The Official Sunni/Salafi Debates Thread

[intoodeep]

Scholars have pointed out that the published editions of hadith collectoions have discrepancies and errors in them which could be corrected by consulting those who have ijazah for the hadiths from qualified teachers. Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad mentioned something along those lines.

Look at the discrepancy in your own sentence. Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad (a non-hadith scolar) has mentioned that (SO?), well its not true. Even the most esteemed hadith scholars with tons of ijazas have discrepancies and errors in their works. Ask any scholar.

[jinnzaman]

By all indications, it seems that Albani learned must of his knowledge of hadeeth simply by reading books at a library. The understanding of the science of hadeeth seems largely self-taught. This is clear from reading biographies by Salafis. Moreover, there is evidence that Rashid Rida had an influence on him.

So my question is on what grounds is he considered a muhaddith? If I memorize al-Bukhari on the internet, does that make me a muhaddith to?

[Ansari]

This story about Imam Albani being a scholar who memorised 100.000 hadiths can be found here: http://www.aussiemuslims.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5343&postcount=11


So Shaykh 'Asheesh responds:
"Is it possible for me to be satisfied in the knowledge that our Shaykh has memorised a hundred thousand hadeeth?"

Shaykh al-Albaanee said:
"This does not concern you."

....

Shaykh al-Albaanee said:
"It is for you to interpret it as an answer and it is for you to interpret it as whatever you wish."

Shaykh 'Asheesh narrates:
"So I happily proclaimed: "Allaahu Akbar", and jubilantly exclaimed: "Laa ilaaha ill-Allaah", and said:
"al-Hamdu Lillaah, indeed the Shaykh has memorised a hundred thousand hadeeth."

So our Shaykh laughed; It was as if he confirmed what I was saying."

Safahaat baydhaa. min hayaat Shaykhinaa al-Albaanee – Page 40

[Husain]

So my question is on what grounds is he considered a muhaddith? If I memorize al-Bukhari on the internet, does that make me a muhaddith to?

Because he attained mastery in many branches of hadith sciences, even though he was weak in others.

You can memorize Bukhari and know nothing about the meaning, status of narrations, fiqh of them etc.

If you attain the mastery without memorizing a book, you are a muhaddith.

Remember "Muhaddith"= one well-versed in the field of hadith.
That is all it means, nothing more.

You will find muhaddithin who were fabricators of ahadith and others who would do much worse.

You will even find some Huffadh like that!!!

Jazakallah Bro Ansari for the link.

These Salafis are even more stupid than I thought!!!

[-Z-]

Sufis and Salafis of the West: Discord and the Hope of Unity (http://www.yahyabirt.com/?p=92)

[tazkiyyah]

http://web.mac.com/jawziyyah/iWeb/The%20Jawziyyah%20Institute/Home_files/Shaban.pdf

[Colonel_Hardstone]

The Wahaabis - Misconceptions Removed
'Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab

All praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all that exists, and may blessings and peace be upon our trustworthy Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Sahaabah and the Taabi'een. To proceed:

We, the assembly of the ghazw (military expedition) of the muwahhideen, when Allaah blessed us – and to Him is due all praise – with entering Makkah al-Musharrafah at midday on yawm as-sabt (Saturday), the eighth day of the month of Muharram al-Haraam in the year 1218 after the Hijrah, after the chiefs of Makkah, its 'ulamaa' and all of its general public had sought the covenant of security from the ameer of the ghazw, Sa'ood; after they had previously agreed with the leaders of the hajeej and the ameer of Makkah to fight him or to make a stand in the Haram, to prevent him from the House; so when the troops of the muwahhideen marched against them, Allaah cast fear into their hearts, so they scattered in disarray, each one of them considering retreat their best option;

And the ameer at that time offered the covenant of security to everyone in al-Haram ash-Shareef, and we entered, our slogan being the talbiyah, in safety, our heads shaved and trimmed, not in fear of anyone of the creation, rather of the Master of the Day of Judgement;

And from the time that the troops entered the Haram, in their great numbers, self-controlled, well-mannered, without cutting down any tree, nor chasing any game animals, nor shedding any blood except for the blood of the hady, or whatever animals Allaah had made lawful according to the legislated manner;

And when our 'Umrah was completed, we gathered the people on the morning of yawm al-ahad (Sunday), and the ameer (rahimahullaah) proposed to the 'ulamaa' that which we seek from the people and for which we fight them, which is: the purity of tawheed for Allaah ta'aalaa alone. And he informed them that there is no disagreement between us regarding anything except for two matters:

The first of them being the purity of tawheed for Allaah ta'aalaa, and the understanding of the types of 'ibaadah, and that du'aa' is one of them, and clarification of the meaning of the shirk due to which our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) fought the people, and his call continued for a long period of time after the Prophethood to that tawheed and to the abandoning of attributing partners with Allaah, all of that before the other four pillars of al-Islaam were made obligatory.

And the second matter is al-amru bil-ma'roof wan-nahyu 'anil-munkar (commanding the good and forbidding the evil), of which nothing remains among them except its name, its effects and meaning having been erased.

So they agreed with us regarding the goodness of that which we are upon, in general and in detail, and they gave the bay'ah to the ameer upon the Book and the Sunnah, and it was accepted from them and they were all pardoned. So he did not put the slightest pressure on a single one of them, and he continued to treat them all with the utmost kindness, especially the 'ulamaa'.

So we explained to them in that meeting, before they departed from us, the evidences for what we are upon, and we sought from them sincere advice, reminder, and explanation of the Truth.

And we informed them that the ameer clearly stated in their meeting that we would accept anything for which they brought a clear evidence from the Book, or the Sunnah, or an athar from as-Salaf as-Saalih, such as al-Khulafaa' ar-Raashideen whom we are commanded to follow by his saying (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "You must follow my Sunnah, and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khulafaa' after me." Or from the four mujtahid imaams and those who received knowledge from them, until the end of the third generation, in accordance with his saying (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "The best of you are my generation, then those who follow them, then those who follow them."

And we informed them that we are with the Truth, wherever it goes, and followers of the clear evidence, and we do not care if that means opposing what those before us were upon, and they did not reject any of that.

Regarding seeking needs from the dead, and the structures built over the graves:

So we put before them the matter of seeking one's needs from the dead, and asked if they still had any misunderstanding regarding it? So one of them mentioned one of two misunderstandings, and we refuted them with the undisputable evidences from the Book and the Sunnah until they accepted, and there was none left among them who had any doubt or misgiving regarding that for which we fought the people, that it is the clear Truth without any doubt.

And they gave us their strongest oaths, without it being asked from them, of the broadening of their understanding and the certainty of their conscience, that they no longer held the slightest doubt that the one who says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam)", or: "Yabna 'Abbaas", or: "Yaa 'Abdal-Qaadir", or other than them from the creations, seeking by that to avert an evil or bring a good from anything that Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of doing, such as healing the sick, or granting victory over the enemy, or guarding from a misfortune, or the like: that he is a mushrik guilty of major shirk, whose blood may be shed and whose wealth is lawful, even if he believes that the ultimate controller of the universe is Allaah ta'aalaa alone but he turned to the creations with du'aa', seeking intercession from them, and drawing closer to them, in order to fulfill his need from Allaah by virtue of their "secret" and by their interceding with Him for them while they are in the barzakh;

And that the structures built over the graves of the righteous people have become in this age idols to which people turn for the fulfillment of needs, and at which acts of devotion are performed, and whose inhabitants are called upon in difficulties, as the people of Jaahiliyyah used to do.

And among them were the mufti of the Hanafiyyah, Shaykh 'Abd al-Malik al-Qala'i, and Husayn al-Maghribi the mufti of the Maalikiyyah, and 'Aqeel ibn Yahyaa al-'Alawi.

So thereafter we demolished all that was worshipped by glorification and belief in it, and due to which benefit and aid were hoped for, from all of the structures built over the graves and other than them, until there did not remain in that purified land a single taaghoot to be worshipped, so all praise is due to Allaah for that.

Then all taxes and customs rates were abolished, and all tobacco pipes were broken, and it was announced that they are haraam. And all of the places frequented by the users of narcotics and those famous for immorality were burnt down, and it was announced that everyone must regularly perform the salaah in jamaa'ah, without praying in different groups, rather that they should gather to pray behind a single imaam, and that imaam should be a follower of one of the four imaams, may Allaah be pleased with them. Then the people would be united, Allaah alone would be worshipped, there would be concord, and discord would disappear.

And an ameer was appointed for them, and the affair was settled without bloodshed, violating honour, or putting pressure on anyone, and all praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all that exists.

Then they were given the letters written by Shaykh Muhammad regarding tawheed, containing the proofs and explaining the evidences for it with the unambiguous aayaat and the mutawaatir ahaadeeth in order to convince them. And a summary of that letter was made for the general public, to be distributed in their sittings and studied in their assemblies, and for the 'ulamaa' to explain its meanings to them in order that they may understand tawheed so that they could hold on to the firmest handhold, and in order that the reality of shirk may be clarified to them so that they could avoid it by being safe on the clear understanding.

And among those who were present from the 'ulamaa' of Makkah, and witnessed most of what took place, was Husayn ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Ibreeqi al-Hadhrami, and thereafter al-Hayyaani. And without hesitation he gathered with Sa'ood and his advisors from the people of knowledge, and asked about the matter of intercession, regarding which the swords were drawn, without shyness or embarrassment, for he had not done any wrong regarding it before.

So we informed him that our madhhab in the usool (fundamentals) of the religion is the madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah, and our way is the way of the Salaf, which is the safer way, and indeed the more knowledgeable and wise, as opposed to those who say that the way of the Khalaf is more knowledgeable.

Allaah's Attributes, and al-qadhaa' wal-qadar

And it is that we accept the aayaat and ahaadeeth of the Attributes upon their apparent meanings, and we leave their true meanings, while believing in their realities, to Allaah ta'aalaa. For Maalik, one of the greatest of the 'ulamaa' of the Salaf, when asked about al-istiwaa' in His Saying (ta'aalaa): "Ar-Rahmaan rose over the Throne." [Taa-Haa: 5] said: "Al-istiwaa' is known, the "how" of it is unknown, believing in it is waajib, and asking about it is bid'ah."

And we believe that good and bad are all from the Will of Allaah ta'aalaa, and that nothing occurs in His Dominion except that which He wills. For the slave is not capable of creating his own actions, rather he earns from them reward due to Allaah's Favour, and punishment due to Allaah's Justice, and Allaah has no obligation over His slave in anything.

And that the believers will see Him in the Hereafter, without mentioning how or comprehending it.

Regarding following the madhaahib:

And in the furoo' (branches) of the religion we are upon the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and we do not object to whoever follows one of the four imaams, as opposed to other than them whose madhaahib have not been clarified.

The Raafidhah, Zaydiyyah, Imaamiyyah and the likes of them: we do not accept from them anything from their corrupt madhaahib, rather we require that they follow one of the four imaams.
And we do not deserve the level of al-ijtihaad al-mutlaq (absolute ijtihaad), and none among us claims it. However, in some matters, if we find an authentic nass (text) from the Book or the Sunnah that is not abrogated or specified or contradicted by a stronger evidence, and one of the four imaams says according to it, then we take it and leave the saying of the madhhab, such as the matter of the inheritance of the grandfather and the brothers, for we put the grandfather first in the inheritance, even though the madhhab of the Hanaabilah says otherwise.

And we do not inquire into a person's madhhab, and we do not oppose him, unless we find a clear text opposing the madhhab of one of the imaams in a matter involving an outward symbol of the religion (shi'aar), such as the imaam of the prayers; so we order the Hanafi and the Maaliki, for example, to observe the same calmness when rising from rukoo' (i'tidaal), and in the sitting between the sajdatayn, due to the clear evidence for that, as opposed to the Shaafi'i imam reciting the basmalah aloud, for we do not order him to recite it quietly. And there is a great difference between these two matters. So when the evidence is strong, then we advise them to follow the nass, even if it opposes the madhhab, and that is found only very rarely.

And there is no objection to ijtihaad in some matters as opposed to others, and this is not contradictory to the lack of the claim to ijtihaad. For it has been that a group of the imaams of the four madhaahib had their own particular views regarding certain matters that were in opposition to their madhhab, whose founder they followed.

Regarding the writings of the 'ulamaa':

Moreover, we turn for aid in understanding the Book of Allaah to the well-known and respected tafseers, among the greatest of which are, to us, the tafseer of Ibn Jareer, and its summary by Ibn Katheer ash-Shaafi'i, and likewise al-Baghawi, al-Baydhaawi, al-Khaazin, al-Haddaad, al-Jalaalayn, and other than them.

And for understanding the hadeeth, to the commentaries of the prominent imaams, such as those of al-'Asqalaani and al-Qastalaani on al-Bukhaari, and that of an-Nawawi on Muslim, and that of al-Manaawi on al-Jaami' as-Sagheer.

And we give great importance to the books of hadeeth, especially al-Ummahaat as-Sitt and their commentaries, and we give importance to the other books in the rest of the fields of study: Usool, furoo', qawaa'id, biographies, grammar, morphology, and all other sciences of the Ummah.

And we not order the banning of any writings at all, except those that contain what the people have fallen into of shirk, such as Rawdh ar-Rayaaheen, or which may result in defects in the 'aqeedah, such as 'ilm al-mantiq (the science of logic), which a group of the 'ulamaa' have declared to be haraam. But we do not interrogate and search for the like of them. Likewise regarding the book ad-Dalaa'il, unless its owner stubbornly displays it publicly, then it is banned from him.

And what occurred from one of the bedouins regarding banning certain books of the people of at-Taa'if, was due to his ignorance, and he as well as others were warned from doing it.

Misconceptions and falsehoods regarding the da'wah:

And from what we are upon is that we do not view the enslavement of the 'Arabs as permissible, and neither did we do it. And we did not fight against anyone but them. And we do not view it permissible to kill women and children.

As for the lies forged against us in order to hide the truth and deceive the people: that we explain the Qur'aan with our opinions, and that we only accept those ahaadeeth which agree with our understanding, without referring back to a commentary or consulting a shaykh, and that we lower the status of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) by saying that the Prophet is a decomposed set of bones in his grave, and that the stick of one of us is of more benefit than him, and that he cannot intercede, and that visiting him is not recommended, and that he did not know the meaning of "laa ilaaha illallaah" until "So know that none has the right to be worshipped but Allaah" was sent down to him, even though the aayah was sent down in al-Madeenah, and that we do not rely on the sayings of the 'ulamaa', and that we ban the books of the followers of the madhaahib due to their containing both truth and falsehood, and that we are mujassimah (anthropomorphists), and that we make takfeer of all of the people of our time and after the sixth century of the Hijrah, except for those who are upon our way;

And branching off from that is their claim that we do not accept the bay'ah of anyone until he admits that he was a mushrik before, and that his parents died attributing partners with Allaah;

And that we forbid sending prayers (salaah) on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), and that we absolutely forbid the legislated manner of visiting the graves, and that whoever follows our way then he is forgiven everything, even his debts, and that we do not give any importance to the Ahl al-Bayt (may Allaah be pleased with them), and that we force them to marry those who are not their equals, and that we force the old man to divorce his young wife so that she can marry a young man if their case is brought before us, then there is no basis to any of that.

So all of these falsehoods, and others besides them that we were asked about before, our answer to every one of these matters is: "Glorified are You! This is an enormous slander." [An-Noor: 16] So whoever narrates from us any of that, or attributes it to us, then he has slandered us a forged a lie.

And whoever witnesses our state, and is present in our sittings, and verifies that which is with us, will know for sure that all of that has been made up and forged against us by the enemies of the religion and the brothers of the shayaateen, in order to frighten the people away from submitting to Allaah ta'aalaa with tawheed in 'ibaadah, and abandoning all forms of shirk, regarding which Allaah has stated that He will not forgive: "And He forgives other sins besides that to whom He wills." [An-Nisaa': 48]

Major sins:

For we believe that whoever commits any of the major sins, such as killing a Muslim unrightfully, adultery, usury, drinking intoxicants, and he repeats that, then his doing that that does not take him out of the fold of al-Islaam, and he is not condemned to eternity in the abode of punishment, as long as he dies as a muwahhid in all forms of his 'ibaadah.

The status of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam):

And what we believe is that the status of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) is absolutely the highest status of the creations, and that he is alive in his grave with the life of the barzakh, higher than the life of the shuhadaa' that has been mentioned in the Revelation, because he is better than them without doubt. And that he hears the Muslim's sending greetings (salaam) on him, and that it is sunnah to visit him, however it is not allowed to set out on a journey except to visit the masjid and pray in it, and if he intends along with that to visit the grave of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), then there is no objection.

And whoever spends his most precious time in sending the prayers (salaah) on him ('alayhis-salaatu was-salaam) according to the manner narrated from him, then he has succeeded in attaining the bliss of both worlds, and it will suffice him from his worries and stress, as it is mentioned in the hadeeth from him.

Allaah's awliyaa':

And we do not reject the karaamaat (miracles) of the awliyaa', and we give them the recognition that they deserve, and that they are upon guidance from their Lord as long as they follow the legislated way and the laws of the Sharee'ah. However, they do not deserve to be given any form of 'ibaadah, whether during their lives or after their deaths. Rather, du'aa' may be sought from them while they are alive, and indeed from any Muslim, for it has come in the hadeeth: "The du'aa' of a Muslim for his brother is answered." And he (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) ordered 'Umar and 'Ali to pray for forgiveness for Uways, and they did so.

Intercession:

And we affirm the intercession for our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) on the Day of Resurrection, according to what has been narrated, and likewise we affirm it for the rest of the Prophets, angels, awliyaa', and children who died young, also according to what has been narrated. And we ask it only from the One Who has power over it, and He will give His Permission for it to whomever He wills from the muwahhideen, who will be the most fortunate of people to receive it, as is narrated, by one of us saying: "O Allaah, grant us the intercession of Your righteous slaves, or Your angels" or the like, which is sought from Allaah alone, not from them. So it is not said: "Yaa Rasoolallaah" or: "Yaa Waliyyallaah, I ask you for intercession", or anything else like: "Come to my aid", or: "Save me", or: "Heal me", or: "Grant me victory over my enemy", or the like, which none but Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of granting. So if this is sought from those who have been mentioned
> while they are in the barzakh, then it is a form of shirk, for there is no narrated text supporting that in the Book or the Sunnah, neither is there any athar from as-Salaf as-Saalih in that regard, rather it is narrated in the Book and the Sunnah and from the consensus of the Salaf that it is major shirk, due to which the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) fought the people.

Swearing oaths and making tawassul:

So if you asked us what we say regarding swearing oaths and making tawassul by other than Allaah, then I say:

We look into the state of the one who is swearing the oath: if he intends by it glorification, like his glorification of Allaah or even greater, as occurs with some of the extreme mushrikeen from the people of our age, when he is asked to swear by his shaykh, i.e. his object of worship whom he depends upon in all of his affairs, he will not accept to do so if he is lying or in doubt, but if his is asked to swear by Allaah only he will do so; then such a person is certainly a kaafir, from the worst of the mushrikeen, and he is the most ignorant of them by consensus. But if he does not intend glorification, rather he does it only due to a slip of the tongue, then this is not major shirk, but the one who said it must be forbidden from it and warned, and ordered to seek Allaah's forgiveness immediately.

As for tawassul, which is to say: "O Allaah, I ask You by the status of Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), or by the right of Your Prophet, or by the status of Your righteous slaves, or by the right of Your slave so-and-so", then this is among the blameworthy bid'ahs for which no evidence has been narrated in the texts, like raising the voice when sending prayers (salaah) on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) after the adhaan.

The Ahl al-Bayt:

As for the Ahl al-Bayt, a question regarding them was directed to the 'ulamaa' of ad-Dir'iyyah, and also regarding the permissibility of the marriage of a Faatimiyyah woman with a non-Faatimi man, and the answer was as follows:

The Ahl al-Bayt, may Allaah be pleased with them, are undoubtedly entitled to our love and affection, as is narrated in the Book and the Sunnah. So it is obligatory to love them and show affection for them, however al-Islaam has made the people equal. So no-one is better than another except in piety. Along with that, they deserve respect and preference, as do the rest of the 'ulamaa', such as sitting at the front of the gatherings, being served first with respect, and given priority when giving way in the street and the like, when others of similar age and knowledge are present.

As for the common practice in some countries or giving preference to their children and their ignorant ones, over one who is more deserving than him, to the extent that if he does not kiss his hand every time he greets him then he will blame him, or quarrel with him, or beat him, or argue with him, then this is a practice for which there is no narrated text or evidence. Rather it is an evil act, whose removal is obligatory. And if he kissed the hand of one of them when returning from a journey, or due to his abundance of knowledge, or from time to time, or after a long absence, then there is no objection to that. However, what has become commonplace in the latter-day jaahiliyyah is that kissing the hand has become a symbol for those who are believed, or whose ancestors are believed, to possess certain powers, or a custom of the arrogant towards other than them. So we forbade it absolutely, especially for the above-mentioned people, in order to prevent the ways leading to shirk as much as we are able.

And the only reason that we demolished the house of as-Sayyidah Khadeejah, the Dome of the Birthplace, and some of the zawaayaa attributed to some of the awliyaa', was to prevent that, and to guard against attributing partners with Allaah as much as we were able, due to the enormous importance of doing so, for shirk will not be forgiven by Allaah. And it is worse than attributing a son to Allaah ta'aalaa, because a son is a perfection in the case of the creation; as for shirk, it is a deficiency, even in the case of the creation, in accordance with His Saying (ta'aalaa): "He gives a parable from yourselves: Do you not have slaves whom your right hands own who are partners in that which We have provided for you?" [Ar-Room: 28]

And as for the marriage of a Faatimiyyah woman to a non-Faatimi man, then it is permissible by consensus, indeed there is no dislike in it at all. For 'Ali married his daughter to 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab, and both of them are sufficient examples to follow. And Sakeenah bint al-Husayn ibn 'Ali married four men, and none of them was a Faatimi, not even a Haashimi, and the Salaf continued on that way without objection. However, we do not compel anyone to get his female ward married, unless she herself requests it and refuses someone unequal to her in social status (kufu'). And the Arabs are equal to each other (akfaa'), so that which is commonplace in some countries of refusing marriage on the grounds of social status is proof of arrogance and trying to be praised. And great evil and corruption could result from this, as has been narrated. Indeed, marriage between those whose status is unequal is permissible, for Zayd – who was a freed slave – was married to Zaynab, the Mother of the Believers, and she was from Quraysh. And the matter is well-known to the followers of the madhaahib. [End of quote.]

Establishing the evidence and the conditions of making takfeer:

So if somebody, seeking to frighten people away from the truth and submission to it, says:

If you declare with certainty that whoever says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah, I ask you for intercession" is a mushrik whose blood may be spilt, then the necessary implication of it is that the majority of the Ummah have committed kufr, especially those of the later generations, because the 'ulamaa' that they followed clearly stated this to be recommended, and they criticised those who say otherwise!

I say:

This is not necessarily the implication, because the implication of the madhhab is not itself a madhhab, as is well-known. For example, it is not implied that we are mujassimah (anthropomorphists) just because we talk about the direction of Allaah's 'uluww (highness, loftiness) as narrated in the hadeeth regarding that.

And we say regarding those who have died: that they are a nation that has passed away; and we do not make takfeer of anyone except the one whom our da'wah to the Truth has reached, and to whom the path has been clarified and the evidence established, and who then continues arrogantly and stubbornly, like the majority of those whom we are fighting today, who insist on attributing partners to Allaah, refusing to carry out the obligations of the religion, and openly committing the major sins and forbidden acts. And as for those other than the majority, we only fight them due to their aiding such people, their acceptance of them, their increasing of their numbers, and their participation with him in fighting us. So in that case he carries the same ruling regarding the duty to fight him. And we excuse those who have passed away, that they were mistaken but excused, due to the fact that they were not infallible from error.

So it is absolutely not allowed to justify that by saying that there was ijmaa' on such a thing, and whoever criticised those who said otherwise was mistaken. And it is not a new thing for someone to be mistaken, for those who were better than them also made mistakes, such as 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radhiyallaahu 'anhu); for when the woman corrected him, he retracted from his statement regarding the matter of the mahr (dowry), and in regard to other matters that are well-known in his biography. Indeed, a large group of the Sahaabah made a mistake while our Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) was among them, and his light guiding them, when they said: "Make for us a dhaat anwaat, as they have a dhaat anwaat."

So if you said:

This is the case of the one who is confused, then when he is corrected he accepts it; then what is to be said about the one who understands the evidences, has looked upon the sayings of the imaams who are followed, and who persisted on that way until he dies?

I say:

There is nothing preventing us from excusing those mentioned, and we do not say that he is a kaafir, and neither do we say about the one mentioned previously that he is guilty of his mistake, even if he persisted in his mistake, due to the lack of anyone who would struggle for the sake of this matter in that time, with his tongue and his sword and his spear. For the evidence was not established against him, nor was the path made clear to him, rather the majority trend of the authors of the time mentioned was the wholesale abandoning of the sayings of the imaams of the Sunnah regarding this matter altogether, and whoever looked upon them was opposed by them before it could settle in his heart, and their prominent people continued to forbid their lesser people from even looking into this matter altogether, and the kings' authority deterred anyone whose heart accepted it, except those of them whom Allaah willed.

Moreover, Mu'aawiyah and his companions (radhiyallaahu 'anhum) saw it fit to oppose Ameer al-Mu'mineen 'Ali ibn Abi Taalib (radhiyallaahu 'anhu), fight him, and declare war against him. They were mistaken in doing that according to ijmaa', and they persisted on that mistake. Yet it is not known that a single one of the Salaf made takfeer of a single one of them, by ijmaa'. Indeed, they did not even label him as a faasiq; rather, they affirmed for them the reward of ijtihaad, even if they were mistaken, as is well-known among Ahl as-Sunnah.

And we are likewise: we do not make takfeer of anyone whose religion is correct, whose righteousness, knowledge, piety, and ascetism is well-known, whose life is praiseworthy, and who made his sincere effort for the Ummah by devoting himself to teaching the beneficial sciences and writing about them, even if he was mistaken in this matter or in other matters. An example is Ibn Hajr al-Haytami: for we are well aware of what he said in ad-Durr al-Munadhdham, yet that does not detract from his great knowledge, and for this reason we give great importance to his books, such as Sharh al-Arba'een, az-Zawaajir, and others, and we rely on what he has transmitted, for he is one of the 'ulamaa' of the Muslims.

This is what we are upon, addressing all who possess sound mind and knowledge, and who possess the quality of fairness, without inclining towards bigoted partisanship or fanaticism: to look to what is said, and not to who said it. As for those whose habit is to oblige adherence to a particular person in everything, regardless of whether it is truth or otherwise, then he has blindly followed those regarding whom Allaah has said: "Verily, we found our fathers following a certain way, and we are following in their footsteps." [Az-Zukhruf: 23] His custom and habit is to know the truth by the people, not the people by the truth. So we do not address him or the like of him except with the sword, until his crookedness is straightened out and his error corrected. And the armies of tawheed, praise be to Allaah, are victorious, and their banners are unfurled with success and progress, "and the unjust will know by what an overturning they shall be overturned." [Ash-Shu'araa': 227] And "verily, it is the Party of Allaah who will be victorious." [Al-Maa'idah: 56] And He said (ta'aalaa): "And verily, it is Our troops who will be victorious." [As-Saaffaat: 173] "And it was incumbent upon Us to grant victory to the believers." [Ar-Room: 47] "And the good end is for the pious." [Al-A'raaf: 128]

Bid'ah:

Moreover, from what we are upon is that bid'ah (innovation), which is everything that was introduced into the religion after the three generations, is in all of its forms blameworthy, as opposed to those who say that there are good and bad bid'ahs, or who divide them into five categories; unless we can harmonise by saying that the good bid'ahs are those that as-Salaf as-Saalih were upon, and that they include that which is obligatory, recommended, and permissible; and in that case they might figuratively speaking be termed bid'ahs; and that the bad bid'ahs are anything other than that, and that they include that which is forbidden and that which is disliked. And there is no objection to this harmonisation.

So from the blameworthy bid'ahs that we forbid are: raising the voice with the adhaan in that which is not part of the adhaan, whether it is with aayaat, or sending prayers upon the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), or dhikr, or other than that after the adhaan, or during the night of al-Jumu'ah, or Ramadhaan, or the two 'Eeds; for all of that is a blameworthy bid'ah.

And we have abolished that which was customary in Makkah of announcing to the people to make dhikr or pray for mercy and the like, and the 'ulamaa' of the madhaahib admitted that it was a bid'ah.

And from them is: the reading of a hadeeth on the authority of Abu Hurayrah before the khutbah; and the commentator on al-Jaami' as-Sagheer has clearly stated that to be bid'ah. And from them is: holding gatherings at a particular time to recite the story of the Prophet's birth (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) in the belief that it is a specially recommended act of worship, without teaching the knowledge of the seerah; for this has not been narrated.

And from them is: holding gatherings to recite the rawaatib of the mashaayikh with raised voices, and reciting al-Faatihah, and making tawassul through them in important affairs; such as the raatib of as-Sammaan, and the raatib of al-Haddaad, and their likes. Indeed, such gatherings might include major shirk, so they are to be fought due to that; and whoever among them is given direction and accepts that these matters in such forms are not Sunnah but rather bid'ah, then he is left; but if they refuse, then the ruler is to punish them what that which he sees sufficient as a deterrent.

And as for the ahzaab (compilations of dhikr and supplications) of the 'ulamaa' that are taken from the Book and the Sunnah, then there is no objection to reciting them and doing so regularly; for dhikr, sending prayers on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), seeking forgiveness, reciting the Qur'aan, and the like is highly recommended according to the Sharee'ah, and the one who observes it is rewarded, and every time a slave of Allaah does it more, then his reward increases, but as long as it is done in the legislated manner: without going to extremes, or corrupting it, or altering it; for Allaah ta'aalaa has said: "Call upon your Lord with devotion and with a low voice." [Al-A'raaf: 55] And He said (ta'aalaa): "And to Allaah belong the Most Beautiful Names, so call on Him by them." [Al-A'raaf: 180] And by Allaah, how great was an-Nawawi with his compilation Kitaab al-Adhkaar, so the interested one should benefit from it, for it contains that which will suffice the one who is successful.

And from them is: that which is commonplace in some countries of reciting the mawlid of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) with poems that are sung, and mixed with sending prayers on him, and adhkaar and recitation of the Qur'aan, and doing that after the Taraaweeh prayer, believing it in that form to be an act of worship. Indeed, the general public imagines that this is from the narrated sunan. So that is forbidden. As for the Taraaweeh prayer, it is sunnah, and there is no objection to praying it in jamaa'ah regularly.

And from them is: that which is commonplace in some countries of praying the five obligatory prayers together after the last Jumu'ah of Ramadhaan. And this is one of the evil bid'ahs by ijmaa', so they are to be warned from that with the severest warning.

And from them is: raising the voice with dhikr when carrying the dead, or when pouring water over the grave, and other than that which has not been narrated from the Salaf. And Shaykh at-Tartooshi al-Maghribi has authored a concise book which he entitled al-Hawaadith wal-Bida', and Abu Shaamah al-Maqdisi wrote a summary of it; so it is upon the one who is concerned for his religion to obtain it.

And we only forbid those innovations that are taken as religion and worship. As for that which is not taken as religion and worship, such as drinking coffee, composing poetry, mentioning the good qualities of the kings, etc. then we do not forbid it, as long as it is not mixed with things like dhikr or i'tikaaf in the masjid, believing it to be an act of worship; for Hassaan refuted Ameer al-Mu'mineen 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radhiyallaahu 'anhu), saying: "I used to recite this poetry in front of one who was better than you," so 'Umar accepted it.

And all kinds of permissible recreations are allowed, because the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) allowed the Abyssinians to play their sports on the day of 'Eed inside his masjid (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam). And singing during building or the like is allowed, as is training for warfare with various types of weapons, as well as that which incites bravery such as war drums, but not other musical instruments, which are forbidden. And the distinction between them is very clear.

And there is no objection to beating the daff (hand-drum) at weddings, for he said (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "I have been sent with the easy religion of monotheism (al-Haneefiyyah as-Samihah)." And he said: "Let the Jews know that in our religion there is enjoyment."

Regarding Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim:
Moreover, we view both Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim and his Shaykh [Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah] as two imaams of truth from Ahl as-Sunnah, and we view their books among the greatest of books; however we do not blindly follow them in every matter, for everyone may have his saying accepted or rejected except our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam). And it is well-known that we disagree with them regarding a number of matters, including the matter of the triple divorce in a single sitting, for we say according to it, following the saying of the four imaams. And we view the waqf as valid, and that nadhr (vowing) is permissible, and that it must be fulfilled in everything except the disobedience of Allaah.

And from the forbidden bid'ahs is: recitation of al-Faatihah for the mashaayikh after the five prayers, and going to extremes in praising them, and making tawassul through them in the way that is commonly done in many countries, and after gatherings of 'ibaadah, believing that this is from the best acts of worship; while it may lead to shirk without a person realising it. For a person might be led to commit shirk without realising it, due to its hidden nature; otherwise, the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) would not have sought Allaah's protection from it with his saying: "O Allaah, I seek Your protection from attributing a partner with You knowingly, and I seek Your forgiveness for that which I do unknowingly. Verily, You are the All-Knower of what is hidden."

So it is necessary to memorise these words, and protect oneself from shirk as much as possible; for 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab said: "The ties of al-Islaam will be undone, one after another, when a person will enter into al-Islaam who does not know what jaahiliyyah is." And that is because he will commit shirk, believing it to be an act of worship. We seek Allaah's protection from going astray and losing our eemaan.

This is what I presented during the discussion with the previously mentioned shaykh [Husayn ibn Muhammad al-Ibreeqi] at the time that he was hesitant, and he requested from me every time to put it in writing; so when he insisted on it, I wrote this down for him without referring back to any book, because I was occupied to the utmost degree with the affair of the ghazw; so whoever wishes to confirm that which we are upon, then let him come to us in ad-Dir'iyyah, and he will see that which will satisfy his thoughts and comfort his sight, of lessons in all of the sciences, especially tafseer and hadeeth; and he will see that which will amaze him, with Allaah's praise and help, of the establishment of the outward symbols (sha'aa'ir) of the religion, and kindness to the weak, the visiting delegations, and the poor people.

At-Tareeqah as-Soofiyyah:

And we do not reject at-Tareeqah as-Soofiyyah, and the purification of the inner self from the evil qualities of disobedience to Allaah connected to the heart and the limbs, as long as the person abides by the laws of the Sharee'ah and the correct methodology. And we do not try to come up with lengthy justifications for any aberrancies in his statements or actions.

And we do not depend on, ask for help from, seek victory from, or place our trust in all of our affairs except upon Allaah ta'aalaa, for He is Sufficient for us, and what an Excellent Trustee; an Excellent Master and an Excellent Helper. And may Allaah bless Muhammad and his family and companions, and grant them peace.


Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah fee al-Ajwibah an-Najdiyyah

[Karim_sunni]

The Wahaabis - Misconceptions Removed
'Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab .........


