On Nuh Ha Mim Keller

[Abdurrahman85]

As salamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah.

I sometimes read Nuh Ha Mim Keller's articles and i trust him. But in the last time, i have read a lot of criticism about him. As you can think mainly by salafis. So I'm a little bit confused about the arguments of the salafis like this one:

http://www.*****************/individ..._of_keller.htm

Can anybody check this?

Wa alaykum salam.

[lumumba_s]

As'salamu `alaykum,

It has already been defended. Shaykh Nuh is a faithful representative of Ahl us-Sunnah `aqida, fiqh and spirituality, it is the Salafis, to varying degress, who have departed from this. All the things that they attribute to Shaykh Nuh in that "article" are true and 90% of the gripes that the Salafis have with him are gripes that they have with the Ash'ari school. That is the underlying current of the article. The other 10% is gripes they have with the men of Tasawwuf. Pay it no attention. It is not Shaykh Nuh who is lying and distorting, Allah preserve him . . .

[loveProphet]

Bismillah,

I was once a Salafi. And when I was Salafi I read many things about Shaykh Nuh Keller, and they weren't pleasant things to read about any person let alone a Muslim.

So I wanted to investigate these claims. I found Shaykh Nuh Keller's website http://www.suhba.org. I was very sucipious of this Sufi business when I came to the website. It had a members only section. I was like what do these sufis have to hide, they probably tell the public one thing and tell their followers another thing.

But that made me more curious as to what they taught. A brother who followed traditional Islam gave Al Maqasid by Imam Nawawi and recommended that I read the Reliance of the Traveler. So I bought Reliance of the Traveler. I read some section of it and was like, Shaykh Nuh Keller seems be Muslim me, I don't see any shirk or kufr in this book.

One of the most beneficial things about this book, is it introduced me to the Aqidah of Imam Ghazali, I always had problems with the Salafi Aqidah on some points, and none of the salafi scholars were able to explain things in a way that seem to stick to all the principles they said they adhered to. When I read Imam Al GHazali's text on Aqidah, I was like this is the Aqidah text I was looking, this is the Aqida text that expresses the principles of Aqidah without contradiction.

Shaykh Nuh Keller was coming to USA, so I thought it would be a good idea to go and talk to him about these other problems I had with him.

So I told this to some of my Salafi brothers, and they recommended that I read this Book by a Salafi Shaykh which was specifically written against Shaykh Nuh. And in it said Shaykh Nuh supports shirk and then it provided evidence from the Reliance of the Traveler. When I read it in the Reliance of the Traveler, I was like Shaykh NUh supoports shirk. At that monment, I no longer wanted to go and see Shaykh Nuh.

So I started reading this book by Ibn Taymiyyah and he was talking about Khidr. So when i read his story I was like perhaps Shaykh Nuh had a reasonable explanation this point in the Reliance of the Traveler. Since I already paid for his suhba, I was like I am going to find out.

During the first lecture without me even asking the question, he explained that part of Reliance of the Traveler, and what he said made alot of sense. So I continued to attend the rest of the Suhba. So Shaykh Nuh Keller was answering all these questions, So I compared him to Imam Malik, he never says, I don't know.

After the lecture, some people approached him and they asked him a question, and I swear by Allah, he replied, I don't know what the scholars say about that. And it was to a question that I would have tried to answer. I didn't really know the answer either. I would tired to answer it because I thought it was a harmless issue and he said what he said.

I wanted to know what is on that website (suhba.org) for members only. I wanted to know the secret (or what I thought were secrets.) So I took the tariqa (became a member to find out the secrets).

On the website in the members only section is just alot of Shaykh nuh lectures on Tasawwuf. So I download them all at the time it was almost 80 hours of lectures. So I listened to them all.

After listening to all these lectures, I came to the conclusion that Salafis are piss poor researchers, and they are slanderers. And that book I read against Shaykh Nuh Keller, I wouldn't know how to begin to write a refutation against it because there are alot of things that are incorrect in defining what shaykh Nuh believed and taught. So he was writing refutation to things that Shaykh nuh Keller doesn't even teach or believe.

The Salafi author of the book has a black and white veiw of the sufis. Everything that is sufi must be sufi and everything that the sufis believe every single sufi believes and teaches. And that is just wrong.

CONCLUSION:

If you want to know if that website is true, go and met Shaykh Nuh Keller and talk to him. And then you'll know if that website is true. He visit the USA and UK once a year. When him comes to visit either country go and visit him. If you can, go to Jordon and visit Shaykh Nuh keller.

And mAy Allah gives us tawfiq in all that we do. Ameen Ameen Ameen.

And Allah knows best.

Assalam-o-Alaikum,
Good article bro.

Yeah the articles written by the wahabi sect have been refuted before HERE in this forum too etc.

Wa Salaam

[Abdurrahman85]

As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah.

