NOTICE

I do not hate nor hold any grudge on the Wahabis/Salafis as a community. The contents provided here are not meant to incite hatred for the wahabis who are Muslims(however confused they may be) but it is simply to convey the truth and expose the lies that prevail among them so as to warn others not to fall into the same mire. May Allah s.w.t. guide us all.
"ISLAM is the ONLY PATH to salvation. Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah is the ONLY vehicle that may take you on that path. Tasawwuf is the engine that drives the vehicle. If you have these, you will earn Allah's pleasure, Insha'Allah." Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie

Quotable Quotes

"If the first inward thought is not warded off, it will generate a desire, then the desire will generate a wish, and the wish will generate an intention, and the intention will generate the action, and the action will result in ruin and divine wrath. So evil must be cut off at its root, which is when it is simply a thought that crosses the mind, from which all the other things follow on." (Al-Hujjatul Islam Imam Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali, Ihya' Ulum al-Deen 6/17) "If you are aware of your humility, then you are arrogant." (Ibn Ata'illah) "Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him." (Imam Al-Shafie r.a.) "Never forget that turning a blind eye to oppression and watching from the sidelines is itself oppression" (Harun Yahya) "Do not sit idle, for indeed death is seeking you' (Hasan Al-Basri)

Monday, May 28, 2007

http://www.hamzayusuf.faithweb.com/ This site which i came across recently disparages Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf and disclaims him as a legitimate source of knowledge in Islam. May Allah guide us all. Ameen. Below is Sheikh GF Haddad's response to baseless attacks against Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf.

RE: Accusations on Shaykh Hamza Yusuf
Answered by Shaykh Gibril F Haddad

There are many things being spread about Shaykh Hamza Yusuf by the opposite parties saying he interprets Quran wrongly , shows daeef ahadith .. condemns suicide bombers to hell fire and calls the fire fighters who saved people from world trade centre as Jihadis and destined to paradise !! then Hamza Yusuf saying that in the Quran the word Jihad is not even used once to present the military form of Jihad .. could you please shed some light on this as I read some emails by Shaykh Yusuf Estes bashing him in his long emails.

Wa `alaykum as-Salam:

Yusuf Estes is not qualified to say anything but good about Sidi Hamza as Estes only stands to learn from him. Estes belongs to a group of persons that speak in the name of Islam while openly admitting that they "do not follow any schools of thought" i.e. they are misguided cf. http://adly.net/Association/WebsiteArticles.html They also hold the Awliya' of Allah in contempt -- may Allah Almighty give them their just deserts.

Whatever one's position on the issue, it remains that the condemnation of suicide bombers of civilians to hell fire is not new nor exclusive to Shaykh Hamza but I have heard it from the Ba `Alawi Shuyukh as per Shaykh Abu Bakr al-`Attas at the Muhammad Fatih Institute in Beirut. It is also the position of al-Albani as cited by Yusuf Estes' Salafite director, Muhammad Adly at http://laila.aresworld.net/suicidebomb.html

And whoever saves one life it is as if he saved all humankind. As for jihad not being military HY is right with respect to all the Makkan Suras; I heard this from Dr. Sa`id al-Buti in one of his Jumu`a sermons. Allah Most High said:

{And whosoever STRIVES (JAAHADA), STRIVES (YUJAAHIDU) only for himself} (29:6). {As for those who STRIVE (JAHADU) in Us (the cause of Allah), We surely guide them to Our paths, and lo! Allah is with the good doers.} (29:69) This is a Meccan Sura and the two verses refer to Jihad al-Nafs. There was no military jihad then.

Also, jihad is not based on a murderous heart but a cleansed heart. Without jihad of the nafs, fighting leads to Hellfire.

Allah Most High said:

{WA NAFSIN WA MAA SAWAAHA, FA-ALHAMAHA FUJURAHA WA TAQWAHA. QAD AFLAHA MAN ZAKAAHA WA QAD KHAABA MAN DAS-SAAHA} "By the nafs and the proportion and order given to it, and its inspiration as to its wrong and its right; Truly he succeeds who purifies it, and he fails that corrupts it" (91:7-10). This is also a Meccan Sura.

Without purification, the nafs remains a "soul that enjoins evil" (al-nafs al-ammara bil-su') until it surrenders itself in total obedience to the call of animal passions and shaytan.

Allah Most High said:

{Have you seen the one who chooses for his god his own lust?} (25:43). {He followed his own lust. Therefore his likeness is as the likeness of a dog; if you attack him he pants with his tongue out and if you leave him he pants with his tongue out} (7:176). These are both also Meccan Suras.

About the person who controlled the passion of his ego Allah says: {But as for him who feared to stand before his Lord and restrained his soul from lust, Lo! The garden will be his home} (79:40-41). This is also a Meccan Sura.

The above are among the many Meccan verses and Suras enjoining jihad al-nafs. One that denies that there was/is such a Divine command commits kufr. Such a command cannot mean military jihad, as there was no permission - much less an order - for such a jihad until the Madinan period.

>another question is that Sufis use 2 ahadith very often > when they talk about Jihad and those are...... The best > Jihad is to fight against your nafs

This is firmly established as true from the glorious Qur'an.

Further, the Prophet said, upon him peace:

1. <> - Ibn Hibban (#1624, 2519): Authentic; - Shu`ayb al-Arna'ut (Commentary on Ibn Hibban): authentic; - al-Hakim: sahih; - `Iraqi confirms him; - it is also in Tirmidhi, Ahmad, and Tabarani; - Albani included it in the "Sahiha".

2. "`A'isha, Allah be well-pleased with her, asked: 'Messenger of Allah, we see jihad as the best of deeds, so shouldn't we join it?' He replied, 'But the best jihad is a perfect Hajj (pilgrimage to Makkah).'" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #2784)

3. On another occasion, a man asked: "Should I join the jihad?" The Prophet asked, upon him peace, "Do you have parents?" The man said yes. The Prophet said: "Then do jihad by serving them!" (Sahih Al-Bukhari #5972)

4. Another man asked: "What kind of jihad is better?" The Prophet replied, upon him peace: "A word of truth spoken in front of an oppressive ruler." (Sunan Al-Nasa'i #4209)

5. The Prophet also said, upon him peace: <> Al-Haythami declared it authentic in Majma` al-Zawa'id.

6. The Prophet, upon him peace, said to Abu Sa`id al-Khudri: "Even if one strikes unbelievers and idolaters with his sword until it breaks, and he is *completely* dyed with their blood, the Rememberers of Allah are above him one degree."

and the second hadith > of Rasul Ullah coming back from a battle and saying we >are coming back from Jihad e Asghar to Jihad e Akbar .. >its said that both these ahadith are extremely weak ,

Let them complain of Ibn al-Qayyim who writes page after page about the jihad of the ego as the greatest jihad in his book al-Fawa'id.

Even if a hadith is very weak it does not mean it is forged. As for these particular hadiths, it is incorrect to say they are very weak for various reasons (see below).

>Please give me exact references of these ahadith and the > classical scholars who authenticated them

The "greater jihad" hadith is narrated variously thus:

1. As a saying of the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, from Jabir - Allah be well-pleased with him - in the wording:

<>

Narrated with a very weak chain containing Yahya ibn al-`Ala' al-Bajali al-Razi (who is accused of forgery) by al-Bayhaqi in al-Zuhd al-Kabir (p. 165 §373=p. 198 §374) and al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad (13:493=13:523) cf. al-Ahdab, Zawa'id Tarikh Baghdad (9:309-311 §2077). This is the narration cited by Imam al-Ghazzali in the Ihya' and thus sourced by al-`Iraqi in his documentation.

However, even if the wording is inauthentic, the meaning of the last phrase i.e. that the greater jihad is the struggle against hawa/nafs IS CONFIRMED AS SAHIH by the verses quoted above and by the narrations of the previous section: 1, 5, and 6.

2. As a saying of the Companions `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn al-`As as cited by Ibn Rajab in his Sharh Hadith Labbayk (p. 128).

3. As a saying of the Tabi`i Ibrahim ibn Abi `Abla narrated by al-Nasa'i in his Kuna in the wording:

"You have come back from the smaller jihad; what about the greater one?" They asked, "What is the greater jihad?" He [Ibn Abi `Abla] replied: "The jihad of the heart."

Al-Qari said in al-Asrar al-Marfu`a: al-`Asqalani in Tasdid al-Qaws ("Adjusting the Bow") said, "This report is famous and widespread but these are the words of Ibrahim ibn Abi `Abla as narrated in al-Nasa'i's Kuna."

4. As a saying of Ibrahim ibn Ad-ham as narrated by al-Bayhaqi in al-Zuhd (p. 152).

5. As a saying of Abu Hatim al-Asamm as narrated by al-Bayhaqi in al-Zuhd (p. 286).

See also: al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-Kamal (2:144); Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (1:142), al-Kafi al-Shafi fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Kashshaf (p. 114), and Tasdid al-Qaws (cf. al-`Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa'); and al-Zayla`i, Takhrij al-Ahadith wal-Athar al-Waqi`a fi Tafsir al-Kashshaf (2:395-396 §825).

Hajj Gibril

**The supposed letters of Yusuf Estes which he supposedly wrote against Hamzah Yusuf has been denied by the former himself. He has stated that :
"The words you quote (above) are not my words, they have been added - others have been taking what I wrote (in private) to a brother years ago, and copied then altered and changed and posted on the web my comments...

All of this is haram and whoever does try to divide the Muslims with such tactics will have to face Allah for what they are doing."

The letters may be found at wahabi owned websites like
http://nuh.faithweb.com/index.html and www.allaahuakbar.net

May Allah s.w.t. protect us from the devil's lies.

Are the Prophets dead in their graves?

This is a non-issue for the Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah. But, it is a huge issue for the wahabis. They simply love repeating that the prophet s.a.w is DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD..he can't hear you !!!! HE IS DEAD, you hear!!?!?!? DEAD !!! astaghfirullah....these wahabis in their delusions claim to be ahl sunnah...let us have a look at what the sunnah has to say about this issue :

PROOF-TEXTS OF THE LIFE OF THE PROPHET IN HIS GRAVE
by GF Haddad ©
.

1st Hadith
inn-Allaha qad Harrama `ala al-arDi an ta'kula ajsâd al-anbiyâ'.

"Allah has defended the earth from consuming the bodies of Prophets".

A sound (sahih) tradition related on the authority of Aws ibn Aws al-Thaqafi by: Ahmad in his Musnad, Ibn Abi Shaybah in the Musannaf, Abu Dawud in the Sunan, Nisa'i in his Sunan, Ibn Majah in his Sunan, Darimi in his Musnad, Ibn Khuzaymah in his Sahih, ibn Hibban in his Sahih, Hakim in the Mustadrak, Tabarani in his Kabir, Bayhaqi in Hayat al-anbiya', Suyuti in Anba' al-adkhiya, Dhahabi who confirmed Hâkim's grading, and Nawawi in the Adhkar.
Another version in Ibn Maja has this addition:

"And the Prophet of Allah is alive and provided for."
fa nabiyyallahi Hayyun yurzaq
Bayhaqi mentions it also in the Sunan al-kubra.
.


2nd Hadith
al-anbiyâ'u aHyâ'un fi qubûrihim yuSallûn

"The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying to their Lord".
A sound (sahih) tradition related on the authority of Anas ibn Malik (r) by: al-Bazzar in his Musnad, Abu Ya`la in his Musnad, Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil fi al-du`afa', Tammam al-Razi in al-Fawa'id, al-Bayhaqi in Hayat al-anbiya' fi quburihim, Abu Nu`aym in Akhbar Asbahan, Ibn `Asakir in Târeekh Dimashq, al-Haythami in Majma` al-zawa'id (8:211), al-Suyuti in Anbâ' al-adhkiya' bi-hayat al-anbiya' (#5), and al-Albani, in Silsilat al-ahadith al-sahihah (#621).

Suyuti adds: "The life of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, in his grave, and [also] that of the rest of the prophets is known to us as definitive knowledge (`ilman qat`iyyan)."

I have used the above information from a post on MSA-Net on that particular hadith by Brother Akram Y. Safadi, for which I thank him.

.


3rd Hadith
(laylata usra bi) marartu `ala Mûsa wa huwa qâ'imun yuSalli fi qabrihi

"(The night I was enraptured to my Lord) I saw Mûsa standing in prayer in his grave".
A sound (sahih) tradition related on the authority of Anas and others by Muslim, Nasa'i, and Bayhaqi in the dala'il al-nubuwwa and the Hayât. Some mention the beginning (in parentheses), while others omit it. Nawawi said in his explanation of this hadith: "The work of the next world is all dhikr and du`a" (sharH SaHeeH Muslim 1/73/267).

.