And they gave us their strongest oaths, without it being asked from them, of the broadening of their understanding and the certainty of their conscience, that they no longer held the slightest doubt that the one who says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam)", or: "Yabna 'Abbaas", or: "Yaa 'Abdal-Qaadir", or other than them from the creations, seeking by that to avert an evil or bring a good from anything that Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of doing, such as healing the sick, or granting victory over the enemy, or guarding from a misfortune, or the like: that he is a mushrik guilty of major shirk, whose blood may be shed and whose wealth is lawful, even if he believes that the ultimate controller of the universe is Allaah ta'aalaa alone but he turned to the creations with du'aa', seeking intercession from them, and drawing closer to them, in order to fulfill his need from Allaah by virtue of their "secret" and by their interceding with Him for them while they are in the barzakh;

And that the structures built over the graves of the righteous people have become in this age idols to which people turn for the fulfillment of needs, and at which acts of devotion are performed, and whose inhabitants are called upon in difficulties, as the people of Jaahiliyyah used to do.




So they [ the followers of Muhamamd Ibn Abdul Wahab ] believe that someone who says "ya rasoellah" [ saaws ] commits shirk, and his blood may be shed, this is really harsch and very shocking to read for me, i know for sure [ based on the things i have read in books [ and from hadith ] that there is nothing wrong in saying ya rasoellah. Or could someone correct me, if this is not the view of a large group of scholars in the 4 mahdabs.

Further from the above quote i get the idea, they see those who perform tawassul also as people guilty of "shirk" , and compare it to idoltary. Thats also a quite shocking opinion in my eyes.

[faqir]

The Wahaabis - Misconceptions Removed
'Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab

Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah fee al-Ajwibah an-Najdiyyah


Some more classic quotes from the reference cited can be read here:


http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=34488&postcount=20

and

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=34489&postcount=21

[tilmeedh]

Actions speak louder than words.

Enough said.


And the only reason that we demolished the house of as-Sayyidah Khadeejah, the Dome of the Birthplace, and some of the zawaayaa attributed to some of the awliyaa', was to prevent that, and to guard against attributing partners with Allaah as much as we were able, due to the enormous importance of doing so, for shirk will not be forgiven by Allaah.What rubbish.
Al-Sayyida Khadija's house a partner to Allah?
My foot.

[SunniWaqas]

:salam:

May I know the reason behind posting this? While I know there may be some 'misconceptions' but overall, this article depicts the typical Wahhabi mindset i.e. Tawassul is a Bid'ah, Sayyidah Khadeejah's house's destruction, and a number of other things.

I think Wahhabis also don't believe the Prophet :saw: to be alive in the SAME manner as the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jam'aah believe. Taqleed is also an issue which is well-known to be opposed by many of them... I don't know how they are claiming in this article that there's nothing wrong in following an Imam...

Wassalam

[Pr1nce]

Why post this? We don't need salafi propaganda

[Yahya]

Wahhabis are a major fitnah of our times. It is best to avoid them, unless you are strong enough in knowledge to refute them.

The other option, and this is trickier, but ultimately better, is to hang around them a lot, being a shining example of the Sunnah of Rasoolullah :saw: and practicing His manners as much as possible, but avoiding argumentation and "touchy" subjects.

Again, if you are knowledgable enough to refute them, then by all means refute them. But know that refuting them on one issue will probably make them start arguments with you on all sorts of issues, including issues that you may not be prepared for.

[_imran_]

Great article. JazakAllahu khair for posting.

[abdul_karim]

When I first came to these forums I was a Hanafi Maturidi and I was looking for a Shaykh in tasawwuf (I live in a rural area in America so I never found one). I argued with Abuz-Zubair (on the IA forums, not here) about what I considered the Salafi's "anthropomorphism". He humbled me immensely when he proved the Salafi position using the evidence of the Qur'an and Sunnah. Immediately I abandoned my Maturidi aqeedah and became an Athari (I also changed my madhhab to Hanbali purely for the sake of congruency). Yet I still believed in visiting the graves of awliya for barakah, and asking the Prophet (salallahu alayhi wa salaam) to make du'a for us at his blessed grave. The more I read the Salafi arguments made the better case (with evidence from Qur'an and Sunnah) and I eventually was won over to the Salafi side on those issues. Yet I still believed in taking bayah to a Shaykh and joining the turuq of tasawwuf. No Salafi argument could budge me. What convinced me of the Salafi position was actually written by a Sufi. It pointed out the breaks and historical impossibilities in every major silsilah (for ex. the Sayyidina Ali to Hasanal-Basri connection) and the fact that they most of the tariqas were started long after their supposed founders passed on. This Sufi article convinced me that the Sufi silsilahs do not really have the unbroken connection with the Prophet (salallahu alayhi wa salaam) that they claim. I am now convinced that the Salafi* dawah is the right way.

*When I say Salafi I do not mean la-madhhabi. I've made the difference clear in another thread.

[Hamood]

*When I say Salafi I do not mean la-madhhabi. I've made the difference clear in another thread.

So you're a Muqallid Salafi?

[allahuakbar786]

i dont get it

[abdul_karim]

So you're a Muqallid Salafi?

Basically. I don't really want to get into the minutae of fiqh, but there is a difference between being a Hanbali Salafi (like most of the people in Saudi Arabia) and a la-madhhabi Salafi (like al-Albani or the Ahle-Hadis of the Indo-Pak region). Again, I don't really want to start a discussion about this aspect of it, which was covered in another post.

[Julaybib]

Salaam's

So how many different types of Salaafi are there ? I went on one of them Salaafi websites you had salaafis criticising other Salaafis. Seems to be a lot of confusion out there.

Even in my home city there seems to be a few rival groups who don't get on with each other.

[SunniWaqas]

Well, what can I say? Maybe the more knowledgeable people might be able to contribute more to this thread. Just a few points though...

I think your 'conversion' was kind of expected because I remember seeing some of your other posts too where you had implied that the Ash'aris and the Maturidis are Bid'atis (or something to that effect).

In a nutshell, what you have concluded is that the overwhelming majority of the Muslims over the past 1400 years (and even now) were 'deviated' and 'on the wrong path' since the majority of them were Ash'aris or Maturidis, and the majority of them were practisers of Tasawwuf (and still are). These Muslims also consisted of the majority of this Ummah's greatest scholars...

You have been convinced of the Salafi way against which some of this Ummah's greatest contemporary scholars have spoken and written extensively. The majority of the Muslim Ummah holds that the Salafis are wrong in certain issues and have veered away from the Jamhoor. I would personally think a number of times before 'converting' like this...

Despite this, I would hold nothing personal against you my brother as long as you remain a practising good Muslim abiding by the Shari'ah and following the beautiful Sunnah of the Prophet (Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wassalam). May Allah guide us to the straight path and unite our hearts.

Wassalam

[abdul_karim]

In a nutshell, what you have concluded is that the overwhelming majority of the Muslims over the past 1400 years (and even now) were 'deviated' and 'on the wrong path' since the majority of them were Ash'aris or Maturidis, and the majority of them were practisers of Tasawwuf (and still are). These Muslims also consisted of the majority of this Ummah's greatest scholars...

You have been convinced of the Salafi way against which some of this Ummah's greatest contemporary scholars have spoken and written extensively. The majority of the Muslim Ummah holds that the Salafis are wrong in certain issues and have veered away from the Jamhoor. I would personally think a number of times before 'converting' like this...


I've heard this before, and it doesn't convince me anymore like it used to.

http://www.jamiat.org.za/isinfo/dsects.html

^^^^^^^^^^^^
This article from a Hanafi website (which appears to have gone dead) used to have a good article about the meaning of "jama'ah" in the hadith that says "stick to the jama'ah".


"The scholars have differed as to the meaning of majority (jama'ah) as contained in the above traditions. There seem to be five more plausible explanations:

The first explanation is that it means the majority of Muslims. Abu Ghalib attests to this view saying: "The majority are the salvation group. Whatever they decide in religious matters is the truth. Whoever opposes them will die a death of ignorance, whether such opposition is done in maters of religious matters or political matters." Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari and ibn Mas'ud also held the same opinion. When 'Uthman ibn 'Affan was murdered, Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari was asked about it, he said: "Adhere to the majority, for Allah will not allow the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad to jointly agree on deviation. Exercise patience until you are granted relief from an oppressive ruler." Ibn Mas'ud said: "Always listen and obey your leader, for h is the firm rope of Allah." He then gripped his hand with the other and said: "It is better that you dislike a few things in the majority (community), than laving a few things in a division."

According to this definition, all the people are included in the majority without exception, even the eminent scholars (mujtahidun).

The second opinion of the word majority (jama'ah) as contained in the tradition under question is that it means the eminent scholars (a'immah al-'Ulama wa al-Mujtahidin) of Islam. Whoever opposes the verdicts which such recognised scholars have pronounced dies a death of ignorance. The laws of Allah are propagated by the 'Ulama who have been made the proof of Allah on this earth. It is this same scholars who are referred to in that tradition: "Verily Allah will not allow my Ummah to jointly agree on wrong." The masses seek religious guidance from the scholars, thus all the scholars will never jointly agree to something wrong.

'Abdullah ibn Mubarak, Ishaq ibn Rahwiah, and the majority of the Usuluyyin adhere to this interpretation. Those who do not qualify to be scholars, automatically fall under the category of followers (muqallidun). Whoever opposes the scholars in their verdicts, dies a death of ignorance. A scholar can not be an innovator in religion (mubtadi'), and if he is of such a nature, he will not be reckoned to be amongst the scholars.

The third opinion of the word majority (jama'ah) as contained in the tradition under question is that it means the Sahabah in specefic. They were the ones who erected the structure of Islam, and fortified its foundations. The Sahabah can never jointly agree on wrong, but any other group besides them can. The Holy Prophet said: "The day of Judgement will not arrive except on the worst of people." In this tradition, the Holy Prophet Muhammad has said that the people of each generation will become progressively worse, and they will collectively deviated and steeped in infidelity (kufr). Thus, only the first generation of Muslims is meant here, and not those following them.

'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz was a vociferous proponent of this explanation. Ibn Wahab reports on the authority of Malik that 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz used to say: "The Holy Prophet and the four Rightly-Guided caliphs devised a pattern for us to follow. To follow it is accepting the Qur'an and submitting fully to Allah. It signifies strength upon Islam. None should change or oppose this way. Whoever seeks guidance from it will be guided, and whoever seeks help from it will be helped. On the other hand, whoever opposes it and follows a path than those of the Believers, Allah will consign him to it, and his abode will be the fire!"

According to this interpreatation, the last part of the tradition: "That path upon which Myself and my Companions are," is supportive of it. Other traditions also support this view which speaks of the virtues of the Sahabah, and the reign of the Khulafa rashidun as the glorious epoch of Islam. The Holy Prophet said: "Adhere to my pattern, and to the pattern of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after me." The Sahabah received direct Prophetic instructions and guidance, they understood Islam the best as they received it first-hand from the Holy Prophet Muhammad. No other group had this opportunity, and the understanding of later scholars of Islam, no matter how erudite and intelligent, can be flawed in some way.
The fourth opinion of the word majority (jama'ah) as contained in the tradition under question is that it means the consensus of the Muslims. If a consensus is decreed on any matter, is is mandatory for all to follow it. Imam Shafi'i said: "The majority will not be heedless to the message of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and to analogy (qiyas). Such heedlessness is only to be found in divisions."

The fifth opinion of the word majority (jama'ah) as contained in the tradition under question is that it means the strict loyalty and unwavering allegiance to one's leader (amir). Tabari was of this opinion. This interpretation is supported by the many traditions which exhort one to always follow the leader. The Holy Prophet also said: "Whoever enters my Ummah in order to divide it, slay his neck."

This adage was perhaps mostly aptly demonstrated by 'Umar ibn al-Khattab. When he was fatally wounded, and it dawned upon him with certitude that his life was so shortly end, he made speedy arrangements for the election of a successor. He instructed in a voice terse with political urgency to Suhaib: "Let 'Ali, 'Uthman, Talhah, Zubair, Sa'd and 'Abd al-Rahman (the nominess) enter into a room. Let ibn 'Umar also enter, but he has no share in the matter. O Suhaib, than stand with a sword raised above their necks. If five of them agree on one person, and one opposes it, slay him. If two of them oppose him, slay both of them. Continue in this fashion until they decide on one person."

[woeuntothee]

You guys are too obvious :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:




Say no to surreptitious salafi dawah.
Say no to surreptitious salafi dawah.
Say no to surreptitious salafi dawah.
I'm not a Salafi and I'm not doing dawah. I'm a Hanbali asking a question. I highly disagree with la-madhhabism, but I'm not accusing the Shaykh of that. Apparently he was a Dhahiri, who fiqh-wise were very similar to Salafis.

[abdul_karim]

You guys are too obvious :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

When I posted that I wasn't a Salafi. Besides, you were accusing me of being a la-madhhabi, which I'm not.

[woeuntothee]

Mate, you were a salafi at heart :P I could read you before you read yourself.

As for la-madhabis ... I'll just not comment on the questionable "hanbali" madhab that the saudis follow.

[abdul_karim]

Mate, you were a salafi at heart :P I could read you before you read yourself.

As for la-madhabis ... I'll just not comment on the questionable "hanbali" madhab that the saudis follow.

And I won't comment on the questionable "Hanbali" madhhab that Musa Furber and other Ash'ari actors follow.

[woeuntothee]

And I won't comment on the questionable "Hanbali" madhhab that Musa Furber and other Ash'ari actors follow.

Alhumdulillah, thanks! Your lack of commentary would be much appreciated - although I must say, its very unlike the general 'salafi' approach of "<Insert any name> UNVEILED!!!" :lol:

[abdul_karim]

Alhumdulillah, thanks! Your lack of commentary would be much appreciated - although I must say, its very unlike the general 'salafi' approach of "<Insert any name> UNVEILED!!!" :lol:

We're getting really immature.

[salman]

And I won't comment on the questionable "Hanbali" madhhab that Musa Furber and other Ash'ari actors follow.

salamu `alaykum

Sidi, may Allah grant you good in all that you seek and decide.

However, I would sincerely advise you not to get ahead of yourself and become a "mini-know-it-all" who seemingly knows, from a sudden transformation, all that one is needed to know to decisively conclude the "questionable" and otherwise. This is jahl murakkab and a disease of the soul.

Having just recently accepted the madhab, I would be cautious if i were you to go around as if somehow you learnt the whole school in a day, and enough to criticize scholars.

May Allah reward you in this life and the next.

wasalam
Salman

[Salafi]

مبروك ألف مبروك

i am a la madhhabi salafi o my brother in islam lol . there have been many salafi mujtahiden and muqallidun. its about aqeedah and not being mut'assib in fiqh (talfeeq). may Allah guide us all.

[Hamood]

مبروك ألف مبروك

i am a la madhhabi salafi o my brother in islam lol . there have been many salafi mujtahiden and muqallidun. its about aqeedah and not being mut'assib in fiqh (talfeeq). may Allah guide us all.

You're the first salafi I've seen who calls himself a 'la madhabi' ...

Whomever Allah guides, no one can misguide, and whomever Allah misguides, no one can guide.

[Salafi]

You're the first salafi I've seen who calls himself a 'la madhabi' ...

lol well most people on SF know us due to this issue.



Whomever Allah guides, no one can misguide, and whomever Allah misguides, no one can guide.

'whomever' and 'whenever' . indeed its true. more applicable to aqaid.

[dining_philosopher]

Ever since i started reading this site abdul kareem, you've always seemed like deeply confused or at least easily convinced person. Flip flopping around from hanafi to hanbali to maliki back to hanbali and now to 'true salafi'. You clearly don't know what you want or what you believe and if some one like a shia were to come along with good enough proof for you I'm sure we would see another thread about you deciding to become shia. Your ignorance is sublime and your arrogance doesn't allow you to see that.

I suppose your situation is a direct result of your stated situation - living in a rural area in america where there are few muslims. I suspect the internet is your primary means of learning about islam. Not surprisingly you are getting a distorted view of islam and have no idea what you are on about. In fact, from your situation i seriously doubt you even have a working knowledge of the hanbali madhab, since there undoubtably few hanbali teachers in rural areas of the USA. But rather you keep pinning yourself with these labels just because it seems 'cool'.

wsalam

[Tajweedpodcast]

Brother i don't understand your point of being salafi or hanbali.
This is not new.
It was existing since the third and fourth century, by athahiriyah..
Question is what do you want to achieve in this forums that you have become hanbali or salafi??
Unless you thought there was a problem in your mind as you are stating.
Imam Attahawi was shafe' then became a hanafi.
Do you want to prove to the forum that you are safe and inshallah you have been given Jannah?

Brother sincerity of intention is very important in declaring and saying whatever you want to utter from you mouth as Mali'kah are writing your (af3aal and aqwaal).
As long as you are on earth alive No guarantee fro anyone. he sahabah ra did not judge or accuse anyone while alive.
"kUNNA LA NAHKMU ALA BA3DINA ILLA 3iNDA ALMAWT"
Try to follw the steps of sahabah ra.
And the only ulamah that have showed that are the Ulamah of 4 imams including the numerous reporters fo tawatur from them.
One more ALL THE QURRA WITH NO EXCEPTION WERE MALIKI HANFI SHAFE' AND ASHARI MATURIDI.
my Ijazah in Quran does not have one hanbali. THOUGH HANBALI ARE WELL RESPECTED BY ALL THE ULAMAH.
Abu amr addani, ashatibi and aljazari till today all the famous qurra who REPORTED AL-QURAN ARE mainly ASHAARI OR MATURIDI WITH HAIGH ISNAD TO RASULULLAH.
wOULD LIKE TO DENY THAT ??
That is tawatur. otherewise if you deny the ASHARI / MATURIDI QURRA WHO HAVE REPORTED THE QURAN TO YOU WOULD BE IN A QUESTION MARK??

khaled
Visit my site (http://www.tajweedinenglish.com)to learn about qiraat and imam shatibi and aljazari

[Sunni_Student786]

If the brother means by "Salafi" that he is following the madhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and that school of aqeedah which has also been named after him, so long as he doesn't make statements like some of the "leaders" of this movement have made regarding Allah's attributes, the fact that he may not believe in Tariqah based Tassawuf, doesn't make him a "deviant" all of a sudden.

I know that no one has used the term to describe the brother, but it appears as though that some are implying it.

The "Salafiyyah" that is most troubling is the la-madhabi variety and those who insist that some of Ibn Taimiyyah's quotes regarding the attributes of Allah, even if understood according to their outward purport, are not wrong. Aside from that, if by "Salafi" he is saying that he is following traditional Hanbalism both in madhab and aqeedah but is rejecting Tariqah based Tassawuf, I would hardly call this stance "unique" nor very troubling.

[Salafi]

from being 'salafi' one obviously means rejection of 'sfi turuq' as well as ta'wil and tafweedh. smile.

[salman]

If the brother means by "Salafi" that he is following the madhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and that school of aqeedah which has also been named after him, so long as he doesn't make statements like some of the "leaders" of this movement have made regarding Allah's attributes, the fact that he may not believe in Tariqah based Tassawuf, doesn't make him a "deviant" all of a sudden.

I know that no one has used the term to describe the brother, but it appears as though that some are implying it.

The "Salafiyyah" that is most troubling is the la-madhabi variety and those who insist that some of Ibn Taimiyyah's quotes regarding the attributes of Allah, even if understood according to their outward purport, are not wrong. Aside from that, if by "Salafi" he is saying that he is following traditional Hanbalism both in madhab and aqeedah but is rejecting Tariqah based Tassawuf, I would hardly call this stance "unique" nor very troubling.

salamu `alaykum

The reason why people are assuming the worse is due to the association the individual has with Abu Zubayr and the Islamic Awakening forums, which is not what we would call "Acceptable Salafism".

Wasalam
Salman

[dining_philosopher]

I have seen abdul karim purport on several occasions that the true belief of imam ahmad was presented correctly by ibn taymiyah.. So clearly in terms of aqidah he is a bit odd.

[Julaybib]

Salaam's

So which Aqeeda do the Hanbalis follow if not Ashari/Maturidi ?

Are The Saudi Salafis followers Of Imam Hanbal (RA) ?

How Many types Of Salaafi are there.?


This not to argue I am just confused Cuz If the Saudis are really Following Imam
Ahmed, then why are people opposed to them from amognst the Deobandis/and other Sunni groups?

[Salafi]

Salaam's

So which Aqeeda do the Hanbalis follow if not Ashari/Maturidi ?

Are The Saudi Salafis followers Of Imam Hanbal (RA) ?

How Many types Of Salaafi are there.?


This not to argue I am just confused Cuz If the Saudis are really Following Imam
Ahmed, then why are people opposed to them from amognst the Deobandis/and other Sunni groups?

types ? infinite. madhhabi la madhhabi and noe 'acceptable'. lol

salafis follow salaf in aqaid and fiqh. it includes the four imams as well as the others.

[Jamaluddine]

Assalamu alaikum,

In the Arabic language, the term 'La-Madhabi' could mean one of two things:

1. Does not follow any of the 4 Madhahib known by Ahlus-Sunnah Wal Jamaah, at all.

2. Does not follow one of the 4 Madhahib known by Ahlus-Sunnah Wal Jamaah, in particular, exclusively and blindly.

Most of the brothers and sisters on this forum think that La-Madhabi Salafis belong to the FIRST category above. THEY ARE WRONG, for all the La-Madhabi Salafis that I have ever met belong to the SECOND category.

I have never met (or even heard of) a Salafi brother or sister who disrespects, rejects or refutes any of the 4 Imams Rahimahumullah. They [or should I say: their shouyoukh (scholars)] rather take from all 4 Imams...and for a good reason:

At the time when the 4 Imams lived, it was not easy to get hold of all the Ahadith relating to a particular matter, therefore each of the 4 Imams based their rulings on what has reached them at the time. However, in later centuries, it became easier for Islamic scholars to gather and analyse all the evidence regarding a particular matter (mainly due to easier means of communication and transport...etc).

This does not mean that we all take upon ourselves the task of gathering evidences about a certain matter, analysing them and taking the strongest,... we should leave that to people whom we trust are qualified to do this.

Seikh Al Munajjid was asked the following question:

Question:

Which of the four Madhhabs is most correct?

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

Allaah has made our worship based on His Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The right way is to understand the texts of sharee’ah as they were understood by the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and their followers among the scholars who are qualified and prominent mujtahids. This includes the imaams whose sincerity, fairness and leadership in religion, knowledge, virtue, goodness and righteousness is a matter of record. The four imaams and founders of the schools of Islamic fiqh (Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam al-Shaafa’i and Imaam Ahmad) – may Allaah have mercy on them all – all followed the texts of the Sharee’ah and their efforts were all focused on teaching and spreading sound Islamic knowledge. All of them were on the right path, and all were devoted followers of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). If mistakes happened, then the Sahaabah made mistakes too. The things to be followed in Sharee’ah are those for which evidence (daleel) is established. In some cases, some scholars may not have known of daleel whilst others did, but this does not mean that their knowledge and ability is to be discredited. All of them were seeking to find and propagate the truth. If a person wants to follow one of the Imaams and adopt his madhhab, then he should follow him in matters for which there is clear, sound daleel, for this is what is required in Islam, but he should not develop partisan or sectarian feelings towards anybody. It is not permissible for the Muslim to believe that he has to follow anybody in all that he says except the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

The person who is suitably qualified can examine what the scholars said and see what is supported by sound daleel. The “rank and file” Muslim who does not know how to examine the evidence and weigh it up should follow a scholar whose religious commitment and knowledge he trusts, and act according to his fatwas. And Allaah knows best.

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid


Therefore Taqleed is fine, as long as it is not with 'Tunnel Vision'. Do Taqleed but keep an open mind, because the scholar that you are following (May Allah reward and guide him) is only human, and hence might make mistakes.

As far as Sunniforum is concerned, I have asked before for the Madhab option 'All 4' to be added, so that I can replace the 'None'. But I am still waiting.

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

[Salafi]

jazakumullahu khairan

[sahih-baba]

salam
the excuses given for la-madhhabism are weak and superficial, whether it is case 1 or 2.

if you don't want to follow 1 madhhab, then the correct way of going about it -the adab of following all maddhabs- is as follows:

1. start with 1 madhhab and learn what you need from it.
2. don't do any of the makruhs and harams according to the maddhab
3. learn what you need from another madhhab and try to do the same.
4. move to the next madhhab and do the same.
5. take no rukhsas unless absolutely necessary.

so for example, you can be maliki but follow other madhhabs out of caution.
for example, the malikis don't have a najasa issue with dogs, whereas all the other 3 madhhabs have some najasa issue with the animal, which means that it would be the safest to follow the shafi'is concerning dogs.

similary the hanbalis do not have a najasa issue with semen and other secretions, which is contrary to the other 3 madhhabs, so it would be the safest to follow the malikis or shafi'is in this regard.

this is the adab of following all madhhabs and has nothing to do with daleels.
wallahu a'lam
wassalam

[abuhajira]

Assalamu alaikum,

At the time when the 4 Imams lived, it was not easy to get hold of all the Ahadith relating to a particular matter, therefore each of the 4 Imams based their rulings on what has reached them at the time. However, in later centuries, it became easier for Islamic scholars to gather and analyse all the evidence regarding a particular matter (mainly due to easier means of communication and transport...etc).

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

:salam:

Brother can you provide me name of one Salafi Alim who has command over the Ahadeeth (Saheeh or Dhaeef, Marjooh or mursal all alike) the way the Mujtahid Imams had?

The above claim is in the very least poorly claimed. We are talking of the mujtahids who attained their Ijtihadi level after becoming Masters in hadeeth (Muhaddith)

The claim also establishes that since the Ulama back then didnt have enough to make their decision on, the Ulama who would come after will have an upper hand when it comes to judgements. Whereas we know that even having our hands on Alim CD, we will not be able to give even fractions of the reasoning which those Mujtahids could give as their second nature.. The claim has divided the knowledge from understanding... Understanding is like noor and information today is even available to an athiest...

In relation to Imam Saheb r.a :

Imam Muhaddith Abdur Rehman bin Mahdi r.a (an expert in rijaal) says

"I was a Naqil of Hadith when I saw that Sufiyaan Thawri (r.a) was an Ameer of Mu'min among the Ulamaa, and Sufiyan bin Uyaina is Ameer ul Ulamaa, and Yahya bin Sa'eed is Qaadi ul Ulamaa BUT Abu Hanifa is Qadi Qudaatul Ulama" {Manaqib Imam Azam Vol 2 Pg 45}

Yahya bin Sa'eed r.a (an Imam of Jarh wa ta'deel) says

"By Allah, Abu Haneefa is the most knowledgable among the Ummah of that which is mentioned from Allah and Rasool :saw:" {Muqadama Kitabul Athaar Pg 8}

Someone asked Abu Zakariya bin Mu'een about the wellbeing of Imam Saheb in field of Hadeeth and he replied that he was well fortified in this field..

In all the four Imams , Imam Saheb is the only one who has the the sanad to Nabi :saw: with only one narrator...

Also if we were to see the importance of verification Imam Saheb gave to hadith was so strict that even the Ulama took note of it. Allama Suyuti says that His (Imam Sahibs)madhab is very strict in regards to hadeeth so much so that if the Ahadeeth of Bukhari and Muslim were to be judged on it then the number of Saheeh hadeeth would only remain half of what it is.. (Nayl ul Autaar).

Even Maulana Abdur Rehman Mubarakpur says that Imam Sahib's strictness to the verification is paralleled by none other..

Abu Na'eem Isfahani has narrated on authority of Yahya bin Nasr that I entered into a house with Abu Haneefa r.a such that the whole house was filled with books. I enquired as to what these books were and he (Imam Sahib) replied that these are books of Hadeeth, and I have narrated only a few of these which can be benefited from.. (Jami' Almasaneed lil Hawarizmi Vol 1 Pg 308)

Ali bin Al Ju'd al Jawhri r.a who was a master in hadeeth and teacher of Imam bukhari and Imam Abu Dawood r.a says , When he (abu hanifa) used to narrate Hadeth it would be as though pearls are coming out (Nurul Anwaar)

Sufiyaan bin uyaina r.a says about Imam Sahib r.a , "The first person who sat me down for hadeeth and in another narration first person who made me a muhaddith was Abu Haneefa" (Manaqib imam Azam Vol 2 Pg 45)

It is upon this that Sheikh Abdul Fatah Abughudda r.a says that this is a proof of grandeur of Imam Abu Haneefa and a sound proof that in Hadeeth Imam Sahib was accepted among the people and that he not only was a Muhaddith but used to make Muhadditheen as well.. (Uqud ul Jmaan...)

Hafiz Muhammad bin Yusuf Asaalihi Ashaafi'i r.a says that Imam abu Hanifa r.a was a very big Haafiz of Hadeeth... (Uqood al Jmaan...)

Imam Abu Yusuf r.a says that he has not seen anyone more knowledgable in fields of Hadeeth and Tafseer than Imam Abu Hanfia r.a...

How can we then claim that he did not have enough hadeeth to make his judgements with. One need to know that to be a Faqeeh one has to have had mastered Hadeeeth. And being a master of hadeeth in those eras included a much more work than a 10 year Hadith study course..

:ws:

[dining_philosopher]

A sunni is some one who follows one of the four sunnite madhabs. If some one does not follow a sunni madhab, then it is quite clear they are not a sunni and are going to hell.

[yours_truly]

A sunni is some one who follows one of the four sunnite madhabs. If some one does not follow a sunni madhab, then it is quite clear they are not a sunni and are going to hell.
I am sorry, but is this a hadith. I mean someone going to hell can only be specified by revelation.

[Musleemah]

bro Jamaluddine
don't waste your time on this issue
It has been explained before, even in some other forums, and the misunderstandings regarding it, and the samething keeps on being repeated.
arguing about this issue, in my opinion, is a waste of time.

may Allah have mercy on all Imams of Sunnah including the 4 great Imams.

[abuhajira]

bro Jamaluddine
don't waste your time on this issue
It has been explained before, even in some other forums, and the misunderstandings regarding it, and the samething keeps on being repeated.
arguing about this issue, in my opinion, is a waste of time.

may Allah have mercy on all Imams of Sunnah including the 4 great Imams.

:salam:

Jazak Allah for confirming that it is indeed waste of time.. that is why we keep closing such threads... Those who will receive guidence from these past threads will get them inshAllah..

:ws:

[yours_truly]

So they [ the followers of Muhamamd Ibn Abdul Wahab ] believe that someone who says "ya rasoellah" [ saaws ] commits shirk, and his blood may be shed, this is really harsch and very shocking to read for me, i
I think they conditioned it with:


the one who says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam)", or: "Yabna 'Abbaas", or: "Yaa 'Abdal-Qaadir", or other than them from the creations, seeking by that to avert an evil or bring a good from anything that Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of doing, such as healing the sick, or granting victory over the enemy, or guarding from a misfortune, or the like: that he is a mushrik guilty of major shirk, whose blood may be shed and whose wealth is lawful

I believe this is like saying "ya amma" (o mommy). If u cry out like this meaning to remember your mom, then this according to the article is not blood-shedding shirk, niether is if i say "ya fulalaan (my wife) bring me a plate of biryani". Because this does not meet the conditions set by the article.
All the article says is:
Saying "ya amma, grant me victory over the enemy" is shirk, because victory-granting is not within my mom's power. It's power rests with Allah. Or if i say "ya fulaan(my wife) save me from the evil eye" then this is shirk because my wife cannot do it.

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I don’t understand statements like “Scholar that you follow”...this implies that a person who follows a Madhab follows a “singular individual” which is far from the truth.

In reality, Hanafi Madhab is composed of:

1. Opinions of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)
2. Opinions of Imam Abu Yusuf (RA)
3. Opinion of Imam Muhammad (RA)
4. Opinions of other students (RA)
5. Overlap opinions i.e. Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) and one of many students (RA) agree

Moreover these opinions have been discussed, refined, defined, disagreed, agreed over centuries so the scholar who gives me (a laymen Muqallid) has centuries of exhaustive research to back him up & NOT ONE MAN!

Conversely following Al-Albani (RA) over Ibnul-Haj’r Asqalani (RA) [Fathul-Bari], Imam Nawawi (RA) [Shar’h Saheeh Muslim], Mujtahid Imams of four Madhabs, is like following ONE MAN blindly, for examples:

1. See Al-Albani (RA)’s opinion about Tashahudd (Attaihiyat) in his book where all of the ones above which I have mentioned are ignored

2. See Al-Albani (RA)’s opinion about Salah of women being the same as men (CATEGORICALLY) in his book where all of the ones above which I have mentioned are ignored

Lastly this thread is an example where we are discussing a position within a Madhab and two Hanafi Scholars are arranged in dialogue!

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25944

Blind-following would have been for all to us ACCEPT Hazrat Soofi Saheb’s reply without question...

Now if this was a quotation of Al-Albani (RA) then the Salafees would have accepted it without question...

Lastly the question of Shaykh Abu-Hajira is worth a million-dollars and worth answering!

[dining_philosopher]

wahabis are going to hell.

[Fundamentalist]

wahabis are going to hell.
:lol: and you're going to the paradise?
I know people are not going to stop their 'stupidity' in the next centuries provided the last hour doesn't come, probably in the following years, we have more madhabs, more groups and sects, and then there will be more 'intersectarian fights', more arguments, more arrogance, ignorance and jahl and thus more 'disgrace at the hands of kuffar'.

[salahuldin786]

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/001966.html

[dining_philosopher]

Wahhabis are like snow flakes.

No two of them are a like, in their beliefs and fiqh.

There are as many sects of wahhabism as there are wahhabis.

[salahuldin786]

i will never follow wahabi's ak salafi's all they say is this is bidah that is shrik and accuse other of kufr and then there saudi king's are shaking hands with the u.s.a and killing are muslim brother and sister's in iraq by letting u.s.a. use there base's to bomb.

they are trouble maker's in the muslim's world if they wasnt here there would be no fitnah amoungst the muslim's.

[salahuldin786]

The Wahaabis - Misconceptions Removed
'Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab

All praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all that exists, and may blessings and peace be upon our trustworthy Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Sahaabah and the Taabi'een. To proceed:

We, the assembly of the ghazw (military expedition) of the muwahhideen, when Allaah blessed us – and to Him is due all praise – with entering Makkah al-Musharrafah at midday on yawm as-sabt (Saturday), the eighth day of the month of Muharram al-Haraam in the year 1218 after the Hijrah, after the chiefs of Makkah, its 'ulamaa' and all of its general public had sought the covenant of security from the ameer of the ghazw, Sa'ood; after they had previously agreed with the leaders of the hajeej and the ameer of Makkah to fight him or to make a stand in the Haram, to prevent him from the House; so when the troops of the muwahhideen marched against them, Allaah cast fear into their hearts, so they scattered in disarray, each one of them considering retreat their best option;

And the ameer at that time offered the covenant of security to everyone in al-Haram ash-Shareef, and we entered, our slogan being the talbiyah, in safety, our heads shaved and trimmed, not in fear of anyone of the creation, rather of the Master of the Day of Judgement;

And from the time that the troops entered the Haram, in their great numbers, self-controlled, well-mannered, without cutting down any tree, nor chasing any game animals, nor shedding any blood except for the blood of the hady, or whatever animals Allaah had made lawful according to the legislated manner;

And when our 'Umrah was completed, we gathered the people on the morning of yawm al-ahad (Sunday), and the ameer (rahimahullaah) proposed to the 'ulamaa' that which we seek from the people and for which we fight them, which is: the purity of tawheed for Allaah ta'aalaa alone. And he informed them that there is no disagreement between us regarding anything except for two matters:

The first of them being the purity of tawheed for Allaah ta'aalaa, and the understanding of the types of 'ibaadah, and that du'aa' is one of them, and clarification of the meaning of the shirk due to which our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) fought the people, and his call continued for a long period of time after the Prophethood to that tawheed and to the abandoning of attributing partners with Allaah, all of that before the other four pillars of al-Islaam were made obligatory.

