THE REAL SALAF SALEH

[jamalsharif1]

I hear people talk about the salaf saleh quite often but what surprises me is that they would quote from scholars that are not from that period of the salaf for example Sh. Ibn Taimiyah (who’s view was not the main stream in his time even though he came in a time full of scholars) or quote Sh. Mohammad Abdulwahab who came 1000 years after our Beloved Prophet.

The views that these two scholars had, was not the view of the majority of the Salaf and that is very easy to prove because of the huge Islamic library we have of the writings of the salaf. People say the Salaf said this and the Salaf said that without quoting from a particular Salaf and when they do sometimes quote, then he is an unknown name to the common lay people.
Ibn Al-Jawzy a name you must have heard of, has a book (which you have not heard of because it is only published by few publishers and the majority of people would not want the public to hear what he says on this topic), the name of the book is:
دفع شبه التشبيه بأكف التنزيه

In the beginning of the book it talks about the people who had these minority views (none of whom you would have heard of from the period of the real Salaf) and he warns against them. Later he dwells into each point where difference has occurred. It is a beautiful book. You can find the book if u search the net.

Another book you can read is the book by the renowned scholar of hadith Al-imam Al-Baihaqy called:

الأسماء والصفات

You will not find it in the bookshops (I wonder why!!) but don’t worry in seconds you can find it in the net.

IF YOU THINK THAT WHAT I AM SAYING IS BIASED OR MISLEAD, HERE IS A SIMPLE TEST YOU CAN DO YOURSELF.
1. Find the verses of Quran or hadith that the so called salafi of today is using as proof.
2. These passages or sayings have commentaries on them. Take three commentaries on each verse or hadith, but don’t read contemporary commentaries because the point here, is to know what the real Salaf have said. and see for yourself what they are saying.

Now a challenge: for every real Salaf's quote you bring to me (must be from a book he wrote whether in aqeedah or tafseer or hadith or fiqh or ANY SCIENCE, not someone saying he said (and even that I will except if there is a chain of narrators from the one who quotes to the who quoted)),, for EVERY quote you give me, I will give you 3 to 5 quotes from the real Salaf hence proving that the view you are propagating is a minority's view.

Al-Imam Al-Nawawy (commentator of sahih muslim), Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalany (commentator of sahih bukhari), ibn Al-Jawzy, al imam Al-Suyuty, al imam Al-Qurtuby (has a famous tafseer on Quran) and many more are common house-hold names, read their books to know the opinions of the real Salaf and their aqeedah.

READ FOR YOUSELF and don’t rely on the cyber sheikhs because it is a platform for every Tom Dick and Harry. I have delivered and Allah is my witness.

 

[Idris16]

Some people say Taliban are grave worshippers, but those very same idiots won't provide proof. So I challenge you, bring proof that Ibn Taymiyah's views were contrary to that of al-Salaf al-Salih.

The names of the Imams you mentioned in the end, were not living at the time of al-Salaf al-Salih.

PS, I brought the issue of Taliban as an example, because the OP didnt provide proof just like others.

 

[thariq2005]

Oh save us the irony.

You talk about the 'real' salaf and you quote Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Hajar and others- who were not from the salaf.

Have you read about al-Qurtubi quoting the view of the salaf regarding the `uluww of Allaah?

Did you know that Ibn al-Jawzi rebuked abul Hasan al-Ash`ari.

The point is... let us all go back to the 'real' salaf. How they understood the attributes of Allaah should be our methodology. This was the methodology of Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullaah and the hanaabilah.

Read about what Ibn Rajab had to say about Ibn al-Jawzi.

 

[Salem9022]

You call Shaykh Ul Islam Ibn Taymiyaa not from the Salaf which is true but then you start talking about Ibn Jawziyaa who was the student of the Shaykh Ul Islam Ibn Taymiyaah as if the student became part of the Salaf before the Teacher did LOL>


And Yes Shaykh Muhammad "IBN" (Son of) Abdul Wahab came 1000 years after. he didn't bring anything new. He just revivied what the Scholars of the Past said like Ibn Taymiyaah and Ibn Jawziyaa and the like.

 

[Hard Rock Moslem]

Assalamu'alaikum,

Follow Qur'an and Sunnah, whoever follow Qur'an and Sunnah inshAllah they are in the right path.

 

[jamalsharif1]

Oh save us the irony.

You talk about the 'real' salaf and you quote Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Hajar and others- who were not from the salaf.

Have you read about al-Qurtubi quoting the view of the salaf regarding the `uluww of Allaah?

Did you know that Ibn al-Jawzi rebuked abul Hasan al-Ash`ari.

The point is... let us all go back to the 'real' salaf. How they understood the attributes of Allaah should be our methodology. This was the methodology of Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullaah and the hanaabilah.

Read about what Ibn Rajab had to say about Ibn al-Jawzi.

