Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ category

55 Orthodox Scholars OPPOSE Wahabism

June 27, 2007


by Zubair Qamar


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

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

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

What is a Wahhabi?

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

Wahhabis as Salafis: deceptive semantics

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

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

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

Wahhabi-Salafi variety

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wahhabis as neo-Kharijites

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ibn Taymiyah: the Wahhabi founder’s role model

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ibn Taymiyah’s “fatwa” of jihad against Muslims

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

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

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

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

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

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

Najd – A place not so holy

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tawassul and Tabarruk

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

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

Wahhabis reject a type of tawassul accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wahhabis attribute a place and direction to Allah

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

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

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

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

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

Imam Ahmad continues:

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

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

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

Article #38 of Imam Tahawi’s work states:

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

Ibn Baz, in a footnote, comments:

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

In another footnote, he says:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Orthodox Sunni scholars oppose Wahhabism

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

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

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

Badat fitnatun kal layli qad ghattatil aafaaqa

wa sha“at fa kadat tublighul gharba wash sharaqa

[A confusion came about like nightfall covering the skies

and became widespread almost reaching the whole world]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bi hamdi wali al-hamdi la al-dhammi astabdi

Wa bil haqqi la bil khalqi lil haqqi astahdi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_____, Salafi Movement Unveiled, ASFA, 1997.
<!–[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]–>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Salami `ala ahlil isabati wal-rushdi

Wa laysa `ala najdi wa man halla fi najdi

[My salutation is upon the people of truth and guidance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See also:

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

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

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

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

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

(5)Gilles, Kepel. Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, p. 72.

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

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

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

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

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

(11)Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baz. “Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.” Available:

(12)Ibid., Zahawi. pp. 7-15


Evidence for Prayer Beads

June 17, 2007

Here are some relevant quotes to this topic Insha’Allah from the link given above:

Use of prayer-beads (masbaha, sibha, tasbih)

Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas reported that once the Prophet saw a woman who had some date-stones or pebbles which she was using as beads to glorify Allah. The Prophet said to her, “Let me tell you something which would be easier or more excellent for you than that.” So he told her to say instead:

subhan allahi `adada ma khalaqa fi s-sama’,
subhan allahi `adada ma khalaqa fi al-ard,
subhan allahi `adada ma khalaqa bayna dhalik,
subhan allahi `adada ma huwa khaliq,
Allahu akbaru ‘adada ma khalaqa fi al-sama’,
Allahu akbaru ‘adada ma khalaqa fi l-‘ard,
Allahu akbaru ‘adada ma khalaqa bayna dhalik,
Allahu akbaru ‘adada ma huwa khaliq,
al-hamdu lillahi `adada ma khalaqa fi al-sama’,
al-hamdu lillahi `adada ma khalaqa fi l-‘ard,
al-hamdu lillahi `adada ma khalaqa bayna dhalik,
al-hamdu lillahi `adada ma huwa khaliq,
la ilaha illallahu `adada ma khalaqa fi al-sama’,
la ilaha illallahu `adada ma khalaqa fi al-ard,
la ilaha illallahu `adada ma khalaqa bayna dhalik,
la ilaha illallahu `adada ma huwa khaliq,
la hawla wa la quwwata illa billahi `adada ma khalaqa fi al-sama’,
la hawla wa la quwwata illa billahi `adada ma khalaqa fi al-ard,
la hawla wa la quwwata illa billahi `adada ma khalaqa bayna dhalik,
la hawla wa la quwwata illa billahi `adada ma huwa khaliq.
“Glory be to Allah as many times as the number of what He has created in Heaven,
Glory be to Allah as many times as the number of what He has created on Earth,
Glory be to Allah as many times as the number of what He has created between them,
Glory be to Allah as many times as the number of that which He is creating.”
and then repeat all of the above four times but substituting “Glory be to Allah” by:
– “Allah is the most great” in the first repetition,
– “Praise be to Allah” in the second repetition,
– “There is no god but Allah” in the third repetition, and
– “There is no change and no power except with Allah” in the fourth repetition. (Narrated by Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi who said it is hasan, Ibn Majah, Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, al-Nasa’i, and al-Hakim, who said it is sahih according to the criterion of Muslim. Dhahabi concurred.)

Safiyya bint Huyayy the Prophet’s wife said: The Prophet came in to see me and in front of me there were four thousand date-stones with which I was making tasbih [counting subhan Allah]. He said: “You make tasbih with so many! Shall I teach you what surpasses your number of tasbih?” She said: “Teach me!” He said: “Say: Subhan Allah `adada khalqihi — Glory to Allah the number of His creation.” Narrated by Tirmidhi who said it is gharib, and both al-Hakim and Suyuti declared it sahih.

Allah says in His Holy Book to His Holy Prophet, “Remind people, for reminding benefits them.” The reminder of Muslims has various forms, public and private. A public form of this reminder is the adhan. The masbaha or sibha or tasbih, or prayer-beads, has had since the earliest Companions the function of a private reminder. It is for that reason that the tasbih was called by them mudhakkir or mudhakkira — “reminder,” and there is a narration traced to the Prophet whereby he said: ni`ma al-mudhakkir al-sibha: “What a good reminder are the prayer-beads!” Shawkani narrates it from `Ali ibn Abi Talib as evidence for the usefulness of prayer-beads in Nayl al-awtar (2:317) from Daylami’s narration in Musnad al-firdaws with his chain, and Suyuti cites it in his fatwa on prayer-beads in al-Hawi li al-fatawi (2:38).