And the second matter is al-amru bil-ma'roof wan-nahyu 'anil-munkar (commanding the good and forbidding the evil), of which nothing remains among them except its name, its effects and meaning having been erased.

So they agreed with us regarding the goodness of that which we are upon, in general and in detail, and they gave the bay'ah to the ameer upon the Book and the Sunnah, and it was accepted from them and they were all pardoned. So he did not put the slightest pressure on a single one of them, and he continued to treat them all with the utmost kindness, especially the 'ulamaa'.

So we explained to them in that meeting, before they departed from us, the evidences for what we are upon, and we sought from them sincere advice, reminder, and explanation of the Truth.

And we informed them that the ameer clearly stated in their meeting that we would accept anything for which they brought a clear evidence from the Book, or the Sunnah, or an athar from as-Salaf as-Saalih, such as al-Khulafaa' ar-Raashideen whom we are commanded to follow by his saying (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "You must follow my Sunnah, and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khulafaa' after me." Or from the four mujtahid imaams and those who received knowledge from them, until the end of the third generation, in accordance with his saying (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "The best of you are my generation, then those who follow them, then those who follow them."

And we informed them that we are with the Truth, wherever it goes, and followers of the clear evidence, and we do not care if that means opposing what those before us were upon, and they did not reject any of that.

Regarding seeking needs from the dead, and the structures built over the graves:

So we put before them the matter of seeking one's needs from the dead, and asked if they still had any misunderstanding regarding it? So one of them mentioned one of two misunderstandings, and we refuted them with the undisputable evidences from the Book and the Sunnah until they accepted, and there was none left among them who had any doubt or misgiving regarding that for which we fought the people, that it is the clear Truth without any doubt.

And they gave us their strongest oaths, without it being asked from them, of the broadening of their understanding and the certainty of their conscience, that they no longer held the slightest doubt that the one who says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam)", or: "Yabna 'Abbaas", or: "Yaa 'Abdal-Qaadir", or other than them from the creations, seeking by that to avert an evil or bring a good from anything that Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of doing, such as healing the sick, or granting victory over the enemy, or guarding from a misfortune, or the like: that he is a mushrik guilty of major shirk, whose blood may be shed and whose wealth is lawful, even if he believes that the ultimate controller of the universe is Allaah ta'aalaa alone but he turned to the creations with du'aa', seeking intercession from them, and drawing closer to them, in order to fulfill his need from Allaah by virtue of their "secret" and by their interceding with Him for them while they are in the barzakh;

And that the structures built over the graves of the righteous people have become in this age idols to which people turn for the fulfillment of needs, and at which acts of devotion are performed, and whose inhabitants are called upon in difficulties, as the people of Jaahiliyyah used to do.

And among them were the mufti of the Hanafiyyah, Shaykh 'Abd al-Malik al-Qala'i, and Husayn al-Maghribi the mufti of the Maalikiyyah, and 'Aqeel ibn Yahyaa al-'Alawi.

So thereafter we demolished all that was worshipped by glorification and belief in it, and due to which benefit and aid were hoped for, from all of the structures built over the graves and other than them, until there did not remain in that purified land a single taaghoot to be worshipped, so all praise is due to Allaah for that.

Then all taxes and customs rates were abolished, and all tobacco pipes were broken, and it was announced that they are haraam. And all of the places frequented by the users of narcotics and those famous for immorality were burnt down, and it was announced that everyone must regularly perform the salaah in jamaa'ah, without praying in different groups, rather that they should gather to pray behind a single imaam, and that imaam should be a follower of one of the four imaams, may Allaah be pleased with them. Then the people would be united, Allaah alone would be worshipped, there would be concord, and discord would disappear.

And an ameer was appointed for them, and the affair was settled without bloodshed, violating honour, or putting pressure on anyone, and all praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all that exists.

Then they were given the letters written by Shaykh Muhammad regarding tawheed, containing the proofs and explaining the evidences for it with the unambiguous aayaat and the mutawaatir ahaadeeth in order to convince them. And a summary of that letter was made for the general public, to be distributed in their sittings and studied in their assemblies, and for the 'ulamaa' to explain its meanings to them in order that they may understand tawheed so that they could hold on to the firmest handhold, and in order that the reality of shirk may be clarified to them so that they could avoid it by being safe on the clear understanding.

And among those who were present from the 'ulamaa' of Makkah, and witnessed most of what took place, was Husayn ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Ibreeqi al-Hadhrami, and thereafter al-Hayyaani. And without hesitation he gathered with Sa'ood and his advisors from the people of knowledge, and asked about the matter of intercession, regarding which the swords were drawn, without shyness or embarrassment, for he had not done any wrong regarding it before.

So we informed him that our madhhab in the usool (fundamentals) of the religion is the madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah, and our way is the way of the Salaf, which is the safer way, and indeed the more knowledgeable and wise, as opposed to those who say that the way of the Khalaf is more knowledgeable.

Allaah's Attributes, and al-qadhaa' wal-qadar

And it is that we accept the aayaat and ahaadeeth of the Attributes upon their apparent meanings, and we leave their true meanings, while believing in their realities, to Allaah ta'aalaa. For Maalik, one of the greatest of the 'ulamaa' of the Salaf, when asked about al-istiwaa' in His Saying (ta'aalaa): "Ar-Rahmaan rose over the Throne." [Taa-Haa: 5] said: "Al-istiwaa' is known, the "how" of it is unknown, believing in it is waajib, and asking about it is bid'ah."

And we believe that good and bad are all from the Will of Allaah ta'aalaa, and that nothing occurs in His Dominion except that which He wills. For the slave is not capable of creating his own actions, rather he earns from them reward due to Allaah's Favour, and punishment due to Allaah's Justice, and Allaah has no obligation over His slave in anything.

And that the believers will see Him in the Hereafter, without mentioning how or comprehending it.

Regarding following the madhaahib:

And in the furoo' (branches) of the religion we are upon the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and we do not object to whoever follows one of the four imaams, as opposed to other than them whose madhaahib have not been clarified.

The Raafidhah, Zaydiyyah, Imaamiyyah and the likes of them: we do not accept from them anything from their corrupt madhaahib, rather we require that they follow one of the four imaams.
And we do not deserve the level of al-ijtihaad al-mutlaq (absolute ijtihaad), and none among us claims it. However, in some matters, if we find an authentic nass (text) from the Book or the Sunnah that is not abrogated or specified or contradicted by a stronger evidence, and one of the four imaams says according to it, then we take it and leave the saying of the madhhab, such as the matter of the inheritance of the grandfather and the brothers, for we put the grandfather first in the inheritance, even though the madhhab of the Hanaabilah says otherwise.

And we do not inquire into a person's madhhab, and we do not oppose him, unless we find a clear text opposing the madhhab of one of the imaams in a matter involving an outward symbol of the religion (shi'aar), such as the imaam of the prayers; so we order the Hanafi and the Maaliki, for example, to observe the same calmness when rising from rukoo' (i'tidaal), and in the sitting between the sajdatayn, due to the clear evidence for that, as opposed to the Shaafi'i imam reciting the basmalah aloud, for we do not order him to recite it quietly. And there is a great difference between these two matters. So when the evidence is strong, then we advise them to follow the nass, even if it opposes the madhhab, and that is found only very rarely.

And there is no objection to ijtihaad in some matters as opposed to others, and this is not contradictory to the lack of the claim to ijtihaad. For it has been that a group of the imaams of the four madhaahib had their own particular views regarding certain matters that were in opposition to their madhhab, whose founder they followed.

Regarding the writings of the 'ulamaa':

Moreover, we turn for aid in understanding the Book of Allaah to the well-known and respected tafseers, among the greatest of which are, to us, the tafseer of Ibn Jareer, and its summary by Ibn Katheer ash-Shaafi'i, and likewise al-Baghawi, al-Baydhaawi, al-Khaazin, al-Haddaad, al-Jalaalayn, and other than them.

And for understanding the hadeeth, to the commentaries of the prominent imaams, such as those of al-'Asqalaani and al-Qastalaani on al-Bukhaari, and that of an-Nawawi on Muslim, and that of al-Manaawi on al-Jaami' as-Sagheer.

And we give great importance to the books of hadeeth, especially al-Ummahaat as-Sitt and their commentaries, and we give importance to the other books in the rest of the fields of study: Usool, furoo', qawaa'id, biographies, grammar, morphology, and all other sciences of the Ummah.

And we not order the banning of any writings at all, except those that contain what the people have fallen into of shirk, such as Rawdh ar-Rayaaheen, or which may result in defects in the 'aqeedah, such as 'ilm al-mantiq (the science of logic), which a group of the 'ulamaa' have declared to be haraam. But we do not interrogate and search for the like of them. Likewise regarding the book ad-Dalaa'il, unless its owner stubbornly displays it publicly, then it is banned from him.

And what occurred from one of the bedouins regarding banning certain books of the people of at-Taa'if, was due to his ignorance, and he as well as others were warned from doing it.

Misconceptions and falsehoods regarding the da'wah:

And from what we are upon is that we do not view the enslavement of the 'Arabs as permissible, and neither did we do it. And we did not fight against anyone but them. And we do not view it permissible to kill women and children.

As for the lies forged against us in order to hide the truth and deceive the people: that we explain the Qur'aan with our opinions, and that we only accept those ahaadeeth which agree with our understanding, without referring back to a commentary or consulting a shaykh, and that we lower the status of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) by saying that the Prophet is a decomposed set of bones in his grave, and that the stick of one of us is of more benefit than him, and that he cannot intercede, and that visiting him is not recommended, and that he did not know the meaning of "laa ilaaha illallaah" until "So know that none has the right to be worshipped but Allaah" was sent down to him, even though the aayah was sent down in al-Madeenah, and that we do not rely on the sayings of the 'ulamaa', and that we ban the books of the followers of the madhaahib due to their containing both truth and falsehood, and that we are mujassimah (anthropomorphists), and that we make takfeer of all of the people of our time and after the sixth century of the Hijrah, except for those who are upon our way;

And branching off from that is their claim that we do not accept the bay'ah of anyone until he admits that he was a mushrik before, and that his parents died attributing partners with Allaah;

And that we forbid sending prayers (salaah) on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), and that we absolutely forbid the legislated manner of visiting the graves, and that whoever follows our way then he is forgiven everything, even his debts, and that we do not give any importance to the Ahl al-Bayt (may Allaah be pleased with them), and that we force them to marry those who are not their equals, and that we force the old man to divorce his young wife so that she can marry a young man if their case is brought before us, then there is no basis to any of that.

So all of these falsehoods, and others besides them that we were asked about before, our answer to every one of these matters is: "Glorified are You! This is an enormous slander." [An-Noor: 16] So whoever narrates from us any of that, or attributes it to us, then he has slandered us a forged a lie.

And whoever witnesses our state, and is present in our sittings, and verifies that which is with us, will know for sure that all of that has been made up and forged against us by the enemies of the religion and the brothers of the shayaateen, in order to frighten the people away from submitting to Allaah ta'aalaa with tawheed in 'ibaadah, and abandoning all forms of shirk, regarding which Allaah has stated that He will not forgive: "And He forgives other sins besides that to whom He wills." [An-Nisaa': 48]

Major sins:

For we believe that whoever commits any of the major sins, such as killing a Muslim unrightfully, adultery, usury, drinking intoxicants, and he repeats that, then his doing that that does not take him out of the fold of al-Islaam, and he is not condemned to eternity in the abode of punishment, as long as he dies as a muwahhid in all forms of his 'ibaadah.

The status of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam):

And what we believe is that the status of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) is absolutely the highest status of the creations, and that he is alive in his grave with the life of the barzakh, higher than the life of the shuhadaa' that has been mentioned in the Revelation, because he is better than them without doubt. And that he hears the Muslim's sending greetings (salaam) on him, and that it is sunnah to visit him, however it is not allowed to set out on a journey except to visit the masjid and pray in it, and if he intends along with that to visit the grave of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), then there is no objection.

And whoever spends his most precious time in sending the prayers (salaah) on him ('alayhis-salaatu was-salaam) according to the manner narrated from him, then he has succeeded in attaining the bliss of both worlds, and it will suffice him from his worries and stress, as it is mentioned in the hadeeth from him.

Allaah's awliyaa':

And we do not reject the karaamaat (miracles) of the awliyaa', and we give them the recognition that they deserve, and that they are upon guidance from their Lord as long as they follow the legislated way and the laws of the Sharee'ah. However, they do not deserve to be given any form of 'ibaadah, whether during their lives or after their deaths. Rather, du'aa' may be sought from them while they are alive, and indeed from any Muslim, for it has come in the hadeeth: "The du'aa' of a Muslim for his brother is answered." And he (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) ordered 'Umar and 'Ali to pray for forgiveness for Uways, and they did so.

Intercession:

And we affirm the intercession for our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) on the Day of Resurrection, according to what has been narrated, and likewise we affirm it for the rest of the Prophets, angels, awliyaa', and children who died young, also according to what has been narrated. And we ask it only from the One Who has power over it, and He will give His Permission for it to whomever He wills from the muwahhideen, who will be the most fortunate of people to receive it, as is narrated, by one of us saying: "O Allaah, grant us the intercession of Your righteous slaves, or Your angels" or the like, which is sought from Allaah alone, not from them. So it is not said: "Yaa Rasoolallaah" or: "Yaa Waliyyallaah, I ask you for intercession", or anything else like: "Come to my aid", or: "Save me", or: "Heal me", or: "Grant me victory over my enemy", or the like, which none but Allaah ta'aalaa alone is capable of granting. So if this is sought from those who have been mentioned
> while they are in the barzakh, then it is a form of shirk, for there is no narrated text supporting that in the Book or the Sunnah, neither is there any athar from as-Salaf as-Saalih in that regard, rather it is narrated in the Book and the Sunnah and from the consensus of the Salaf that it is major shirk, due to which the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) fought the people.

Swearing oaths and making tawassul:

So if you asked us what we say regarding swearing oaths and making tawassul by other than Allaah, then I say:

We look into the state of the one who is swearing the oath: if he intends by it glorification, like his glorification of Allaah or even greater, as occurs with some of the extreme mushrikeen from the people of our age, when he is asked to swear by his shaykh, i.e. his object of worship whom he depends upon in all of his affairs, he will not accept to do so if he is lying or in doubt, but if his is asked to swear by Allaah only he will do so; then such a person is certainly a kaafir, from the worst of the mushrikeen, and he is the most ignorant of them by consensus. But if he does not intend glorification, rather he does it only due to a slip of the tongue, then this is not major shirk, but the one who said it must be forbidden from it and warned, and ordered to seek Allaah's forgiveness immediately.

As for tawassul, which is to say: "O Allaah, I ask You by the status of Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), or by the right of Your Prophet, or by the status of Your righteous slaves, or by the right of Your slave so-and-so", then this is among the blameworthy bid'ahs for which no evidence has been narrated in the texts, like raising the voice when sending prayers (salaah) on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) after the adhaan.

The Ahl al-Bayt:

As for the Ahl al-Bayt, a question regarding them was directed to the 'ulamaa' of ad-Dir'iyyah, and also regarding the permissibility of the marriage of a Faatimiyyah woman with a non-Faatimi man, and the answer was as follows:

The Ahl al-Bayt, may Allaah be pleased with them, are undoubtedly entitled to our love and affection, as is narrated in the Book and the Sunnah. So it is obligatory to love them and show affection for them, however al-Islaam has made the people equal. So no-one is better than another except in piety. Along with that, they deserve respect and preference, as do the rest of the 'ulamaa', such as sitting at the front of the gatherings, being served first with respect, and given priority when giving way in the street and the like, when others of similar age and knowledge are present.

As for the common practice in some countries or giving preference to their children and their ignorant ones, over one who is more deserving than him, to the extent that if he does not kiss his hand every time he greets him then he will blame him, or quarrel with him, or beat him, or argue with him, then this is a practice for which there is no narrated text or evidence. Rather it is an evil act, whose removal is obligatory. And if he kissed the hand of one of them when returning from a journey, or due to his abundance of knowledge, or from time to time, or after a long absence, then there is no objection to that. However, what has become commonplace in the latter-day jaahiliyyah is that kissing the hand has become a symbol for those who are believed, or whose ancestors are believed, to possess certain powers, or a custom of the arrogant towards other than them. So we forbade it absolutely, especially for the above-mentioned people, in order to prevent the ways leading to shirk as much as we are able.

And the only reason that we demolished the house of as-Sayyidah Khadeejah, the Dome of the Birthplace, and some of the zawaayaa attributed to some of the awliyaa', was to prevent that, and to guard against attributing partners with Allaah as much as we were able, due to the enormous importance of doing so, for shirk will not be forgiven by Allaah. And it is worse than attributing a son to Allaah ta'aalaa, because a son is a perfection in the case of the creation; as for shirk, it is a deficiency, even in the case of the creation, in accordance with His Saying (ta'aalaa): "He gives a parable from yourselves: Do you not have slaves whom your right hands own who are partners in that which We have provided for you?" [Ar-Room: 28]

And as for the marriage of a Faatimiyyah woman to a non-Faatimi man, then it is permissible by consensus, indeed there is no dislike in it at all. For 'Ali married his daughter to 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab, and both of them are sufficient examples to follow. And Sakeenah bint al-Husayn ibn 'Ali married four men, and none of them was a Faatimi, not even a Haashimi, and the Salaf continued on that way without objection. However, we do not compel anyone to get his female ward married, unless she herself requests it and refuses someone unequal to her in social status (kufu'). And the Arabs are equal to each other (akfaa'), so that which is commonplace in some countries of refusing marriage on the grounds of social status is proof of arrogance and trying to be praised. And great evil and corruption could result from this, as has been narrated. Indeed, marriage between those whose status is unequal is permissible, for Zayd – who was a freed slave – was married to Zaynab, the Mother of the Believers, and she was from Quraysh. And the matter is well-known to the followers of the madhaahib. [End of quote.]

Establishing the evidence and the conditions of making takfeer:

So if somebody, seeking to frighten people away from the truth and submission to it, says:

If you declare with certainty that whoever says: "Yaa Rasoolallaah, I ask you for intercession" is a mushrik whose blood may be spilt, then the necessary implication of it is that the majority of the Ummah have committed kufr, especially those of the later generations, because the 'ulamaa' that they followed clearly stated this to be recommended, and they criticised those who say otherwise!

I say:

This is not necessarily the implication, because the implication of the madhhab is not itself a madhhab, as is well-known. For example, it is not implied that we are mujassimah (anthropomorphists) just because we talk about the direction of Allaah's 'uluww (highness, loftiness) as narrated in the hadeeth regarding that.

And we say regarding those who have died: that they are a nation that has passed away; and we do not make takfeer of anyone except the one whom our da'wah to the Truth has reached, and to whom the path has been clarified and the evidence established, and who then continues arrogantly and stubbornly, like the majority of those whom we are fighting today, who insist on attributing partners to Allaah, refusing to carry out the obligations of the religion, and openly committing the major sins and forbidden acts. And as for those other than the majority, we only fight them due to their aiding such people, their acceptance of them, their increasing of their numbers, and their participation with him in fighting us. So in that case he carries the same ruling regarding the duty to fight him. And we excuse those who have passed away, that they were mistaken but excused, due to the fact that they were not infallible from error.

So it is absolutely not allowed to justify that by saying that there was ijmaa' on such a thing, and whoever criticised those who said otherwise was mistaken. And it is not a new thing for someone to be mistaken, for those who were better than them also made mistakes, such as 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radhiyallaahu 'anhu); for when the woman corrected him, he retracted from his statement regarding the matter of the mahr (dowry), and in regard to other matters that are well-known in his biography. Indeed, a large group of the Sahaabah made a mistake while our Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) was among them, and his light guiding them, when they said: "Make for us a dhaat anwaat, as they have a dhaat anwaat."

So if you said:

This is the case of the one who is confused, then when he is corrected he accepts it; then what is to be said about the one who understands the evidences, has looked upon the sayings of the imaams who are followed, and who persisted on that way until he dies?

I say:

There is nothing preventing us from excusing those mentioned, and we do not say that he is a kaafir, and neither do we say about the one mentioned previously that he is guilty of his mistake, even if he persisted in his mistake, due to the lack of anyone who would struggle for the sake of this matter in that time, with his tongue and his sword and his spear. For the evidence was not established against him, nor was the path made clear to him, rather the majority trend of the authors of the time mentioned was the wholesale abandoning of the sayings of the imaams of the Sunnah regarding this matter altogether, and whoever looked upon them was opposed by them before it could settle in his heart, and their prominent people continued to forbid their lesser people from even looking into this matter altogether, and the kings' authority deterred anyone whose heart accepted it, except those of them whom Allaah willed.

Moreover, Mu'aawiyah and his companions (radhiyallaahu 'anhum) saw it fit to oppose Ameer al-Mu'mineen 'Ali ibn Abi Taalib (radhiyallaahu 'anhu), fight him, and declare war against him. They were mistaken in doing that according to ijmaa', and they persisted on that mistake. Yet it is not known that a single one of the Salaf made takfeer of a single one of them, by ijmaa'. Indeed, they did not even label him as a faasiq; rather, they affirmed for them the reward of ijtihaad, even if they were mistaken, as is well-known among Ahl as-Sunnah.

And we are likewise: we do not make takfeer of anyone whose religion is correct, whose righteousness, knowledge, piety, and ascetism is well-known, whose life is praiseworthy, and who made his sincere effort for the Ummah by devoting himself to teaching the beneficial sciences and writing about them, even if he was mistaken in this matter or in other matters. An example is Ibn Hajr al-Haytami: for we are well aware of what he said in ad-Durr al-Munadhdham, yet that does not detract from his great knowledge, and for this reason we give great importance to his books, such as Sharh al-Arba'een, az-Zawaajir, and others, and we rely on what he has transmitted, for he is one of the 'ulamaa' of the Muslims.

This is what we are upon, addressing all who possess sound mind and knowledge, and who possess the quality of fairness, without inclining towards bigoted partisanship or fanaticism: to look to what is said, and not to who said it. As for those whose habit is to oblige adherence to a particular person in everything, regardless of whether it is truth or otherwise, then he has blindly followed those regarding whom Allaah has said: "Verily, we found our fathers following a certain way, and we are following in their footsteps." [Az-Zukhruf: 23] His custom and habit is to know the truth by the people, not the people by the truth. So we do not address him or the like of him except with the sword, until his crookedness is straightened out and his error corrected. And the armies of tawheed, praise be to Allaah, are victorious, and their banners are unfurled with success and progress, "and the unjust will know by what an overturning they shall be overturned." [Ash-Shu'araa': 227] And "verily, it is the Party of Allaah who will be victorious." [Al-Maa'idah: 56] And He said (ta'aalaa): "And verily, it is Our troops who will be victorious." [As-Saaffaat: 173] "And it was incumbent upon Us to grant victory to the believers." [Ar-Room: 47] "And the good end is for the pious." [Al-A'raaf: 128]

Bid'ah:

Moreover, from what we are upon is that bid'ah (innovation), which is everything that was introduced into the religion after the three generations, is in all of its forms blameworthy, as opposed to those who say that there are good and bad bid'ahs, or who divide them into five categories; unless we can harmonise by saying that the good bid'ahs are those that as-Salaf as-Saalih were upon, and that they include that which is obligatory, recommended, and permissible; and in that case they might figuratively speaking be termed bid'ahs; and that the bad bid'ahs are anything other than that, and that they include that which is forbidden and that which is disliked. And there is no objection to this harmonisation.

So from the blameworthy bid'ahs that we forbid are: raising the voice with the adhaan in that which is not part of the adhaan, whether it is with aayaat, or sending prayers upon the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), or dhikr, or other than that after the adhaan, or during the night of al-Jumu'ah, or Ramadhaan, or the two 'Eeds; for all of that is a blameworthy bid'ah.

And we have abolished that which was customary in Makkah of announcing to the people to make dhikr or pray for mercy and the like, and the 'ulamaa' of the madhaahib admitted that it was a bid'ah.

And from them is: the reading of a hadeeth on the authority of Abu Hurayrah before the khutbah; and the commentator on al-Jaami' as-Sagheer has clearly stated that to be bid'ah. And from them is: holding gatherings at a particular time to recite the story of the Prophet's birth (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) in the belief that it is a specially recommended act of worship, without teaching the knowledge of the seerah; for this has not been narrated.

And from them is: holding gatherings to recite the rawaatib of the mashaayikh with raised voices, and reciting al-Faatihah, and making tawassul through them in important affairs; such as the raatib of as-Sammaan, and the raatib of al-Haddaad, and their likes. Indeed, such gatherings might include major shirk, so they are to be fought due to that; and whoever among them is given direction and accepts that these matters in such forms are not Sunnah but rather bid'ah, then he is left; but if they refuse, then the ruler is to punish them what that which he sees sufficient as a deterrent.

And as for the ahzaab (compilations of dhikr and supplications) of the 'ulamaa' that are taken from the Book and the Sunnah, then there is no objection to reciting them and doing so regularly; for dhikr, sending prayers on the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam), seeking forgiveness, reciting the Qur'aan, and the like is highly recommended according to the Sharee'ah, and the one who observes it is rewarded, and every time a slave of Allaah does it more, then his reward increases, but as long as it is done in the legislated manner: without going to extremes, or corrupting it, or altering it; for Allaah ta'aalaa has said: "Call upon your Lord with devotion and with a low voice." [Al-A'raaf: 55] And He said (ta'aalaa): "And to Allaah belong the Most Beautiful Names, so call on Him by them." [Al-A'raaf: 180] And by Allaah, how great was an-Nawawi with his compilation Kitaab al-Adhkaar, so the interested one should benefit from it, for it contains that which will suffice the one who is successful.

And from them is: that which is commonplace in some countries of reciting the mawlid of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) with poems that are sung, and mixed with sending prayers on him, and adhkaar and recitation of the Qur'aan, and doing that after the Taraaweeh prayer, believing it in that form to be an act of worship. Indeed, the general public imagines that this is from the narrated sunan. So that is forbidden. As for the Taraaweeh prayer, it is sunnah, and there is no objection to praying it in jamaa'ah regularly.

And from them is: that which is commonplace in some countries of praying the five obligatory prayers together after the last Jumu'ah of Ramadhaan. And this is one of the evil bid'ahs by ijmaa', so they are to be warned from that with the severest warning.

And from them is: raising the voice with dhikr when carrying the dead, or when pouring water over the grave, and other than that which has not been narrated from the Salaf. And Shaykh at-Tartooshi al-Maghribi has authored a concise book which he entitled al-Hawaadith wal-Bida', and Abu Shaamah al-Maqdisi wrote a summary of it; so it is upon the one who is concerned for his religion to obtain it.

And we only forbid those innovations that are taken as religion and worship. As for that which is not taken as religion and worship, such as drinking coffee, composing poetry, mentioning the good qualities of the kings, etc. then we do not forbid it, as long as it is not mixed with things like dhikr or i'tikaaf in the masjid, believing it to be an act of worship; for Hassaan refuted Ameer al-Mu'mineen 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radhiyallaahu 'anhu), saying: "I used to recite this poetry in front of one who was better than you," so 'Umar accepted it.

And all kinds of permissible recreations are allowed, because the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) allowed the Abyssinians to play their sports on the day of 'Eed inside his masjid (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam). And singing during building or the like is allowed, as is training for warfare with various types of weapons, as well as that which incites bravery such as war drums, but not other musical instruments, which are forbidden. And the distinction between them is very clear.

And there is no objection to beating the daff (hand-drum) at weddings, for he said (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam): "I have been sent with the easy religion of monotheism (al-Haneefiyyah as-Samihah)." And he said: "Let the Jews know that in our religion there is enjoyment."

Regarding Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim:
Moreover, we view both Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim and his Shaykh [Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah] as two imaams of truth from Ahl as-Sunnah, and we view their books among the greatest of books; however we do not blindly follow them in every matter, for everyone may have his saying accepted or rejected except our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam). And it is well-known that we disagree with them regarding a number of matters, including the matter of the triple divorce in a single sitting, for we say according to it, following the saying of the four imaams. And we view the waqf as valid, and that nadhr (vowing) is permissible, and that it must be fulfilled in everything except the disobedience of Allaah.

And from the forbidden bid'ahs is: recitation of al-Faatihah for the mashaayikh after the five prayers, and going to extremes in praising them, and making tawassul through them in the way that is commonly done in many countries, and after gatherings of 'ibaadah, believing that this is from the best acts of worship; while it may lead to shirk without a person realising it. For a person might be led to commit shirk without realising it, due to its hidden nature; otherwise, the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) would not have sought Allaah's protection from it with his saying: "O Allaah, I seek Your protection from attributing a partner with You knowingly, and I seek Your forgiveness for that which I do unknowingly. Verily, You are the All-Knower of what is hidden."

So it is necessary to memorise these words, and protect oneself from shirk as much as possible; for 'Umar ibn al-Khattaab said: "The ties of al-Islaam will be undone, one after another, when a person will enter into al-Islaam who does not know what jaahiliyyah is." And that is because he will commit shirk, believing it to be an act of worship. We seek Allaah's protection from going astray and losing our eemaan.

This is what I presented during the discussion with the previously mentioned shaykh [Husayn ibn Muhammad al-Ibreeqi] at the time that he was hesitant, and he requested from me every time to put it in writing; so when he insisted on it, I wrote this down for him without referring back to any book, because I was occupied to the utmost degree with the affair of the ghazw; so whoever wishes to confirm that which we are upon, then let him come to us in ad-Dir'iyyah, and he will see that which will satisfy his thoughts and comfort his sight, of lessons in all of the sciences, especially tafseer and hadeeth; and he will see that which will amaze him, with Allaah's praise and help, of the establishment of the outward symbols (sha'aa'ir) of the religion, and kindness to the weak, the visiting delegations, and the poor people.

At-Tareeqah as-Soofiyyah:

And we do not reject at-Tareeqah as-Soofiyyah, and the purification of the inner self from the evil qualities of disobedience to Allaah connected to the heart and the limbs, as long as the person abides by the laws of the Sharee'ah and the correct methodology. And we do not try to come up with lengthy justifications for any aberrancies in his statements or actions.

And we do not depend on, ask for help from, seek victory from, or place our trust in all of our affairs except upon Allaah ta'aalaa, for He is Sufficient for us, and what an Excellent Trustee; an Excellent Master and an Excellent Helper. And may Allaah bless Muhammad and his family and companions, and grant them peace.


Ad-Durar as-Saniyyah fee al-Ajwibah an-Najdiyyah


brother how can you be a hanafi wahhabi dont follow a madhab.

[Fundamentalist]

i will never follow wahabi's ak salafi's all they say is this is bidah that is shrik and accuse other of kufr and then there saudi king's are shaking hands with the u.s.a and killing are muslim brother and sister's in iraq by letting u.s.a. use there base's to bomb.

they are trouble maker's in the muslim's world if they wasnt here there would be no fitnah amoungst the muslim's.
As for licking kuffar's boots, hanafis or madhabis are doing the same thing in Egypt, Iraq and Pakistan. Nifaq is common in all groups and sects of Muslims, as we have 'fanatics' and sectarian fools in all groups, madhabis and nonmadhabis, at the same time there are 'true Muslims' everywhere belonging to any groups.
It's sad how arrogance and ignorance prevails in this ummah, we believe in more 'fanaticism' than in Allah and His Messenger s.a.w.

[Jamaluddine]

By the way, I forgot tosay:

The term 'La-Madhabi' is not a name that Salafis have given themselves. Rather, other people have decided to call them this (among other unfair and confusing names). Salafis like to be known by the more correctly descriptive name: AHLUS-SUNNAH WAL JAMAAH.

[Jamaluddine]

Assalamu alaiki sister Musleemah,

It is so nice to see that you are still around!

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

[Jamaluddine]

Assalamu alaikum,


:salam:

Brother can you provide me name of one Salafi Alim who has command over the Ahadeeth (Saheeh or Dhaeef, Marjooh or mursal all alike) the way the Mujtahid Imams had?

The above claim is in the very least poorly claimed. We are talking of the mujtahids who attained their Ijtihadi level after becoming Masters in hadeeth (Muhaddith)

The claim also establishes that since the Ulama back then didnt have enough to make their decision on, the Ulama who would come after will have an upper hand when it comes to judgements. ...

Bro Abu Hajira:

May Allah SWT forgive you. You have twisted what I said. You have made me dare say what I would not dare think!.

Your question is a very easy one to answer, but it has nothing to do with what we are talking about here. Read my post again, carefully.

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

[abuhajira]

By the way, I forgot tosay:

The term 'La-Madhabi' is not a name that Salafis have given themselves. Rather, other people have decided to call them this (among other unfair and confusing names). Salafis like to be known by the more correctly descriptive name: AHLUS-SUNNAH WAL JAMAAH.

:salam:

It is all in ones understanding my brother. It all depends which group of salafies you belong to..

Can you really claim that those who call themselves "Ahl Hadeeth" in pakistan have not chosen that name for themselves instead call themselves "Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah"? If so then their "Akabirs" like Nawab Sidique Hasan Khan Sahib, Shah Jahanpuri Saheb , Faiz Alam Sideequi etc etc would disagree since they have called Ahl Hadeeth a new group termed Ahl Hadeeth...

But then we have others Salafies in pakistan itself.. Mas'oodies, Jamat ul Muslimeen, and now even some people from Maudoodies have started calling themselves Salafies..

As I said its all how we play the words.. you are saying that they call themselves Ahl Sunnah Wal Jamah, then inshAllah they should have no problem in accepting the Ijma'i and Qiyaas e Sharii understanding of the remaining 90-95% of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jamah.

:ws:

[abuhajira]

Assalamu alaikum,



Bro Abu Hajira:

May Allah SWT forgive you. You have twisted what I said. You have made me dare say what I would not dare think!.

Your question is a very easy one to answer, but it has nothing to do with what we are talking about here. Read my post again, carefully.

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

:salam: br.

I understand your post.. and you may very well have put it in all humbleness. however, I had merely wish to point out that quite often anti-Madhahib people tend to portray Imams as a weak in Hadith or in the least not having vast enough ahaadith. But your post even portrayed the whole schools of thoughts to be lacking in hadeeth material then. This may be argues uptill one level, but when we understand the level of Hifz of hadith one required merely to be acceptable figure in Ilm Hadeeth in those times, it is very very unlikely for us to judge that they didnt have that many ahadeeth to work their masa'il with.

Which new Ahadith came about after the times of Mujtahideen that these imams and their shura and followers had not taken into account while establishing their madhab's opinions..

Perhaps you can give some examples of ahadeeth which the madhahib fail to consider because they were not available then.. remember we are talking about whole madhab as a group and not individual Imam etc..

:ws:

[Sunni_Student786]

salamu `alaykum

The reason why people are assuming the worse is due to the association the individual has with Abu Zubayr and the Islamic Awakening forums, which is not what we would call "Acceptable Salafism".

Wasalam
Salman

Now I understand.

