Eternal Hell!?

[Irfan]

Irfan, now that I've explained the importance of orthodoxy in Islam, let me share with you what the view of the consensus is regarding this matter. apparently the knowledge that heaven and hell are eternal is known by all Muslims thus there are consequences for failing to believe this , as explained by Shaykh Nuh Keller:

1) matters about Islam that everyone knows, which even a child raised among Muslims would know, technically termed ma‘lum min al-din bi d-darura or “necessarily known as being of the religion”;

(2) matters that not everyone knows;

(3) and matters that are disagreed upon even by “those who know,” the ulema or scholars.

Affirmation or denial of tenets of faith within each category vary in their eternal
consequences because of their relative accessibility, and the individual’s opportunities to find them out.

Things That Everyone Knows

To deny anything of the first category above constitutes plain and open unbelief.

It includes such things as denying the oneness of Allah, the attributes of prophethood, that prophetic messengerhood has ended with Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace); the resurrection of the dead; the Final Judgement; the recompense; THE EVERLASTINGNESS OF PARADISE AND HELL; they obligatoriness of the prayer, zakat, fasting Ramadan, or the pilgrimage; the unlawfulness of wine or adultery; or anything else that is unanimously concurred upon and necessarily known by Muslims, since there is no excuse not to know these things in the lands of Islam; though for someone new to the religion, or raised in a wilderness, outside of the lands of Islam, or some other place where ignorance of the religion is rife and unavoidable, their ruling becomes that of the second category. As Imam Nawawi explains:

Any Muslim who denies something that is necessarily known to be of the religion of Islam is adjudged a renegade and an unbeliever (kafir) unless he is a recent convert or was born and raised in the wilderness or for some similar reason has
been unable to learn his religion properly. Muslims in such a condition should be
informed about the truth, and if they then continue as before, they are adjudged
non-Muslims, as is also the case with any Muslim who believes it permissible to commit adultery, drink wine, kill without right, or do other acts that are necessarily known to be unlawful (Sharh Sahih Muslim, 1.150).

https://archive.org/stream/NuhHaMim...h-Ha-Mim-Keller-Iman-Kufr-and-Takfir_djvu.txt

you must have misread/misunderstood those verses as I assure you many verses unequivocally mention the eternal duration of heaven and hell

Well diifferent shaikhs have different opinions. I Just found this ayat puzzling you can check it for yuorself.
In regard do denial of anything from Kur'an I agree, but intrepretations are different.

 

[Abdullah]

Well diifferent shaikhs have different opinions. I Just found this ayat puzzling you can check it for yuorself.
In regard do denial of anything from Kur'an I agree, but intrepretations are different.

did you read that excerpt properly?, it says that this fact is what 'every Muslim knows'; this means there are no disagreements on it amongst Muslim Scholars. Zakir Naik uttered some of his ignoramus musings on it but he's not a Scholar

 

[wil]

He doesn't believe what you believe so he is an ignoramus?

Every Muslim knows? Yet I've heard say we are all Muslim we just don't know it?

That everyone in time was always Muslim even before Mohammed, but we did not know it?

If we are all Muslim, but don't know it how do.we know what every Muslim knows?

 

[Abdullah]

He doesn't believe what you believe so he is an ignoramus?

Every Muslim knows? Yet I've heard say we are all Muslim we just don't know it?

That everyone in time was always Muslim even before Mohammed, but we did not know it?

If we are all Muslim, but don't know it how do.we know what every Muslim knows?

zakir naik was just musing away as to what the 'forever' word could mean in relation to the time we'll spend in heaven or hell, he obviously hadn't looked up what the scholars' say on it or he was deviating away from the 'what every Muslim knows' point as salafis sometimes do. this is indeed a point which every Muslim knows as it's a basic point I knew from childhood!

' every Muslim' just refers to the followers of Muhammad pbuh here I'm afraid wil so you are not included!

 

[wil]

So when one says "every Muslim" ...zakir naik is not included either?

(Not defending the salfist ignoramus comments as you described, just clarifying)

 

[Abdullah]

So when one says "every Muslim" ...zakir naik is not included either?

(Not defending the salfist ignoramus comments as you described, just clarifying)

he knew but salafis (that minority deviant sect) regard themselves as capable of interpreting and don't follow traditional qualified Scholarship, this is why we saw his 'great brain' get to work in pondering on the meaning of the word forever!

 

[Irfan]

he knew but salafis (that minority deviant sect) regard themselves as capable of interpreting and don't follow traditional qualified Scholarship, this is why we saw his 'great brain' get to work in pondering on the meaning of the word forever!

Well what do you say about Shabir Ally or Hamza Yusuf they are definately not "salafists" (actually wahabits). Evene Ibn Taymiyyah (btw I dislike him) who was one of the most conservative scholars and his students came to conclusion that Hell must somehow wanish at the end. Btw I am not much in favour of rigid scolars because faith can never come by reading and studying books and writtings of previous scholars, the great Al Ghasali realised it in the 11th century and many others like Rumi, Ibn Arabi etc. And if You would place in frant of me a Aleem (scholar) and Areef (gnostic) I would choose always Areef.
Don't andrestand me wrongly I know that we need scholars as well but blind following without your own thinking and spiritual experience is not much in fact its very little and it could be very dangerous.