The statement propagated nowadays by “Salafis” whereby counting dhikr on beads is an innovation, is undoubtedly false. The use of beads for counting dhikr is definitely established as a practice allowed by the Prophet and a Sunna of the Companions. This is proven by the sahih hadith of Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas, who related that the Prophet once saw a woman using some datestones or pebbles (nawan aw hasan), and did not prohibit her to use them. This hadith is found in Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, Nisa’i, Ibn Maja, Ibn Hibban, and Hakim. Dhahabi declared it sahih. Another sahih hadith to that effect was related by Safiyya, who was seen by the Prophet, Peace be upon him, counting “Subhan Allah” on four thousand date stones. This hadith is found in Tirmidhi, Hakim, and Tabarani, and was confirmed as sahih by Suyuti. It is also related from the Prophet’s freedman, Abu Safiyya, that a mat would be spread for him and a basket made of palm leaves brought which was filled with pebbles with which he would make tasbih until mid-day. Then it would be taken away, and then brought back after he had prayed, and he would make tasbih again until evening. This is narrated in Ibn Hajar’s Isaba (7:106 #652) with his chain, who says that Bukhari narrates it [in his Tarikh], as well as al-Baghawi through two chains. Shawkani cites it, as seen below.

Shawkani said in Nayl al-awtar (2:316-317):

The Prophet justified the counting of dhikr on the fingers by the fact that the fingers will be questioned and will speak, that is, they will witness to that effect. It follows that counting tasbih on them, because of this aspect, is better than using dhikr-beads or pebbles. But the two other hadiths [of Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas and Safiyya bint Huyayy] indicate the permissibility of counting tasbih with date-stones and pebbles, and similarly with dhikr-beads because there is no distinguishing factor between them in the Prophet’s stipulation to the two women concerning it, and no disapproval of it. As for directing to what is better: this does not negate permissibility (la yunafi al-jawaz). There are reports to that effect.

It is related in Hilal al-Haffar’s monograph through Mu`tamar ibn Sulayman from Abu Safiyya the Prophet’s freedman that a mat would be spread for him and a basket made of palm leaves brought which was filled with pebbles with which he would make tasbih until mid-day. Then it would be taken away, and then brought back after he had prayed, and he would make tasbih again until evening. Imam Ahmad narrates it in Kitab al-zuhd [with his chain].

Ahmad also narrates from al-Qasim ibn `Abd al-Rahman that Abu al-Darda’ had a bag filled with date-stones and that whenever he prayed the noon prayer he would bring them out one by one and make tasbih on them until they were finished.

Ibn Sa`d in his Tabaqat narrates [with his chains] that Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas used to count tasbih on pebbles, and that Fatima bint al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib used to make tasbih with a thread stringed with knots, and that Abu Hurayra made tasbih with a string of pebbles (al-nawa al-majmu`).

`Abd Allah the son of Imam Ahmad narrated in Zawa’id al-zuhd that Abu Hurayra had a thread stringed with one thousand knots and that he would not sleep until he had counted tasbih on them.

al-Daylami narrates in Musnad al-firdaws through Zaynab bint Sulayman ibn `Ali, and from Umm al-Hasan bint Ja`far from her father from her grandfather from `Ali, and it is traced back to the Prophet: “What a good reminder are the prayer-beads!”

Suyuti related reports with their chains in his monograph on the subject entitled al-Minha min al-sibha and it is part of his collected fatwas. He says towards the end of it: “It is not related from any one of the Salaf nor the Khalaf that it is forbidden to count tasbih on the sibha (dhikr-beads). On the contrary, most of them used to count tasbih on it, and they did not consider it disliked.”

The Indian hadith scholar Zakariyya al-Khandlawi similarly relates in his book Hayat al-sahaba that Abu Hurayra said: “I recite istighfar (formula of asking forgiveness) 12,000 times daily” and that, according to his grandson, he had a piece of thread with 1,000 knots and would not go to sleep until he had said subhan allah (Glory to Allah) on all of these knots. According to her grand-daughter through Imam al-Husayn, Fatima also used to count her dhikr on a thread with knots.

Mawlana Zakariyya continues, “It is well-known that many other Companions of the Prophet, Peace be upon him, used beads in their private devotions, such as Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas himself, Abu Safiyya the slave of the Prophet, Abu Sa`d, Abu Darda’, and Fatima, May Allah be pleased with them all. Stringing or not stringing the beads together does not make any difference.”

It is well-established that counting dhikr is a Sunna of the Prophet, Peace be upon him. He himself advised his wives, `Ali, and Fatima to count tasbih (subhan allah), tahmid (al-hamdu lillah), and takbir (allahu akbar) thirthy-three times each before going to bed at night. Ibn `Amr relates that he saw the Prophet, count the times he said subhan allah on his right hand. This does not mean that it is not allowed to use the left also, as the Prophet simply said: “Count [the dhikr] on your fingers.”

Imam Suyuti recounted in one of his fatwas entitled al-Minha fi al-sibha (The profit derived from using dhikr-beads) the story of `Ikrima, who asked his teacher `Umar al-Maliki about dhikr-beads. `Umar answered him that he had also asked his teacher Hasan al-Basri about it and was told: “Something we have used at the beginning of the road we are not desirous to leave at the end. I love to remember Allah with my heart, my hand, and my tongue.” Suyuti comments: “And how should it be otherwise, when the prayer-beads remind one of Allah Most High, and a person seldom sees prayer-beads except he remembers Allah, which is among the greatest of its benefits.”

As for Albani’s statements against the prayer-beads, his rejection of the hadith ni`ma al-mudhakkir al-sibha (see his Silsila da`ifa #83), and his astounding claim that whoever carries dhikr-beads in his hand to remember Allah is misguided and innovating, then we direct the reader to their refutation in Mahmud Sa`id’s Wusul al-tahani bi ithbat sunniyyat al-sibha wa al-radd `ala al-albani (The alighting of mutual benefit and the confirmation that the dhikr-beads are a Sunna, and the refutation of Albani).

As for the idea that the prayer-beads come from Buddhism or Christianity, it was one of the Hungarian scholar Ignaz Goldziher’s (fl. 1897 CE) legacies to orientalism.

