Questions about Wahabi's?

[silentflute]

Hi,

I was involved in a discussion recently and would like to ask a few questions hoping someone can assist?

Do "Wahabbis" commit anthropomorphism to Allah? What do they say? If possible a source or reference to their belief regarding this.

Do they realy hate the companions RA of the prophet SAW like the Shiahs?
Do they realy not love the prophet SAW?

Once again if possible a source or reference to their belief regarding this.

JazakAllah Khair.

[Akbar the Great]

Hi,

I was involved in a discussion recently and would like to ask a few questions hoping someone can assist?

Do "Wahabbis" commit anthropomorphism to Allah? What do they say? If possible a source or reference to their belief regarding this.

Do they realy hate the companions RA of the prophet SAW like the Shiahs?
Do they realy not love the prophet SAW?

Once again if possible a source or reference to their belief regarding this.

JazakAllah Khair.

:salam:
I don't really know that much about Wahabis, but they definetely DON'T hate the companions of the Prophet (:saw:); in fact, they call themselves "salafis" for that reason...
:ws:

[maneatinglizard]

Hi,

I was involved in a discussion recently and would like to ask a few questions hoping someone can assist?

Do "Wahabbis" commit anthropomorphism to Allah? What do they say? If possible a source or reference to their belief regarding this.

:salam:

This is the source of the big debate between Salafis and non-Salafis, and so I can't really give an answer either way, except that there are Salafis who are not anthropomorphists, and there are Salafis that are. As for the beliefs of their scholars, I can't say.


Do they realy hate the companions RA of the prophet SAW like the Shiahs?

No


Do they realy not love the prophet SAW?

No

[sohail.amaan]

http://www.islamiccentre.org/presentations/wahhabi.pdf

[sohail.amaan]

http://mailofislam.com/uploads/Difference_Between_Sunni_and_Wahabi.pdf

[ad-Darqawi]

http://www.islamiccentre.org/presentations/wahhabi.pdfWhat is that man? A presentation to explain to people who the Wahhabis are?! I find it a bit excessive. Hitler also made such presentations about the Jews.

[sohail.amaan]

What is that man? A presentation to explain to people who the Wahhabis are?! I find it a bit excessive. Hitler also made such presentations about the Jews.

So that one is not authentic ??

[Callum]

Wahabis!

[EmGee909]

I wanna know once and for all..

What is the problem with Wahhabis? Whats so 'wrong' about them? Cos i know most Asians just hate them and attribute stuff to them which they dont actually do.

Also let me just point out, that there is a difference between Salafis and people who say they are Salafis. The true Salafis are good people because they follow the Salaf - these true salafis basically include all the good scholars out there (Arifi etc.). Theres one easy way to knowing someone is a true Salafi, and that is that they never actually call themself a Salafi because that is arrogant and arrogance is obviously not the way of the Salaf. So when you want to talk bad about Salafis remember that by doing this you are talking bad about good people, and if you meant to be talking about those extreme and excessive people (not gonna name any) who go around and declare themselves as 'Salafeeeeeeee' then dont call them Salafi and call them something else.

[eko]

I'm Asian, Indonesia to be exact.

I can understand why most Asian don't really like Wahabi. When I talk about Wahabi, then it means Wahabi in Indonesia. The condition in other country might differ from where I live.

In Indonesia we usually go to the grave of our Ulamas and make du'a there. Not because the Ulama in the grave can do anything to the du'a. But we hope because of the love to the Ulama will make the du'a will be more easily accepted by Allah. Other thing we do is celebrating Maulid of Sayyidi Nabi sallallahu alaihi wasallam. In some villages, the celebration is so huge and can be compared to Idul Fitri and Idul Adha. And there is a tahlil: Tahlil is a recitation of some surah in Koran and zikr that we do in a group, in niat we ask Allah give the pahala to our parents in the grave or to the parents (in the grave) of the one who invite us to do tahlil.

The Wahabi will come and accused us of doing Syirkh, because we make du'a while visiting the grave of our Ulamas. Regarding Maulid, Wahabi will easily say bid'ah here, bid'ah there, to the other majority Muslims. And they really hate tahlil.

On some occasion I've bought a book "Adabul Mufrad" of Imam Bukhari rahmatullahi alahi from a Wahabi book store, and he suggest me to buy "Sahih Adabul Mufrad" of Syaikh Al-Albani. In the end he gave me the Adabul Mufrad of Imam Bukhari, but this book is so differ. There's a lot of footnote where Syaikh Al-Albani give comments as if the hadits is not correct if the Syaikh was not saying anything about it. After some researching I've found most of book translation in Indonesia, was translated from books published from Saudi publishers. Our Ulamas has give notice not to pick books from Saudi publishers, because there's a lot of evidence of missing chapters or pages from these publishers. Especially the chapter about tawassul in many books. I'm not memorize this books, so I follow our Ulama.

Most Wahabi don't even want to be called Wahabi. They say they are Salafi, but because of much critics from our Ulama, now they don't want to be called Salafi in Indonesia, but they want to be called Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The same name of the dominant muslims group in Indonesia. I wonder how many times they will change their names in the future.

in the end, I might be wrong. because I'm just a layman. Afwan.

[Usman]

So that one is not authentic ??

nope

[Usman]

I'm Asian, Indonesia to be exact.

I can understand why most Asian don't really like Wahabi. When I talk about Wahabi, then it means Wahabi in Indonesia. The condition in other country might differ from where I live.

In Indonesia we usually go to the grave of our Ulamas and make du'a there. Not because the Ulama in the grave can do anything to the du'a. But we hope because of the love to the Ulama will make the du'a will be more easily accepted by Allah. Other thing we do is celebrating Maulid of Sayyidi Nabi sallallahu alaihi wasallam. In some villages, the celebration is so huge and can be compared to Idul Fitri and Idul Adha. And there is a tahlil: Tahlil is a recitation of some surah in Koran and zikr that we do in a group, in niat we ask Allah give the pahala to our parents in the grave or to the parents (in the grave) of the one who invite us to do tahlil.

The Wahabi will come and accused us of doing Syirkh, because we make du'a while visiting the grave of our Ulamas. Regarding Maulid, Wahabi will easily say bid'ah here, bid'ah there, to the other majority Muslims. And they really hate tahlil.

On some occasion I've bought a book "Adabul Mufrad" of Imam Bukhari rahmatullahi alahi from a Wahabi book store, and he suggest me to buy "Sahih Adabul Mufrad" of Syaikh Al-Albani. In the end he gave me the Adabul Mufrad of Imam Bukhari, but this book is so differ. There's a lot of footnote where Syaikh Al-Albani give comments as if the hadits is not correct if the Syaikh was not saying anything about it. After some researching I've found most of book translation in Indonesia, was translated from books published from Saudi publishers. Our Ulamas has give notice not to pick books from Saudi publishers, because there's a lot of evidence of missing chapters or pages from these publishers. Especially the chapter about tawassul in many books. I'm not memorize this books, so I follow our Ulama.

Most Wahabi don't even want to be called Wahabi. They say they are Salafi, but because of much critics from our Ulama, now they don't want to be called Salafi in Indonesia, but they want to be called Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The same name of the dominant muslims group in Indonesia. I wonder how many times they will change their names in the future.

in the end, I might be wrong. because I'm just a layman. Afwan.

See, the problem here is, Wahabi/Salafi are same people. The problem is, there are a lot of people wrongly allying themselves to this group, mostly either for the sake of money or to look more authentic. You'll see a group of people wearing red falasteeni handkerchiefs over their heads to look more "arab". These people are not the real wahabis, rather... they just want to look "cool" by setting the trend.

The real wahabis are Hanbali Salafis; on the other hand, this group does not adhere to any madhab, and their so-called "Ahlul Hadeeth" sect has been going through different phases since the time of their birth ( 1888 ) .

The major problem with the real Wahabis is just that they are very strict, rather , hasty in passing the fatwa of shirk and kufr upon people. This is why the mainstream Ahlus sunnah has always had a beef with them.

On the other hand, the innovators have started calling themselves the real "sunnis" and whoever doesn't agree with their bid'aat and customs and rituals, is labelled a wahabi. So the other side has been using Wahabi as a curse word, so that they can label anyone a Wahabi and people won't listen to him/her.

The truth about the real wahabis is that they are Ahlus sunnah wal Jama'ah, but untrustworthy in their fatawa as they don't do enough research , rather emphasize on their own opinions and if someone doesn't accept them, is labelled a deviant.

[eko]

See, the problem here is, Wahabi/Salafi are same people. The problem is, there are a lot of people wrongly allying themselves to this group, mostly either for the sake of money or to look more authentic. You'll see a group of people wearing red falasteeni handkerchiefs over their heads to look more "arab". These people are not the real wahabis, rather... they just want to look "cool" by setting the trend.

The real wahabis are Hanbali Salafis; on the other hand, this group does not adhere to any madhab, and their so-called "Ahlul Hadeeth" sect has been going through different phases since the time of their birth ( 1888 ) .

The major problem with the real Wahabis is just that they are very strict, rather , hasty in passing the fatwa of shirk and kufr upon people. This is why the mainstream Ahlus sunnah has always had a beef with them.

On the other hand, the innovators have started calling themselves the real "sunnis" and whoever doesn't agree with their bid'aat and customs and rituals, is labelled a wahabi. So the other side has been using Wahabi as a curse word, so that they can label anyone a Wahabi and people won't listen to him/her.

The truth about the real wahabis is that they are Ahlus sunnah wal Jama'ah, but untrustworthy in their fatawa as they don't do enough research , rather emphasize on their own opinions and if someone doesn't accept them, is labelled a deviant.


If you look through the history of ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah, then Wahabi, Salafi, or any other names they pick, are not definitely ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah. not even close.
even though they claim to be the ahlus sunnah.

and when I talk about Salafi, I'm not talking about some people who claim themselves as Salafi. I'm talking about educated scholars, most of them are from the Islamic University of Madeenah of Saudi Arabia who spread Salafi movement in Indonesia. but once again, the condition in my country can be differ from other countries.

The university offering full scholarships to some of the traditional Islamic boarding school in Indonesia. They also build schools in Indonesia to spread Salafi movement with funds from Saudi government.

[ardianto]

I'm Asian, Indonesia to be exact.

I can understand why most Asian don't really like Wahabi. When I talk about Wahabi, then it means Wahabi in Indonesia. The condition in other country might differ from where I live.

In Indonesia we usually go to the grave of our Ulamas and make du'a there. Not because the Ulama in the grave can do anything to the du'a. But we hope because of the love to the Ulama will make the du'a will be more easily accepted by Allah. Other thing we do is celebrating Maulid of Sayyidi Nabi sallallahu alaihi wasallam. In some villages, the celebration is so huge and can be compared to Idul Fitri and Idul Adha. And there is a tahlil: Tahlil is a recitation of some surah in Koran and zikr that we do in a group, in niat we ask Allah give the pahala to our parents in the grave or to the parents (in the grave) of the one who invite us to do tahlil.

The Wahabi will come and accused us of doing Syirkh, because we make du'a while visiting the grave of our Ulamas. Regarding Maulid, Wahabi will easily say bid'ah here, bid'ah there, to the other majority Muslims. And they really hate tahlil.

On some occasion I've bought a book "Adabul Mufrad" of Imam Bukhari rahmatullahi alahi from a Wahabi book store, and he suggest me to buy "Sahih Adabul Mufrad" of Syaikh Al-Albani. In the end he gave me the Adabul Mufrad of Imam Bukhari, but this book is so differ. There's a lot of footnote where Syaikh Al-Albani give comments as if the hadits is not correct if the Syaikh was not saying anything about it. After some researching I've found most of book translation in Indonesia, was translated from books published from Saudi publishers. Our Ulamas has give notice not to pick books from Saudi publishers, because there's a lot of evidence of missing chapters or pages from these publishers. Especially the chapter about tawassul in many books. I'm not memorize this books, so I follow our Ulama.

Most Wahabi don't even want to be called Wahabi. They say they are Salafi, but because of much critics from our Ulama, now they don't want to be called Salafi in Indonesia, but they want to be called Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The same name of the dominant muslims group in Indonesia. I wonder how many times they will change their names in the future.

in the end, I might be wrong. because I'm just a layman. Afwan.
:salam:

The pure and true Wahabi in Indonesia are "The Padri" in Minangkabau region that launch Islamic purification movement to eliminate bid'ah and shirk in 1803. Padri movement was established by some Minangkabau Ulama who back from Makah-Madinah. Same like movement that launch by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, Padri used weapons too to fight "Adat people", Muslims that committed bid'ah and Shirk. And this war is known as the first Padri War.

Typical of The Padri were, they wore white Arab dresses, wore white turbans, had long beards. That's why some people call Padri as White People. But Padri movement was ended in 1938 after Dutch colonial army defeated them in the last Padri War and arrested their great leader, Tuanku Imam Bonjol.

The second wave of Islamic reformation in Indonesia happened in early of 20th century. Started by Kyai Haji Ahmad Dahlan who established Muhammadiyah organization in 1912 after he back from Arabia. One of his mission is correcting deviation in Indonesian Muslims. Although Muhammadiyah is based on Islamic reformation thought from Shaykh Rashid Rida, in fiqh matter they follow thought from Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah. Muhammadiyah people are known as non-madhabi.

Then Haji Zamzam and Haji Muhammad Yunus who back from Makah-Madinah established Persatuan Islam (Persis) in 1923. Their mission is bring Muslims back to Qur'an and Sunnah. Their popular slogan is "Eliminate TBC (tachyul, bid'ah, churafat)". Although in many matter they are different than the Salafis who come later, their idea in eliminate TBC seem like inspired by Wahabiyah.

The Salafis are people who started to exist in Indonesia since late of 80's. They are known as follower of Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Al Utahymin, and also Shaykh Al Albany. Usually they do not call themselves Salafi. But there is a group in Indonesian Salafis that called "The Yemeni Salafis" by observers, because this group was established by students of Shaykh Muqbil in Dammaj Darul Hadith, Yemen, and they call themselves Salafi. After Shaykh Muqbil passed away, they took Shaykh Rabee ibn Hadi al Madkhali as their mufti. During Muslims-Christians conflict in Maluku, Yemeni Salafi established a Mujahidin group that called "Laskar Jihad".

[Riyaaz]

Slm,

We find groups all over the world (and in different times, past and current) attempting to purify Islaam. If 'traditional' Islaam (as practiced by a large portion of the ummah) is the correct version of Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah (as claimed by many ulema) why is it that there is always 'orthodox' groups (Wahabi, Salafi,ahle Hadeeth even Deobandi) trying to correct it?

[Seeker Of Tasawwuf]

An Article On Their Beliefs :



Salafis and their like minded groups worship a Sky God who has two hands, two eyes, a face, a mouth and tongue in the mouth, two shins, legs, fingers in hands and feet, and a huge human like physical body; who is sitting on a big chair on the skies in a certain direction. They say that this huge Sky Idol has limitations on his movements as he cannot come near human beings, therefore, knows about them, only by his knowledge. They call this human-like-Deity ( المعبود مثل الإنسان ) as Allah.

It is important to understand the perception of God by Salafis, Christians and Hindus who worship Idol Gods in different formats. Salafis call their Sky God as Allah because God is translated in Arabic as Allah. Similarly, Christians in Arabic, Persian and Urdu translations of Bible, refer to their God as Allah. Islamic perception of Allah ( سبحانہ و تعا لی ) is completely different from the idolized perception of Hindus, Salafis, Christians and other people.

Salafis also claim that their Sky Idol God is one of its kind, self made, independent, neither beget nor begotten. They claim they are Muslims and misinterpret following Quranic verses to describe their Sky God.



قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ . اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ . لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ . وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُوًا أَحَد (Meaning – Say, He is the God, the one and only. God, the eternal and absolute. He begets not, nor is he begotten. And there is none like him. (Ikhlas 1-4).


They also claim that their Sky God has created this Universe. They worship this Sky Idol and prostrate in front of him 5-times a day during their prayer.

Ibn Baz (1910-1999) the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia wrote: (Their Sky) God has (i) a physical body (al-jism), (ii) He is physically sitting on the sky, and (iii) He has limbs, hands, eyes, tongue, face and other body parts. Read more…


Dr. Zakir Naik the famous Salafi Missionary who runs a Salafi TV Channel “Peace TV”, compares their Sky God with other Gods and tries to prove that their Idol God is the greatest of all.



PHYSICAL FEATURES OF SALAFI SKY GOD



The information on the physical features of Sky God provided by Salafi Scholars does not include the following.

(i) Whether their Sky God’s body is made up of bones, flesh and blood like humans/animals or is made up of mud or metal?

(ii) Ibn Taymiyyah once physically showed to the people that their Sky God walks like human beings. If their Sky God can walk like human beings and is not physically handicapped then why does he have limitation of movements and is unable to come near human beings?

(iii) If he is like human beings, then they should provide the following information.

(a) Does he have hair on his head or is bald?

(b) Does he have mustache and beard on his face?

(c) Does he have hair on his hands, legs, chest, and other places on his body?

(d) Does he have internal organs like heart, liver, lungs, etc.?

(e) Does he have all external organs like human beings.

(f) Does he covers his body or not?


(g) There are many other things people would like to know about their Sky God, like his routine schedule, hobbies, etc.

[ardianto]

Slm,

We find groups all over the world (and in different times, past and current) attempting to purify Islaam. If 'traditional' Islaam (as practiced by a large portion of the ummah) is the correct version of Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah (as claimed by many ulema) why is it that there is always 'orthodox' groups (Wahabi, Salafi,ahle Hadeeth even Deobandi) trying to correct it?
:salam:

Something that correct in our opinion maybe incorrect according other people opinion. Something that incorrect in our opinion maybe correct according other people opinion.

[eko]

:salam:

The pure and true Wahabi in Indonesia are "The Padri" in Minangkabau region that launch Islamic purification movement to eliminate bid'ah and shirk in 1803. Padri movement was established by some Minangkabau Ulama who back from Makah-Madinah. Same like movement that launch by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, Padri used weapons too to fight "Adat people", Muslims that committed bid'ah and Shirk. And this war is known as the first Padri War.

Typical of The Padri were, they wore white Arab dresses, wore white turbans, had long beards. That's why some people call Padri as White People. But Padri movement was ended in 1938 after Dutch colonial army defeated them in the last Padri War and arrested their great leader, Tuanku Imam Bonjol.

The second wave of Islamic reformation in Indonesia happened in early of 20th century. Started by Kyai Haji Ahmad Dahlan who established Muhammadiyah organization in 1912 after he back from Arabia. One of his mission is correcting deviation in Indonesian Muslims. Although Muhammadiyah is based on Islamic reformation thought from Shaykh Rashid Rida, in fiqh matter they follow thought from Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah. Muhammadiyah people are known as non-madhabi.

Then Haji Zamzam and Haji Muhammad Yunus who back from Makah-Madinah established Persatuan Islam (Persis) in 1923. Their mission is bring Muslims back to Qur'an and Sunnah. Their popular slogan is "Eliminate TBC (tachyul, bid'ah, churafat)". Although in many matter they are different than the Salafis who come later, their idea in eliminate TBC seem like inspired by Wahabiyah.

The Salafis are people who started to exist in Indonesia since late of 80's. They are known as follower of Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Al Utahymin, and also Shaykh Al Albany. Usually they do not call themselves Salafi. But there is a group in Indonesian Salafis that called "The Yemeni Salafis" by observers, because this group was established by students of Shaykh Muqbil in Dammaj Darul Hadith, Yemen, and they call themselves Salafi. After Shaykh Muqbil passed away, they took Shaykh Rabee ibn Hadi al Madkhali as their mufti. During Muslims-Christians conflict in Maluku, Yemeni Salafi established a Mujahidin group that called "Laskar Jihad".


Wa'alaikumsalaam Ardianto, tinggal dimana :) ?

[ardianto]

Wa'alaikumsalaam Ardianto, tinggal dimana :) ?
Bandung, euy, Bandung. :cheesygri

[maneatinglizard]

I wanna know once and for all..

