The Kaafiyah Channel

In this lecture, Dr. Ali Ataie presents the traditional Sunni account of the revelation, transmission, collection, and preservation of the Holy Qur’an. Beginning with the Qur’an’s revelation to the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, the presentation examines the role of memorization, oral transmission, written records, the early Muslim community, and the eventual collection and standardization of the Qur’anic text. https://youtu.be/WYzHzaUX8rA

Shaykh Adham al-Asimi makes a similar case in the explanation of this verse. You can watch it here: https://youtu.be/PXpv-Tfa0zE

Given the recent controversy that arose due to the statement of an American scholar regarding "The problem of damnation," I feel it is relevant to share this translation of mine from Sh. Saeed Foudah's work on what the fiṭrah actually is: https://kaafiyahchannel.wordpress.com/2022/08/22/fitrah-isnt-what-you-think-it-is/

Someone challenged the interpretation I presented here by Imam al-Razi, stating two objections. The first objection: It doesn't appear likely that Allah SWT would use terminology that could easily imply something blasphemous against Himself. Reply: This is, in all honesty, a silly objection. There are many names amongst the 99 Beautiful Names of Allah that could be taken the wrong way when understood literally – hence they are not understood literally. To just give one example (which was brought up mockingly by a Christian apologist during a debate): Allah's name al-Wārith (lit. "The Inheritor"). A coherent explanation of this name is provided by Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH): الوارِثُ هو الَّذِي تَرْجِعُ إلَيْهِ الأمْلاكُ بَعْدَ فَناءِ المُلّاكِ. وذَلِكَ هو اللَّهُ سُبْحانَهُ، إذْ هو الباقِي بَعْدَ فَناءِ خَلْقِهِ، وإلَيْهِ مَرْجِعُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ ومصيرُهُ Meaning: He is The Inheritor, to Whom all the possessions return after their owners perish. That is Allah, because He is The Ever-Remaining after His creation perishes. Unto Him all things shall return. The point being made: A name that could potentially be misunderstood (be it for Allah or for His special servants) is not a reason for it to not be used by Him. The second objection: The other problem with Al-Razi's explanation is that the phrase "son of God" or even the plural "sons of God" appears a very large amount of times in the Bible, mostly in the Old Testament. The phrase was used metaphorically and yet Allah SWT still condemns their usage in the Qur'an 5:18. Notice, the Jews & Christians meant it metaphorically and yet Allah SWT still condemns it. This appears inconsistent with Al Razi's explanation. Reply: I looked at al-Razi's exegesis of 5:18 (where the phrase in question appears) and found the objector's conclusion to not be the case. Firstly, the Christians have a specific metaphysical meaning they intend with "Son of God," this specific meaning of theirs (which is beyond the meaning of an obedient servant of Allah) is rejected. Secondly, the Jews don't use the term in the same way as Christians. When reading al-Razi's explanation, it does not appear to me that the figurative usage itself is condemned, rather the claim (of being sons of God) is. He mentions this in passing as part of a longer discourse: ثُمَّ إنَّهُ تَعالى أبْطَلَ عَلَيْهِمْ دَعْواهم وقالَ: ﴿قُلْ فَلِمَ يُعَذِّبُكم بِذُنُوبِكُمْ﴾ وفِيهِ سُؤالٌ، وهو أنَّ حاصِلَ هَذا الكَلامِ أنَّهم لَوْ كانُوا أبْناءَ اللَّهِ وأحِبّاءَهُ لَما عَذَّبَهم لَكِنَّهُ عَذَّبَهم، فَهم لَيْسُوا أبْناءَ اللَّهِ ولا أحِبّاءَهُ [...] Meaning: Then Allah invalidates the Jews' claim and says: "Say: 'Then why does Allah punish you for your sins?'" This raises a question: The gist of this speech is that had they been Allah's sons and beloved ones, He would not have punished them. However, He did punish them. Thus, they are not Allah's sons nor beloved ones. This goes to show that the condemnation is directed at the claim, rather than the usage of the term. The point being made: It is very well possible that the term "son of God" was permitted to be used honorifically amongst the past nations.