The subject of bid’ah elucidated

June 17, 2007

Here is an excerpt from Shehu Uthman Dan Fodio on the subject of innnovation taken from his ihya ul sunnah:

An Explanation of the Scope of Innovation and the Proofs of the Obligation to Avoid It; Its Divisions, What is Acceptable From It and What is Unacceptable

The Scope of Innovation (al-bid`a`):

The scope of innovation, is as Abu’l-Hassan as-Saghir said, “It is that which deviates from the Book, the sunna and the Consensus.”

Al-Faakihaani said, “Strictly speaking, it is invented matters in the deen which appear as though it is from the deen, but it is not in actuality from it.”

Ahmad az-Zaruuq said in his Umdat ‘l-Murid as-Saadiq,

“The reality of innovation according to the shari`a are invented matters in the deen that resemble the deen and look like they are from it, but are actually not from it. This is regardless if this resemblance to the deen is by form (bi ‘l-suura) or by meaning (bi ‘l-haqiqa).

This is in accordance with the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, `Every invented thing is an innovation, and every innovation is an error.’

The scholars, may Allah be pleased with them, have explained that the meaning of the above mentioned tradition refers to the altering of the judgment (of the shari`a) based on the conviction that which is not in reality within the realm of the deen, to consider it as apart of it.

However, this does not include all invented matters in general, especially when the shari`a encompasses it within its principles. In that case it is attributed to the shari`a.”

The realized ones (al-muhaqqiquun) have said, “Some innovation has been included among the branches of the shari`a, with regard to invented matters in general and as far as language is concerned. Pertaining to this is the words of Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, regarding the matter of the supererogatory night prayers of Ramadhan (at-taraaweeh), “This innovation is a benefit.” He called it an innovation (al-bid`a`) with respect to the form in which it had been established. Otherwise it is a sunna owing to the fact that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did it three nights in Ramadhan during his life-time.

Its performance was established by the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “Truly I was afraid that you would make it obligatory upon yourselves.” Thus he indicated the occasion in order that the permanence of the judgment would be known at the time of the lifting of the judgment, as was established by Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, with the consensus from the Companions in accepting it.”

If you were to say, “How can reprehensible innovation (al-bid`a` ‘l-makruuh) be an error (dalaala) when reprehensible actions from one respect is permissible (al-jaa’iz); seeing that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had delivered a judgment that every innovation is an error?” I say, that Ahmad az-Zaruuq said in his Umdat ‘l-Murid as-Saadiq, [s”It is possible to do reprehensible deeds, while inventing it is forbidden because it amounts to making legal decisions against the decisions of the Lawgiver and going beyond what he has established.”

The Proofs of the Obligation of Avoiding Innovation:

As for the proofs of the obligation of avoiding innovation, realize, and may Allah make you and us successful, that the proofs of the obligation of avoiding innovation are the same proofs for the obligation of following the sunna. This is because the ordering of a thing in effect prohibits its opposite. That which will suffice in that is the words of Allah ta`ala, “This is my straight path, so follow it. And do not follow other divergent ways, lest you be parted from His way.”

Ibn Mas`ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, one day drew a line in front of us. He then drew some lines on his right and some lines on his left. He then said, ‘This is my path and these are divergent ways. And upon everyone of these ways there is a devil who calls to them.’ I believe he said, ‘From among mankind.’ He meant by that ‘from the people of innovation’ (ahlu ‘l-bid`a`). Then he recited this verse, ‘This is my straight path’, meaning the single line, ‘so follow it. And do not follow other divergent ways’, meaning the lines on his right and left, ‘lest you be parted from His way’.”

Al-Mujahid and Zaid ibn Aslam said, “His straight path is Islam and the sunna; and the divergent ways are innovation and corrupt passions.” That which will also suffice you in that is the words of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “Whoever introduces into this matter of ours that which is not from it, will be rejected.” This was related by al-Bukhari and Muslim .

Al-Ishbili said in his commentary upon the al-Arba`een an-Nawawiyya, (which for the most part discusses the meaning of the above tradition), “This tradition is an important principle (qaa`ida) from the fundamentals of the deen. It is also from among the comprehensive speech (jawaami`i kalim) of the Chosen Prophet which he was given, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. That is, that it is straightforward in its rejection of every innovation and invention which is not in accordance with the fundamental principles of the shari`a.” He then said, “The author (meaning an-Nawawi) mentioned that in Muslim there is an additional tradition which is considered good (hassan) meaning by that the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “Whoever does an act which is not in accordance with our matter, then it is rejected.” That is, that some of the perpetrators might cling stubbornly to an innovation which others had invented before them, and this tradition is brought as a proof against them. Meaning by that the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “Whoever invents something in this matter of ours which is not from it, will be rejected.” Then the perpetrators might say, “I have not invented anything.” Then the other additional narration which is related in Muslim should be brought as a proof against them. And it is the words of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “Whoever does an act which is not in accordance with our matter, then it is rejected.” For that is the clearest way to answer every person who invents matters in the deen – regardless if he be the inventor himself or if someone invented it before him.”

He then said, “It is necessary for you to memorize this tradition, circulate it and utilize it in thwarting reprehensible actions.” The author of al-Ifsaah said concerning the above tradition, “It is understood in this from a jurisprudential point of view that whoever invents something in the deen which is not from it, is then rejected; meaning it is returned to him and not accepted from him.”

And his saying, “. . .that which is not from it. . .”, means that which is disapproved from it. As for the derivatives of the foundations (tafree`’l-usuul) which emerge from it, they are not included in the things to be rejected – like [1] the writing down of the Qur’an in book form, [2] the madh’habs which have been established upon the best reflection of the fuqaha who exercise independent judgment (mujtahid) by tracing their branches back to the sayings of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace; [3] the composed books on the subject of grammar, arithmetic, the obligations and other than these from the sciences which find its origin and are built upon the teachings and orders of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

For none of the above sciences are included among the things which the above tradition rejects. His saying, “Whoever does an act which is not in accordance with our matter. . .”, this means our judgments and our permission, ” . . .then it is rejected”, meaning it shall be returned back to him and it will not be rewarded.”

The Divisions of Innovation:

As for the divisions of innovation, al-Qaraafi said,

” It is in five divisions.