What is the problem with Wahhabis? Whats so 'wrong' about them? Cos i know most Asians just hate them and attribute stuff to them which they dont actually do.

Also let me just point out, that there is a difference between Salafis and people who say they are Salafis. The true Salafis are good people because they follow the Salaf - these true salafis basically include all the good scholars out there (Arifi etc.). Theres one easy way to knowing someone is a true Salafi, and that is that they never actually call themself a Salafi because that is arrogant and arrogance is obviously not the way of the Salaf. So when you want to talk bad about Salafis remember that by doing this you are talking bad about good people, and if you meant to be talking about those extreme and excessive people (not gonna name any) who go around and declare themselves as 'Salafeeeeeeee' then dont call them Salafi and call them something else.

:salam:

I think this would be a good source to understand why many people have problems with Salafis:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?70497-The-Attributes-of-a-Salafi-s-God

[TripolySunni]

I wanna know once and for all..

What is the problem with Wahhabis? Whats so 'wrong' about them? Cos i know most Asians just hate them and attribute stuff to them which they dont actually do.

Also let me just point out, that there is a difference between Salafis and people who say they are Salafis. The true Salafis are good people because they follow the Salaf - these true salafis basically include all the good scholars out there (Arifi etc.). Theres one easy way to knowing someone is a true Salafi, and that is that they never actually call themself a Salafi because that is arrogant and arrogance is obviously not the way of the Salaf. So when you want to talk bad about Salafis remember that by doing this you are talking bad about good people, and if you meant to be talking about those extreme and excessive people (not gonna name any) who go around and declare themselves as 'Salafeeeeeeee' then dont call them Salafi and call them something else.

al-Salamu Aleykum,

The Salafis you're familiar with as an Arab are different than the Salafis of the subcontinent or so it seems.

[Abdul Qaadir]

إن الدين ‏ ‏ليأرز ‏ ‏إلى ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏كما ‏ ‏تأرز ‏ ‏الحية إلى جحرها ‏ ‏وليعقلن ‏ ‏ الدين من ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏معقل ‏ ‏الأروية ‏ ‏من رأس الجبل

Verily the Religion will retreat to Hijaaz just like the snake retreats to its hole and the mountain goat retreats to the top of the mountain.

This Hadeeth of the Prophet :saw: shows us that the true and authentic Islaam will be found in Al-Hijaaz, the land of Makkah and Madeenah.

The other "versions" and "brands" of Islaam that are popular in such places as Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Morocco, etc., cannot therefore be the authentic Islaam. The authentic Islaam will be that Islaam which is practiced and propogated in the land of Hijaaz, which today is dominated by the "Wahhaabis" that people from other countries like Indonesia, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc., constantly condemn as "deviant". But the Islaam that is practiced in those countries is diluted with all kinds of falsehood and innovations, especially the veneration of tombs and the seeking of succour from the dead.

[eko]

إن الدين ‏ ‏ليأرز ‏ ‏إلى ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏كما ‏ ‏تأرز ‏ ‏الحية إلى جحرها ‏ ‏وليعقلن ‏ ‏ الدين من ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏معقل ‏ ‏الأروية ‏ ‏من رأس الجبل

Verily the Religion will retreat to Hijaaz just like the snake retreats to its hole and the mountain goat retreats to the top of the mountain.

This Hadeeth of the Prophet :saw: shows us that the true and authentic Islaam will be found in Al-Hijaaz, the land of Makkah and Madeenah.

The other "versions" and "brands" of Islaam that are popular in such places as Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Morocco, etc., cannot therefore be the authentic Islaam. The authentic Islaam will be that Islaam which is practiced and propogated in the land of Hijaaz, which today is dominated by the "Wahhaabis" that people from other countries like Indonesia, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc., constantly condemn as "deviant". But the Islaam that is practiced in those countries is diluted with all kinds of falsehood and innovations, especially the veneration of tombs and the seeking of succour from the dead.


would you please verify the sanad (authenticity) of the hadits you've mentioned to the members of this forum, especially for brothers/sisters from Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Morocco, that you accused to have unauthentic Islam.

[Abdul Qaadir]

would you please verify the sanad (authenticity) of the hadits you've mentioned to the members of this forum, especially for brothers/sisters from Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Morocco, that you accused to have unauthentic Islam.

I didn't say all Muslim brothers/sisters in those countries are practicing unauthentic Islaam. But in general, the Islaam practiced in those countries is unauthentic.

As for the Hadeeth, here is the Sanad:

حدثنا ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عبد الرحمن ‏ ‏أخبرنا ‏ ‏إسمعيل بن أبي أويس ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏كثير بن عبد الله بن عمرو بن عوف بن زيد بن ملحة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏جده ‏
أن رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم

You can read it in Sunan Tirmidhi, Kitaab ul Imaan an Rasoolullaah, Baab Maa Jaa' an al-Islaam Badaa' Ghareebaa wa saya'ooda Ghareeba

[eko]

Please someone verify these hadits, because I'm just a layman.


حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا حُسَيْنُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عَوْنٍ عَنْ نَافِعٍ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ قَالَ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ لَنَا فِي شَامِنَا وَفِي يَمَنِنَا قَالَ قَالُوا وَفِي نَجْدِنَا قَالَ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ لَنَا فِي شَامِنَا وَفِي يَمَنِنَا قَالَ قَالُوا وَفِي نَجْدِنَا قَالَ قَالَ هُنَاكَ الزَّلَازِلُ وَالْفِتَنُ وَبِهَا يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ

rough translation:
It has been told to us Muhammad ibn al Mutsanna who said had told us Husayn ibn Hasan, who said we had told Ibn 'Aun from Nafi' from Ibn 'Umar who said [the Prophet sallallaahu' alaihi wasallam] said: "O Allah, grant blessing to us, on our Sham and our Yemen. "*The Companions said, "Our Najd as well?". He said "there appears tossing and slander, and there would appear devil horns"
[Shahih Bukhari 2/33 no 1037]



الْفِتْنَةُ مِنْ هَا هُنَا الْفِتْنَةُ مِنْ هَا هُنَا وَأَشَارَ إِلَى الْمَشْرِقِ

rough translation:
Fitnah is coming from there, fitnah is coming from there, pointing to the east (Najd).
[Kitabul Fitan, Muslim]

[ahamed_sharif]

Assalamu alaykum


Quoted by Abdul_Qaadir

The other "versions" and "brands" of Islaam that are popular in such places

Did he mean to say:

The versions and brands of Islaam followed by muslims for 1300 years was non-authentic. Authentic version of Islam is understood from last few decades?????????

[dr.ati]

Assalamu alaykum


Quoted by Abdul_Qaadir


Did he mean to say:

The versions and brands of Islaam followed by muslims for 1300 years was non-authentic. Authentic version of Islam is understood from last few decades?????????

:salam:
What was practiced by the Muslims for 1300 years? The concept of Taqleed crept in after 400 years , Wahdat ul Wujood after 600 years and some sects were formed in the Sub continent 1250 years after Islam emerged. Do you want Muslims to accept everything which came into their luggage in this 1400 years long journey of Islam?

[Abu_Tamim]

:salam:
What was practiced by the Muslims for 1300 years? The concept of Taqleed crept in after 400 years , Wahdat ul Wujood after 600 years and some sects were formed in the Sub continent 1250 years after Islam emerged. Do you want Muslims to accept everything which came into their luggage in this 1400 years long journey of Islam?

:salam:

:ws:
What was practiced by the Muslims for 1300 years?

Taqlid.

The concept of Taqleed crept in after 400 years ,

Says who? The 'concept' of Taqlid is in the Qur'an and Sunna and in the lives of the Salaf themselves.

Hudhayfa :anhu: said that the Prophet :saw: said, "I do not know how long I will remain amongst you. So follow these two after me: Abu Bakr and 'Umar. (Musnad Ahmed, Sunan Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Majah).

Imam Bukhari narrated from Ikrima that the people of Madina asked ibn 'Abbas about a woman who -during Hajj- makes her first tawaf and then enters her menses before she can make her final tawaf. Ibn 'Abbas said that she could go home without making her final tawaf. The people of Madina said, "We will not take your opinion over that of Zaid ibn Thabit."

Wahdat ul Wujood after 600 years

Wahdat ul Wujud or Wahdat ul Shuhood is not a part of the religion even according to its proponents.

and some sects were formed in the Sub continent 1250 years after Islam emerged.

You mean the Ahl Hadith? Or are you referring to the maslaks as sects again?
Do you want Muslims to accept everything which came into their luggage in this 1400 years long journey of Islam?

Stick to one school and no extra baggage will collect.

[Abdul Qaadir]

Please someone verify these hadits, because I'm just a layman.


حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا حُسَيْنُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عَوْنٍ عَنْ نَافِعٍ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ قَالَ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ لَنَا فِي شَامِنَا وَفِي يَمَنِنَا قَالَ قَالُوا وَفِي نَجْدِنَا قَالَ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ لَنَا فِي شَامِنَا وَفِي يَمَنِنَا قَالَ قَالُوا وَفِي نَجْدِنَا قَالَ قَالَ هُنَاكَ الزَّلَازِلُ وَالْفِتَنُ وَبِهَا يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ

rough translation:
It has been told to us Muhammad ibn al Mutsanna who said had told us Husayn ibn Hasan, who said we had told Ibn 'Aun from Nafi' from Ibn 'Umar who said [the Prophet sallallaahu' alaihi wasallam] said: "O Allah, grant blessing to us, on our Sham and our Yemen. "*The Companions said, "Our Najd as well?". He said "there appears tossing and slander, and there would appear devil horns"
[Shahih Bukhari 2/33 no 1037]



الْفِتْنَةُ مِنْ هَا هُنَا الْفِتْنَةُ مِنْ هَا هُنَا وَأَشَارَ إِلَى الْمَشْرِقِ

rough translation:
Fitnah is coming from there, fitnah is coming from there, pointing to the east (Najd).
[Kitabul Fitan, Muslim]

This Hadeeth is referring to Iraaq. In that time Iraaq was also called Najd.


سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏سَالِمَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏ ‏يَا أَهْلَ ‏ ‏الْعِرَاقِ ‏ ‏مَا أَسْأَلَكُمْ عَنْ الصَّغِيرَةِ وَأَرْكَبَكُمْ لِلْكَبِيرَةِ ‏ ‏سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏أَبِي ‏ ‏عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏
‏سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُ ‏ ‏إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ تَجِيءُ مِنْ هَاهُنَا وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ نَحْوَ الْمَشْرِقِ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنَا الشَّيْطَانِ


Saalim bin Abdillaah bin Umar said: "O People of Iraaq, why do you ask about the small sins when you are guilty of big sins? For I heard my father Abdallaah bin Umar :anhu: say that he heard the Messenger of Allaah :saw: say, "Verily the Fitnah wil come from there, and he pointed with his hand to the east, from there would come the Horn of Satan." [Saheeh Muslim]

So it is clear that the narrations about Najd, the East, and the Horn of Satan all refer to the land of Iraaq.

[eko]

This Hadeeth is referring to Iraaq. In that time Iraaq was also called Najd.


سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏سَالِمَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏ ‏يَا أَهْلَ ‏ ‏الْعِرَاقِ ‏ ‏مَا أَسْأَلَكُمْ عَنْ الصَّغِيرَةِ وَأَرْكَبَكُمْ لِلْكَبِيرَةِ ‏ ‏سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏أَبِي ‏ ‏عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏
‏سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُ ‏ ‏إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ تَجِيءُ مِنْ هَاهُنَا وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ نَحْوَ الْمَشْرِقِ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنَا الشَّيْطَانِ


Saalim bin Abdillaah bin Umar said: "O People of Iraaq, why do you ask about the small sins when you are guilty of big sins? For I heard my father Abdallaah bin Umar :anhu: say that he heard the Messenger of Allaah :saw: say, "Verily the Fitnah wil come from there, and he pointed with his hand to the east, from there would come the Horn of Satan." [Saheeh Muslim]

So it is clear that the narrations about Najd, the East, and the Horn of Satan all refer to the land of Iraaq.


the hadits says about companions from najd asking for dua, at the time of Rasulullah salalluhu alaihi wasallam, Iraq is not even exist and Iraq today is not east of Medina. where do you live actually? how come you don't even know the root history of your group?

Najd + Hijaaz == Saudi Arabia today.

[Abdul Qaadir]

the hadits says about companions from najd asking for dua, at the time of Rasulullah salalluhu alaihi wasallam, Iraq is not even exist and Iraq today is not east of Medina. where do you live actually? how come you don't even know the root history of your group?

Najd + Hijaaz == Saudi Arabia today.

Read the sharh of that Hadeeth by both Ibn Hajr al Asqalani and Imaam Nawawi...both of them said that Najd is referring to Iraaq.

Why? Because in those days many different lands were known as Najd, as Najd simply means an elevated land.

So the people who came to Rasoolullaah :saw: requesting his Du'a for Najd were in reality from Iraaq, and Allaah knows best, but this seems to be the strongest and most sound opinion which the Muhaditheen had.

Iraaq is east of Madinah (though not directly east), but that doesn't matter, its in the general direction of east.

So out of the four directions (north, east, south, west), if the Prophet :saw: had to point to Iraaq, obviously he can't point north (Syria), south (yemen), west (Africa)...but East!

[eko]

This Hadeeth is referring to Iraaq. In that time Iraaq was also called Najd.


سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏سَالِمَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏ ‏يَا أَهْلَ ‏ ‏الْعِرَاقِ ‏ ‏مَا أَسْأَلَكُمْ عَنْ الصَّغِيرَةِ وَأَرْكَبَكُمْ لِلْكَبِيرَةِ ‏ ‏سَمِعْتُ ‏ ‏أَبِي ‏ ‏عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُا ‏
‏سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏يَقُولُ ‏ ‏إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ تَجِيءُ مِنْ هَاهُنَا وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ نَحْوَ الْمَشْرِقِ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنَا الشَّيْطَانِ


Saalim bin Abdillaah bin Umar said: "O People of Iraaq, why do you ask about the small sins when you are guilty of big sins? For I heard my father Abdallaah bin Umar :anhu: say that he heard the Messenger of Allaah :saw: say, "Verily the Fitnah wil come from there, and he pointed with his hand to the east, from there would come the Horn of Satan." [Saheeh Muslim]

So it is clear that the narrations about Najd, the East, and the Horn of Satan all refer to the land of Iraaq.


There are companions from Sham, Yemen, and Najd, so based on your explanation:

Sham - specific location in the past
Yemen - specific location in the past
Najd - somekind elevated land that can be anywhere in the past

People never called themselves "I'm people of elevated land"
and the syarh you're referring talk about hadits Shaheeh Muslim, not specific najd from the first hadits I'm referring from Shaheeh Bukhari.

Is this ain't true?
Najd, specific location in the past + Hijaaz, specific location in the past == Saudi Arabia today.

[Abdul Qaadir]

There are companions from Sham, Yemen, and Najd, so based on your explanation:

Sham - specific location in the past
Yemen - specific location in the past
Najd - somekind elevated land that can be anywhere in the past

People never called themselves "I'm people of elevated land"
and the syarh you're referring talk about hadits Shaheeh Muslim, not specific najd from the first hadits I'm referring from Shaheeh Bukhari.

Is this ain't true?
Najd, specific location in the past + Hijaaz, specific location in the past == Saudi Arabia today.

Najd was another name for Iraaq. Go read the Hadeeth I posted where Saalim ibn Abdillah ibn Umar mentioned that it refers to Iraaq. Then read the explanation of the Hadeeth by the Muhaditheen like Imaam Nawawi and Ibn Hajr Asqalani.

Interpreting Ahadeeth with modern geography can lead to many mistakes. Let me give you an example. The Prophet :saw: said that the Hour will not be established until the Muslims fight the Turks, described as people with flat faces like shields, red in complexion, beady eyes, wearing shoes made of hair.

‏لا تقوم الساعة حتى تقاتلوا ‏ ‏ الترك

So does the word الترك refer to the Turks we know today - the people of Turkey who are called Turks or Turkish?

No, the Hadeeth is referring to the Tatars and Mongols, as the Muhaditheen have explained - not the modern Turks of Turkey. Why? Because they were also generally known as Turks or Turkic people, in the olden days, but in modern days Turks only refers to people from Turkey who are known as "Turkish"

But if you say that in the Hadeeth, Turks refers to the people of Turkey today, then can't we also say that the "Wahhaabis" and Saudis were great Muslims, because they fought the Ottoman Turks, and Rasoolullaah :saw: said that the Muslims will fight the Turks, so therefore the Ottoman Turks were not Muslim!

See the danger of interpreting Ahadeeth based on modern geography?

[hiso]

إن الدين ‏ ‏ليأرز ‏ ‏إلى ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏كما ‏ ‏تأرز ‏ ‏الحية إلى جحرها ‏ ‏وليعقلن ‏ ‏ الدين من ‏ ‏الحجاز ‏ ‏معقل ‏ ‏الأروية ‏ ‏من رأس الجبل

Verily the Religion will retreat to Hijaaz just like the snake retreats to its hole and the mountain goat retreats to the top of the mountain.

This Hadeeth of the Prophet :saw: shows us that the true and authentic Islaam will be found in Al-Hijaaz, the land of Makkah and Madeenah.

The other "versions" and "brands" of Islaam that are popular in such places as Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Morocco, etc., cannot therefore be the authentic Islaam. The authentic Islaam will be that Islaam which is practiced and propogated in the land of Hijaaz, which today is dominated by the "Wahhaabis" that people from other countries like Indonesia, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc., constantly condemn as "deviant". But the Islaam that is practiced in those countries is diluted with all kinds of falsehood and innovations, especially the veneration of tombs and the seeking of succour from the dead.

So, based on the above hadith, You mean that the authentic islam is with salafis/wahhabis ?
Can you please elaborate. How can you fix the hadith to this time period ?

[Abdul Qaadir]

So, based on the above hadith, You mean that the authentic islam is with salafis/wahhabis ?
Can you please elaborate. How can you fix the hadith to this time period ?

Because this Hadeeth is connected with the glad tidings for the Ghuraba (Strangers), and we are definitely living in the time of the Ghuraba, when Islaam has become something strange, and the majority of the people have become corrupted.

So the Hadeeth says that Islaam will retreat to the Hijaaz just like a snake goes out in the morning and returns to its nest at night, or the mountain goat returns to the top of the mountain. Therefore, Hijaaz is the nest/fortress of Islaam where Islaam will always be pure and authentic. Even in the time of Dajjaal, the cities of Makkah and Madeenah will be protected from his fitnah.

As for other lands, even we can see in our own time how they have become corrupted. For example, the Prophet :saw: even prophecised that one day Shaam (the Levant) will become corrupted and there will be no good in it. Look in the Muslim world and you see fitnah everywhere - Egypt, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.

But you will not see any problems in the land of Hijaaz, because this is the fortress of Islaam. You will not see evil things like grave worship, shirk, gambling, alcohol, black magic, astrology, fortune telling, politics, demonstrations, prostitution, unveiled women, gayism, and so on as you see in the rest of the Muslim world. But alhamduillaah, Hijaaz is free of all these evil things.

[Ace Abbas]

Dear brother silentflute, do visit any Asian country, and try to talk to any Muslim about this. You'll know the answer.

[Abdul Qaadir]

Here is another Hadeeth talking about the time of corruption in the end of days, and that there will be a single group which is upon the truth:


قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا فسد أهل الشام فلا خير فيكم لا تزال طائفة من أمتي منصورين لا يضرهم من خذلهم حتى تقوم الساعة


When the people of Syria become corrupted, then there is no more good in them, but there will never cease to be a Group from my Ummah that is aided (by Allaah) and no harm will come to them from their opponents until the Hour is established.