Before all the Dawah bros, there was Imam al-Razi (d. 606 AH) who wrote in his tafsir under 9:30 regarding the term "Son of Allah": والأقْرَبُ عِنْدِي أنْ يُقالَ: لَعَلَّهُ ورَدَ لَفْظُ الِابْنِ في الإنْجِيلِ عَلى سَبِيلِ التَّشْرِيفِ، كَما ورَدَ لَفْظُ الخَلِيلِ في حَقِّ إبْراهِيمَ عَلى سَبِيلِ التَّشْرِيفِ، ثُمَّ إنَّ القَوْمَ لِأجْلِ عَداوَةِ اليَهُودِ، ولِأجْلِ أنْ يُقابِلُوا غُلُوَّهُمُ الفاسِدَ في أحَدِ الطَّرَفَيْنِ بِغُلُوٍّ فاسِدٍ في الطَّرَفِ الثّانِي، فَبالَغُوا وفَسَّرُوا لَفْظَ الِابْنِ بِالبُنُوَّةِ الحَقِيقِيَّةِ. والجُهّالُ قَبِلُوا ذَلِكَ، وفَشا هَذا المَذْهَبُ الفاسِدُ في أتْباعِ عِيسى عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ، واللَّهُ أعْلَمُ بِحَقِيقَةِ الحالِ. A rough translation: What seems most correct to me is that perhaps the phrase "Son [of God]" appeared as an honorific title in the Gospel, just like the phrase "Intimate Friend" [khalīl] appears as an honorific title for the Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him). Then, however, the people – out of enmity towards the Jews and to combat their fanaticism on one end of the spectrum [i.e. rejecting Prophet Jesus altogether] – started exaggerating and interpreting the word "Son" as actual sonship, thereby ending up on the other end of the spectrum [i.e. making him divine]. The ignoramuses accepted this meaning and thus this invalid doctrine grew legs and became widespread among the followers of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). Allah knows best about the reality of the matter. The takeaway: it can be granted the Jesus was the Son of God in the figurative sense of the word. However, this was abrograted in our sharī'a due to misusage.

Three 'aqida texts that I have translated: 1. The Qayrawani Creed https://t.me/kaafiyahchannel/301 2. The Creed of Ibn al-Hajib https://t.me/kaafiyahchannel/295 3. The 'Aḍudi Creed https://t.me/kaafiyahchannel/345

I am writing an article responding to a Christian apologist mentioning 'problematic' hadiths – the mutashābihāt ones. Here is a snippet from the article, where I explain the hadith and present the proper way of understanding it. Ibn Furak relates a hadith in which it is stated: ‘’(…) ‘Do you recognize your Lord?’ The people will say: ‘If He makes Himself known to us, we will recognize Him.’ At that moment the sāq will be lifted and every single believer will drop down to the ground in prostration to Allah.’’’ The word sāq is not ascribed to anyone; it is used without a definite article and it is not connected to any noun or pronoun, like sāq Allah (Allah’s sāq) or sāquhū (His sāq). Although one of the meanings is ‘shin,' in this context it means ‘hardship’ [shiddah]. That is one of the usages in the Arabic language. Like a poet once said: ‘’War has become vehement [qāmat al-ḥarb binā ‘alā sāq].’’ It used in the same meaning in the Quran 68:42: ‘’The day when hardship [sāq] is lifted.’’

I was asked the other day how I've memorised all the death dates of major scholarly figures in the past, as I often cite them in conversations. I'll start with the good news. I've never actually sat down to memorise death dates as a dedicated task, and neither should you. That would sound boring and not something I'd recommend. The best way to memorise the dates is to do so passively or by indirectly giving dates more importance in your studies. I'd recommend three ways you can do that: (1) Whenever you write a scholar's name in your notes, always accompany the name with their death date. E.g. "Abu Hanifah (d. 150)" Each time you write their name and date will serve as a reminder of the year they passed away. (2) When learning about a scholar, situate information about them according to an approximate timeline. E.g. if you identify a teacher-student relationship, like Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728) and Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751), then not only have you situated both figures in the same century which makes it easier to remember, but you can also assume the student died after the teacher. (3) Organise your digital library according to death dates. Whenever you name a document or folder, start with the death date. E.g. "(d. 660 AH) al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam - al-Qawa'id al-Kubra" By doing this, you not only organise the list of documents chronologically, but everytime you look for the document or browse through your folder, you remind yourself of the year the scholar passed away. It also serves as a quick personal database for death dates which can be quite handy. So there you go, my friends! Sometimes it's not about having a good memory more than it is about study techniques. If you do this over a long enough time period, you'll have the database of death dates stamped in your head.