The first division is that which is obligatory (waajib) according to consensus. It is that which encompasses the fundamental principles of obligation and takes its proofs from the shari`a – like the recording of the Qur’an and the principles of the shari`a out of fear that these would be lost. Verily delivering the above to those who will come after us is an obligation according to consensus. And neglecting to do so is forbidden according to consensus. In this type of innovation there is no way that there can be disagreement concerning its obligation.

The second division is that which is forbidden (muharram) according to consensus. It is that which encompasses the fundamental principles of prohibition and takes its proofs from the shari`a – like taxes, giving preference of those who are ignorant over those who are scholars, and appointing religious post to those who are not suitable for them by means of inheritance, and making the support for that the fact that it was the place of his father, while he himself is not qualified for that.

The third division is that which is recommended (manduub). It is what encompasses the fundamental principles of recommendation and takes its proofs from the shari`a – like the taraaweeh prayer, the establishment of the distinctive stature of the Imams, judges and those who possess authority – although this was contrary to what the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, did. The reason for this being that the aim and the welfare of the deen cannot occur except by establishing the pre-eminence of the government in the hearts of the people. People during the time of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, had innate magnitude and this magnitude was the deen. This continued until the proper order of government became defective and the generation of the Companions passed away. Then a generation appeared that did not attach greatness to government except by outward appearance. So emphasizing the outward appearance became incumbent, in order that the overall welfare could be maintained.

The fourth division is that which is reprehensible (makruuh). It is what encompasses the fundamental principles of reprehensibility and takes its proofs from the shari`a – like specifying certain days for blessings and others with certain kinds of worship. From that category is the increase in the fixed recommended acts; like the invocations of Sub’hanna Allahi thirty- three times, Al-hamdu lillahi thirty-three times, and Allahu akbar thirty-three times at the end of every obligatory prayer. He then does more than the limit which was established by the Lawgiver. This is reprehensible because of what is in it regarding going beyond what the Lawgiver prescribed and showing lack of correct courtesy (adab) towards him. The condition of holding something in importance is when a thing is prescribed – to stop with it, while to revert to
leaving its limits is lack of correct courtesy (qillatu adab).

The fifth division is that which is permitted (mubaah). It is that which encompasses the fundamental principles of permissibility and takes its proofs from the shari`a – like the utilization of sieves and agricultural tools for the improvement of livelihood, the wearing of beautiful clothing, the adopting of nice homes and other things.

The author of the al-Isttifa’u said, “Innovation is that which did not exist during the time of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.”

Ibn Abd’s-Salaam said,

“Among these innovations are those which are obligatory (waajibat) like the preliminary sciences to understanding the Book of Allah and the sunna of His Messenger – such as grammar (nahwa), eloquence (bayaan) and the like. This is because the preservation of the shari`a cannot be achieved except by these. An obligation which cannot be achieved except by something, makes that thing also obligatory.

Among these innovations are those which are forbidden (muharramat) like the sect of the Jabriyya who say that created things have no power at all; or the sect of the Murjiyya who say eternal punishment is for the disbelievers only. Opposing them by guarding the shari`a from their heretical innovation is a collective obligation (fard kifaya).

Among these innovations are those which are highly recommended (manduuba) like the taraaweeh prayers, the building of military garrisons (ribaats), and the doctrines regarding the minute details of the science of sufism.

Among these innovations are those which are allowable (mubaaha) like shaking hands after the subh and asr prayers, taking delight in the most delicious of foods, drinks, clothing and homes; and the widening of the sleeves of the garments.

What is Unacceptable and What is Acceptable in Innovation:

As for that in which there is disapproval (al-inkaar) and that in which there is approval (laa yunkar) from innovation, realize and may Allah make us and you successful – that it as like what Shaykh Izzadeen ibn Abd’s-Salaam said, “Disapproval or objection is related to that in which there is unanimous agreement concerning its obligation or prohibition. Whoever leaves that in which there is a difference of opinion concerning its obligation or performs and act in which there is a difference of opinion concerning its prohibition, (while he is following some of the scholars in that), then there is no objection to that, except if he is following him in an issue whose legal judgment has been repealed.”

I say, it is based upon this that it is not permissible for you to disapprove of the innovation of anyone except if you are aware that the action is from among those innovations which are forbidden by consensus of opinion. What we mean by objection in this context is the prohibited objection. Further, if it can be objected to – then that objection should be done with sincerity and guidance which is simply giving good advice and excellent deeds.

The exact wording of the reply of Izzadeen ibn Abd’s-Salaam concerning the divisions of innovation is, “All praises are due to Allah, realize that innovations are different varieties. The first variety are those which the shari`a has proved to be highly recommended (manduub), or obligatory (waajib) – but which had not been done during the first era. This variety is approved innovation (bid`a`tu hassana). The second variety are those which the shari`a has proved to be forbidden (tahreem), or reprehensible (karaahat), along with it not being previously done during the first era. This variety is abominable innovation (bid`a`tu qabeeha). The third variety are those which the shari`a has proven to be allowable (ibaahat) along with it not being previously done during the first era. This variety is allowable innovation (bid`a`tu mubaahat).”

It is mentioned in the Takhlees ‘l-Ikhwaan, “Take close notice, my brothers, and may Allah guide you – of the above reply and behave in accordance with it. Be watchful of your Lord, do not enter into matters except by Him or for Him and make your desires subservient to the shari`a. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, ‘Neither one of you truly believes until his desires are subservient to what I have came with.’ If you do not intend by your actions the continence of Allah, you will exhaust yourselves and exhaust others.”