Again i hear follow the views of ibn taimiah who followed the salaf saleh but no names.
the reason i mentioned those names is that the best commentary on sahih muslim is that of al-imam nawawy, the best commentary on sahih bukhari is that of ibn hajar, so if you hav a hadith that comes from those two books than what other commentary would you pick? why are they called the best because of the indepth analasys of the hadith plus the the take on whatever has been said so then u will get a bigger picture. but you can decide to rely on what is said to you instead of checking t out yourself. if it is with verses than i offered tafseer al-qurtubi because it is indepth too which means you get all views in the matter not a onesided show that is not the way ilm is taught--blind belief.
and by the way apart from suyuti and ibn hajar all of the ulama i hav mentioned predate ibn taimiah.

i hop not to offend but to open a serious discussion backed by proof. i hav opened these books and hav read them, all i am asking is for pple to read.
for example the aqeedah tahawiyah and tahawy is from the age of the real salaf it has no division of aqeedah into three i.e. rububiah, uluhiah and asmaa wa sifat. and it is true to assume that that is your view. isnt that a contradiction.

 

[jamalsharif1]

You call Shaykh Ul Islam Ibn Taymiyaa not from the Salaf which is true but then you start talking about Ibn Jawziyaa who was the student of the Shaykh Ul Islam Ibn Taymiyaah as if the student became part of the Salaf before the Teacher did LOL>


And Yes Shaykh Muhammad "IBN" (Son of) Abdul Wahab came 1000 years after. he didn't bring anything new. He just revivied what the Scholars of the Past said like Ibn Taymiyaah and Ibn Jawziyaa and the like.

ibn aljawzy is b4 ibn taimiah but ibn alqayyim aljawziah is the student of the latter. big difference but it can easily be overlooked.
and ibn abdulwaheeb brought back what ibn taimiah and his student ibn al-qayyim said and got support from the saudi family that......(i dont want to go into it) but the point is that when he ibn taimiay said it did not pick up momentum bcos it was a minority view. if it wasnt the case why was he then jailed three times on separate occassions for his views. (plz do not think that this is a stab at him being a scholar, he was a great scholar but at the same time a scholars view is not absolute law)

 

[thariq2005]

the reason i mentioned those names is that the best commentary on sahih muslim is that of al-imam nawawy, the best commentary on sahih bukhari is that of ibn hajar, so if you hav a hadith that comes from those two books than what other commentary would you pick? why are they called the best because of the indepth analasys of the hadith plus the the take on whatever has been said so then u will get a bigger picture.

It doesn't mean everything Ibn Hajar rahimahullaah, or al-Nawawi said was correct. I don't know why you are trying to claim Ibn Hajar like he was an ash`ari... in actual fact he opposed the Usool of Ash`arism and that is that a person is obligated to do Nadhr. Ibn Hajar disagreed with this view and clearly even mentioned that this was from the beliefs of the Ashaa`irah, as he said:

" وقد نقل القدوة أبو محمد بن أبي جمرة عن أبي الوليد الباجي عن أبي جعفر السمناني وهو من كبار الاشاعرة أنه سمعه يقول أن هذه المسألة من مسائل المعتزلة بقيت في المذهب والله المستعان "
(Refer to Kitaab al-Eemaan)

Clearly from the above you can see that he mentioned that this belief of the ashaa`irah was from the remnants of the mu`tazilah... which only goes to show that the Ashaa`irah are an off-shoot from the mu`tazilah (but not just as worse).

but you can decide to rely on what is said to you instead of checking t out yourself. if it is with verses than i offered tafseer al-qurtubi because it is indepth too which means you get all views in the matter not a onesided show that is not the way ilm is taught--blind belief.

Look your own scholar (i.e al-Qurtubi) that you believe to be one of the ashaa`irah admitted himself as to what the view of the salaf was regarding the Istiwaa of Allaah...

وقد كان السلف الأول رضي الله عنهم لا يقولون بنفي الجهة ولا ينطقون بذلك ، بل نطقوا هم والكافة بإثباتها لله تعالى كما نطق كتابه وأخبرت رسله . ولم ينكر أحد من السلف الصالح أنه استوى على عرشه حقيقة . وخص العرش بذلك لأنه أعظم مخلوقاته ، وإنما جهلوا كيفية الاستواء فإنه لا تعلم حقيقته . قال مالك رحمه الله : الاستواء معلوم - يعني في اللغة - والكيف مجهول ، والسؤال عن هذا بدعة
(http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?flag=1&bk_no=48&surano=7&ayano=54)
[Tafseer of Soorah al-A`raaf: 54]

Al-Qurtubi mentions the view of the salaf after mentioning the view of the people of kalaam and he clearly mentions, above, that NONE OF THE SALAF denied that the Istiwaa of Allaah above His `arsh is reality (Haqeeqah). And he even goes on to explain the statement of Imaam Maalik about what the Imaam meant when he said :"al-Istiwaa ma`loom" and that it means Istiwaa is known in the language (bearing in mind that Al-Qurtubi was a maaliki and explaining the statement of Imaam Maalik).