4th Hadith
ma min aHadin yusallimu `alayya illa radda ilayy-Allahu rûHi Hatta arudda `alayhi al-salâm

"No-one greets me except Allah has returned my soul to me so that I can return his salâm".
From Abu Hurayra, in Abu Dawud with a sound (SaHeeH) chain. This hadith has been adduced by the scholars as the legal proof for the validity and modality of visiting and greeting the Prophet , although the hadith does not mention the necessity of physically visiting the Prophet in Madina.

A note about the translation of "has returned": Suyuti said that "radda" means `ala al-dawâm," i.e. permanently, and not temporarily: in other words, Allah does not return the rûH and take it back, then return it again and then take it back again, but He returned it to the Prophet permanently, and the Prophet is alive permanently.

Sakhawi, Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalâni's student, said: "As for us (Muslims) we believe and we confirm that he is alive and provided for IN HIS GRAVE" (al-qawl al-badee` p. 161). Ibn al-Qayyim said in al-RûH p. 58: "It is obligatory knowledge to know that his body is in the earth tender and humid (i.e. as in life), and when the Companions asked him: 'How is our greeting presented to you after you have turned to dust' he replied:

'Allah has defended the earth from consuming the flesh of Prophets,'
and if his body was not in his grave he would not have given this answer."
Ibn Hajar al-Haythami wrote in al-jawhar al-munaZZam (?):

"tawâtarat al-adillatu wa al-nuqûlu bi anna al-MuSTafa Hayyun Tariyyu... wa Sawmun thumma Hajjun kulla `âmin yaTTahhiru li al-Salâti bi mâ'i ghaythi" which means:

"The proofs and the transmitted texts have been established as authentic in the highest degree that the Prophet is alive and tender... that he fasts and performs pilgrimage every year, and that he purifies himself with water which rains on him."

.


5th Hadith
Hayâti khayrun lakum tuHaddithuna wa yuHaddathu lakum fa idha muttu kânat wafâti khayran lakum tu`raDu `alayya a`mâlukum fa in ra'aytu khayran hamidtu allaha wa in ra'aytu ghayra dhâlik istaghfartu Allaha lakum

"My life is a great good for you, you will relate about me and it will be related to you, and my death is a great good for you, your actions will be presented to me (in my grave) and if I see goodness I will praise Allah, and if see other than that I will ask forgiveness of him (for you)."
Qadi `Iyad cites it in "al-Shifa" (1:56 of the Amman edition) and Suyuti said in his "Manahil al-safa fi takhrij ahadith al-shifa" (Beirut 1988/1408) p. 31 (#8): "Ibn Abi Usama cites it in his Musnad from the hadith of Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Mazni, and al-Bazzar from the hadith of Ibn Mas`ud with a sound (sahih) chain."

It is cited in Subki's Shifa' al-siqâm fi ziyarat khayr al-anâm
[The Healing of the Sick Concerning the Visit of the Best of Creation],
where he mentions that Bakr ibn Abd Allah al-Mazini reported it, and Ibn al-Jawzi mentions it through Bakr and then again through Anas ibn Malik in the penultimate chapter of the penultimate section of al-Wafa, both huffaz without giving the isnad. However, Ibn al-Jawzi specifies in the introduction of al-Wafa that he only included sound traditions in his bûk. He also mentions the version through Aws ibn Aws: "The actions of human beings are shown to me every Thursday on the night of (i.e. preceding) Friday." See also FatH al-Bâri 10:415, al-Mundhiri's Targheeb wa al-Tarheeb 3:343, and Ahmad 4:484.

.


6th Hadith
Man Salla `alayya `inda qabri sami`tuhu, wa man Salla `alayya nâ'iyan bullightuhu

"Whoever invokes blessings on me at my grave, I hear him, and whoever invokes blessings on me from afar, I am informed about it."
Ibn Hajar says in FatH al-Bâri 6:379: "Abu al-Shaykh cites it with a good chain (sanad jayyid)," and Bayhaqi mentions it in Hayât al-anbiyâ with "ublightuhu" in the end.

.


7th Hadith
Man zara qabri wajabat lahu shafa`ati.

"Whoever visits my grave, it becomes incumbent upon me to intercede for him."
Narrated by al-Daraqutni, al-Dulabi, al-Bayhaqi, Khatib al-Baghdadi, al-`Uqayli, Ibn `Adiy, Tabarani, and Ibn Khuzaymah in his Sahih, all through various chains going back to Musa ibn Hilal al-`Abdiyy from Ubayd Allah Ibn Umar, both from Nafi`, from Ibn `Umar.

Dhahabi declared this chain hasan (fair) as narrated, in "Mizan al- i`tidal," vol. 4, p. 226: "Huwa salih al-hadith" which means:"He -- Musa ibn Hilal -- is good in his narrations." Al-Sakhawi confirmed him in the "Maqasid al-hasana", while al-Subki declared it sahih according to Samhudi in Sa`adat al-dârayn 1:77. Ibn `Adiyy said: "He [Musa ibn Hilal] is most likely acceptable; other people have called him 'unknown' and this is not true... He is one of the shuyukhs of Imam Ahmad and most of them are trustworthy." al-Kamil fi al-Du`afa (6:2350). Albani declared him "thabit al-riwaya" (of established reliability) in his Irwa' 4:338. About `Ubayd Allah ibn `Umar al-`Umari: - Dhahabi calls him "saduq hasan al-hadith" [truthful, of fair narrations] al-Mughni 1:348; - Sakhawi says of him "salih al-hadith" [of sound narrations] al-tuhfat al-latifat 3:366; - Ibn Mu`in said to Darimi about him: "salih thiqat" [sound and reliable] al-kamil 4:1459.

This is one of the prûf-texts adduced by the ulama of Islam to derive the obligation or recommendation of visiting the Prophet's grave and seeking him as "wasilat" (intermediary/means). See the chapter on visiting the Prophet's grave in Nawawi's bûk "al-Adhkar" and in Qadi `Iyad's bûk "al-Shifa." Sakhawi said in "al-qawl al-badee`" p. 160: "The emphasis and encouragement on visiting his noble grave is mentioned in numerous ahadith, and it would suffice to show this if there was only the hadith whereby the truthful and God-confirmed Prophet promises that his intercession among other things becomes obligatory for whoever visits him, and the Imams are in complete agreement from the time directly after his passing until our own time that this is among the best acts of drawing near to Allah."

Blessings and Peace on the Prophet, his Family, and his Companions.


.

Visiting Graves:



Dawud ibn Salih says: "[The Umayyad Caliph] Marwan [ibn al-Hakam] one day saw a man placing his face on top of the grave of the Prophet . He said: "Do you know what you are doing?" When he came near him, he realized it was Abu Ayyub al-Ansari. The latter said: "Yes; I came to the Prophet , not to a stone. I heard the Prophet say:
Do not weep on religion if its people assume its leadership (walyahu), but weep on it if other than its people assume it."
Ahmad 5:422, Hakim (Mustadrak 4:515); both the latter and al-Dhahabi said it was sahih. It is thus cited by as-Subki (Shifa' as-siqam p. 126), Ibn Taymiyya (al-Muntaqa 2:261f.), and al-Haythami (al-Zawa'id 4:2).
Brother Audah is right if his point is to show that kissing the grave, rubbing or hugging it is neither haram nor an innovation, although it is disliked that people should be permitted to do it.

Blessings and Peace on the Prophet, his Family, and his Companions.

GF Haddad ©
[ Feb. 1996]

the Tashahhud. Was it changed?

About one week ago, I was youtubing Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips, the reknown Jemaican wahabi scholar from the States. I stumbled across a clip of one of his many talks where he impudently mocks the accepted form of tashahhud where "Assalamu'alaiaka ayyuhan nabi ..." is uttered and equates it with the saying of Ya Muhammad which he claimed to be an act of shirk. Below is the fatwa of Sheikh GF Haddad about the issue.

Was The Tashahhud Changed After The Prophet’s Death?

Answered by Shaykh Gibril F Haddad

Was the tashahhud (at-tahiyyatu lillahi…) changed after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) passed away? I read this hadith: Volume 8, Book 74, Number 281: Narrated Ibn Mas'ud: Allah's Apostle taught me the tashahhud as he taught me a sura from the Qur’an, while my hand was between his hands. (Tashahhud was) all the best compliments and the prayers and the good things are for Allah. Peace and Allah's Mercy and Blessings be on you, O Prophet! Peace be on us and on the pious slaves of Allah, I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and I also testify that Muhammad is Allah's slave and His Apostle. (We used to recite this in the prayer) during the lifetime of the Prophet, but when he died, we used to say, "Peace be on the Prophet." What did the ulama say about this hadith?



In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,


As-Salamu `alaykum,


No, the tashahhud was not changed after the Holy Prophet passed away, blessings and peace be upon him. The ulama knew this hadith and did not consider it good enough evidence to change what many, many other hadiths said to the contrary. I have detailed this reply in a few points below.


1. The translation above is wrong. The correct translation is as follows:


`Abd Allah ibn Sakhbara: I heard Ibn Mas’ud say: “The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless and greet him) taught me, [as he held] my hand in his two hands, exactly the way he would teach me a sura from the Qur’an: al-tahiyyaat... [etc.]. As-Salamu `alayka ayyuha al-Nabi, wa-rahmatullah, wa-barakatuh.... [etc.] while he was among us. Then, when his soul was seized, we [still] said: as-Salamu; meaning, on the Prophet. This means: even after he passed away, we continued to give him the Salam as we did before, when he was among us. It would be incorrect from the viewpoint of Arabic to say that it means a switch to the indirect-speech formula after the passing of the Prophet.


2. This exact understanding is confirmed by Muslim’s narration – and he is more meticulous than al-Bukhari in the precision of the terms narrated – from the same `Abd Allah ibn Sakhbara, from Ibn Mas`ud: “The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless and greet him) taught me tashahhud [as he held] my hand in his two hands, exactly the way he would teach me a sura from the Qur’an...” Then Muslim said: “Then he recounted the tashahhud in the same terms as they did.” He means by “they” all other four chains for this hadith which he had narrated through Abu Wa’il Shaqiq ibn Salama from Ibn Mas`ud and which have the direct-speech formula (`alayka) as explicited in the next paragraph. So Ibn Mas`ud, even in Ibn Sakhbara’s narration from him, only meant: We continued to say: As-Salamu `alayka ayyuha al-Nabi even after the passing of the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace.


3. This exact understanding is further confirmed by al-Nasa’i’s narration from the same `Abd Allah ibn Sakhbara, from Ibn Mas`ud: “The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless and greet him) taught us tashahhud exactly the way he would teach us a sura from the Qur’an, [as he held] his [Ibn Mas‘ud’s] hand in his two hands: .... As-Salamu ‘alayka ayyuha al-Nabi.....”


4. More importantly than all the preceding, the Prophet himself taught the Companions to say: “Peace and blessings upon you, O Prophet” without telling them to change it after his death. This is narrated from (a) Ibn Mas`ud himself as well as from others of Ahl al-Fatwa among the Companions after the time of the Prophet upon him peace, some more senior than him such as our liege-lord (b) `Umar ibn al-Khattab (Muwatta’), also (c) Abu Musa al-Ash`ari (Muslim, Four Sunan); and others such as (d) our Mother ‘A’isha (Muwatta’, al-Tirmidhi) (e) Ibn ‘Umar (al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud), (f) Jabir (al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Majah), (e) Ibn `Abbas (Muslim and the Four Sunan)!


5. As mentioned, Ibn Mas`ud himself says that the Prophet, upon him peace, taught them to say in the tashahhud: As-Salamu `alayka ayyuha al-Nabi and not otherwise whatsoever. His senior student Shaqiq narrates it from Ibn Mas`ud, from the Prophet upon him blessings and peace, in al-Bukhari in four places and in Muslim in four places as well as in al-Nasa’i in five places, Ibn Majah with four chains, and Abu Dawud.


6. Another senior student of Ibn Mas‘ud, ‘Alqama, also narrates it thus from Ibn Mas‘ud in al-Nasa’i (with 3 chains) who adds that ‘Alqama said: “Ibn Mas‘ud would teach us those words just as [meticulously as] he would teach us Qur’an.” And in Abu Dawud, this is exactly how ‘Alqama would teach tashahhud to his students.


7. Another senior student of Ibn Mas‘ud, al-Aswad ibn Yazid, also narrates it thus from Ibn Mas‘ud in al-Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, and al-Tirmidhi who adds: “This is the most authentic wording of the tashahhud.”


8. Another major student also narrates it thus from Ibn Mas‘ud: Abu al-Ahwas ‘Awf ibn Malik (four Sunan). Are all of the above (Shaqiq, ‘Alqama, al-Aswad, Abu al-Ahwas) wrong in what Ibn Mas‘ud taught them, and only a single man (`Abd Allah ibn Sakhbara) knew?