Also in the Takhlees ‘l-Ikhwaan just before the above words it says, “O my brother! May Allah guide you – be in opposition to heretical innovation and make a distinction between that which is abominable (in order to object to it) and between that which is approved (in order not to object to it). This is so that you may be safe with your Lord from being associated with objectionable things by only objecting to that which is clearly objectionable. For whoever objects to that which it is not permissible to object to, it is as though he had done the same objectionable act he was attempting to prohibit or even worse. For this reason I have tried to relate in this book the differences of opinion in order that you may avoid objecting to that in which there is a difference of opinion. This is because objecting to that is also objectionable and is not permissible. I have cautioned you about this because some of you have claimed that you are only prohibiting against innovation and reprehensible deeds. For this reason I wished to clearly stipulate that to you, so that the most knowledgeable among you can change.”

Also in the Takhlees ‘l-Ikhwaan just before the above words it says, “So take notice, may Allah be merciful to you, of the divisions of innovation and preserve it carefully in your memory that you may realize not every innovation is objectionable. Rather, it is as you have seen. There are those which are highly recommended (mustahaba) in which there is reward for it. There are those which are allowable (mubaaha) in which there is neither reward or punishment. There are those which are obligatory (waajiba) in which there is reward for discharging it and punishment for it being neglected. There are those which are reprehensible (markup) in which there is reward for leaving it and there is no punishment for doing it.”

If you were to say, “Keeping away from the companion of forbidden innovation (al-bid`a al-muharrama) is unanimously agreed upon. Is it then permitted to keep away from the companion of reprehensible innovation (al-bid`a al-makru`uh) as well?” I say: that the reply is as it is said in the Takhlees ‘l-Ikhwaan, “The most obvious meaning of the message is fleeing from perpetrating it. This is made clear by his words, ‘The keeping away which is permissible is the keeping away from the heretical innovator’.”

Abu’l-Hassan al-Maliki says in his Tahqiq’l-Mubaani narrating from al-Faakihani; “There is a difference of opinion regarding what the Shaykh intended here. It is said that he meant forbidden innovation (bid`a muharrama) and it is said he meant that which is reprehensible (makruuh).” Then he said, “Al-Faakihani said, `In keeping away from the person who commits reprehensible innovation, I have a view: Is it permissible to keep away from the perpetrator or not?’.”

Here ends the explanation of the boundaries of innovation and the proofs of the obligation to avoid it, its divisions, what is objectionable from it and what is not objectionable.

O Allah! make us successful at following the Sunna of Your Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, by his standing with You!

A new brother runs away from Wahabism

June 15, 2007

Tarheel_D: hi, do you like hamza yusef?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what’s not to like??
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of course
Tarheel_D: well, i’m new to the study of islam – but i read in one place that he was not good. so i was not sure.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he was not good?
Tarheel_D: yes, this man told me that he (hamza) was too wanting to give in to western thought.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: …
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: did he produce any examples?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the wahabis love to make fitnah
Tarheel_D: i have his email, i’ll show you.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: on Sheikh Hamza Yusuf
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: please do
Tarheel_D: dear brother may allah reward u, thank you for taking the time to email me. hamaza yousef is a coward that sucks from the tit of capitalism. he is quick to assist and defend the kafir president of the usa and the danish kufar and is hard on the muslims. zaytuna’s duty is to instill passiveness into american muslims and have them work on jihad al naffs in a way that the prophet mohamid alehi salat w salam never did. may i suggest dear akhi this school .

Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: suck tits of passivism???
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: la hawla wala quwata illa billah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: capitalism???
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: subahanallah
Tarheel_D: yes, he was angry as i took it
Tarheel_D: but i wondered about this brothers islaam.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: this is a clear lie
Tarheel_D: this brother who emailed me.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and blatant
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: attack on the learned Sheikh
Tarheel_D: are you american?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i’m Malaysian
Tarheel_D: ah, and you like the sheik?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of course
Tarheel_D: this is the man’s website
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: check out my blog
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the issues that the wahabis
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: have against Sheikh Hamza is addressed on my blog
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: they are nothing more than liars
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of the highest order
Tarheel_D: well i see on your website, you have sheiks to be avoided. so this man says to avoid hamza and you say to avoid these. how are people new to islam supposed to know the truth?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: check out the proofs provided bro
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: are you new to Islam?
Tarheel_D: in your site?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: akhi..if a person is a fake scholar..would you suggest him for the new revert?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of course not
Tarheel_D: yes, i’m new. as i have seen wahabbi or salafi seem to be very extreme.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: the lies that the wahabis have on sheikh hamza
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: are nothing more than cheap attacks
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: they are very extreme
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: they will not accept differences
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: everything that is not in line with their beliefs and doctrine
Tarheel_D: yes, that is how it seems
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: approved by their scholars of Islam
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i.e. Ibn baz and Albani
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: will be rejected without hesitation
Tarheel_D: but i thought in islam there are different schools
Tarheel_D: is hamza yusef a sufi?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes he is
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he is of the Maliki school of thought
Tarheel_D: can any sunni be a sufi?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: LOL of course habibi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: a sunni should be a sufi
Tarheel_D: i thought that sunni’s didn’t like sufi’s
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol only wahabis hate sufis
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ya habibi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: sufis are part of sunnism
Tarheel_D: so they are seen as a division?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: wahabism in truth is out of ahl sunnah waljama’ah
Tarheel_D: so anyone from any madhab can practice sufism? i assumed that sufism was a madhab in itself
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: no brother
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: sufism
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: or tasawwuf is a science in Islam
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: it is not another madhab
Tarheel_D: now it’s making more sense.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: alhamdulillah
Tarheel_D: so in the room “islam answers back” are they mostly salafi?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: yes
Tarheel_D: yes, it’s mostly such fighting and putting down. it’s hard to learn anything
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: mhm
Tarheel_D: is this room open often?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: daily
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: for at least 12 hours
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: per day
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: or more
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: or sometimes less
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: depend
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: depends*
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: \it’s usually open at this time yea
Tarheel_D: oh. i have been going to islam answers back for so long and have learned so little. i think i have wasted so much time.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: subahanallah bro
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: akhi check out this website
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie:
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you can learn much here
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: even take courses
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: from traditional scholars of Islam
Tarheel_D: thank you akhi, i need to know where to go to learn true islam.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: that is the best website bro
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: if you cannot travel
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: though my suggestion to you
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: is to seek a sheikh in Islam
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama’ah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: do not fall into the pit of lies of the wahabis
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: approach a traditional scholar and ask humbly to become his student
Tarheel_D: unfortunately, there is not even a masjid near me at all. and i think this is the difficulty – hard to know what is true on the internet.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: subahanallah
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: habibi…trust me…though you do not know me…I swear by Allah that the website is absolutely trustworthy
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: it is run by true qualified scholars of Islam
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: who’s ijazat is traced back to the prophet s.a.w.
Tarheel_D: thank you akhi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: they have many courses that you can undertake
Tarheel_D: yes, i’m looking now.
Tarheel_D: akhi, may i add you as a friend here on paltalk?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: of course brother
Tarheel_D: thank you. i was beginning to lose a bit of faith, allah forgive me. thinking that wahabism was the true islam – but those people continued to discourage me.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: masha’Allah ya habibi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: May Allah s.w.t. make the path easy for you
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and help us all in our journeys and search for true ‘ilm
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Ameen
Tarheel_D: ameen
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Habibi…do you mind if I posted this private text on my blog?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: post*
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: or would you like it to remain private?
Tarheel_D: no, it’s fine
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: jazakumullah bro

