قبر کو مس کرنے اور چومنے میں کوئی مسئلہ نہیں: احمد بن حنبل

صحیح بخاری کے مشہور شارح، بدر الدین عینی، اپنی کتاب عمدۃ القاری شرح صحیح بخاری، جلد ۱۴، صفحہ ۴۷۱؛ میں رقمطراز ہیں


وقال أيضا وأما تقبيل الأماكن الشريفة على قصد التبرك وكذلك تقبيل أيدي الصالحين وأرجلهم فهو حسن محمود باعتبار القصد والنية وقد سأل أبو هريرة الحسن رضي الله تعالى عنه أن يكشف له المكان الذي قبله رسول الله وهو سرته فقبله تبركا بآثاره وذريته وقد كان ثابت البناني لا يدع يد أنس رضي الله تعالى عنه حتى يقبلها ويقول يد مست يد رسول الله وقال أيضا وأخبرني الحافظ أبو سعيد ابن العلائي قال رأيت في كلام أحمد بن حنبل في جزء قديم عليه خط ابن ناصر وغيره من الحفاظ أن الإمام أحمد سئل عن تقبيل قبر النبي وتقبيل منبره فقال لا بأس بذلك قال فأريناه للشيخ تقي الدين بن تيمية فصار يتعجب من ذلك ويقول عجبت أحمد عندي جليل يقوله هذا كلامه أو معنى كلامه وقال وأي عجب في ذلك وقد روينا عن الإمام أحمد أنه غسل قميصا للشافعي وشرب الماء الذي غسله به

(ہمارے شیخ زین الدین نے) اسی طرح کہا کہ شریف مکانات/جگہوں کو تبرک کی نیت سے چومنے، اور اسی طرح نیک لوگوں کے ہاتھوں اور پیروں کو چومنا، یہ قصد و نیت کے اعتبار سے حسن اور ممدوح ہے۔ ابو ہریرہ نے امام حس سے کہا کہ مجھے وہ جگہ دکھائیں جہاں نبی پاک نے چوما۔ اور وہ ان کی ناف تھی، وہ انہوں نے وہ چوما، اس وجہ سے کہ نبی پاک کے آثار اور اولاد کی وجہ سے تبرک حاصل کریں-
اور ثابت البنانی انس کا ہاتھ تب تک نہ چھوڑتے جب تک چوم نہ لیتے، اور کہتے کہ اس ہاتھ نے نبی پاک کا ہاتھ مس کیا ہے۔ اسی طرح امام احمد بن حنبل سے قبر رسول اور منبر رسول و چومنے کے بارے میں پوچھا گیا، تو انہوں نے جواب دیا کہ اس میں کوئی حرج نہیں
شیخ فرماتے ہیں کہ میں نے دیکھا کہ ابن تیمیہ اس پر حیران ہوئے اور کہا: عجیب ہے! امام احمد تو میرے نظر میں بہت جلیل القدر ہیں، اور وہ اس طرح کی باتیں کر رہے ہیں- اور اس ضمن میں یہ بھی عجیب ہے- اسی طرح امام احمد سے مروی ہے کہ وہ امام شافعی کی قمیص دھوتے اور اس پانی کو پی جاتے جس سے قمیص دھوئی ہوتی


ابو ہریرہ کی جس روایت کی بات ہو رہی ہے، وہ مجمع الزوائد، جلد ۹، صفحہ ۱۰۵؛ پر یوں درج ہے

15045- وعن عمير بن إسحاق قال: رأيت أبا هريرة لقي الحسن بن علي فقال له: اكشف عن بطنك حيث رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقبل منه، فكشف عن بطنه فقبله.
15056- وفي رواية: فقبل سرته.
رواه أحمد والطبراني إلا أنه قال: فكشف عن بطنه ووضع يده على سرته.
ورجالهما رجال الصحيح غير عمير بن إسحاق وهو ثقة.