9. Nor did the major Companions whose Sunna we were ordered to imitate together with that of the Prophet e, such as Abû Bakr and ‘Umar, teach the Companions and Successors otherwise, nor did the rest of the Companions, nor did any of the Four Sunni Schools, nor does any authentic book of fiqh teach otherwise except a modernist person of bid`a who published an unauthorized and unauthoritative book he titled “The Prophet’s Prayer.”


10. Just supposing that Ibn Sakhbara’s narration from Ibn Mas`ud is actually different (as the Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari believed), then there are many reasons why it could not have precedence over the other version. Among them: First, strength from the hadithic perspective. The familiar version is both in al-Bukhari with four chains and in Muslim with four chains as well as the Sunan and the Muwatta’, while Ibn Sakhbara’s version is only in al-Bukhari with one chain.


11. Second, fiqh-based strength and history from the hadithic perspective. None of the major students of Ibn Mas`ud narrate this divergent understanding from him. This divergent understanding is narrated from Ibn Mas`ud only by a minor student who met Ibn Mas`ud for a short while, `Abd Allah ibn Sakhbara. The totality of the hadiths he narrates from Ibn Mas`ud in the Nine Books is 40 including this one. Whereas the senior students all narrate in the hundreds such as `Alqama (273), al-Aswad (143), Shaqiq (385), Masruq (112), Abu al-Ahwas (162). It makes no sense that a junior alone knew from Ibn Mas`ud what the others did not know and it is even stranger that it should be about something so fundamental as the salat! Unless what he relates DOES NOT CONTRADICT BUT RATHER CONFIRMS what the others narrate in this regard, as is quite clear.


12. Third, it would be folly for us to leave the Prophet’s teaching on tashahhud as narrated and practiced by the totality of the Companions (except one, supposedly) and as understood by all Four Sunni Schools, in order to follow, 14 centuries later, a modern understanding which could very well be – and assuredly is – skewed and innovative. Such a choice is idiotic because the probability that it is wrong is enormous.


13. Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam said: “Among the immense marks of honor from Allah to His Prophet [i.e. the exclusive special attributes (khasa’is) of the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace] is that he be addressed with Salam in the same manner before and after his earthly life.” The author of Mu‘tasar al-Mukhtasar (1:53) mentioned it then said: “The entire clause, ‘while he was among us, then, when his soul was seized, we said: as-Salamu, meaning, on the Prophet’” is disclaimed (munkar) because it presupposes that the tashahhud inside the prayer be different after the lifetime of the Prophet than it was during it and this contrary to universal practice and to what Abu Bakr and ‘Umar used to teach the people.”


14. This innovated controversy is a good example for the golden rule that the Religion is not taken from the books but from the qualified ulama teachers all the way to the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace. Nor are the Qur’an and Sunna approached in a vacuum but only through the understanding of the ulama of this umma beginning with the Companions then their Successors and so forth to our time. This umma has a lineage and is not an orphaned umma like the other Communities. Another rule is that not every sound hadith necessarily forms evidence as we were warned by Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, Ibn Abi Layla, Ibn Mahdi, Malik, and many others.


Allah knows best and from Him comes all success.

Gibril Haddad

20 ways to spot a Wahabi/Salafi

Below are 22 points/actions which may give away a Wahabi.




1. Says 'A'UDHUBILLAH" when hearing the loud dhikr of a gathering and repeptition of praise to Allah.

2. Claims loud dhikr to be bid'ah dalalah(blameworthy innovation).

3. Claims sufism/tasawwuf to be bid'ah dalalah(blameworthy innovation).

4.Makes fun of Al-Hay or Hu which is frequently uttered at sufi gatherings.(Astaghfirullah)

5.Claims Tawassul to be shirk and kufr. Those who do it are declared mushrik and kafir.

6. Claims that visiting graves is haram.

7. Claims that visiting Madinah with the intention of visiting the Prophet's grave is haram.

8. Claims that taqleed(imitation, following) means 'blind following' and that it is haram and even shirk.

9. Claims that saying 'Ya Rasulullah' is shirk and kufr without consideration of why many Muslims do that or whether it has support(it does).

10. Approves the destruction of important and historical Islamic sites by the Saudi regime.

11. Asks you to pin point where Allah is or he will do it himself.

12. Declares that Allah has literal hands, face etc.

13. Uses verses meant for PAGANS on Muslims such as
[Who is more astray than the one who performs supplication (du'a') to [worship] other than Allah; the one other than Allah he supplicates to will not answer his du'a'.] Surah Al-Ahqaf, verse 5. **Ibn Abdul Wahab the great innovator started this.

14. Calls Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab "SHEIKHUL ISLAM".

15. Calls the self made "scholar" Nasiruddin Al-Albani "Sheikhul Hadith".

16. Belittles the fiqh of the four great schools of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah, especially the Hanafiyyah fiqh.

17. Belittles the scholars of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah.

18. Declares Al-Hujjatul Islam Imam Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali a deviant and that his magnum opus Ihya' Ulumuddin a weak book.

19. Uses and gloat about the term "ittiba' " in replacement of taqleed, thinking it makes them right and clever.

20. Makes indiscriminate fatawa about fiqhi issues without proper qualifications.

21. Loves making takfir and making declarations and pronouncements of bid'ah on others.

22. Attempts to discredit and weaken the positions of the four great schools of fiqh of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah by citing sahih hadith that may seem or appear contradictory to the established positions to the eyes of mundane individuals, such as the issue of rafa' yadain or raising the hands during prayer as practiced by the Hanafi school of fiqh.

If a person you meet has any of the above examples, there is 90% chance that he is a Wahabi aka Salafi. If a person you meet has all of the above criteria, then he is 110% a WAHABI. Beware of such individuals, for their speech are tempting and poisonous.

Takfir

PROHIBITION OF CALLING MUSLIMS KAFIR!
Collected by Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie

Takfir or the practice of calling another person who truly testifies the shahadah a kafir(rejecter, concealer, unbeliever)is strictly prohibited in the Qur'an, the Sunnah and the writings of many eminent ulama'.

The Qur'an
According to the Qur'an in Surah An-Nisa' verse 94, if someone gives you the salam we CANNOT say that he is an unbeliever. When someone gives you the salam or he gives others the salam that is sufficient proof that he is Muslim. During the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w incidents occured whereby sometimes people would suspect that such people who give salam were not sincere. In response to these the prophet s.a.w. would say to them "Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?"
Also, the Qur'an says
"O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How bad is it, to insult one's brother after having Faith [i.e. to call your Muslim brother (a faithful believer) as: "O sinner", or "O wicked", etc.]. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed Zâlimûn (wrong-doers, etc.)." (Surah Al-Hujurat, ayah 11)

The Ahadith
The fastest way to leave Islam is perhaps to call another brother a kafir...NA'UZUBILLAH!!!
1732. Ibn `Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "When a person calls his brother (in Islam) a disbeliever, one of them will certainly deserve the title. If the addressee is so as he has asserted, the disbelief of the man is confirmed, but if it is untrue, then it will revert to him.''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.'' (Bukhari, Book of Ethics; Book 78, ch. 44)
``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Ibn Umar)
``Call not the people of your Qibla [i.e. those who face the Ka`ba in Makka for prayer] as kafir.''
(Al-Nihaya of Ibn Athir, vol. iv, p. 187)
``Three things are the basis of faith. [One is] to withhold from one who says `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call him kafir for any sin, nor expel him from Islam for any misconduct.''
(Abu Dawud, Book of Jihad, 15:33)
``Whoever attributes kufr [unbelief] to a believer, he is like his murderer.''
(Tirmizi, ch. Iman)

Views of Ulama' of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah

``And among the doctrines of the Ahl as-Sunna is that none of the people of the Qibla can be called kafir.''
(Sharh `Aqa'id Nasfi, p. 121)

Imam Abu Hanifa's stance
``He did not call as kafir anyone from among the people of the Qibla.''(Sharh Mawaqif, fifth part)
``It is extremely serious to expel a Muslim from the faith.'' (Sharh Shifa, vol. ii, p. 500)

Allama Sayyid Jalaluddin
``The takfir of people of the Qibla is itself an act of unbelief.''(Dala'il al-Masa'il)

Husain Ahmad Madani
``All great scholars are unanimous in holding that if, out of hundred ingredients of the belief of some Muslim, ninety-nine are those of unbelief, and merely one of true Islamic faith, it is not allowed to call him kafir, nor does his life or property become violable. In fact, Hazrat Gangohi [a founder of Deoband religious school] clearly states in his Anwar al-Qulub that the saying of the jurists about ninety-nine grounds does not set a limit, and that if 999 out of a thousand points in the belief of a Muslim are unbelief (kufr) and only one is true belief, even then he cannot be called kafir.''(Naqsh-i Hayat, Bait-ut-Tauhid, Karachi, 1953, vol. i. p. 126)

Sayyid Abul Ala Maudoodi
``The aim of these injunctions is that there should be as much caution in calling a Muslim kafir as there is in pronouncing a death sentence against someone. In fact, this matter is even more serious because by killing a person there is no risk of one becoming a kafir, but this risk does exist if one calls a Muslim kafir if that man is not really a kafir. Should there even be an iota of Islamic belief in that man's heart, the slander of kufr shall reflect back upon the accuser. Hence, he who has fear of God in his heart, and has some realisation of the great danger of being involved in kufr, shall never dare call a Muslim kafir until he has carried out a thorough enquiry and fully ascertained that such a person was a kafir. There is so much caution in this regard that if there is a man whose conduct clearly shows insincerity, and whose condition is openly showing that he is not a Muslim at heart, if even he recites the Kalima with his tongue, it is not allowed to call him kafir and treat him as a kafir.''
(Tarjuman al-Quran, issue for month of Jumadi al-Awwal, 1355 A.H., circa 1936, vol. viii, p. 5)

My dear brothers and sisters, calling fellow brethren kuffar risks being kuffar ourselves. Thus let us abstain from such a path lest we damn ourselves for it.

Sunday, May 27, 2007

WAHHABISM: UNDERSTANDING THE ROOTS AND ROLE MODELS OF ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

by Zubair Qamar*
condensed and edited by ASFA staff



Introduction
The most extremist pseudo-Sunni movement today is Wahhabism (also known as Salafism). While many may think that Wahhabi terror is a recent phenomenon that has only targeted non-Muslims, it will surprise many to know that the orthodox Sunni Muslims were the first to be slaughtered in waves of Wahhabi massacres in Arabia hundreds of years ago. One only has to read the historical evolution of Saudi Arabia to know the gruesome details of the tragedy – a tragedy in which thousands of Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims perished at the hands of Wahhabi militants.

The extremist interpretations of Wahhabism, although previously confined to small pockets of people in Arabia, has survived to this day under the protection, finance, and tutelage of the Saudi state religious organs. This has transformed Wahhabism – and related Salafi groups that receive inspiration and support from them – from a regional to a global threat to be reckoned with by the world community. To a Wahhabi-Salafi, all those who differ with them, including Sunni Muslims, Shi’ite Muslims, Christians, and Jews, are infidels who are fair targets.

Do the majority of Sunnis support Wahhabism? Are Sunnis and Wahhabis one and the same?



What is a Wahhabi?


Because Wahhabis claim to be “true Sunnis,” it is difficult for one who is unfamiliar with Wahhabism to distinguish it from orthodox Sunni Islam. If a Wahhabi is asked if he/she is Sunni, he/she will always reply in the affirmative. When asked if they are Wahhabis, they reply with an emphatic “no” as they consider it an insult to what they believe and stand for: “Purity of worship and reverence to God alone. The authentic carriers of Islam from the time of the Prophet (s)[1] until now.” Calling them Wahhabis implies that they learned ideas from a man – Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab – instead of the Qur’an and Sunnah – the two great sources of Islam. Irrespective of what they think, they are not following the Islamic sources authentically, but the wrong interpretations of the founder of the Wahhabi movement who appeared in the 1700s. Sunnis and other Wahhabi detractors have labeled them as Wahhabis to differentiate them from orthodox Sunnis.



Wahhabis as Salafis: deceptive semantics



Wahhabis differentiate themselves from orthodox Sunnis by labeling themselves Salafis, which refers to the word salaf – the time period in which the early Muslims lived in the first 300 years after the Hijra, or emigration, of Prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Medina in 622. The Companions (Sahaba), those who followed the Companions (Tabi’een), and those who followed those who followed the Companions (Taba al-Tabi’een) who lived in the time period of the Salaf are exemplars par excellence of what Muslims should be, as Prophet Muhammad (s) had praised these Muslims as being the best of Muslims. Therefore, it has been the aim of every Muslim since the time of Prophet Muhammad (s) to adhere to and to follow the footsteps of the adherents of the salaf. This means that when a Wahhabi calls himself a Salafi, he claims to be a genuine follower of pristine Islam. This, however, is far from the truth.