[Sunni_Student786]

Salafis now play lip service to the concept of following the four madhabs and what they say seems about right till you get to their statements that say "it is permissible to follow a madhab for the laymen until he finds that the opinion of another madhab is stronger".

What's wrong about this statement is that they are making the claim that the laymen is capable of understand which ruling is strong.

Even more troublesome, they fail to realize the relative strength or weakness of a position, is based on the relative importance different pieces of evidences have in the different usuls of the madhabs. The Salafi will claim that all four madhabs are valid, but then if the Hanbali and Maliki madhab conflict on issue since the Hanbali madhab's ruling involved giving hadith more weight than Madinian Amal as a record of Sunnah, he will say that one must clearly follow the position with the strongest evidence which to the Salafi, because of their Hanbali roots, means that position which is backed up with more hadith text. This is a glaring contradiction.

A madhab cannot be both valid for someone to follow yet have invalid Usul, yet this is the image that one gets if one looks at the totality of their statements regarding Taqleed and Madhaahib.

[Musleemah]

"it is permissible to follow a madhab for the laymen until he finds that the opinion of another madhab is stronger".


akhi, did Salafi SCHOLARS say this, or some salafis on the internet ?

because I have posted the saying of sh. Ibn Uthaimeen rahimahu Allah in this forum, in which he says that a laymen does taqlid and scholars are the ones who look into opinions and choose what THEY believe is stronger in their opinion.

so that statement above would apply to scholars who have knowledge of fiqh and tools of ijtihad, not to laymen.

[abdul_karim]

A sunni is some one who follows one of the four sunnite madhabs. If some one does not follow a sunni madhab, then it is quite clear they are not a sunni and are going to hell.

Ibn Arabi didn't follow one of the four Sunni madhhabs. Is he going to hell?

[AbdulQahhar]

:salam:

bros, don't ask each other questions like that - asking such a question could easily mean a Muslim is putting a Muslim on a test and that ain't nice (nor maybe allowed).
I'm sure we all know :alhamd: that only ALLAH :taala: knows who is going where.
Also to claim that if somebody who is not from Ahlu Sunnah is going to Jahannam is heavily ridiculous.

:insh: out there are humble Muslims, some of them might not even have a clue why their fathers are of this or that Madhhab or why they're not of a Madhhab, and some of those people are too busy doing good works for ALLAH :taala:, surely some brave guy here would not dare to claim they are going to Jahannam? Just think about it. May ALLAH :taala: give you enough humbleness and time to think about it.

[woeuntothee]

akhi, did Salafi SCHOLARS say this, or some salafis on the internet ?

because I have posted the saying of sh. Ibn Uthaimeen rahimahu Allah in this forum, in which he says that a laymen does taqlid and scholars are the ones who look into opinions and choose what THEY believe is stronger in their opinion.

so that statement above would apply to scholars who have knowledge of fiqh and tools of ijtihad, not to laymen.


A few issues arise as a result of what you're saying.
1 - the 'layman' will then sway around according to the differnt 'salafi scholars' he goes to as they all have a ticket to ijtihad amongst madhabs (which leads to the 2nd issue). Different scholars will come to slightly different conclusions about issues and they all have their "convincing DALEEL" - as i've seen amongst salafis in Australia. To rectify this, if you're then saying that a layman must make taqlid of ONE individual "Salafi scholar", then ... well that leaves them open to a another world of problems.

2 - The doors of ijtihad are almost closed; By that I mean most of the issues that require ijtihad have already been ruled upon by qualified ulema hundreds of years ago. These ulema (as we can all agree) had access to all the ahadith and other literature that was required to make a ruling, and on top of that they had a closer proximity to the Nabee (saw), which makes them a "better" group of people (as per the hadith). The claim to fame of the new "Salafi scholars" is that they've reached a level of Ijtihad where they can deem the stance of One madhab more correct compared to another [also, sometimes the resulting stance is not even the ijma of any of the 4 madhabs], which implies that they are more Qualified than the Mujtahid imams of the past 1500 years. That is a pretty steep claim... most muslims won't fall for this as it is an insult to our intelligence - a handful of young kids and reverts may get caught up but usually realise the fallacy soon enough and leave.

[Sunni_Student786]

akhi, did Salafi SCHOLARS say this, or some salafis on the internet ?

because I have posted the saying of sh. Ibn Uthaimeen rahimahu Allah in this forum, in which he says that a laymen does taqlid and scholars are the ones who look into opinions and choose what THEY believe is stronger in their opinion.

so that statement above would apply to scholars who have knowledge of fiqh and tools of ijtihad, not to laymen.

Sister, I am quite sure that the words that I have posted above have been attributed, rightfully or wrongfully, to Salafi scholars.

I will try to find those quotations for you. It may indeed be that the words have been incorrectly translated, but even if that is the case, I am hard pressed for an answer for as to why Salafis, Arab or non-Arab, usually subscribe that same view and mention that "condition" when speaking of the permissibility of Taqleed and the value in following the madhaahib.

That tells me that, at a minimum, even if the Salafi shuyookh do not wish to have their words understood that way, they use such misleading phraseology, or discuss such delicate matters in books and lectures available to that masses, that lead to that undrestanding. If would be better if they didn't discuss scholarly issues save with other scholars, if that (i.e. their words being misunderstood even to those who know Arabic) is indeed the case.

I will try to find those quotations for you soon insha'allah (I am a bit busy these days).

[MohammadMufti]

A sunni is some one who follows one of the four sunnite madhabs. If some one does not follow a sunni madhab, then it is quite clear they are not a sunni and are going to hell.

O wise one who just damned me, what madhab did Abu Huraira (ra) follow? My point is not to equate myself or anyone who is the dirt on the sandels of Abu Huraira (ra) with him (ra), but what was his madhab or was he not Sunni? Are the Zahiris going to Jahanam as well?

[ryameen]

Assalamualaykum,

Why don't you try reading a book such as I'la al-Sunan (by Dhafar Ahmad Uthmani) which is about the proofs of the positions of the Hanafi Madhhab from the Quran and Sunnah? And likewise for other Madhabib.

I am hoping that it might be a much sincere intellectual exercise. At the end of the day if we understand each other, then we would become closer. And it is always fruitful to be close to our own Muslims brothers and sisters.

And the Salafi brethren might perhaps be able to suggest books that expound the position of their scholars. Really, we should, if we can have the ability to do so, do this with the intention of finding our similarities and common grounds.

I am not qualified enough to have this debate but I really hope that this suggestion be helpful to those who are qualified. Perhaps brother Abu Hajira or another Talib Ilm or Alim may be able to suggest some books to the other brothers and sisters. But honestly lets work on common grounds, we have many.

lets not be provoked by provocateurs if you get my drift.

[MohammadMufti]

Assalamualaykum,

Why don't you try reading a book such as I'la al-Sunan (by Dhafar Ahmad Uthmani) which is about the proofs of the positions of the Hanafi Madhhab from the Quran and Sunnah? And likewise for other Madhabib.


Walaikum Asalam Akhi, I was of the understanding that this is a very expansive (thus expensive title) and I have not to date found a translation of even portions into English. So, unfortunatly, I have to generally rely on smaller tracts on certain specific (generally controversial) issues. For the time being, is their a shorter (prefereblly English or Urdu) book with a similar goal?

[Jafarrr]

inshallah can somone give me a answer

how long is tarweeh prayer?

i am wonder because some people say it is 10 rakat, some say its 11, others say its 20.

if it is 11, are the final rakat 3 rakat?

thank you alhamdullilah

[IbnShafiq]

inshallah can somone give me a answer

how long is tarweeh prayer?

i am wonder because some people say it is 10 rakat, some say its 11, others say its 20.

if it is 11, are the final rakat 3 rakat?

thank you alhamdullilah

As salamu alaikum

Taraweeh Is 20 rak'a. It is prayed right after Isha salat.

Salatul Tahajjud(the night vigil) should be prayed in the last portion of the night before fajr. It is 8 rak'a with 3 witr.

wa salam

[-Z-]

Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation (http://muslimmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/pledge-of-mutual-respect-and-cooperation-between-sunni-muslim-scholars-and-organizations-2.pdf)

[woeuntothee]

http://alchishti.wordpress.com/2006/08/19/yasir-qadhi-the-deobandis-unite-with-moderate-sufis/

[Jafarrr]

thats messed up cuz i went to a sunni mosque and they prayed ten for tarweeh.

[buriedaway_4536]

I'm pretty confused about this too.
I've heard it's an 8 minimum. But then, I was told a friend heard it was 20 and 20 only...

[Al-Khattab]

it is 20 and only 20 rakaats.

8 (or 11 rakaats if include the witr) is tahajjud salaat not traveeh, if you look at the hadith in which the salafis use for their daleel for 8 rakaats it clearly states in and out of ramadhan!!!!!!!!!!

it seem they have become confused on this issue.

[Jee Hadi]

don't be confused people. read the books of fiqh you will find the simple answers there. its 20 rakaats in the Hanafi madhab.

A lot of people used to claim it is 8 rakaat (which is tahajjud) but you can see on TV they even do 20 rakaats in the Masjid al-Haram too.

[Sunni_Student786]

Thoughtful.

[Abu Affan al-Hanafi]

Taraweeh consists of 20 Rakaahs. That's the way of the men of knowledge since the Sahaba. Only recently La-Madhabiyya(often known as Salafis or Wahhabis) came up with the idea of 8 Rakaahs. Unfortunetly alot of Sunnis have been misguided through them.

[-Z-]

On Unity: a cautious note of optimism (http://shafii.org/perspectives/2007/09/24/on-unity-a-cautious-note-of-optimism/)

[-Z-]

Jinnzaman: Proposal to Effectuate the Unity Pledge (http://jinnzaman.hadithuna.com/proposal-to-effectuate-the-unity-pledge/)

[laughinglion]

Taraweeh consists of 20 Rakaahs. That's the way of the men of knowledge since the Sahaba. Only recently La-Madhabiyya(often known as Salafis or Wahhabis) came up with the idea of 8 Rakaahs. Unfortunetly alot of Sunnis have been misguided through them.

:salam:

The 'sunnah' of taraweh is twenty rakahs. It is also meritorious to perform any number of rakahs, the command is to spend a portion of the night, during the nights of ramadhan, in prayer.

If one wishes to be dogmatic about the number of rakahs then it is a sign that one has not understood the purpose of salah. That is, that if one feels that the quantity of one's prayer is of more relevance than their quality...

with peace

[Jamaluddine]

Dear Moderator,

Assalamu alaikum,

Where is my post?

You should not have removed it, for unlike a lot of other posts, it did not insult or even mention any individuals or groups.

All my post contained was concise scholarly opinions about the number of Rakaahs in Taraweeh Prayers. It showed the opinions of various scholars from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah. And it said that people should not divide on issues like these.

Instead of removing it, you should have pointed out where it was out of line... but it wasn't (out of line), was it?!

Or is it that you only want your own vision/opinion/view to be posted?

The Qur'an tells us of an infamous dictator who wanted his people to see only his own vision/opinion/view:

[40:29]

...Fir'aun said: "I but point out to you that which I see (myself); nor do I guide you but to the Path of Right!"


YUSUFALI: ...Pharaoh said: "I but point out to you that which I see (myself); Nor do I guide you but to the Path of Right!"

PICKTHAL: ...Pharaoh said: I do but show you what I think, and I do but guide you to wise policy.

SHAKIR: ...Firon said: I do not show you aught but that which I see (myself), and I do not make you follow any but the right way.


You had neither reason nor right to remove it!

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

[woeuntothee]

Whilst i agree with the general trend towards unity - which is the duty of all muslims: to respect and appreciate the differences in opinion within our ummah - it is unfortunate that some of those who we are trying to unite with are openly discarding our stance as invalid. This can be seen upon questioning any 'salafi' masjid or organisation about 'asharis', 'maturidis', 'tariqas' etcetera. The articles give a valid general solution but knowledge of the reality of the matter is also extremely vital, lest we start attending information sessions and lectures by these 'allies'(?) leading to severe misguidance (May Allah protect us all).

Mind you, there is no doubt in regards to their faith, intentions, or valid adherence to Islam as Husn e Dhann is always applied, inshaAllah - that is not my point at all.

[-Z-]

Making the Pledge More Than Words (http://www.sunnisisters.com/?p=2625)

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I have read and analysed in some detail the criticisms levelled at this pledge by Brother Abuz-Zubair & Shaykh Haitham Hamdan in particular and although we don’t have to agree with them but we should learn to appreciate their point of view.

Brothers/Sisters ascribing to Athari Aqeedah really see the world in a simple back/white manner i.e. us vs. them and they really wholeheartedly believe that the “them” need to be “saved” from misguidance or at the very least everything contrary to the “Athari Aqeedah” must be refuted at all costs and at all times and matters of Aqeedah are the single-most overriding matter ABOVE AND BEYOND everything else.

Years ago the battleground used to be Fiqh positions (particularly within the Madhab of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)) and statements like “I don’t follow Abu Haneefa (RA), I follow Allah (SWT) & His Rasul- (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam)…” being chanted all over the Masajid; that war has ended with the translation/publication of many classical works in English and cropping up of hundreds of web-sites & blogs all over the place and the tables have turned to some extent as the positions of Shaykh Al-Albani (RA), Shaykh Bin-Baaz (RA), Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) are being attacked (or at the very least questioned)!

The battle has shifted to Aqeedah issues and for many it is the LAST line of defence and the Brothers/Sisters ascribing to Athari Aqeedah have the MOST TO LOSE with this pledge!

They give up their “Aqeedah refutations (leave to the experts???)” due to this pledge and what do they gain in return? Obscurity? Because just in case people haven’t noticed that there are ONLY three things (in essence) heavily debated on almost ALL ISLAMIC FORUMS & in our Masjiad & campuses on the Net:

1) Following a Madhab (recent Fatawas by Sahykh Salman Al-Odah and others have put a damper on that one)…most Ex-Salafees are now Hanbalees anyways!

2) Tassawuff (Al-Maghrib’s newer courses will address and acknowledge Ihsan as Zuh’d, rather then Tareeqas (which the traditionalists espouse) so the fences will be mended in some ways on that one)!...Also in many Masajid like GreenLane (so mellow now you wouldn’t recognise the place from 10 years ago!) there are increasing lectures on Zuh’d and Tazkiyya!

3) Aqeedah (Brothers/Sisters on the Athari Aqeedah believe that they have some ascendancy on this front (*) and genuinely believe that the sacrifices made by Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal (RA) & others gives them the evidence and backing to go all guns blazing…

Sorry for the long lecture but I understand where they are coming from, it is from a deep, sincere and genuine desire to define and protect Sunnah and NOT to lose the winning ground (some selfish motive there as stated by Abuz-Zubair that most of the Aqeedah refutations are by him)

In the end I would say again that I don't agree with them but respect their positions and sincerity.

(*) The current ascendency is due to Non-Atharees not engaging in Aqeedah issues as they don’t generally consider it as pivotal for laymen as Atharees do, there is enough refutation material available in Arabic & Urdu etc. and it is a matter of time before people get fed up and refutations start from the Non-Atharees (just like they did on the Fiqh/Tassawuff front)

[JayshAllah]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I have read and analysed in some detail the criticisms levelled at this pledge by Brother Abuz-Zubair & Shaykh Haitham Hamdan in particular and although we don’t have to agree with them but we should learn to appreciate their point of view.

Brothers/Sisters ascribing to Athari Aqeedah really see the world in a simple back/white manner i.e. us vs. them and they really wholeheartedly believe that the “them” need to be “saved” from misguidance or at the very least everything contrary to the “Athari Aqeedah” must be refuted at all costs and at all times and matters of Aqeedah are the single-most overriding matter ABOVE AND BEYOND everything else.

Years ago the battleground used to be Fiqh positions (particularly within the Madhab of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)) and statements like “I don’t follow Abu Haneefa (RA), I follow Allah (SWT) & His Rasul- (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam)…” being chanted all over the Masajid; that war has ended with the translation/publication of many classical works in English and cropping up of hundreds of web-sites & blogs all over the place and the tables have turned to some extent as the positions of Shaykh Al-Albani (RA), Shaykh Bin-Baaz (RA), Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) are being attacked (or at the very least questioned)!

The battle has shifted to Aqeedah issues and for many it is the LAST line of defence and the Brothers/Sisters ascribing to Athari Aqeedah have the MOST TO LOSE with this pledge!

They give up their “Aqeedah refutations (leave to the experts???)” due to this pledge and what do they gain in return? Obscurity? Because just in case people haven’t noticed that there are ONLY three things (in essence) heavily debated on almost ALL ISLAMIC FORUMS & in our Masjiad & campuses on the Net:

1) Following a Madhab (recent Fatawas by Sahykh Salman Al-Odah and others have put a damper on that one)…most Ex-Salafees are now Hanbalees anyways!

2) Tassawuff (Al-Maghrib’s newer courses will address and acknowledge Ihsan as Zuh’d, rather then Tareeqas (which the traditionalists espouse) so the fences will be mended in some ways on that one)!...Also in many Masajid like GreenLane (so mellow now you wouldn’t recognise the place from 10 years ago!) there are increasing lectures on Zuh’d and Tazkiyya!

3) Aqeedah (Brothers/Sisters on the Athari Aqeedah believe that they have some ascendancy on this front (*) and genuinely believe that the sacrifices made by Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal (RA) & others gives them the evidence and backing to go all guns blazing…

Sorry for the long lecture but I understand where they are coming from, it is from a deep, sincere and genuine desire to define and protect Sunnah and NOT to lose the winning ground (some selfish motive there as stated by Abuz-Zubair that most of the Aqeedah refutations are by him)

In the end I would say again that I don't agree with them but respect their positions and sincerity.

(*) The current ascendency is due to Non-Atharees not engaging in Aqeedah issues as they don’t generally consider it as pivotal for laymen as Atharees do, there is enough refutation material available in Arabic & Urdu etc. and it is a matter of time before people get fed up and refutations start from the Non-Atharees (just like they did on the Fiqh/Tassawuff front)

I don't agree with everything you said but I do acknowledge that it is intelligent analysis.

What I just wanted to add, however, was that to be fair, I think both groups have affected each other. I think both groups are actually coming closer to each other and reaching a sort of middle-ground.

Frankly, I get flustered by these arguments because by the end of the debate, I start thinking "is this just a debate about terminology?"

[Colonel_Hardstone]

I don't agree with everything you said but I do acknowledge that it is intelligent analysis.

What I just wanted to add, however, was that to be fair, I think both groups have affected each other. I think both groups are actually coming closer to each other and reaching a sort of middle-ground.

Frankly, I get flustered by these arguments because by the end of the debate, I start thinking "is this just a debate about terminology?"

Asslamo Allaikum,

I see Brothers/Sisters most sincerely defending the Sunnah and I appreciate their sentiment and can’t disagree with the intention and they see themselves losing out due to this pledge or to put it another way they see the Sunnah losing out due to this pledge and it must be hard to reconcile or accept in their hearts and minds...Genuine people with genuine intentions!

I also find that the main issue of contention is over Arabic terminology; which is being debated on English forums in English and labels are being thrown at each other, battle-lines being drawn and its most unfortunate because most people debating don’t have a clear idea as to what they are defending or supposed to be defending (all they know is I MUST DEFEAT THE OTHER) i.e. these are over 1000 year old issues perhaps of little relevance to a common Muslim in London, Toronto or New York today.

[SeekerOfGuidance]

:salam:

Sorry for posting this here. I wanted to post in the thread with the same name in the In depth Fiqh section, but the site wouldn't let me. Also I did apply to join the brothers' section a while back, however no reply has been forthcoming. Typical muslims. ;)
I request any moderators reading this to sort it out. :jazak: in advance.

Anyway, I wanted to say that I used to be a Salafi. It took me many years to realise the fallacy and contradictions within the Salafi methodology.

By ‘Salafi’ or ‘La Madhabi’ we mean those who give preference to the knowledge of a few modern day scholars over the conclusions of a whole body of Mujtahids deliberating on issue after issue, through hundreds of years.

Imagine the following scenario:

A large hall. In one corner is seated Abu Hanifah (ra), his students, the students of students and so on – generations of scholarly giants. Each individual in this group is a Mujtahid Mutlaq. In front of them is a book of fatwa based on their collective efforts. Each fatwa has been scrutinised by every member of this group, over a period of many centuries, rechecking, refining them in light of possible new evidences.

Then in another corner is the group of Imam Malik (ra) with his students, students of students, etc. And so on with the other corners occupied by Imam Shafii (ra) and Imam Hanbal (ra).

In centre of this hall is Shaykh "modern self-proclaimed Mujtahid". He is examining the fatwa on a particular issue. He turns towards the first corner, at Abu Hanifah’s group and comments, “Abu Hanifah, based on my extensive research, you and your group of hundreds of Mujtahids got it wrong this time.”

Then he turns to the second corner and proclaims, “Imam Malik (ra), well what can I say, you were nearly there, but not quite right. There were a few basic errors your group of hundreds of Mujtahids failed to spot, despite many centuries of selfless sacrifice and effort in coming to the truth. Luckily, for you, I am here!”

Then he turns to the third corner, “Imam Shafi (ra), on this one you’re hundred percent spot on, well done all of you!”

Off to the fourth corner, “Imam Hanbal, sorry to say that your group got this one wrong this time, hopefully you will have done better on the next fatwa I will be examining....”

.... Later, on another issue, agreed upon by all the Madhahibs, he comments, “I’m sorry to say that in this particular issue, all of you groups have got it wrong! Don’t worry, I’m still here to correct your collective mistakes...”

THE END

The beauty of the Islam is that Allah did not preserve for us just the Qur'an and the Sunnah, but also their interpretations and how they should be applied in our lives, through a myriad of magnificent systems and mechanisms that developed over time. For example, the Madhahib provide us, the laymen, with rulings that have not been made by 1, 2 or a handful of modern self-claimed Mujtahids today, but each fatwa has been formulated, rechecked, refined over a period of hundreds of years, by a galaxy of the best scholars this Ummah has produced.

Imagine what would happen if only the Qur'an and Sunnah were passed down to us without any of the scholarly heritage that came with it - there would be chaos - everyone will interpret the Qur'an and Sunnah for their own purposes. Each individual will come to their own unique understanding of what the Qur'an and Sunnah is telling them to do. People will interpret the Qur'an and Sunnah to justify what they want to believe.

This is effectively what each of the Salafi groups are doing - their scholars are allegedly coming to a better understanding of Islam than the combined efforts of our predecessors. The chaos this is causing is blatantly apparent today, from the extreme modernists who are using Qur'an and Sunnah to justify complete assimilation with the non-Muslims, to the Salafi Jihadis who are using the same sources to justify the killing of civilians.

[MuslimDragon]

The conception we have about our tradition is probably fairly distorted.

Imam at Tabari, who is understood to be at the level of mujtahid mutlaq, didnt consider Imam Ahmed a faqih

Imam Bukhari greatly disliked Abu Hanifah

The madhhabs developed as guilds and became very powerful that way

etc etc

You are definitly on the right track in that you want to embrace the tradition as a foundation. That is needed because it is thru the tradition that we receive important information from the past. However, we do not stop here. We certainly can critique and reexamine. We know more now than anytime in human history. so we have a lot more information about the reality to help give us insight into religion. This doesn't mean it is a free for all but truly any position that can be logically substantiated from the source texts has weight. So the Salafis are not entirely wrong but they have been very intellectually dishonest and surprisingly incomplete in many of their conclusions. If you dont study the tradition or reality I guess that would happen. So let us be intellectually honest and recognize what the Islamic tradition has been and yet at the same time not be traditionalists in the sense that we are narrow minded.

[JJJ]

bro, the problem with ur scenario is that u refer to Sheikh Al-Albanni as someone who was a "La Madhabi" and therefore didn't follow any madhabs.

but the thing is, if u refer to his biography, u would realise that he himself was hanafi.

so in ur scenario, Sheikh Al-Albanni wouldn't be in the centre of the hall, but would be amongst the group of people with Imam Abu Hanifah.

[JayshAllah]

I thought you guys signed a sunni unity pledge?

[MuslimDragon]

bro, the problem with ur scenario is that u refer to Sheikh Al-Albanni as someone who was a "La Madhabi" and therefore didn't follow any madhabs.

but the thing is, if u refer to his biography, u would realise that he himself was hanafi.

so in ur scenario, Sheikh Al-Albanni wouldn't be in the centre of the hall, but would be amongst the group of people with Imam Abu Hanifah.

I belive Al Albani began studying the Hanafi madhhab and then became frustrated and left his teacher and the madhhab. He proceeded to spend a lot of time in the Damascus library researching and that is how he was coming up with opinions on matters - reading in the library and then reflecting.

[MuslimDragon]

I thought you guys signed a sunni unity pledge?

The Sunni Unity Pledge is a nice thing but it was mostly signed by Zaytuna members and friends so I am not sure how much of an impact it will actually have. I hope that at least institutionally it will have a major impact - where all the institutions that afiliated with the agreement will recognize one another.

[loveProphet]

I thought you guys signed a sunni unity pledge?
Well if they start teaching us with dignity and respect in Saudi and elsewhere, then it would be a different scenario.

[JJJ]

I belive Al Albani began studying the Hanafi madhhab and then became frustrated and left his teacher and the madhhab. He proceeded to spend a lot of time in the Damascus library researching and that is how he was coming up with opinions on matters - reading in the library and then reflecting.

bro, read Al-Albani's biography before making such comments, since it's clear that what u believe and what actually happened are two totally different things.

here's a link detailing Al-Albani's biography:
http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/seerah/0045.htm

[woeuntothee]

JJJ, I wouldn't call that the most impartial source, you need to do more research on Albani's views on madhabs and taqlid.

[JJJ]

JJJ, I wouldn't call that the most impartial source, you need to do more research on Albani's views on madhabs and taqlid.

woeuntothee, i have a few questions, did u read Al-Albani's biography?? and did u use a non-biased source or did u refer to an anti Al-Albani sheikh??

i suggest u do more research on Al-Albani as well. the link that i posted was an online summary, if u want further details then u should read a book called "Hayat Al-Albani (the Life of Al-Albani)" by Muhammad ash-Shaibaani.

in most cases, people that criticise Al-Albani and say he had no knowledge, etc are people who didn't read his biography and were relying on what other people were telling them about him (rather than doing their own research).

[woeuntothee]

With all due respect, your conviction on what you believe seems to be a major obstacle in your understanding of this matter. A person's "biography" is an extremely bad source in 'critiquing' an individual's views because they're not written by the individual, but rather about the individual by a separate individual. This leaves it open to being biased or inclined in some way or other (negatively OR positively). You're contradicting yourself by requesting we rely on Shaibani's impression on Albani, instead of relying on 'other people' (who are more accomplished and authoritative, mind you).

A better idea is to consider albani's own texts - he hasn't been criticised by mere simpletons but ulema who are well versed in fiqh and hadith, for being inaccurate with his Hadith grading (in fact, he went against the gradings of a lot of classical scholers who would undoubtedly have had more knowledge on the matter). That left him open to make a lot of inaccurate jurisprudential conclusions - which were on occasions contrary to the Hanafi madhab (and sometimes all four madhabs).

You must realise that if a person studies such a vast subject, that requires many years, under a scholar (who is his claimed 'ijaza') there would be many more sources attesting to it - unfortunately his ijaza seems to have been that given as a 'blessing'. Albani didn't have a positive view on the Ijaza system anyway.

Also, no one claims that he had 'no knowledge' - he was a very bright person and gained a lot of knowledge from books - which is contrary to the Islamic tradition of attaining 'authoritative' Islamic knowledge.

[JJJ]

so i take it, that means u haven't read Al-Albani's biography??

and Al-Albani does have an ijaza and was taught by scholars (not from books) - details are listed in the link i posted. did u even read it??

[woeuntothee]

Firstly, why are you insisting i read biased propoganda by a nobody with questionable accuracy? Its what you've told us NOT to do in your previous post, ie. to rely on other people.

Secondly, yes i've read it all before. I - unfortunately - used to be quite salafi influenced and held Albani at extremely high regard until i came to see and realise his blatant disregard (hopefully unintentional) of the Scholars of the Ummah.
To equip myself to debate the poor 'misguided' traditional muslims following madhabs, i had to learn what was said on both sides, especially 'my' side. Alhumdulilalh i came to my senses.

[woeuntothee]

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq6.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/albintro.htm

http://sunnah.org/history/Innovators/al_albani.htm

Few things you may like to read.

[JJJ]

woeuntothee, I wouldn't call those links you posted to be impartial sources either.

but i will read it nonetheless, not really impressed with the arguments in the first link so far, for example - they mention that the ijaza received from Sheikh Raghib al-Tabbakh is not a real ijaza of learning as Al-Albani did not study from that sheikh. So the author might have a point on that one, but the author makes no reference to the other ijaza's Al-Albani has (which are listed in that link i posted). the author can't really claim Al-Albani has "no" ijaza by only debunking the validity of one of them.

[woeuntothee]

http://www.livingislam.org/k/albi_e.html <= read that too. As i said, he wasn't very fond of the Ijaza system in the first place!

I'd hardly call that "debunking" - what makes you gurantee the authenticity of the biography? There is a lot of mystery that shrouds the 'ijazas' of albani, and at the end of the day, its a matter of accepting the opinions of ulema of high standard, or some half baked biography by salafis to propogate one of their most favourite 'sheikhs' because he validates their reformist views.
If you read the whole article, you'll see that it is only a small part of the bigger picture, and notice how carefully worded the article is so as to not do injustice to Albani.

Furthermore, is it not enough that Albani re-classified so many hadiths that had already been classified by 1500 years of scholarship? Needless to say, his re-classifications and fiqh opinions were inaccurate and inconsistent with the Ummah.

Gtg for now, more later, inshaAllah.

[scents of paradise]

:salam:

La Madhabi also includes all such people who are against blind traditionalism and who refuse any affliation with any sects..such as myself..hope that answered your initial question.

:ws:

[SeekerOfGuidance]

:salam:

La Madhabi also includes all such people who are against blind traditionalism and who refuse any affliation with any sects..such as myself..hope that answered your initial question.

:ws:

:salam:

If you don't follow any of the four main madhahib, is there any other group of Mujtahids you have taken to decipher the rulings from the sources, using a consistent, tried and tested methodology over many centuries?

Following a Madhab does not mean affiliation with any sect.

By definition a 'sect' is a group deviating from generally accepted religious tradition. It's quite safe to say (90%+ of sunnis) that following a Madhab is generally accepted religious tradition. Which begs the question whether La Madhabi can be bracketed as a sect.

[aakaash]

For example, the Madhahib provide us, the laymen, with rulings that have not been made by 1, 2 or a handful of modern self-claimed Mujtahids today, but each fatwa has been formulated, rechecked, refined over a period of hundreds of years, by a galaxy of the best scholars this Ummah has produced.

One who can distinguish between the father of Hanifa and the son of Hanbal and AlBani is not a layman at all. What about us, the real laymen? I don’t have the ability even to understand any of them.

[Skilly]

What I understand from the those great four Imam of the Madhab is that they never held the position that one should follow them blindly without evidence.

They held the position that if something that comes to you that is true with evidence than on should discard their opinion for what is correct.

They themselve was corrected many times by their own student.

THe problem arises that when people blindly become affilated with their own madhab with the exclusion of others even wheter they are wrong.

This is a problem...

The most clear of this is what Allah has said: “They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah”. (9:31)

So you if you really wan't to follow in the footstep of those Imam's one would not blindly follow them without evidence, and if any of them are shown weak or wrong by evidence one would not discard it for the sake of one's own Madhab.

[SeekerOfGuidance]

:salam:

Please read what I had written earlier.

A doctor’s invitation to his colleagues, to assess the strength of a particular concoction in dealing with a medical condition, does not apply to the layman. A layman must go through an intense programme of education that has developed through hundreds of years of scholarship, before he can begin to formulate an opinion.

The science of assessing the strength of rulings, extracted from the sources, is far more complicated than any other science. According to Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (ra), just one of the qualifications required for such a task is having committed to memory over 400,000 Hadiths. So you and I have no legitimacy to judge the strength of a particular evidence shown by a particular self-claimed Mujtahid today.

The Imams did not address us, but their students, and other Mujtahids, to constantly recheck their rulings, in light of possible new evidences. In fact, a Mujtahid Mutlaq is not permitted to do taqleed – he has mastered all the necessary sciences to extract rulings from the sources directly, and as a result he must come to his own conclusions.

Many of the students of the Imams, the students of their students, and so on, were Mujtahids. They travelled far and wide pursuing knowledge, some of them having over a thousand teachers, of different schools of thought, spread over the Islamic world. Thus each of them constantly came across alternative viewpoints and evidences which they had to weigh against their own. Through this process of each Mujtahid exerting his own Ijtihad on an issue, a process running over many centuries, the strength of a particular ruling became quite apparent.

All the Ulama today would agree that there is no contemporary scholar around who is of the calibre of, let’s say, Imam Shafii (ra), or any of the Mujtahids in the early period of this Ummah.

However, even if Imam Shafii (ra) was to come today and issue a fatwa that differs to one in his Madhab, the ruling in the Madhab would be regarded as stronger, and given preference. For it is the culmination of the Ijtihad of hundreds of Mujtahids, including Imam Shafii (ra) himself, spanning over many centuries.

This is the reason why many of the rulings of the founding Imams are not taken to be the ruling of their Madhab.

:ws:

[Skilly]

Well what if you come across stuff where the scholars differed upon.

What position do you take?

Do one use the above as an excuse to say my madhab is correct and yours is wrong?

Do you say all correct although such would be a misnomer?

Or do one re-examine the evidence and choose the one correct (strongest) regardless wheter it goes against one's own madhab or not?

Obviously this is for those who are in a position to do so.

I my opinion following the latter is following in the footstep of those great scholar.

[Kareem]

Well what if you come across stuff where the scholars differed upon.

What position do you take?

Do one use the above as an excuse to say my madhab is correct and yours is wrong?

Do you say all correct although such would be a misnomer?

Or do one re-examine the evidence and choose the one correct (strongest) regardless wheter it goes against one's own madhab or not?

Obviously this is for those who are in a position to do so.

I my opinion following the latter is following in the footstep of those great scholar.
I believe that what is said is that all four are valid. Not that all four are correct as two contradictory statements cannot both be true.

Insha'Allah Allah will inform us of what was correct. But we know from the Sunnah of Rasulullah sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam when his sahaba differed about the implications of his words that Allah allows differences of oppinion.

[Skilly]

I believe that what is said is that all four are valid. Not that all four are correct as two contradictory statements cannot both be true.

Insha'Allah Allah will inform us of what was correct. But we know from the Sunnah of Rasulullah sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam when his sahaba differed about the implications of his words that Allah allows differences of oppinion.

The allow of different opinion is got do with the statement of the prophet.

You know the one when a scholar get's a it wrong he gets 1 reward for it, and when he gets it correct he gets double the reward for it..something along the line.

It does not mean one should follow the incorrectness or at the expense of the correct one.

Wassalam

[Kareem]

The allow of different opinion is got do with the statement of the prophet.

You know the one when a scholar get's a it wrong he gets 1 reward for it, and when he gets it correct he gets double the reward for it..something along the line.

It does not mean one should follow the incorrectness or at the expense of the correct one.