A new work that deals with all the main points and is – you'd never guess this... – fewer than 60 pages!

Book 352: أحسن الكلام في تنزيه القدوس السلام Author: Allama Sayyid Muhammad Ameen Hashimi al-Maturidi Topic: Refutation This is a refutation in Arabic on the issue of Imkan al-Kazib that has been recently published. Allama Sayyid Muhammad Ameen Hashimi is a teacher at Jamia Faizan al-Mustafa in Mardan. In the book he talks about: - Flaw or deficiency in the attributes - Husn and Qubh - Allah's power over possibilities - Kalaam Nafsi and Lafzi - Does Allah have power of Naqais but their occurence is impossible? - Kizb is mumkin bil-dhat but Mumtani bil ghayr? - Does this make Allah Ajiz? It has been endorsed by several scholars including Mufti Fazal Subhan al-Qadiri al-Khairabadi.

re/cemeteries -- many talented individuals have been squandered in desolate communities that offer no thriving environment for their prosperity and growth. while the best of these spirits feel a deep sense of alienation and loss, most gradually succumb to their lifeless surroundings and lose their potential, drive and excellences along with them. al-farabri (d.320/932) reports that he heard < imam > al-bukhari (d.256/870) say: i entered baghdad eight times, and each time i would sit with < imam > ahmad b. hanbal (d.241/855). on my last farewell visit, he said to me: o abu ‘abd-Allah, are you leaving knowledge and its people and departing for khurasan..? al-bukhari remarked: now i remember his words… one of the greatest gifts God bestows upon a person, and one for which a person should strive, is residing in a community where he is able to benefit others and reap good himself. the famous < tabi’i > rabi’ah al-ra’y (d.136/753) said: nobody who has something of knowledge should lay himself to waste. i personally heard one scholar lamenting his adopted country of residence as a “graveyard for the learned (maqbara al-‘ulama’).” yet i am aware of his contemporary, who, after a decade of similar dissatisfaction, packed his bags and returned to his homeland, heeding the call of an elder who feared for his knowledge withering in neglect. now, over the years, he has excelled in his vocation, having serving thousands and is considered one of the leading senior mudarrisin of his land. the latter’s story mirrors that of sufyan al-thawri (d.161/778) who arrived in ashkelon (‘asqalan) and resided there for three days without anyone asking him anything. he said: it’s better for me to leave this city; this is a city where knowledge dies. it's also reported that < imam > malik (d.179/785) advised < imam > al-shafi’i (d.204/820) upon parting ways with him: do not settle in the countryside; your knowledge will be lost. { and say: my lord! land me in a blessed alighting-place, for thou art the best who cause to alight. } [22:29] -- ref. ibn muflih (d.763/1362) in al-adab al-shar’iyyah 2:145, sahih al-bukhari, kitab al-‘ilm, ibn ‘abd al-barr (d.463/1071) in jami’ bayan al-‘ilm 1:609, and al-‘adawi (d.1189/1775) in his hashiyah on al-khalil 1:35.

This is, so far, the best video I have seen on "The Islamic Dilemma." Dr. Nasser uses a presentation to go through all the verses that are used to support this 'dilemma.' I encourage you to watch it and share it with others. https://youtu.be/qOS6R6-jhEw

Proofs of Prophethood: Conveying Ancient Truth to a Modern Audience In this presentation, Shaykh Hatim al-ʿAwni offers new insights on the veracity of the final messenger ‌‏ﷺ along with suggestions on how to present this truth to a younger audience. (Click “CC Arabic” to enable professional (not auto-generated) English subtitles) https://youtu.be/b21qiVESlZA