Orthodox Sunni Muslims believe that they are the true bearers of pristine Islam since the time period of the Salaf. Because there were time gaps between the noble period of the Salaf and centuries that followed, the authentic positions of the early Muslims were passed by scholars in those times and afterwards to later generations via meticulous, systematic, and methodological means of preservation. The knowledge was passed from qualified scholars to other qualified scholars through the centuries, who passed it to the masses. This uninterrupted chain of knowledge from the time of the Salaf until now has been authentically preserved by the orthodox Sunnis. Orthodox Sunnis, therefore, have roots in the Salaf, and are represented today by the four surviving authentic schools of Islamic jurisprudence: Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools (madhahib).

The Wahhabis, by calling themselves Salafis, not only claim to follow the footsteps of the early Muslims, but also use semantics to fool and allure less informed Muslims into accepting Wahhabism. Wahhabis say, “You must follow the Muslims of the Salaf.” (This is undoubtedly true.) Then the Wahhabi semantics: “Therefore you must be a Salafi and nothing else. Following anything else means you’re following a path that is different from the Muslims of the Salaf.” By such deceptive semantics, the less informed Muslims believe that Salafis must truly represent the pristine interpretations of the early Muslims of the Salaf. After all, the word Salafi sounds like Salaf, so it must truly be representative of it. Far from it. When the less informed goes beyond semantics and blind faith and investigates what a Salafi believes, the truth unveiled is that the understanding of Salafis (Wahhabis) is different and contradictory to the understanding and positions of the pious Muslims who lived in the Salaf – and the majority of Muslims who have ever lived (Sunnis).



Wahhabi-Salafi variety


The Wahhabi-Salafis believe that Sunnis have been vehemently wrong for the past 1,000+ years and aim to bring the Muslims out of a state of ignorance (jahilliyya) that has existed, in their minds, since the time of the pious adherents of the Salaf. Even if the majority of orthodox Sunni Muslims were strong today, indeed if they ruled an empire that stretched far to every corner of the globe, it would still be a failure to Salafis because to them the foundations of such a political system would have been based on reprehensible innovation (bid’a) and blasphemy (kufr).

To the Salafi, the presence and power of Sunni orthodoxy, in all of its manifestations as illustrated throughout Islamic history, is just as impure as the rising European hegemony in all of its manifestations since the demise of the Muslim Ottoman Empire. To the Salafis, a minority in this world, the world is an abode of blasphemy, ruled and occupied by infidels that demands reformation through both non-violent and violent means to bring about a supposedly pure Islamic world system.

Wahhabi-Salafis come in various strains, some being more extreme than others. The variety in strains is due to differences in approach of bringing the Muslims back to a state of strengthened belief based on the example of the pious ancestors. It must be emphasized that although all Wahhabis are called Salafis, all Salafis are not purely Wahhabi. “Salafi Muslims” include those like Syed Qutb who wish to eradicate the supposed current state of ignorance (jahiliyya) and bring Muslims back to a state of purity – a purity reminiscent of the purity of Muslims who lived in the time period of the Salaf. However, all Salafi Muslims, whether they are Wahhabi or Qutbi, admire with exaggeration the role models Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab and Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, whose hard-line interpretations have inspired revolutionaries today. Therefore, although all Salafis are not Wahhabis, they admire many of the same role models – role models who have been rejected and condemned by masses of orthodox Sunni scholars for their unauthentic representations of pristine Islam. It can also be said that all Wahhabis consider themselves to be Salafis and prefer to be called by this name (instead of Wahhabi), even though differences exist between Salafi groups.

Although there are differences in approach among Salafis, they have nonetheless allied themselves in an attempt to make the Salafi vision a reality by both non-violent and violent means.

An example of this are the Salafi-oriented Deobandis and their alliance with the Wahhabis. The alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood (and its various factions and offshoots) and the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia was strengthened during the 1950s and 1960s in the struggle of the Muslim Brotherhood against Egypt’s Nasserist regime. Saudis had provided refuge for some leaders of the Brotherhood, and also provided assistance to them in other Arab States. The Wahhabi-Salafi alliance was further strengthened as a response to the growing threat of Shi’ah power when the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran revolted and overthrew the U.S.-allied Shah in 1979.

Lastly, the alliance made itself manifest in the holy struggle (jihad) against the atheist/Communist Soviets in Afghanistan. Salafis of all strains worked together as the “righteous Sunnis” to counter the Shi’ah-Communist threat, from proselytizing to killing to make their Salafism prevail. Indeed, Salafis have used both proselytizing and revolutionary means to express their message using both political and apolitical approaches. So-called “Sunni terrorism” today is perpetrated by radical Salafis who desire to replace “infidel” governments with myopic “scholars” who adhere to their fanatical interpretations and ideologies. Their tentacles are spread to all corners of the globe, including Bosnia, Albania, Indonesia, Philippines, Uzbekistan, England, Malaysia, South Africa, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Salafis have demonstrated the havoc they are capable of wreaking in recent decades.



Wahhabis as neo-Kharijites



The Wahhabis are especially notorious for reviving the ways of the Khawarij (or Kharijites). They originated in the time of the caliphates of Uthman and Ali, among the closest companions to Prophet Muhammad. They were the earliest group of fanatics who separated themselves from the Muslim community. They arose in opposition to Ali – Prophet Muhammad’s son-in-law – because of his willingness to arbitrate with Mu’awiyah, governor of Damascus at that time, over the issue of the caliphate. The Khawarij, meaning “those who exited,” slung accusations of blasphemy against Ali and Mu’awiyah – and those who followed them – saying that the Qur’an, and not them, had the ultimate authority in the matter. Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, in his book Talbis Iblis (The Devil’s Deception) under the chapter heading “A Mention of the Devil’s Delusion upon the Kharijites,” says that Dhu’l-Khuwaysira al-Tamimi was the first Kharijite in Islam and that “[h]is fault was to be satisfied with his own view; had he paused he would have realized that there is no view superior to that of Allah’s Messenger…” Furthermore, the orthodox Sunni scholar Imam Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi discusses the Kharijite rebellions and their bloody massacres of tens of thousands of Muslims in one of his books. He explicitly mentions the Azariqa, one of the most atrocious Kharijite movements led by Nafi’ ibn al-Azraq from the tribe of Banu Hanifa – the same tribe where the heretic Musaylima the Prevaricator (or Liar) who claimed prophethood alongside Prophet Muhammad came from. Just as the Khawarij threw accusations of blasphemy on Ali and Mu’awiya, Wahhabis throw accusations of blasphemy against Sunnis and Shi’ites.





The Al-Sa`ud and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the founder of Wahhabism



Wahhabism is named after the its founder, Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1792), and has its roots in the land now known as Saudi Arabia. Without this man, the al-Sa`ud ‎, one of many clans spread over the Arabian peninsula, would not have had the inspiration, reason, and determination to consolidate the power that they did and wage "jihad" on people they perceived to be “polytheists” – those who attribute partners in worship to Almighty God. How intimately close was al-Sa`ud‎’s association with Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab? Robert Lacey eloquently illustrates this association:



Until [Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s] coming the Al Sa`ud ‎ had been a minor sheikhly clan like many others in Nejd, townsmen and farmers, making a comfortable living from trade, dates and perhaps a little horse-breeding, combining with the desert tribes to raid outwards when they felt strong, prudently retrenching in times of weakness. Modestly independent, they were in no way empire builders, and it is not likely that the wider world would ever have heard of them without their alliance with the Teacher.[2]



The al-Sa`ud are originally from the village of ad-Diriyah, located in Najd, in eastern Arabia situated near modern day Riyadh, the capital of Sa`ud‎i Arabia. Ancestors of Sau’ud Ibn Muhammad, whom little is known about, settled in the area as agriculturists and gradually grew in number over time into the clan of al-Sa`ud ‎.

Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab was raised in Uyainah, an oasis in southern Najd, and was from the Banu Tamim tribe. He came from a religious family and left Uyainah in pursuit of Islamic knowledge. He traveled to Mecca, Medina, Iraq, and Iran to acquire knowledge from different teachers. When he returned to his homeland of Uyainah, he preached what he believed to be Islam in its purity – which was, in fact, a vicious assault on traditional Sunni Islam.

The orthodox Sunni scholar Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi said that the teachers of Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, including two teachers he had studied with in Medina – Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi and Shaykh Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi – became aware of his anti-Sunni Wahhabi creed and warned Muslims from him. His shaykhs, including the two aforementioned shaykhs, used to say: “God will allow him [to] be led astray; but even unhappier will be the lot of those misled by him.”[3]

Moreover, Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab’s own father had warned Muslims from him, as did his biological brother, Sulayman Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, an orthodox Sunni scholar who refuted him in a book entitled al-Sawa’iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd `ala al-Wahhabiyya [“Divine Lightnings in Refuting the Wahhabis”]. Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab was refuted by the orthodox Sunni scholars for his many ugly innovations. Perhaps his most famous book, Kitab at-Tawheed (Book of Unity of God) is widely circulated amongst Wahhabis worldwide, including the United States. His book is popular in Wahhabi circles, although orthodox Sunni scholars have said that there is nothing scholarly about it, both in terms of its content and its style.



Ibn Taymiyah: the Wahhabi founder’s role model



It is worth giving an overview of a man named Ahmed Ibn Taymiyah (1263-1328) who lived a few hundred years before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab. The Wahhabi founder admired him as a role model and embraced many of his pseudo-Sunni positions. Who exactly was Ibn Taymiyah and what did orthodox Sunni scholars say about him? Muslim scholars had mixed opinions about him depending on his interpretation of various issues. His straying from mainstream Sunni Islam on particular issues of creed (`aqeedah) and worship (`ibadat) made him an extremely controversial figure in the Muslim community.

Ibn Taymiya has won the reputation of being the true bearer of the early pious Muslims, especially among reformist revolutionaries, while the majority of orthodox Sunnis have accused him of reprehensible bid’ah (reprehenisible innovation), some accusing him of kufr (unbelief).[4]

It behooves one to ask why Ibn Taymiyah had received so much opposition from reputable Sunni scholars who were known for their asceticism, trustworthiness, and piety. Some of Ibn Taymiyah’s anti-Sunni and controversial positions include:

(1) His claim that Allah’s Attributes are “literal”, thereby attributing God with created attributes and becoming an anthropomorphist;

(2) His claim that created things existed eternally with Allah;

(3) His opposition to the scholarly consensus on the divorce issue;

(4) His opposition to the orthodox Sunni practice of tawassul (asking Allah for things using a deceased pious individual as an intermediary);

(5) His saying that starting a trip to visit the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) invalidates the shortening of prayer;

(6) His saying that the torture of the people of Hell stops and doesn’t last forever;

(7) His saying that Allah has a limit (hadd) that only He Knows;

(8) His saying that Allah literally sits on the Throne (al-Kursi) and has left space for Prophet Muhammad (s) to sit next to Him;

(9) His claim that touching the grave of Prophet Muhammad (s) is polytheism (shirk);

(10) His claim that that making supplication at the Prophet Muhammad’s grave to seek a better status from Allah is a reprehensible innovation;

(11) His claim that Allah descends and comparing Allah’s “descent” with his, as he stepped down from a minbar while giving a sermon (khutba) to Muslims;

(12) His classifying of oneness in worship of Allah (tawheed) into two parts: Tawhid al-rububiyya and Tawhid al-uluhiyya, which was never done by pious adherents of the salaf.



Although Ibn Taymiyah’s unorthodox, pseudo-Sunni positions were kept away from the public in Syria and Egypt due to the consensus of orthodox Sunni scholars of his deviance, his teachings were nevertheless circulating in hiding. An orthodox Sunni scholar says:


Indeed, when a wealthy trader from Jeddah brought to life the long-dead ‘aqida [creed] of Ibn Taymiya at the beginning of this century by financing the printing in Egypt of Ibn Taymiya’s Minhaj al-sunna al-nabawiyya [italics mine] and other works, the Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Bakhit al-Muti‘i, faced with new questions about the validity of anthropomorphism, wrote: "It was a fitna (strife) that was sleeping; may Allah curse him who awakened it."



It is important to emphasize that although many of the positions of Ibn Taymiyah and Wahhabis are identical, they nonetheless contradict each other in some positions. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts Sufism (Tasawwuf) as a legitimate science of Islam (as all orthodox Sunni Muslims do), Wahhabis reject it wholesale as an ugly innovation in the religion. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts the legitimacy of commemorating Prophet Muhammad’s birthday (Mawlid) – accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims as legitimate – Wahhabis reject it as a reprehensible innovation that is to be repudiated.