The words of your own scholars are clear...

i hop not to offend but to open a serious discussion backed by proof. i hav opened these books and hav read them, all i am asking is for pple to read.
for example the aqeedah tahawiyah and tahawy is from the age of the real salaf it has no division of aqeedah into three i.e. rububiah, uluhiah and asmaa wa sifat. and it is true to assume that that is your view. isnt that a contradiction.

Yeah al-`Aqeedah al-Tahaawiyyah is an excellent `aqeedah book that clearly expresses the views of Abu Haneefah rahimahullaah, just because Imaam al-Tahaawi did not categorize al-Tawheed does not mean that it is bid`ah to categorize Tawheed of Allaah. There are many scholars who categorized tawheed, both from the scholars of the salaf and the later scholars. Like al-Tabari rahimahullaah categorized it into two: Al-Ruboobiyyah and al-Uloohiyyah... check Tafseer al-Tabari: 3/336, 23/182...

Just to give you one example from the tafseer of al-Tabari: In the tafseer of the ayah: فليعمل عملاً صالحاً ولا يشركْ بعبادة ربِّه أحداً

Al-Tabari explained it by saying: فليخلصْ له العبادةَ وليفردْ له الربوبية

Here is the statement of Ibn Battah in al-Ibaanah `an shar`iyyah al-Firqah al-Naajiyah/51 :

وذلك أن أصل الايمان بالله الذي يجب على الخلق اعتقاده في إثبات الايمان به ثلاثة أشسياء:
احدها: ان يعتقد العبد ربانيته ليكون بذلك مباينا لاهل التعطيل الذين لا يثبتون صانعا.
والثاني: ان يعتقد وحدانيته ليكون مباينا بذلك أهل الشرك الذين أقروا بالصانع وأشركوا معه في العبادة غيره.
والثالث: أن يعتقده موصوفا بالصفات التي لا يجوز إلا أن يكون موصوفا بها من العلم والقدرة والحكمة وسائر ما وصف به نفسه في كتابه … ولأنا نجد الله تعالى قد خاطب عباده بدعوتهم الى اعتقاد كل واحدة من هذه الثلاث والايمان بها

Here is the statement of Abu Haneefah rahimahullaah in his Fiqh al-Absat: يدُعى من أعلى لا من أسفل؛ لأنَّ الأسفل ليس الأوسط وصف الربوبية والألوهية في شيء
(Translate the above statement of the Imaam- that clarifies how the salaf believed in the attributes of Allaah)

Finally, the statement of Abu Haatim (Ibn Hibbaan) rahimahullaah in the introduction of his book rawdhah al-`uqalaa', he said:

الحمد لله المتفرد بوحدانية الألوهية، المتعزز بعظمة الربوبية، القائم على نفوس العالم بأجالها، والعالم بتقلبها وأحوالها، المانّ عليهم بتواتر آلائه، المتفضل عليهم بسوابع نعمائه، الذي أنشأ الخلق حين أراد بلا معين ولا مشير، وخلق البشر كما أراد بلا شبيه ولا نظير، فمضت فيهم بقدرته مشيئته، ونفذت فيهم بعزته إرادته


Now, how about we take your test and see:

IF YOU THINK THAT WHAT I AM SAYING IS BIASED OR MISLEAD, HERE IS A SIMPLE TEST YOU CAN DO YOURSELF.
1. Find the verses of Quran or hadith that the so called salafi of today is using as proof.
2. These passages or sayings have commentaries on them. Take three commentaries on each verse or hadith, but don’t read contemporary commentaries because the point here, is to know what the real Salaf have said. and see for yourself what they are saying.

1) Let us take one ayah from Soorah Taha: 5

الرَّحْمَٰنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَىٰ
(A 'salafi' translation) The Most Beneficent (Allah) Istawa (rose over) the Throne

2) Let us see three commentaries on "Istawa" from the REAL salaf:

Mujaahid, who was from the taabi`een said this regarding istiwaa:

اسْتَوَى: علا على العرش
Istawaa (means): Rose over the throne
(and this was narrated by Bukhaari in his saheeh: Kitab "At-Tawheed", chapter {And His Throne was over water})

Abu'l `Aaliyah, as narrated by bukhaari again (from the same chapter), said:

وقال أبو العالية استوى أي ارتفع
Abu'l `Aaliyah said: Istawaa means Irtafa`a (to rise)

Here is what al-Tabari said regarding the ayah in Soorah Taha (link to his tafseer: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=3221&idto=3221&bk_no=50&ID=3242#docu):

الرحمن على عرشه ارتفع وعلا
Again, al-Tabari said Rise over His Throne!

Basheer al-Zahraani (208 A.H) said: سمعت غير واحد من المفسرين يقول : {الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى}: ارتفع.
"I heard more than one from the mufassireen saying (he quoted the ayah), that it means "Irtafa`a" (to rise)"


I think I have given more than three commentaries.

The way of the Salaf is clear and simple.