Entering Paradise “for” your deeds

The Prophet ﷺ said: “‘None of you will enter Paradise for his deeds.’ They asked: ‘Not even you O Allaah’s Messenger ﷺ?’ He replied: ‘Not even me, unless Allaah covers me with His Favor and Mercy.’[1]

Shaikh al-Albaani:

“Know that this narration may be problematic to some people and they may presume that it contradicts Allaah’s تعالى statement: {This is the Paradise which you have been made to inherit for what you used to do}[2] and similar verses and narrations which point out that entering Paradise happens for one’s deeds. This has been addressed in several ways, the most correct answer being that: the preposition “for” in the narration means “for the price of,” and the “for” in the verse means “because of.” In other words, righteous deeds are a necessary means to entering Paradise, however they don’t amount to the price for entering Paradise and its everlasting bliss and ranks.”


[1] Saheeh Muslim 2816
[2] Surah Az-Zukhruf 43:72

[as-sisilah as-saheehah 2602 / alalbaany.com]

Advertisements
Entering Paradise “for” your deeds

The Kursi is Allaah’s Footstool

Imaam at-Tahaawiyy said:

The `Arsh (Throne) and the Kursi (Footstool) are real.”

Shaikh al-Albaani:

“Allaah تعالى said about the Kursi: {His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth}.[1] The Kursi is that which is in front of the `Arsh; and it has been authentically reported that Ibn `Abbaas said: ‘The Kursi is the place for the two Feet, and no one can tell how vast the `Arsh is except Allaah تعالى,’ as narrated in my book Mukhtasar Al-`Uluw lith-Thahabi no. 36.[2]

There isn’t any authentic report ascribable to the Prophet ﷺ regarding the Kursi besides his ﷺ statement: ‘The seven heavens in comparison to the Kursi are just like a ring thrown in a desert, and the greatness of the `Arsh over the Kursi is like the greatness of that desert over that ring.’ This is something which also invalidates interpreting the Kursi as ‘knowledge,’ and this interpretation is not an authentic report from Ibn `Abbaas as I clarified in As-Saheehah no. 109.”


[1] Surah Al-Baqarah 2:255
[2] Abu Musa al-Ash`ari also said: “The Kursi is the place for the two Feet, and it creaks like a camel saddle does under heavy load” –Mukhtasar Al-`Uluw lith-Thahabi no. 85

[al-`aqeedah at-tahaawiyyah sharh wa ta`leeq 49 / alalbaany.com]

The Kursi is Allaah’s Footstool

The rivers of Paradise present in this world

Abu Hurairah (رضي الله عنه) narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said:

1. “Sayhaan, Jayhaan, Al-Furaat (i.e. the Euphrates) and An-Neel (i.e. the Nile) are all rivers of Paradise” – Saheeh, As-Saheehah no. 110.

Abu Hurairah (رضي الله عنه) narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said:

2. “Four rivers are gushed forth from Paradise: Al-Furaat (i.e. the Euphrates), An-Neel (i.e. the Nile), As-Sayhaan and Jayhaan” – Hasan, As-Saheehah no. 111.

Anas bin Maalik (رضي الله عنه) narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said:

2. “(The tree) Sidratul-Muntahaa appeared before me in the seventh heaven; its fruits were (enormous) like jugs from (the town of) Hajar and its leaves were (enormous) like the ears of elephants. Two visible rivers and two hidden rivers were flowing out from its trunk. I said: ‘O Jibreel! What are these?’ He replied: ‘The hidden ones are in Paradise and the visible ones are the Nile and Euphrates.’” – Saheeh, As-Saheehah no. 112.

Shaikh al-Albaani:

“Furthermore, perhaps what is meant by these rivers being from Paradise is that they are originally from there, just like man is originally from Paradise; and such is indicated by the wording of the second hadeeth: ‘are gushed forth . . .’ So the hadeeth does not contradict the perceived phenomenon of these rivers emanating from their well-known springs on Earth.

If this, or something similar, isn’t the meaning, then the hadeeth is one of the matters of the unseen: it is obligatory to believe in them and submit to the one informing us of them. {But no, by your Lord, they will not have faith until they make you (O Muhammad) judge in whatever disputes occur between them, and then find within themselves no discomfort over what you have judged and submit completely} [4:65].”