Ibn Taymiyah is an inspiration to Islamist groups that call for revolution. Kepel says, “Ibn Taymiyya (1268-1323) – a primary reference for the Sunni Islamist movement – would be abundantly quoted to justify the assassination of Sadat in 1981…and even to condemn the Saudi leadership and call for its overthrow in the mid-1990s”.[5]

Sivan says that only six months before Sadat was assassinated, the weekly Mayo singled out Ibn Taymiyya as “the most pervasive and deleterious influence upon Egyptian youth.” Sivan further says that Mayo concluded that “the proliferating Muslim associations at the [Egyptian] universities, where Ibn Taymiyya’s views prevail, have been spawning various terrorist groups.” Indeed, a book entitled The Absent Precept, by `Abd al-Salam Faraj – the "spiritual" leader of Sadat’s assassins who was tried and executed by the Egyptian government – strongly refers to Ibn Taymiyya’s and some of his disciples’ writings. Three of four of Sadat’s assassins willingly read a lot of Ibn Taymiyya’s works on their own.[6]

Ibn Taymiyah is also noted to be a favorite of other Salafi extremists, including the Muslim Brotherhood’s Syed Qutb. Ibn Taymiyyah’s student, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, is also frequently cited by Salafis of all colors.



Ibn Taymiyah’s “fatwa” of jihad against Muslims

What is also well-known about Ibn Taymiyah is that he lived in turbulent times when the Mongols had sacked Baghdad and conquered the Abassid Empire in 1258. In 1303, he was ordered by the Mamluk Sultan to give a fatwa (religious edict) legalizing jihad against the Mongols. Waging a holy war on the Mongols for the purpose of eliminating any threat to Mamluk power was no easy matter. The Mongol Khan Mahmoud Ghazan had converted to Islam in 1295. Although they were Muslims who did not adhere to Islamic Law in practice, and also supported the Yasa Mongol of code of law, they were deemed apostates by the edict of Ibn Taymiyah. To Ibn Taymiyah, Islamic Law was not only rejected by Mongols because of their lack of wholesale adherence, but the “infidel” Yasa code of law made them legal targets of extermination. The so-called jihad ensued and the Mongol threat to Syria was exterminated. Wahhabis and other Salafis to this day brand the Mongol Mahmoud Ghazan as a kafir (disbeliever). Orthodox Sunni Muslims, however, have praised Mahmoud Ghazan as a Muslim. Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani writes:



In fact, Ghazan Khan was a firm believer in Islam. Al-Dhahabi relates that he became a Muslim at the hands of the Sufi shaykh Sadr al-Din Abu al-Majami’ Ibrahim al-Juwayni (d.720), one of Dhahabi’s own shaykhs of hadith….During his rule he had a huge mosque built in Tabriz in addition to twelve Islamic schools (madrasa), numerous hostels (khaniqa), forts (ribat), a school for the secular sciences, and an observatory. He supplied Mecca and Medina with many gifts. He followed one of the schools (madhahib) of the Ahl al-Sunna [who are the orthodox Sunnis] and was respectful of religious scholars. He had the descendants of the Prophet mentioned before the princes and princesses of his house in the state records, and he introduced the turban as the court headgear.[7]



Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab would later follow Ibn Taymiyah’s footsteps and slaughter thousands of Muslims in Arabia.



Orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyah’s pseudo-Sunni positions



Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned by a fatwa (religious edict) signed by four orthodox Sunni judges in the year 726 A.H for his deviant and unorthodox positions. Note that each of the four judges represents the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims belong to today. This illustrates that Ibn Taymiyah did not adhere to the authentic teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam as represented by the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. There is no evidence to indicate that there was a “conspiracy” against Ibn Taymiyyah to condemn him, as Wahhabis and other Salafis purport in his defense. The names of the four judges are: Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Jama’ah, ash-Shafi’i, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn al-Hariri, al-`Ansari, al-Hanafi, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr, al-Maliki, and Qadi [Judge] Ahmad Ibn `Umar, al-Maqdisi, al-Hanbali.

Some orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyya for his deviances and opposition to the positions of orthodox Sunni Islam include: Taqiyy-ud-Din as-Subkiyy, Faqih Muhammad Ibn `Umar Ibn Makkiyy, Hafiz Salah-ud-Din al-`Ala’i, Qadi, Mufassir Badr-ud-Din Ibn Jama’ah, Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Kilabi al-Halabi, Hafiz Ibn Daqiq al-`Id, Qadi Kamal-ud-Din az-Zamalkani, Qadi Safi-ud-Din al-Hindi, Faqih and Muhaddith `Ali Ibn Muhammad al-Baji ash-Shafi’i, the historian al-Fakhr Ibn al-Mu`allim al-Qurashi, Hafiz Dhahabi, Mufassir Abu Hayyan al-`Andalusi, and Faqih and voyager Ibn Batutah.





Najd – A place not so holy


Najd, in Saudi Arabia, is where the founder of Wahhabism came from. It was a mostly barren and dry land inhabited by Bedouins who used to graze animals. With sparse water, it is not the most comfortable of places since its climate has extremes of heat and cold in the summer and winter seasons. Najd has a notorious reputation in the orthodox Sunni community for originating seditions (fitan) long before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab came. Indeed, it is known to have harbored many trouble mongering individuals who challenged the Muslims both spiritually and physically. The orthodox Sunni Iraqi scholar Jamal Effendi al-Zahawi says:



Famous writers of the day made a point of noting the similarity between Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s beginnings and those of the false prophets prominent in Islam’s intial epoch like Musaylima the Prevaricator, Sajah al-Aswad al-Anasi, Tulaiha al-Asadi and others of his kind [14].



Fenari says that although Najd is closest to to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, it has only been dispraised by Prophet Muhammad (s) in authentic traditions. He raises another interesting point that while many Arabian tribes were praised by Prophet Muhammad, the Banu Tamim – the most well known tribe of Central Arabia where Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab was from – is praised only once. Moreover, authentic traditions that “explicitly critique” the Banu Tamimites are far more numerous. Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, documents the evolution of the Kharijite movements and illustrates how the tribe of Banu Tamim played a leading role in it. Imam Abd al-Qahir also states that the Tamimites – and the Central Arabians in general – were intimately involved in the Kharijite rebellions against the Muslims, contrasting their immense contribution to the minimal contribution of members of the tribes of Medina and Yemen. It is from Banu Tamim where a man name Abu Bilal Mirdas came from, who, although being a relentless worshipper, turned out to be one of the most barbaric Kharijite fanatics. “He is remembered as the first who said the Tahkim – the formula ‘The judgment is Allah’s alone’ – on the Day of Siffin, which became the slogan of the later Kharijite da’wa.” It is reminiscent of what Wahhabis say today – that they strictly adhere to nothing but the Qur’an and Sunnah – although it is merely a jumble of words without coherent meaning. Najda ibn Amir of the tribe of Banu Hanifa was a Kharijite whose homeland was Najd, and the best known woman among the Kharijites was a Tamimite named Qutam bint `Alqama. It is fascinating to see that fanatics of all types came from a region where the fanatic Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab came from.





The Wahhabi assault on graves and the massacre of Muslim communities in Riyadh and Karbala



With the ferocious zeal of a “divine” mission, aimed at terminating what they perceived as the filthy polytheistic scum of Arabia, the Wahhabi army led by Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ first destroyed graves and objects in Najdi towns and villages that were used for what they condemned as “polytheistic practices.” The Wahhabi movement mustered supporters who rallied behind their cause, increased the size of their army, and successfully united most of the people of Najd under the banner of Wahhabism by 1765.

The assault and “jihad”of Wahhabism did not stop after the death of Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ in 1765, but continued with unrelenting and barbaric force under the leadership of his son, Abdul-Aziz, who captured the city of Riyadh in 1773. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab died a year earlier but left four sons who continued spreading Wahhabism and strengthened the Wahhabi family’s alliance with the Al-Sa`ud ‎.[8] Later, in 1801, the Wahhabi army marched to Karbala with a force of 10,000 men and 6,000 camels.[9] Upon reaching Karbala, they mercilessly and indiscriminately attacked its inhabitants for eight hours, massacring about 5,000 people. Moreover, they severely damaged Imam Hussein’s mosque, looted the city, and left the carnage-laden city with its treasures on 200 camels.[10] This holocaust won the Wahhabi criminals the unforgiving hatred and wrath of the Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims, who, until this day, curse them passionately. The Shi’ite Muslims consider Imam Hussein, a grandson of Prophet Muhammad (s), one of the most sacred figures and his tomb one of the most sacred sites on earth. Every year, thousands of Shi’ites gather at the site to commemorate the death of Imam Hussein. Visiting Karbala one is indeed filled me with awe and spiritual strength even as a devout Sunni. Shi’ite wrath, of course, didn’t mean much to the Wahhabis. The Shi’ites, along with the Sunnis, had already been labeled as “blasphemers” for practicing tawassul and tabarruk. What are these practices? Are they part of Sunni Islam or not?



Tawassul and Tabarruk
Nuh Keller, an orthodox Sunni scholar, defines tawassul as “supplicating Allah by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, a good deed, or a name or attribute of Allah Most High”. I remember doing tawassul in 1989 at Imam Abu Hanifah’s tomb, the noble and renowned Islamic scholar whose ijtihad the majority of Sunni Muslims follow. Although I had not studied much about Islam and the practices of tawassul at that time, I had been told by trustworthy Muslims that using pious individuals as intermediaries when asking Allah for something was a blessed opportunity that I couldn’t afford to miss. I had also visited the tomb of the great sufi and saint Abdul-Qadir Jilani and performed tawassul over there. An example of tawassul is: “Oh Allah, I ask you to cure my illness by means of the noble status of Imam Abu Hanifah (s).”



When doing tawassul, the source of blessings (barakah) when asking Allah through an intermediary is Allah – not the intermediary. The intermediary is simply a means to ask Allah for things. Although it is not necessary for a Muslim to use a pious intermediary when asking Allah, it is recommended because it was a practice of Prophet Muhammad (s), the Companions (ra), and of the great scholars of Islam (ra). It is not only prophets and saints (in their graves) that are used as means to asking Allah. A Muslim can also ask Allah through relics (tabarruk) that belonged to pious people, and may even use amulets with verses on the Qur’an on them as a means of asking God for protection from evil. It is not the means that provides protection, but Allah.



Wahhabis reject a type of tawassul accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims


Although Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Wahhabis believe that tawassul by one’s good deeds, a name or attribute of God, or intercession by someone who is alive and present is permissible, Wahhabis accuse Sunnis (and Shi’ites) of committing shirk (attributing partners in worship to God) when doing tawassul through an intermediary who is not alive or present (in the worldly life). That is, to a Wahhabi, tawassul through an intermediary who has died and is in his grave is ugly blasphemy. This is critical to know because this is the primary reason why Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab and the Al-Sa`ud ‎ criminals that collaborated with him massacred many Muslims in the Arabian peninsula. Muslims had been doing this form of tawassul for over 1,000 years but the Wahhabis believed it was blasphemy that had to be exterminated by the sword. What Wahhabis were doing in actuality was massacring orthodox Sunni Muslims, even though they foolishly believed they were fighting against evil blasphemors that didn’t deserve to live. Wahhabis were not following the footsteps of the pious Salaf, but the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah who a couple of hundred years before them denounced that particular form of tawassul as sinful. Wahhabis today forbid Muslims from doing tawassul through Prophet Muhammad, and have enforced strict rules around his grave in Medina, Saudi Arabia. It is for this reason that Wahhabis forbid Muslims from visiting the graves of pious Muslims, and have destroyed markings on graves to prevent Muslims from knowing the specific spots where saints are buried. Yet, it is interesting to note the hypocritical nature of the Wahhabis when they had refused the demolishing of the grave of Ibn Taymiyah in Damascus, Syria to make way for a road. Somehow, this is not “polytheism” to them, but it is “polytheism” for the majority of the Islamic community.



The flawed Wahhabi understanding of tawassul: confusing the means with the Giver



Wahhabis wrongly accuse orthodox Sunnis of committing shirk (polytheism) when asking God for something using an intermediary, whether the means is a pious human being in his grave, objects (tabarruk), or seeking protection from God using amulets with verses of the Qur’an written on them (ruqya). The Wahhabi believes that asking God for something through a means is the same as worshipping the means itself. That is, for people who do tawassul through a pious saint in his grave is asking the pious saint – and not God – for things. People who do tabarruk through a relic of Prophet Muhammad (s) are asking the relic – and not God – for blessings, and people who wear ruqya are asking the ruqya itself for protection – and not God. When a Muslim visits the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) grave and calls on the Prophet (s), “Oh Prophet,” (Ya Rasulullah), the Wahhabis accuse such a person of worshipping the Prophet (s) and refuse to accept the understanding that the Prophet himself is a means to asking God for things. Such an act to Wahhabis drives a Muslim out of the realms of the religion of Islam. In sum, the Wahhabis believe that such people are worshipping creation alongside God, and are therefore guilty of polytheism – attributing partners in worship to God.