عمیر بن اسحاق نے کہا کہ میں نے دیکھا کہ ابو ہریرہ امام حسن سے ملے، اور کہا کہ اپنے پیٹ کو میرے لیے آشکارہ کریں جہاں میں نے دیکھا کہ نبی پاک نے چوما۔ پس انہوں نے آشکارہ کیا، اور انہوں نے چوما۔ اور دوسری روایت میں ہے کہ ان کے ناف کو چوما۔ احمد اور طبرانی نے روایت کی، اور راوی سارے ثقہ ہیں سوارئے عمیر بن اسحاق کے، اور وہ ثقہ ہیں

امام احمد کے جس قول کی طرف نشاندہی کی، وہ ان کی العلل و المعرفۃ الرجال، جلد ۲، صفحہ ۴۹۲؛ پر یوں درج ہے


3243 – سألته عن الرجل يمس منبر النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم ويتبرك بمسه ويقبله ويفعل بالقبر مثل ذلك أو نحو هذا يريد بذلك التقرب إلى الله جل وعز فقال لا بأس بذلك

امام احمد سے پوچھا گیا کہ ایک شخص منبر رسول کو چھوتا ہے، اور چھونے اور اسے چومنے سے تبرک حاصل کرنا چاہتا ہے۔ اور وہ یہ کام قبر کے ساتھ بھی کرتا ہے اور اس کا ارادہ اللہ کا قرب حاصل کرنا ہے۔ احمد بن حنبل نے جواب دیا کہ اس میں کوئی حرج نہیں


اب لگائیے شرک کے فتوے !!!

The Shared History of Saudi Arabia and ISIS

The Saudi regime has imprisoned its moderate Islamists and allowed its radicals to cause mayhem in the Levant. It is uncertain whether those radicals are indirectly or directly sponsored by the Saudi regime. But it is certain that the regime shares their hatred of Shia Muslims, the Assad and Maliki regimes, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Iran. While the Saudi regime cannot realistically bomb its rivals, jihadis are performing the role with precision.

A recent report argues that ISIS or the ‘Islamic State’ is largely a self-funded movement, drawing on a wide range of sources. The Saudi regime is not one of them. The report debunks ex-Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s accusations that his country faces the threat of terrorists funded directly by Saudi Arabia. Yet the prominence of Saudis in its rank and file is yet to be explained. Notwithstanding the Saudi offensive to absolve itself from any connection with Islamic State, these groups have demonstrated a certain affinity not only with the Saudi religious tradition but also its political history.

From Beirut to Baghdad, Saudi radicals who have joined ISIS and other similar militia are determined to eliminate their rivals and enemies, and finally establish their dream Islamic state. Evidently those Saudi jihadis now fighting for Islamic State are not satisfied with their own allegedly Islamic state, known as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They are the generation of the 1990s—young, connected, unruly and full of zeal in support of an Ummah, narrowly defined as a Sunni community that excludes all others in the world of Islam. This is not surprising: they have grown up in Saudi Arabia, whose Wahhabi form of Islam crushes religious diversity.

Yet the exodus of young Saudis to neighbouring Arab countries must not be seen through a purely religious lens. Above all, it is a product of Saudi policies that use religion in the service of the state. The Saudi state itself was produced by an earlier version of the conflicts we are witnessing today in the Levant. As early as 1912 the founder of the Saudi kingdom, Ibn Saud, created tribal militia called the Ikhwan and indoctrinated its fighters in the art of killing Muslims who objected to his own political authority on the ground that they were kafir—infidels. He enlisted the tribal youth of the Arabian Peninsula in a jihad against all those who resisted his hegemony. His first state was called Dawlat Najd and Hijaz, as it incorporated Central Arabia and the Western province where the holy cities of Mecca and Madina are located. The founder assumed several titles, including Emir, Imam and Sultan, before he settled on the title of King, at the suggestion of the British colonial power.

The creation of modern Saudi Arabia is unique in the Arab world as it was a jihadi project from the very beginning. Unlike in other Arab states where the youth are introduced to a mythologized nationalist narrative about history, Saudi youth are indoctrinated into the unique jihadi narrative of the state as one that came into being as a result of the efforts of a pious leader who energised his people, saved them from blasphemy and eradicated un-Islamic beliefs and practices.