Wassalam
Do you know what is incorrect and what is correct? Cause if the most knowledgable scholars that this Ummah has ever seen, including the sahabah themselfs, could not resolve their differences then what makes you think the scholars today can?

More than one conclusion can be drawn from the Qur'an and the Sunnah with proper ijtihad. There are plenty of examples were Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, the sahabah radiallahu anhum, and the scholars allowed for different interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

[Skilly]

Do you know what is incorrect and what is correct? Cause if the most knowledgable scholars that this Ummah has ever seen, including the sahabah themselfs, could not resolve their differences then what makes you think the scholars today can?

More than one conclusion can be drawn from the Qur'an and the Sunnah with proper ijtihad. There are plenty of examples were Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, the sahabah radiallahu anhum, and the scholars allowed for different interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Mate I am not talking about layman I am talking abou those who have the ability, means, learning to do so.

To say that everything where the scholars differed or ruling they gave one cannot know if it is correct or incorrect would be quite ignorant of the fact that these most knowledgeable scholars themself was corrected sometime by their own student, they themself corrected themself in light of evidence, and they themself never asked one to take their rulling where their is a case of difference blindly without examining them. If they indeed they where alive today they themself would have don't the very same thing as they did when they where alive.
That what made them Great scholars the sincerity and honesty and fear of Allah(swt). They never said blindly follow me in all things, they are 100% correct in all thing.

I am not saying it in disrespect of them. I am saying this in admiration.


As we begin to post biographies of Islamic figures, there are some principles we need to keep in mind. Amongst these biographies are those of Great Islamic Scholars, yet even such knowledgeable people are not infallible. We know that everyone can make mistakes, and we pray Allah swt forgives us all for this.
These scholars themselves, said that they were vulnerable and often admitted when they were corrected.

Imaam Abu Hanifa said:

"It is haram (prohibited) for someone who does not know my evidence to give fatwaa (verdicts) on the basis of my words." Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day." [Ibn \'Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa\' fi Fadaa\'il ath-Thalaathah al-A\'immah al-Fuqahaa\' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/309), Ibn \'Aabideen in his Footnoes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa\'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29, 32) & Sha\'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah\'s companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and \'Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/344).]

This humility was a characteric of all the great scholars of Islam. They were not infallible, and they continually reminded their followers of this fact. The previous scholars may have made mistakes, but we should use the Qur'an and Sunnah as our Criterion in determining the truth.

Imaam Maalik ibn Anas said:

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]
Once again, we see that the stress has been placed on examining the opinions of previous scholars in light of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Imaam Ash-Shaafi'ee said:

If you see me saying a statement and that which is in opposition to it has been authenticated from the Prophet (P), then know that indeed my intellect has departed. (Reported by Ibn Abee haatim in Aadaab-ush-Shaafi'ee [page 93] and Ibn Asaakir in Tareekh Dimishq [1/10/15] with an authentic narration)

Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said:

Do not blindly follow me and do not blindly follow Malik or Shafi'ee or Al-Awzaa'ee or Ath-Thawri, [but] take from where they took from (i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah)
(Reported by Ibn Al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Muwaqi'een [2/302])

[amjedm]

Mate I am not talking about layman I am talking abou those who have the ability, means, learning to do so.

To say that everything where the scholars differed or ruling they gave one cannot know if it is correct or incorrect would be quite ignorant of the fact that these most knowledgeable scholars themself was corrected sometime by their own student, they themself corrected themself in light of evidence, and they themself never asked one to take their rulling where their is a case of difference blindly without examining them. If they indeed they where alive today they themself would have don't the very same thing as they did when they where alive.
That what made them Great scholars the sincerity and honesty and fear of Allah(swt). They never said blindly follow me in all things, they are 100% correct in all thing.

I am not saying it in disrespect of them. I am saying this in admiration.


As we begin to post biographies of Islamic figures, there are some principles we need to keep in mind. Amongst these biographies are those of Great Islamic Scholars, yet even such knowledgeable people are not infallible. We know that everyone can make mistakes, and we pray Allah swt forgives us all for this.
These scholars themselves, said that they were vulnerable and often admitted when they were corrected.

Imaam Abu Hanifa said:

"It is haram (prohibited) for someone who does not know my evidence to give fatwaa (verdicts) on the basis of my words." Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day." [Ibn \'Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa\' fi Fadaa\'il ath-Thalaathah al-A\'immah al-Fuqahaa\' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/309), Ibn \'Aabideen in his Footnoes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa\'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29, 32) & Sha\'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah\'s companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and \'Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/344).]

This humility was a characteric of all the great scholars of Islam. They were not infallible, and they continually reminded their followers of this fact. The previous scholars may have made mistakes, but we should use the Qur'an and Sunnah as our Criterion in determining the truth.

Imaam Maalik ibn Anas said:

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]
Once again, we see that the stress has been placed on examining the opinions of previous scholars in light of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Imaam Ash-Shaafi'ee said:

If you see me saying a statement and that which is in opposition to it has been authenticated from the Prophet (P), then know that indeed my intellect has departed. (Reported by Ibn Abee haatim in Aadaab-ush-Shaafi'ee [page 93] and Ibn Asaakir in Tareekh Dimishq [1/10/15] with an authentic narration)

Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said:

Do not blindly follow me and do not blindly follow Malik or Shafi'ee or Al-Awzaa'ee or Ath-Thawri, [but] take from where they took from (i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah)
(Reported by Ibn Al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Muwaqi'een [2/302])

Brother, the points above have been answered in the book "The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" by Sheikh Muhammad Taqi Usmani.

[Kareem]

Mate I am not talking about layman I am talking abou those who have the ability, means, learning to do so.

To say that everything where the scholars differed or ruling they gave one cannot know if it is correct or incorrect would be quite ignorant of the fact that these most knowledgeable scholars themself was corrected sometime by their own student, they themself corrected themself in light of evidence, and they themself never asked one to take their rulling where their is a case of difference blindly without examining them. If they indeed they where alive today they themself would have don't the very same thing as they did when they where alive.
That what made them Great scholars the sincerity and honesty and fear of Allah(swt). They never said blindly follow me in all things, they are 100% correct in all thing.

I am not saying it in disrespect of them. I am saying this in admiration.


As we begin to post biographies of Islamic figures, there are some principles we need to keep in mind. Amongst these biographies are those of Great Islamic Scholars, yet even such knowledgeable people are not infallible. We know that everyone can make mistakes, and we pray Allah swt forgives us all for this.
These scholars themselves, said that they were vulnerable and often admitted when they were corrected.

Imaam Abu Hanifa said:

"It is haram (prohibited) for someone who does not know my evidence to give fatwaa (verdicts) on the basis of my words." Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day." [Ibn \'Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa\' fi Fadaa\'il ath-Thalaathah al-A\'immah al-Fuqahaa\' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/309), Ibn \'Aabideen in his Footnoes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa\'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29, 32) & Sha\'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah\'s companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and \'Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I\'laam al-Mooqi\'een (2/344).]

This humility was a characteric of all the great scholars of Islam. They were not infallible, and they continually reminded their followers of this fact. The previous scholars may have made mistakes, but we should use the Qur'an and Sunnah as our Criterion in determining the truth.

Imaam Maalik ibn Anas said:

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]
Once again, we see that the stress has been placed on examining the opinions of previous scholars in light of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Imaam Ash-Shaafi'ee said:

If you see me saying a statement and that which is in opposition to it has been authenticated from the Prophet (P), then know that indeed my intellect has departed. (Reported by Ibn Abee haatim in Aadaab-ush-Shaafi'ee [page 93] and Ibn Asaakir in Tareekh Dimishq [1/10/15] with an authentic narration)

Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said:

Do not blindly follow me and do not blindly follow Malik or Shafi'ee or Al-Awzaa'ee or Ath-Thawri, [but] take from where they took from (i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah)
(Reported by Ibn Al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Muwaqi'een [2/302])al-hamdulillah, yes they said these things. But are you ignoring the fact that we live about 1200 years after they lived and that what you decsribe has come to pass. In years between their lives and ours their fatawa have been verified or corrected if needed over and over again by their students, their students, their students etc.
Or is that what you are disputing here? Cause if not I don't see your argument.

I personally feel that we can feel secure that in the last 1200 years or so the oppinions of each madhhab have been examined thoroughly enough that everything that is taught has a strong basis in the Qur'an and Sunnah. And those oppinions that do know are not to be shadh. Actually this was pretty much known 600 years ago.

[Skilly]

al-hamdulillah, yes they said these things. But are you ignoring the fact that we live about 1200 years after they lived and that what you decsribe has come to pass. In years between their lives and ours their fatawa have been verified or corrected if needed over and over again by their students, their students, their students etc.
Or is that what you are disputing here? Cause if not I don't see your argument.

I personally feel that we can feel secure that in the last 1200 years or so the oppinions of each madhhab have been examined thoroughly enough that everything that is taught has a strong basis in the Qur'an and Sunnah. And those oppinions that do know are not to be shadh. Actually this was pretty much known 600 years ago.

First I must stress that one understand what I am saying, I am not saying that those minor difference invalidate one's Islam or anything. Nor am I saying you can't study under a madhab or you have to follow one.

Anyway here is my question:

Verified how?
Be more specific.

Secondly 1200 years only show that this difference exist still today which does not make sense if what you say is true...atleast not entirely.

What factors is ignoring here is this:

1. Daleel that has reached
2. Quality of Daleel.
3. Quality & soundness of reasoning and conclusion
4. Blind partnership.

and maybe so many more.

Ok let me ask an example.

If I was a following the Hanafi madhab, can I go against my Madhab for an opinion of a shafee, Hanbali or malaki at which they differed?

Be careful how you answer.

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

Salam Alaikom



What is the madhab of Imam Abu haneefa?
What is the madhab of Imam Malik?
What is the madhab of Imam Shafi?
What is the madhab of Imam Ahmad?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn taimeeya?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Qayyem?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Bukhari?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Albani?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-khateeb Al baghdadi?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Al jowzy ?

Ibn Al jowzy wrote a whole chapter against sufism so what does that make him ?
has anybody read a book called Talbees iblees ?


For the record yes I am a salafi ... so if someone calls me a wahhabi then I ask Allah from now before you even say it to bring us both on judgment day for me to ask my right back from this harsh and bad insult.

I follow the manhaj of the Propet peace be upon him based on the saheeh hadeeth's and the manhaj of the Sahaba may Allah be please with them.
If following them if being a wahhabi then I am one of them !

[IbnShafiq]

Salam Alaikom



What is the madhab of Imam Abu haneefa?
What is the madhab of Imam Malik?
What is the madhab of Imam Shafi?
What is the madhab of Imam Ahmad?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn taimeeya?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Qayyem?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Bukhari?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Albani?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-khateeb Al baghdadi?
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Al jowzy ?

Ibn Al jowzy wrote a whole chapter against sufism so what does that make him ?
has anybody read a book called Talbees iblees ?


For the record yes I am a salafi ... so if someone calls me a wahhabi then I ask Allah from now before you even say it to bring us both on judgment day for me to ask my right back from this harsh and bad insult.

I follow the manhaj of the Propet peace be upon him based on the saheeh hadeeth's and the manhaj of the Sahaba may Allah be please with them.
If following them if being a wahhabi then I am one of them !


I'm take a stab at this although i think its silly. If i get any wrong one the other more knowledgeable brothers or sisters can correct me:

What is the madhab of Imam Abu haneefa? Was a fouder a madhab DUH ;)
What is the madhab of Imam Malik? " "
What is the madhab of Imam Shafi?" "
What is the madhab of Imam Ahmad?" "
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn taimeeya? Hanbali
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Qayyem? Hanbali
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Bukhari? shafi
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Albani? Imam?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-khateeb Al baghdadi? Shafi i think
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Al jowzy ? hanabli

[IbnShafiq]

Most of the greatest Scholars in the history of this Ummah followed one of the four schools of thought. I'm sure a list can be made up for you. Without these Ulama we muslims would be lost..

Al hamdulilah The One that preserved His religion on the hearts and hands of the Scholars of Ahlul Sunna wa jama3

I think if you realize that pretty much all of the hadith scholars like Al Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn majah, Nasi3, Abu dawood, Tirmidhe and others all made taqleed Of Imam shafi in Fiqh. Yet you look into the compalations of Ahadith searching for your fiqh very sad indeed.

We all follow the Sunnah of the Rasul May Allah bless him and grant him peace( or we at least try to). The Madhabs are merely vehicles in which to accomplish this goal.

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

So Imam Bukhari is a muqalled ?

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

Note that ibn al jowzy has written a whole chapter against sufism !
in book called : Talbees Iblees

[Saad]

Note that ibn al jowzy has written a whole chapter against sufism !
in book called : Talbees Iblees

Sufism or fake Sufis? There is a difference.

[IbnShafiq]

So Imam Bukhari is a muqalled ?

Yes

and ibn jawzi is also a muqalid

[amjedm]

Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said:

Do not blindly follow me and do not blindly follow Malik or Shafi'ee or Al-Awzaa'ee or Ath-Thawri, [but] take from where they took from (i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah)
(Reported by Ibn Al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Muwaqi'een [2/302])

The following quotation from "The Legal Status Of Following A Madhab" explains the above statement.

Ibn Taymiyah reported that Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal used to:

"Instruct the lay person to ask Ishaaq, Abu Obaid, Abu Thaur and Abu Mus'ab. However, he used to prohibit his own companions like Abu Dawood, Uthman ibn Sa'eed, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Athrum, Abu Zar'ah, Abu Hatim and Muslim (among others) to follow anyone. He would say to them:

"You must follow the sources of the Qur'an and Sunnah". Fatawa ibn Taymiyah: vol. 2, page 240.

This statement by Ibn Taymiyah makes it very clear that Taqleed was unsuitable only for those scholars/students who themselves were jurists and had the potential to become like their teachers in making decisions directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah. As for those who did not possess the requisite qualifications, they are strongly implored to follow a Mujtahid and practice Taqleed. In fact, Taqleed for the non-scholar was so overwhelmingly accepted amongst the scholars that only the Mu'tazlites disagreed with the idea. Shaykh Saifuddin Aamodi wrote:

"The lay person and the scholar who does not possess the ability to exercise Ijtihad - although they may possess some reliable skills in certain issues - must follow the opinion of a Mujtahid according to experts in principles and foundations (Usool).

Some Mu'tazilites of Baghdad have differed on this issue and have prohibited Taqleed even for these people."

There has been a difference of opinion - among the Mujtahids - as to whether a person who is capable of Ijtihad can follow another's opinion. Khatib of Baghdad has narrated Abu Sufyan as saying that indeed he may do so and Imam Muhammad as saying that he may follow the opinion of someone who is more knowledgeable than he. Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah has also narrated this opinion from Imam Muhammed. Imam Shai'fee and Imam Ahmed both say that this not allowed at all.

[mustajab]

Note that ibn al jowzy has written a whole chapter against sufism !
in book called : Talbees Iblees

What does sufism have to do with maddhabs.

[Skilly]

Assalamu alaikum wr wb

If you read my post you would have noted for those who are in a position to do so.

For example take me. My Madhab would be my local trusted reputable scholar who I go to.

As of that I am not against the Idea, I admit this is somewhat the case. I prefer that people to ask for evidence and if the Imam can provide various opinions where they differed is an added bonus.
This by all mean's does not mean that one has to stick to the scholar opinion and neglect the stronger more correct if that comes to light.

[Kareem]

First I must stress that one understand what I am saying, I am not saying that those minor difference invalidate one's Islam or anything. Nor am I saying you can't study under a madhab or you have to follow one.

Anyway here is my question:

Verified how?
Be more specific.

Secondly 1200 years only show that this difference exist still today which does not make sense if what you say is true...atleast not entirely.

What factors is ignoring here is this:

1. Daleel that has reached
2. Quality of Daleel.
3. Quality & soundness of reasoning and conclusion
4. Blind partnership.

and maybe so many more.

Ok let me ask an example.

If I was a following the Hanafi madhab, can I go against my Madhab for an opinion of a shafee, Hanbali or malaki at which they differed?

Be careful how you answer.
Verified how? come on, you know we don't just follow one Imams sayings. They had students, and they had students and so on. Those that were qualified did their ijtihad and sometimes came to their own consluions. Look at the books that gather the various oppinions and note the mashhur or mu`tamid of the schools, it's not always the oppinion of the Imam the school was named after.

And it makes perfect sense. You act as if difference of oppinion has all to to with using weak proofs or overlooking proofs. The reason why there are differences of oppinion has not all to do with what proofs have reached them, it's a factor yes. But like I said after 1200 years of checking and verifying I personally feel safe assuming that the fatawa based on unsound proofs are known to be shadh. But the madhahib are by definition different schools of thought, they look at the daleel in different ways. What might be strong according to one school might have little relevance in another. That is a major reason why there is ikhtilaf.

And the obligation is to follow a mujtahid in all things. I never said one was obligated to stick to one madhhab in all things. Not even sunnipath says that. So yea technicly you could pray like a maliki, fast like a hanbali, make hajj like a shafi`i and marry like a hanafi and all will be right. But I don't see why anyone would want to do that.

[Kareem]

This by all mean's does not mean that one has to stick to the scholar opinion and neglect the stronger more correct if that comes to light.
And when is it going to come to light, who is going to say such and such an oppinion is stronger. Do you not realise that oppinion A may be strong according to the shafi`is but weak according to the malikis due to the different methodology they employ.

to compare oppinions between the madhahib one must have mastered all of them. But a scholar who has not done that has is authority on any madhhab but his own.

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

Yes

and ibn jawzi is also a muqalid


No you are totally wrong here,
Imam Al-Bukhari is never and not a Muqalled, If he was here he would disown you to be a Muslim brother.

You can say he is a Muqalled of the Messenger of Allah him self Salla Allahu Alaihi Wa sallam.
He follows the Hadeeth ( Ahal Al Hadeeth ) and so does Imam shafi' which never himself said follow me but he said to his students ( Follow the hadeeth ) and whatever Hadeeth disagrees with any Imam then we follow the hadeeth. period!

Second of all Imam shafi is nothing compared to Bukhari in the knowledge of Hadeeth
The imam of the Dunya in Hadeeth is Bukhari as described by his student Imam Muslim.


If you read the sharh of Bukhari for Ibn hajar you'll be sure Imam Bukhari is not a Muqalled rather he is from ahal Al hadeeth which described by Ibn qayyem who are the victorious sect on judgment day

Read Ibn Qayyems words:
يا مبغضا أهل الحديث وشاتما ** أبشر بعقد ولاية الشيطان
ألم تعلم بأنهم أنصار دين الله** والإيمان والقرآن

And he goes on so he is never a hanbali which is a sect made up by his students and not the Imam himself.. Imam Ahmad was following Ahal al hadeeth because he has his famous saying in his misnad

الفرقة الناجية إن لم يكونوا أهل الحديث فلا أدري من هم
Imam Ahmad: The victorious sect if not people of hadeeth then I do not know who they are. saheeh.

Anyways besides that
you say ibn qayyem is a hanbali and the imam himself says he's from Ahal Al hadeeth and has quotes again sufism ( no offence but he does ). Also Imam shafi has anti quotes against sufism followers.

I wish this thread can go on and not close. I feel it wil be

[abdullatif]

This thread is already void of adab. The teachers of bukhari are known. Who there teachers where is known. So let us come about discussions of benefit. Always remeber a madhhab is just a means to following the sunnah of our beloved Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wa sallam). As the saying goes roughly in english if one wishes to know the fiqh of Imam Bukhari look at his chapter headings in sahih bukhari.

One last point Imam Bukhari never a Muaqallid. May Allah help us

[Saad]

الفرقة الناجية إن لم يكونوا أهل الحديث فلا أدري من هم
Imam Ahmad: The victorious sect if not people of hadeeth then I do not know who they are. saheeh.



Ahle Hadees means Muhaditoon and not Ahle Hadees ghair Muqallids of our time.

There is a book called Tahqiq Ahl ul Hadith by Allamah Habib ur Rahman Azami in which he discuss what is meant by the term Ahl ul Hadith used by early scholars.


This book explains the meaning of the term “Ahl ul Hadith.” This term is used in many books dating from different periods. The author, spent his whole life teaching hadith, shows that those who claim to be Ahl ul hadith have completely misrepresented the facts.

http://www.al-rashad.com/tahqiq-alhadith-p-412.html



And if you can read Urdu then Muhaqqiq Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar has also discussed this in details in his book Taifa-e-Mansurah.

[Abu Jaabir]

One aalim put it very beautifully, If we all took the strongest proof and made amal on that only then what would happen to the rest of the ahaadith of Nabi (saw).
Because of the four madhaahib every hadith/action of nabi (saw) is being practiced.

What if imaam Abu Hanifa uses a certain hadith as proof & imaam Bukhari says that hadith is weak?

Imaam Abu hanifa is a Tabiee he has taken hadith from Sahaaba as well as fellow Tabieen. Imaam Bukhari came 200 years after the time of fuqaha. The chain of narrators would have been much longer & weak narrators could be in that chain. Hence a hadith could be weak according to Imaam Bukhari & not according to Imaam Abu Hanifa RA

[nik61]

I'm take a stab at this although i think its silly. If i get any wrong one the other more knowledgeable brothers or sisters can correct me:

What is the madhab of Imam Abu haneefa? Was a fouder a madhab DUH ;)
What is the madhab of Imam Malik? " "
What is the madhab of Imam Shafi?" "
What is the madhab of Imam Ahmad?" "
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn taimeeya? Hanbali
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Qayyem? Hanbali
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Bukhari? shafi
What is the madhab of Imam Al-Albani? Imam?
What is the madhab of Imam Al-khateeb Al baghdadi? Shafi i think
What is the madhab of Imam Ibn Al jowzy ? hanabli

The majority of Muslims follow one of the four madhhab. The Imams of madhahibs follows their own interpretation of the Qur'an and the Sunnah since they are qualified to do so. It is haram for them to follow another mujtahid.
Accordingly it is also unlawful for layman like us to quote directly from the Qur'an and the Sunnah since we are not qualified to do so.
If a layman like myself takes up reading by myself a big thick book about medicine, does that qualifies me as a doctor? Can I immediately open up a clinic since I've already read a big thick book on medicine?
Certain ulama said that Imam al Bukhari was Shafi'i. Some say he has his own madhhab as also was the case with Imam Muslim. Imam Abu Dawud was Hanbali and Imam Nasa'i was Shafi'i. The great hadith scholar Ibnu Hajar al-Asqalani, who wrote Fath al Bari was a muqallid!
Nasir Albani, according to my opinion never was an Imam!
Al Khatib al Baghdadi was indeed a Shafi'i.
Most of the mujaddids after Imamuna Shafi'i were following a madhhab.
What the Imams of madhhab says about following the sahih hadith was to their most knowledgeable followers like what Imam Shafi'i said to Imam Muzani since he was able to differentiate between sahih and weak hadith.

[Skilly]

Verified how? come on, you know we don't just follow one Imams sayings. They had students, and they had students and so on. Those that were qualified did their ijtihad and sometimes came to their own consluions. Look at the books that gather the various oppinions and note the mashhur or mu`tamid of the schools, it's not always the oppinion of the Imam the school was named after.

And it makes perfect sense. You act as if difference of oppinion has all to to with using weak proofs or overlooking proofs. The reason why there are differences of oppinion has not all to do with what proofs have reached them, it's a factor yes. But like I said after 1200 years of checking and verifying I personally feel safe assuming that the fatawa based on unsound proofs are known to be shadh. But the madhahib are by definition different schools of thought, they look at the daleel in different ways. What might be strong according to one school might have little relevance in another. That is a major reason why there is ikhtilaf.

And the obligation is to follow a mujtahid in all things. I never said one was obligated to stick to one madhhab in all things. Not even sunnipath says that. So yea technicly you could pray like a maliki, fast like a hanbali, make hajj like a shafi`i and marry like a hanafi and all will be right. But I don't see why anyone would want to do that.

First as above again. One make it seem's that 1200 years of re-checking the same evidence, each madhab arrived at the same conclusion that their own madhab came to?

Which will not make sense.

Secondly, I don't think so, because the difference is from 1200 years ago.

Reality disproves it. If anything it is more like 1200 years of Partnership rather than anything if we discount the other factors I listed.

Just a reminder, your statement here:

"And the obligation is to follow a mujtahid in all things. I never said one was obligated to stick to one madhhab in all things."

Is a contradiction.


p.s. I don't understand Urdu. I am not pakistan.

The problem here is people cannot admit the simple reality.
I extremely admire the great four scholar's because I realise what kind of Muslims they where.

[Skilly]

What does sufism have to do with maddhabs.

Absolutely nothing, especially sufism of today. It has nothing got to do with Islam except for a few concept they empasise that is part of Islam.

If anything they are heresy called gnosis that infiltrated the rank of Islam. It breeds on religion lacking it's own structure that is why you see them try so hard to establish one on Bidah.

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

Imam bukhari is Muqalled of the Messenger of Allah and not an imam who can make mistakes !
The messenger of Allah said: My ummah will divide into 73 sects, 72 in hell and one in paradise.

Bukhari said: They are Ashab Al hadeeth ( meaning the people of hadeeth ).
Which was the way of the 4 imams together plus ibn qayyem and ibn al jowzy and the rest of ahel el sunnah scholars.

People who say stuff about these imams that they follow certain madhabs brought by man who makes mistakes are ignorant and no offence ..

Imam shafi and the rest of the 3 say: If the hadeeth is saheeh then it is my madhab !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those imams will disown people who attributed them to these sects... because themselves those imams say we follow the Hadeeth and ahlul Hadeeth

and basically ahlul Hadeeth are the Sahaba because they are the Narrators of Hadeeth !

[Sunni Muslim]

Note that ibn al jowzy has written a whole chapter against sufism !
in book called : Talbees Iblees



That book also has sections against other groups and not just so called Sufi's. The Talbis is against Sufi pretenders and if you can get his work known as Sifatus Safwa - you'll see the names and details of the real Sufiyya.

[Sunni Muslim]

Yes

and ibn jawzi is also a muqalid



True, Ibn al Jawzi is a Hanbali and his work on Hanbali fiqh known as al-Madhhab al Ahmad fi Madhhab al Imam Ahmad is now in print.

[Sunni Muslim]

Imam bukhari is Muqalled of the Messenger of Allah and not an imam who can make mistakes !
The messenger of Allah said: My ummah will divide into 73 sects, 72 in hell and one in paradise.

Bukhari said: They are Ashab Al hadeeth ( meaning the people of hadeeth ).
Which was the way of the 4 imams together plus ibn qayyem and ibn al jowzy and the rest of ahel el sunnah scholars.

People who say stuff about these imams that they follow certain madhabs brought by man who makes mistakes are ignorant and no offence ..

Imam shafi and the rest of the 3 say: If the hadeeth is saheeh then it is my madhab !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those imams will disown people who attributed them to these sects... because themselves those imams say we follow the Hadeeth and ahlul Hadeeth

and basically ahlul Hadeeth are the Sahaba because they are the Narrators of Hadeeth !



After the formation of the 4 well known Madhhabs, most of the true Ahlul-Hadith belonged to these 4 Madhhabs. It has already been mentioned here the following from one of the leading Imams of the true Ahlul Hadith and he was a Shafi'i in Madhhab also:

Khatib al-Baghdadi writes: As far as the Islamic rules are concerned, there are two types. The first are those which are known by necessity to be part of the Deen of the Prophet (malum min ad-deen un-nabiy biz-zaroora) (saw) like the five daily prayers, Zakat, fasting in Ramadhan, Hajj; the prohibition of adultery and wine and so on. Taqleed is not allowed in these matters since they are such that everyone should know and understood.

The second type are these rules which need to be understood and extrapolated (i.e. require istinbat) such as the details of the ibaadat (ritual worships), mu’amala (transactions) and nikah (weddings), for example. Taqleed is permitted in these issues since Allah (swt) says: ‘So ask the people who remember if you know not’ (Surah an-Nahl: 43) [al-Faqih wal Mutafaqqih Vol 2 pg. 67]

In reference to the above verse the following mufassiroon (expert commentators) have stated the following; Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas stated “…So Allah has commanded people to take advice of the Ulema and their warnings and to act upon their advice.” [Ahkam ul-Quran Vol. 2 pg 262]

Imam Al-Alusi states the following in his most famous tafsir of Quran “…This ayah has been used as dalil (evidence) to prove that referring to scholars is necessary in cases where one does not have the knowledge of the issue in question. Imam Suyuti in his ‘ikleel’ writes that this ayah has been used to prove the point that the lay person may follow another Imam (taqleed) in furoo details” [Ruh ul-Ma’ani vol 14 pg.148]

Al-Baghdadi also writes; “who is allowed to make taqleed? It is the lay person who does not have the tools to understand the laws of Islam. The lay person is allowed to follow a scholar and act upon his advice due to the above verse” [al-Faqih wal Mutaffaqih Vol. 2 pg 68]

Allah (swt) says in the Quran ‘And if you dispute in any matter, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger (saw)’ (Surah an-Nisa: 59) Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas “…Allah has ordered that that the matter be referred to the book of Allah and the Hadith of his messenger something, the lay person is not a person pf knowledge and therefore he is not of this caliber/ability. The lay person would be unaware of how to refer to Allah and to the Sunnah and their proofs i.e. how they would apply to the situation and to the events. Therefore it is firmly established that the command is to refer to the Ulema (i.e. those capable of comprehending the Book and the Sunnah i.e. can make istinbat extrapolate the legal rulings from the text – Mujtahidoon) [Ahkam ul-Quran Vol. 2 Pg.257]
------

Even al-Albani allowed taqleed to a certain extent. See this:

http://www.salaf italk.net/st/printthread.cfm?Forum=23&Topic=2749


Cassette no. 27 from the "Silsilah Fataawaa Jeddah"

Question: We face a difficulty in that it is said that you reject blind following of the Scholars, but you make taqleed of Yahyaa bin Ma`een and Ahmad in their sayings, or [in] the sayings of them both, such as, "So and so is da`eef", "So and so is thiqah", and we want to listen in this manner, so is the acceptance of the saying of the Scholars about a narrator that he is da`eef or thiqah pure taqleed, or is it built upon something knowledge-based that is not to be labelled taqleed for example, and there is another question that is built upon this one.

Shaykh al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah): I say that this matter has been treated by as-San`aanee in his risaalah and he tends to the view that this is not taqleed. And personally I am not satisfied with that [i.e. as-San`aanee's view in not calling it taqleed], I am not satisfied with this[1], however, can a person reject taqleed? As for me then I do not reject taqleed, rather I affirm it, rather, I obligate it, even if one besides me might oppose me, then he can, no doubt.

So we benefit from this mutual difference in this matter, I believe that the most senior of the Imaams are not saved from [resorting to] taqleed, let alone the lesser ones, let alone their Scholars, let alone the students of knowledge, and finally, let alone the common people. So what is the difficulty then?

The basis of the difficulty in my view is something that does not arise in the first place (i.e. there is no difficulty in the first place), because those who make this statement are either those muqallidah (blind followers) who wish to argue against us [by saying] that you claim that taqleed is forbidden so why do you blindly follow (yourself)! Or they are from those Ghulaat (Extremists) from our Salafee brothers who forbid taqleed with an absolute (unrestricted) forbiddence. And both of the two groups are upon error, yes.

And based upon this, I am able to answer, if I have an answer... depending on which of the two groups this criticism comes from, so if they are the muqallideen (blind-followers), then it is very clear that we say "you do not have this place...(meaning, this is not your place)", meaning just as the arabic similitude says, "This is not your nest...", this is not the subject of your research!! And if he is from our Salafee brothers who exaggerate in obligating research and ijtihaad until even upon the common people, then we say that this has no evidence for it, rather, it is opposed to what our Salaf as-Saalih said. For this reason, I say that I do not believe that there is any difficulty in this [criticism], regardless of whether it came from them (the muqallidah) or from them (the ghulaat in the matter of taqleed).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE
[1] What the Shaykh means, judging by the other quotations, is that he does not agree with as-San`aanee negating that this is taqleed, because he does consider it taqleed, but it is not something blameworthy, rather it is taqleed that is permissible, and that whether you call it Ittibaa` or Taqleed, does not change the reality behind it, namely, that it is only a representation of doing what Allaah commanded when he said, "Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know...", this is the essence of what is found in the other quotations (to follow inshaa'Allaah) that explain what the Shaykh means here, Allaah knows best.



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


Even Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al Qayyim are listed as Hanabila by Ibn Rajab al Hanbali in his Dhayl Tabaqat al Hanabila, as was the much later Muhammad Ibn Abdal Wahhab, though all 3 of them had some aspects which went against the mainstream view of their Madhhab.

Can you name just 50 major Imams after the Salaf till the days of the last Caliphate who attacked the following of the Madhhabs and said we are just Ahlul Hadith? Just look at the Tabaqat works of the 4 madhhabs and you'll see the true Ahlul Hadith Imams are within one of the 4 major Madhhabs.

[Abu Salma]

Imam shafi and the rest of the 3 say: If the hadeeth is saheeh then it is my madhab !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/B]

As-salamu 'alaykum,

Brother, please understand that Imam al-Shafi'i and the other imams were addressing their students who where themselves 'ulama. They were not addressing Zayd the Shoe Salesman or Harith the Peasant.

How will YOU know when a hadith is sahih or not? By making Taqlid to a scholar, right?

What do you do when shaykh al-Albani told you to leave your arms by the side after ruku' and shaykh Ibn Baz told you to put them on your chest (thus going against the four madhhabs)? Which one of them do you follow? Do you mix your own "version" of salah from their books? Or do you choose one of them and follow him in salah (in reality making taqlid of him)?

La Hawla wa la Quwwata illa biLlah.

[Skilly]

As salaam alaikum
Brother Skilly
What is the simple reality you talk about ? Please elaborate.

Some question for you. What makes a scholar today to be able to examine the evidences and declare one particular opinion to be the strongest amongst several opinions ? What advantage do the scholars of today have over the past scholars including the fuqahaa that makes them declare a stronger opinion among several ?

JazakAllah

We can talk about the various factors that effected the opinions of past scholar's and what followed afterward. To do this one should actually go and study the madhab's and why and how difference arose, and what followed.

We can talk about the past all day but what we can do of today, as for those who have the mean's. Is re-examine the madhab's evidence in which they differed and take the strongest/ most correct one amongst it.

The problem here is people try to paint a so rosy picture and daunty picture to Justify blind taqleed and partnership. 1200 of this 1200 of that! Come on the argument is full of hole, and one must be blind to 1200 of history.
If anything 1200 of history has shown the latter.

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

Said Bak

First of all I am not a Muqalled as you might assume me to be. How will I know if a Hadeeth is Saheeh from Dha'eef from MOw'dhoo'. That is the good thing about the KNowledge of the science of the Hadeeth. The knowledge of Jarh And Ta'deel.
The book of Imam Thahabi comes into place ( Seyar A'lam Al nubala' )
You see the narration and do a research on the history of each narrator ! what was said about him and is he good and so on...
I dont just listen to Anybody who says saheeh and weak just like that...
I study Hadeeth and this is something you gain knowledge in for 30 to 40 years... not in a single post in a forum !

definitely I am not a Muqalled... If you don't know how to compare between saheeh and weak don't indirectly accuse me of being a Muqalled.


What do you do when shaykh al-Albani told you to leave your arms by the side after ruku' and shaykh Ibn Baz told you to put them on your chest (thus going against the four madhhabs)? Which one of them do you follow? Do you mix your own "version" of salah from their books? Or do you choose one of them and follow him in salah (in reality making taqlid of him)?