[nudhum al-faraa.id vol. 2 p. 460-1 / alalbaany.com]

The rivers of Paradise present in this world

the meaning of ‘actions are only judged by intentions’


THE MEANING OF ‘ACTIONS ARE ONLY JUDGED BY INTENTIONS’
sources: silsilat ul-hudaa wa nnoor, 340/8 & nudhum al-faraaid, 21
asaheeha translations

~ Explanation of the hadeeth: ‘Actions are only judged by intentions’
[Saheeh al-Bukhaari #1] ~

Shaikh al-Albaani (rahimahullaah):

“This hadeeth means that righteous actions are only (sound/accepted/rewarded) by sincere intentions, not that actions opposing the Legislation turn into righteous legislated actions due to coupling them with righteous intentions. No one will say that except someone ignorant or pursuing his own interests!

Many people know this hadeeth in wording but don’t understand its meaning. Why? Because oftentimes we turn (to some people) and say: ‘Yaa akhi, this action that you are doing, or this statement that you are uttering, is not a righteous action.’ What is the answer? ‘Yaa akhi, the Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: ‘Actions are only judged by intentions’ and my intention is good! My intention is righteous!’

So what is the meaning of the hadeeth? Does the hadeeth mean that evil actions are only (sound/accepted/rewarded) by righteous intentions? Or does it mean that righteous actions are only (sound/accepted/rewarded) by righteous intentions? This latter statement is the meaning. As for if one’s actions are not righteous but intention is righteous – this is not enough. Likewise it is also not enough if it is vice versa: i.e. if one’s actions are righteous but intention is not righteous. So the hadeeth gives us two opposites: just like it is a condition for righteous action that there be righteous intention, it is likewise a condition for righteous intention that there be righteous action. So either one is not enough without the other.

You hear many people nowadays swearing by their fathers for example, saying: ‘Yaa akhi, by Allaah, my intention is good.’ Sometimes you may find a person coming to a grave and praying there – a grave of a prophet or righteous person or the like – then when they are prohibited from that, he tells you: ‘My intention is not to worship him, my intention is to seek nearness to Allaah (tawassul) through him.’ Ok, your coming to this grave – granted that the intention is righteous – is an action, so is this a righteous action? The answer is no, because the Messenger (‘alayhi ssalaam) used to say: ‘Don’t sit on the graves nor pray toward them.’ And du’aa is part of prayer, in fact du’aa is worship as he (‘alayhi ssalaam) said. Hence turning to the grave with du’aa is like turning to it with prayer: it is an action that is not righteous, and this unrighteous action is not justified by the intention being righteous, if we grant that the intention is righteous.

Thus, for our actions to be righteous, they must be in agreement with the Legislation. This is what our Lord (‘azza wa jal) pointed to with His Statement in the Noble Qur’aan: {whoever hopes for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work and not associate any partner in the worship of his Lord}.”

the meaning of ‘actions are only judged by intentions’

Is marriage fate or a choice?

Q: “Is marriage fate or a choice?”

Shaikh al-Albaani:

“What is the difference between this question and the question: (is it fate or a choice that) one is rich and another is poor, and one is beautiful and one is ugly, and so on. No doubt what is decreed for a person is something that will happen and there is none that can avert it. But he is responsible for making the effort; after that, he is not at fault for the outcome of the matter if it happens contrary to his choice.

So if this person got engaged to a woman and was eager to do so as she was righteous, then with time it became clear that she was evil! Of course, this was fate. But everything happens as decreed, like the Prophet ﷺ said: ‘Everything happens as decreed, even laziness and activeness.’[1] However, this does not mean that a person, within his capabilities, is not responsible for striving to choose that which is good. No, this is something else. So a person must strive, then the rest is up to Allaah تبارك وتعالى.

So the answer is: of course it is fate, but we shouldn’t understand that it is fate and so -as some people say- a person just puts his trust in Allaah and that’s it. No, (rather) he takes the means, then he puts his trust in the Lord of all lords.”[2]

[silsilatul hudaa wa nnoor 134/5]


[1] Saheeh Muslim 2655
[2] ‘lords’ meaning masters, owners and the like

Is marriage fate or a choice?