Alhamdulillah. May Allah s.w.t. make the path easy for all of us.Ameen.

Hadarah by Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

June 15, 2007

The Public Dhikr (Hadra)

© Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1996.

A person coming to the Middle East to learn something about the tariqa is likely, at some point in his visit, to see the brethren in the hadra or “public dhikr” as it has been traditionally practiced by generations of Shadhilis in North Africa under such sheikhs as al-‘Arabi al-Darqawi, Muhammad al-Buzidi, and Ahmad al-‘Alawi before being brought to Damascus from Algeria by Muhammad ibn Yallis and Muhammad al-Hashimi at the beginning of this century.

Upon entering the mosque, one will see circles of men making dhikr (women participants are screened from view upstairs) standing and holding hands, now slightly bowing in unison, now moving up and down with their knees in unison, the rows rising and falling, breathing in unison, while certain of them alternate at pacing around their midst, conducting the tempo of the group’s motion and breathing with their arms and step. Singers near the sheikh, in solo or chorus, deliver mystical odes to the rhythm of the group; high, spiritual poetry from masters like Ibn al-Farid, Sheikh Ahmad al-‘Alawi, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Himsi, and our own sheikh.

Though a very stirring experience, it is meticulously timed and controlled, and as with all group dhikrs, the main adab or “proper behaviour” is harmony. No one should stand out in any way, but rather all subordinate their movement, breathing, and dhikr to that of the group. The purpose is to forget one’s individuality in the collective sea of spirits making dhikr in unison. Individual motives, thoughts, and preoccupations are momentarily put aside by means of the Sacred Dance, of moving together as one, sublimating and transcending the limitary and personal through the timelessness of rhythm, conjoined with the melody of voices singing spiritual meanings.

It is an experience that joins those travelling towards Allah spiritually, socially, and emotionally. Few forget it, and visitors from the West to whom it is unfamiliar sometimes wonder if it is a bid‘a or “reprehensible innovation,” as it was not done in the time of the earliest Muslims, or whether it is unlawful (haram) or offensive (makruh); and why they see the ulama and righteous attending it in Damascus, Jerusalem, Aden, Cairo, Tripoli, Tunis, Fez, and wherever there are people of the path.

I was one of those who asked our sheikh about the relation of the hadra to the shari‘a or “Sacred Law” which is the guiding light of our tariqa. As Muslims, our submission to the law is total, and there are no thoughts or opinions after legally answering the question “Does the hadra agree with orthodox Islam?”

Because it comprises a number of various elements, such as gathering together for the remembrance of Allah (dhikr), singing, and dancing, we should reflect for a moment on some general considerations about the Islamic shari‘a before discussing each of these separately.

First, the Islamic shari‘a furnishes a comprehensive criterion for all possible human actions, whether done before or never done before. It classifies actions into five categories, the obligatory (wajib), whose performance is rewarded by Allah in the next life and whose nonperformance is punished; the recommended (mandub), whose performance is rewarded but whose nonperformance is not punished; the permissible (mubah), whose performance is not rewarded and whose nonperformance is not punished; the offensive (makruh), whose nonperformance is rewarded but whose performance is not punished; and the unlawful (haram), whose nonperformance is rewarded and whose performance is punished.

Now, Allah in His wisdom has made the vast majority of human actions permissible. He says in surat al-Baqara, “It is He who has created everything on earth for you” (Koran 2:29), which establishes the shari‘a principle that all things are mubah or permissible for us until Allah indicates to us that they are otherwise. Because of this, the fact that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) did not do this or that particular practice does not prove that it is offensive or unlawful, but only that it is not obligatory.

This is the reason that when shari‘a scholars speak of bid‘a, they do not merely mean an “innovation” or something that was never done before, which is the lexical sense of the word, but rather a “blameworthy innovation” or something new that no legal evidence in Sacred Law attests to the validity of, which is the shari‘a sense of the word. The latter is the bid‘a of misguidance mentioned in the hadith “The worst of matters are those that are new, and every innovation (bid‘a) is misguidance” (Sahih Muslim. 5 vols. Cairo 1376/1956. Reprint. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1403/1983, 2.592: 867), which, although general in wording, scholars say refers specifically to new matters that entail something offensive or unlawful.

Imam Shafi‘i explains:

New matters are of two kinds: something newly begun that contravenes the Koran, sunna, the position of early Muslims, or consensus of scholars (ijma‘): this innovation is misguidance. And something newly inaugurated of the good in which there is no contravention of any of these, and is therefore something which although new (muhdatha), is not blameworthy. For when ‘Umar (Allah be well pleased with him) saw the [tarawih] prayer being performed [in a group by Muslims at the mosque] in Ramadan, he said, “What a good innovation (bid‘a) this is,” meaning something newly begun that had not been done before. And although in fact it had, this does not negate the legal considerations just advanced [n: i.e. that it furnishes an example of something that ‘Umar, who was a scholar of the Sahaba, praised as a “good innovation” despite his belief that it had not been done before, because it did not contravene the broad principles of the Koran or sunna]

(Dhahabi: Siyar a‘lam al-nubala’. 23 vols. Beirut: Mu’assassa al-Risala, 1401/1981, 10.70).

