Only Muslims allowed in heaven?

[farhan]

Guys guys guys, nobody has any mental problems. Shafais ave a different view than Hanafis upon this. And neither claims to be knowledgeable of the unseen . So believe/follow the viewpoint you like & keep away from "mutashabihat".


A Letter to Christians in the Ukraine


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](1) There are some peoples who have not been reached by the message of one of the prophets of God that we must worship the One God alone, associating nothing else with Him. Such people are innocent, and will not be punished no matter what they do. As the Qur'an says, "We do not punish until We send a Messenger" (Qur'an 17:15). These include, for example, the Christians who lived in the period after the spread of the myth of Jesus' deification until the time of the next messenger, the prophet Muhammad (God bless him and give him peace), who renewed the call to the pure, original religion of all the prophets: "Your God is One; none has a right to be worshipped with Him." [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A great Muslim scholar, al-Ghazali, adds to this category of people those who have only been reached with a distorted picture of Islam. In al-Ghazali's view, such people are excused until after they have had an opportunity to learn the truth (Faysal al-tafriqa, Majmu'a rasa'il al-Imam al-Ghazali, 3.96). [/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](2) A second group of people consists of those who turn away from God's divine message of monotheism, rejecting the command to make their worship God's alone; whether because of blindly imitating the religion of their ancestors, or for some other reason. These are people to whom God has sent a prophetic messenger and reached with His message, and to whom He has given hearing and an intellect with which to grasp it-but after all this, persist in associating others with Allah. Such people have violated God's rights, and have accepted to go to hell, which is precisely what His messengers have warned them of, and because of which, they have no excuse: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Truly, Allah does not forgive that any be associated with Him in worship; but He forgives what is less than that to whomever He wills" (Qur'an 4:48). [/FONT]​

This is obviously a shafai view, not Hanafi.

Until next time, take care of your self & eact other

 

[Neemai]

any person that followed their respective prophet, before the advent of the Prophet muhammad [saw], will enter heaven. But after the advent of the prophet Muhammad [saw], all other previously revealed religions have been abrogated, thus whoever hears of the prophet [saw] and does not accept his message, i.e, does not convert to Islam, shall be doomed to hell.

From my own personal perspective I don't see how I could ever love a God who would doom millions of people to eternal suffering in hell over the matter of which prophet they follow as quoted above. However, thank you both for your comments. I read the link MW, and appreciate that different viewpoints exist on this matter.

It's interesting for me as similar sectarian/non-sectarian arguments are also given within other traditions I have studied in more depth - it appears to be a universal phenomenon in regards to religious matters.

"As for the Righteous, they will be in bliss; And the Wicked - they will be in the Fire."


... Neemai

 

[Abdullah]

I deliberately posted the entire Sura, so that verses could not be read out of context. The comments of my own are not interpretations, simply pointing out how I read them and of course you are welcome to comment on the verses too, although you appear not to have done so.

Could you please give me the verse(s) of the Quran that state this and that this will only be for Muslims (assuming you do not mean anyone that has submitted to G-d).

I will be happy if you can tell me which verses of the Quran change the meaning of the Sura I quoted. Particularly as Dr Badawi points out that there is no evidence that any single verse of the Quran abrogates any other verse of the Quran.

Sister, the above statements of yours convinces me that you are not interested in any evidence at all, and are just bent on perveresly insisting on the validation of all religions and that non-Muslims will and can go to heaven as well [without being subject to the interpretation of the Scholars of Islam].

Well sister, I have shown you that to beleive in the validation of all religions, even Christianity and judaism [after the advent of muhammad [saw] is kufr by consensus, so if you want to risk kufr, than that is upto you, but dont say on the Day of judgement that you weren't warned.

These silly and non-sensical/contradictory arguments of yours wont fool any Muslim sis, they will only convince any Muslim [even the most ignorant of them], that your just hell bent on perversing the teachings of Islam, no matter waht kind of clear and overwhelimng evidences you are shown to the contrary.

So would you class Dr Badawi as an expert? If so please go to clip 3/7 and at 7 minutes you will hear Dr Badawi state that the interpretation can be read as "Don't die except in a state of submission to G-d", here he is talking about Jews and Christians.

