Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (May Allah have Mercy on him) said in ‘Al-Furqan bayn Awliya Al-Rahman wa Awliya Al-Shaytaan’ [1]:

The word Shar’ or Sharee’ah (law) when used to mean the Qur’an and the Sunnah, no ally of Allah nor anyone else has any right to go against it or beyond it. Whoever thinks that any ally of Allah has a route to Allah other than the following of Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessing of Allah upon him) internally and externally and therefore does not follow him internally and externally is a Kaafir (disbeliever).

Whoever uses the story of Musa and Al-Khidhr [2] as a basis for this proposition [3] is mistaken for two reasons:

1) One of them is, that Musa had not been sent to Al-Khidhr, and it was not obligatory upon Al-Khidhr to follow Musa. Rather, Musa was sent to the Children of Israel specifically, whereas Muhammad (Peace and Blessing of Allah upon him) was sent with a general message for the two free-willed, the Humans and the Jinns. Even if those greater in stature than Al-Khidhr had met Prophet Muhammad, such as Ibrahim, Musa, or ‘Isa, it would have been obligatory upon them to follow him, so what about Al-Khidhr, whether we say that he was a prophet or [a non-prophet] ally of Allah? This is why Al-Khidhr said to Musa: "I have knowledge of the knowledge of Allah which He has taught me and which you do not know, and you have knowledge of the knowledge of Allah which He has taught you and which I do not know" [4]. And so it is not up to anyone, from among the Humans or the Jinns, to make such a statement once the Message of Prophet Muhammad has reached them.

2) The second is that, the three acts of Al-Khidhr reported in the Qur’an contain no violation of the Laws of Musa, although Musa did not understand at first the reasons which made them lawful. When he later clarified them to him, he agreed with him on what he did.

The puncturing of the boat and then patching it later was done for the benefit of its owners out of fear of that oppressor who wished to confiscate it [had it remained in mint condition], thus this was done as a favor to them, and is thus permissible.

The killing of al-Saa’il (i.e. attackers and transgressors) is allowed even if they are young, and if someone causing his parents to apostate cannot be prevented except through his death, it would be permissible to kill him. Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) said to Najdah Al-Haruuri [5] when he was asked about the killing of young boys:

"If you know about them what Al-Khidhr knew about the boy in the story, then kill them, otherwise do not kill them". Narrated by Al-Bukhari [6]

As for the good deeds done to the orphans [7] without anything in return, and being patient over hunger, then these are from the good virtuous acts in which there was no violation of the law of Allah.

Reference:

[1] ‘Al-Furqan bayn Awliya Al-Rahman wa Awliya Al-Shaytaan’ by Ibn Taymiyah p. 112-113 (Daar Ibn Rajab) – Quote taken from English translation of book and Edited by Al-Sirat Al-Mustaqeem team, with footnotes added.

[2] The story was mentioned in Surat Al-Kahf (Chapter 18) and in some Prophetic traditions.

[3] This is in reply to the one who claims that one can transgress the bounds of the Sharee’ah of Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings upon him) and still be an ally of Allah, just as Al-Khidhr (Peace be upon him) did actions against Musa’s approval, and Musa (Peace be upon him) was a Prophet at the time, yet Al-Khidhr remained an ally of Allah. Ibn Taymiyah (May Allah shower him Mercy) points out the falseness of such claim.

[4] Authentic Tradition: Narrated by Al-Bukhari (4725, 4726, 4727, 3400, 3401), and Muslim (2380)

[5] He is Najdah ibn ‘Aamir Al-Haruri, one of the heads of the Khawaarij. He had statements which he adopted and followers who have perished. He was mentioned in Saheeh Muslim that he wrote a letter to Ibn Abbas asking him some question including the ruling on killing the Children who oppose them, so Ibn Abbas answered him back.

[6] Authentic Narration: Narrated by Muslim (1812), Abu Dawud (2727), Al-Tirmithi (1556), and Ahmad (1/224, 352).

[7] The re-building of their wall without any charge

 

644164_231473673644539_682480483_n

Advertisements