I don't imitate nither Al-Albani or Imam shafi3i. I imitate the Hadeeth...
And the Hadeeths are clear about Salah and how to do it....

Havent you ever heard scholars say to each other: Who disagrees with me with proof then he is actually agreeing with me !

Regarding Salah I know all the hadeeths..
which ones do you want to know ?
Ps. I do not post english hadeeths
I only do arabic !

[Ahlul Hadeeth]

When I say
لا إله إلا الله

I mean to say :

There is no deity worthy of worship, but Allah.

and when I say :

أشهد أن محمد رسول الله

I mean to say :

There is no one worthy of following ( imitating - taqleed ) But Mohammad Peace be upon him
صلى الله عليه وسلم

and by Following the Sahaba I am following Mohammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) Because they are the narrators of Islam.

Not the 4 imams... not the sufee imams... not the salafi imams..
But I follow Mohammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

I learn under scholars of Ahal al hadeeth and with proof from the Quran and Hadeeth and only by that is where the truth lies !

[Sunni Muslim]

Said Bak

First of all I am not a Muqalled as you might assume me to be. How will I know if a Hadeeth is Saheeh from Dha'eef from MOw'dhoo'. That is the good thing about the KNowledge of the science of the Hadeeth. The knowledge of Jarh And Ta'deel.
The book of Imam Thahabi comes into place ( Seyar A'lam Al nubala' )
You see the narration and do a research on the history of each narrator ! what was said about him and is he good and so on...
I dont just listen to Anybody who says saheeh and weak just like that...
I study Hadeeth and this is something you gain knowledge in for 30 to 40 years... not in a single post in a forum !

definitely I am not a Muqalled... If you don't know how to compare between saheeh and weak don't indirectly accuse me of being a Muqalled.


I don't imitate nither Al-Albani or Imam shafi3i. I imitate the Hadeeth...
And the Hadeeths are clear about Salah and how to do it....

Havent you ever heard scholars say to each other: Who disagrees with me with proof then he is actually agreeing with me !

Regarding Salah I know all the hadeeths..
which ones do you want to know ?
Ps. I do not post english hadeeths
I only do arabic !



So, it means that you think you are capable of Independent Ijtihad, though hundreds of Hadith Masters knew thousands of ahadith by heart but still made taqleed of a recognised Madhhab.

And, i doubt you know every single hadith on Salah - for if you did you should be able to give us a single Sahih Hadith to place the hands upon the chest - which are all weak - but todays "Ahlul Hadeeth" say it is Sahih!

[Yahya]

and when I say :

أشهد أن محمد رسول الله

I learn under scholars of Ahal al hadeeth and with proof from the Quran and Hadeeth and only by that is where the truth lies !

Well perhaps you should have consulted the Qur'an and realized the truth of Arabic Grammar. You should have typed:
أشهد أن محمداً رسول الله

If you do not take the care to observe proper Arabic Grammar, then how can we be convinced that you have taken the proper care when you are interpreting a hadith?

[Abu Salma]

As-salamu 'alaykum,

There is no salvation except through following the Salaf.


‘Whatever was newly introduced after the salaf contains no goodness’.

[Abu Salma]

Declaration Regarding My Islamic Stance
Read it here > (http://www.sunnilinks.com/?p=24)

Basically it's just me clarifying that I am no longer a Sufi or an Ash'ari/Maturidi but rather a Sunni (Athari/Salafi) and posts on this forum by me - prior to this one - should be viewed in the light of that.

[dining_philosopher]

This is by you? What put's you under the impression that we care what your stance is on anything?

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Declaration Regarding My Islamic Stance

BismilL&#226;hi-r-Rahm&#226;ni-r-Rah&#238;m

Al-hamduliLl&#226;h, was-sal&#226;tu was-sal&#226;mu ‘al&#226; Ras&#251;liLl&#226;h, wa ba’d:

As-sal&#226;mu ‘alaikum wa rahmatuLl&#226;hi wa barak&#226;tuh,

Dear brothers and sisters in Isl&#226;m,

There is no reason to delay telling you about where I stand, other than fearing your reactions and we should not

fear anything other than All&#226;h (subh&#226;hanu wa ta’&#226;l&#226;), so let me explain:

In my time as a Muslim I have been through times of confusion and have changed my views more than once. When I was a new Muslim I went to the Waqf mosque in Copenhagen[1] and later joined Hizb ut-Tahr&#238;r and stayed with them for 3-4 years. After that I was nearly drawn in by the Sh&#238;’ah, but al-hamdulill&#226;h All&#226;h protected me from that fitnah. Then I became a Salaf&#238; and was one for another 3-4 years. Internal disagreement amongst the Salafies (not on fundamental matters) left me tired and confused and so I left the Salaf&#238; understanding for what has been called “Traditional Sunni Islam” or the “Ash’ar&#238;/M&#226;tur&#238;d&#238;/Suf&#238;” understanding. That change happened in the Summer of 2006.

Looking at this through a negative filter, it is easy to criticise me and call me a “leaf in the wind” and there is of course some truth to that, considering the number of times I have changed. However, I choose to look at this from a positive perspective and I thank All&#226;h (subh&#226;hanu wa ta’&#226;l&#226;) for letting me experience these groups and sects first hand and learn how they are in reality and not just through words in articles and on paper. Furthermore, my changes have always been grounded in my intention to follow al-Haqq (the Truth).

This yearning for al-Haqq has now lead me back to the understanding, about which I no longer hold any doubt is the correct and true one, namely Fahm as-Salaf as-S&#226;lih (the understanding of the Pious Predecessors), without adding anything to it. I wash my hands from the Ash’ar&#238; and M&#226;tur&#238;d&#238; understandings and all the other understandings of the Ahl ul-Kal&#226;m and Ahl ul-Bid’ah in general, among them those who like to call themselves as-S&#251;fiyyah or Ahl ut-Tasawwuf. There is no doubt that sul&#251;k and tazkiyat un-nafs is a part of Isl&#226;m, but as with everything else in Isl&#226;m this “science” too needs to be understood through the principle of:

“There is no salvation except through following the Salaf”

And All&#226;h is the One Who Guides.

So I am a Salaf&#238; (Athar&#238;) in ‘aq&#238;dah and manhaj (methodology), wal-hamdulill&#226;h [2]

As shaikh Muhammad N&#226;sirudd&#238;n al-Alb&#226;ni (rahimahull&#226;h) wrote:

“As for the one who ascribes himself to all of the as-Salaf us-S&#226;lih then he ascribes himself to what is protected from error.”
[Majallat ul-As&#226;lah, 9/87]

All&#226;humma y&#226; Muqallib al-Qul&#251;bi thabbit qul&#251;ban&#226; ‘al&#226; D&#238;nik, wa sall&#238; wa sallim wa b&#226;rik ‘al&#226; nabiyyin&#226; Muhammadin wa ‘al&#226; &#194;lihi wa Sahbihi ajma’&#238;n.

Wrote the slave in need of his Rabb’s Forgiveness and Grace,
Sa’&#238;d bin Gunnar Bak
al-Iskandin&#226;f&#238;

Odense, Denmark - 4 Shaww&#226;l 1428 | 15 October 2007

Notes:
[1] Al-Waqf al-Iskandin&#226;f&#238; also known as “Masjid ut-Tawbah” a mostly Ikhw&#226;n&#238;/Qutb&#238; controlled mosque and organisation in Copenhagen, Denmark.
[2] This public declaration is necessary because I have been involved in spreading falsehood and misunderstandings in my time with the Ahl ul-Bid’ah. So now is should be clear to whoever reads this that I have nothing to do with my former Ahl ul-Bid’ah stances, having made Tawbah from them.

This declaration is available on my website too.


Asslamo Allaikum,

I find this post very odd along with another one which was posted by a brother a few weeks ago.

Whats the point of these declarations? I make dua for your well-being as a Muslim & wish you the best of luck as you were/are/will be my Muslim Brother, but really, who cares (in the nicest sense of the phrase)?

There are plenty of Brothers/Sisters who go the other way i.e. leave Athari Aqeedah etc. and no declarations are made as there is no need.

[Abu Salma]

This is by you? What put's you under the impression that we care what your stance is on anything?

:salam:

What puts you under the impression that it was posted for your sake?

As I wrote:


This public declaration is necessary because I have been involved in spreading falsehood and misunderstandings in my time with the Ahl ul-Bid’ah. So now is should be clear to whoever reads this that I have nothing to do with my former Ahl ul-Bid’ah stances, having made Tawbah from them.

[dining_philosopher]

As I said, why do you feel the need to proclaim it publicly? No one cares.

[abuhajira]

:salam:

May Allah keep you well.. I echo what Br Muadh Khan said.. Your declaration be as it may.. let us see you as a muslim brother inshAllah..

:ws:

[Abu Salma]

...but really, who cares (in the nicest sense of the phrase)?

:salam:

Not many I would suspect. But again, that was not the purpose. I could choose to spend a few days deleting all my post on the forum instead, but it seemed easier to just post this declaration. The declaration was not aimed specifically at this forum. It is a post on my website, but I thought it should be posted here as well.

Fî Amânillâh.

[Abu Salma]

As I said, why do you feel the need to proclaim it publicly? No one cares.

I have noticed that every time you post it is without any kind of adab. Your user name really suits you perfectly.

And really. Why do you think I care if you think no one cares? :D

[Julaybib]

I thought you was a Murabitun...Anyway its no big deal.

[dining_philosopher]

I have noticed that every time you post it is without any kind of adab. Your user name really suits you perfectly.

And really. Why do you think I care if you think no one cares? :D


Why wouldn't you? If you didn't care what other people thought then you wouldn't share your 'declaration' with us.

[celt islam]

I thought you was a Murabitun...Anyway its no big deal.

Asalaamualaykum.

As for Sidi Said being part of the Murabitun this in reality was not the case as i will fully explain.

Sidi Said bak gave bayah once to the amir of the Murabitun Darqawi tariqah and then due to his lack of yaqin he left almost straight away and became an Internet mureed of the wonderful Shaykh Nuh Keller, due to the nature of Sidi Said you will see he has a pattern of not being able to ground himself in a path hence why he changes his opinions almost weekly.

After some time Sidi Said came back to the company of various Mureeds of Shaykh Abdal Qadir as Sufi by internet and wanted to give his Bayah once again at this time He was advised not to take things lightly but he was demanding and full of energy in becoming part of the Murabitin that we gave him another chance to prove himself and the amir once again allowed Sidi Said to give bayah again which he did .

After a short time Sidi Said came and visited me and we have such a great time chating about various things to which he said many a great thing about how he was lost and now he had finally made his mind where his heart lays, within a month of him returning back home he again decided to leave the Murabitun darqawi tarqah.

You see Sidi Said is a good man that i know and its sad that after his departure he never kept contact and i sadly lost what i thought was a freind.

The reality is this Sidi Said was never actually in the Murabitun long enough to be a mureed so in reality he was never really a Murabit it was all in his imagination and virtual reality called the internet.
Taking Bayah is one thing and thats the start but Sidi Said never visited one community of the murabitun or was in any activity among the murabitun nor did he ever meet or converse with the Shaykh hence he never ever really was in the Murabitun and this can be said of him being part of other tariqas.

What i see clearly as day in Sidi Said is that he cannot make his mind up at all due to being confused and not having real Yaqin in his heart.
One day Sidi said is a hanifi another day a maliki another day a salaafi cant you see that he has made his deen one of constant change and confustion , this is a clear pattern Sidi Said constantly does and i feel for him because now i know he needs help seriously.

Sidi Said i know you will read this and this is why i wrote it as i thought i had a friend in you and then you went cold against me and cut me off Please wake up and dont let the shaytaan confuse you because thats all confusion is .

As far as calling the ahul dhkir a bunch of ahul bida well thats just silly and deep in your heart you know that.

Al albani and his hench men of psudo salaafism do not represent tradtional Islam , what happend anyway to the book by Imam Yasin Dutton which clearly explains things? if you dont accept that book anymore i will buy it from you and put it to some good use :cheesygri

How many time have i heard from your own mouth you mocking and taking the biscuit about the salaafis and wahaabis? let alone other people and shaykhs.

You take your path Sidi Said thats your choice i just make dua that you get Yaqin in what you believe.

Sidi Said i love you as my brother dont forget that!

Your brother in Islam

ma salaama Abdullah

[dining_philosopher]

Celt why do you think its fine to insult people then tell the you love them as a brother and expect it to be ok?

[celt islam]

:cheesygri
Celt why do you think its fine to insult people then tell the you love them as a brother and expect it to be ok?

Asalaamualaykum

Ask me a real serious queston with adab and the adab of giving me a salaam and i may give you an answer :cheesygri

Ma salaama Abdullah :cheesygri

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

Declaration Regarding My Islamic Stance

BismilLâhi-r-Rahmâni-r-Rahîm

Al-hamduliLlâh, was-salâtu was-salâmu ‘alâ RasûliLlâh, wa ba’d:

As-salâmu ‘alaikum wa rahmatuLlâhi wa barakâtuh,

Dear brothers and sisters in Islâm,

There is no reason to delay telling you about where I stand, other than fearing your reactions and we should not

fear anything other than Allâh (subhâhanu wa ta’âlâ), so let me explain:

In my time as a Muslim I have been through times of confusion and have changed my views more than once. When I was a new Muslim I went to the Waqf mosque in Copenhagen[1] and later joined Hizb ut-Tahrîr and stayed with them for 3-4 years. After that I was nearly drawn in by the Shî’ah, but al-hamdulillâh Allâh protected me from that fitnah. Then I became a Salafî and was one for another 3-4 years. Internal disagreement amongst the Salafies (not on fundamental matters) left me tired and confused and so I left the Salafî understanding for what has been called “Traditional Sunni Islam” or the “Ash’arî/Mâturîdî/Sufî” understanding. That change happened in the Summer of 2006.

Looking at this through a negative filter, it is easy to criticise me and call me a “leaf in the wind” and there is of course some truth to that, considering the number of times I have changed. However, I choose to look at this from a positive perspective and I thank Allâh (subhâhanu wa ta’âlâ) for letting me experience these groups and sects first hand and learn how they are in reality and not just through words in articles and on paper. Furthermore, my changes have always been grounded in my intention to follow al-Haqq (the Truth).

This yearning for al-Haqq has now lead me back to the understanding, about which I no longer hold any doubt is the correct and true one, namely Fahm as-Salaf as-Sâlih (the understanding of the Pious Predecessors), without adding anything to it. I wash my hands from the Ash’arî and Mâturîdî understandings and all the other understandings of the Ahl ul-Kalâm and Ahl ul-Bid’ah in general, among them those who like to call themselves as-Sûfiyyah or Ahl ut-Tasawwuf. There is no doubt that sulûk and tazkiyat un-nafs is a part of Islâm, but as with everything else in Islâm this “science” too needs to be understood through the principle of:

“There is no salvation except through following the Salaf”

And Allâh is the One Who Guides.

So I am a Salafî (Atharî) in ‘aqîdah and manhaj (methodology), wal-hamdulillâh [2]

As shaikh Muhammad Nâsiruddîn al-Albâni (rahimahullâh) wrote:

“As for the one who ascribes himself to all of the as-Salaf us-Sâlih then he ascribes himself to what is protected from error.”
[Majallat ul-Asâlah, 9/87]

Allâhumma yâ Muqallib al-Qulûbi thabbit qulûbanâ ‘alâ Dînik, wa sallî wa sallim wa bârik ‘alâ nabiyyinâ Muhammadin wa ‘alâ Âlihi wa Sahbihi ajma’în.

Wrote the slave in need of his Rabb’s Forgiveness and Grace,
Sa’îd bin Gunnar Bak
al-Iskandinâfî

Odense, Denmark - 4 Shawwâl 1428 | 15 October 2007

Notes:
[1] Al-Waqf al-Iskandinâfî also known as “Masjid ut-Tawbah” a mostly Ikhwânî/Qutbî controlled mosque and organisation in Copenhagen, Denmark.
[2] This public declaration is necessary because I have been involved in spreading falsehood and misunderstandings in my time with the Ahl ul-Bid’ah. So now is should be clear to whoever reads this that I have nothing to do with my former Ahl ul-Bid’ah stances, having made Tawbah from them.

This declaration is available on my website too.


You're confused bro.

[Skilly]

Assalamu alaikum wr wb.

No worries, I care. I appreciate your effort of trying to clear up some falsehood you was spreading. Your repentance to Allah(swt) is good enough for us.

May Allah(swt) keep you on this straight path.

[MohammadMufti]

Why wouldn't you? If you didn't care what other people thought then you wouldn't share your 'declaration' with us.

His point was that instead of going through and deleting his old posts where he said such and such things against such and such people, he would simply make a public declaration to clear it up. That doesn't necessitate that he cares what anyone thinks (especially what you think), but this was the way of clearing yourself from previous views of the Muslims - you can not go and burn all the old books and letters you wrote but you can publicly make a declaration that will free you of them.

[rasheed gonzales]

as-Salâm 'alaikum wa rahmatullah,


This is by you? What put's you under the impression that we care what your stance is on anything?


… you were/are/will be my Muslim Brother, but really, who cares (in the nicest sense of the phrase)?
I find it amusing that the two of you cared enough to post. You could easily have done what the others who don't care did and ignored it.

[SeekerOfGuidance]

Declaration Regarding My Islamic Stance

BismilLâhi-r-Rahmâni-r-Rahîm

Al-hamduliLlâh, was-salâtu was-salâmu ‘alâ RasûliLlâh, wa ba’d:

As-salâmu ‘alaikum wa rahmatuLlâhi wa barakâtuh,

Dear brothers and sisters in Islâm,

There is no reason to delay telling you about where I stand, other than fearing your reactions and we should not

fear anything other than Allâh (subhâhanu wa ta’âlâ), so let me explain:

In my time as a Muslim I have been through times of confusion and have changed my views more than once. When I was a new Muslim I went to the Waqf mosque in Copenhagen[1] and later joined Hizb ut-Tahrîr and stayed with them for 3-4 years. After that I was nearly drawn in by the Shî’ah, but al-hamdulillâh Allâh protected me from that fitnah. Then I became a Salafî and was one for another 3-4 years. Internal disagreement amongst the Salafies (not on fundamental matters) left me tired and confused and so I left the Salafî understanding for what has been called “Traditional Sunni Islam” or the “Ash’arî/Mâturîdî/Sufî” understanding. That change happened in the Summer of 2006.

Looking at this through a negative filter, it is easy to criticise me and call me a “leaf in the wind” and there is of course some truth to that, considering the number of times I have changed. However, I choose to look at this from a positive perspective and I thank Allâh (subhâhanu wa ta’âlâ) for letting me experience these groups and sects first hand and learn how they are in reality and not just through words in articles and on paper. Furthermore, my changes have always been grounded in my intention to follow al-Haqq (the Truth).

This yearning for al-Haqq has now lead me back to the understanding, about which I no longer hold any doubt is the correct and true one, namely Fahm as-Salaf as-Sâlih (the understanding of the Pious Predecessors), without adding anything to it. I wash my hands from the Ash’arî and Mâturîdî understandings and all the other understandings of the Ahl ul-Kalâm and Ahl ul-Bid’ah in general, among them those who like to call themselves as-Sûfiyyah or Ahl ut-Tasawwuf. There is no doubt that sulûk and tazkiyat un-nafs is a part of Islâm, but as with everything else in Islâm this “science” too needs to be understood through the principle of:

“There is no salvation except through following the Salaf”

And Allâh is the One Who Guides.

So I am a Salafî (Atharî) in ‘aqîdah and manhaj (methodology), wal-hamdulillâh [2]

As shaikh Muhammad Nâsiruddîn al-Albâni (rahimahullâh) wrote:

“As for the one who ascribes himself to all of the as-Salaf us-Sâlih then he ascribes himself to what is protected from error.”
[Majallat ul-Asâlah, 9/87]

Allâhumma yâ Muqallib al-Qulûbi thabbit qulûbanâ ‘alâ Dînik, wa sallî wa sallim wa bârik ‘alâ nabiyyinâ Muhammadin wa ‘alâ Âlihi wa Sahbihi ajma’în.

Wrote the slave in need of his Rabb’s Forgiveness and Grace,
Sa’îd bin Gunnar Bak
al-Iskandinâfî

Odense, Denmark - 4 Shawwâl 1428 | 15 October 2007

Notes:
[1] Al-Waqf al-Iskandinâfî also known as “Masjid ut-Tawbah” a mostly Ikhwânî/Qutbî controlled mosque and organisation in Copenhagen, Denmark.
[2] This public declaration is necessary because I have been involved in spreading falsehood and misunderstandings in my time with the Ahl ul-Bid’ah. So now is should be clear to whoever reads this that I have nothing to do with my former Ahl ul-Bid’ah stances, having made Tawbah from them.

This declaration is available on my website too.



:salam:

Is there anything in particular that turned you back again?

[Abu Salma]

:ws:


You're confused bro.

Yes, I have been for a while. Deluded and confused, but now the fog has cleared, al-hamdulill&#226;h.


No worries, I care. I appreciate your effort of trying to clear up some falsehood you was spreading. Your repentance to Allah(swt) is good enough for us.

May Allah(swt) keep you on this straight path.

Am&#238;n! Barak All&#226;hu f&#238;ka y&#226; Skilly.


His point was that instead of going through and deleting his old posts where he said such and such things against such and such people, he would simply make a public declaration to clear it up. That doesn't necessitate that he cares what anyone thinks (especially what you think), but this was the way of clearing yourself from previous views of the Muslims - you can not go and burn all the old books and letters you wrote but you can publicly make a declaration that will free you of them.



I find it amusing that the two of you cared enough to post. You could easily have done what the others who don't care did and ignored it.

Brothers Muhammad and Rasheed, jaz&#226;kuma Ll&#226;hu khairan.


Is there anything in particular that turned you back again?

You know when kids play with the universal remote control, so it doesn't have the right settings anymore and becomes useless? Then you read the manual and put the settings right again and suddenly the remote control works again? I feel sort of like that. (The kids in the parable being Shait&#226;n and the people of innovations).

Maybe not a perfect explanation, but I hope it makes sense. Basically I was convinced (once again) by the overwhelming proof that the truth lies in clinging to the understanding of the Salaf.

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

:ws:



Yes, I have been for a while. Deluded and confused, but now the fog has cleared, al-hamdulill&#226;h.
.


Salam 'Alaykum bro,

You have left Da'watus Salafiyya before. Remember that they wrote a refutation just because you left? You call that the straight path?

I have the feeling you will leave Salafiyya again soon...

Btw, what about your wife? I remember you asked on Ahadun Ahad Forums/Marifah forums for a text on tasawwuf to convince your wife that tasawwuf is part of Islam.

Did she turn into a salafi again? Or is she still Sunni?

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

FROM ONE EXTREME TO THE OTHER!

THE RIDICULOUS SITUATION OF THE ONE WHO WENT 'BAK': ABOO ZAKARIYYA SA’’EED GUNNAAR BAK OF DENMARK AND HIS ‘‘SALAF..DK’’ WEBSITE -

http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_SalafDK.pdf

[Abu Salma]

:salam:


Salam 'Alaykum bro,

You have left Da'watus Salafiyya before. Remember that they wrote a refutation just because you left? You call that the straight path?

I have the feeling you will leave Salafiyya again soon...

Btw, what about your wife? I remember you asked on Ahadun Ahad Forums/Marifah forums for a text on tasawwuf to convince your wife that tasawwuf is part of Islam.

Did she turn into a salafi again? Or is she still Sunni?

May Allâh guide you and me and keep us steadfast upon the Truth.

As for my wife I really don't understand how she is any concern of yours, but I am happy to tell you that she never accepted my misconceptions and stayed a Salafiyyah, al-hamdulillâh.


FROM ONE EXTREME TO THE OTHER!

THE RIDICULOUS SITUATION OF THE ONE WHO WENT 'BAK': ABOO ZAKARIYYA SA’’EED GUNNAAR BAK OF DENMARK AND HIS ‘‘SALAF..DK’’ WEBSITE -

http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_SalafDK.pdf

I have actually contacted the admin of SalafiManhaj.com, who was happy to hear about my return to Salafiyyah and he has removed the link to the file from their pdf archive index. I will ask him remove the file itself too inshâ'Allâh.

[loveProphet]

:ws:

So i guess the only sect left is shi'ism now?
When are you going to join/try them?

[Abu Salma]

:ws:

So i guess the only sect left is shi'ism now?
When are you going to join/try them?

:salam:

May All&#226;h protect me from that.

However, your question leads me to think you haven't really read my declaration at all.

I wrote:


After that I was nearly drawn in by the Sh&#238;’ah, but al-hamdulill&#226;h All&#226;h protected me from that fitnah.

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum Brothers,

With due respect, does it really matter?

The brother in question has adopted what he thinks to be the closest way to Sunnah (in his opinion), there is no point in putting him through cross-examination and questioning.

If he has reservations or questions he knows where to get answers from Insha'Allah.

All Muslims are brothers in Islam and make dua for all of them to get Hidaya & die on Hidaya (no hidden swipes at Salafees, here!) [Ameen].

Its his choice and he has made it.

The culture of insults and counter-insults has to STOP, some people make it the purpose of their life, Subhanullah.

If he starts positing refutations of Ahlus-Sunnah here (or anyone else) then it will be handled Insha'Allah, but still lets maintain LOVE & RESPECT.

[xii]

:salam:

Dear brother Said, my commisserations to you on choosing ahlul baatil after knowing the truth. Wallahi we love you for the sake of Allah (SWT) but we are a bit concerned about the way you keep changing minhaj to minhaj. Please have firm yaqin in what you believe in and may Allah (SWT) guide you to the truth. :D

:ws:

[Abu Salma]

may Allah (SWT) guide you to the truth.

:ws:

&#194;m&#238;n!

[Julaybib]

Salaam's

I can understand the attraction of the Salaafi Dawah, for a new convert or indeed
a muslim who has newly started practicing.

Anyways I agree with Brother Muadh khan. in the above post.

[woeuntothee]

I don't think its our place to chastize sidi Said or look down on him, just because he doesn't feel comfortable with what we believe, the way we believe it. Alhumdulillah.

I agree with sidi Muadah Khan.

[Kareem]

Asslamo Allaikum Brothers,

With due respect, does it really matter?

The brother in question has adopted what he thinks to be the closest way to Sunnah (in his opinion), there is no point in putting him through cross-examination and questioning.

If he has reservations or questions he knows where to get answers from Insha'Allah.

All Muslims are brothers in Islam and make dua for all of them to get Hidaya & die on Hidaya (no hidden swipes at Salafees, here!) [Ameen].

Its his choice and he has made it.

The culture of insults and counter-insults has to STOP, some people make it the purpose of their life, Subhanullah.

If he starts positing refutations of Ahlus-Sunnah here (or anyone else) then it will be handled Insha'Allah, but still lets maintain LOVE & RESPECT.
exactly

[Ibn Ajibah]

"You'll be back"--Words of a Shaikh to a person who left him to be a salafi. And yes, he did come back.

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

"You'll be back"--Words of a Shaikh to a person who left him to be a salafi. And yes, he did come back.

best reply in this topic.

[Ibn Ajibah]

Abdul Hakim Murad said:


Most new Muslims, however, soon see through this. A majority of people come to Islam for real spiritual or intellectual reasons, and will continue with their quest once they are inside Islam. Becoming Muslim is, after all, only the first step to felicity. Those individuals who adopt Islam because they need an identity will be condemned to wander the sectarian and factional hall of mirrors, constantly looking for the perfect group that will give them their desperately needed sense of specialness and superiority.

food for thought for all of us.

[Ansari]

So did you turn madkhali, suroori, qutbi, takfiri or ...?

[celt islam]

So did you turn madkhali, suroori, qutbi, takfiri or ...?


Asalaamualaykum,

Well this is a good queston as due to the nature of Sidi Said he may also chop and change from one to another but ALLAH hu alim?

Sidi Said has made his mind up for now , time will tell where he is going next i pray he finds peace and love where ever he goes ameen

[whodat]

Dear brother,

I for one am happy that you continue to grow as a person and may Allah strengthen your conviction. The way I look at it is you've tasted the best of fruits from all the groups. A public redress i think is appropriate because you may have contributed to unnecessary arguments in the past on either side of the fence. However you move forward, perhaps you should reflect on your behaviour as a salafi and traditional. Did you engage in debate that left ill feelings between brothers? I myself am sometimes torn between both groups because I have many friends from them. Agree to disagree but dear bro concentrate on beneficial knowledge and avoid polemical debates. In the future it may be us who benefit from you. If one thing you have learned from your past is you spoke without knowledge sit with someone has some maturity and has studied our faith in a formal fashion.

[loveProphet]

"You'll be back"--Words of a Shaikh to a person who left him to be a salafi. And yes, he did come back.
An excellent reply.

[woeuntothee]

With all due respect to the few brothers who are of the opinion that it was good to publicise this whole debacle, to open-endedly address the whole world of one's internal battle in a decleration, I disagree with you vehemently.

While technically it is all good to make public declerations of what you believe - it should be left to general issues, and not such deep matters of the changing heart. In effect what has been done is the 'burning of bridges' - Since Islam is a never ending quest towards truth, to burn bridges by such declarations will only act as an obstacle in the quest.

I would like to again add that we should fix our attitude and adab (looks sternly at celt) when dealing with this matter. Eg: "It seems like our dear lovely brother has somehow unintentionally knocked a few screws loose in his ever-so-handsome head" - Just because we're using nice words doesn't mean our sentences become any less venomous.

[MohammadMufti]

Remember that they wrote a refutation just because you left? You call that the straight path?

I never quite understood why so many people that call themselves Salafi are constantly spending as much time as they can on personal attacks. But than I saw the reactions of so many brothers on this thread which essentially mimic what was on salafimanhaj website only from the other angle. Only difference is perhaps that over there they compile it into a pdf file for greater distribution. :/

[tazkiyyah]

We certainly live in confusing times. There is nothing wrong in seeking the truth actively.

However, brother said bak. You are clearly still in the forumlative stages of your world-view.

I advise you to close down your internet blog..be it sufi/salafi or whatever and go study somewhere you trust for about 15 years, and then when you have some clarity in your vision, then perhaps you can do da'wah based on a firm grounding in whichever path you adopt insha'allah?

Its not waajib for you to have a blog.

One of the signs of the end of time
is kathratul khutabaa wa qillat al fuqaha

An abundance of public speakers, and a paucity of true men of understanding.

The rush to blog every new view...every new flavour of coffee....every little thing that happens is surely pathological?Perhaps,dare i say it,self-aggrandising. The desire for fame in a world of population explosions..the desire for this one ant like me to look bigger than I am..To cry to be noticed and famous(or infamous)-all publicity is good publicity

[OneLife]

Honestly, who cares? One day a Salafi, next day a Hanafi, another day an Ashari, followed by being a biddati, and on and on it goes. It's your life, no one really cares about Internet declarations.

People really turn Islam and it's tenets into a joke sometimes.

[IbnShafiq]

As Salam Alaikum

What I find rather interesting is the brothers speaking in defense of you calling themselves hanafi. While you have insulted us and and our scholars. Deobandis Scholars are Maturidi aren't they. This man bunches them with ahl bid'ah and you defend him just pathetic. We live in the worst of times

"I wash my hands from the Ash’arî and Mâturîdî understandings and all the other understandings of the Ahl ul-Kalâm and Ahl ul-Bid’ah in general, among them those who like to call themselves as-Sûfiyyah or Ahl ut-Tasawwuf.I wash my hands from the Ash’arî and Mâturîdî understandings and all the other understandings of the Ahl ul-Kalâm and Ahl ul-Bid’ah in general, among them those who like to call themselves as-Sûfiyyah or Ahl ut-Tasawwuf."

[Zubair]

salam

Brother Said i'm just happy you didn't become a shia or something else, but i encourge you to learn arabic first and study some aqida texts, you don't want to depend on what salafis write about Ashari and Maturidi, don't trust their (online) work. Go learn and see what the scholars of Ahl lu Sunnah believe and practice upon that, don't just read one or to scholars like Shaykh ibn Taymiyya, study from other classical scholars.

May Allah guide us all.

[JawadS]

Bismillah.

Assalamu alaikum.

I know this is not any of my business. It seems as if Sidi Said Bak has made his decision, and there is nothing we can do to change that. But, I do think that Sidi Tazkiyyah is correct. Sidi Said, you should not rely on the Internet and don't adopt it as your "Shaykh". It is very easy on the Internet for someone to add Shaykh in front of their names and write an article, which may contain errors regarding the deen, and thus, misleading many from obtaining the right knowledge of Islam. Therefore, you should try (if you can afford and circumstances allow you) to go learn at the feet of authorized scholars, especially in terms of our basic Islamic knowledge (i.e. Aqeedah and Fiqh), whereever you are able to do so. There have been many scholars who traveled to places quite afar from where they lived to gain knowledge. All matters of Aqeedah should be learned with the help and guidance of authorized scholars. There is alot of misguidance and error on the Internet and it is very unsafe to learn the deen and Aqeedah on it, as it will taint your Islam and Iman.

This "constant change" of from one thought to another is showing us that you are seeking for truth. So continue to do so, but at the feet of scholars who are authorized, not self research, as we have a tendency to believe anything when we are eagerly seeking knowledge. Learn from Ash'ari and Maturidi scholars directly than those who only bash and criticize these schools of thoughts of Aqeedah, and learn from Fiqh of Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi'i, and Hanbali from these scholars. You can also learn from the Salafi scholars to see where you feel most comfort. Once you know where you best fit, then stay steadfast on that to the best of your ability, inshaAllah. We have tendency to "regress" back to a state that we feel is comfortable and easy. But being a student/seeker of knowledge is tough. So don't falter in your quest to learn the deen. Try to get your questions answered so that you may gain insight and a better understanding of "Traditional Sunni Islam" rather than leaving them unanswered and leaving you in doubt, only to leave you confused.

Remember, don't learn your deen from the internet, learn from the scholars of Islam. May Allah Ta'ala help and guide you, and us, in the search for Truth with much success. Ameen.

Ma'salama.

[Abdullah Ali al Hanafi]

Shaikh Ibn 'Uthaymeen on the Madkhali Salafis
by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Ibn 'Uthaymeen
Source: Lecture "Alaykum Bissunnah"*
Courtesy Of: SunnahOnline.com

Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen says :

From his [the Prophet] sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam's statement,

"Whoever lives amongst you will see much differing, so adhere to my Sunnah",

It can be learnt that if parties (ahzaab) within the ummah emerge in increasing numbers then one should not affiliate himself to a party (hizb). In the past, many groups have appeared; Khwaarij, Mu'tazilah, Jahmiyyah, Shee'ah, even Raafidah. Then there appeared, later on Ikhwanis, Salafis, Tablighis, and all those like them. Put all of them to one side and take [the path] ahead. Which is what the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallaam guided to, "Adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided caliphs." No doubt, it is obligatory for all Muslims to adopt the way of the salaf as their madhhab, not affiliation to a specific party (hizb) named, "The Salafis". It is obligatory for the Islamic Ummah to adopt the way of the salaf as-salih as their madhhab, not bigotry to those called "the salafis". Pay attention to the difference: There is the way of the salaf, and there is a party (hizb) called "the salafis".