And if you tell him, "waht is a state of submission", Im sure...that he'll say..."it is to be a muslim and live ones life according to the will of Allah and Sunnah of muhammad [saw]". and for the non-Muslims who havn't heard about Islam...it is to be a monothiest and who does not bellie his fitrah".

In clip 4/7 at 52 seconds, you will also hear Dr Badawi say "theological correctness or incorrectness is left for G-d to judge."

That is correct, so God would judge between the two Sunni Creeds and on the Day of judgement we would find out the correct one; i.e, it could turn out that the Matarudi's are right concerning the non-Muslims.

Waht we can be sure of is that either the matarudi's or the Asharis, or a mix and mash of opinions of both creeds are right, for both creeds have been accepted by the consensus to be right and there is confirmation for us in the Quran and Sunnah that consensus could not be wrong. Also it has been decicively established that the meaninig of the Quran is protected along with it's verses, thus for the whole ummah to have got the creed worng would mean that a part of the meaning of the Quran ahs been corrupted, and that is impossible.

Perhaps you didn't watch all 7 of the clips?

InshAllah I will.

Please give me a single verse of the Quran that even slightly suggests that a person that does not come to conceptual monothiest belief on their own, will go to hell.

inshAllah I will find out the evidences behind the matarudi view and post it up here.

So now we have 2 different scholars giving completely different opinions, again. One scholar has just said that even a person that has never even heard the term Islam but does not come to conceptual monothiest understanding will burn in hell. Now we have "only those who have heard about Islam in it's undistorted form" and reject it will burn in hell. You have to admit they are quite different opinions.

Yup, but there both valid, for they are both based on substantial evidence.

How interesting, you post the above statement and then give a link to a scholar that states very clearly, and I quote "you can't say anybody is going to hell". So which is it?

This is the kind of thnig that made me doubt your mental well benig sis ; I specifically said that he gives an explanation for why you can't say that anybody's going to hell [whcih is in accordance with the explanation I gave] and then you miss the explanation and that takes us back to square one regarding it! .

He said in his statement that the reason why you can't say anybody's going to hell, is becasue no-one knows what a persons seal is, i.e, wether a person will die as a Muslim [for a kaafir/non-Muslim can convert in the last moments of his life and a muslim can even convert to kufr [Allah forbid] in the last moments of his life]; he gave examples of Umar [ra] and Abu Sufyan [ra], who were great enemies of Islam at one stage during their life and later they became muslim [Abu Sufyan became Muslim after fightnig against Islam for 20 years!] to show how a non-Muslim/kaafir of today can become a Muslim of tommorrow, thus what he means is that, ONLY IN THIS SENSE, we cannot say anybody's going to hell.

Also, included in the reason for why nobody can say who is going to hell, is the fact that Allah may even forgive the worst sinner out of the Muslims if He chooses, and for some ashari's, how are they to know which non-Muslim has recieved a clear message of Islam before they die...?

But if you tell him, if a person recieves a clear message of islam and thereafter dies as a non-Muslim, will he go to hell"?, I'm sure his answer will be [and Dr jamal Badawi's answer or any Islamic Scholars answer will be] a resounding "yes"., for in this sense you can define what kind of people will go to hell and what kind wont. As you can see, Allah Himslef has mentioned time and time again in the Quran as to what kind of people will go to hell, so therefore this matter is not a part of the knowledge of the unseen, and we too have to believe in what Allah has told us in the Quran.

He also states that the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) said "the Ummah will never agree on an error". So where scholars disagree we can assume this is an error?

Nope, not in the valid differences of opinions in the four verified school of thoughts, for such kind of differences is a mercy to the ummah.

The consensus of the Scholars regard the opinions of the four Schools to be valid, therefore, they cannot be wrong.

But for the mujtahids, the opinions other then their, is a possible error, in one sense and all correct in another, and I have explained all of this before, so if you want your memory refreshed over it, refer to previous threads.

The consensus regards only the ahlus Sunnah [the people of the four Schools of thought] to have the correct interpretation of the Quran, thus being on the correct path, and as Shaykh Hamza Yusuf said, there is evidence of the consensus being correct, in the Quran itself.