Regarding the verse "do not take jews and christians as "friends" you know that word used here is awllyah which in first order means custodians or protectors and it can mean also friend. In my trnaslation of the Qur'an it says custodians/protectors.

 

[Abdullah]

Well what do you say about Shabir Ally or Hamza Yusuf they are definately not "salafists" (actually wahabits). Evene Ibn Taymiyyah (btw I dislike him) who was one of the most conservative scholars and his students came to conclusion that Hell must somehow wanish at the end. Btw I am not much in favour of rigid scolars because faith can never come by reading and studying books and writtings of previous scholars, the great Al Ghasali realised it in the 11th century and many others like Rumi, Ibn Arabi etc. And if You would place in frant of me a Aleem (scholar) and Areef (gnostic) I would choose always Areef.
Don't andrestand me wrongly I know that we need scholars as well but blind following without your own thinking and spiritual experience is not much in fact its very little and it could be very dangerous.

Regarding the verse "do not take jews and christians as "friends" you know that word used here is awllyah which in first order means custodians or protectors and it can mean also friend. In my trnaslation of the Qur'an it says custodians/protectors.

shabir ally is a Ahmed Deedad follower so not mainstream I'm afraid

Ibn Taymiyyah was astray in many matters including this one; infact Shaykh Hamza Yusuf said in one of his talks that ibn taymiyahs view could be considered kufr (Islam nullifier) but we give him benefit of doubt as he could have changed his view before he died or that due to his presumably sincere misinterpretation, it's just a deviancy and not kufr.

Hamas Yusufs view is that those who contradict consensus' out of coming to or following a sincere misinterpretation, due to their 'mistake' they are not regarded as kuffar but just mistaken ( and I agree with that ).

as for Imam al-Gazali, he grappled with the seemingly contradiction of Allah being Most Merciful and He keeping kuffar in hell for an eternity, and came to the conclusion that most of the non-muslims will be saved from the fire due to them not receiving a compelling dawah (invitation to Islam with proofs and logical arguments). he does agree however that a minority of the non-muslims will remain in hell forever

if following the learned people of Islam can be dangerous than how dangerous is it to follow our own ignorant selves?

anyway we don't follow Scholars in matters of absolute consensus' as they're knowledge that 'every Muslim knows'

 

[Olzhas]

Some people are unjust and there is no excuse for that for example killing a child? Why would Allah forgive them?

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

I don't know should I start this tread on Islam disscusions bacause it concerns also christians, namley eternal Jahannam or Hell. In the Holy Qur'an there are few striking verses that have been always puzzling for me Pharphrase :"... and there will be (paradise) untill Heavens and Earth endure... and there will be hell until Heavens and Earth endure..." Yet the entire Qur'an keep informing us that Heavens and Earth ( i.e the created world) will not endure. And throughout Qur'an there is emphasis on rather kind of gnostic Return of everthing to Allah( literaly everthing). In other verse it says that inhabitants of paradise ill be asked : "are you satisfied?" they will reply what else is there and then God speaks to them : come in to my (own) Jannah (garden/paradise/heaven). although Qur'an suggest bodily resurrection there is another vers whche says : "O You calmed soul get returned to your Lord!" and I was thinking to myself if God is Ar Rahman (All merciful), I can't never be merciful as Him , yet i wouldn't keep these people in hell vorever, well I wouldn't let them into paradise but I would after they got their punishment let them simply vanish. This is not unique to Islam but also its zoroastrian end of days scenario and also some christian streams.

Sorry but this is a very confused message. Please, show your chapter and verse references when citing a core religious text, especially when you are aware your English isn't your first language.

The return to Allah is the judgement. I suppose (personal view here) it is also the experience of infinity, Allah being the Infinite. We will all end in infinity one way or another. Be it infinite felicity or infinite hell.

Hi Irfan,

You are right. Hell is not eternal. Phrases such as "Return of everthing to Allah( literaly everthing)" show that Hell is not eternal.

You are on the right track. Keep up the good work.

Illogical. Non sequitur.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Hi Irfan —
The idea that hell doesn't exist is mere sentimentalism.

The images of hell however, owe more to the medieval mind than the Sacred Oracles

Hmm .. "the medieval mind" .. I wonder where they got their minds from?
I would say the Bible, myself.
When I sit in a medieval cathedral, and imagine sitting next to one of these medieval people, and the
world as they were in with its "city walls" and the evil that they had to guard against...
It's no wonder to me why they had no difficulty in believing in an eternal hell.

Those people in a position of responsibility, who have to administer justice and so on
[ the church was responsible for that back then ], needed to get their sense of justice from somewhere.