قال محمد بن إسمعيل قال علي بن المديني هم أصحاب الحديث


Muhammad ibn Isma'eel al Bukhaari said that Ali ibn al-Madeeni said: "They are the People of Hadeeth"

They aren't the Sufis, they aren't the Asharis, they aren't the Muqallideen, they aren't the Shiah, they aren't the Jamaa'at-i-Islami

they are the ASHAABUL HADEETH

[eko]

@abdul qadir

I'm not using modern geography. And Najd is so specific in the past, so there are cluster of hadits about Miqat points for pigrimate:

- miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu’l-Hulayfa
- people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa
- iraq as know today at Dhat Irq
- Yemenis at Yalamlam
- the people of Najd at Qarn

Where is Qarn? would you say it's in Iraq too?

ok, I don't want to continue this again. enough for today..

[hiso]

Because this Hadeeth is connected with the glad tidings for the Ghuraba (Strangers)
Sorry, i dont see this in the hadith.


we are definitely living in the time of the Ghuraba, when Islaam has become something strange, and the majority of the people have become corrupted.
agreed. But is the hadith referring to this time ?


So the Hadeeth says that Islaam will retreat to the Hijaaz just like a snake goes out in the morning and returns to its nest at night, or the mountain goat returns to the top of the mountain. Therefore, Hijaaz is the nest/fortress of Islaam where Islaam will always be pure and authentic. Even in the time of Dajjaal, the cities of Makkah and Madeenah will be protected from his fitnah.

Did the hadith say always ? If yes, then whats the point in returning ?


Even in the time of Dajjaal, the cities of Makkah and Madeenah will be protected from his fitnah.

agreed


As for other lands, even we can see in our own time how they have become corrupted. For example, the Prophet :saw: even prophecised that one day Shaam (the Levant) will become corrupted and there will be no good in it. Look in the Muslim world and you see fitnah everywhere - Egypt, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.

But you will not see any problems in the land of Hijaaz, because this is the fortress of Islaam. You will not see evil things like grave worship, shirk, gambling, alcohol, black magic, astrology, fortune telling, politics, demonstrations, prostitution, unveiled women, gayism, and so on as you see in the rest of the Muslim world. But alhamduillaah, Hijaaz is free of all these evil things.

Sorry brother, seems you are not aware. Where do you stay BTW ? Did you visit the hijaz ? Did you have any personal experience ?

[Abdul Qaadir]

@abdul qadir

I'm not using modern geography. And Najd is so specific in the past, so there are cluster of hadits about Miqat points for pigrimate:

- miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu’l-Hulayfa
- people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa
- iraq as know today at Dhat Irq
- Yemenis at Yalamlam
- the people of Najd at Qarn

Where is Qarn? would you say it's in Iraq too?

ok, I don't want to continue this again. enough for today..

Like I said, in those days there was more than 1 Najd, and Iraaq was also known as Najd. How can you deny this historical fact?

[hiso]

@abdul qadir

I'm not using modern geography. And Najd is so specific in the past, so there are cluster of hadits about Miqat points for pigrimate:

- miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu’l-Hulayfa
- people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa
- iraq as know today at Dhat Irq
- Yemenis at Yalamlam
- the people of Najd at Qarn

Where is Qarn? would you say it's in Iraq too?

ok, I don't want to continue this again. enough for today..

To my weak understanding, Qarn is in the east !!!

[hiso]

Like I said, in those days there was more than 1 Najd, and Iraaq was also known as Najd. How can you deny this historical fact?

You seem to be picking and quoting.
ok, assuming there was more than 1 najd in those times (FOR WHICH YOU DIDNT PROVIDE ANY PROOF). What about Prophet (s.a.w) speaking about the najd of east. If it is iraq, then iraq has travelled from east to north in this time :rolleyes: ?.
while the proof for the najd of east has been provided above.


Muhammad ibn Isma'eel al Bukhaari said that Ali ibn al-Madeeni said: "They are the People of Hadeeth"

They aren't the Sufis, they aren't the Asharis, they aren't the Muqallideen, they aren't the Shiah, they aren't the Jamaa'at-i-Islami

they are the ASHAABUL HADEETH

who are these ashaabul hadeeth by the way? Dont make your own conclusions.
Doesnt the sufis, ashari's, muqallideen follow any hadith ?

[TripolySunni]

For god's sake enough with the Hadiths of Najd and Iraq already, There are Sufis in Najd and in Iraq and there are Salafis in Najd and in Iraq, there are Shias in Najd and in Iraq, all of you should quite explaining these Hadiths the way you please.

[Abdul Qaadir]

You seem to be picking and quoting.
ok, assuming there was more than 1 najd in those times (FOR WHICH YOU DIDNT PROVIDE ANY PROOF). What about Prophet (s.a.w) speaking about the najd of east. If it is iraq, then iraq has travelled from east to north in this time :rolleyes: ?.
while the proof for the najd of east has been provided above.

Okay here is the proof:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=3912&BookID=33&PID=12980

وقال الخطابي : نجد من جهة المشرق ومن كان بالمدينة كان نجده بادية العراق ونواحيها وهي مشرق أهل المدينة ، وأصل النجد ما ارتفع من الأرض ، وهو خلاف الغور فإنه ما انخفض منها وتهامة كلها من الغور ومكة من تهامة ، انتهى وعرف بهذا وهاء ما قاله الداودي إن نجدا من ناحية العراق فإنه توهم أن نجدا موضع مخصوص ، وليس كذلك بل كل شيء ارتفع بالنسبة إلى ما يليه يسمى المرتفع نجدا والمنخفض غورا


al-Khattaabee said: ‘the najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it’s regions [baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa] for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.’ by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that ‘Najd is in the direction of Iraaq’ [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr. [Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59]


who are these ashaabul hadeeth by the way? Dont make your own conclusions.
Doesnt the sufis, ashari's, muqallideen follow any hadith ?

The As-haab ul Hadeeth are the people who follow the Hadeeth.

There is nothing in the Ahadeeth about Sufism, Asharism, Taqleed, Ahlur Rayy, etc.

All of these sects and deviations are opposed to the Hadeeth.

[Abdul Qaadir]

There is also another version of the Hadeeth as narrated in Al Mu'jam al Awsat of Tabarani:

The hadeeth of ibn Umar reported in at-Tabaraanee in ‘al-Awsat’ that the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said;
O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our Shaam and our Yemen." A person said, "And Iraaq O Messenger of Allaah?" He said, "from there arises the horn of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves. Ibn Hajr al-Haythamee says in his ‘Mujma az-Zawaa`id’ (3/305 – chapter ‘collection of du`aas made for (Madeenah)’): ‘its narrators are trustworthy and precise.

This version of the Hadeeth clarifies that the horn of Satan will come from Iraaq, and not the modern day Najd in Saudi Arabia.

[hiso]

Okay here is the proof:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=3912&BookID=33&PID=12980

وقال الخطابي : نجد من جهة المشرق ومن كان بالمدينة كان نجده بادية العراق ونواحيها وهي مشرق أهل المدينة ، وأصل النجد ما ارتفع من الأرض ، وهو خلاف الغور فإنه ما انخفض منها وتهامة كلها من الغور ومكة من تهامة ، انتهى وعرف بهذا وهاء ما قاله الداودي إن نجدا من ناحية العراق فإنه توهم أن نجدا موضع مخصوص ، وليس كذلك بل كل شيء ارتفع بالنسبة إلى ما يليه يسمى المرتفع نجدا والمنخفض غورا


al-Khattaabee said: ‘the najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it’s regions [baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa] for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.’ by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that ‘Najd is in the direction of Iraaq’ [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr. [Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59]

Oh !!! i thought you are going to show a hadith for this too.... But...



The As-haab ul Hadeeth are the people who follow the Hadeeth.
There is nothing in the Ahadeeth about Sufism, Asharism, Taqleed, Ahlur Rayy, etc.
All of these sects and deviations are opposed to the Hadeeth
Keep your set of hadiths to yourself.
Just spreading false accusations with picking and quoting you own sets of hadiths does nothing good.

[Abdul Qaadir]

Oh !!! i thought you are going to show a hadith for this too.... But...


Read the Hadeeth I quoted from Tabarani, where the Prophet :saw: said that the Horn of Satan will come from Iraaq.

Don't interpret the Ahadeeth independently of each other...take the Ahadeeth as a whole and your confusion will be solved.

Now lets look at some of the facts about Iraaq:

i. that is where the fitnah of Khawaarij started

ii. that is where Imaam Hussain :anhu: was betrayed and martyred

iii. that is where many deviated sects and movements took hold (i.e. Ahlur Rayy, Rafidhah, Murji'ah, Mu'tazilah etc.,)

iv. that is where the fitnah of the Mihna took place by the cruel Mu'tazili king

v. the invasion of Halagu and fall of Baghdad, one of the worst tragedies in Islamic history

vi. the recent wars in Iraaq

vii. Dajjaal will appear from between Syria and Iraaq

[hiso]

Read the Hadeeth I quoted from Tabarani, where the Prophet :saw: said that the Horn of Satan will come from Iraaq.


I suppose you changed the wording in this hadith? najd to iraaq ? can you show the arabic text.
Also, above you did not give the proof of najd's from hadiths ?

[Abdul Qaadir]

I suppose you changed the wording in this hadith? najd to iraaq ? can you show the arabic text.
Also, above you did not give the proof of najd's from hadiths ?

Yes, I can show you numerous narrations in Arabic, I'll give you a useful link to this end:

http://www.****************/vb/showthread.php?t=148113

Let me also quote one such narration from Majmu' az Zawa'id

مجمع الزوائد ج3/ص305
وعن ابن عباس قال دعاني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال اللهم بارك لنا في شامنا ويمننا فقال رجل من القوم يا نبي الله وعراقنا فقال إن بها قرن الشيطان وتهيج الفتن وإن الجفاء بالمشرق رواه الطبراني في الكبير
ورجاله ثقات باب نقل وبائها

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

This is hilarious. He wants to generalize Najd to any place in the East or that is elevated (while at the same time specifying the meaning of the Hadith to refer to Iraq only), but also wants to restrict the meaning of the other Hadith (i.e. Islam coming to Hijaz like a snake) to today!

I'd expect a person who says that Allah :taala: has a shape, a real voice, a shadow, five fingers on his hand, and performs actions in time to say other ridiculous things, so I guess this is just typical.

[rqsnnt]

If you look through the history of ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah, then Wahabi, Salafi, or any other names they pick, are not definitely ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah. not even close.
even though they claim to be the ahlus sunnah.
....

:bism:
:salam:

Brother eko, Plz take a glass of water & drink & read following Fatwa & Enjoy ur lack of thinking.


The Ahlul-Hadith are from the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa` but do not Taqleed
(follow one Madhab). Kindly refer Taqleed at www.ask-imam.com

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
FATWA DEPT.

Source (http://www.islam.tc/cgi-bin/askimam/ask.pl?q=2071&act=view)

:jazak:

[usmanqadir]

al-Salamu Aleykum,

The Salafis you're familiar with as an Arab are different than the Salafis of the subcontinent or so it seems.

I Wanted to say that the arabs are not wahabis basically they are malaki or shafi Please do not relate them with wahabis........................................... .........

[eko]

afwan

[eko]

:bism:
:salam:

Brother eko, Plz take a glass of water & drink & read following Fatwa & Enjoy ur lack of thinking.


The Ahlul-Hadith are from the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa` but do not Taqleed
(follow one Madhab). Kindly refer Taqleed at www.ask-imam.com

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
FATWA DEPT.

Source (http://www.islam.tc/cgi-bin/askimam/ask.pl?q=2071&act=view)

:jazak:


It has been answered before in other thread.

there are other question in the Ask Imam Website. please take a loot at the end note.

Ask Imam (http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=a9e7e306b652c9f09dc0f2c2a4688a00)


Mufti Ebrahim Desai and the ‘Ulamā affiliated with Ask-Imam do not agree with the views mentioned in the article, the views of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab or the views of the current day Wahhabis wherein they differ with the Aqā’id and practices of the ‘Ulamā of Deoband and the remainder of the Ahl al-Sunnah. It is unknown how such a response was originally placed on this website. Kindly note that this serves as a clear and lucid renunciation from the aforementioned article.

If you look through the history, then Ahlul-Hadits can be trace back long before Salafi exist. Because this thread become out of control, by using Fatwa from a Great Ulama out of the context of the fatwa itself. Then I want to find a way to close it with the proper understanding.

Let me start, you are right, there must be many things where I have no capabilities to comments and have lack of thinking. Then I want to apologize for any hard comments that I made. Let we close this before it become out of control. Afwan

Salaam,

[TripolySunni]

I Wanted to say that the arabs are not wahabis basically they are malaki or shafi Please do not relate them with wahabis........................................... .........

what?

[hiso]

I Wanted to say that the arabs are not wahabis basically they are malaki or shafi Please do not relate them with wahabis........................................... .........

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Please elaborate...

[hiso]

Yes, I can show you numerous narrations in Arabic, I'll give you a useful link to this end:

http://www.****************/vb/showthread.php?t=148113

Let me also quote one such narration from Majmu' az Zawa'id

مجمع الزوائد ج3/ص305
وعن ابن عباس قال دعاني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال اللهم بارك لنا في شامنا ويمننا فقال رجل من القوم يا نبي الله وعراقنا فقال إن بها قرن الشيطان وتهيج الفتن وإن الجفاء بالمشرق رواه الطبراني في الكبير
ورجاله ثقات باب نقل وبائها


The link would not work here. And then i am not Allama to check the authenticity of the hadith which you are quoting.
BTW, do you also quote ahadith out of sihaah?

[Abdul Qaadir]

The link would not work here. And then i am not Allama to check the authenticity of the hadith which you are quoting.
BTW, do you also quote ahadith out of sihaah?

The narration is authentic, all the narrators are thiqaat.

the riwayah can be checked in Tabarani's Majmu'a al-Kabeer

unfortunately the link I provided, which has all the references and details, isn't working on this forum
- because obviously you people try to block our websites to try to keep your people from being guided to the authentic Islaam

Well block all our sites, but Allaah will always find a way to guide to the Sunnah whoever He wants to guide, you blocking our sites cannot harm our Dawah in the least

[hiso]

because obviously you people try to block our websites to try to keep your people from being guided to the authentic Islaam


Subhanallah, you have already divided the ummah. Atleast i would consider the salafis to be amont the ahlus sunnah.


Well block all our sites, but Allaah will always find a way to guide to the Sunnah whoever He wants to guide, you blocking our sites cannot harm our Dawah in the least
Well, All i can say is "All the best".

Also, why are you quoting from out of sihaah ?

[rqsnnt]

If you look through the history of ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah, then Wahabi, Salafi, or any other names they pick, are not definitely ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah. not even close.
even though they claim to be the ahlus sunnah.
...



:salam: Brother eko

I need to know answer from u for some questions.

1. What will be status of Salat (Valid or Invalid) for a member of ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah behind Wahabi, Salafi, or any other names they pick(Ahlul-Hadith)?

2. What will be status (Valid or Invalid) for a member of ahlus sunnah wal jama'ah of eating meat which is slaughtered by Wahabi, Salafi, or any other names they pick(Ahlul-Hadith)?



:jazak:

[rqsnnt]

Subhanallah, you have already divided the ummah. Atleast i would consider the salafis to be amont the ahlus sunnah.
...

:salam: Brother hiso.



Subhanallah, you have already divided the ummah. Atleast i would consider the salafis to be amont the ahlus sunnah

Subhanallah, If Salafis r among the ahlus sunnah then why posting their sites URL r Naturally blocked in this forum? U have already seen the proof about link. Any answer?


:jazak:

[TripolySunni]

The link would not work here. And then i am not Allama to check the authenticity of the hadith which you are quoting.
BTW, do you also quote ahadith out of sihaah?

It's 100% Sahih.

[hiso]

:salam: Brother hiso.
Subhanallah, If Salafis r among the ahlus sunnah then why posting their sites URL r Naturally blocked in this forum? U have already seen the proof about link. Any answer?
:jazak:
:ws:
Being in ahlus sunnah doesnt mean they are 100 % authentic. There are quite some of deviations.


It's 100% Sahih.
@Tripoly
:salam:
I do not doubt the authenticity of the hadith. (excuse me if you got that impression).
My question: Do these people also use ahadith outside the sihah ?

[rqsnnt]

:ws:
Being in ahlus sunnah doesnt mean they are 100 % authentic. There are quite some of deviations.


@Tripoly
:salam:
I do not doubt the authenticity of the hadith. (excuse me if you got that impression).
My question: Do these people also use ahadith outside the sihah ?

:bism:

Bring ur parameters to be 100% authentic.

:jazak:

[Abdul Qaadir]

Yes there's nothing wrong with using Ahadeeth that are not in Sihaah us Sitta. Sihaah us sitta = Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, and Nasa'i

Yet there are many authentic Ahadeeth in other collections, such as Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta of Malik, Ibn Hibban, Darimi, Daaraqutuni, Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Abi Shaybah, and many more

[TripolySunni]

:ws:
Being in ahlus sunnah doesnt mean they are 100 % authentic. There are quite some of deviations.






al-Salam Aleykum,

Not all of Ahlul-Hadith are the same, some reach different conclusions based on their research, one Salafi might think a Hadith is authentic while another may weaken it thus having different opinions.

[hiso]

Yes there's nothing wrong with using Ahadeeth that are not in Sihaah us Sitta. Sihaah us sitta = Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, and Nasa'i

Yet there are many authentic Ahadeeth in other collections, such as Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta of Malik, Ibn Hibban, Darimi, Daaraqutuni, Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Abi Shaybah, and many more

Excuse me, i was under wrong impression due to some ignorant ahlul-hadith people that only sihaah's are authentic.


Not all of Ahlul-Hadith are the same, some reach different conclusions based on their research, one Salafi might think a Hadith is authentic while another may weaken it thus having different opinions.
agreed.

[rqsnnt]

Do these people also use ahadith outside the sihah ?

:salam:

Yes we do follow something which is Authentic and not abrogated ahadith outside the sihah.

:jazak:

[usmanqadir]

what?
I mean to say that they are followers of Imam Malik (R.A) or Imam Shafi (R.A) and Wahhabi have certain beliefs which are against our four imams so Saudi people are followers of right but Wahhabi have certain beliefs that are against our sahaba and Islam ...............

[Abdul Qaadir]

I mean to say that they are followers of Imam Malik (R.A) or Imam Shafi (R.A) and Wahhabi have certain beliefs which are against our four imams so Saudi people are followers of right but Wahhabi have certain beliefs that are against our sahaba and Islam ...............

Which Wahhaabi beliefs are against Islaam ? Please enlighten me.

[usmanqadir]

Which Wahhaabi beliefs are against Islaam ? Please enlighten me.

Hazrat Umer (R.A) said that tarawi will be of 20 rakkat but they just offer 8 rakkat and when you ask the reason from them they say that is bidat-e-umari............. Is speaking against sahaba is not the same thing like you are speaking against Islam....................

[dr.ati]

when you ask the reason from them they say that is bidat-e-umari............. Is speaking against sahaba is not the same thing like you are speaking against Islam....................

Kindly provide a reference for it

[usmanqadir]

Kindly provide a reference for it

inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

[dr.ati]

inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

Kindly do so as i will be the first one to call the one Fasiq who has used such an insane terminology.

[hiso]

inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

:salam:
forget it brother, there is no use arguing. I was doing a mistake (arguing), please dont carry that forward. Hope we all understand... Ameen.

:ws:

[dr.ati]

:salam:
forget it brother, there is no use arguing. I was doing a mistake (arguing), please dont carry that forward. Hope we all understand... Ameen.

:ws:
Kindly let him provide a reference for what he said. Atleast i am ready to change my mind. If he did not provide a reference then it means that he just transmitted a hearsay to accuse the Ahli Hadiths and that itself is enough to deem him a liar per the Hadith of Sayyedna Muhammad SWS.

[dr.ati]

Excuse me, i was under wrong impression due to some ignorant ahlul-hadith people that only sihaah's are authentic.