Salaam.

ps: You will usually hear Scholars who speak publicly, only say things like, "no one can say anybody's going to hell", and "only God knows who going to hell and who's going to heaven", etc, which are ofcourse truthfull statements in the sense that was explained by shakh Hamza, and the reason for this is because they know that statements such as "kaafirs will burn in hell", etc, can be misconstrued by some non-Muslims or the media to be hatefull statements and the media and other non-Muslim organisations could denounce them as being 'hatemongerers', 'radicals', etc, thus they only stick to 'non-Muslim friendly' statements and avoid one's that could be misconstrued.

i hope you dont think that I'm being hatefull towards the non-Muslims when I explain in the correct context the circumstances that will lead them to hell;

I only do it in order to give the definitive Islamic view regarding this, so that there could be no misunderstanding to anyone...of what our religion says about it; esspecially when your comments could lead to potential misunderstandings.

If people misunderstand in this issue and are lead to believe that all religions are valid to Allah, or that one does not have to be Muslim and can go to heaven anyway, then that could lead to some of them rejecting Islam on that misunderstanding, thus my explanations of the nitty girttty of this subject is only to save the people from being mislead into remaining in kufr.

Salaam.

 

[Abdullah]

if you dont mind me asking sis, do you have any mental problems? , or do you suffer from an abnormality such as a understanding problem or learning difficulties?

because it seems to me that you have an abnormally low iq; sometimes it seems to be lower than that of a five year old.

This is not meant to be insulting, or meant as a joke sis; I am seriously worried about your mental health; have you got over that previous problem you mentioned?

My apologies if i've hurt your feelings over this, but when I've explained to you many times over that there are two views regarding this matter, and when even I included the statement that this was the Matarudi view before I posted Ibraheem Desai's comments, and then you come out with an absolute no-brainer such as the one you did, then could you blame me for thinking the above?

Salaam.

 

[Abdullah]

Salaam,

I'm just listening to Jamal Badawi's speech and I'll just comment on his statement that Allah wants all mankind to be righteous, and this righteousness is not limmited to "faith claims".

Now Jamal Badawi is givnig a speech in which non-Muslims are part of the audience [it seems] and the theme of his speech is about how mankind can live together in peace.

Jamal Badawi is a public speaker on who'm the pressure of making speeches that sounds to be "all religions friendly" [and that helps to 'unite humanity'] to his main critics, who are the non-Muslims and non-Muslim authorities?, thus at times such speakers may say something that is correct according to the definition he has used in his mind for the words, and also appears to be "all religions friendly" to the non-Muslims.

Faith "claims", are just claims of people, thus in Islam if a person claims to be a good Muslim, or a practicing muslim, etc, etc, then obivoulsy that is not what God will judge him on, but God will judge him on wether he has obeyed God with sincerety in his heart, and wether he truly is a sincere practicing muslim, thus in this sense, righteousness does indeed go beyond faith 'claims'.

He wouldn't have meant by it that all religions are valid to God...for such a belief is kufr by consensus.

Martin Lings is a person that is associated with the belief in 'perrenialism'; Shaykh hamza Yusuf said regarding Martin Lings beleifs that Martin lings beleives contrary to what he has been taught, i.e, shaykh Hamza believes that only the Islamic religion is valid to Allah... [this should not lead us to anthemetize martin Lings, for anthemetising is not unconditional. martin lings based his 'perrenialism' views in 'taweel', which at best, according to some... makes his perrenialism view hetorodox, but not kufr].

In Shaykh Hamza Yusuf's Book, 'the Creed of imam Tahawi...', which one reviewer described as [paraphrasing] 'being sensetive to all religions/peoples', Shakh hamza translated the Creedal point, [parapharisng] "Only islam is valid to Allah", as [paraphrasing] "only submission is valid to Allah". Now his definition of the word 'submission' is obvious to Muslims, i.e, it means to be a muslim and live according to Allah's will and Sunnah of the prophet [saw], but because his book was aimed at a wider audience then Muslims, and because of the status of shaykh Hamza as a 'moderate figure who is working to build bridges between Islam and the west", he translated that word as 'submission' rather then Islam, as it was followed by the verse in which Allah says that if a person chooses another religion other than Islam, he will be a looser in the day of judgement, thus he sensed that his potential audience and people like the arch bishop of canterbury, who'm he wanted to comment on the book, may find the word 'Islam' in this context a bit insensetive [thus it may be damaging to his book sales and 'moderate bridge-builder figure' reputation], thus he chose a word that was sensetive to all religions.

I mentioned all of this to show of how we shouldn't jump to the wrong conclusions when we hear public speakers using words/wordings/phrases/ which are correct in the definition they use in their minds, but also are sensitive to the wider audience.