Jazakallahu khayran aMuslimForLife. I think the same way. I was also once a salafi but after reading the book fiqh al-iman of Abdurrahman Ibn Yusuf I realized how narrow minded these salafis are. But there are some really strong arguments in the website I postet:

"His claim that “Kitaab as-Sunnah” of Imaam Abdullaah bin Ahmad is forged due to it’s containing two unknown narrators in it’s chain of narration, and that it’s editor al-Qahtaanee tries to sweep this fact under the rug by saying that ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim authenticated the attribution to the author. [ibid]. Suffice it to say that the authenticity of the sanad is not the only thing that can be used to attribute a book to it’s author rather there are other conditions that can be met, and due to these being fulfilled the researching scholars firmly attributed the book to it’s author, such as those that Qahtaanee mentioned: not only ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim as Keller incorrectly claims, but ibn al-Jawzee, al-Bayhaqee, al-Laalikaa’ee and others."

or

"Following on from (5) his then going on to quote from ‘as-Sunnah’ of al-Khallaal a narration going to Imaam Ahmad that he apparently made tafweed of the meanings of the Attributes of Allaah. [ibid]. But this book has more than two unknown narrators in it’s chain. So why the discrepancy? Why reject one book for a specific deficiency, but accept another book with that same deficiency? The answer is that justice is rare to find! In the case of the first book it contains [in it’s authentic narrations] things which contradict the innovations of the Ash’arees, so they try to find something to discredit it. In the second case, the book contains one narration [out of many that contradict the Ash’aree stances] that agrees with them, so they in turn sweep under the rug the deficiencies [in their eyes] of the book! Suffice it say, in case anyone is now in doubt of the authenticity of this books ascription, that in the same way that the researching scholars firmly attributed ‘as-Sunnah’ to Imaam Abdullaah, they firmly attributed ‘as- Sunnah’ to al-Khallaal."

Hmmm... I have no problems with asharis, maturidis and real salafis (tafwid etc.) And there are a lot of arguments for Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Kellers arguments, but especially in the above cited topics I am a little bit confuesd. It would be nice to meet him but I live in germany. (Sorry for my english) Is it possible to send him an e-mail?

Wa alaykum salam.

[aMuslimForLife]

As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah.

Jazakallahu khayran aMuslimForLife. I think the same way. I was also once a salafi but after reading the book fiqh al-iman of Abdurrahman Ibn Yusuf I realized how narrow minded these salafis are. But there are some really strong arguments in the website I postet:

"His claim that “Kitaab as-Sunnah” of Imaam Abdullaah bin Ahmad is forged due to it’s containing two unknown narrators in it’s chain of narration, and that it’s editor al-Qahtaanee tries to sweep this fact under the rug by saying that ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim authenticated the attribution to the author. [ibid]. Suffice it to say that the authenticity of the sanad is not the only thing that can be used to attribute a book to it’s author rather there are other conditions that can be met, and due to these being fulfilled the researching scholars firmly attributed the book to it’s author, such as those that Qahtaanee mentioned: not only ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim as Keller incorrectly claims, but ibn al-Jawzee, al-Bayhaqee, al-Laalikaa’ee and others."

or

"Following on from (5) his then going on to quote from ‘as-Sunnah’ of al-Khallaal a narration going to Imaam Ahmad that he apparently made tafweed of the meanings of the Attributes of Allaah. [ibid]. But this book has more than two unknown narrators in it’s chain. So why the discrepancy? Why reject one book for a specific deficiency, but accept another book with that same deficiency? The answer is that justice is rare to find! In the case of the first book it contains [in it’s authentic narrations] things which contradict the innovations of the Ash’arees, so they try to find something to discredit it. In the second case, the book contains one narration [out of many that contradict the Ash’aree stances] that agrees with them, so they in turn sweep under the rug the deficiencies [in their eyes] of the book! Suffice it say, in case anyone is now in doubt of the authenticity of this books ascription, that in the same way that the researching scholars firmly attributed ‘as-Sunnah’ to Imaam Abdullaah, they firmly attributed ‘as- Sunnah’ to al-Khallaal."

Hmmm... I have no problems with asharis, maturidis and real salafis (tafwid etc.) And there are a lot of arguments for Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Kellers arguments, but especially in the above cited topics I am a little bit confuesd. It would be nice to meet him but I live in germany. (Sorry for my english) Is it possible to send him an e-mail?

Wa alaykum salam.

As Salaam Alaykum,

I don't think anyone denies that Imam Ahmad wrote a book entitled, "Kitabu Sunnah" the issue is, is the book that we have presently authentic.

We believe Imam Ashari wrote a book entitled Ibana but we don't believe there is autentic copy of it today.

You see the difference???

Maa salaama,

aMuslimForLife

[lumumba_s]

Since even those who are attacking him admit that it the book as we know it know, and as others who came before us read it, contains forgeries, is it really such a big deal that he should be accused of lying or distorting because of what he said about it? Is that not nitpicking, which is haram?

[Yasin786]

Salaam Aleykum.

You should go to the shaykh and ask him the questions you are asking us, Shaykh Nuh is Masha'Allah an alim and he knows what he is saying, any question you have will be blown out of the water and you will end up being embarrassed. I suggest anyone who wants to critisize any shaykh, should probably check themselves before they go bashing Alims and Awliya, I see a great deal of it and I personally am really tired of defending the shaykhs of Ahlul Sunnah Wa'l Jamaah.


Walaikum Salaam