A Different Point of View In truth, those who most easily attain safety are often the common folk. Borrowing the words of Ustadh Fathi al-Tijani of Malaysia: “The learned look upon the common people as being full of faults, while the common people look upon the learned with reverence and honor. So who, then, is saved from ‘I am better than he’?” On the scale of salvation, safety is not measured by the abundance of knowledge, but by the purity of the heart’s gaze, humility before Allah, and a heart that is protected from belittling His creation. Herein lies the servanthood of the common people: they are spared from self-regard by honoring those who possess knowledge. They [are more likely to be] preserved from these diseases of the heart, whereas the learned—when preoccupied with noticing the faults of others—are inclined to fall into kibr khafī (subtle arrogance). Thus the common people are saved by their adab, while the learned may be ruined by their sense of self. Knowledge, in its reality, is a very heavy trust. It is not an absolute sign of honor, but a subtle trial. When one is granted knowledge, he is required to become more aware of his own weakness, not sharper in detecting the shortcomings of others. Yet when knowledge is not accompanied by tazkiyat al-nafs (the purification of the soul), it turns into an instrument of judgment rather than a means of salvation. From this arises a state in which the learned view the common people through the lens of error: errors in worship, errors in etiquette, errors in understanding. Such a gaze, if left unchecked, releases a poison that kills the blessing of knowledge itself. This is what is called the veil of knowledge—a dangerous veil, because its bearer does not realize that he is veiled. Knowledge is meant to give birth to khashya (reverent awe). But when it produces a feeling of one being purer, more correct, and more secure than others, then that knowledge has stopped at the intellect and has not reached the heart. One who is veiled by his knowledge looks down upon people, not alongside them with mercy. Yet the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was sent not but as a mercy. By contrast, the common person who looks upon the learned with honor stands in the station of adab. Even if his deeds are few and his knowledge limited, his heart is not tainted by contempt. He assumes goodness in others and evil in himself. In the sight of Allah, this adab is of immense worth. For adab is the sign of a living heart, and a living heart is closer to guidance than an intellect filled with information but hardened. Safety is not measured by the quantity of memorization, the breadth of debate, or the sharpness of argument. It is measured by the heart’s gaze toward creation. Whoever looks upon creation with mercy is imitating the attribute of Allah’s mercy. Whoever looks upon creation with humiliation is claiming a station that is not his. Allah does not evaluate who knows the most, but who submits the most. The learned are often tested with a false sense of security, feeling safe because they know the rulings, understand the proofs, and can distinguish truth from falsehood. Meanwhile, the common people often live between fear and hope—and therein lie the wings of salvation. Many are destroyed by confidence in themselves, and many are saved by continual humility and hope in the mercy of Allah. The common people are saved by their adab, and the learned are tested by their knowledge. Whoever safeguards the gaze of his heart is the one closest to safety. And Allah knows best what is most correct.

An excellent piece on the fallacy of composition. Muslims are often told in reply to the Kalam Cosmological Argument: ''Just because individual entities (within the universe) are contingent/emergent, that does not mean that the whole (i.e. the universe itself) is such too.'' This article lays out why the argument presented by Muslim theologians is, in fact, not a fallacy. Please note: this is not Abu al-Barakat al-Nasafi. https://redbridegroom.substack.com/p/the-fallacy-that-isnt-abu-al-barakat

Prior to discussing the wisdom behind a particular Islamic ruling, Shaykh Hatim al-'Awni prefaced the discussion with a few maxims. Among them was the following: "It's necessary that this discussion is based on an incontestable premise, namely that Islam is the True Religion and that all other faiths are false. If anyone doubts that, then it's futile to discuss any Islamic ruling. That is because even if you are to satisfy him by demonstrating the fairness of that ruling, that doesn't prevent him from criticizing Islam with another ruling. Such a doubter of Islam should be sat down and the following matters should be asserted first: 1. The existence of a Creator 2. The necessity of believing in (matters related to) prophethood 3. Evidences for the prophethood of our Prophet, the Seal of Messengers ﷺ If he now believes in Islam and is convinced that it's the Truth and all else is false, then at this point it will be a fruitful discussion. That is because the discussion will be based upon a sound maxim. Prior to that, the discussion regarding a particular ruling will be useless since he doesn't even believe in the universal ruling: Islam is the Truth. Islam is the sole religion that is sound in its attribution to Allah and is sanctified with preservation and perpetuity till the Hour is established."

This is a partial translation and abridgement of Ibn Hisham's masterpiece called Mughni al-Labib 'an Kutub al-A'arib. I pray it benefits someone and entices him to get the actual book. I worked on this in the period of 2019-2021. The majority of it was checked back then by my Nahw teacher. You can also find it on Academia: https://www.academia.edu/145526870/Ibn_Hisham_Mughni_al_Labib_partial_translation_

Coming soon in sha Allah. I worked on it from 2019-2021, after that I didn't have time for it anymore, but I figured I might as well share it, rather than let it catch dust on my hard drive. I had it checked by my Ustadh back in the day. Fun fact: I wrote the majority of it on my phone.