What is the objective? Following the Salaf. Why? The salafi brothers are the closest sect to that which is right, no doubt, but their problem is the same as others, that some of these sects declare others as being misguided, they declare them to be innovators and as being sinners. We don't censure this, if they deserve it, but we censure handling this bid'ah in this way. It is obligatory for the leaders of these sects to get together and say, "Between us is the book of Allah, and the Sunnah of His messenger, so lets us judge by them and not according to desires, opinions and not according to personalities. Everyone makes mistakes and achieves correctness no matter what he has reached with regards to knowledge and worship. Infallibility is [only] in the religion of Islam."

In this hadeeth the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallaam guided to the way in which a person secures himself. He doesn't affiliate him to any sect, only the way of the salaf as-salih, to the Sunnah of our Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallaam and the rightly guided caliphs.
Footnotes:

*The tape is part of his Sharh of An-Nawawi's 40 hadeeth, in the sharh of the hadeeth of Irbaad ibn Saariyah (no.28).

source:To download, right click and save target as: tahzir_salafiya.mp3 <http://salafiyyah-jadeedah.tripod.com/Ibn_Uthaymeen_Salafis.htm

[nik61]

But the real question should be: Was he a Sunni or not?

Salafis still like this man.

From what I read about him by Shaykh GF Haddad, he doesn't appear to be Sunni. Try the link below and read it.

http://www.abc.se/~m9783/n/uthaym_e.html

In his book Aqidat al Muslimin, pg 11, Ibn Uthaymeen said, "The establishment of Allah on the throne means that He is sitting in person on His throne."

Wallahu ta'ala a'lam bi al sawab

[Habib1968]

Salam alaikoum ,


I was last year in Egypt and there was some salafi brothers from my country in the mosque where I used to pray and we had sometimes some discussions ; they talked a lot about sheikh Outhaymeen ; he is well respected ...

They also asked me where is Allah (swa) ; " aqida control ":rolleyes:


Wa salam

[JayshAllah]

There are many people who refrain from using labels, and Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen is one of them.

[dining_philosopher]

Just seems to be one of those salafis who says he is 'just muslim' but still follows salafi fiqh and aqidah.

[syed bin muhammed]

History of Salafism
From the perspective of the Salafis themselves, their history starts with Muhammad himself. They consider themselves direct followers of his teachings, and wish to emulate the piety of the first three generations of Islam (the Salaf). All later scholars are merely revivers (not 'founders'). Modern scholars may only come to teach (or remind) us of the instructions of the original followers of Islam. From the perspective of some others, however, the history of Salafism started a few hundred years ago, the exact time and place still being a matter of discussion.

From a perspective widely shared by scholars of Islam, the history of Salafism started in Egypt in the mid 19th century among intellectuals at al-Azhar University, the preeminent center of Islamic learning, located in Cairo. Prominent among them were Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905), Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1839-1897) and Rashid Rida (1865-1935).[16][17][18][19][20] These early reformers recognized the need for an Islamic revival, noticing the changing fortunes in the Islamic world following the Enlightenment in Europe. Al-Afghani was a political activist, whereas Abduh, an educator, and head of Egypt's religious law courts, sought gradual social reform and legal reform "to make sharia relevant to modern problems." Abduh

argued that the early generations of Muslims (the salaf al-salihin, hence the name Salafiyya, which is given to Abduh and his disciples) had produced a vibrant civilization because they had creatively interpreted the Quran and hadith to answer the needs of their times. [21]

Other self-described Salafi disavow these early figures. One prominent Salafi website, for example, describing itself as promoting "the creed and manhaj of the salaf us-saalih - pure and clear," [22], includes among its publications one claiming al-Afghani and Muhammad ‘Abduh were "known freemasons and ... also upon great misguidance in their ideologies." It alleges they were interested in an "anti-colonial political movement" rather than "orthodox Islaam" or "the way of the Salaf," but their

call was deceptively surrounded with slogans of `returning back to the way of the forefathers.` It is for this reason that you see the mistaken notion amongst western writers that `Salafiyyah` began at the hands of Jamaal ud-Deen al-Afghaani, and Muhammad Abduh, and also the mistaken notion that Hassan al-Bannah was upon `Salafiyyah`, due to the influence of Muhammad Rasheed Ridhaa upon him. [23][24]

Many self-described Salafi today point instead to Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab as the first figure in the modern era to push for a return to the religious practices of the salaf as-salih or "righteous predecessors". [25] His evangelizing in 18th century Saudi Arabia was a call to return to what he believed were the practices of the early generations of Muslims. His works (especially Kitab at-Tawhid) are still widely read by Salafis around the world today, and the majority of Salafi scholars still reference his works frequently.[26] After his death, his views flourished under the generous financing of the House of Saud and initiated the current worldwide Salafi movement. Regardless, it should still be pointed out that the terms "Salafi" and Wahhabi are not necessarily synonymous. Wahhabism has been variously described as a subset of Salafism,[6] a derogatory synonym for Salafism, [27] or a formerly separate current of Islamic thought that appropriated "language and symbolism of Salafism" until the two became "practically indistinguishable" in the 1970s.[28]

In recent years considerable publicity has been given to the self-described Salafism of Al-Qaeda, and related groups calling for the killing of civilians, and opposed many Muslim groups and governments, including the Saudi government and Muslim Brotherhood.[29] Debate continues today over the appropriate method of reform, ranging from violent political Islamism to less politicized evangelism. Despite some similarities, the different modern groups that claim to be part of Salafism often strongly disapprove of each other and deny their Salafi character

[Abu Salma]

:salam:

The other side of the story:


What is a Salafi and What is Salafism?

The reader will notice that the word "Wahhabi" is always indented with quotation marks here at TheWahhabiMyth.com. Those who are labelled with this word do not themselves use this term, as it is used as a means of belittlement. The reasons for the rejection of this term are clearly outlined throughout this book. The correct way of referring to them is by terming them Salafis, as they are those who adhere to the way of the Salaf - the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his companions.

Following the way of the Salaf is the way which has been legislated in the Quran and Sunnah, the very sources of Islam. The Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) said to his daughter Fatimah: "Indeed, I am for you a blessed Salaf."[1]

When asked about which was the correct and acceptable way of understanding Islam, the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) replied by saying: "That which I and my companions are upon."[2]

Similarly, Allah says in the Quran that He is pleased with the companions "and also those who follow them exactly (in faith)."[3]

As such, He said regarding the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him security) and his companions:

"So if they believe as you (i.e. the Salaf) believe, they are indeed rightly guided."[4]

All of the orthodox scholars of Islam followed the way of the Salaf in understanding religion. Early scholars such as Imam al-Awzaa'ee, who died 157 years after the Prophet's emigration to Medina, said: "Be patient upon the Sunnah, and stop where the people (i.e. the Salaf) stopped, and say what they said, and refrain from what they refrained from, and follow the path of your righteous Salaf; for verily, sufficient for you is what was sufficient for them."[5]

Today, one of the famous Sunni schools of jurisprudence is named after a scholar named Abu Haneefah. Millions of Muslims all over the world ascribe themselves to his school of jurisprudence; those who the media would term "mainstream" Muslims. Regarding adherence to the Salafi methodology, he said, "Adhere to the narrations and way of the Salaf, and beware of newly invented matters (in religion), for all of it is innovation."[6]

The orthodox scholars who came after these early generations also followed the understanding of the Salaf in religious matters. Imam adh-Dhahabi said: "It is authentically related from ad-Daraqutni (a scholar from approximately 1,000 years ago) that he said: There is nothing more despised by me than 'ilmul-kalaam (innovated speech and rhetoric). I (adh-Dhahabi) say: The man never entered into ’ilmul-kalaam, nor did he enter into argumentation (i.e. philosophy)[7], he did not delve into that. Rather, he was Salafi (a follower of the Salaf)."[8]

The present day scholars who stick to the mainstream understanding of Islam also ascribe themselves to the way of the Salaf. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable of scholars alive today. Regarding Salafism, he made the following remark: "It is not a party from amongst the various parties… Hence Salafism is a group of people who are upon the way of the Salaf, upon what the Messenger (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his Companions were upon; and it is not a party from amongst the contemporary groups present today."[9]

The media claim that Salafis/"Wahhabis" believe that all those who do not follow their form of Islam are heathens" is a tall tale. Salafis believe that those Muslims who do not follow the understanding of the Salaf are not adhering to these and other clear texts. As such, they do not fall under the above-mentioned Quranic verse as being "rightly guided." Salafis distinguish between those who fall into religious innovation and those who fall into disbelief.

When considering the proofs which are contained within the Quran and Sunnah and the statements of all the orthodox scholars of Islam from the earliest generations to the present time, it becomes obvious that it is a great blunder for the media to refer to Salafism as being a new movement called "Wahhabism" which came about only two centuries ago during the time of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab in Saudi Arabia.

"So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?" [Quran 10:32]

- abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth


[1] al-Bukhaaree (no. 2652)

[2] Saheeh Sunan at-Tirmidhee (3/54)

[3] Quran 9:100

[4] Quran 2:137

[5] al-Hujjah (6/A-B) of Ismail Abu Fadhl

[6] Sawnul-Mantaq wal-Kalaam (p. 32) of As-Suyuti

This statement does not come from the standpoint of being narrow-minded. On the contrary, any open minded individual will research the authenticity of any claim that something constitutes revelation from the Creator. If this claim is found to be true and its texts require the person to submit to its decrees, it would not be from wisdom to then proceed to search for contradicting knowledge that leads to uncertainty. Most philosophers would not try to claim that philosophy leads to certain knowledge. For that reason, you will find some philosophers looking at objects and discussing whether or not they are actually in existence.

Philosophizing and leaving the texts and understanding of the Salaf is what leads groups like al-Qaeda to establish new methodologies in religion. Consequently, conjecture is something which is censured in Islam.

"They follow nothing but conjecture; and verily, conjecture avails nothing against the truth." [53:28]

[8] Siyar A'laamun-Nubalaa' (16/457) of Adh-Dhahabi

[9] Refer to the cassette, "at-Tahdheer min al-Bid'ah", second cassette, delivered as a lecture in Hawtah Sadeer (Saudi Arabia).

[10] Saudi Time Bomb? Analysis: Wahhabism, PBS Frontline (Nov. 15, 2001)

[celt islam]

:salam:

The other side of the story:

Asalaamualaykum.

Wasnt too long ago you were considering the salaafis kaffir due to their extremist literalist beliefs on ALLAH having two hands and a leg etc etc. and you even asked me if Shaykh AbdalQadir as Sufi considered them kaffir and what was my answer? i told you that he does not call any muslim a kaffir ever! but that salaafis are muslims but on a wrong path.

The Salaafi sects vary from country to country and also depending on who their scholars maybe.

The reality is this, the salaafis do not represent tradtional islamic teaching in fact they reject the teachings of the madhabs and claim that anyone following a madhab is a blind follower.

These neo-Khawarij salaafi movements are well-known for attacking the mainstream Muslims for following the established Madhabs (the traditional Schools of thought). They say you should not follow the Scholars but only the Quran and Sunnah (Hadiths) of the Prophet (SAW). Which tacitly implies the previous Scholars did not do that.

In any case this is a redundant argument as following the opinion of a scholar is a must, unless one is a scholar who is capable of deducing the rules from the Islamic texts.

The vast majority of the Muslims are not scholars. Therefore, the salaafis claim of following the Quran and Sunnah in reality means: do not follow the established Madhabs but follow our interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah, i.e. our Madhab. So instead of referring to the books of the traditional scholars like the Hanafi, Shafee, Maliki, Hanbali, Ghazali, and others, you should pickup ‘only’ the books of Al-Albani or Bin-Baaz etc etc

[Abu Salma]

Wasnt too long ago you were considering the salaafis kaffir due to their extremist literalist beliefs on ALLAH having two hands and a leg etc etc. and you even asked me if Shaykh AbdalQadir as Sufi considered them kaffir and what was my answer? i told you that he does not call any muslim a kaffir ever! but that salaafis are muslims but on a wrong path.

:ws:

Actually that's not totally correct. Someone (a Habashi) had told me that Wahhabis were kuffar and I wanted to know what the Murabitun view was. I never adopted the view of the so-called Wahhabis being kuffar, even when I thought they were not upon the correct understanding and I disagreed with a Naqshbandi Sufi I knew in not giving them Salaams (I continued to give them Salaams).

[celt islam]

:ws:

Actually that's not totally correct. Someone (a Habashi) had told me that Wahhabis were kuffar and I wanted to know what the Murabitun view was. I never adopted the view of the so-called Wahhabis being kuffar, even when I thought they were not upon the correct understanding and I disagreed with a Naqshbandi Sufi I knew in not giving them Salaams (I continued to give them Salaams).


Asalaamualaykum, Please note as i said Quote " Wasnt too long ago you were considering the salaafis kaffir "

In view of; taking into consideration is what i mean, i didnt mean that you did consider them kaffir lol which i knew u didnt but you did think about it no? lol

[Abdullah Ali al Hanafi]

Salamu Alaikum , Ya Muslimeen.

the Salafiyeen are our brothers in Islam.

they believe in the same Prophet
they believe in the same Kalima
they believe in the same Tawheed
they believe in the 5 Pillars of Islam
they believe in the same Quran
they differ of course in certain issues and concepts

but still they are our brothers.

some people highly respect , Imam Mohammed ibn abdul Wahab rahmatullah Alaih some will call him a reviver

some will not respect him. most are ignorant about him they dont understand his Dawah and Message.

some even rely on NON Muslim sources like some Fictional Story from a so called british Spy Hempner.

most people never studied the message of the noble imam ibn abdul Wahab
to understand you must study the root and not rely on rumours.

Imam ibn abdul Wahab fought the like Imam Rumi would call them ''Fake Sufis''

Imam ibn Abdul Wahab never fought Tasawwuf nor Sufism he even praised it as we can read from what his son said.

we must be very careful with Takfeer and not be Extremists like the Rafida and the Barlewis who call those who dont agree with them ''Wahabis'' and make takfeer on so called ''Wahabis''

its important that we muslims : Hanafi,Maliki,Shafii,Hanbalee,Salafi,Ashari,Maturi di ,Athari unite

this whole Wahabi concept is created by the British and Shia to slander the practicing muslims , Imam Ibn Abdul Wahab never started a movement called Wahabism nor did he call his Followers Wahabis. this is all used by the Media and the Shiites to divide the muslims , Ibn Abdul Wahab was a Hanbalee from Najd

Masalama

[JayshAllah]

The reality is this, the salaafis do not represent tradtional islamic teaching

And the Salafis say the same thing about you Asharis, who up until the seventh century were considered heretics and fought by the TRADITIONAL Hanbalis. But I guess those Hanbalis were not traditional, eh?

According to Ibn Asakir, who lived in the 7th Islamic century, the Asharis were a minority. This means that for half of the century, the Asharis were a minority...a fringe movement...If the Asharis were regarded as a heretical sect for the first 5 centuries (3rd to the 7th, for they weren’t even around before the 3rd century), by the entire Sunni world, banned from schools, expelled from cities and cursed on the mimbars, were the Sunni scholars of these five centuries misguided?


They say you should not follow the Scholars but only the Quran and Sunnah (Hadiths) of the Prophet (SAW). Which tacitly implies the previous Scholars did not do that.

Please do not lie.

No Salafi scholar has ever claimed that any of the scholars did not follow the Quran and the Sunnah... The Salafis in fact say that the scholars always advised to follow the Quran and Sunnah and that they called to that, so we call to that.

When a Salafi says not to blindly follow Imam Abu Hanifa [ra], then this is not out of disrespect to Abu Hanifa [ra]...your arguments are similar to the Christians who say that we Muslims disrespect Jesus [ra] because we say not to worship him...

The Salafis say don't blindly follow Abu Hanifa [ra] because he [ra] wouldn't want that nor called to that but rather called away from that.

Your argument that the Salafis insinuate against the scholars is a lie and academically dishonest, nothing more than a smear tactic.


In any case this is a redundant argument as following the opinion of a scholar is a must, unless one is a scholar who is capable of deducing the rules from the Islamic texts.

In fact, that's exactly what Salafis say. They say that the layman should follow a scholar, not a Madhab. In fact, the opinion that a layperson should follow a madhab has always been a minority opinion.


The vast majority of the Muslims are not scholars. Therefore, the salaafis claim of following the Quran and Sunnah in reality means: do not follow the established Madhabs but follow our interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah, i.e. our Madhab. So instead of referring to the books of the traditional scholars like the Hanafi, Shafee, Maliki, Hanbali, Ghazali, and others, you should pickup ‘only’ the books of Al-Albani or Bin-Baaz etc etc[/SIZE][/FONT]

You mentioned the Hanbalis. Please name the names of prominent Hanbali madressas and scholars in the world alive today which you consider traditional.

[mustajab]

And the Salafis say the same thing about you Asharis, who up until the seventh century were considered heretics and fought by the TRADITIONAL Hanbalis. But I guess those Hanbalis were not traditional, eh?

According to Ibn Asakir, who lived in the 7th Islamic century, the Asharis were a minority. This means that for half of the century, the Asharis were a minority...a fringe movement...If the Asharis were regarded as a heretical sect for the first 5 centuries (3rd to the 7th, for they weren’t even around before the 3rd century), by the entire Sunni world, banned from schools, expelled from cities and cursed on the mimbars, were the Sunni scholars of these five centuries misguided?

Reference needed and more proof if you can provide.

[amjedm]

The Salafis say don't blindly follow Abu Hanifa [ra] because he [ra] wouldn't want that nor called to that but rather called away from that.


:salam:

In answer to the above statement - the following is quoted from The Legal Status of Following a Madhab by Mufti Taqi Usmani (db). Page 96-98.


The Statements of Mujtahid Imams Themselves

Contentions that the Imams themselves have prohibited the following of their opinions until they have discovered the proofs and that if their opinions conflict with any Hadith, they should smite their opinions against the wall and practice the Hadith, are of course true. However to do justice to such statements, one would have to conclude that they are not addressed to people who do not possess the faculty of Ijtihad. Rather, they were appealing to those scholars who were capable of Ijtihad. Shah Waliyyullah of Delhi has summarised such statements thus:

"These statements can be assessed against those who have some ability to exercise Ijtihad - albeit in one single issue; or against those who have conclusively determined that the Prophet :saw: ordered this and prohibited that [and the issue is not abrogated]. This may be achieved by researching the corpus of the Hadith, the statements of those scholars who opposed and supported [the view in question] or this may be acquired by realising that many expert scholars have opposed the view in question which in itself can only be supported by analogy or deductin. If such is the case, then there is no reason to go against the Hadith of the Prohphet :saw:." 129

This meaning is clear. The Mujtahid Imams did not claim that Taqleed was not valid. Their own lives were filled with incidents and occasions where lay people cam to them with hundreds of questions to which they answered without volunteering any proofs. Taqleeds permissibilty was never questioned during the era of the Mujtahids. If such a practise was held to be invalid the Imams would never have allowed themselves to become it's tools. Several statments from the Imams categorically state Taqleed to be necessary for the non-Mujtahid. The following are a few examples:

"When the Mufti is such that he a Mujtahid, then the lay person must follow him, even if the Mufti has erred in his judgement. This is how Hasan has narrated from Imam Abu Hanifa; Ibn Rustum from Muhammad and Bashir ibn Waleed from Abu Yusuf." 130

Imam Abu Yusuf continues:

"The lay person must follow the jurists since he is not capable of understanding the Hadith independently." 131

Ibn Taymiyah reported that Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal used to:

"Instruct the lay person to ask Ishaaq, Abu Obaid, Abu Thaur and Abu Mus'ab. However, he used to prohibit his own companions like Abu Dawood, Uthman ibn Sa'eed, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Athrum, Abu Zar'ah, Abu Hatim and Muslim (among others) to follow anyone. He would say to them:

"You must follow the sources of the Qur'an and Sunnah". 132

This statement by Ibn Taymiyah makes it very clear that Taqleed was unsuitable only for those scholars/students who themselves were jurists and had the potential to become like their teachers in making decisions directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah. As for those who did not possess the requisite qualifications, they are strongly implored to follow a Mujtahid and practice Taqleed. In fact, Taqleed for the non-scholar was so overwhelmingly accepted amongst the scholars that only the Mu'tazlites disagreed with the idea. Shaykh Saifuddin Aamodi wrote:

"The lay person and the scholar who does not possess the ability to exercise Ijtihad - although they may possess some reliable skills in certain issues - must follow the opinion of a Mujtahid according to experts in principles and foundations (Usool).

Some Mu'tazilites of Baghdad have differed on this issue and have prohibited Taqleed even for these people." 133

Shaykh Khatib of Baghdad wrote:

"It has been narrated from certina Mu'tazlites that it is not permissible for a lay person to follow the opinion of a scholar until he knows the reasoning behind his opinion. This is wrong because the lay person has no recourse to understanding the reasoning until he has studied for several years; has actually participated in the discussions with jurists and other scholars; has developed an understanding for analogy and realised what is correct and what is not. For a lay person to go through all this is subjecting him to carry a burden which is beyond his capabilities and that is not incumbent upon him." 134

There has been a difference of opinion - among the Mujtahids - as to whether a person who is capable of Ijtihad can follow another's opinion. Khatib of Baghdad has narrated Abu Sufyan as saying that indeed he may do so and Imam Muhammad as saying that he may follow the opinion of someone who is more knowledgeable than he. 135

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah has also narrated this opinion from Imam Muhammed. Imam Shai'fee and Imam Ahmed both say that this not allowed at all. 136

129 - Hujjaatullah al-Baligah: vol. 1, page 155
130 - Kifayah, the Commentary on Hidayah in the chapter of Fasting
131 - Abu Yusuf cited previously from Hidayah: vol. 1, page 226
132 - Fatawa Ibn Taymiyah: vol. 2, page 240.
133 - Ihkaamul Ahkaam, by Aamodi: vol. 4, page 197 also in Mustasfa of Al-Ghazali: vol. 2, page 124
134 - Al-Faqith wal Mutafaqqih, by Khatib: vol. 2, page 69
135 - Ibid.
136 - Fatawa Ibn Taymiyah: vol. 2, page 24

:ws:

[Abu Salma]

Asalaamualaykum, Please note as i said Quote " Wasnt too long ago you were considering the salaafis kaffir "

:ws:

I never use "consider" to mean that in a context like that. When I say "I consider a Chrisitian to be a Kafir" that does not mean "I am thinking about the possibility of him being a Kafir". I would use it in the meaning "in my view, a Christian is a Kafir". So that is why I understood what I did from what you wrote.


In view of; taking into consideration is what i mean, i didnt mean that you did consider them kaffir lol which i knew u didnt but you did think about it no? lol[

I was confused at the time yes - hoping that what the Habashis claim was not true, but like I said, I never adopted their view, al-hamdulillâh.

[abuzainab]

Another typical discussion on slandering fellow Muslims. This is very typical of muslims that sections of quotes are being used to disprove others. We must learn that there is a method of debate and just slandering others is not debate.

A reformist movement or someone not strictly adhering to a Madhab is not neccessarily a Salafi or on the wrong path.
Secondly the debate on Salafism/Whabbism is well engineered by the enemies of Islam to let the Muslims fight and argue while they do their work.

There should be mature debates and we must learn to accept each other. One who believes in Allah, angels, books, Prophets of Allah, Qadr and Akhirah/Day of Judgement is a Muslim.
Let Allah decide on the Day of Judgement who is a Muslim or not.

[amjedm]

This is very typical of muslims that sections of quotes are being used to disprove others.

:salam:

If the above is referring to the quotation I've made then I'm answering the point put foward by the brother that the Imam's :rahma: used to disapprove of Taqleed.

On the other hand, if the quote is not referring to me, please ignore my post.

:ws:

[jeberti-by-choice]

besm allah,

i usually dont comment or make threads in most forums i joined but rather my interest is about more reading ppl's opinion's and thoughts,but since i joined this forum i couldnt stop releaising da non stop attack on saudi ppl callin them wahabisim either directly or indirectly,my uncle has been doing dawah since i can remember and recently on his trip back from congo,rwanda,malawi he couldnt stop praising da saudi brothers for their generosity there and their efforts,u might ask so what?just look at rwanda in 1993 muslims were under 1% now they r at 15% and a mosque gettin build on average of one a week,and they dont follow so called wahabisim but are taught what most sunni muslims around da world practise,now to congo did any1 know there is close to 15 million muslims in da congo?more than jordan,tunisia combined,now when he arrived there da saudi's were already there savin da muslim populations with books and basic needs,he learned while there that da vatican allocated 25billion dollars to catholise africa and congo muslims was one of the biggest targets if it wasnt for da saudis almost all of those muslims wouldve fallen in the vatican hand with no knowledge to fight against da vatican except with their muslim names,also thanx partly to da saudi generosity and dawa malawi is muslim majority.

frankly no country in da world do more to help muslims than saudia arabia,those so called wahabi who follow the mezhab of imam hanbali may allah be pleased with him are nothing but a western propaganda to split sunnah and if to those ppl that call them non muslims in here what are u doing for muslims around da world,and for those who think im a saudi i hate to disappoint u im not neither saudi or an arab just a muslim alhamdullallah who might through the years my ancestors were saved by a simple dawah from those so called wahabi's to preserve our commitment to allah and islam and what better gift to a person than showing him da right path or preserving his islam gods willing,maybe if it wasnt for their effort i wouldnt have been here.

salam wa aleykom.

[Imam Zaid Institute]

Assalaamu Alaykum

You are right, the Saudi's are doing alot of moves to spread Islam. That's very good of them. It's a money issue, and hence you don't see that much traditional Islam being spread, unfortunetly. The problem with the pseudo-Salafiyya, known as Wahhabiyya, is their Aqeedah and Khawarij attitude. They call the majority of Muslims as mushrikeen. That's where the problem lies.

[jeberti-by-choice]

Assalaamu Alaykum

You are right, the Saudi's are doing alot of moves to spread Islam. That's very good of them. It's a money issue, and hence you don't see that much traditional Islam being spread, unfortunetly. The problem with the pseudo-Salafiyya, known as Wahhabiyya, is their Aqeedah and Khawarij attitude. They call the majority of Muslims as mushrikeen. That's where the problem lies.


asslam wa alikum,

da point is the mezhab they follow is da most strict mezhab in sunnah islam "hanbali" thats why only 10% of da muslims follow it,every mezhab has its speciality like shafi and maliki r called the hadiths mazhab,hanafi qeyas and ijmah,hanbali r more focused on aqeeda and thats why they seem harsher but in reality they mostly say if u do such and such its not in fold of islam,but ppl assume they called them kufaar if thats da case 80% of ppl that attends hajj wont be allowed in makkah.in a way maybe i wouldnt want every muslim country to follow imam hanbali teachings bcoz of the scary image it may cause against attracting converts but i wouldnt want saudi to be open like egypt or turkey coz next thing u know there will be bars opened in there.

salam.


[MOD NOTE] Please do not use slangs, "da" amd "the".. there is only one letter difference.. please use proper english.

[woeuntothee]

Unfortunately, its not as simple as that, brother.

Read some articles on www.masud.co.uk to know more about the 'salafi'/'wahhabi' mindset, insha'Allah.

[abuhajira]

asslam wa alikum,

da point is the mezhab they follow is da most strict mezhab in sunnah islam "hanbali" thats why only 10% of da muslims follow it,every mezhab has its speciality like shafi and maliki r called the hadiths mazhab,hanafi qeyas and ijmah,hanbali r more focused on aqeeda and thats why they seem harsher but in reality they mostly say if u do such and such its not in fold of islam,but ppl assume they called them kufaar if thats da case 80% of ppl that attends hajj wont be allowed in makkah.in a way maybe i wouldnt want every muslim country to follow imam hanbali teachings bcoz of the scary image it may cause against attracting converts but i wouldnt want saudi to be open like egypt or turkey coz next thing u know there will be bars opened in there.

salam.


[MOD NOTE] Please do not use slangs, "da" amd "the".. there is only one letter difference.. please use proper english.

:salam:

The fact that they are salafi has nothing to do with staunchness, the same staunchness can be observed within the parameters of madhahib as well. We should not confuse the administrative issues with religious..

:ws:

[Skilly]

Asslamo Allaikum Brother,

If you confess to following Qur'aan & Sunnah then leave KALAM alone, my dear Brother.


Salam:

If you are accusing me of KALAM than I think you have no awareness.
I am not the one who's theology is based on KALAM..... so your word of caution is better directed towards Asharis and Maturidis.


Wassalam

@Soofi Saheb

THank's for your input. [clip: unneccesary]

Anyway thank's for you input, we don't wan't people doing high Jumps over graves do we? :cheesygri

[woeuntothee]

Edit: I apologize for my outburst - may Allah give me more patience to be able to properly deal with all situations and people, good and bad.

Silky, just have a bit of respect, if not for the Ulema of Islam, atleast for human beings older than you. These people have dedicated their lives to that which you dedicate your 'forum time' upon and have as a result accomplished great feats - So, regardless of your differing opinion with "Sunnipath, Keller, Gf Haddad"(May Allah Preserve them all), it is quite a harsh and unfair allegation for you to think that they are all dishonest in their intentions.

Allah guide us all.

[Skilly]

besm allah,

i usually dont comment or make threads in most forums i joined but rather my interest is about more reading ppl's opinion's and thoughts,but since i joined this forum i couldnt stop releaising da non stop attack on saudi ppl callin them wahabisim either directly or indirectly,my uncle has been doing dawah since i can remember and recently on his trip back from congo,rwanda,malawi he couldnt stop praising da saudi brothers for their generosity there and their efforts,u might ask so what?just look at rwanda in 1993 muslims were under 1% now they r at 15% and a mosque gettin build on average of one a week,and they dont follow so called wahabisim but are taught what most sunni muslims around da world practise,now to congo did any1 know there is close to 15 million muslims in da congo?more than jordan,tunisia combined,now when he arrived there da saudi's were already there savin da muslim populations with books and basic needs,he learned while there that da vatican allocated 25billion dollars to catholise africa and congo muslims was one of the biggest targets if it wasnt for da saudis almost all of those muslims wouldve fallen in the vatican hand with no knowledge to fight against da vatican except with their muslim names,also thanx partly to da saudi generosity and dawa malawi is muslim majority.

frankly no country in da world do more to help muslims than saudia arabia,those so called wahabi who follow the mezhab of imam hanbali may allah be pleased with him are nothing but a western propaganda to split sunnah and if to those ppl that call them non muslims in here what are u doing for muslims around da world,and for those who think im a saudi i hate to disappoint u im not neither saudi or an arab just a muslim alhamdullallah who might through the years my ancestors were saved by a simple dawah from those so called wahabi's to preserve our commitment to allah and islam and what better gift to a person than showing him da right path or preserving his islam gods willing,maybe if it wasnt for their effort i wouldnt have been here.

salam wa aleykom.


Assalamu alaikum wr wb

I advise you before reading falsehood of website like Masud to go the source itself...
His work is widely available and you can check it yourself. If you know arabic than you see his work in originality, or you can check some translation available.

He is a man that has been maligned so many timeand so many falsehood has been said about him.

Don't expect many here to defend him, even if someone lied about him, and they know it is a lie they would allow it and let it pass as long as it discourage you.

So my advise is go to the source and see for yourself since his work is available to us, and if you going to rely on the enemy of Ahul Ahl sunnah wa Jammah than know you would hardly get any honesty from them.

Wassalam

[Skilly]

Edit: I apologize for my outburst - may Allah give me more patience to be able to properly deal with all situations and people, good and bad.

Silky, just have a bit of respect, if not for the Ulema of Islam, atleast for human beings older than you. These people have dedicated their lives to that which you dedicate your 'forum time' upon and have as a result accomplished great feats - So, regardless of your differing opinion with "Sunnipath, Keller, Gf Haddad"(May Allah Preserve them all), it is quite a harsh and unfair allegation for you to think that they are all dishonest in their intentions.

Allah guide us all.

Assalamu alaikum wr wb

My accusation is not merely based on differing opinion as this thread shows. It is quite real and apparent, neither is it harsh and unfair.
This is not an isolated incident, and it is such a common kowledge I expect most student of knowledge to know this.

If they are not dishonest in their intention than you must concede they are ignorant.

Either way it show how unfit they are to be relied upon.

Wassalam

[woeuntothee]

As has been highlighted before - there is room for interperative difference upon the matter - further, if you've learnt anything from what Maulana Soofi Sb (Allah preserve him) has said, you'd realise the complexity of the matter, and how it is a matter for the ulema to discuss, not simpletons like you and me. Then for a person of your credibility (or lack thereof) to go further and slander our ulema calling them names is extremely puerile doesn't increase your status - inshaAllah, I hope you get banned from this forum for disturbing the peace that the moderators try so hard to maintain.

[woeuntothee]

Yeh, let him go to the 'source itself' so his heart can be polluted with bid'ati nonsense taking him closer to the edge of the Islamic fold. The simple way it can be explained is that salafis err from the MAINSTREAM interperation of the Quran and Sunnah as it has been explained for 1500 years. Unfortunately these guys only came around 200 years ago, which in itself should speak volumes of the position of this considerably new 'sect'.

You also have to realise that there are different brands of 'wahhabism' (Salafism). The least offensive is the one who claims to follow the Hambali madhab - although a lot of their contemporary rulings are against the madhab. The most offensive of the lot are the ones who believe Allah to have qualities that do not befit him (like He sits on a chair, He is bound by six directions, naouthubillah). You also have a group of them who believe that it is haram to follow a specific madhab which again is against the consensus of the Ulema who say that a layman must follow a madhab.

Ofcourse, this doesn't mean that wahhabis are bad people, i have a few friends who are salafi and they're great people masha'Allah. Similarly many christians are great people, but their beliefs are not correct.

Most people in the world are Christians who propogate their own way of life - in fact nowadays the Athiests seem to be the most vocal in propogation of thier 'religion'(or lack thereof) - DOES THAT MAKE THEM CORRECT? NO. Just shows that they have a lot of resources at their disposal and are utilising them to propogate their view. Saudi Arabia is rich with Petrol Dollars, and they can afford to go around building masjids, alhumdulillah - but with taht they are also propogating their version of islam, which is DIFFERENT in some vital poitns to the Islam followed by our Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and followed by the majority of the Muslim world.

Look at our Muslim world, everyone follows a madhab, except parts of saudi arabia and small groups in the western countries - the reason is as you've mentioned - they target weak communities where they can easily propogate their seriously LACKING version of islam (Weak communities like where there is a lot of war, or a minority of muslims, or confusion etc). Madhabs are followed in India, Pakistan, Turkey, Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Indonesia, Malaysia, EVERYWHERE there are many muslims and scholars who understand the deen, unlike the wahhabis.

End conclusion: Stay AWAY from Wahhabis/Salafis groups, and stick to the MAJORITY of the muslims, as the prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wasalam) ordered, and you won't go wrong.

[Abdurrahmaan]

Salaam,

I seem to be confused, you say that numbers do not matter:
"Most people in the world are Christians who propogate their own way of life - in fact nowadays the Athiests seem to be the most vocal in propogation of thier 'religion'(or lack thereof) - DOES THAT MAKE THEM CORRECT? NO."

Then you say:
"Look at our Muslim world, everyone follows a madhab"

Also, do most people in the Muslim world study fiqh, or do they just follow what their shaykh tells them?