The now deceased former Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Ibn Baz, defends Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s accusation of polytheism that he had heaped on the Muslim masses and his resorting to “jihad” by saying that Muslims had gone astray because they had “worshipped” things are than God:



The people of Najd had lived in a condition that could not be approved of by any believer. Polytheism had appeared there and spread widely. People worshipped domes, trees, rocks, caves or any persons who claimed to be Auliya (saints) though they might be insane and idiotic.

There were few to rise up for the sake of Allah and support His Religion. Same was the situation in Makkah and Madinah as well as Yemen where building domes on the graves, invoking the saints for their help and other forms of polytheism were predominant. But in Najd polytheistic beliefs and practices were all the more intense.

In Najd people had worshipped different objects ranging from the graves, caves and trees to the obsessed and mad men who were called saints.

When the Sheikh [Ibn Abdul-Wahhab] saw that polytheism was dominating the people and that no one showed any disapproval of it or no one was ready to call the people back to Allah, he decided to labour singly and patiently in the field. He knew that nothing could be achieved without jihad (holy fighting), patience and suffering [italics mine].[11]



Orthodox Sunnis, however, have never claimed to worship the means, but only God. Because Wahhabis didn’t tolerate this, they massacred thousands of Muslims who they saw as being “polytheists” in Arabia. In actuality, they were Sunni Muslims who were following Islam in its purity as taught by the pious ancestors that lived in the time period of the Salaf.





Wahhabis attribute a place and direction to Allah



While accusing the masses of Muslims of being polytheists, Wahhabis themselves have differentiated themselves from other Muslims in their understanding of creed. Due to the Wahhabis’ adherence to an unorthodox, grossly flawed literal understanding of God’s Attributes, they comfortably believe that Allah has created or human attributes, and then attempt to hide their anthropomorphism by saying that they don’t know ‘how’ Allah has such attributes. For example, Bilal Philips, a Wahhabi author says:



He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit. He has a form befitting His majesty [italics mine], the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.



Discussing each part of his statement will shed light into his anthropomorphic mind. Bilal Philips says that “Allah has a form befitting His majesty…” What he confirms in his mind is that Allah definitely has a form. He even specifies the kind of form by saying: “He [Allah] has neither corporeal body…” meaning that Allah has a form that is not like the forms of creation, and then says, “nor is He a formless spirit. Then he says, “He has a form befitting His majesty…” The problem with such statements to a Muslim is that they express blatant anthropomorphism. What Bilal Philips is doing here is foolishly attributing a “form” to God that, in his mind, nobody has ever seen. Therefore, Bilal Philips believes that God has some type of form, or non-corporeal body. No orthodox Sunni Muslim scholar has ever said such a perfidious thing.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, one of the greatest mujtahid Sunni imams ever to have lived, refuted such anthropomorphic statements over a thousand years before Bilal Philips was born. The great Sunni Ash`ari scholar, Imam al-Bayhaqi, in his Manaqib Ahmad relates with an authentic chain that Imam Ahmed said:



A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies.



Imam Ahmad continues:



The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components. The expression has not been handed down in Shari’ah. Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.



Imam Ahmed is a pious adherer of the time period of the Salaf that was praised by Prophet Muhammad (s). How can Bilal Philips claim to represent the pious forefathers of the Salaf? He not only contradicts them but is vehemently refuted by them. The great pious predecessors had refuted ignoramuses like Bilal Philips in their times long ago.

Blatant anthropomorphism is also illustrated by the Wahhabi Ibn Baz’s commentary on the great work of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi called “Aqeedah at-Tahawiyyah” (The Creed of Tahawi), a work that has been praised by the orthodox Sunni community as being representative of Sunni orthodoxy. The now deceased Ibn Baz was Saudi Arabia’s grand Mufti.

Article #38 of Imam Tahawi’s work states:



He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created entities are.



Ibn Baz, in a footnote, comments:



Allah is beyond limits that we know but has limits He knows.



In another footnote, he says:

By hudood (limits) the author [referring to Imam Tahawi] means [limits] such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.

Ibn Baz deceptively attempts to represent the noble Sunni Imam al-Tahawi as an anthropomorphist by putting his own anthropomorphic interpretation of Imam Tahawi’s words in his mouth. It must be emphasized that not a single orthodox Sunni scholar understood Imam Tahawi’s statement as Ibn Baz did.



Ibn Baz’s also shows anthropomorphism in a commentary by the great Sunni scholar Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani. Ibn Baz says:



As for Ahl ul-Sunna – and these are the Companions and those who followed them in excellence – they assert a direction for Allah, and that is the direction of elevation, believing that the Exalted is above the Throne without giving an example and without entering into modality.



Another now deceased Wahhabi scholar, Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, blatantly expresses his anthropomorphism. He says:



Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.



The great Sunni Hanbali scholar, Ibn al-Jawzi, had refuted anthropomorphists who were saying that Allah’s establishment is ‘in person’ hundreds of years ago:



Whoever says: He is established on the Throne ‘in person’ (bi dhatihi), has diverted the sense of the verse to that of sensory perception. Such a person must not neglect that the principle is established by the mind, by which we have come to know Allah, and have attributed pre-eternity to Him decisively. If you said: We read the hadiths and keep quiet, no one would criticize you; it is only your taking them in the external sense which is hideous. Therefore do not bring into the school of this pious man of the Salaf – Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] – what does not belong in it. You have clothed this madhab [or school of jurisprudence] with an ugly deed, so that it is no longer said ‘Hanbali’ except in the sense of ‘anthropomorphist’



Sulayman ibn `Abdul Allah ibn Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, the grandson of the Wahhabi movement’s founder, says:



Whoever believes or says: Allah is in person (bi dhatihi) in every place, or in one place: he is a disbeliever (kafir). It is obligatory to declare that Allah is distinct from His creation, established over His Throne without modality or likeness or exemplarity. Allah was and there was no place, then He created place and He is exalted as He was before He created place



Just as Bilal Philips affirms a form to Allah in his mind, and Ibn Baz confirms limits to Allah in his mind, al-Uthaymeen confirms that Allah is literally sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne in his mind. All of them have loyally followed the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the two arch-heretics who were instrumental in causing tribulation (fitna) and division among the Muslim masses because of their reprehensible, unorthodox interpretations of the Islamic sources.

Wahhabi anthropomorphists say: Allah is in a direction, Allah has limits, Allah is literally above the Throne, and that Allah is sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne. To a Muslim, the fact is that the Throne is located in a particular direction and a certain place. By understanding Allah to be above the Throne literally as the Wahhabis do, they are attributing Allah with created attributes and, as a result, are implying that a part of the creation was eternal with Allah. This opposes what the the Qur’an and the following hadith authentically related by al-Bukhari says:



Allah existed eternally and there was nothing else [italics mine].



Sunni orthodoxy clears Allah of all directions and places. To a Sunni, Allah has always existed without the need of a place, and He did not take a place for Himself after creating it. Orthodox Sunni scholars have said exactly what was understood by Prophet Muhammad (s) and his Companions (ra). Imam Abu Hanifah, the great mujtahid Imam who lived in the time period of the Salaf said: “Allah has no limits…”, period. And this is what Sunni orthodoxy represents.



Orthodox Sunni scholars oppose Wahhabism



I end this article with a selected list of orthodox Sunni scholars who have refuted Wahhabism and warned Muslims from its poison. The list of scholars, along with names of their books and related information, is quoted from the orthodox Sunni scholar Muhammad Hisham Kabbani[12]:



Al-Ahsa'i Al-Misri, Ahmad (1753-1826): Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect. His son Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Ahsa'i also wrote a book refuting them.



Al-Ahsa'i, Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Rahman: wrote a sixty-seven verse poem which begins with the verse:



Badat fitnatun kal layli qad ghattatil aafaaqa

wa sha``at fa kadat tublighul gharba wash sharaqa



[A confusion came about like nightfall covering the skies

and became widespread almost reaching the whole world]



Al-`Amrawi, `Abd al-Hayy, and `Abd al-Hakim Murad (Qarawiyyin University, Morocco): Al-tahdhir min al-ightirar bi ma ja'a fi kitab al-hiwar ["Warning Against Being Fooled By the Contents of the Book (by Ibn Mani`) A Debate With al-Maliki (an attack on Ibn `Alawi al-Maliki by a Wahhabi writer)"] (Fes: Qarawiyyin, 1984).



`Ata' Allah al-Makki: al-sarim al-hindi fil `unuq al-najdi ["The Indian Scimitar on the Najdi's Neck"].



Al-Azhari, `Abd Rabbih ibn Sulayman al-Shafi`i (The author of Sharh Jami' al-Usul li ahadith al-Rasul, a basic book of Usul al-Fiqh: Fayd al-Wahhab fi Bayan Ahl al-Haqq wa man dalla `an al-sawab, 4 vols. ["Allah's Outpouring in Differentiating the True Muslims From Those Who Deviated From the Truth"].



Al-`Azzami, `Allama al-shaykh Salama (d. 1379H): Al-Barahin al-sati`at ["The Radiant Proofs..."].



Al-Barakat al-Shafi`i al-Ahmadi al-Makki, `Abd al-Wahhab ibn Ahmad: unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.



al-Bulaqi, Mustafa al-Masri wrote a refutation to San`a'i's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's "Sa`adat al-Darayn" and consists in 126 verses beginning thus:



Bi hamdi wali al-hamdi la al-dhammi astabdi

Wa bil haqqi la bil khalqi lil haqqi astahdi



[By the glory of the Owner of glory, not baseness, do I overcome;

And by Allah, not by creatures, do I seek guidance to Allah]



Al-Buti, Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan (University of Damascus): Al-Salafiyyatu marhalatun zamaniyyatun mubarakatun la madhhabun islami ["The Salafiyya is a blessed historical period not an Islamic school of law"] (Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1988); Al-lamadhhabiyya akhtaru bid`atin tuhaddidu al-shari`a al-islamiyya ["Non-madhhabism is the most dangerous innovation presently menacing Islamic law"] (Damascus: Maktabat al-Farabi, n.d.).



Al-Dahesh ibn `Abd Allah, Dr. (Arab University of Morocco), ed. Munazara `ilmiyya bayna `Ali ibn Muhammad al-Sharif wa al-Imam Ahmad ibn Idris fi al-radd `ala Wahhabiyyat Najd, Tihama, wa `Asir ["Scholarly Debate Between the Sharif and Ahmad ibn Idris Against the Wahhabis of Najd, Tihama, and `Asir"].



Dahlan, al-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni (d. 1304/1886). Mufti of Mecca and Shaykh al-Islam (highest religious authority in the Ottoman jurisdiction) for the Hijaz region: al-Durar al-saniyyah fi al-radd ala al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Pure Pearls in Answering the Wahhabis"] pub. Egypt 1319 & 1347 H; Fitnat al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Wahhabi Fitna"]; Khulasat al-Kalam fi bayan Umara' al-Balad al-Haram ["The Summation Concerning the Leaders of the Sacrosanct Country"], a history of the Wahhabi fitna in Najd and the Hijaz.



al-Dajwi, Hamd Allah: al-Basa'ir li Munkiri al-tawassul ka amthal Muhd. Ibn `Abdul Wahhab ["The Evident Proofs Against Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession Like Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Wahhab"].



Shaykh al-Islam Dawud ibn Sulayman al-Baghdadi al-Hanafi (1815-1881 CE): al-Minha al-Wahbiyya fi radd al-Wahhabiyya ["The Divine Dispensation Concerning the Wahhabi Deviation"]; Ashadd al-Jihad fi Ibtal Da`wa al-Ijtihad ["The Most Violent Jihad in Proving False Those Who Falsely Claim Ijtihad"].



Al-Falani al-Maghribi, al-Muhaddith Salih: authored a large volume collating the answers of scholars of the Four Schools to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.



al-Habibi, Muhammad `Ashiq al-Rahman: `Adhab Allah al-Mujdi li Junun al-Munkir al-Najdi ["Allah's Terrible Punishment for the Mad Rejector From Najd"].



Al-Haddad, al-Sayyid al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan ibn al-Qutb

Sayyidi `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad al-Shafi`i: al-Sayf al-batir li `unq al-munkir `ala al-akabir ["The Sharp Sword for the Neck of the Assailant of Great Scholars"]. Unpublished manuscript of about 100 folios; Misbah al-anam wa jala' al-zalam fi radd shubah al-bid`i al-najdi al-lati adalla biha al-`awamm ["The Lamp of Mankind and the Illumination of Darkness Concerning the Refutation of the Errors of the Innovator From Najd by Which He Had Misled the Common People"]. Published 1325H.



