PGL known as Project Guiding Light, is not even able to defend Imām Abū Hanīfah and S͟hayk͟hul Islām, and makes such absurd statements no one before him has ever said. And his fanboys still expect him to defend their beliefs on hākimiyyah and other matters?
The ease with which anyone can dismantle Daniel Haqiqatjou's shirk apologetics is laughable.
This conversation I had with him was around six months ago and lasted only about 20 minutes before it was interrupted by the host of the live.
Imagine what could be done to this fool in a proper, uninterrupted discussion. He knows he would be embarrassed, which is why he blocked me.
Shaykh ʿAbdullāh bin Sulaymān al-Manīʿ said:
“I asked him [Imām Ibn Bāz] about the ruling on shaking hands with a non-Muslim.
The answer: there is no harm in it, if there is a need or if he extends his hand.”
[Masāʿil al-Imām Ibn Bāz, p. 31]
@AlmahdiWesam And you know in Al-thabāt waʾl-shumūl fī al-sharīʿa al-islāmiyya, it affirms your claim because apologetics becomes dangerous when it adopts secular, liberal, or purely rationalist assumptions instead of deriving its arguments from Islamic foundations itself.
@AlmahdiWesam I see, I haven’t really, you know looked at the Dawah scene or Islamic apologetics, but its clear to me that some of these Muslim apologists spend more time critiquing other religions, while not knowing their own. And it’s sad because layman take them as their source of īlm.
Shaykh Ṣāliḥ Ibn Fawzān Ibn ʿAbdullāh Al-Fawzān حفظه الله said:
Many of those who claim to be Muslims, when they are afflicted by hardship, seek help from their dead and their saints, calling out their names on land and at sea. This is from the severity of their shirk.
the stance of the ḥanafī mad͟hab on the rawāfidh (+zaydīyyah).
muḥammad alamgrī al-ḥanafī said:
if a rāfiḍī reviles and curses the two sheikhs (abū bakr and ‘umar)—allāh forbid—he is a disbeliever (kāfir). however, if he merely prefers ‘alī—may allāh the exalted ennoble—
Orientalist Professor Walid A. Saleh from the university of Toronto refutes the Islamic Dilemma.
He says that the Quran KNOWS its stories differ from the Biblical versions and that it explains these differences by saying the jews falsified their scriptures.
Imam al-Mu'afa (185. AH) was asked who is superior, Mu'awiyah bin Abi Sufyan or 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Aziz.
al-Mu'afa replied:
“Mu’awiyah was superior to 600 [individuals] like 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Aziz.”
[al-Sunnah of al-Khallal]
The shroud of Turin DOESN’T prove Christianity
The earliest historical source for it comes after the 14th century.
The Bishop of Troyes (Pierre d’Arcis) wrote to Pope Clement VII stating:
The shroud was “cleverly painted”.
•It was falsely presented as Jesus’ burial cloth.
•The bishop believed it was a recently made fraud.
•Despite this, later people treated it as genuine
If this shroud truly covered Jesus, it would appear in early Christian sources
Shaykh Abā Baṭayn said:
Whoever directs any part of worshipto other than Allah, then this is shirk al-akbar, which Allah does not forgive.
Allah said: “Indeed, Allāh does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills.” (an-Nisāʾ: 48) So whoever claims that Allah forgives it has rejected the statement of Allah.
The definition and reality of worship is obedience to Allah. Thus every outward and inward statement and action that Allah loves is worship.
Everything that He commanded legislatively, whether as an obligation or as a recommendation, is worship. This is the reality of worship according to all the scholars. Whoever directs any part of it to other than Allah is a kāfir mushrik.
[ad-Durar as-Sanniyah 10/391]
https://t.co/JXp24ejAd4
he was declared a khārijī for rebelling against a ruler who didn’t rule by the entire sharī’ah!
abū bakr al-khallāl said:
abū hishām narrated to us, saying: i heard yaḥyā ibn ādam, during the days of abū al-sarāyā, say, "there are people here who adopt the views of—
stop this already. You and libyano got absolutely embarrassed by a random jew and had to kick him when he questioned you on the baseless theory of Eliazar being called son of God and worshipped. If you can't defend it why the hell are you propagating it to your followers?
The virtue of ʾImām ʾAḥmad
ʾImām Abū Bakr al-Khallāl said:
“If the people were to reflect upon the words of ʾAḥmad ʾIbn Ḥanbal — May Allāh have mercy on him — in everything, and understand the meanings of what he speaks, and take it with understanding and humility, they would know that there was not in the world anyone like him in his time more adherent to ḥadīth than him, nor more knowledgeable than him of its meanings, and of everything. And praise be to Allāh.”
[Kitāb as-Sunnah by Imām al-Khallāl 2/430]
Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah—may Allāh have mercy upon him—said:
“And it is not for anyone to ascribe himself to a shaykh, giving allegiance based upon following him and showing enmity based upon that. Rather, it is obligatory upon him to ally with everyone who is from the people of faith (Ahl al-Īmān) and whoever piety (taqwā) is known from, from all of the shuyūkh and others.”
Source: Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā (12/512)
Translation: Makthaba Salafiyyah Maldives
https://t.co/KQgsdJozWk
Shaykh ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Bin Ḥassan bin Muḥammed bin ʿAbd al-Wahāb رحمه الله said:
From the sign that a student of knowledge is sincere [has Ikhlāṣ] is that,
• He is silent about that which does not concern him,
• Subservient to his Lord,