 

[Thomas]

Hmm .. "the medieval mind" .. I wonder where they got their minds from?
I would say the Bible, myself.

The eternality of hell is biblical.

What it looks like, is another matter ... the only Biblical imagery I know of is Sheol in the Hebrew Scriptures, and the analogy of Gehenna in the New Testament.

 

[muhammad_isa]

What it looks like, is another matter ... the only Biblical imagery I know of is Sheol in the Hebrew Scriptures, and the analogy of Gehenna in the New Testament.

Really???
You don't think that the NT [ including Book of Revelation ] conjures up any imagery of its own?

 

[Thomas]

You don't think that the NT [ including Book of Revelation ] conjures up any imagery of its own?

Depends how fervid one's imagination is

As I said, the NT speaks of Gehenna. The Book of Revelations speaks of a pool of fire ...

 

[muhammad_isa]

Depends how fervid one's imagination is

As I said, the NT speaks of Gehenna..

What about the parable of Lazarus and Dives (Luke 16:19-31). Jesus here depicts a wicked man suffering fiery torment in hades, which is contrasted with the bosom of Abraham, and explains that it is impossible to cross over from one to the other.

Paul speaks of "wrath" and "everlasting destruction" (cf. Romans 2:7-9; 2 Thessalonians).

How many more quotes would you like me to show you, that tell us that
gehenna is everlasting?

 

[Thomas]

How many more quotes would you like me to show you, that tell us that
gehenna is everlasting?

I'm not saying it isn't. I said that hell is a necessity, because of man's finite understanding: The perpetual separation from God.

I further believe that all things exist by God's will. That's not a one-off event, it's ongoing. At every given moment, the cosmos exists because God holds it in existence. To reject God is to reject the source and sustenance of one's very existence. Sever that tie, and ...

Who is in hell is another question. God's mercy is infinite ... if anyone is in hell, it's because they choose to be there.

In the 6th century, the Church rejected Origen’s ideas regarding universalism and the apokatastasis — the final restoration of all things to their original perfection, which includes men and angels.

The Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar suggested that, given God's desire that all will be saved (cf 1 Timothy 2:4-6), and that this was accomplished on the Cross (cf John 19:30), we may reasonably hope that all people will be saved. Catholic doctrine states that hell exists, but has never claimed to know if any human being is actually in Hell. When the Church says that Hell exists, it means that the definitive rejection of God’s love is a real possibility. "Hell" or "Gehenna" are metaphors for an eschatalogical state we can neither know nor imagine. We assume the tragic condition of having definitively refused the offer of the divine life. But is there anyone in this state of being? We don’t know.

We are in fact permitted to hope and surely exhorted to pray that all people will finally surrender to the love that is being in God.

The existence of Hell is real in as much as it is a necessary corollary of two fundamental convictions: that God is love and that human beings are free to choose to accept or deny that love.

Whether there is a sin beyond God's forgiveness, other than the rejection of that forgiveness, it would seem not.

Thus the choice to accept eternal life, or eternal death, is ours. Whether God would then choose to inflict eternal suffering on those who opt for the latter, is a question for each conscience to ask of themselves, but it's a difficult question when we are exhorted to forgive any offence against us.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..The perpetual separation from God.

Exactly.

To reject God is to reject the source and sustenance of one's very existence. Sever that tie, and ...

Indeed.

who is in hell is another question. God's mercy is infinite ... if anyone is in hell, it's because they choose to be there.

Yes .. choose, as in they do not repent.

Catholic doctrine states that hell exists, but has never claimed to know if any human being is actually in Hell. When the Church says that Hell exists, it means that the definitive rejection of God’s love is a real possibility. "Hell" or "Gehenna" are metaphors for an eschatalogical state we can neither know nor imagine. We assume the tragic condition of having definitively refused the offer of the divine life. But is there anyone in this state of being? We don’t know.

What? Come off it. Of COURSE we know that there will be people in hell.
It is totally illogical to say that there is an eternal hell, but there is nobody in it. What does that even mean?
Hell is a state of being, and not a geographical place.

Thus the choice to accept eternal life, or eternal death, is ours. Whether God would then choose to inflict eternal suffering on those who opt for the latter, is a question for each conscience to ask of themselves..

..but you have already said that it is the sinner that "chooses to be in hell" .
..now you are implying that it is God that chooses.
Which is it?

 

[Thomas]

What? Come off it. Of COURSE we know that there will be people in hell.
It is totally illogical to say that there is a hell, but there is nobody in it. What does that even mean?

That God's infinite mercy surpasses human understanding.

..but you have already said that it is the sinner that "chooses to be in hell" .. now you are implying that it is God that chooses.

No, that's not it at all ... Rather it depends on what kind of God one believes in.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No, that's not it at all ... Rather it depends on what kind of God one believes in.

Yes .. and you don't believe in the Catholic variety, imo

 

[Thomas]

Yes .. and you don't believe in the Catholic variety, imo