Salaam.

 

[Abdullah]

Sorry sis, the complete statements of Shaykh hamza regarding in what sense we can't say anybody is going to hell", and the examples given of umar and Abu-Sufyan [raa], is in the previous link provided AND at the following link:

Sheikh Hamza Yusuf: Creed Of Imam Al Tahawi p5

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

I am pleased to see that you have taken the teaching of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) of tolerence and patience so much to heart.

Just so we are clear, I have never said that anyone of any faith, even Muslim, WILL or WILL NOT be admitted into heaven or sent to hell. I leave this to Allah (swt) and trust, with all my heart, that He will do this with absolute mercy, as He has promised.

Why do you think that Sheikh Hamza Yusuf sent his new book to the Archbishop of Canterbury for an endorsement? Surely, according to your statements, the Archbishop is an infidel and his opinions should surely be invalid? Perhaps if our scholars are so respectful of others faith you should consider following suit.

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

In Sheikh Hamza Yusuf's interview, clip No3 at about 5 minutes and 33 seconds he says:

"faith is something that happens in the heart, which is why I opened this book with a quote from Imam Ghazali saying that faith is not a set of formula's, it is a light that G-d puts in the heart".

This for me is Islam, not quoting endless scholars opinions and arguing about interpretations. It is about my personal submission to Allah, to being the best Muslim I am capable of being and each day trying to become a better person for Allah. If you don't like that then you are welcome to your opinion but you will never make my heart filled with bile and hatred.

 

[Muslimwoman]

I ask you very politely to do something for me and for yourself. Go to a mirror, look into your eyes and ask this question "when I quote endless scholars, call fellow Muslims insane and tell everyone they are an infadel and going to burn in hell, do I think they will be tempted to go and try reading the Quran?". Now stay there and ask yourself this question "when Sally quotes the Quran and talks to people of the peace and tolerence of the Quran, do I think that people may be tempted to go and try reading the Quran?"

I know that you want to follow blindly Abdullah and that is your choice but at times it is good for all of us to examine our motives and consider the effect our actions are having on others.

as salaam aleykum wr wb

 

[Francis king]

if you dont mind me asking sis, do you have any mental problems? , or do you suffer from an abnormality such as a understanding problem or learning difficulties?

because it seems to me that you have an abnormally low iq; sometimes it seems to be lower than that of a five year old.

This is not meant to be insulting, or meant as a joke sis; I am seriously worried about your mental health; have you got over that previous problem you mentioned?

that's cheeky that is, and not at all respectful... what ur saying is, abdullah, that muslimwomans' interpretation of Islam isn't valid because ur version of misery isn't the same as her decent observation of what Islam is...

as a "kaafir" muslimwoman has been very patient with me in other threads, and she has explained Islam very well to me, to the extent where, as a religion, I can see some merit in it which I previously did not see...

being a sly dog and making low blows like- have u gotten over ur past problems is uncalled for... but hey, if that's the only way u can win ur argument- go for it...

 

[Muslimwoman]

Thank you for your comments Francis. It is very difficult to explain Islam to people when Muslims themselves have very different ideas of what Islam really means.

As with all faiths, we can only try our best to understand and be true to G-d the best way we know how.

 

[iBrian]

Apologies for not seeing this earlier, and thanks to dauer for raising the issue - will PM Abdullah reminding him of conduct issues.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Apologies for not seeing this earlier, and thanks to dauer for raising the issue - will PM Abdullah reminding him of conduct issues.

Thank you Brian but it really is not necessary (although I would say differently if he was speaking to someone of a different faith). Unfortunately there are Muslims with views like Abdullah's and I would prefer to try to get through to him with patience and understanding. It may take me 10 years of posting but I am determined to show Abdullah that speaking politely and not using personal insults gets better results but thank you to Dauer and yourself for your concern.

 

[Ahmad232]

as salaam aleykum wr wb

On another thread brother farhan posted a link to answer questions about Islam. I was very interested in the following and would like to know others opinions on this interpretation and what do you think the writer means by unfortunaltey?:


"Do Muslims believe that everyone will burn in Hell-fire except Muslims"?