Thanks God that you got it off your chest

[dr.ati]

Assalamu alaykum

Let us read what is Moulana Waheeduzzamaan's view about five sahabah radiallahum ajmayeen

ومنھ تعلم ان من الصحابھ من ھو فاسق کالولید و مثلھ یقال فی حق معاویھ و عمرو و مغیرہ و سمرہ

nuzlul abraar; vol.3; Page 94

Rough translation for the above quote:
With this we conclude that among sahabh who were faasiq, like waleed bin uqbah (RA) also they say muwaviyah (RA) , Umro bin aas, mugairah bin shuabah and smrah bin jundab (radiallahum ajmayeen); regarding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not the view of ahlussunnah.
:salam:
Do you honestly feel that the Ahli Hadiths believe this? Waheed uz zamaan was a shia. If that is the case then Ahmed Saeed Multani Deobandi wrote a book against Imam Bukhari ra , should i be posting what he said and say that its what the Deobandi's believe? Lets be honest.

[dr.ati]

Lets not derail the thread and let this brothr bring the reference so that i change my mind.


inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

[حسان 30]

Hazrat Umer (R.A) said that tarawi will be of 20 rakkat but they just offer 8 rakkat and when you ask the reason from them they say that is bidat-e-umari............. Is speaking against sahaba is not the same thing like you are speaking against Islam....................

Okay I'm Wahhabi and you're wrong, so now bring your other proof.

[usmanqadir]

Okay I'm Wahhabi and you're wrong, so now bring your other proof.

Well well well wait i have the speech of Moulana Iylas goomand shortly will be uploading it on youtube and than also link will be avilable for you people and wahabi i have seen never offer 20 rakkat in my home town i have never seen one............

[dr.ati]

No one knows who is Ahamed Saeed Multani deobandi, no one quotes from him, but in ahlul hadeeth majaalis, Moulana waheeduz zamaan name is heard again and again with alqaab.

The product of Waheeduzzaman's student is Abdul qadeer, his comments about Imam hussain RA.

May be you can quote from Abu aalaa moudoodi, because he is hanafi. But who agrees with him.

I have heard this many times "Who is Omar?" "Who is Usman?". Did you hear from any hanafi "who is Bukhari?" (regarding their authority)

:salam:

I am not interested in raising polemics of no use but you can do a bit of google search on "Ahmed Saeed Multani".He was a mamati Deobandi and he wrote a book " Quran Muqadas aur Bukhari Muhadas" against Imam Bukhari ra for which he was jailed for an year.As we know that his indivdual views don't represent the views of the Jamhoor of deoband and the deobandis have denounced him , his stance is not presented to raise arguements against Deobandis.
Wahhed Uz Zamaan was initially a Hanafi , then denounced Taqleed and then adopted some Tafzeeli deviant beliefs. The Ahli Hadiths disowned and castigated him after he wrote a controversial book "Hidayat ul Mehdi" . This is what Waheed Uz Zamaan says

http://www.ircpk.com/album/Wahiduzaman/images/07-01_jpg.jpg

Waheed Uz Zamaan says (Rough transtaion)

" A friend of mine has written it to me that since i have penned down Hidayat ul mehdi , the Ahli Hadith scholars and general Ahlu Hadith have distanced themselves from me"

This is what an Ahli Hadith Scholar says about Waheed Uz Zaman> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnEQLId2b3Y

I would be expecting honesty from you and i hope that you will not bring in Waheed Uz Zamaan's opinions to malign the Ahli Hadiths anymore.

:jazak:

[حسان 30]

Well well well wait i have the speech of Moulana Iylas goomand shortly will be uploading it on youtube and than also link will be avilable for you people and wahabi i have seen never offer 20 rakkat in my home town i have never seen one............

I guess you have never heard of Mecca, Ramadan, Taraweeh?

[Aspirer]

Well well well wait i have the speech of Moulana Iylas goomand shortly will be uploading it on youtube and than also link will be avilable for you people and wahabi i have seen never offer 20 rakkat in my home town i have never seen one............

The claim is not 'wahhabis don't offer 20 rakat.' Rather the claim is 'wahhabis say 20 rakat taraweeh is a bidah and therefore say Umar :anhu: is a bidatee.' If you can prove that 'wahhabis' offer only 8 rakats taraweeh, that is only half the proof.

Alternately, the case could be made that it hardly matters how many rakats are made for taraweeh (after all, Malikis offer 34 or 36, I forget which) so long as taraweeh is offered. The endless bickering over taraweeh is absurd; let people offer their 8 or their 20 or their 34-36 and get on with your life.

[usmanqadir]

I guess you have never heard of Mecca, Ramadan, Taraweeh?

I have mentioned a thousand of times that people of macca and madina are not Wahhabi they are followers of Imam Shafi (R.A) or Imam Malik (R.A) now do not mix wahabi with shafi or maliki

[حسان 30]

I have mentioned a thousand of times that people of macca and madina are not Wahhabi they are followers of Imam Shafi (R.A) or Imam Malik (R.A) now do not mix wahabi with shafi or maliki


Where the heck did you get that information from?

The Aimah of the haramayn are Wahhabi Hanbalis.....

[dr.ati]

Brother usmanqadir , i am waiting


inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

[mukhtar]

Dr Ati, :salam:...just a side note from the thread...
Did your fingers shake when u wrote this below?


Wahhed Uz Zamaan was initially a Hanafi , then denounced Taqleed and then became a shia.

[dr.ati]

Dr Ati, :salam:...just a side note from the thread...
Did your fingers shake when u wrote this below?

:salam:

Not really , why?

[mukhtar]

:salam:

Not really , why?

It's just not the first time for me to hear accounts of this type about ulama.

Regarding the subject of the previous pages, I guess in simple logical terms:
The Ahlul Hadeeth will never dare say that 'Umar RA was a bid'ati.
However, you are aware of Umar's saying about 20 rak'a.
You are also aware of what some Ahlul Hadeeth say about the classification of bid'a.

That is probably where the brothers are coming from;

It's just my 2cts...no intent to engage in the thread.

We ask Allah to save us from the type of incident you quoted in the thread.

Take care,
Mukhtar

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

I am not interested in raising polemics of no use but you can do a bit of google search on "Ahmed Saeed Multani".He was a mamati Deobandi and he wrote a book " Quran Muqadas aur Bukhari Muhadas" against Imam Bukhari ra for which he was jailed for an year.As we know that his indivdual views don't represent the views of the Jamhoor of deoband and the deobandis have denounced him , his stance is not presented to raise arguements against Deobandis.
Wahhed Uz Zamaan was initially a Hanafi , then denounced Taqleed and then adopted some Tafzeeli deviant beliefs. The Ahli Hadiths disowned and castigated him after he wrote a controversial book "Hidayat ul Mehdi" . This is what Waheed Uz Zamaan says

http://www.ircpk.com/album/Wahiduzaman/images/07-01_jpg.jpg

Waheed Uz Zamaan says (Rough transtaion)

" A friend of mine has written it to me that since i have penned down Hidayat ul mehdi , the Ahli Hadith scholars and general Ahlu Hadith have distanced themselves from me"

This is what an Ahli Hadith Scholar says about Waheed Uz Zaman> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnEQLId2b3Y

I would be expecting honesty from you and i hope that you will not bring in Waheed Uz Zamaan's opinions to malign the Ahli Hadiths anymore.

:jazak:

:salam:

1. You're referring to a Mamati. This only harms you because we all know that at least some Mamatis (I only say some because the Mamati group doesn't seem very well defined) are closer to Salafis in beliefs than regular Deobandis. In other words, this example is pretty much void from the get go.

2. Even if he was Hayati, then criticism of Imam Bukhari :rahma: and criticism of a Sahabi (not only that, but a Rashid Khalifa) is no where near being on the same level. Great Ulema of the past, including Imam Muslim :rahma: if my memory is correct, criticized him quite harshly, while no one can possible hope to escape deviation from Ahlus Sunnah when they criticize Umar :anhu:. Of course, the person you mentioned shouldn't have attackedImam Bukhari, because whatever criticism he faced in the past has been clarified and refuted by later scholars, and so those issues should not be brought up by anyone today as an actual argument.

3. Another problem arises for Salafis (mostly Ahlul Hadith; you included) however. If it is wrong to attack Imam Bukhari :rahma: when the Ulema have defended him and refuted the attacks against him, then it is equally wrong to attack an Imam who is of an even higher status than him, namely Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma:. So I wonder why you haven't been jailed for the lies you attempted to spread about him, while referencing the fact that those lies were initiated by people of the past.

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:


The claim is not 'wahhabis don't offer 20 rakat.' Rather the claim is 'wahhabis say 20 rakat taraweeh is a bidah and therefore say Umar :anhu: is a bidatee.' If you can prove that 'wahhabis' offer only 8 rakats taraweeh, that is only half the proof.

Actually, what he should have done is restricted his statement by saying that some Wahabis say 20 rakaat is a bidah, as this is undeniably true. Not only that, but the "some" qualifier is significant, because a large number of people are guilty of this.


Alternately, the case could be made that it hardly matters how many rakats are made for taraweeh (after all, Malikis offer 34 or 36, I forget which) so long as taraweeh is offered. The endless bickering over taraweeh is absurd; let people offer their 8 or their 20 or their 34-36 and get on with your life.

Okay, could I make 1000 rakaat of taraweeh if I wanted to? I've heard this argument before (I believe Shaikh Muhammad Mukhtar ash-Shinqiti said this) but it's quite problematic to say that it doesn't matter how correct you perform a Sunnah action, as long as you're performing that Sunnah.

Sure, it may be better to perform it and perform it incorrectly than to not perform it at all (and I'm not even sure that this is true), but the reality is that it is best to perform it without any defects, and so this discussion is deserving of attention.

[Aspirer]

:salam:



Actually, what he should have done is restricted his statement by saying that some Wahabis say 20 rakaat is a bidah, as this is undeniably true. Not only that, but the "some" qualifier is significant, because a large number of people are guilty of this.



Okay, could I make 1000 rakaat of taraweeh if I wanted to? I've heard this argument before (I believe Shaikh Muhammad Mukhtar ash-Shinqiti said this) but it's quite problematic to say that it doesn't matter how correct you perform a Sunnah action, as long as you're performing that Sunnah.

Sure, it may be better to perform it and perform it incorrectly than to not perform it at all (and I'm not even sure that this is true), but the reality is that it is best to perform it without any defects, and so this discussion is deserving of attention.

:ws:

Okay, if I say 'some Sufis sacrifice cows to people in graves and make tawaf around the graves,' what would you say? Probably 'those people do not represent Sufis.' So then who represents Sufis? The khilafas, doubtlessly, who know that such things are incorrect and stick to other things.
The same is the case with regards to those you dub 'wahhabis.' The ulema are the representations of those you tar thusly- the ulema (that I am aware of; you can check what Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen :rahim: or Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim: had to say on the matter rather simply if you choose) do not say it is a bid'ah. As for laymen, laymen say what laymen say and they are not important in the final consideration unless this is a football game where people are pitted against one another.

Now the contention is that people performing 8 rakahs plus 3 are 'incorrect.' Are they incorrect or is there ikhtilaaf? Is the number of rak'ahs prayed by Umar :anhu: a Sunnah? How about the numbers that others of the time said to pray? Is it that important when a number was clearly not set by Rasulullah :saw:? Are Malikis 'incorrect,' or do they get to have a 'chance of being correct?'

[حسان 30]

:ws:


:ws:

You've got to be careful with him, too many hard questions and he falls apart at the seams.

[maneatinglizard]

:ws:

Okay, if I say 'some Sufis sacrifice cows to people in graves and make tawaf around the graves,' what would you say? Probably 'those people do not represent Sufis.' So then who represents Sufis? The khilafas, doubtlessly, who know that such things are incorrect and stick to other things.
The same is the case with regards to those you dub 'wahhabis.' The ulema are the representations of those you tar thusly- the ulema (that I am aware of; you can check what Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen :rahim: or Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim: had to say on the matter rather simply if you choose) do not say it is a bid'ah. As for laymen, laymen say what laymen say and they are not important in the final consideration unless this is a football game where people are pitted against one another.

Now the contention is that people performing 8 rakahs plus 3 are 'incorrect.' Are they incorrect or is there ikhtilaaf? Is the number of rak'ahs prayed by Umar :anhu: a Sunnah? How about the numbers that others of the time said to pray? Is it that important when a number was clearly not set by Rasulullah :saw:? Are Malikis 'incorrect,' or do they get to have a 'chance of being correct?'

:salam:

Actually, it doesn't matter what Shaikh ibn Uthaymeen :rahma: or Shaikh ibn Taymiyyah :rahma: (both of whom favored 20 rakaat, by the way), because I said some. I don't have to prove every single "Wahabi" (I didn't dub them "Wahabi," the other brother did, and I was merely repeating his usage of terminology) took the opinion of 8 rakaat, merely that some did, and called 20 rakaat bid`ah. I find it very strange that I'd even have to prove this to you. Do you even know who the Ahlul Hadith are? I'm not sure why you are getting involved in this discussion if you don't know the background of it.

As for whether or not 8 rakaat can be accepted as a matter of Ikhtilaaf, then that's your job to prove it to me, not the other way around. 20 rakaat is established; if you want to say that 8 rakaat is a valid opinion, then you're the one who needs to prove that, not the one following the established opinion.


:ws:

You've got to be careful with him, too many hard questions and he falls apart at the seams.

lol okay.

[Ace Abbas]

I have mentioned a thousand of times that people of macca and madina are not Wahhabi they are followers of Imam Shafi (R.A) or Imam Malik (R.A) now do not mix wahabi with shafi or maliki

Really? I thought that most of they are Hanbali. Shafi'i schools are in Asia countries, Somalia and Tanzania, also in Oman if not mistaken.
Maliki schools are in North Africa countries.
As far as I know, Saudi Arabia is a place for Hanbali school.
Wahhabis cover about 5% of the world's Islamic population only.

[dr.ati]

:salam:

1. You're referring to a Mamati. This only harms you because we all know that at least some Mamatis (I only say some because the Mamati group doesn't seem very well defined) are closer to Salafis in beliefs than regular Deobandis. In other words, this example is pretty much void from the get go.

2. Even if he was Hayati, then criticism of Imam Bukhari :rahma: and criticism of a Sahabi (not only that, but a Rashid Khalifa) is no where near being on the same level. Great Ulema of the past, including Imam Muslim :rahma: if my memory is correct, criticized him quite harshly, while no one can possible hope to escape deviation from Ahlus Sunnah when they criticize Umar :anhu:. Of course, the person you mentioned shouldn't have attackedImam Bukhari, because whatever criticism he faced in the past has been clarified and refuted by later scholars, and so those issues should not be brought up by anyone today as an actual argument.

3. Another problem arises for Salafis (mostly Ahlul Hadith; you included) however. If it is wrong to attack Imam Bukhari :rahma: when the Ulema have defended him and refuted the attacks against him, then it is equally wrong to attack an Imam who is of an even higher status than him, namely Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma:. So I wonder why you haven't been jailed for the lies you attempted to spread about him, while referencing the fact that those lies were initiated by people of the past.

:salam:

1. With what a courage have you classified Mamatis as Salafis ! The only issue in which they differ with you is that they don't accept your version of Aqeedah about the life of Sayyedna Muhammad SWS. They are more staunch Muqalids than you and it is this staunchness in Hanfism that Ahmed Saeed Multani wrote the book against Imam Bukhari ra.
The only faction with in the deobandis which is close to Salafis is the "Panjiri" group and they are not
orthodox mamatis. I wonder the way you people have pushed the Mamatis out of Deobandism in Pakistan , if the same standards are applied universally , i am sure that 60 % of Deobandis will come out to be Mamatis.

2. Br Usmaniqadir said that the Ahli Hadiths call the 20 Rakaat Tarwaeeh to be "Bidat e Umeri". He also promised me to provide the reference for the Ahli Hadiths usage of this terminology but almost 24 hours since then and the thread has been derailed to save the face of him.

3. Instead of beating your favorite horse against me which is the false accusation of contempt of Imam Abu Hanifa rahimuhullah by me, i would suggest you to try you hands on the past Hanafis who fabricated Hadiths to slander Imam Shafi rahimuhullah.
Recorded in Sahih Ibn Hibban
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَعْدَانَ الْأَزْدِيُّ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، مَرْفُوعًا: «يَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي رَجُلٌ يُقَالُ لَهُ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِدْرِيسَ، أَضَرُّ عَلَى أُمَّتِي مِنْ إِبْلِيسَ، وَيَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي رَجُلٌ يُقَالُ لَهُ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ، هُوَ سِرَاجُ أُمَّتِي

Rough translation " The Prophet PBUh said that there will be born a man in my Ummah by the name of Muhammad bin Idrees (Imam Shahfi ra). His calamity upon the Ummah will be greater than that of Ibless. Another person by the name of Nauman bin Thabit will be born and he will be the lamp of mu Ummah" (Included in Maw'doaat by Imam Sayauti in Tadreeb 'ur ray')

[dr.ati]

Hazrat Umer (R.A) said that tarawi will be of 20 rakkat but they just offer 8 rakkat and when you ask the reason from them they say that is bidat-e-umari............. Is speaking against sahaba is not the same thing like you are speaking against Islam....................


Kindly provide a reference for it


inshALLAH will shortly give you the proof and also you can ask from any wahabi regarding this but i will give u the proof regarding this........

24 hours since your promise brother Usmanqadir. You still searching for the proof?

[mukhtar]

:ws:

Now the contention is that people performing 8 rakahs plus 3 are 'incorrect.' Are they incorrect or is there ikhtilaaf? Is the number of rak'ahs prayed by Umar :anhu: a Sunnah? How about the numbers that others of the time said to pray? Is it that important when a number was clearly not set by Rasulullah :saw:? Are Malikis 'incorrect,' or do they get to have a 'chance of being correct?'

:salam:

For the benefit of the discussion, do you know the Maliki position on Taraweeh well?
If you know it in detail, it is a great eye opener for Salafis/Ahlu hadeeth if they chose to take heed.

The intent is to benefit in shaa Allah; in short:
Imam Malik RA made fatwa for 20 rak'ats; but he himself prayed 8 rak'ats at his home because of the strength of the adilla that Nabee SAW prayed that number.

The important thing to notice here, is that Imam Malik RA did not make fatwa contrary to what 'Umar established because of the ijma' of the Sahaba on the matter. So the fatwa in the madhab of Malik has remained at 20 rak'ats; keeping to that number is mustahab, and there is no blame on those who pray less (as is the case in many Maliki countries).

The blame and shame is for people to try to prove that 8 is better than 20; it is utmost foolishness and audacity. It is just as claiming that Hafiz Ibn Hajar RA had issues in aqeeda....I'm sure you understand what I am referring to.

Again, the intent is to benefit.


We ask Allah for tawfeeq.

[Ace Abbas]

What is the big problem about tarawih? :|
Rasulullah :saw: performed tarawih 8 raka'ahs. So, it's a sunnah. What's the big deal then?
Abu Bakar :anhu: performed tarawih 20 raka'ahs. And the aqidah of ahlus sunnah wal jamaah is to follow the al-Qur'an, ahadith and sahabas. So, if you perform it by 20 raka'ahs, you're actually on the right aqidah as well. Rasulullah :saw: himself once asked the Muslims to follow his sahabas. And if you follow the way of Abu Bakar as-Siddiq, you're actually following Rasulullah :saw:.

Rasulullah :saw: performed tarawih with 8 raka'ahs, and there's a narration which says that he once recited al-Baqarah, ali Imran and an-Nisa in one raka'ah.
Abu Bakar as-Siddiq performed tarawih with 20 raka'ahs, and there is no way that others can stand for a long time waiting Abu Bakar as-Siddiq to finish reciting al-Baqarah, ali Imran and an-Nisa in one raka'ah.
So, in my assumption, the duration of 8 raka'ahs of Rasulullah :saw: is not the same as the duration of 20 raka'ahs of Abu Bakar as-Siddiq. I believe that Rasulullah :saw:'s recitations were longer than Abu Bakar as-Siddiq's. Wallahu a'lam.