As for the practice of Muslims gathering together for group dhikr or the “invocation of Allah,” there is much evidence of its praiseworthiness in the sunna—aside from the many Koranic verses and the hadiths establishing the general merit of dhikr in every state—such as the hadith related by Bukhari:

Truly, Allah has angels going about the ways, looking for people of dhikr, and when they find a group of men invoking Allah, they call to one another, “Come to what you have been looking for!” and they circle around them with their wings up to the sky of this world.

Then their Lord asks them, though He knows better than they, “What do My servants say?” And they reply, “They say, Subhan Allah (“I glorify Allah’s absolute perfection”), Allahu Akbar (“Allah is ever greatest”), and al-Hamdu li Llah (“All praise be to Allah”), and they extoll Your glory.”

He says, “Have they seen Me?” And they answer, “No, by Allah, they have not seen You.” And He says, “How would it be, had they seen Me?” And they say, “If they had seen You, they would have worshipped You even more, glorified You more, and said Subhan Allah the more.”

He asks them, “What do they ask of Me?” And one answers, “They ask You
paradise.” He says, “Have they seen it?” And they say, “No, by Allah, My Lord, they have not seen it.” And He says, “How would it be, had they seen it?” And they say, “If they had seen it, they would have been more avid for it, sought it more, and been more desirous of it.”

Then He asks them, “From what do they seek refuge?” And they answer, “From hell.” He says, “Have they seen it?” And they say, “No, by Allah, they have not seen it.” And He says, “How would it be, had they seen it?” And they say, “If they had seen it, they would have fled from it even more, and been more fearful of it.”

He says, “I charge all of you to bear witness that I have forgiven them.” Then one of the angels says, “So-and-so is among them, though he is not one of them but only came for something he needed.” And Allah says, “They are companions through whom no one who keeps their company shall meet perdition”

(Sahih al-Bukhari. 9 vols. Cairo 1313/1895. Reprint (9 vols. in 3). Beirut: Dar al-Jil, n.d., 8.107–8: 6408).

The last line of the hadith shows the highest approval for gatherings of dhikr in the religion of Allah. Some other accounts transmit the condemnation of Ibn Mas‘ud (Allah be well please with him) for gathering together to say Subhan Allah (perhaps out of fear of ostentation), but even if we were to grant their authenticity, the above hadith of Bukhari, containing the explicit approval of such gatherings by Allah and His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) suffices us from needing the permission of Ibn Mas‘ud or any other human being.

Further, the explicit mention of the various forms of dhikr in the hadith suffice in reply to certain contemporary “re-formers” of Islam, who attempt to reduce “sessions of dhikr” to educational gatherings alone by quoting the words of ‘Ata’ (ibn Abi Rabah, Mufti of Mecca, d. 114/732), who reportedly said,

Sessions of dhikr are the sessions of [teaching people] the lawful and unlawful, how you buy, sell, pray, fast, wed, divorce, make the pilgrimage, and the like. (Nawawi: al-Majmu‘: Sharh al-Muhadhdhab. 20 vols. Cairo n.d. Reprint. Medina: al-Maktaba al-Salafiyya, n.d., 1.21).

Perhaps ‘Ata’ intended to inform people that teaching and learning shari‘a are also a form of dhikr, but in any case it is clear from the Prophet’s explicit words (Allah bless him and give him peace) in the above hadith that “sessions of dhikr” cannot be limited to teaching and learning Sacred Law alone, but primarily mean gatherings of Muslims to invoke Allah in dhikr.

As for dancing, Imam Ahmad relates from Anas (Allah be well pleased with him), with a chain of transmission all of whose narrators are those of Bukhari except Hammad ibn Salama, who is one of the narrators of Muslim, that the Ethiopians danced in front of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace); dancing and saying [in their language], “Muhammad is a righteous servant.” The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, “What are they saying?” And they said, “‘Muhammad is a righteous servant’”

(Musnad al-Imam Ahmad. 6 vols. Cairo 1313/1895. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Sadir, n.d., 3.152).

Other versions of the hadith clarify that this took place in the mosque in Medina, though in any case, the fact that dancing was done before the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) establishes that it is mubah or “permissible” in the shari‘a, for if it had been otherwise, he would have been obliged to condemn it.

For this reason, Imam Nawawi says:

Dancing is not unlawful, unless it is languid, like the movements of the effeminate. And it is permissible to speak and to sing poetry, unless it satirizes someone, is obscene, or alludes to a particular woman”

(Minhaj al-talibin wa ‘umdat al-muttaqin. Cairo 1338/1920. Reprint. Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, n.d., 152).

This is a legal text for the permissibility of both dancing and singing poetry from the Minhaj al-talibin, the central legal work of the entire late Shafi‘i school. Islamic scholars point out that if something which is permissible, such as singing poetry or dancing, is conjoined with something that is recommended, such as dhikr or gatherings to make dhikr, the result of this conjoining will not be offensive (makruh) or unlawful (haram).

