For years now, the condemnation of an act which is well-rooted in the Deen has often been done without the use of any proof, but rather with pitiable logical examination and ill-witted analogies.
Today, we're setting the Records Straight.
Today, we're setting the Records Straight.
Firstly, I acknowledge your right to accept or reject furu' issues. But the fact that you're doing so without proof from any Shari'a source, and yet directly linking the issue to Shirk is indeed worrying.
It leaves me wondering; what's so difficult to understand?
It leaves me wondering; what's so difficult to understand?
'Laya' is derived from the word 'Al-Ayah' ( i.e. verse of the Qur'an). Laya is simply a verse of the Holy Qur'an (differentiate Laya from Tamimah and other like things, for the sake of Allah).
Your statement "laya tana bada kariya?" = "Qur'ani yana bada kariya"=YES!
Your statement "laya tana bada kariya?" = "Qur'ani yana bada kariya"=YES!
You said "a natural state din sa (Laya)". The natural state of Laya is that its a verse from the Qur'an; yet you deliberately berate it and count it as Shirk.
How did you do that? - belittling and insulting the Qur'an and you don't even realize!
How did you do that? - belittling and insulting the Qur'an and you don't even realize!
Allah SWT says in Surat Al-Isra 17:82
And We send down of the Qur'an that which is HEALING and MERCY for the believers, but it does not increase the wrongdoers except in loss.
Under the Tafsir of this verse, Qurtubi said:
And We send down of the Qur'an that which is HEALING and MERCY for the believers, but it does not increase the wrongdoers except in loss.
Under the Tafsir of this verse, Qurtubi said:
1. Laya is good because the Prophet Said: "Whoever hangs something, he is entrusted to it" (Tirmidhi 2214). Whoever is entrusted to the Quran is entrusted to Allah, the Best of Trustees.
2. Abu Ja'far Muhammad bn Ali (RA) used to make Laya for his children (as protection).
2. Abu Ja'far Muhammad bn Ali (RA) used to make Laya for his children (as protection).
3. Scholars differ on whether or not it is permissible to wear 'Laya' during copulation or defecation.
(The difference here is not on whether or not it is permissible at all).
(The difference here is not on whether or not it is permissible at all).
In addition to this, Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As narrated: I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: If I drink an antidote, or tie an AMULET, or compose poetry, I am the type who does not care what one will say about me.
Sunan Abu-Dawud (Book 29, Hadith 15).
Sunan Abu-Dawud (Book 29, Hadith 15).
The collector of the above hadith, Abu Dawud added: this was peculiar to the Prophet, but SOME PEOPLE HAVE ALLOWED to use it (i.e. antidote and amulet).
The checklist for its permissibility is
Doesn't include polytheism ✔️
Knowing that protection comes from Allah ✔️
The checklist for its permissibility is
Doesn't include polytheism ✔️
Knowing that protection comes from Allah ✔️
'Awf b. Malik said: In the pre-Islamic period we used to apply spells and we asked: Messenger of Allah! how do you look upon it? He replied: Submit your spells to me. There is no harm in spells so long as they involve no polytheism.
Sunan Abu-Dawud (Book 29, Hadith 32)
Sunan Abu-Dawud (Book 29, Hadith 32)
If even spells got a pass mark as long as they involve no polytheism, then how did you manage to link up Shirk with the Qur'an?
On the Analogy
"Da akwai ayar, da an bawa Sahabbai Ayar"
I say: You only say this because you think the Sahabah were afraid of been killed on the field of Jihad.
Malam, the SAHABAS ARE NOT LIKE YOU.
"Da akwai ayar, da an bawa Sahabbai Ayar"
I say: You only say this because you think the Sahabah were afraid of been killed on the field of Jihad.
Malam, the SAHABAS ARE NOT LIKE YOU.
In your mention of the events of Uhud is a refutation for your analogy.
In Bukhari, Sa'd narrates he saw the Prophet being guarded by two people wearing the whitest of white fighting a fierce battle. And he never saw them before or after Uhud. These were angels.
In Bukhari, Sa'd narrates he saw the Prophet being guarded by two people wearing the whitest of white fighting a fierce battle. And he never saw them before or after Uhud. These were angels.
But he SAW got injured anyway, so is it possible that an arrow will miss the angels? Of course not. It means the injuries the Prophet SAW sustained were done for a wisdom.
It's high time you stopped these ill-witted analogies. They don't stand in as a proof anywhere.
It's high time you stopped these ill-witted analogies. They don't stand in as a proof anywhere.
In the end, anyone who believes his allaigence is to Allah and His Messenger, then here is the word of Allah and His Messenger; whoever believes his allaigence is to pitiable logic, then let him go with it without declaring the former as Mushrikuun.
Was-salaam
Was-salaam