Al-Hamami al-Misri, Shaykh Mustafa: Ghawth al-`ibad bi bayan al-rashad ["The Helper of Allah's Servants According to the Affirmation of Guidance"].



Al-Hilmi al-Qadiri al-Iskandari, Shaykh Ibrahim: Jalal al-haqq fi kashf ahwal ashrar al-khalq ["The Splendor of Truth in Exposing the Worst of People] (pub. 1355H).



Al-Husayni, `Amili, Muhsin (1865-1952). Kashf al-irtiyab fi atba` Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab ["The Dispelling of Doubt Concerning the Followers of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab"]. [Yemen?]: Maktabat al-Yaman al-Kubra, 198?.



Al-Kabbani, Muhammad Hisham, Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine, vol. 1-7, As-Sunnah Foundation of America, 1998.

_____, Islamic Beliefs and Doctrine According to Ahl as-Sunna - A Repudiation of "Salafi" Innovations, ASFA, 1996.

_____, Innovation and True Belief: the Celebration of Mawlid According to the Qur'an and Sunna and the Scholars of Islam, ASFA, 1995.

_____, Salafi Movement Unveiled, ASFA, 1997.


Ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Shafi`i, `Abd Allah: Tajrid sayf al-jihad `ala mudda`i al-ijtihad ["The drawing of the sword of jihad against the false claimants to ijtihad"].



The family of Ibn `Abd al-Razzaq al-Hanbali in Zubara and Bahrayn possess both manuscript and printed refutations by scholars of the Four Schools from Mecca, Madina, al-Ahsa', al-Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, Yemen and other Islamic regions.



Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab al-Najdi, `Allama al-Shaykh Sulayman, elder brother of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab: al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["Divine Lightnings in Answering the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Ibrahim Muhammad al-Batawi. Cairo: Dar al-insan, 1987. Offset reprint by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul: Hakikat Kitabevi, 1994. Prefaces by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi`i and Shaykh Muhammad Hayyan al-Sindi (Muhammad Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab's shaykh) to the effect that Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is "dall mudill" ("misguided and misguiding").



Ibn `Abidin al-Hanafi, al-Sayyid Muhammad Amin: Radd al-muhtar `ala al-durr al-mukhtar, Vol. 3, Kitab al-Iman, Bab al-bughat ["Answer to the Perplexed: A Commentary on "The Chosen Pearl,"" Book of Belief, Chapter on Rebels]. Cairo: Dar al-Tiba`a al-Misriyya, 1272 H.



Ibn `Afaliq al-Hanbali, Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Rahman: Tahakkum al-muqallidin bi man idda`a tajdid al-din [Sarcasm of the muqallids against the false claimants to the Renewal of Religion]. A very comprehensive book refuting the Wahhabi heresy and posting questions which Ibn `Abdul Wahhab and his followers were unable to answer for the most part.



Ibn Dawud al-Hanbali, `Afif al-Din `Abd Allah: as-sawa`iq wa al-ru`ud ["Lightnings and thunder"], a very important book in 20 chapters. According to the Mufti of Yemen Shaykh al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad al-Haddad, the mufti of Yemen, "This book has received the approval of the `ulama of Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, and Ahsa' [Arabian peninsula]. It was summarized by Muhammad ibn Bashir the qadi of Ra's al-Khayma in Oman."



Ibn Ghalbun al-Libi also wrote a refutation in forty verses of al-San`ani's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-darayn and begins thus:



Salami `ala ahlil isabati wal-rushdi

Wa laysa `ala najdi wa man halla fi najdi



[My salutation is upon the people of truth and guidance

And not upon Najd nor the one who settled in Najd]



Ibn Khalifa `Ulyawi al-Azhari: Hadhihi `aqidatu al-salaf wa al-khalaf fi dhat Allahi ta`ala wa sifatihi wa af`alihi wa al-jawab al-sahih li ma waqa`a fihi al-khilaf min al-furu` bayna al-da`in li al-Salafiyya wa atba` al-madhahib al-arba`a al-islamiyya ["This is the doctrine of the Predecessors and the Descendants concerning the divergences in the branches between those who call to al-Salafiyya and the followers of the Four Islamic Schools of Law"] (Damascus: Matba`at Zayd ibn Thabit, 1398/1977.



Kawthari al-Hanafi, Muhammad Zahid. Maqalat al-Kawthari. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Azhariyah li al-Turath, 1994).



Al-Kawwash al-Tunisi, `Allama Al-Shaykh Salih: his refutation of the Wahhabi sect is contained in Samnudi's volume: "Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn."



Khazbek, Shaykh Hasan: Al-maqalat al-wafiyyat fi al-radd `ala al-wahhabiyyah ["Complete Treatise in Refuting the Wahhabis"].



Makhluf, Muhammad Hasanayn: Risalat fi hukm al-tawassul bil-anbiya wal-awliya ["Treatise on the Ruling Concerning the Use of Prophets and Saints as Intermediaries"].



Al-Maliki al-Husayni, Al-muhaddith Muhammad al-Hasan ibn `Alawi: Mafahimu yajibu an tusahhah ["Notions that should be corrected"] 4th ed. (Dubai: Hashr ibn Muhammad Dalmuk, 1986); Muhammad al-insanu al-kamil ["Muhammad, the Perfect Human Being"] 3rd ed. (Jeddah: Dar al-Shuruq, 1404/1984).



Al-Mashrifi al-Maliki al-Jaza'iri: Izhar al-`uquq mimman mana`a al-tawassul bil nabi wa al-wali al-saduq ["The Exposure of the Disobedience of Those Who Forbid Using the Intermediary of the Prophets and the Truthful Saints].



Al-Mirghani al-Ta'ifi, `Allama `Abd Allah ibn Ibrahim (d. 1793): Tahrid al-aghbiya' `ala al-Istighatha bil-anbiya' wal-awliya ["The Provocations of the Ignorant Against Seeking the Help of Prophets and Saints"] (Cairo: al-Halabi, 1939).



Mu'in al-Haqq al-Dehlawi (d. 1289): Sayf al-Jabbar al-maslul `ala a`da' al-Abrar ["The Sword of the Almighty Drawn Against the Enemies of the Pure Ones"].



Al-Muwaysi al-Yamani, `Abd Allah ibn `Isa: Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.



Al-Nabahani al-Shafi`i, al-qadi al-muhaddith Yusuf ibn Isma`il (1850-1932): Shawahid al-Haqq fi al-istighatha bi sayyid al-Khalq (s) ["The Proofs of Truth in the Seeking of the Intercession of the Prophet"].



Al-Qabbani al-Basri al-Shafi`i, Allama Ahmad ibn `Ali: A manuscript treatise in approximately 10 chapters.



Al-Qadumi al-Nabulusi al-Hanbali: `AbdAllah: Rihlat ["Journey"].



Al-Qazwini, Muhammad Hasan, (d. 1825). Al-Barahin al-jaliyyah fi raf` tashkikat al-Wahhabiyah ["The Plain Demonstrations That Dispel the Aspersions of the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Muhammad Munir al-Husayni al-Milani. 1st ed. Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Wafa', 1987.



Al-Qudsi: al-Suyuf al-Siqal fi A`naq man ankara `ala al-awliya ba`d al-intiqal ["The Burnished Swords on the Necks of Those Who Deny the Role of Saints After Their Leaving This World"].



Al-Rifa`i, Yusuf al-Sayyid Hashim, President of the World Union of Islamic Propagation and Information: Adillat Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`at aw al-radd al-muhkam al-mani` `ala munkarat wa shubuhat Ibn Mani` fi tahajjumihi `ala al-sayyid Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki ["The Proofs of the People of the Way of the Prophet and the Muslim Community: or, the Strong and Decisive Refutation of Ibn Mani`'s Aberrations and Aspersions in his Assault on Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki"] (Kuwait: Dar al-siyasa, 1984).



Al-Samnudi al-Mansuri, al-`Allama al-Shaykh Ibrahim: Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn al-wahhabiyya wa muqallidat al-zahiriyyah ["Bliss in the Two Abodes: Refutation of the Two Sects, Wahhabis and Zahiri Followers"].



Al-Saqqaf al-Shafi`i, Hasan ibn `Ali, Islamic Research Intitute, Amman, Jordan: al-Ighatha bi adillat al-istighatha wa al-radd al-mubin `ala munkiri al-tawassul ["The Mercy of Allah in the Proofs of Seeking Intercession and the Clear Answer to Those who Reject it"]; Ilqam al hajar li al-mutatawil `ala al-Asha`ira min al-Bashar ["The Stoning of All Those Who Attack Ash'aris"]; Qamus shata'im al-Albani wa al-alfaz al-munkara al-lati yatluquha fi haqq ulama al-ummah wa fudalai'ha wa ghayrihim... ["Encyclopedia of al-Albani's Abhorrent Expressions Which He Uses Against the Scholars of the Community, its Eminent Men, and Others..."] Amman : Dar al-Imam al-Nawawi, 1993.



Al-Sawi al-Misri: Hashiyat `ala al-jalalayn ["Commentary on the Tafsir of the Two Jalal al-Din"].



Sayf al-Din Ahmed ibn Muhammad: Al-Albani Unveiled: An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues, 2nd ed. (London: s.n., 1994).



Al-Shatti al-Athari al-Hanbali, al-Sayyid Mustafa ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan, Mufti of Syria: al-Nuqul al-shar'iyyah fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["The Legal Proofs in Answering the Wahhabis"].



Al-Subki, al-hafiz Taqi al-Din (d. 756/1355): Al-durra al-mudiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya, ed. Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari ["The Luminous Pearl: A Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya"]; Al-rasa'il al-subkiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya wa tilmidhihi Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ed. Kamal al-Hut ["Subki's treatises in Answer to Ibn Taymiyya and his pupil Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya"] (Beirut: `Alam al-Kutub, 1983); Al-sayf al-saqil fi al-radd `ala Ibn Zafil ["The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya)" Cairo: Matba`at al-Sa`ada, 1937; Shifa' al-siqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam ["The healing of the sick in visiting the Best of Creation"].



Sunbul al-Hanafi al-Ta'ifi, Allama Tahir: Sima al-Intisar lil awliya' al-abrar ["The Mark of Victory Belongs to Allah's Pure Friends"].



Al-Tabataba'i al-Basri, al-Sayyid: also wrote a reply to San`a'i's poem which was excerpted in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-Darayn. After reading it, San`a'i reversed his position and said: "I have repented from what I said concerning the Najdi."



Al-Tamimi al-Maliki, `Allama Isma`il (d. 1248), Shaykh al-Islam in Tunis: wrote a refutation of a treatise of Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.



Al-Wazzani, al-Shaykh al-Mahdi, Mufti of Fes, Morocco: Wrote a refutation of Muhammad `Abduh's prohibition of tawassul.



al-Zahawi al-Baghdadi, Jamil Effendi Sidqi (d. 1355/1936): al-Fajr al-Sadiq fi al-radd 'ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq ["The True Dawn in Refuting Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession and the Miracles of Saints"] Pub. 1323/1905 in Egypt.



Al-Zamzami al-Shafi`i, Muhammad Salih, Imam of the Maqam Ibrahim in Mecca, wrote a book in 20 chapters against them according to al-Sayyid al-Haddad.

See also:



Ahmad, Qeyamuddin. The Wahhabi movement in India. 2nd rev. ed. New Delhi : Manohar, 1994.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Throughout the article, (s) means “peace be upon him,” and (ra) means “may Allah (swt) be pleased them.”

[2] Lacy, Robert. The Kingdom: Arabia & the House of Sa`ud ‎. p. 59.

[3] Zahawi, Jamal E (1996) The Doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna Versus the ‘Salafi’ Movement. Translated by Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani. As-Sunna Foundation of America.

[4] For example, orthodox Sunni scholar Abu Ala Bukhari accused people of unbelief (kufr) if they called Ibn Taymiyah “Shaykh”. Imam Zahid al-Kawthari accused Ibn Taymiyah’s positions on the creed to be tantamount to apostasy.

[5] Gilles, Kepel. Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, p. 72.

[6] Sivan, Emmanuel. Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. pg. 102-103.

[7] Kabbani, Hisham M (1996). Islamic Beliefs & Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna A Repudiation of “Salafi” Innovations. Volume I. As-Sunna Foundation of America.



[8] Safran, Nadav. (1988). Saudi Arabia: The Ceaseless Quest for Security. Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY. Pg. 11.

[9] Safran, Nadav. (1988). Saudi Arabia: The Ceaseless Quest for Security. Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY. Pg. 12.

[10] Bagot, Blubb, Sir J. (1961). War in the Desert .New York: Norton. Pg. 44.

[11] Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baz. “Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.” Available: www.alinaam.org.za/library/hist_bio/ibnwahhaab.htm.