Anyway, regarding to the bid'ah thingy. This is what Imam ash-Shafi'i viewpoint:

A major contribution of al-Shafi`i in the foundations of the Law was his division of innovation (al-bid`a) into good and bad on the basis of `Umar’s words about the tarâwih or congregational supererogatory night prayers in the month of Ramadan: "What a fine innovation this is!" Harmala narrated that al-Shafi`i concluded: "Therefore, whatever innovation conforms to the Sunna is approved (mahmûd), and whatever opposes it is abominable (madhmûm)." Agreement formed in the Four Schools around his division, as illustrated by the endorsement of some major later authorities in each school. Among the Hanafis: Ibn `Abidin, al-Turkumani, and al-Tahanawi; among the Malikis: al-Turtushi, Ibn al-Hajj, and al-Shatibi; consensus among the Shafi`is; and reluctant acceptance among later Hanbalis, who altered al-Shafi`i’s terminology to read "lexical innovation" (bid`a lughawiyya) and "legal innovation" (bid`a shar`iyya), respectively û although inaccurately û matching Shafi`i’s "approved" and "abominable".

This issue has been discussed by the ulama for a long time ago. Who raises this issue back???

Wallahu a'lam.

[usmanqadir]

24 hours since your promise brother Usmanqadir. You still searching for the proof?

No my dear brother i am not searching for proof brother the proof is with the friend and my finals are there inshALLAH as soon as i get it from him i will upload it on you tube and than will give you the link and also there is a proof with me is about Rafa-e-yadan which is sabit from Haidth but the Wahhabi ( Note i have written Wahhabi not shaifi and maliki ) started it in India (of that time ) in 1860 for proof you can have a look at Wahhabi book Naqoosh Abu-al-wafa on page 39,40 and 44 you can have a look there and also they say we are gheer muqalad though Takleed is sabit from Quran please read my wordings carefully bro thanks..............

[usmanqadir]

Really? I thought that most of they are Hanbali. Shafi'i schools are in Asia countries, Somalia and Tanzania, also in Oman if not mistaken.
Maliki schools are in North Africa countries.
As far as I know, Saudi Arabia is a place for Hanbali school.
Wahhabis cover about 5% of the world's Islamic population only.

Actually majority of them i have seen in Saudi are Shafi or Maliki and may ALLAH be mercyful on us we are mixing Wahhabi with them it is a big big mistake......

[dr.ati]

No my dear brother i am not searching for proof brother the proof is with the friend and my finals are there inshALLAH as soon as i get it from him i will upload it on you tube and than will give you the link and also there is a proof with me is about Rafa-e-yadan which is sabit from Haidth but the Wahhabi ( Note i have written Wahhabi not shaifi and maliki ) started it in India (of that time ) in 1860 for proof you can have a look at Wahhabi book Naqoosh Abu-al-wafa on page 39,40 and 44 you can have a look there and also they say we are gheer muqalad though Takleed is sabit from Quran please read my wordings carefully bro thanks..............

So the proof is gone with the winds.
As you say that Rafa ul Yadain in Thabit from Hadith and the Wahabis started it in india in 1860. I think if that is true then the Wahabis did a tremendous job. What better thing can a person do than starting something which is Thabit from Hadith?
I would suggest you to read and learn more about the "Wahabis" before you make you make subjective posts about them.

[dr.ati]

Actually majority of them i have seen in Saudi are Shafi or Maliki and may ALLAH be mercyful on us we are mixing Wahhabi with them it is a big big mistake......

Get your facts straight before making more childish claims. The overwhelming majority of people in Saudi Arabi are Hanbali/Salafis.

[usmanqadir]

So the proof is gone with the winds.
As you say that Rafa ul Yadain in Thabit from Hadith and the Wahabis started it in india in 1860. I think if that is true then the Wahabis did a tremendous job. What better thing can a person do than starting something which is Thabit from Hadith?
I would suggest you to read and learn more about the "Wahabis" before you make you make subjective posts about them.

Nops i have written that read my wordings clearly but you did not they did not started it as a sunnat they started it on the order of britians and proof is not gone and what about Takleed you did not have passed any comment on that ......................

[usmanqadir]

Get your facts straight before making more childish claims. The overwhelming majority of people in Saudi Arabi are Hanbali/Salafis.

Do not take it your heart bro Hnablai as well as shafi and maliki are also Muslims why you are getting angry on such a small thing if i am wrong you can make me correct as i am seeker of knowledge but u got angry......

[usmanqadir]

Yup that is my mistake that i skipped a line because of typing mistake but you can see that he the Wahhabi scholar himself says that we started rafa-e-yadan on order of Britisher..........

[safinatun_naja]

Really? I thought that most of they are Hanbali. Shafi'i schools are in Asia countries, Somalia and Tanzania, also in Oman if not mistaken.
Maliki schools are in North Africa countries.
As far as I know, Saudi Arabia is a place for Hanbali school.
Wahhabis cover about 5% of the world's Islamic population only.

As Salamu alaikum,

The Hijaz has always been predominately Shafi'i and Maliki. The Hanbali school didn't really get a foothold in Hijaz until after 'Abd al-Wahhab's era.

[Aspirer]

:salam:

Actually, it doesn't matter what Shaikh ibn Uthaymeen :rahma: or Shaikh ibn Taymiyyah :rahma: (both of whom favored 20 rakaat, by the way), because I said some. I don't have to prove every single "Wahabi" (I didn't dub them "Wahabi," the other brother did, and I was merely repeating his usage of terminology) took the opinion of 8 rakaat, merely that some did, and called 20 rakaat bid`ah. I find it very strange that I'd even have to prove this to you. Do you even know who the Ahlul Hadith are? I'm not sure why you are getting involved in this discussion if you don't know the background of it.

What they favored is less important than what they authorized; the both of them agreed that there was no set number of rakat and any particular number would fulfill the Sunnah. So why argue?

The Ahl-e-Hadith? The group? Some of them seem very sectarian. They seem like a mirror-image of the rest of the IndoPak population; so much sectarianism on either side. However, I am not particularly knowledgeable about their particular ulema nor do I really care about their position as a result.


As for whether or not 8 rakaat can be accepted as a matter of Ikhtilaaf, then that's your job to prove it to me, not the other way around. 20 rakaat is established; if you want to say that 8 rakaat is a valid opinion, then you're the one who needs to prove that, not the one following the established opinion.

I don't need to prove anything to you, actually, I'm a layman. Some of the scholars I take fatawa from have said that the matter is broad in scope and can be fulfilled with 11 or with 23 or with more than that, so I don't see a need to prove anything really. Unless you assert that the scholars I take fatawa from are mistaken to the point that they're misleading people out of a Sunnah, well, in which case, I would say 'that is a most serious slander!'


For the benefit of the discussion, do you know the Maliki position on Taraweeh well?
If you know it in detail, it is a great eye opener for Salafis/Ahlu hadeeth if they chose to take heed.

The intent is to benefit in shaa Allah; in short:
Imam Malik RA made fatwa for 20 rak'ats; but he himself prayed 8 rak'ats at his home because of the strength of the adilla that Nabee SAW prayed that number.

The important thing to notice here, is that Imam Malik RA did not make fatwa contrary to what 'Umar established because of the ijma' of the Sahaba on the matter. So the fatwa in the madhab of Malik has remained at 20 rak'ats; keeping to that number is mustahab, and there is no blame on those who pray less (as is the case in many Maliki countries).

The blame and shame is for people to try to prove that 8 is better than 20; it is utmost foolishness and audacity. It is just as claiming that Hafiz Ibn Hajar RA had issues in aqeeda....I'm sure you understand what I am referring to.

Again, the intent is to benefit.


We ask Allah for tawfeeq.

What I don't know is why you asked for my email, since you have yet to contact me with regards to anything. I find that somewhat odd.

That's nice. I don't see how its relevant. I don't see how social cohesion or anything of the sort ought to be threatened by some masjids praying eight rakat and some praying twenty; so long as the advice of Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen :rahim: is heeded and whomsoever wishes to pray eight rakat but finds himself in a congregation of twenty does not stop after eight or something ridiculous such as that.

Who said 8 is better? 11 is fine, 23 is fine, 34-36-whatever is fine; all are fine because no number was fixed by the Prophet :saw:, so why squabble?

With all due respect to the great Amir al-Muminin in Hadith, Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani :rahim: how is bringing him up relevant, and why is he not able to have mistakes? Who is allowed to have mistakes in aqeedah, in your mind? If you could send me a list of 'people who are allowed to have mistakes in aqeedah,' then that would be really helpful.

Ameen.

[mukhtar]

I don't need to prove anything to you, actually, I'm a layman. Some of the scholars I take fatawa from have said that the matter is broad in scope and can be fulfilled with 11 or with 23 or with more than that, so I don't see a need to prove anything really.

So alhamdulillah, from what you're saying, you agree with taqlid.
We make taqlid and take fatwa from scholars whom Nabee SAW has himself, through his honorable tongue, attested to their righteousness. You guys know so many ahaadeeth, there is no need for me to refer you to the text of the hadeeth that justifies my claim.
On the other hand, you just chose to take fatwa from others who do not have that privilege.


Unless you assert that the scholars I take fatawa from are mistaken to the point that they're misleading people out of a Sunnah, well, in which case, I would say 'that is a most serious slander!'

Really? I'm confused, those same scholars have 'slandered' ulama of the past...and you do not see it as slander. Your nafs, and the nafs of many, is content with looking for and finding mistakes in what the ulama have written/said...the only benefit in this activity is to your nafs...we say these things for the sake of Allah, because even here on the forum, when someone says anything about the aimma of the haramain who have slandered the ulama of the past, everyone jumps and talks about respect of the ulama...yet, no one raises when Hafiz Ibn Hajar is said to have the wrong aqeedah....or Imam Nawawi, etc...etc...etc...


That's nice. I don't see how its relevant. I don't see how social cohesion or anything of the sort ought to be threatened by some masjids praying eight rakat and some praying twenty; so long as the advice of Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen :rahim: is heeded

You do not see its relevance for either one of 2 reasons:
1/ You refuse to think.
2/ Your thinking is deficient, as many ahlul hadeeth/salafis, laymen and ulama alike. The deficiency of their reasoning has been dealt with in many writings; you may take the time to consult them.



With all due respect to the great Amir al-Muminin in Hadith, Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani :rahim: how is bringing him up relevant, and why is he not able to have mistakes? Who is allowed to have mistakes in aqeedah, in your mind? If you could send me a list of 'people who are allowed to have mistakes in aqeedah,' then that would be really helpful.

Same as previous comment.
The problem is that most of you do not realize, or fake not to realize, what making a "mistake" in aqeedah means.
If you say that Hafiz Ibn Al Hajar made a mistake in aqeedah, which some of your loved ones have said, then you are saying that he was a fasiq. Nothing less, nothing more...

We've heard it before, we continue to hear it, but we just reply these things to you so our brothers who have not had the misfortune to deviate as you have, do not get misled and have doubts about the greatness of the ulama of ahlusunnah.


The advice is the same, just look around you and ponder over the ending that those who have attacked the ulama of the past have had....some of their own ulama have warned their followers from their excesses...and repented from them....

[Aspirer]

So alhamdulillah, from what you're saying, you agree with taqlid.
We make taqlid and take fatwa from scholars whom Nabee SAW has himself, through his honorable tongue, attested to their righteousness. You guys know so many ahaadeeth, there is no need for me to refer you to the text of the hadeeth that justifies my claim.
On the other hand, you just chose to take fatwa from others who do not have that privilege.

Well yeah, what, am I supposed to open Bukhari and act on it? That's a weird approach to things.

If you could quote that hadith, that'd be nice. I'd be interested in hearing it, because I am a person who considers things and retracts them if I am proven wrong- this is why I retracted statements I made in another thread, because it was clear that I hadn't gotten to the bottom of things.


Really? I'm confused, those same scholars have 'slandered' ulama of the past...and you do not see it as slander. Your nafs, and the nafs of many, is content with looking for and finding mistakes in what the ulama have written/said...the only benefit in this activity is to your nafs...we say these things for the sake of Allah, because even here on the forum, when someone says anything about the aimma of the haramain who have slandered the ulama of the past, everyone jumps and talks about respect of the ulama...yet, no one raises when Hafiz Ibn Hajar is said to have the wrong aqeedah....or Imam Nawawi, etc...etc...etc...

My nafs, my nafs, my nafs. If I make tarjeeh with regards to following a different way and I am inclined thusly, does this mean that I am deceived by my nafs until I agree with you? I am certain this is not what you're actually saying, but it sure seems that way.

The arguments I have read with regards to the invalidity of the approach some of the scholars I take fatawa from have taken have, in all honesty, not stood up to scrutiny. Is stating someone is wrong in a fiqh issue a slander? I don't know about that one. Is stating someone is wrong in an aqeedah issue a slander? Well, I don't know, do you have a problem stating that some other scholars are wrong in an aqeedah issue? Sharh Aqaid Nasafi has no problem refuting 'the Hanbalis' and stating that they are mistaken, so is Sharh Aqaid Nasafi a slanderous text?

Mufti Abdur Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera all but said that most Hanbalis were mujassimah in a video that is quite easily available on this board, and then he said that they became crypto-mujassimah after Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim:. Is that slander?

I would also note the extraordinary slander heaped upon the Najdi Dawah from its inception, wherein it is variously claimed that it was led by a shrieking demon who burned down all of Arabia and danced on the remains, it is claimed that it was led by a slavering monster whose followers were dancing imps, X is claimed, Y is claimed, et cetera, et cetera, whatever- against whom is slander okay? I have yet to derive this principle from what you have said because you are not being very clear with regards to it.


You do not see its relevance for either one of 2 reasons:
1/ You refuse to think.
2/ Your thinking is deficient, as many ahlul hadeeth/salafis, laymen and ulama alike. The deficiency of their reasoning has been dealt with in many writings; you may take the time to consult them.

I have read many a refutations of them and found them to be unconvincing in the end. If you have more convincing refutations available, then by all means, send them to me that I might benefit. The statements with regards to 'writing x' or 'writing y' and an invitation to consult them are not really helpful, because it could mean 'consult someone else,' who I am not aware of and am therefore as unable to consult as I would be unable to consult a newspaper article from the year 1957 in Persian.

Avoid linking me to anything by Gibril Fouad Haddad, Hisham Kabbani, or The Legal Status of Following a Mad'hab because I have read most of the former, the middle I would not read, and I have read the latter.

So when everyone is doing the same thing, there is social cohesion? But some of you do not do raf'al yadain, and some people do- is that cause for a lack of social cohesion? How about doing sujood as sadjat in different ways- does this harm social cohesion? Why does praying taraweeh in 11 or 23 rakahs threaten social cohesion but doing raf'al yadain or not doing it doesn't? Praying with your arms by your sides?

A more direct comparison can be found in the Hanafi view of Asr. Hanafis pray Asr later but they'll pray behind Imams of other persuasions if they happen to be around at the time; this can be easily compared to praying 11 or 23 rakats of taraweeh so long as you're following the Imam at the time and not giving people a hard time over doing one or the other.

Either all of these things (or arguments that arise from them between muqallids, which should not arise in the first place) threaten social cohesion or none of them do, because they are fundamentally based on following fatawa issued by scholars who are legitimate. If the scholars are illegitimate, then this is quite a serious charge and had best be substantiated one way or the other.


Same as previous comment.
The problem is that most of you do not realize, or fake not to realize, what making a "mistake" in aqeedah means.
If you say that Hafiz Ibn Al Hajar made a mistake in aqeedah, which some of your loved ones have said, then you are saying that he was a fasiq. Nothing less, nothing more...

We've heard it before, we continue to hear it, but we just reply these things to you so our brothers who have not had the misfortune to deviate as you have, do not get misled and have doubts about the greatness of the ulama of ahlusunnah.

Okay, so was Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim: a faasiq? Is it okay to call Ibn Taymiyyah a faasiq? I don't think this is what you're charging, just trying to clarify. How about Ibn Qudama :rahim: or Ibn al-Qayyim :rahim: or any one of the many Hanbali aqeedah holders throughout history, are they all faasiqs since their aqeedah does not agree with some of those whom you have noted? Ibn Qudama famously wrote massive refutations against some who held another aqeedah, so did many others in this respect. Were they all faasiq or not? Who gets to be a faasiq and who doesn't, in your view, since some views are simply not reconcilable?

How about Mufti Taqi Usmani's view? He says that all approaches taken with regards to aqeedah are 'conceivable.' Do you take this view?

Are people faasiq until they agree with Hafiz Ibn Hajar :rahim:?

I am sorry to hear that you consider me to be 'deviated.'


The advice is the same, just look around you and ponder over the ending that those who have attacked the ulama of the past have had....some of their own ulama have warned their followers from their excesses...and repented from them....

What excesses? Is saying 'there is more than one valid viewpoint with regards to taraweeh' an excess now?

As for your email, well, I will not beg at your feet for you to send me your refutations of people whom I take fatawa from. If you wish to send them then send them, if you do not then do not; but if you consider the people whom I take fatawa from to be deviant and yet you do not send them, then it proves that you do not consider me to be a brother- you most certainly would not want to be taking fatawa from deviants, would you? And this means that you do not want for me what you want for yourself- which can very simply be extrapolated to be in conformation with the hadith to which I am referring. Of course, if my reasoning is faulty, then I would love to read and consider the scathing refutations that you were sure to send me until I stopped being humble.

I consider what comes my way. If this is a great crime that I have 'deviated' due to, well, say what you like, then. But if you send me things, I will read them. If you do not, I will not be able to. Do what you like.

[suleimanibnsalim]

Get your facts straight before making more childish claims. The overwhelming majority of people in Saudi Arabi are Hanbali/Salafis.

That's not true, brother Ati. Sure, the establishment scholars may be hanbalis, but many of the people of Hijaz are 'sufis', and have been for centuries. Many of the people of Ahsa' are not Hanbalis either etc.

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

Brother Aspirer:

I'm sorry if this sounds rude, but I don't think anyone is really convinced by your claims of wanting to objectively discern the reality of the matters which you are discussing/arguing. You suddenly went from being a Hanafi to saying you have no Madhab because you are a layman (I wonder if you were a layman when you were a Hanafi), saying you take fatawa from Salafis, and arguing in favor of all of their positions, regardless of whether or not you have any actual knowledge of what you speak of, regardless of how ridiculous their opinions they be.

You may have retracted your statements in the other thread, but that was after incessantly arguing a position you had absolutely no basis for, other than repeatedly claiming that Ibn Taymiyyah's :rahma: positions were "well known." You only retracted your statements because you had no where to go, and even then it looked like you only wanted to get out of the predicament you put yourself in. You can claim all you want that you sincerely want to learn the truth, but you are not at all showing that with your posting behavior, just like dr.ati's initial claim of being a confused Deobandi was made very suspicious when he immediately began arguing Ahlul Hadith positions and slandering Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma:.

You said you don't care what the Ahlul Hadith scholars say? Ajeeb! You attempt to defend them and their positions, and then immediately say that you are ignorant of their positions and that you don't care what they have to say. Then why did you speak about their positions in the first place? If you want to claim that you were speaking in reference to the Saudi Salafis and their position, then again this speaks of your ignorance, because this entire issue of 8 rakaah Taraweeh relates almost entirely to the Ahlul Hadith, not the Saudis.

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

Brother mukhtar:

Did you get my email?

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

1. With what a courage have you classified Mamatis as Salafis ! The only issue in which they differ with you is that they don't accept your version of Aqeedah about the life of Sayyedna Muhammad SWS. They are more staunch Muqalids than you and it is this staunchness in Hanfism that Ahmed Saeed Multani wrote the book against Imam Bukhari ra.
The only faction with in the deobandis which is close to Salafis is the "Panjiri" group and they are not
orthodox mamatis. I wonder the way you people have pushed the Mamatis out of Deobandism in Pakistan , if the same standards are applied universally , i am sure that 60 % of Deobandis will come out to be Mamatis.