Mocking the religion is major disbelief

Q: “With regard to mocking the religion, which was mentioned in Allaah’s Statement: {Say: Was it Allaah and His Aayaat (verses, revelations, proofs, lessons, signs) and His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed},[1] is the disbelief here kufr i`tiqaadi (disbelieving by one’s heart) or kufr `amali (disbelieving by one’s limbs)?”[2]

Shaikh al-Albaani:

“No doubt, this is kufr i`tiqaadi, indeed this is disbelief with two horns (i.e. it is clear disbelief) because it is not possible for a believer – no matter how weak his eemaan (faith) is – to mock the Aayaat of Allaah عز وجل. And this type of disbelief is what falls under our previous statement when we were saying that it is not permissible to declare a Muslim to be a disbeliever unless he utters something which would show us what is settled in his heart. So here, his mocking the Aayaat of Allaah عز وجل is the greatest confirmation from him that he does not believe in that which he is mocking. Hence, he is a disbeliever who has committed kufr i`tiqaadi.”


[1] Surat ut-Tawbah 9:65-66
[2] “Whoever does an act of disbelief due to his opposing the Legislation while disbelief in it is also settled in his heart, then this is kufr i`tiqaadi: the disbelief that Allaah does not forgive, and its doer will dwell in the Fire forever. But if this act of disbelief is contrary to what is settled in his heart such that he believes in the judgment of his Lord but he opposes it (only) by his action, then his disbelief is only kufr `amali and not kufr i`tiqaadi: so he is under the Will of Allaah تعالى; if He wills, He will punish him, and if He wills, He will forgive him” – Shaikh al-Albaani, Silsilat ul-Ahaadeeth is-Saheehah 6/112

[silsilat ul-hudaa wa nnoor 672/3 / asaheeha translations]

Mocking the religion is major disbelief

the ruling on the one who abandons prayer – part 4

source: silsilat ul-hudaa wa nnoor – the series of guidance and light tape no. 323

~

*Question #23: “Our Shaykh, I am asking you about the issue of proofs with regard to the ruling on the one who abandons the prayer. In the treatise ‘The ruling on the one who abandons prayer’ by Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen, he is of the opinion that the one who abandons the prayer is a disbeliever, and he has many proofs, such as Allaah’s statement about the mushrikoon:[1] {But if they repent, perform salaah (the prayer), and give zakaah (obligatory charity), then they are your brethren in religion}.[2] So he says that what is understood from the aayah is that if they don’t do that, they are not our brethren; and the religious brotherhood isn’t negated by sins even if they are great, but it is negated when one leaves Islaam”

Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullaah) answers:

“Yet he is not saying that if the person prays but doesn’t give the zakaah that he is (likewise) not a Muslim and that he has disbelieved by that. May Allaah guide you, you are bringing his proof but I would like to turn your attention to (the fact) that there is no proof in it because he is not saying about the one who abandons the zakaah the same as he is saying about the one who abandons the prayer. You didn’t just narrate his opinion, rather you narrated (both) his opinion and his proof, but I would like to turn your attention to (the fact) that this is not a proof for him, because the aayah includes zakaah along with the prayer, [yet he is differentiating between the one who abandons the former and the one who abandons the latter].”

 

*Question #23 (continued): “What is the ruling on this man who has abandoned the prayer, not out of denying (its legislation) but out of laziness? And what is the daleel (evidence)?”

Shaykh al-Albaani answers:

“This (man) is one who is rebellious and disobedient (to Allaah), and not a disbeliever. The daleel is that ‘Whoever says laa ilaaha illAllaah[3] (sincerely) will enter Paradise,’[4] and the daleel is that ‘Allaah has prescribed five prayers upon (His) slaves, so whoever performs them and does them well, and completes their rukoo’ (bowing), sujood (prostration) and khushoo’ (submissive humility and attentiveness), then he has a covenant with Allaah that He will enter him into Paradise, and whoever does not perform them and does not complete their rukoo’, sujood and khushoo’, then he does not have a covenant with Allaah; If He wills, He will punish him and if He wills, He will forgive him,’[5] and if he was a disbeliever, He would not forgive him because Allaah says: ‘Verily, Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with Him (in worship), but He forgives except that (anything else) to whom He wills.’”[6]

 


[1] those who associate partners with Allaah
[2] Surat ut-Tawbah, 9:11
[3] none has the right to be worshiped but Allaah
[4] Silsilat ul-Ahaadeeth is-Saheeha #2355
[5] Saheeh ibn Maajah #1158, Saheeh at-Targheeb #400, Hukm Taarik is-Salaah p. 46
[6] Surat un-Nisaa, 4:48

~

asaheeha translations

the ruling on the one who abandons prayer – part 4