact that they believed Allah was the greater God in order to render the partnership they
ascribed to other than Allah close to meaningless. It is as if you have forgotten that partnership implies at
least a partial equality in some issues.
For instance you use the talbiyah of the pagans when they affirm that their idols are partners which Allah
owns and that He owns what they own. This would somehow imply they did not attribute istiqlal
[independence] to their idols. If we return to some commentators like Ibn Al-Atheer what the idols own
according to the pagans are the things which are brought to them by their worshipers. Owning [Milk] in
the arabic language means the power to dispose of something. The meaning of the talbiyah is that the
mushrikun believe Allah has the power to dispose of His partners and the things which are brought to
them. This however does not negate istiqlal [independence] in every way. One may still believe that idols
can harm or benefit people by their essence without the need of Allah, without His permission and so on.
The talbiyah only negates the belief that Allah can not dispose of them or of what they own. It does not
affirm that they need His help, His permission or His causes in order to act.
I tried to simultaneously tag you in this post while only quoting what I am responding to in order to not
make it too long.
Lastly I am not interested in arguing with you. That's what I would do with Bassam or something. I'm
just interested in how you respond to our claims and our counterclaims. Nothing more. This is the
truth, hold me to it on yawm al Qiyamah.
(Also give me time to copy all of your statements and citations/quotes. Might take a day or two.)

#12
12-25-2016, 02:13 PM
Yunus(nickname)

Join Date: Jun 2011

Posts: 224

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaifAlIslam
Salam alayqum, Sister to say they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is to say they were Muwahid in
belief of Rububiyyah. And this statement can be seen here:
"Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not
know from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of
"al-ilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah. [Ref: Fath Al
Majeed Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76]
The disbelievers whom the Messenger fought affirmed Tawheed ar-Rububiyah (Oneness of Allah's
Lordship), yet their affirmation of Tawheed ar-Rububiyah did not enter them into Islam and did not
sanctify their blood or wealth. [Ref: Explanation Of Four Fundamental Principles, by Shaykh Salih
Ibn Al Fawzan, Page 30, Published by: QSEP]
With regards to polytheists believing their idols were not Rabb, thats an evil Sunnah which has
originated from you. The matter is established against you:

-------------------There are many other things I want to address but I would be wasting very valuable time with you.
Firstly, because you're lost cause, nothing will/can change your end, and secondly, you have the
almighty power of delete with your side. It does away with all arguments, wush of the magic delete
button and you destroy all that opposes your belief, it vanishes from illusionary existance.

No need to debate. Please don't get this thread deleted, at least not until I can see what on earth they are
trying to say and how they are trying to respond to our claims. I want to specifically see how she attempts
to claim either there existed pagans who only did shirk in acts of worship or that ascribing Rubbubiyah to
other than Allah is either not shirk in Rubbubiyah or not taking other than Allah as a Rabb.
Besides, most Muslims don't hold her views on tawheed anyways, and she's on the wrong side of history.
She'll find out she's wrong on this on yawm al Qiyamah if she doesn't in this life. So relax, if she wants to
censor, this is the small circle in existence Allah has given her control over and He'll judge whether she
did right with that little power or not.

#13
12-25-2016, 03:58 PM
Um Abdullah M.
Moderator of Aqeedah Forum

Join Date: Jun 2007

Posts: 3,913

I will read your posts and reply tomorrow insha Allah (it is night time now where I live).

Too tired today from discussing on Facebook with some Muslims about greeting others for Christmas.