With what courage have you failed to understand what I said. I didn't say that Mamatis are Salafis, but that some are, and even those who aren't can't be used against Hayatis.



2. Br Usmaniqadir said that the Ahli Hadiths call the 20 Rakaat Tarwaeeh to be "Bidat e Umeri". He also promised me to provide the reference for the Ahli Hadiths usage of this terminology but almost 24 hours since then and the thread has been derailed to save the face of him.

How many threads were derailed so that you could save face? Maybe I should start saving the links.



3. Instead of beating your favorite horse against me which is the false accusation of contempt of Imam Abu Hanifa rahimuhullah by me,

Yeah, I'm sure someone who spread stories that Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma: allowed the worship of shoes has no contempt for him.


i would suggest you to try you hands on the past Hanafis who fabricated Hadiths to slander Imam Shafi rahimuhullah.
Recorded in Sahih Ibn Hibban
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَعْدَانَ الْأَزْدِيُّ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، مَرْفُوعًا: «يَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي رَجُلٌ يُقَالُ لَهُ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِدْرِيسَ، أَضَرُّ عَلَى أُمَّتِي مِنْ إِبْلِيسَ، وَيَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي رَجُلٌ يُقَالُ لَهُ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ، هُوَ سِرَاجُ أُمَّتِي

Rough translation " The Prophet PBUh said that there will be born a man in my Ummah by the name of Muhammad bin Idrees (Imam Shahfi ra). His calamity upon the Ummah will be greater than that of Ibless. Another person by the name of Nauman bin Thabit will be born and he will be the lamp of mu Ummah" (Included in Maw'doaat by Imam Sayauti in Tadreeb 'ur ray')

It's hilarious how you like to argue but can't seem to understand anything. I clearly said that many of the Imams have been attacked, slandered, etc., and that we today do not have the right to bring those attacks up because later scholars have addressed and clarified those matters. My problem with you is that you brought up those slanders in a time when they should not have been brought up.

Who repeats that slander against Imam Shafi` :rahma: in this age? No one, and that's entirely the point which you can't seem to get.

Oh, and by the way, whoever translated that should try to do a better job, because there's no reason to use Imam Abu Hanifa's :rahma: lesser known name when the actual report states "Abu Hanifa."

[Aspirer]

:salam:

Brother Aspirer:

I'm sorry if this sounds rude, but I don't think anyone is really convinced by your claims of wanting to objectively discern the reality of the matters which you are discussing/arguing. You suddenly went from being a Hanafi to saying you have no Madhab because you are a layman (I wonder if you were a layman when you were a Hanafi), saying you take fatawa from Salafis, and arguing in favor of all of their positions, regardless of whether or not you have any actual knowledge of what you speak of, regardless of how ridiculous their opinions they be.

Do laymen have a mad'hab? It's a clear position on the part of some that they do not. Is this a position I'm allowed to adopt, as I previously adopted that they did have them, or is it invalid? I assure you that I want to discern the truth and frankly the explanations advanced to me by various articles and fatawa of the Ulema of Deoband were not really consistent in explaining one principle or the other to the point that I stopped making taqleed of them.

Why do some positions get the distinction of being 'ridiculous' and some do not?


You may have retracted your statements in the other thread, but that was after incessantly arguing a position you had absolutely no basis for, other than repeatedly claiming that Ibn Taymiyyah's :rahma: positions were "well known." You only retracted your statements because you had no where to go, and even then it looked like you only wanted to get out of the predicament you put yourself in. You can claim all you want that you sincerely want to learn the truth, but you are not at all showing that with your posting behavior, just like dr.ati's initial claim of being a confused Deobandi was made very suspicious when he immediately began arguing Ahlul Hadith positions and slandering Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma:.

No, I was clearly incorrect- I retracted my statements because I was incorrect. There's clearly work to be done in that regard, and if the other person who was arguing on the other side was right- then there's no problem with that. So I was wrong. I'm willing to admit that. You must, however, admit, that certain opinions of Ibn Taymiyyah's :rahim: could certainly give an impression as to my side, such as The Friends of Allah and the Friends of Shaytaan- whether that impression was correct or not is up in the air now.


You said you don't care what the Ahlul Hadith scholars say? Ajeeb! You attempt to defend them and their positions, and then immediately say that you are ignorant of their positions and that you don't care what they have to say. Then why did you speak about their positions in the first place? If you want to claim that you were speaking in reference to the Saudi Salafis and their position, then again this speaks of your ignorance, because this entire issue of 8 rakaah Taraweeh relates almost entirely to the Ahlul Hadith, not the Saudis.

I see, so does Sheikh al-Albani :rahim: not count as a Salafi? He was of the opinion that it should be 11 and no more. He has a right to that position just like the Ahl-e-Hadith scholars do. And the Saudi Salafis, like Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim: say that any number is fine because there was clearly no number set in stone by the Prophet :saw:.

I do not take fatwa from Ahl-e-Hadith because I find them to be pointlessly sectarian, sort of like Deobandis in the West seem to have turned out.

[Ace Abbas]

Do not take it your heart bro Hnablai as well as shafi and maliki are also Muslims why you are getting angry on such a small thing if i am wrong you can make me correct as i am seeker of knowledge but u got angry......

Lol welcome to Sunni Forum.

[maneatinglizard]

:salam:

First of all, I want to apologize if my last post seemed rude or offensive. I just want to warn you that your posts don't seem sincere sometimes, even though I'm pretty sure they are.


Do laymen have a mad'hab?

Laymen can have a Madhab, that much is agreed upon. Whether or not it is obligatory is the matter of debate, and I do certainly feel that it being obligatory is the correct opinion, which is why I follow that opinion.


It's a clear position on the part of some that they do not. Is this a position I'm allowed to adopt, as I previously adopted that they did have them, or is it invalid?

Obviously, I can't really say whether or not that opinion is valid or not, but I can certainly say that it is dangerous to not affiliate oneself with a legal tradition when there is nothing forcing us to do so. The other opinion was a luxury in the days when Sharia was enforced upon the people; nowadays there is too much confusion and deviance to allow laypeople to follow opinions arbitrarily.


I assure you that I want to discern the truth and frankly the explanations advanced to me by various articles and fatawa of the Ulema of Deoband were not really consistent in explaining one principle or the other to the point that I stopped making taqleed of them.

And the Salafis are consistent? They can't even agree upon exactly how stringent a person should be in following their Madhab.


Why do some positions get the distinction of being 'ridiculous' and some do not?

So are you proposing that all opinions are ridiculous, or that none of them are? If not, then obviously some are ridiculous and some aren't. We may disagree on which positions fit into which category, but I don't see why you would ask this question.

As for their ridiculous positions, how about their position that singing Nasheeds is haram because Sufis do it? Or that having prayer rows marked by lines is a bid`ah, but having speakers is okay? I mean, I'm sure I could make a list of ridiculous Salafi opinions, but what good will that do if you can just arbitrarily disassociate yourself from any opinion that you don't like. Do you see the dangers of this path?


No, I was clearly incorrect- I retracted my statements because I was incorrect. There's clearly work to be done in that regard, and if the other person who was arguing on the other side was right- then there's no problem with that. So I was wrong. I'm willing to admit that. You must, however, admit, that certain opinions of Ibn Taymiyyah's :rahim: could certainly give an impression as to my side, such as The Friends of Allah and the Friends of Shaytaan- whether that impression was correct or not is up in the air now.

:alhamd: the impression I got was that you were just backing out of the discussion to save face.


I see, so does Sheikh al-Albani :rahim: not count as a Salafi? He was of the opinion that it should be 11 and no more.

I said that the opinion of 8 raka`ah taraweeh is the primarily the opinion of the Ahlul Hadith, and not the Saudi Salafis. Albani :rahma: was not a Saudi Salafi, so I don't know why bringing him up would create a problem with what I said.


He has a right to that position just like the Ahl-e-Hadith scholars do.

I'm sure you are aware that there is considerable debate as to whether or not he had the right to hold any opinion.


And the Saudi Salafis, like Ibn Taymiyyah :rahim: say that any number is fine because there was clearly no number set in stone by the Prophet :saw:.

Going back to my original question: can I pray 1000 rakaat taraweeh?


I do not take fatwa from Ahl-e-Hadith because I find them to be pointlessly sectarian, sort of like Deobandis in the West seem to have turned out.

This is absolutely hilarious that you'd say this. The Salafis are the absolute most sectarian group there is, far more than any Deobandi. The Salafis believe that anyone without their explicit Aqeeda is a mubtadi`/kaffir, depending on their level of extremism, and so you decided to follow them instead of the so called sectarian Deobandis? Have you actually listened to a Deobandi, or read one of their books? It's ajeeb. This very forum that you are posting on is supposedly Deobandi, and it's the only forum you'll find where a large portion of the members don't actively attack other groups, and yet you call the "Western Deobandis" sectarian. Are the IA members not sectarian? Are the Madkhalis not sectarian?

Again, this last statement reeks of confirmation bias and and insincerity. You may be sincere, but if you really think that Deobandis are more sectarian than Saudi Salafis, then you're also blinded into denying reality (sorry to say it, but I honestly believe that's true).

[Shahed-560]

See, the problem here is, Wahabi/Salafi are same people. The problem is, there are a lot of people wrongly allying themselves to this group, mostly either for the sake of money or to look more authentic. You'll see a group of people wearing red falasteeni handkerchiefs over their heads to look more "arab". These people are not the real wahabis, rather... they just want to look "cool" by setting the trend.

The real wahabis are Hanbali Salafis; on the other hand, this group does not adhere to any madhab, and their so-called "Ahlul Hadeeth" sect has been going through different phases since the time of their birth ( 1888 ) .

The major problem with the real Wahabis is just that they are very strict, rather , hasty in passing the fatwa of shirk and kufr upon people. This is why the mainstream Ahlus sunnah has always had a beef with them.

On the other hand, the innovators have started calling themselves the real "sunnis" and whoever doesn't agree with their bid'aat and customs and rituals, is labelled a wahabi. So the other side has been using Wahabi as a curse word, so that they can label anyone a Wahabi and people won't listen to him/her.

The truth about the real wahabis is that they are Ahlus sunnah wal Jama'ah, but untrustworthy in their fatawa as they don't do enough research , rather emphasize on their own opinions and if someone doesn't accept them, is labelled a deviant.

I believe brother Usman has beautifully described two extreme groups in the last two paragraphs, while one exceeds in innovations, the other is ever ready to shoot with 'deviant' bullets if you disagree with them.

[dr.ati]

Nops i have written that read my wordings clearly but you did not they did not started it as a sunnat they started it on the order of britians and proof is not gone and what about Takleed you did not have passed any comment on that ......................

let me rephrase what you are trying to say

1. Rafa ul Yadain is proven from Hadiths
2.The Ahli Hadiths started doing Rafa ul Yadain by the order of British

This leads us to the conclusion

1.Muslims of India did not use to act on the Hadiths of Rafa ul Yadain and had abrogated a Sunnah.
2.The Ahli Hadiths revived the Sunnah of Rafa ul Yadain by the order of British

If that is the case then thumbs up for the British and Ahli Hadiths though i do wonder why the British will be interested in reviving a Sunnah.

[Aspirer]

:salam:

First of all, I want to apologize if my last post seemed rude or offensive. I just want to warn you that your posts don't seem sincere sometimes, even though I'm pretty sure they are.

:ws:

It's quite alright.


Laymen can have a Madhab, that much is agreed upon. Whether or not it is obligatory is the matter of debate, and I do certainly feel that it being obligatory is the correct opinion, which is why I follow that opinion.

I respectfully disagree that it is obligatory, as many have in the past. All the best to you, though.



Obviously, I can't really say whether or not that opinion is valid or not, but I can certainly say that it is dangerous to not affiliate oneself with a legal tradition when there is nothing forcing us to do so. The other opinion was a luxury in the days when Sharia was enforced upon the people; nowadays there is too much confusion and deviance to allow laypeople to follow opinions arbitrarily.

Anyone who would follow opinions arbitrarily would do it whether they followed a mad'hab or not. What keeps a person from following arbitrary dispensations or opinions is their willpower, commitment to the religion, their taqwa and their iman. If they lack these things, then they will, as many layman Hanafis do, neglect the tenets of the mad'hab which are wajib (praying all Sunnah, growing a beard of one fist-length minimum, covering the head) while still identifying as such.


And the Salafis are consistent? They can't even agree upon exactly how stringent a person should be in following their Madhab.

That's a fiqh issue, so who cares?




So are you proposing that all opinions are ridiculous, or that none of them are? If not, then obviously some are ridiculous and some aren't. We may disagree on which positions fit into which category, but I don't see why you would ask this question.

As for their ridiculous positions, how about their position that singing Nasheeds is haram because Sufis do it? Or that having prayer rows marked by lines is a bid`ah, but having speakers is okay? I mean, I'm sure I could make a list of ridiculous Salafi opinions, but what good will that do if you can just arbitrarily disassociate yourself from any opinion that you don't like. Do you see the dangers of this path?

Asked it so you would give examples.

Well, given that none of the people I take fatwa from hold these opinions (checked), I don't see how disassociating from them will be a problem.



:alhamd: the impression I got was that you were just backing out of the discussion to save face.

Don't see how that would work, my face was clearly not saved.


I said that the opinion of 8 raka`ah taraweeh is the primarily the opinion of the Ahlul Hadith, and not the Saudi Salafis. Albani :rahma: was not a Saudi Salafi, so I don't know why bringing him up would create a problem with what I said.

Well yes, but they certainly think of it as a valid number to perform. Requiring it and not leaving room for anything else is the sort of pointless sectarianism that I referred to which turns me off from the Ahl-e-Hadith jamaat.


I'm sure you are aware that there is considerable debate as to whether or not he had the right to hold any opinion.



Going back to my original question: can I pray 1000 rakaat taraweeh?

He was a muhaddith, whether some people like it or not. He had some strange opinions based on his research and his un-affiliation to a legal tradition; in it were elements of the Dhahiri approach. Was Ibn Hazm qualified to hold opinions? He had some strange ones too, like that you couldn't urinate into standing water and then use it to wash, but you could urinate into a bottle and pour it into standing water and use it to wash. Maybe some of his opinions were wrong or outside the schools. Big deal, he was still a scholar.

That would be very difficult. It's also a dumb question. 11-36 is the range most people pray in and the position that any of them is accurate because no number is fixed is the best way to avoid bickering.


This is absolutely hilarious that you'd say this. The Salafis are the absolute most sectarian group there is, far more than any Deobandi. The Salafis believe that anyone without their explicit Aqeeda is a mubtadi`/kaffir, depending on their level of extremism, and so you decided to follow them instead of the so called sectarian Deobandis? Have you actually listened to a Deobandi, or read one of their books? It's ajeeb. This very forum that you are posting on is supposedly Deobandi, and it's the only forum you'll find where a large portion of the members don't actively attack other groups, and yet you call the "Western Deobandis" sectarian. Are the IA members not sectarian? Are the Madkhalis not sectarian?

I have read plenty of Deobandi books and I took fatwa from AskImam/Darul Iftaa for a long time. What is 'ajeeb?' I don't speak Urdu.

The question is, is there sectarianism that is necessary and sectarianism that isn't necessary? I think there is. You think so too; obviously, or else everyone who called themselves 'Muslim' would be a Muslim even if they worshipped Buddha or something. So there are criterion. And people who don't fulfill the criterion, aren't Muslim. That's good. Is there a second set of criterion? Seems like. Deobandis say, 'Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah are Ashari or Maturidi and follow one of the four schools.' So this pushes out other groups: Mutazil'ah, Jahmi. It would also appear to push out Salafis, who do not follow either of those Imams in aqeedah; but then you look a little deeper and a strange thing happens.

Nobody seems to agree on this. The fatwa site for the main Darul Uloom says Salafis are Ahlus Sunnah and the difference in aqeedah does not matter; AskImam says three different things depending on the time period, MuftiSays says the aqeedah of Salafis is correct and also says that every scholar that came after Abul Hasan al-Ashari :rahim: was an Ashari (bwuh)? Aqaidul Islam (by Maulana Ilyas Kandhalvi) says one thing about Aqeedah and Sharh Aqaid Nasafi says another (says a WHOLE LOT of another, might I add). Mufti Abdur-Rahman Ibn Yusuf Mangera says that many early Hanbalis were straight anthropomorphists until Ibn Taymiyyah and then became crypto-anthropomorphists. The current Sheikhul-Hadith at Darul Uloom Deoband echoes this (if I recall correctly, perhaps I do not); these beliefs are in accordance with Sharh Aqaid (Hanbalis are refuted on pages 59, 60, and 66 of the English translation for holding a position that Salafis hold today; interesting, hmm). The former beliefs are not.

I read Sharh Aqaid. It's incomprehensible slop. I don't know why it was written. It reads like one of those books that parents threaten their children with, that if they're bad they'll read it to them until they beg for mercy. Maybe I'm just too stupid to get it, who knows?

All I want is a little consistency where it matters. I don't care what people do in fiqh issues as long as they're convinced that what they're doing is the right way to be doing it. But these things? They bothered me and they didn't stop bothering me.

And I don't give a monkey's fiddle about Madkhalis, so yeah.

[dr.ati]

With what courage have you failed to understand what I said. I didn't say that Mamatis are Salafis, but that some are, and even those who aren't can't be used against Hayatis.

Kindly view the first Fatwa of Mufti Ibrahim Desai and tell me if he is Hayati or Mamati

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?39818-Mufti-Ebrahim-Desai-vs.-Mufti-Ebrahim-Desai

How many threads were derailed so that you could save face? Maybe I should start saving the links.

Kindly do so and highlight them to me so that i can correct my mistakes.


Yeah, I'm sure someone who spread stories that Imam Abu Hanifa :rahma: allowed the worship of shoes has no contempt for him.

I have told you more than 10 times that i don't believe that Imam Abu Hanifa Rahimuhullah deemed it correct to worship a shoe to gain the nearness of Allah. I just said that such a narration is there in Tareekh Al Baghdad from which someone was qouting the manaqib of Muhammad bin Hassan Al-Shaibani

Who repeats that slander against Imam Shafi` :rahma: in this age? No one, and that's entirely the point which you can't seem to get.

The slander has been repeated many times though i don't want to get into it as it is of no use and relevance in this age.

Oh, and by the way, whoever translated that should try to do a better job, because there's no reason to use Imam Abu Hanifa's :rahma: lesser known name when the actual report states "Abu Hanifa."

I translated it and the same narration has been reported with both the name and Kuniya of Imam Abu Hanifa ra.

[maneatinglizard]

let me rephrase what you are trying to say

1. Rafa ul Yadain is proven from Hadiths
2.The Ahli Hadiths started doing Rafa ul Yadain by the order of British

This leads us to the conclusion

1.Muslims of India did not use to act on the Hadiths of Rafa ul Yadain and had abrogated a Sunnah.
2.The Ahli Hadiths revived the Sunnah of Rafa ul Yadain by the order of British

If that is the case then thumbs up for the British and Ahli Hadiths though i do wonder why the British will be interested in reviving a Sunnah.

How about they created fitna by leaving one established sunnah for another and then spreading confusion amongst the masses by attacking the first established position?

I don't care whether the British were involved or not (and they almost definitely weren't), because what they did still created fitna.

[dr.ati]

How about they created fitna by leaving one established sunnah for another and then spreading confusion amongst the masses by attacking the first established position?

I don't care whether the British were involved or not (and they almost definitely weren't), because what they did still created fitna.

So then this fitna was initiated by Imam Shafi and Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal? What about Imam Bukhari who wrote "Juz -al- Qirra'at Wa Juz -al- Rafa -ul- Yadain" ? All of them came after Imam ABu Hanifa so according to your logic , they steered fitna as well? Were they not aware of the Hanafi position on Rafa Ul Yadain?
By the way , which established Sunnah did they leave?