You said:
"The most offensive of the lot are the ones who believe Allah to have qualities that do not befit him (like He sits on a chair..."
Sitting is not the same as Istiwaa, and throne is not the same as chair.

Is this not how Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) describes himself (Arrahman 'alal 'arsh istawaa)?

[Skilly]

Is this not how Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) describes himself (Arrahman 'alal 'arsh istawaa)?

Yes that is the point. They find allah(swt) offensive.

So they desbelieve in it by negating it.

Well we believe Allah Swt) is above his arsh

[Isaac1]

I have just about seen enough from the mentioned forum, discussed with and even read from "certain" Salafis enough hatred for those that are not from their elite to last them an entire life time. Now I have tried to get certain material deleted by the mods, especially when scholars have been referred to as DOGS and in instances where people have been condemmned to HELL, for something which they do no agree with.

Now I dont know about anybody else on this forum, but i think I great deal of adab must be attained reagrdless if you agree or disagree with the scholar. And what amazes me is that these people claim to follow the Salaf. You know how does calling a well respected scholar of Sunni Islam, [no names required] a DOG benefit anynone?

Just read for yourself some of the fitnah which is going around. And if you ask me why I post this, ask yourself would you wish for someone to talk ill of your mother or father, without being corrected? Now I try my best to uphold the respect which scholars deserve be it from my opinion or opinion I do not agree with. The least people can do is not to ridicule them on anopen forum for all to read and make fun off.

We have a duty to defend the honour of those that are maligned publicly.

.................................................. .......................

[IbnShafiq]

The mods should ban you

[IbnShafiq]

Salaam,

I seem to be confused, you say that numbers do not matter:
"Most people in the world are Christians who propogate their own way of life - in fact nowadays the Athiests seem to be the most vocal in propogation of thier 'religion'(or lack thereof) - DOES THAT MAKE THEM CORRECT? NO."

Then you say:
"Look at our Muslim world, everyone follows a madhab"

Also, do most people in the Muslim world study fiqh, or do they just follow what their shaykh tells them?

You said:
"The most offensive of the lot are the ones who believe Allah to have qualities that do not befit him (like He sits on a chair..."
Sitting is not the same as Istiwaa, and throne is not the same as chair.

Is this not how Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) describes himself (Arrahman 'alal 'arsh istawaa)?


yes sitting is not the same as istiwa so whats the problem here.

"Yes that is the point. They find allah(swt) offensive."

I find YOU offensive and youshould be banned for what you say. Who are you talking about? Who finds Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala offensive? Since you came to this forum you have been starting problems with statements like this one.
_________________________________!!!!!!!!!

[woeuntothee]

Salaam,

I seem to be confused, you say that numbers do not matter:
"Most people in the world are Christians who propogate their own way of life - in fact nowadays the Athiests seem to be the most vocal in propogation of thier 'religion'(or lack thereof) - DOES THAT MAKE THEM CORRECT? NO."

Then you say:
"Look at our Muslim world, everyone follows a madhab"

Also, do most people in the Muslim world study fiqh, or do they just follow what their shaykh tells them?

Assalam Alaikum brother,

There are two things that is being expressed - Firstly, the most vocal group of people, or the most seemingly 'active' or 'effective' group need not be the correct group. It simply means that they have more resources available at that time - i.e. petrodollars / governmental control / media etc (hence the christian example although i admit i should've articulated it better).

Secondly, within islam the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) told us that we must stick to the majority of the ummah('s scholarship) - who happen to be ashari/maturidi madhabis.

Muslims have a duty to learn/study basic fiqh, most don't explicity study it doesn't change the fact that they still follow legitimate ulema who have studied Fiqh of Madahibs, not 'fiqhensteins', as you would clearly see if you look past the Western Fast Food Islam.


You said:
"The most offensive of the lot are the ones who believe Allah to have qualities that do not befit him (like He sits on a chair..."
Sitting is not the same as Istiwaa, and throne is not the same as chair.

Is this not how Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) describes himself (Arrahman 'alal 'arsh istawaa)?

That is not the understanding of the Ulema - we practice Taweel or tafwid - perferably tafwid.
Tafwid, as Maulana Nuh Keller (Allah preserve him) puts it is:

"The All-merciful is ‘established’ (istawa) upon the Throne" (Koran 20:5)

does not enable one to say that "Allah is ‘established’ upon Throne," or that "The All-merciful is upon the Throne" or anything else besides "The All-merciful is ‘established’ (istawa) upon the Throne." Full stop.

Taweel, which is assigning figurative meanings to the mutashabihat was also practiced by the Sahaba and Salaful saleh - (I suspect especially because of similar attitudes to that shown by the literalist salafis).

According to the Aqida of Muslims, there is just no room for literalism in some attributes of Allah, as promoted by some wahhabi/salafis. Unfortunately, it serves no purpose except to blur the explicit difference between our and the pagan understanding of God.

Here's a good article on the issue by Maulana Nuh Keller (May Allah preserve him): Literalism and the Attributes of Allah (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/littlk.htm)

[Abdurrahmaan]

salaam,

"Secondly, within islam the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) told us that we must stick to the majority of the ummah('s scholarship) - who happen to be ashari/maturidi madhabis."

The majority of Muslims point up when referring to Allah, the majority of muslims make dua with the palm of thier hands facing up, the majority of muslims believe that Allah can hear them when they make dua, the majority of muslims feel that if they are more humble and beg in their dua then their dua is more likely to be accepted...am I right?

I follow the majority of Muslims who believe that Allah is hearing us, and seeing us right now. I follow the majority of Muslims who feel that Allah is most wise.
Do not the majority of muslims feel this way?

[Abdurrahmaan]

As for your link to the article on literalism...

1). On the authority of Abi Yunus Saleem bin Jabeer, Mawlah of Abu Hurayrah that he said, “I heard Abu Hurayrah reciting the verse, “Surely Allah commands you to make over trusts..” until, “surely Allah is Seeing, Hearing” (Annisa’a: 58) He said, “I saw the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) put his hand on his ears and eye.” Abu Hurayrah (radhiallahu ‘an) said, “I saw the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) recite this verse and do that.” (Abu Dawood, Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Habban, At-tabarani, Ibn Mindah)
Ibn Yunus said, that Al-Muqre’e said, “Surely Allah is Seeing, Hearing, means that Allah sees and hears.” Abu Dawood said, “And this is a refutation of the Jahmees.”
In this hadeeth we see that the attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) are to be taken literally. This doesn’t mean that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) is similar to the creation, He is above that. As Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) said, “there is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees” So He affirms hearing and seeing to himself, while negating that it is like any creation.

2). On Ubaydallah bin Maqsim that he was looking at Abdullah bin ‘Umar talking about how the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) talked and said, “Allah (Azza Wa Jal) will take the heavens and earth with his hands and will say, “I am Allah” and he will straighten his fingers and then constrict them, and then say, “I am the King” when I looked to the pulpit I saw it shaking because of something moving under it, to the point that I said it will not fall with the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ) standing on it” (Muslim)
From this we see the affirmation of Allah clenching and straightening his fingers without comparing it to that of the creation.

3). In a long hadeeth on the authority of Abdullah bin Mas’ood (radhiallahu ‘an) that the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said in the end of this hadeeth, “The slave asks Allah to enter him into Jannah, Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) says, “Would you be happy if I gave you from Jannah similar to the earth and what is in it?” The slave says, “Do you mock me and you are the Mighty Lord”—the narrator then says that Abdullah bin Mas’ood then laughs, and then says, “Why don’t you ask me why I am laughing?” They said, “Why did you laugh?” Ibn Mas’ood said, “The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) laughed, then said to us, “Why don’t you ask me why I am laughing?” We said, “Why are you laughing of Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam)?” He (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said, “Allah laughs when this person says, “Do you mock me and you are the Mighty Lord?” (Ahmad, Abu Awanah, Abu Yahla, Ashaashe, Attabarani, Al hHkim)
This hadeeth shows the literalness of Allah’s laughing.

4). On the authority of Jabir (radhiallahu ‘an) that the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) used to increase in saying, “Oh changer of the hearts, make my heart firm on your religion.” Some of the Sahaba said to the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam), “Do you fear for us after we believed in you, and what you brought?” He said, “Indeed the heart is between 2 fingers from the fingers of Allah (Azza Wa Jal)” he said like this, and Abu Ahmad moved his fingers. (Abu Ya’lah, Tabare, Addarqatne, ibn Minda)
This shows the literalness of Allah’s fingers.

5). On the authority of Hammad bin Salama that he said, “The fingers have been affirmed on the authority of Anis bin Malik on the Prophet when Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) said, “And when his Lord appeared to the mountain.” He said, “Like this” And he showed a piece of his little finger. My father said that Mu’adh related this to us, and Hameed Attaaweel said to him, “What do you want from this oh Abu Muhammad--- or, does this confirm the fingers?” He said so he hit him in his chest with a powerful blow and said, “And who are you oh Hameed? And what are you oh Hameed? Anis bin Malik relates this to me on the authority of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) and you say, “What do you want from this?!”

6). On Abbas (radhiallahu ‘an) that he said, “A Jew passed by the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) and the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said to him, “Oh Jew, tell us something.” So the Jew said, “What do you say Abu Qasim about when Allah takes the heavens on this, the earth on this, the water on this, the mountains on this, and all of the creation on this.” And Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Assilt pointed to his little finger for the first one then to the next finger until he reached the thumb. And Allah revealed, “No just estimate have they made of Allah, such as is due to Him.” (Tirmidhee classified it as strange but authentic, Ahmad, Ibn Khuzama and others)
And Abdullah said in “Assunnah” I heard my father may Allah have mercy on him say, “Yahya bin Sa’eid told us of the hadeeth of Sufyan on Al ‘Amash on Mansoor on Ibraheem on Abeed on Abdullah on the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) that he said, “Indeed Allah holds the heavens on his fingers.” My father may Allah have mercy on him said, “Yahya showed us with his fingers, going from finger to finger until he reached the last one.” (Bukhari and Muslim)
These affirm that Allah has fingers, as well as their literalness, without comparing them to the fingers of the creation.

7). Harith bin Suwayd said, “I entered on Abdullah while he was sick, he gave us two talks, one about himself, and the other a hadeeth on the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) where he said, “Allah is happier with repentance of his slave than a person who is in the desert, and with him is his animal which has all his food and drink, so he sleeps, and when he wakes he finds his animal gone, then he looks for it and finally stops from thirst and says, “I will return to my former place and sleep until I die.” So he puts his head down to die, and when he wakes he sees his animal with his food and drink still on it. So Allah is happier with the repentance of his slave, than this man would be with finding his animal.” (Bukhari and Muslim)
And this hadeeth affirms the attribute of happiness to Allah, and shows its literalness.

8). Abu Razeen (radhiallahu 'an) said, "The Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu
`alayhi wa sallam) said, "Our lord laughs from His slaves' desperateness
although His relief is near." I said, "Oh Messenger, the Lord laughs?" He
said, "Yes." I said: "We will never miss out on goodness from a lord who
laughs" (Ahmad, Ibn Majah, Ateyalsee, and others)
From this we know that the companion understood the attribute of Allah
laughing and its literalness, and it shows good and mercy.

9). On Jabir (radhiallahu ‘an) in the long hadeeth about the Prophet’s (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) Hajj, from the speech on Arafah he said, “And indeed I left for you something of which you will not be misguided if you held to it, the Book of Allah, and you ask from me, so what will you do?” They said, “We bear witness that you gave us the message and advised us.” So he said while pointing his index finger to the sky, “Oh Allah bear witness, Oh Allah bear witness.” three times. (Muslim)
This hadeeth proves that Allah is above the heavens with the pointing of the Prophet towards the sky.

[woeuntothee]

The Allah ta'ala of the muslims, the Allah of Adam (alayhisalam) to Ibrahim (alayhisalam) to Muhammad (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) does not resemble His creation... we're not pagans.

SubhanAllah - wasn't abdul Wahhab supposed to eradicate shirk bidah kufr etc

[Ahmet_T]

They find allah(swt) offensive.

I find your referring to Allah in the lowercase as offensive.

Where is the gong or the clown with the broom when you need him.

[...:::sandal:::...]

بسم الله الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على آله و صحبه و من والاه

As-Salaamu Alaikum wa RahmatUllahi wa Barakaatuh

Brother Abdurrahmaan said,

salaam,

"Secondly, within islam the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) told us that we must stick to the majority of the ummah('s scholarship) - who happen to be ashari/maturidi madhabis."

The majority of Muslims point up when referring to Allah, the majority of muslims make dua with the palm of thier hands facing up, the majority of muslims believe that Allah can hear them when they make dua, the majority of muslims feel that if they are more humble and beg in their dua then their dua is more likely to be accepted...am I right?

I follow the majority of Muslims who believe that Allah is hearing us, and seeing us right now. I follow the majority of Muslims who feel that Allah is most wise.
Do not the majority of muslims feel this way?



If those involved don't mind, I would like to say a few words.


As is well known, there is physical highness. And there are abstract highnesses (highness of rank, honor, status, value-numeric or otherwise, sovereignty, etc.). An example of the second is a person who is standing addressing a reclining king by saying “your highness” even though he would be physically higher than the king. The first highness which is the physical one, is what the so-called "salafis" of today affirm for Allah SWT, along with the Jews, Christians, Five Percenters, Nation of Islam (saying Allah came down in the form of Farad Muhammad) unless they've abandoned that since, the Karraamiyyah (a famous group of anthropomorphists), the Mujassimah (anthropomorphists in general), the believers in Greek Mythology (gods of Mt. Olympus in the sky), and others. Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah affirm the second type. We do say that Allah is over His throne, but that being over the throne does not have to mean He is physically over it the way some physical thing is over something else. The throne is a creation of Allah. He is the Lord of the throne and the throne is His slave. He is over it in an abstract way, the way a Lord is over His subordinate but to a degree beyond calculation. To claim literal meanings like "sitting" or "suspended over" is to say that Allah is parallel to His throne. Yet how can this be when Allah is unparalleled in His Essence, Qualities and Actions. They believe in a Lord parallel to His creation. We believe in a Lord unparalleled.

People point upward with their hands, heads or other physical objects to indicate “highness”. This is because in the physical language of gesture, “highness” whether physical or abstract, is indicated by pointing upward. Since people’s hands are inarticulate, it cannot be discerned by pointing alone if one means to indicate physical highness, abstract highness, or both. Hence this cannot be used as evidence to say that the majority of Muslims believe that Allah SWT is a huge individual sitting on a throne above the sky in the form of Adam AS. This would make Jews and Christians believers with correct aqeedah since they refer to Allah SWT as “the man upstairs” and “our heavenly father” in a LITERAL sense.

It would also affirm that the Jews were right when they said that Allah SWT after creating the heavens and earth in six days sat down on the throne and putting His right leg on His left reclined saying “No one can sit down this way besides me” since after all, according to Abdurrahmaan and the like minded, Allah is not just above the throne, he sits on it.

The Christians would also be safe to say that Allah SWT created the heavens and earth in six days and rested on the seventh. These brothers just went a step further and specified what exactly He rested on. If a book is resting on a table, that means it’s sitting there. How then will they nullify the meth-heb of the Christians concerning the Essence of Allah, when they also agree that Allah Ta’aala rested on the throne (sat down on it) upon completing the creation of the heavens and earth? Or maybe they’re in agreement!? Allah knows best!

Umar ibn al Khattab Radiy Allaahu Anhu was right when he stated, “Whoever failed to recognize Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) will fail to recognize Islam.”

And another said,


و بضدها تتميز الأشياء

And by their opposites, things are recognized.

As for the raising of hands during supplication, we are all beggars to Allah as Allah SWT has said:


يأيها الناس أنتم الفقراء إلى الله والله هو الغني الحميد

O Mankind, you are the needy of Allah while Allah is the Independent, the Deserving of all Praise.




Raising the hands while begging is the practice of any beggar intent on receiving something. So if you ever see a beggar begging people for food with both his/her hands extended facing down, please let us know.


Furthermore, we all believe that Allah SWT sees and hears everything that we do when we do it. But what Abdurrahmaan apparently means is what so many other wahhabis mean when they say “what is Allah doing right now?” Just because we are bound by the limits of time and space does not mean that the same applies to Allah SWT. So why must He be in “real time”? Is it because we are? What He does effects His creations, not Himself. So why do you, the critics of Imam Abu Hanifa RAH and other Fuqahaa (Jurists) for making Qiyas, why do YOU make Qiyas (analogy) on the Self, Qualities, and Actions of Allah SWT that do not resemble anything that you know?? Then after you’ve portrayed a physical deity moving and reacting in real time, you want to throw in the disclaimer “but not as you can imagine!”


Then Abdurrahmaan went on to say:

I follow the majority of Muslims who believe that Allah is hearing us, and seeing us right now. I follow the majority of Muslims who feel that Allah is most wise.
Do not the majority of muslims feel this way?


First of all, the majority of Muslims are laymen. That’s who you have just affirmed that you follow. Laymen. Al Hamdu lillah that you have clarified for us what your leaders and scholars are. I wanted to say it. You took the burden off me. Thank you.


Secondly, I would like those concerned to take a good look and compare what woeuntothee said to what Abdurrahmaan said.


Woeuntothee said, -key word- SCHOLARSHIP:

“We must stick to the majority of the ummah('s scholarship)”

Whereas Abdurrahmaan, clearly misunderstanding what woeuntothee said, as if it went clear over his head, as if woeuntothee was slam-dunking on a midget, began to answer a question that was never asked:

The majority of Muslims point up when referring to Allah, the majority of muslims make dua with the palm of thier hands facing up, the majority of muslims believe that Allah can hear them when they make dua, the majority of muslims feel that if they are more humble and beg in their dua then their dua is more likely to be accepted...am I right?

I follow the majority of Muslims who believe that Allah is hearing us, and seeing us right now. I follow the majority of Muslims who feel that Allah is most wise.
Do not the majority of muslims feel this way?

Wow! What a recipe! Just:

1. Mix a quart of -Totally rejecting scholarship of the last 11 centuries after the Salaf RAH
2. Add 2 scoops of-Becoming a literalist totally incapable of using deductive reasoning
3. Then spice it up with-Follow the masses of laymen like yourself who have never sat to learn aqidah with teachers that have a sanad (chain) of Shuyukh leading back to the Salaf.

Thats what they want us to eat and thats what they are trying worldwide to stuff down our throats. I tell them like I said in Ramadan, "Inni Saa'im Inni Saa'im" I'm fasting, I'm fasting! May Allah save us and give us all Wisdom. Ameen

[Musleemah]

"You'll be back"--Words of a Shaikh to a person who left him to be a salafi. And yes, he did come back.

May Allah keep our brother Said Bak steadfast on haqq !

[Julaybib]

Salaam's

They seem to attack, anyone and everyone including fellow Salaafis. Shaykh Salman Al Awdah, Yasir Qadhi and Maulana Abdul Hadi Umari leader Of the Ahle Hadith. all get a Hammering.

[Musleemah]

So did you turn madkhali, suroori, qutbi, takfiri or ...?

he is athari/Salafi/Sunni
no other attached labels

[Ahmet_T]

We should certainly abstain from that recipe. ;)

[...:::sandal:::...]

I find your referring to Allah in the lowercase as offensive.

Where is the gong or the clown with the broom when you need him.

sweep sweep sweep ;)

[Ahmet_T]

My advice would be to stay away. There is no benefit there. None.

[...:::sandal:::...]

بسم الله الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على آله و صحبه و من والاه



As-Salaamu Alaikum wa RahmatUllahi wa Barakaatuh

Abdurrahmaan, after those hadeeth let's go where you want to take us!

Let's go totally literal and see where it takes us!


Abdurrahmaan, or any other "salafis" that take all things LITERAL, whats the daleel that Allah is:

1. not a male, because the LITERAL meaning of huwa when used for a living thing is "he". Furthermore only the male gender (never female) is used for Allah in the Qur'an and Sunnah when the singular form is used so this would mean in your meth-theb of literalism that Allah is a man (wa na'uthu billah) if not, where is the proof from your meth-heb?

2. not more than one, because the LITERAL meaning of NAHNU is we. We LITERALLY means more than one speaker and to say it means anything else is to take the word out of it's original meaning to a meaning of status, or greatness or sovereignty and that is Ta'weel . And Allah referred to Himself as "WE" all throughout the Qur'an.

3. Where is the proof that the Prophet SAW said that Tawheed is three parts, tawheed al Uluhiyyah, tawheed ar rububiyyah, and tawheed al asmaa was sifaat. And that hellfire will cease to exist one day.


And since you wahabis are the hadeeth specialists, please only cite SOUND proofs. Now, that shouldn't be too hard for you who call yourselves ahlul hadeeth and ahlul athar.

May Allah save us from the deviations of those who don't understand. AMEEN.

[Abdurrahmaan]

salaam,

"People point upward with their hands, heads or other physical objects to indicate “highness”."

So when people mention a king, do they point up, whats you're proof for this? If it was meant to mean "abstract highness" then why point towards the sky? If I tell someone which way the qiblah is and I point, what does that mean?

"according to Abdurrahmaan and the like minded, Allah is not just above the throne, he sits on it."

??? I said two posts ago that sitting is not the same as istiwa...how did you come about this conclusion???

Mentioning the belief of Christians and Jews is not proof.


"Furthermore, we all believe that Allah SWT sees and hears everything that we do when we do it."
"Then after you’ve portrayed a physical deity moving and reacting in real time,"

Contradictory, either you need to be more clear, or you are confused in your beliefs.

"Follow the masses of laymen like yourself who have never sat to learn aqidah with teachers that have a sanad (chain) of Shuyukh leading back to the Salaf."

I told you the issues on which I follow the majority of muslims, very basic issues of Aqidah, so does this mean that you believe the majority of muslims are on the incorrect aqidah? You see, I can proudly say that majority of muslims have the same aqidah as I do, not as advanced and with maybe minor mistakes, but when taken to a basic level, our beliefs coincide. If you say that the majority of muslims are on the incorrect aqidah, then only you and your small splinter group are correct.

If you are going to debate, please debate with proofs, not with insults of slam-dunking and recipes.

[Mods: Sunni Forum Rules:
2.19 Avatars CANNOT contain faces or outlines of people, including cartoon drawings. Nor can they contain weapons, or imply any hatred to any group of people/religion. Avatars containing images related to movies, musicians, etc., are also not allowed. Such avatars will be removed. sunniforum.com reserves the right to remove any avatar deemed to be inappropriate. This also applies to any photographs or pictures in signatures, and the like in the main body of any post.]

[woeuntothee]

JazakAllah kheir Sandal for your insightful and sweeping posts :).


??? I said two posts ago that sitting is not the same as istiwa...how did you come about this conclusion???

Well:


You said: "He sits on a chair..."
Sitting is not the same as Istiwaa, and throne is not the same as chair.

Is this not how Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) describes himself (Arrahman 'alal 'arsh istawaa)?

So, No - that's Not how Allah describes himself ('that' being "He sits on a chair"). Your understanding of "Arrahman alal arshistawa" is incorrect.



You see, I can proudly say that majority of muslims have the same aqidah as I do, not as advanced and with maybe minor mistakes, but when taken to a basic level, our beliefs coincide.
LOL! subhanAllah, everyone has minor mistakes, except you eh? :D

[Abu Salma]

May Allah keep our brother Said Bak steadfast on haqq !


he is athari/Salafi/Sunni
no other attached labels

:salam:

:jazak:

[laughinglion]

:salam:

One should not make one's Islam an object of arguementation.

[Abu Salma]

:salam:

One should not make one's Islam an object of arguementation.

:ws:

Indeed. That's what I fell into and ended up leaving the pure Salafi understanding. Now I am back and may Allah :taala: cause us to die while we are upon what the Salaf were upon.

[Pr1nce]

You are confused. There was no need to make declarations such as these.

[Abdurrahmaan]

salaam,

If you could please explain to us why you made the change.
Jazakallahukhair

[...:::sandal:::...]

بسم الله الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على آله و صحبه و من والاه

As-Salaamu Alaikum wa RahmatUllahi wa Barakaatuh


salaam,

"People point upward with their hands, heads or other physical objects to indicate “highness”."

So when people mention a king, do they point up, whats you're proof for this?

If the king is physically on earth, they would point directly at him. But something nonphysical like numbers, why do we say that 2 is a higher number than 1 when neither of them are in a physical place? Dosen't highness have to mean physical highness according to your understanding?

If it was meant to mean "abstract highness" then why point towards the sky?

Because of the fact that pointing upward simply denotes highness, no more no less. It's being abstract highness is not understood by the pointing itself, but by something else, by recognition of whose highness is being indicated. Since we know that there is nothing like unto Allah, why are we even having this conversation to begin with? The type of pointing that you want to affirm means a physical highness i.e. only applies to a physical being. As was stated, the hand cannot talk to say which one it means. And since you will no longer be able to tell Allah on the day of Judgment that you never heard the truth about these matters I advise you to please read these responses carefully, I explained this point about highness clearly in my first reply, my time does not allow for repetition.

If I tell someone which way the qiblah is and I point, what does that mean?

Exactly, that's my point exactly, it would mean the ka'bah is at the end of your point. The ka'bah is a physical object, is Allah? Your pointing would mean that the physical Ka'bah is at the end of your point. Here you go again with this QIYAS that is WAAY out of context. Please tell me, do you believe Allah SWT a creation?? If not, then WHY DO YOU FEEL SO COMFORTABLE COMPARING HIM TO HIS CREATIONS TO AFFIRM SIMILARITIES WHILE KNOWING THERE IS NOTHING LIKE UNTO HIM??


"according to Abdurrahmaan and the like minded, Allah is not just above the throne, he sits on it."

??? I said two posts ago that sitting is not the same as istiwa...how did you come about this conclusion???

I was going to answer this with your ambiguous qoute but Al Hamdu lillah, Br. woeuntothee already did, so Jazaahullahu Khairan.



Mentioning the belief of Christians and Jews is not proof.

Is this a response? Can you please tell us how your belief system about the "Self" of Allah is different? Mentioning the belief of the Christians and Jews is sufficient proof and I mentioned why. By their opposites, things are recognized, and the statement of Umar RAA. Please read more carefully. Comparing what the people of Baatil say to the people of Haqq can help a person see and appreciate the truth. Not only that but RasoolUllah SallAllahu Alaihi wa Sallam informed us that this ummah would follow the ways of the Christians and Jews step by step until if they went into a lizard hole we would follow them in. Now whose belief is coincides with the "man upstairs" and the "heavenly father" honestly, ours or yours? I also forgot to mention the biggest group of kuffar on the face of the earth, and the most to be in Hell: Ya'juj and Ma'juj. They also believed that Allah SWT is LITERALLY over the skies in a way that doesn't befit His majesty. So they shot arrows into the sky that came back down with blood. So were they believers when they thought that these arrows, if they went far enough could reach Allah? Or are you ready to read some Ash'ari and Maturidi books of aqeedah?


"Furthermore, we all believe that Allah SWT sees and hears everything that we do when we do it."
"Then after you’ve portrayed a physical deity moving and reacting in real time,"

Contradictory, either you need to be more clear, or you are confused in your beliefs.

ًLiteralists. When here does not apply to Allah but to us. When I said this I meant if it actually becomes a reality and comes to pass that we do it, then it is something seen and heard by Allah. If you substitute the "when we" with "if we actually", you will understand what I meant. The Arabic word mataa is used like this. I thought you might understand that if you read a little further. Now I see that I had better simplify my expressions even more. And on that note, I believe there's a kiddy song that goes, "she'll be comin' 'round the mountain when she comes." Furthermore, the confused one in reality is you if you don't know that second line:

"Then after you’ve portrayed a physical deity moving and reacting in real time,"

Why didn't you respond to that? Do you know the answer? By the way, why would you focus on an apparent contradiction based on the usage of a word while the rest of the paragraph explained exactly what I meant and didn't mean. A person does such whom does not have answers.

"Follow the masses of laymen like yourself who have never sat to learn aqidah with teachers that have a sanad (chain) of Shuyukh leading back to the Salaf."

I told you the issues on which I follow the majority of muslims, very basic issues of Aqidah, so does this mean that you believe the majority of muslims are on the incorrect aqidah?

No, of course not. This is what the Wahhabis say. They go so far as to say that the majority of scholars of Tafseer, Hadeeth, Fiqh, Lughah, etc. were deviants in terms of aqidah. If you are a "salafi", and your scholars say this, then I testify that they are laymen for if they had reached our Shuyukhs' level of knowledge, they would have understood their conclusions and recognized their validity.

Furthermore, it is clear that the laymen I referred to were the wahabi teachers, not the majority of the Muslims, because the majority of the Muslims do not divulge in the topics of aqeedah the wahabis divulge into. So how can you claim them? They, like the early Salaf, do not look for hadeeths mentioning body parts seeking to single them out and focus on them. They read the text to understand how it applies to them and their actions, not the "self" of Allah. So the Salaf as-Saalih and the common Muslims follow the safer path by taking the texts as they come. And in the context they came in, while practicing it's injunction.


You see, I can proudly say that majority of muslims have the same aqidah as I do, not as advanced and with maybe minor mistakes, but when taken to a basic level, our beliefs coincide.

On the contrary, the laymen representing the majority of the Muslims read the ayaat and ahaadeeth that you build the foundations of your deen upon and kept going, not cutting and pasting all the references to hand, face, shin, fingers, etc and focusing on them. Those few of them influenced by your group had to be taught and trained to notice and look for references to eyes, hands, a shin, a face, etc. otherwise, they would have stayed like the Salaf as Saalih, who did not attempt to define Allah through these descriptions but just took the texts as they came while implementing the good actions the texts invited toward.



If you say that the majority of muslims are on the incorrect aqidah, then only you and your small splinter group are correct.

Subhaanallah, are you really a "salafi"? You sound like one of us! This is exactly what we say to "salafis" when they use the hadeeth about the 73 sects to try to prove that the 72 that are astray represent the majority of the Ummah (basically whoever they can paste a label on- Ash'ari, Maturidi, Tablighi, Ikhwaani, Deobandi, Kawthari, Mawdoodi, Mu'tazili, Shi'i, Hizbee, Murji'i, etc. etc.) are all astray and that their little band is saved. Thereafter, they go and say they're part of the "Saved Sect". Again, Christians are the only other group that proudly boast "I've been saved" believing that Jesus died for their sins while the true Salaf RAH were ALL afraid that they were Munafiqeen! Umar RAA used to say, "Woe to my Mother, she shouldn't have given birth to me!" He didn't go shouting in the streets, "Hey, look at me, I'm one of the ten guaranteed Jannah!"

If you are going to debate, please debate with proofs, not with insults of slam-dunking and recipes.

Ohh, I'm sorry you felt insulted by the midget analogy, but frankly I would rather have that analogy in my book of deeds than the Ka'bah analogy you used for Allah SWT. The analogy I said only offended you, a creation, while the analogy you gave for Allah is even more far fetched and repugnant if you only knew. Brother, don't you see how you are insulting our intelligence by inviting us to inclusively literalize our sacred texts. Why do you wahabis invade everything? Don't they have enough wahabi forums already?

Have you ever stopped to think how many muslims worldwide are feeling insulted by the fitnah of the Wahabis - Intentionally not returning salaams, not shaking brothers' hands (leaving them hanging because they're "deviants"), telling brothers who are not on their minhaj "I hate you for the sake of Allah", labeling masjids "masjid diraar" and forbidding people from praying in them, while prayer is happening inside the masjids praying outside of the masjids making a separate salat on the sidewalk behind another imam showing the non-muslims our division, taking masjids from Imams by force with guns and weapons, forcefully rolling up brothers' pant legs while they're in salaat, spitting to the left and smashing feet hard extending elbows in ruku' and sujud to the next brothers face during congregational salat, the list goes on. I really fail to understand how wahhaabis find so much time to invade Sunni websites when their own group needs so much Islaah.

[mujahideenryder]

as-Salaamu Alaikum wa Rahmaatullaah Bro. Said,

I don't really care what you are, but I am offended that you called the people of tasawwuf ahlul biddah. There is no need for that.

You should read the "Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation (http://muslimmatters.org/2007/09/22/pledge-of-mutual-respect-and-cooperation/)" in which many scholars and respected Muslims in the ummah from all three Sunni doctrines (Ashari, Athari and Maturidi) signed declaring that we as an ummah should stay away from attacks, claims of devaition upon each other and takfiring of each other.

May Allaah azza wa jaal guide us all on the straight path. Ameen!

[Abdurrahmaan]

salaam,

Subhanallah, the majority of your reply was emotional rants about wahabees. Either reply with proofs or don't waste my time. Here is an example of what proofs look like. http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=240286&postcount=14

If you point somewhere, there is no hidden meaning, that's the general direction of where something is. Not that it symbolizes something being high.

Allah is creating my movement as I am typing. Allah was always moving and creating, and Allah is moving and creating now in real time. It doesnt befit the Creator to sit still and do nothing. Perfection never leaves Allah, part of Allah being perfect is that he never stops creating.

Your philisophical, aristotlian, kalami arguments dont make sense, they are illogical. And if you really believe this, then I feel sorry for you because your aqeedah is all doubts and confusion.

I could go on and rant about how terrible sufis act and use large and colored font, but that would be too sensationalist for me.

[...:::sandal:::...]

salaam,

Subhanallah, the majority of your reply was emotional rants about wahabees. Either reply with proofs or don't waste my time. Here is an example of what proofs look like. http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=240286&postcount=14

If you point somewhere, there is no hidden meaning, that's the general direction of where something is. Not that it symbolizes something being high.

Allah is creating my movement as I am typing. Allah was always moving and creating, and Allah is moving and creating now in real time. It doesnt befit the Creator to sit still and do nothing. Perfection never leaves Allah, part of Allah being perfect is that he never stops creating.

Your philisophical, aristotlian, kalami arguments dont make sense, they are illogical. And if you really believe this, then I feel sorry for you because your aqeedah is all doubts and confusion.

I could go on and rant about how terrible sufis act and use large and colored font, but that would be too sensationalist for me.



بسم الله الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على آله و صحبه و من والاه

As-Salaamu Alaikum wa RahmatUllahi wa Barakaatuh



Subhanallah, the majority of your reply was emotional rants about wahabees. Either reply with proofs or don't waste my time.

Ok thats false but let's say it's true, couldn't you have answered some of the questions in the lesser part of my response? And the things I said were true and constituted proofs. And how dare you talk about wasting YOUR time? After responding with a few sentences. It took longer to read what I wrote than it took for you to type a response, so how are you complaining about wasting your time?


HaHaHaHa:cheesygri
After all of those textual and intellectual proofs this is all you have to say? Now you're insulting me. At least I answered your questions. You have given me no logical answers for what I've said. Nor any sound proofs for Allah "moving" in real time. You brothers are really hilarious. When I rip Wahabi CD's onto my ITunes, I set the genre as comedy.

Do you believe Allah can be carried on the wing of a mosquito if He wills?


Allah was always moving and creating, and Allah is moving and creating now in real time. It doesnt befit the Creator to sit still and do nothing.

May Allah save us!!! Now this is the Mes'alah of Hawaadith laa Awwala laha. Events without beginning. Allah was always creating? A throne before the throne a world before the world...eternally. When you believe in a god that is a physical body and changes you must create another lie that he was always doing something because how could he exist doing nothing, or as you put it, "to sit still and do nothing."