Simple response is "NO". Unfortunately it's not up to Muslims to decide who goes to hell-fire and who doesn't. That decree is going to come from Allah SWT and our belief is on the basis of what Allah swt tells us in Quran, "All sins can be forgiven except Shirk (creating partners with Allah)". Muslims don't have a free-ride either. Our belief is that Paradise is for people who are pure. What does that mean? In order for anyone to enter paradise he/she must be free of sins. Now that process is multi-faucet. The tribulations that one goes through in life will wash-away some of the sins. Some of the sins will be forgiven for the pain & sufferings of death and the grave. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said that the Day of Reckoning will be a very tough day. The horrors of that day that one would have to encounter will take away some of the sins. Then Allah SWT is capable of forgiving any other delinquencies, if there is still some left then the sole would have to spend
some time in hell to get purified. But as long as one sincerely believes in one-ness of Allah swt then the possibility of Paradise is there. This is a very vast topic that scholars have written books about, so I know I can't do justice with it in this limited space. Bottom line is that according to the teachings of our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) there will be people in paradise that were not from his Ummah.

salaam !

you are hundred percent right ofcourse that anyone free of shirk can enter heaven

HOWEVER!, rejection of Islam constitutes shirk sis

 

[Ahmad232]

From my own personal perspective I don't see how I could ever love a God who would doom millions of people to eternal suffering in hell over the matter of which prophet they follow as quoted above. However, thank you both for your comments. I read the link MW, and appreciate that different viewpoints exist on this matter.

It's interesting for me as similar sectarian/non-sectarian arguments are also given within other traditions I have studied in more depth - it appears to be a universal phenomenon in regards to religious matters.

"As for the Righteous, they will be in bliss; And the Wicked - they will be in the Fire."


... Neemai

Hi Neemai!

i agree with your latter statement: "As for the Righteous, they will be in bliss; And the Wicked - they will be in the Fire."

this is indeed true, but say for example God sends a Messenger to all of mankind, who says, hey guys this is the new guidance from God, you all have to follow this now ... and those who follow will be saved those who reject wont

wouldn't being 'righteous' depend on following that message?

yes ofcourse!

so this is really the Islamic baiss for condeming rejectors of the Islamic faith to hell

however not all non-muslims end up in hell as it is dependant upon who gets that Prophetic message right?

so... [shaykh nuh says it best! ]:

Where is the mercy? Would Allah put someone in the hellfire merely for worshipping in another religion besides Islam? This question is answered by traditional Islam according to two possibilities:

(1) There are some peoples who have not been reached by the message of the Prophet of Islam (Allah bless him and give him peace) that we must worship the One God alone, associating nothing else with Him. Such people are innocent, and will not be punished no matter what they do. Allah says in surat al-Isra',

"We do not punish until We send a Messenger" (Qur'an 17:15). These include, for example, Christians and others who lived in the period after the spread of the myth of Jesus godhood, until the time of the prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), who renewed the call to pure monotheism.
The great Muslim scholar, Imam Ghazali, includes in this category those who have only been reached with a distorted picture of the Messenger of Islam (Allah bless him and give him peace), presumably including many people in the West today who know nothing about Allah's religion but newspaper stories about Ayatollahs and mad Muslim bombers. Is it within such people's capacity to believe? In Ghazali's view, such people are excused until after they have had an opportunity to learn the undistorted truth about Islam (Ghazali: "Faysal al-tafriqa," Majmu'a rasa'il al-Imam al-Ghazali, 3.96). This of course does not alter our own obligation as Muslims to reach them with the da'wa.

(2) A second group of people consists of those who turn away from God's divine message of Islam, rejecting the command to make their worship God's alone; whether because of blindly imitating the religion of their ancestors, or for some other reason. These are people to whom God has sent a prophetic messenger and reached with His message, and to whom He has given hearing and an intellect with which to grasp it but after all this, persist in associating others with Allah, either by actually worshipping another, or by rejecting the laws brought by His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace), which associates their own customs with His prerogative to be worshipped as He directs. Such people have violated God's rights, and have accepted to go to hell, which is precisely what His messengers have warned them of, so they have no excuse:

"Truly, Allah does not forgive that any be associated with Him; but He forgives what is less than that to whomever He wills" (Qur'an 4:48).
In either case, Allah's mercy exists, though for non-Muslims unreached by the message, it is a question of divine amnesty for their ignorance, not a confirmation of their religions validity.

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/amat.htm