[rqsnnt]

How about they created fitna by leaving one established sunnah for another and then spreading confusion amongst the masses by attacking the first established position?



:salam:

Partial text from comment of Imam Tirmidi about hadith of Rafa ul Yadain.

And Abdullah bin Mubarak said: 'the hadith of the one who raises his hands is established, ' and he mentioned the hadith of Salim from his father (Ibn Umar), 'and the hadith of ibn Mas'ood is not established, "that the Prophet did not raise his hands except the first time"'.

Brother is't very strange to say fitna! Comment of Imam Tirmidi is showing which one is established or not.


:jazak:

[ahamed_sharif]

Assalamu alaykum


So then this fitna was initiated by Imam Shafi and Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal? What about Imam Bukhari who wrote "Juz -al- Qirra'at Wa Juz -al- Rafa -ul- Yadain" ? All of them came after Imam ABu Hanifa so according to your logic , they steered fitna as well? Were they not aware of the Hanafi position on Rafa Ul Yadain?

Can you please explain the difference between the view of 'Imam shafi and Imam Ahamed ibn Hanbal' and the present day 'ahlo hadeeth' on qiraat behind imam and rafa ul yadain.

It was not a fitnah for 1300 years. It did get turned to a fitnah recently. Can Dr.ati and rqnsst comment on this.

[suleimanibnsalim]

I read Sharh Aqaid. It's incomprehensible slop. I don't know why it was written. It reads like one of those books that parents threaten their children with, that if they're bad they'll read it to them until they beg for mercy. Maybe I'm just too stupid to get it, who knows?

You are taking it too far, brother. Have you not read the harsh hanbali refutations of ash'aris?

Believe what you want about the sharh. The fact you are not aware that "'ajeeb" is an Arabic word may say something about how qualified you are to decipher the sharh al-'aqa'id. Why don't you read some of the most celebrated primers of usul al-fiqh? I'm sure you'll get the same impression; many 'ulama do not fully comprehend usul al-fiqh to its fullest extent, due to the prerequisite sciences needed to master it. It is interesting that a large portion if not the majority of primers of usul al-fiqh were written upon the "tariqat al-mutakallimin", and borrowed the systematization from the works of Kalam. You should have a look at the evolution of usul al-fiqh texts. The ash'ari and maturidi methodology did alot for Islam. Even if you may disagree with them, please maintain a level of respect for them.

was-salam

[Aspirer]

You are taking it too far, brother. Have you not read the harsh hanbali refutations of ash'aris?

Yes, and they're all based on hadith and athar and Qur'an. I have yet to see statements of the Salaf approving of Kalam as a science that can be compared to the statements that made clear their rejection of it.


Believe what you want about the sharh. The fact you are not aware that "'ajeeb" is an Arabic word may say something about how qualified you are to decipher the sharh al-'aqa'id. Why don't you read some of the most celebrated primers of usul al-fiqh? I'm sure you'll get the same impression; many 'ulama do not fully comprehend usul al-fiqh to its fullest extent, due to the prerequisite sciences needed to master it. It is interesting that a large portion if not the majority of primers of usul al-fiqh were written upon the "tariqat al-mutakallimin", and borrowed the systematization from the works of Kalam. You should have a look at the evolution of usul al-fiqh texts. The ash'ari and maturidi methodology did alot for Islam. Even if you may disagree with them, please maintain a level of respect for them.

was-salam

What effect would knowing whether a word is arabic or not have on deciphering a translation of Sharh Aqaid? It's not in Arabic.

If someone can explain to me what Kalam did that was positive, and explain why the Salaf unanimously condemned Kalam in all ways, shapes, and forms, and yet this didn't apply to Ashar'i Kalam, and then explain a number of other things then I'm willing to respect it.

It is clear that some form of background studying is indeed required to understand Sharh Aqaid. Background in what? should be the next question. If someone spent ten years studying Qur'an and Hadith was handed Sharh Aqaid, what would he make of it without a background in other matters not established in Qur'an and Hadith? Would he recognize it as something drawn or established from Qur'an and Hadith?

Until then, considering the attitude of the Hanbalis towards it- which was a mixture of derision, rejection, and outrage excepting a few, I don't see why respect in this case is necessarily required. I am not interested in respecting it simply because other people have respected it who were more intelligent and learned than me- it can easily be proven that other people who were as intelligent and learned as those people rejected it categorically, so that's not an argument. What did Imam Shafi'i :rahim:, Imam Malik :rahim:, and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal :rahim: say about Kalam?

I am certainly not qualified to 'refute' it, but it doesn't sit well with some thinking. Is this the aqidah that the Prophet :saw: brought and spoke of to bedouins from the desert? Where did the Prophet :saw: talk about accidents and bodies, and the need to prove that the non-existent is not a thing? Why is it that no two people who say 'the Sharh represents my aqeedah' can ever be counted on to agree with what's in it concerning Hanbalis and concerning other things? Why do the Ulema of Deoband vary so wildly on this if it's so simple and self-evident?

If you can answer these questions, I will respect it. I'm willing to listen.

[rqsnnt]

Assalamu alaykum



Can you please explain the difference between the view of 'Imam shafi and Imam Ahamed ibn Hanbal' and the present day 'ahlo hadeeth' on qiraat behind imam and rafa ul yadain.

It was not a fitnah for 1300 years. It did get turned to a fitnah recently. Can Dr.ati and rqnsst comment on this.

:bism:
:salam:


Can you please explain the difference between the view of 'Imam shafi and Imam Ahamed ibn Hanbal' and the present day 'ahlo hadeeth' on qiraat behind imam and rafa ul yadain.

I think there is no difference view between Imam shafi and Imam Ahamed ibn Hanbal' and the present day 'ahlo hadeeth' on qiraat behind imam and rafa ul yadain. They r following Authentic hadith.



It was not a fitnah for 1300 years. It did get turned to a fitnah recently. Can Dr.ati and rqnsst comment on this.

As a person u may have ur own opinion & comments. I don't agree with u & i have no comment.:cheesygri

Plz read post #125 to see comments of others about rafa ul yadain.

:jazak:

[Ace Abbas]

You are taking it too far, brother. Have you not read the harsh hanbali refutations of ash'aris?

was-salam

Salam. Brother, you haven't answered my question.

This is what you've posted on 14-06-2011, at 04:36 PM:
I'm not really bothered about what you said about wahhabis (I'm not a wahhabi, and disagree with them on numerous points); what I am bothered about, and I suspect this is the case for many other users here, is that you badmouth the wahhabis on the rafidi forum!

And my reply was (14-06-2011, at 10:47 PM):
Okay, I'm a bit confused here. First, you said that you disagree with the Wahhabis on numerous points. But at the same time you are scolding me for badmouth the Wahhabis on the Rafidi forum. Brother, if you disagree with them, why are you scolding me for badmouth the Wahhabis on the Rafidi forum? I don't understand. Mind to explain, please?

[حسان 30]

Salam. Brother, you haven't answered my question.

This is what you've posted on 14-06-2011, at 04:36 PM:
I'm not really bothered about what you said about wahhabis (I'm not a wahhabi, and disagree with them on numerous points); what I am bothered about, and I suspect this is the case for many other users here, is that you badmouth the wahhabis on the rafidi forum!

And my reply was (14-06-2011, at 10:47 PM):
Okay, I'm a bit confused here. First, you said that you disagree with the Wahhabis on numerous points. But at the same time you are scolding me for badmouth the Wahhabis on the Rafidi forum. Brother, if you disagree with them, why are you scolding me for badmouth the Wahhabis on the Rafidi forum? I don't understand. Mind to explain, please?

Because the Raafidhis are kuffaar, and it doesn't make sense to bad mouth a Muslim to a Kaafir.

[Ace Abbas]

Because the Raafidhis are kuffaar, and it doesn't make sense to bad mouth a Muslim to a Kaafir.

I didn't ask you. I asked brother suleimanibnsalim. So, stay away.

[Shahed-560]

Kindly let him provide a reference for what he said. Atleast i am ready to change my mind. If he did not provide a reference then it means that he just transmitted a hearsay to accuse the Ahli Hadiths and that itself is enough to deem him a liar per the Hadith of Sayyedna Muhammad SWS.

لسلام عليكم

Well, here is Saudi all masajids excepting Haramain Sharifain pray only 8 Rakah instead of 20 Rakah, established by Sayidina Umar (RA) and which was being done until so called Ahle Hadees proponents started 8 Rakah with all vigor. Action speaks louder than speech. Why do you think they do not pray 20 Rakah? Is not it due the fact that they consider it to be bidah? This brother I think has rightly termed it from their point of view as bidah-e-Umri. Why you are asking for proof and I do not understand why the brother even agreed to provide you proof?

We get bobmerded daily with bidah bidah from the so called Ahle Hadees brothers here in Saudi (specially from the sub-continent orgin) Dawah Al-Irshad in all matters that do not conform to their way and you are asking here for proof? If you are somehow tricked into discussions by these Ahle Hadees brothers and if the subject of Taraweeh come up, you will definitely hear from them if not exactly the word Bidah-e-Umari, similar to it and the last line is we follow only Quran and Sahih Hadees. I did once ask an Ahle Hadees brother when he started pastering me too much - "why don't you start cleansing Haramain Sharifain of so called bidah of 20 Rakah Taraweeh first? How do you tolerate bidah in your own front yard?" He had no answer. And we call Shias as Gustakh-e-Sahaba!!

There was an incidence when one of their so called knowledgeable person wanted to argue with one Mufti in the pretext of discussing issues. Agreed time to meet was after Maghrib and Mufti Sahab made it amply clear that he will only clarify issues and won't embark into argument and did not have much time to spare. Ahle Hadees brother with his retinue came after 10:00pm. One of our elderly brothers was also with Mufti Sahab at that time. So what I am narrating is that I heard from this brother which I have no reason to doubt. Mufti Sahab made it clear that appointed time was after Maghrib and accepted their excuses. When a certain question was asked Mufti Sahab asked them as to what type of daleel they will accept, from Quran, Sunnah of Rasool (SWA) or Ijmah on the issue. Since they did not respond Mufti Sahab said that he would provide daleel from Quran and provided accordingly. However, without any comments of understanding on the issue they came up with a 'but' to open up argument. Mufti Sahab then very politely excused himself refusing to take part in such futile arguments after providing daleel from Quaran.

You see, the same thing I see in this forum who are Ahle Hadees or support their views. After reading few book and browsing internet sites they feel that they are qualified to discuss/argue on deep Sharai issues. They then start developing the habit of arguments to defeat the opponents like the brother in the above incidence who was not an Alim but thought he is qualified to discuss or argue issues with a Mufti. This is their general attitude.

[suleimanibnsalim]

I didn't ask you. I asked brother suleimanibnsalim. So, stay away.

because rafidah are much worse than wahhabis.

[حسان 30]

I didn't ask you. I asked brother suleimanibnsalim. So, stay away.

lol

Too bad for you this is an open forum and I can come and go as a i please.

[Ace Abbas]

because rafidah are much worse than wahhabis.

What does that have to do with me badmouthing them?

[din4932]

Asslam o aliakum

stop saying bad word

[mh16388]

See, the problem here is, Wahabi/Salafi are same people. The problem is, there are a lot of people wrongly allying themselves to this group, mostly either for the sake of money or to look more authentic. You'll see a group of people wearing red falasteeni handkerchiefs over their heads to look more "arab". These people are not the real wahabis, rather... they just want to look "cool" by setting the trend.

correct

The real wahabis are Hanbali Salafis;
correct

The major problem with the real Wahabis is just that they are very strict, rather , hasty in passing the fatwa of shirk and kufr upon people. This is why the mainstream Ahlus sunnah has always had a beef with them.
agreed. cant call a muslim a kafir just like tht


On the other hand, the innovators have started calling themselves the real "sunnis" and whoever doesn't agree with their bid'aat and customs and rituals, is labelled a wahabi. So the other side has been using Wahabi as a curse word, so that they can label anyone a Wahabi and people won't listen to him/her.
absolutely correct. i read this comment and the correct wording really impressed me masha Allah


The truth about the real wahabis is that they are Ahlus sunnah wal Jama'ah, but untrustworthy in their fatawa as they don't do enough research , rather emphasize on their own opinions and if someone doesn't accept them, is labelled a deviant.

i dont know about not much research. but even after a lot of research and full understanding of the topic it is wrong to assume labels.
Here is a hadith you may like:
`Itban bin Malik (May Allah be pleased with him) said in his long Hadith cited in the Chapter entitled `Hope' reported: When the Prophet (PBUH) stood up to offer As-Salat (the prayer) he asked, "Where is Malik bin Ad-Dukhshum?'' A man replied: "He is a hypocrite. He does not love Allah and His Messenger.'' The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Do not say that. Do you not know that he said: La ilaha illallah (there is no true god except Allah),' seeking His Pleasure. Allah has made the fire of Hell unlawful for him who affirms that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah.''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

[mh16388]

Who cares? Simply have good relation with all. Stay away from debate and respect scholars no matter who they are and stay away from those people who add fuel to fire by speaking complex matters of deen to laymen. The laymen then sees only one side and lables others. There are various people of various level of understanding. Some are overzealot in their stance and some are more tolarent. So my humble advise would to stick to those scholars or muslim who are respectful. Associate yourself with those who follow the due process and is respectful and those who value knowledge and wisdom.
Allahualam

i read somewhere that 'good manners are a manifestation of emaan in a person'...that says a lot about a person when you put their behavior into perspective

[Musleemah]

http://www.islamiccentre.org/presentations/wahhabi.pdf

What a load of garbage, the file does not even support their claims with proof.


http://mailofislam.com/uploads/Difference_Between_Sunni_and_Wahabi.pdf


So that one is not authentic ??

Yes, it is not authentic, most of it is lies.

[Musleemah]

An Article On Their Beliefs :



Salafis and their like minded groups worship a Sky God who has two hands, two eyes, a face, a mouth and tongue in the mouth, two shins, legs, fingers in hands and feet, and a huge human like physical body; who is sitting on a big chair on the skies in a certain direction. They say that this huge Sky Idol has limitations on his movements as he cannot come near human beings, therefore, knows about them, only by his knowledge. They call this human-like-Deity ( المعبود مثل الإنسان ) as Allah.

It is important to understand the perception of God by Salafis, Christians and Hindus who worship Idol Gods in different formats. Salafis call their Sky God as Allah because God is translated in Arabic as Allah. Similarly, Christians in Arabic, Persian and Urdu translations of Bible, refer to their God as Allah. Islamic perception of Allah ( سبحانہ و تعا لی ) is completely different from the idolized perception of Hindus, Salafis, Christians and other people.

Salafis also claim that their Sky Idol God is one of its kind, self made, independent, neither beget nor begotten. They claim they are Muslims and misinterpret following Quranic verses to describe their Sky God.



قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ . اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ . لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ . وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُوًا أَحَد (Meaning – Say, He is the God, the one and only. God, the eternal and absolute. He begets not, nor is he begotten. And there is none like him. (Ikhlas 1-4).


They also claim that their Sky God has created this Universe. They worship this Sky Idol and prostrate in front of him 5-times a day during their prayer.

Ibn Baz (1910-1999) the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia wrote: (Their Sky) God has (i) a physical body (al-jism), (ii) He is physically sitting on the sky, and (iii) He has limbs, hands, eyes, tongue, face and other body parts. Read more…


Dr. Zakir Naik the famous Salafi Missionary who runs a Salafi TV Channel “Peace TV”, compares their Sky God with other Gods and tries to prove that their Idol God is the greatest of all.



PHYSICAL FEATURES OF SALAFI SKY GOD



The information on the physical features of Sky God provided by Salafi Scholars does not include the following.

(i) Whether their Sky God’s body is made up of bones, flesh and blood like humans/animals or is made up of mud or metal?

(ii) Ibn Taymiyyah once physically showed to the people that their Sky God walks like human beings. If their Sky God can walk like human beings and is not physically handicapped then why does he have limitation of movements and is unable to come near human beings?

(iii) If he is like human beings, then they should provide the following information.

(a) Does he have hair on his head or is bald?

(b) Does he have mustache and beard on his face?

(c) Does he have hair on his hands, legs, chest, and other places on his body?

(d) Does he have internal organs like heart, liver, lungs, etc.?

(e) Does he have all external organs like human beings.

(f) Does he covers his body or not?


(g) There are many other things people would like to know about their Sky God, like his routine schedule, hobbies, etc.


Why do mods allow blatant lies to be posted about our beliefs?
if you are not going to remove it, at least comment and say that it is false !
Subhanallah

[mh16388]

Why do mods allow blatant lies to be posted about our beliefs?
if you are not going to remove it, at least comment and say that it is false !
Subhanallah

what this guy wrote is not true?

[Musleemah]

what this guy wrote is not true?

Are you serious?
you believe that heresy to be our belief?
sky god !
sky idol !
and a huge human like physical body !
has a mouth and tongue !
Ibn Taymiyyah once physically showed to the people that their Sky God walks like human beings !
.. etc.

A bunch of blatant lies

[mh16388]

Are you serious?
you believe that heresy to be our belief?
sky god !
sky idol !
and a huge human like physical body !
has a mouth and tongue !
Ibn Taymiyyah once physically showed to the people that their Sky God walks like human beings !
.. etc.

A bunch of blatant lies

i dont know much about salafis so i was asking:s

[Musleemah]

i dont know much about salafis so i was asking:s

Then before accepting anything said about their beliefs from their enemies, verify it by checking their sites to see for yourself what they believe in
[mod clip]
there are tons more but these should suffice.

[Mathbooh]

:salam:

Then before accepting anything said about their beliefs from their enemies, verify it by checking their sites to see for yourself what they believe in
For example ****bogus sites**** (no spaces), **bogus**
there are tons more but these should suffice.

What the heck sister?u crying for the mods to wade into this and help you out? I guess your own medicine is too bitter for you.The mods have time and again expressed therir wish to steer clear of these type of aqeedah discussions yet you and almost all of your salafi/wahhabi bretheren have come here and have limited your contributions to this site to these discussions in your endeavour to deflate and guide the deviant and corrupt beliefs of the deobandi's and their akabir.The problem went out of hand on many occasions and the mods decided to create this section,where there is less intervention by the mods.That article is a reflection of how u's come accross and the arrogant insensitivities,misinterpretation,twisting words,ridiculing e.t.c. of u's when discussing these topics.This is a taste of your own medicine so please don't cry crocodile tears and don't try to push the mods to intervene.
The way you feel now is the same way asha'aris and maturidi's feel on a daily basis when the likes of HH and the rest of the salafi clique go about launching their venemous campaign and twisting the beliefs of the maturidiyyah to suit their own agendas.

was salam

[Musleemah]

:salam:


What the heck sister?u crying for the mods to wade into this and help you out? I guess your own medicine is too bitter for you.The mods have time and again expressed therir wish to steer clear of these type of aqeedah discussions yet you and almost all of your salafi/wahhabi bretheren have come here and have limited your contributions to this site to these discussions in your endeavour to deflate and guide the deviant and corrupt beliefs of the deobandi's and their akabir.The problem went out of hand on many occasions and the mods decided to create this section,where there is less intervention by the mods.That article is a reflection of how u's come accross and the arrogant insensitivities,misinterpretation,twisting words,ridiculing e.t.c. of u's when discussing these topics.This is a taste of your own medicine so please don't cry crocodile tears and don't try to push the mods to intervene.
The way you feel now is the same way asha'aris and maturidi's feel on a daily basis when the likes of HH and the rest of the salafi clique go about launching their venemous campaign and twisting the beliefs of the maturidiyyah to suit their own agendas.

was salam

:ws:

Listen, I have nothing to do with what anyone does or says, if you see me saying such lies about Asharis or Maturidis, saying stuff like they believe in a different god than Allah ... etc. then you can say that I am getting the "taste of my own medicine".