The Saudi fighters of the twenties had a special dislike for statues and graves. They arrived in Mecca and Medina in the mid-1920s and immediately went on a rampage, searching for signs of blasphemy. They destroyed graves and imposed on the population strict codes of conduct. No woman was to be seen in the streets and no tobacco was to be consumed in public. They immediately marked the beginning of their rule by implementing a series of measures, from rounding people up to perform prayers to monitoring public morality.

From Ibn Taymiyyah To Daish (ISIS/ISIL) – by Sidq Miqal

The gruesome incineration of the Jordanian Pilot by Da’ish (ISIS) in Iraq has shocked many around the world. However, more than countering merely the violence and the mayhem, the current challenge posed by ISIS uprising is how to clearly define the factors and the actors. We need to understand that the prominent ideological factor that seems to motivate ISIS –and its Jihadist brethren from Mali to Indonesia- revolves round the concept of political authority in Islam. This ideology is not only driven by the teachings of the medieval Islamic scholar, Ibn Taymiyyah, but has also encouraged political violence and extremism in the name of Islam. Hence, it is important to examine the extent to which this ideology has predisposed the jihadist mindset of ISIS and others. So, let’s examine the radical political ideology of Ibn Taymiyyah and its influence on the ideological motivations of ISIS as well as the implications of his ideas for ISIS agenda.

And so the method on how to kill Al-Kassasbeh was not some dreamed up concoction, but stemmed from Islam as the quest on how to execute him circulated the Muslim world. In the burning scene video (see 1:00 above) ISIS gave the Islamic edict straight from the top Islamic authority of Ibn Taymiyya’s jurisprudence:http://shoebat.com/…/watch-horrific-video-isis-burning-pow…/

Several competing theories abound to explain the ISIS uprising, broadly revolving round socio-economic, political, and religious issues and the politics of post-colonial dominance and impunity, with despotic regimes motivating resistant movements to transform themselves into violent armed groups. One discourse that has remained less well examined is the theoretical claim that ISIS and all other Deobandi and Salafi jihadists have been deeply influenced by the religious and ideological teachings of the radical medieval Islamist, Ibn Taymiyyah. Let’s focus on the influence of Ibn Taymiyyah because there is no other Islamic theologian who has had as much influence on radical political ideology of Islam as Ibn Taymiyyah. The ideology itself is constructed on the concept that a legitimate political authority must be based on the Quran and the Sunna. Thus, it becomes a duty for all Muslims to ensure that Islamic law is implemented in society. As such, it is argued that most Islamic theologians, including reformers, revivalists and Islamists either from the Sufi or Sunni tradition, from the Wahhabis to Sayyid Qutb to Maududi and to Osama Bin Laden have in one way or the other attacked the validity of secular political authority. They have also questioned the authority of Muslim but secular political leaders who have failed both in their personal and political lives to uphold correct Islamic ideals.

How do we relate the concept and practice of Ibn Taymiyyah’s political ideology to the ISIS call for an Islamic state? Let’s make an attempt to examine the development of the concept of legitimate political authority in Islam, followed by an analysis of its radical and violent implications, how it was transited down to ISIS and why such ideology is a potent tool for Jihadist mobilisation efforts. Some of the lessons that ISIS and other contemporary Jihadists have drawn from Ibn Taymiyyah are as follows:

Ibn Tamyiyyah and Political Islam:

Ibn Taymiyyah was born in Harran, an old city within the Arabian Peninsula between Sham and Iraq (Al-Sham is an old name that represents the areas of Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon) in the year 1263. Ibn Taymiyyah became a professor of Islamic law. His political ideology was very unpopular with political leaders at the time and he was imprisoned in both Syria and Egypt. He portrayed Islam as a political ideology by which Muslims ought to explain and justify the ends and means of all organized social action. In this sense the ideology of political authority in Islam is more than merely a religion in the narrow sense of theological belief, private prayer and ritual worship. Ibn Taymiyyah picked up some religious elements in Islam and turned them into an ideological precept.