#14
12-26-2016, 01:40 AM
SaifAlIslam

Join Date: May 2016

Posts: 66

Quote:
Originally Posted by Um Abdullah M.
As for the ayah (3:80) : Nor would he order you to take angels and Prophets for lords. Would he
order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's Will?} .. If you check the tafsir of this ayah,
you will see that the verse is speaking about the Jews and Christians, and that the reason behind the
revelation of this verse is that a group from the Jews came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa
sallam) and asked him if he is calling them to worship him like the Christians worship Jesus (alayhi
assalam); and Allah revealed this ayah.
Meaning Of Verse In Simple Words:
Taking Prophets as lords was something which Jews/Christians did. And taking the angels as Lords was
something which the polytheists did. This verse adresses the Muslims and says the Jews Christians, and
polytheists took Prophets and angels as lords and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) would
no instruct you to take them your your lords because he would be inviting you to Kufr.
Substantiating The Disputed Meaning With Evidence:
The verse is not only talking abou Jews/Christians it is inclusive of polytheists of Arabia because
polytheists believed their goddesses, Lat, Uzza, Manat were angels and daughters of Allah therefore. And
I explained the relevent portion of verse (i.e. "Nor would he order you to take angels and prophets for
lords. Would he order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's Will?") with verses which
establish polytheists belived their trinity goddesses were daughters of Allah and angels. The evidence
followed: Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto
Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying! [Ref: 17:40]
Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male sex, and for Him,
the female? [Ref: 53:19/21] I had expalined verse of Quran with verses of Quran.
---------------Forum rules are perfectly suited to protect your Kharijism. They weren't Wahi were they? You made these
rules so you can invoke them and do away with anything that obliterates Kufr. And anything that
champions Noor of Islam eradicates darkness of Kufr and apostasy. Lastly, I am here to teach the religion
of Islam to you and your kind and not to learn anything from you or your kind. I don't want to disbelieve
after I have believed in religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala).

#15

12-26-2016, 02:47 AM
SaifAlIslam

Join Date: May 2016

Posts: 66

Meaning Of Verse In Simple Words:

Taking Prophets as lords was something which Jews/Christians did. And taking the angels as Lords was
something which the polytheists did. This verse adresses the Muslims and says the Jews Christians, and
polytheists took Prophets and angels as lords and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) would
no instruct you to take them your your lords because he would be inviting you to Kufr.
Substantiating The Disputed Meaning With Evidence:
The verse is not only talking abou Jews/Christians it is inclusive of polytheists of Arabia. Polytheists
believed angels were children of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and following verse of proof of their
belief:"They say, The All-beneficent has taken offsprings. Immaculate is He! Rather they are [His]
honoured servants. They do not venture to speak ahead of Him, and they act by His command. He
knows that which is before them and that which is behind them, and they do not intercede except for
someone He approves of, and they are apprehensive for the fear of Him. Should any of them say, I am a
god besides Him, We will requite him with hell. Thus do We requite the wrongdoers." [Ref: 21:26/29]
And specificly the Polytheists believed their goddesses, Lat, Uzza, Manat were angels and daughters of
Allah therefore. And I explained the relevent portion of verse (i.e. "Nor would he order you to take
angels and prophets for lords. Would he order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's
Will?") with verses which establish polytheists belived their trinity goddesses were daughters of Allah and
angels. The evidence followed: Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons,
and taken unto Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying!
[Ref: 17:40] Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male sex,
and for Him, the female? [Ref: 53:19/21] I had expalined verse of Quran with verses of Quran.
Tafsir Ibn Abbas On Verse 3:80:
"(And he commanded you) O people of the Quraysh, Jews and Christians (not that ye should take the
angels) as daughters of Allah (and the Prophets for lords. Would he command you to disbelieve) how
could Abraham command you to follow disbelief (after ye had surrendered (to Allah)) after he
commanded you to follow Islam (completely Surrendering to Allah), saying to you: (Lo! Allah hath
chosen for you the (true) Religion; therefore die not save as men who have surrendered [2:132]). Allah
says here: Allah has not sent a Messenger except that He commanded him to follow Islam and not
Judaism, Christianity or the worship of idols, as these unbelievers claim. It is also said that this verse
was revealed about the claims of the Jews that Muhammad commanded them to love him and worship
him as the Christians worshipped Jesus. The Christians and idolaters also made the same claim." [Ref:
Tafsir Ibn Al Abbas - 3:80]
------------Some additions were made so Hujjah is established against you.

#16

12-26-2016, 07:57 AM
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 66

SaifAlIslam

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus(nickname)
...
Salam alayqum
Brother what I wrote was enough she and her kind and bend backwards, if Allah wills it will stand. You
brought smile on my face. Al hamdu lillah you're beginning to naturalise the Tawheed/Shirk defintion of
Ahle Sunnat. I am gladly leaving this in your hands. Anything you require from me you can send me pm.
If i don't get anything academic I won't be writing anything in this thread. I was just wondering, where
was you in IslamicAwakening forum in 'What Is Ibadah?' madness? That head banging made me write the
principles of Ahle Sunnat for tawheed and Shirk. I wrote all i could to support the sufi Shirk and Kufr,
and to present the Shirk to Ahle Najd. lol. In the hope they will be Mushrik one dark side gets em.

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:57 AM.

Contact Us - Multaqa Ahl al-Hadeeth - Archive - Top
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright 2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Nothing In This Thread Has Been Added, Or Omitted, Or Inserted. (MSAli)