And just because someone lies about your beliefs, it does not make it ok for you or anyone to do the same, lying is HARAM, so whether it was a salafi or an Ashari, both are accountable for their actions.

Allah will account the liar and slanderer for what he wrote, and every liar, whether it was from our side or yours, and account every person who saw it and knew it was a lie but deliberately kept silent.

As for the mods steering clear of this section of the forum, then I did not know about that, as I don't surf the forum much, I stay away for many months then visit a little then leave again, that is the case with most forums I am registered in.

p.s. read my signature.

[Mathbooh]

:salam:

:ws:

Listen, I have nothing to do with what anyone does or says, if you see me saying such lies about Asharis or Maturidis, saying stuff like they believe in a different god than Allah ... etc. then you can say that I am getting the "taste of my own medicine".

And just because someone lies about your beliefs, it does not make it ok for you or anyone to do the same, lying is HARAM, so whether it was a salafi or an Ashari, both are accountable for their actions.

Allah will account the liar and slanderer for what he wrote, and every liar, whether it was from our side or yours, and account every person who saw it and knew it was a lie but deliberately kept silent.

As for the mods steering clear of this section of the forum, then I did not know about that, as I don't surf the forum much, I stay away for many months then visit a little then leave again, that is the case with most forums I am registered in.

p.s. read my signature.

sister,I'm not going to go through your posts to knit-pick.suffice to say that you know very well the atmosphere surrounding these topics.That post was just a very simplistic and childish(imho) view of the wahhabi creed and that is exactly a mirror of what wahhabi's do all the time in the exact same manner i.e.interpreting and misrepresenting ashari/maturidi aqidah to suit their own fantasies.
Sister, since I've been back on the forum I've found you here everyday and your contributions have been limited solely to controversial aqeedah topics on which there is much ikhtilaaf.what other reason/excuse do you have for this other than the stated objective of your wahhabi bretheren that go around ridiculing,cheerleading e.t.c. like faceless paper mobs,on internet forums other than to correct the 'corrupt beliefs of the maturidiyyah/deobandi's/asharis?(ask HH to propogate his views on youtoube-he does'nt have a problem with videos-he won't do it cos spineless people love to attack others from behind the skirt of internet forums and other platforms where they are not easily identifiable.They can't come out in the open and slur the way they do on internet forums and propogate their phsycopathic vitriol.Sister could you not find other topics of the thousand of topics presented here where you could have contributed positively?
And who said it's right to lie e.t.c. I just presented my opinion that it was proposterous for you to get self-rightous when this is the type of tendencies we've become accustomed to from your side !!!
We all know about the wrongs of lies e.t.c. I was not questioning them so I don't know why you were elaborating on it's evils.I was stating that your side perpetually engage in these type of tactics,hence it's a bit disingenious for you to try and claim the moral high-ground.

was salam

[Musleemah]

:ws:


Sister, since I've been back on the forum I've found you here everyday and your contributions have been limited solely to controversial aqeedah topics on which there is much ikhtilaaf.what other reason/excuse do you have for this other than the stated objective of your wahhabi bretheren that go around ridiculing,cheerleading e.t.c.

Find me one post by me where I was ridiculing , cheerleading ..etc. (a recent one)
I do not know when you came back, nor do I know you to begin with, the first time I noticed you was a few days ago; but I came back less than a month ago, in the second half of June, and my posts are either:
- Answering a question on aqeedah, especially if it is asking about our (i.e. salafi) beliefs
- A reply to a false accusation against us, or a false claim about our belief
- A discussion between salafis and Asharis on a belief of Islam in which it is claimed that our belief isn't according to its teachings, so I get into the discussion posting proofs I believe support our belief being according to the teachings of Islam.
I did not start any thread on aqeedah, nor did I post to "cheerlead" or "ridicule" like you claim.
You do not know what is in one's heart, so do not attack other people's intentions, when you have no knowledge of it, nor is it even evident in one's posts.



And who said it's right to lie e.t.c. I just presented my opinion that it was proposterous for you to get self-rightous when this is the type of tendencies we've become accustomed to from your side !!!
We all know about the wrongs of lies e.t.c. I was not questioning them so I don't know why you were elaborating on it's evils.I was stating that your side perpetually engage in these type of tactics,hence it's a bit disingenious for you to try and claim the moral high-ground.

was salam

:ws:

You make it sound like we are the ones who started it, and that your fellow Asharis are all so righteous !
Do you know that this arguing on matters of aqeedah between salafis (i.e. Atharis) and Asharis has been going on for around a 1000 years ?
yes, it did not start with the start of this forum, it has been going on for a very long time, and I don't believe it will end soon, but it is every Muslims duty to call to what they believe is the correct beliefs, but the problem is that each side has people who are ignorant and ill mannered, who only give a bad name to their fellow Musilms who share the same beliefs.
I admire the brothers/sisters from both sides who maintain adab, and have civil discussions in these topics, without resorting to attacking the others intentions, using bad adab, making false claims about the others beliefs or person ...etc.

[Mathbooh]

:salam:

:ws:


Find me one post by me where I was ridiculing , cheerleading ..etc. (a recent one)
It was shown to you that your comments were misplaced.Upto today you have not edited this post.

:
Re: How a Sufi shaykh saved his mureed from a plane accident !!!
:salam:

Allah Ta'ala said:
{ هُوَ الَّذِي يُسَيِّرُكُمْ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ حَتَّى إِذَا كُنْتُمْ فِي الْفُلْكِ وَجَرَيْنَ بِهِمْ بِرِيحٍ طَيِّبَةٍ وَفَرِحُوا بِهَا جَاءَتْهَا رِيحٌ عَاصِفٌ وَجَاءَهُمُ الْمَوْجُ مِنْ كُلِّ مَكَانٍ وَظَنُّوا أَنَّهُمْ أُحِيطَ بِهِمْ دَعَوُا اللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ لَئِنْ أَنْجَيْتَنَا مِنْ هَذِهِ لَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الشَّاكِرِينَ (22) فَلَمَّا أَنْجَاهُمْ إِذَا هُمْ يَبْغُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّمَا بَغْيُكُمْ عَلَى أَنْفُسِكُمْ مَتَاعَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا ثُمَّ إِلَيْنَا مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَنُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ } [يونس : 22 ، 23]

{He it is Who enables you to travel through land and sea, till when you are in the ships, and they sail with them with a favourable wind, and they are glad therein, then comes a stormy wind and the waves come to them from all sides, and they think that they are encircled therein. Then they invoke Allâh, making their Faith pure for Him Alone, (saying): "If You (Allâh) deliver us from this, we shall truly be of the grateful." But when He delivers them, behold! they rebel (disobey Allâh) in the earth wrongfully. O mankind! Your rebellion (disobedience to Allâh) is only against your ownselves, - a brief enjoyment of this worldly life, then (in the end) unto Us is your return, and We shall inform you of that which you used to do.} (Quran 10:22-23)

In times of distress and extreme fear for their lives, the Arab polytheists, who worshiped idols with Allah Azza wa Jal, would forget their idols and would only supplicate to Allah to save them from the danger they are in, while this person in the story mentioned above, in time of distress, forgets Allah Azza wa Jal, and seeks help in his shaykh who is in a different land ! I guess the presence of his shaikh in his heart is more then the presence of Allah Azza wa Jal.

Subhanallah, it really shows that the shirk commited today is worse than the shirk of the past.

May Allah make us live upon Tawheed, and die upon it.




I do not know when you came back, nor do I know you to begin with, the first time I noticed you was a few days ago; but I came back less than a month ago, in the second half of June, and my posts are either:
- Answering a question on aqeedah, especially if it is asking about our (i.e. salafi) beliefs
- A reply to a false accusation against us, or a false claim about our belief
- A discussion between salafis and Asharis on a belief of Islam in which it is claimed that our belief isn't according to its teachings, so I get into the discussion posting proofs I believe support our belief being according to the teachings of Islam.
^^
I asked,do you not find any other important threads on the entire forum where you could contribute positively?



I did not start any thread on aqeedah, nor did I post to "cheerlead" or "ridicule" like you claim.
^^
You do not know what is in one's heart, so do not attack other people's intentions, when you have no knowledge of it, nor is it even evident in one's posts.
khair sister.For you in particular,I would revoke my sentiments and expressions and I apologise because I do not want to insult my muslim sister on a public forum.How I wish it was HH or Abdul Qadir in your place.





:ws:

You make it sound like we are the ones who started it, and that your fellow Asharis are all so righteous !
Do you know that this arguing on matters of aqeedah between salafis (i.e. Atharis) and Asharis has been going on for around a 1000 years ?


^^
I think you missed the point sister.I was trying to make you understand that the way you feeling is the same way we feel and your side are the primary culprits.Just go to IA and if you have a fair mind you would understand what I'm talking about.

was salam

[Musleemah]

:salam:

It was shown to you that your comments were misplaced.Upto today you have not edited this post.

:ws:
I do not remember the details of the discussion after that post of mine, but I don't mind removing my post if I was wrong in my understanding of the story.
Please post the link for the thread, because I don't know how to find it, I don't remember its title.


I asked,do you not find any other important threads on the entire forum where you could contribute positively?
well I did try one time, I checked the threads for that day, and found that the threads are either
- political, which I don't have much interest in, and usually it turns into arguments too.
- fiqh question, or discussing, and I am a layperson in fiqh
- someone having a problem and needing an advice, and it already had several pages of posts, which were more than sufficient (I read several pages of its posts)
- a controversial topic, such as something we believe is bidah or doubtful, I mean a practice, and not a belief, so I would just be causing an argument in that thread.

Because I am usually busy (especially during this period of time due to the situation in my home country) I don't browse the forums topics, I just check the thread that I am already participating in. This is the case with other forums I am a members in, like ummah, which is even more diverse, and has tons of topics, I don't browse its threads much, sometimes I go there just to share something I feel is beneficial and leave.
The only forum I check daily is the one I am a mod in.
And even in that one I don't participate very often (at least not in the past few months), depending on if I have knowledge in the topic, and if it needs my participation.
Hopefully, insha Allah, when I increase in knowledge, I will be of more benefit; Allahul Musta'an.
May Allah increase me, you, and every Muslim in beneficial knowledge.

[mh16388]

Then before accepting anything said about their beliefs from their enemies, verify it by checking their sites to see for yourself what they believe in
[mod clip]
there are tons more but these should suffice.

yes i asked you for verification.
and you verified

[Haqq-786]

Ibn Taymiyyah once physically showed to the people that their Sky God walks like human beings !
.. etc.

A bunch of blatant lies
I agree this is tantamount to heresy did these people forget of Surah Ikhlas?? "None is comparable unto Him". But serious there is a lot of clues of these Wahabbi's:
1) Their immense emnity of the Progeny(a.s) of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) - See the grand mufti of 'saudi' arabia defending the actions of Yazeed(l.a) when he butchered Hussain(a.s) in Karbala
2) The warning of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) of the people of najd (ibn Wahhab was from there) that is narrated in many Sunni AND Shi'ite sources and the fact the Saudi's not only made modern day najd their capital of the Arabian Peninsula (Riyadh) and put their family name before Arabia! Surely the 'revivalists' of Islam are Ahl ul Bidat?
3) The Saudi's true intention is apparent with a port within 'Saudi' Arabia(n Peninsula) that is made in the image of a Jewish menorah!!! Look on google maps to see for yourself! You only need to see their foreign policy to see who they really are the friend of!
4) There are some allegations made against the Wahhabi sect made in a book "Confessions of a Spy" which you can find easily insha Allah. I do not know the truth behind this but looking at all the signs mentioned before I am not surprised considering the concrete facts.
5) It is well known the Wahabbi's have slain Muslim men women AND children even one's taking shelter within the masjid. Even Muslim's praying Quran were not spared (refer to massacre of Ta'if for more info)
6) They destroyed the shrines of Ahl ul Bait(a.s) claiming it is bidat to erect building over the grave yet keep HUGE mausoleoms for their 'Saudi' ancestors and kings! These people surely are Abdus Shaytaan and they belong to Ahl ul Munafiqun, they are the living embodiment of hypocrisy and Allah the Exalted has stated in Quran:
[Shakir 33:48] And be not compliant to the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and leave unregarded their annoying talk, and rely on God; and God is sufficient as a Protector.
It is incumbent upon us to question our leaders and if they show signs of hypocrisy or disbelief then here is Allah telling us not to comply with them! Look at the example of Imam Hussain(a.s), how he went on hajj, got told assassin's were attempting to murder him disguised as pilgrims! Hussain(a.s) changes intention to umrah, leaves with his family and a few loyal warriors (very few) and is heavily outnumbered yet fought valiantly in battle and they all got martyred and his family(a.s) was captured and thrown into a jail. What was their crime? Simply being the Progeny(a.s) of the Messenger of Allah(s.a.w.w). Do these people following the likes of Yazeed and Muawiyah not know that it is compulsory to pray for Mihammad wa ale Muhammad(a.s) in their salaat or it is rendered void? Do they not know that the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) himself said that the hypocrites were known by their hatred of Ali(a.s)? Dis they not hear the tradtion of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) stating "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is it's gate" and Ali is from me and I am from him" and "whoever angers Fatima angers me, whovever angers me, angers Allah and whoever angers Allah will be thrown in Hell". These are all found in Sunni references too, don't take my word for it go look for yourself, Islam is logical religion and we are told not to blindly follow:
[Shakir 2:256] There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

So we are not forced to believe but when we do believe we shall see hypocrisy very clearly. Think of hypocrisy as a coin: on one side is the name of Allah and on the other is the name of Iblis(l.a)

[mh16388]

I agree this is tantamount to heresy did these people forget of Surah Ikhlas?? "None is comparable unto Him". But serious there is a lot of clues of these Wahabbi's:
1) Their immense emnity of the Progeny(a.s) of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) - See the grand mufti of 'saudi' arabia defending the actions of Yazeed(l.a) when he butchered Hussain(a.s) in Karbala
2) The warning of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) of the people of najd (ibn Wahhab was from there) that is narrated in many Sunni AND Shi'ite sources and the fact the Saudi's not only made modern day najd their capital of the Arabian Peninsula (Riyadh) and put their family name before Arabia! Surely the 'revivalists' of Islam are Ahl ul Bidat?
3) The Saudi's true intention is apparent with a port within 'Saudi' Arabia(n Peninsula) that is made in the image of a Jewish menorah!!! Look on google maps to see for yourself! You only need to see their foreign policy to see who they really are the friend of!
4) There are some allegations made against the Wahhabi sect made in a book "Confessions of a Spy" which you can find easily insha Allah. I do not know the truth behind this but looking at all the signs mentioned before I am not surprised considering the concrete facts.
5) It is well known the Wahabbi's have slain Muslim men women AND children even one's taking shelter within the masjid. Even Muslim's praying Quran were not spared (refer to massacre of Ta'if for more info)
6) They destroyed the shrines of Ahl ul Bait(a.s) claiming it is bidat to erect building over the grave yet keep HUGE mausoleoms for their 'Saudi' ancestors and kings! These people surely are Abdus Shaytaan and they belong to Ahl ul Munafiqun, they are the living embodiment of hypocrisy and Allah the Exalted has stated in Quran:
[Shakir 33:48] And be not compliant to the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and leave unregarded their annoying talk, and rely on God; and God is sufficient as a Protector.
It is incumbent upon us to question our leaders and if they show signs of hypocrisy or disbelief then here is Allah telling us not to comply with them! Look at the example of Imam Hussain(a.s), how he went on hajj, got told assassin's were attempting to murder him disguised as pilgrims! Hussain(a.s) changes intention to umrah, leaves with his family and a few loyal warriors (very few) and is heavily outnumbered yet fought valiantly in battle and they all got martyred and his family(a.s) was captured and thrown into a jail. What was their crime? Simply being the Progeny(a.s) of the Messenger of Allah(s.a.w.w). Do these people following the likes of Yazeed and Muawiyah not know that it is compulsory to pray for Mihammad wa ale Muhammad(a.s) in their salaat or it is rendered void? Do they not know that the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) himself said that the hypocrites were known by their hatred of Ali(a.s)? Dis they not hear the tradtion of the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.w) stating "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is it's gate" and Ali is from me and I am from him" and "whoever angers Fatima angers me, whovever angers me, angers Allah and whoever angers Allah will be thrown in Hell". These are all found in Sunni references too, don't take my word for it go look for yourself, Islam is logical religion and we are told not to blindly follow:
[Shakir 2:256] There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

So we are not forced to believe but when we do believe we shall see hypocrisy very clearly. Think of hypocrisy as a coin: on one side is the name of Allah and on the other is the name of Iblis(l.a)

in sha Allah a knowledgeable person from the above mentioned 'sect' will answer your allegations.most people like me dont have enough knowledge but they jump on the bandwagon of bashing. this is Ramazan and we shd all concentrate on our ibaadat.

[sunni_786]

:salam:


What the heck sister?u crying for the mods to wade into this and help you out? I guess your own medicine is too bitter for you.The mods have time and again expressed therir wish to steer clear of these type of aqeedah discussions yet you and almost all of your salafi/wahhabi bretheren have come here and have limited your contributions to this site to these discussions in your endeavour to deflate and guide the deviant and corrupt beliefs of the deobandi's and their akabir.The problem went out of hand on many occasions and the mods decided to create this section,where there is less intervention by the mods.That article is a reflection of how u's come accross and the arrogant insensitivities,misinterpretation,twisting words,ridiculing e.t.c. of u's when discussing these topics.This is a taste of your own medicine so please don't cry crocodile tears and don't try to push the mods to intervene.
The way you feel now is the same way asha'aris and maturidi's feel on a daily basis when the likes of HH and the rest of the salafi clique go about launching their venemous campaign and twisting the beliefs of the maturidiyyah to suit their own agendas.

was salam



A-uzoo-billahi-minishaytaanirajeem-bismillahirahmaan-iraheem
laa ilaaha illalaahu- muhammadurasoolullah
assalaamualaikum-warahmatullahi-wabarakatuhu

I am new to this website and I don't know how to use this website quite yet. Iam sorry sister if I have interupted but I would like to ask a question regarding wahabis. A friend of mine is a sunni, but his 3 brothers and sister-in-kaws are wahabis. I don't get it how can that be. HE LIVES WITH THEM AND EATS WITH THEM. aLSO HOWEVER HIS MOTHER IS A SUNI TOO and his father. But how can a suni live with wahabis. Plus if a sunni msulim girl gets married to the sunni boy. Is that allowed, because she will also be living with the wahabis.
Please can you help me answer this questuion
Jazakhallah-hu- khayra

[xs11ax]

Bismillah
Wahabyte are also part of Ahle Sunnah Wal Jammah. Please do not use the word sunni as if it is only one set of people. People are quick to use these lables without knowing the context. Little bit of respect goes a long way.
Allahualam

:salam:

he is probably a barelwi, hence thinks that only barelwi are sunnis.

[brother19791]

i agree with what bro usman qadir has said :

The only people apart from shia who disrespect the sahaba , auliya Allah are ahle-hadith..

based on what i have met in the sub continent , yes they do always say so what if umar did this ?

usman did this ??? so what ???

as if umar ra and usman ra failed to understand the deen and now after 1400yrs Allah has given him Aqal more than the sahaba's .

POOR MISGUIDED SOULS

Dr.ati i have told u earlier also dont bring bad name to the great Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal ra .

dont ask me for proofs ?? just stay with ahle hadiths in sub continent and u will see how they behave .

[brother19791]

i agree with what bro usman qadir has said :

The only people apart from shia who disrespect the sahaba , auliya Allah are ahle-hadith..

based on what i have met in the sub continent , yes they do always say so what if umar did this ?

usman did this ??? so what ???

as if umar ra and usman ra failed to understand the deen and now after 1400yrs Allah has given him Aqal more than the sahaba's .

POOR MISGUIDED SOULS

Dr.ati i have told u earlier also dont bring bad name to the great Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal ra .

dont ask me for proofs ?? just stay with ahle hadiths in sub continent and u will see how they behave .