[12] Ibid., Zahawi. pp. 7-15.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Onomat Al-Sufi l-Shafie vs Paltalk Unitarian

Messianic_Teddybear: how did he disprove it?
Messianic_Teddybear:
Messianic_Teddybear: by saying that G-d is not a man?
Messianic_Teddybear: that G-d would not lower himself to his creation
Messianic_Teddybear: etc
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: cause thats exactly what oneness teaches
Messianic_Teddybear: waaaaahahahahaha
Messianic_Teddybear: like i said
Messianic_Teddybear: he cannot debate me
Messianic_Teddybear: simply cause there is no debate
Messianic_Teddybear: and no defense
Messianic_Teddybear: against oneness
Messianic_Teddybear:
Messianic_Teddybear: you guys go debate trinetarians
Messianic_Teddybear:
Messianic_Teddybear: you have much more luck in that
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear came online at 2:32 AM
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: erm
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: those were not what his arguments revolved around
Messianic_Teddybear: why not
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: obviously
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you didn’t pay attention
Messianic_Teddybear: i left
Messianic_Teddybear: guess i missed them
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and u didn’t hear what i said
Messianic_Teddybear: then
Messianic_Teddybear: let me guess
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: come back to the room
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: use the mic
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and let’s see how great u fair
Messianic_Teddybear: why
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: with me
Messianic_Teddybear: he would not listen to me then
Messianic_Teddybear: kept ignoring me
Messianic_Teddybear: etc
Messianic_Teddybear: what makes you think he will listen to me now
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no he didn’t ignore you
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: several people
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: were blasting off
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and he tried to debate
Messianic_Teddybear: he kept on slamming that other christian
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: everyone on text
Messianic_Teddybear: and ignored me
Messianic_Teddybear: even thou i was answreing all his questions etc
Messianic_Teddybear: all the time
Messianic_Teddybear: so i just left
Messianic_Teddybear: one way street
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Messianic_Teddybear: onomat
Messianic_Teddybear: how much do you know about the oneness teaching in scripture?
Messianic_Teddybear: do you know what we believe?
Messianic_Teddybear: you do not do you?
Messianic_Teddybear: so how then can you say he beat me?
Messianic_Teddybear: if you do not know what we teach to begin with?
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you’re a unitarian?
Messianic_Teddybear: bingo
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: good for u
Messianic_Teddybear: but we call ourselves modalists
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Messianic_Teddybear: its considered a heresy in christianity
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: not even trinetarians know oneness well enough to debate it
Messianic_Teddybear: what makes you muslims think you do?
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: i mnea
Messianic_Teddybear: what is there to debate>?
Messianic_Teddybear: a god man?
Messianic_Teddybear: cause thats not oneness
Messianic_Teddybear: a triune god?
Messianic_Teddybear: no oneness either
Messianic_Teddybear: god being fleh?
Messianic_Teddybear: not oneness
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Messianic_Teddybear: god being born?
Messianic_Teddybear: not onenesss
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: those concepts are found in christianity not Islam
Messianic_Teddybear: yes
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Islam has the purest concept of God
Messianic_Teddybear: they are found in scripture
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in His Oneness
Messianic_Teddybear: exactly
Messianic_Teddybear: not really
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: we never associate Him with anything
Messianic_Teddybear: cause allah is not G-d my friend
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: how is He not God?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: who is God Yahweh?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: do you know where that name comes from?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: whims and fancy
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: that’s where
Messianic_Teddybear: christian bible contain allah for G-d in arabic true
Messianic_Teddybear: but as a WORD
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i’ve checked the Bible
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in Hebrew
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no tetragrammaton mate
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the migic word
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: magic*
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: is concocted
Messianic_Teddybear: like we use the word G-d for the creator
Messianic_Teddybear: in islam
Messianic_Teddybear: allah is a NAME
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what you have is adonai and elohei
Messianic_Teddybear: one of his 99 names
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes..it is
Messianic_Teddybear: not a wod
Messianic_Teddybear: word
Messianic_Teddybear: in arabic there is but one main word for G-d
Messianic_Teddybear: and thats allah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: exactly
Messianic_Teddybear: christians who speak arabic simply have no other word for the creator to use
Messianic_Teddybear: thats why its in their bibles
Messianic_Teddybear: but as a word
Messianic_Teddybear: not a name
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: it’s also based on Eloh
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: same word
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Eloh
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: found in the hebrew text
Messianic_Teddybear: you are partially right in that
Messianic_Teddybear: its based on el
Messianic_Teddybear: but not eloh
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: el is the root
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes
Messianic_Teddybear: el stands for one
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: then you have the word eloh
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: or alaha in aramaic
Messianic_Teddybear: allah stems from en lil
Messianic_Teddybear: which is sumerian in origine
Messianic_Teddybear: not arabic
Messianic_Teddybear: or hebrwe
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: all languages are connected one to the other
Messianic_Teddybear: actually not allah
Messianic_Teddybear: btu al ilah does
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: refer to Grim’s theory
Messianic_Teddybear: al ilah also does not mean the god
Messianic_Teddybear: liek so many muslims say
Messianic_Teddybear: but it means the deity
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: deity is another word for God
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ilah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in arabic
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: means one that is worshipped
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: al ilah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: means The one that is worshipped
Messianic_Teddybear: elohim is used in hebrew in 2 forms
Messianic_Teddybear: plural
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i know
Messianic_Teddybear: and singular
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: plural of number
Messianic_Teddybear: elohim is a plural intensive
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and plural of respect
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the royal plural
Messianic_Teddybear: applied to G-d its strictly singular
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: we have the same thing in arabic
Messianic_Teddybear: like eloah
Messianic_Teddybear: applied to pagan deities its plural
Messianic_Teddybear: ashoreth is called elohim
Messianic_Teddybear: yet asthoreth is a female noun
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Messianic_Teddybear: moses was called elohim
Messianic_Teddybear: even Jesus was
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yep
Messianic_Teddybear: but applied to the creator its always strictly singular
Messianic_Teddybear: trinetarians seem to conviniently forget that
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: they pervert the language
Messianic_Teddybear: yup
Messianic_Teddybear: as they pervert his word
Messianic_Teddybear: not to mention deity
Messianic_Teddybear: let me outline what oneness really is about
Messianic_Teddybear: from a biblical perspective
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ok
Messianic_Teddybear: G-d created the Son
Messianic_Teddybear: he was not co eternal as trinetarians claim
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of course he did
Messianic_Teddybear: he created him through his word
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: brb eating
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: just go on
Messianic_Teddybear: oh ok
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i’m reading
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: but my hands are oily
Messianic_Teddybear: john 1:1
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: and in john 1:!4 we see G-d creating the Son in mary’s womb
Messianic_Teddybear: 1:14
Messianic_Teddybear: the name given to this Son was Jesus
Messianic_Teddybear: or Yeshua
Messianic_Teddybear: which means Yah saves
Messianic_Teddybear: Yeshua however never said i am the Son
Messianic_Teddybear: or that hte Son had sent him
Messianic_Teddybear: he said the father had sent him
Messianic_Teddybear: and that the father dwelleth in him
Messianic_Teddybear: and that he and the father are one
Messianic_Teddybear: why would he say that if he was only the Son right
Messianic_Teddybear: then he says he is the comforter
Messianic_Teddybear: in john 14
Messianic_Teddybear: and in john 14:16 we read waht the comforter is
Messianic_Teddybear: the Holy Spirit
Messianic_Teddybear: there we have the G-dhead
Messianic_Teddybear: Father
Messianic_Teddybear: Son
Messianic_Teddybear: Holy Spirit
Messianic_Teddybear: the 3 roles of our creator in his omnipresence
Messianic_Teddybear: or modes
Messianic_Teddybear: hench the term modalist
Messianic_Teddybear:
Messianic_Teddybear: this is G-d’s deity
Messianic_Teddybear: and it has a name
Messianic_Teddybear: colosians 2:9
Messianic_Teddybear: Yeshua
Messianic_Teddybear: both christians today and muslims allocate Jesus to mary’s fleshly offspring
Messianic_Teddybear: muslims because they see him juste as a prophet
Messianic_Teddybear: christians because they know jack shit about scripture or do not want to know
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: but he is all these modes
Messianic_Teddybear: G-d perse
Messianic_Teddybear: Yeshua
Messianic_Teddybear: he is incarnated in what you call Yeshua
Messianic_Teddybear: this incarnation is permanent
Messianic_Teddybear: right now Yeshua is sitting at the right hand of the Father in heaven
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you see
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: we believe he never got crucified
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: as in
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: killed
Messianic_Teddybear: remember G-d is omnipresent
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: on the cross
Messianic_Teddybear: i know that
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he was saved
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: hence his name
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Yeshua
Messianic_Teddybear: and that it only appeared as such
Messianic_Teddybear: etc
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: God saves
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he was saved
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right moving on
Messianic_Teddybear: according to islam he was
Messianic_Teddybear: not according to the Bible
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: about the Father dwelling in Jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you got this from Paul
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Paul said
Messianic_Teddybear: yeah
Messianic_Teddybear: so?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: all the fullness of God
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: dwelt in Jesus
Messianic_Teddybear: sort of yes
Messianic_Teddybear: it says
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and that entity which dwelt in Jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: is the Father
Messianic_Teddybear: for in him dwelleth all the fullness of the godhead bodily
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: God
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: All of Him dwelt in Jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: but you see
Messianic_Teddybear: correction
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the contradiction occurs
Messianic_Teddybear: the father dwelleth in the Son
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: that’s what i said?
Messianic_Teddybear: what you call Jesus is not all of his deity
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Paul said
Messianic_Teddybear: no you said G-d dwelleth in Jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: All the FULLNESS of God was pleased to dwell in Jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: this is what Paul said
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: shall i give u the verse
Messianic_Teddybear: no thtas not what he said
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ?
Messianic_Teddybear: sure
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lemme give u the verse
Messianic_Teddybear: i wonder what bible you use
Messianic_Teddybear: let me guess
Messianic_Teddybear: new world translation?
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Messianic_Teddybear: show me from th etrusted kjv please
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Colossians 1:19
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Colossians 2:9
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in the kjv
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the word there is Father
Messianic_Teddybear: 7 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: verse 19
Messianic_Teddybear: 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Messianic_Teddybear: yes so?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yep
Messianic_Teddybear: your point?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: that’s what i said
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what were u correcting me on?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you said i was wrong
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: so i gave those two verses
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: which proves what i said
Messianic_Teddybear: no
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: so i should be asking what ur point is
Messianic_Teddybear: i thought you where refering to col 2:9
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: since u said “CORRECTION”
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Messianic_Teddybear: i know col 1:19
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: okay good
Messianic_Teddybear: so again your point?
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: so the Father
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: dwelt in jesus
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: all of Him
Messianic_Teddybear: yup
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: His fullness
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: right
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: so again
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you see if this is true
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: then the contradiction occurs
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in John 17
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and several other places
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: but i particularly favour this chapter
Messianic_Teddybear: what verse in john 17?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the whole chapter
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what is Jesus doing?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and verse 3 in specific
Messianic_Teddybear: 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Messianic_Teddybear: before th world was?/
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i said verse 3
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: not 5
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: verse 5 proves nothing
Messianic_Teddybear: why not read the context friend
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: refer to Jeremiah
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the context
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Jesus is praying for his disciples
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: u don’t get my poinmt?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: point*
Messianic_Teddybear: 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes..exactly
Messianic_Teddybear: let me put the whole cahpter
Messianic_Teddybear: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: how did he say this?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and who was he talking to?
Messianic_Teddybear: 1 ¶ These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
6 ¶ I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: read no need bro
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i’ve read the whole chapter several times
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: loll
Messianic_Teddybear: ok i will explain
Messianic_Teddybear:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: please do
Messianic_Teddybear: G-d is omnipresent
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Messianic_Teddybear: i know he is not in islam
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he is in Islam as well
Messianic_Teddybear: but in the Bible he is
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: but not in His person
Messianic_Teddybear: no
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: His being
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: since this leads to pantheism
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: He is OMNIPRESENT
Messianic_Teddybear: islam says allah exists iwthout a place
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in the sense
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: that His vision surpasses everything
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: nothing escapes His sight
Messianic_Teddybear: anyway
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and wherever u are
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: u can contact him
Messianic_Teddybear: The father
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: without problems
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in this He is Omnipresent
Messianic_Teddybear: who is omnipresent G-d
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Omnipresence
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in being
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: amounts to paganism
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: as it clearly leads to pantheism
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no different from the hindu concept of God
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: whereby He permeates the whole Universe
Messianic_Teddybear: says he is well pleased that his (G-d’s) fullness dwelleth in the Son (Christ)
Messianic_Teddybear is now offline.
Messages will be delivered when they sign on to Paltalk.

-------Discussion ends--------------