Imam Jalal al-Din Suyuti was asked for a fatwa or formal legal opinion concerning “a group of Sufis who had gathered for a session of dhikr,” and he replied:

How can one condemn making dhikr while standing, or standing while making dhikr, when Allah Most High says, “. . . those who invoke Allah standing, sitting, and upon their sides” (Koran 3:191). And ‘A’isha (Allah be well pleased with her) said, “The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) used to invoke Allah at all of his times” [Sahih Muslim, 1.282: 373]. And if dancing is added to this standing, it may not be condemned, as it is of the joy of spiritual vision and ecstasy, and the hadith exists [in many sources, such as Musnad al-Imam Ahmad, 1.108, with a sound (hasan) chain of transmission] that Ja‘far ibn Abi Talib danced in front of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) when the Prophet told him, “You resemble me in looks and in character,” dancing from the happiness he felt from being thus addressed, and the Prophet did not condemn him for doing so, this being a basis for the legal acceptability of the Sufis dancing from the joys of the ecstasies they experience

(al-Hawi li al-fatawi. 2 vols. Cairo 1352/1933–34. Reprint. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1403/1983, 2.234).

Now, Suyuti was a hadith master (hafiz, someone with over 100,000 hadiths by memory) and a recognized mujtahid Imam who authored hundreds of works in the shari‘a sciences, and his formal opinion, together with the previously cited ruling of Imam Nawawi in the Minhaj al-talibin, constitutes an authoritative legal text (nass) in the Shafi‘i school establishing that circles of dhikr which comprise the singing of spiritual poetry and dancing are neither offensive (makruh) nor unlawful (haram)—unless associated with other unlawful factors such as listening to musical instruments or the mixing of men and women—but rather are permissible.

To summarize, the hadra of our tariqa, consisting of circles of invocation of Allah (dhikr) conjoined with the singing of permissible poetry and dancing, is compatible with the Sacred Law of orthodox Islam; and when the latter elements facilitate presence of heart with Allah (as they do with most people who possess hearts), they deserve a reward from Allah by those who intend them as such. And this is the aim and importance of the hadra in the tariqa.

An evening exchange with a Wahabi

June 15, 2007
7:15 pm, Thursday, 6/14/2007, Paltalk, 
Social Issues Section, Sub Section Humanities, 
Room Tasawwuf is the  of Ahl Heart of Islam.

As I entered the room, brother scally_chris my comrade was on the microphone giving references from the Qur’an, the Sunnah and scholars about the issue of “Is the Prophet Alive in his grave?”. I pmed(private messaged) brother Tridax who was also in the room and asked him what’s going on.
Tridax: assalamualaikum
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ws wr
Tridax: just in time as usual
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: o.O
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what’s the topic exactly?
Tridax: she is ok
Tridax: an open minded salafi sister
Tridax: whether dead can pray for us
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: oic
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: who’s sam?
Tridax: he seems a knowledgeable brother but not sympathetic to sufis
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: o.O
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol
Tridax: he was responding to some questions of shakira
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: oic
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: he rejects the Prophet s.a.w is alive in the grave?
Tridax: yes
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: subahanallah
Tridax: i gave the verse in the quran that shaheeds are live
Tridax: he just ignores
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i will take the mic and emphasise what chris has stated
Tridax: 002.154
YUSUFALI: And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: “They are dead.” Nay, they are living, though ye perceive (it) not.

“This knowledgeable brother”(sam4546) as I found out later was a wahabi and an avid follower of Albani.

After scally_chris had completed his piece, it was sam4546’s turn on the microphone. When he came on, he started saying “okay, you produced the Qur’anic verse “And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: “They are dead.” Nay, they are living, though ye perceive (it) not.”, Ibn Hajar mentioned in Fath Al-Bari that if the shuhada’/martyrs are alive than how can the Prophet s.a.w be dead? But you see, Ibn Hajar was just a man, man make mistakes…..” This is when I first dotted him(he was dotted 3 times in all). After dotting him I went straight for the mic and sternly warned him not to belittle Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani and informed him that many scholars besides have used the verse and applied qiyas(analogy) to affirm that the Prophets are alive in their grave along with many ahadith which speak about the issue specifically. I then told him of the saheeh hadith from Rasulullah s.a.w. which says “My Ummah will not agree upon an error” and that I would rather take the explanation of the likes of Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani r.a. any second of the day than the claims of a paltalker. I said all of this with the thinking that the person rejects the fact that the Prophet s.a.w. was alive to which I was later corrected by this wahabi brother.

INTERMISSION(sam4546 goes for salah and returns about 10 minutes later)

The conversation continues.
I was on the microphone when the brother came in. I was quite ecstatic. I informed him the microphone will be handed to him after i’ve given him some ahadith about the Prophet’s s.a.w. state in the grave.
1st Hadith :
“Al-Anbiya’ Ahaya’un fi quburihim yusallun”
“The Prophets are alive in their graves worshipping their Lord”
Sharh by Sheikh GF Haddad :
A sound (sahih) tradition related on the authority of Anas ibn Malik (r) by: al-Bazzar in his Musnad, Abu Ya`la in his Musnad, Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil fi al-du`afa’, Tammam al-Razi in al-Fawa’id, al-Bayhaqi in Hayat al-anbiya’ fi quburihim, Abu Nu`aym in Akhbar Asbahan, Ibn `Asakir in Târeekh Dimashq, al-Haythami in Majma` al-zawa’id (8:211), al-Suyuti in Anbâ’ al-adhkiya’ bi-hayat al-anbiya’ (#5), and EVEN al-Albani, in Silsilat al-ahadith al-sahihah (#621).

I then declared that this is DEFINITE proof that the Prophet s.a.w. is alive in his grave. In addition, I said that when we go to his grave, we may speak to him and he can listen(i brought this up because salafis love to make an issue out of it). I thus produced the following hadith to substantiate my claim:

2nd hadith :
“Man Salla `alayya `inda qabri sami`tuhu, wa man Salla `alayya nâ’iyan bullightuhu”
“Whoever invokes blessings on me at my grave, I hear him, and whoever invokes blessings on me from afar, I am informed about it.”
Ibn Hajar says in FatH al-Bâri 6:379: “Abu al-Shaykh cites it with a good chain (sanad jayyid),” and Bayhaqi mentions it in Hayât al-anbiyâ with “ublightuhu” in the end.

Before I went off the microphone, I informed the person to please not come up and reject the hadiths I provided lest he become a Quranist like how some wahabis have become.

sam4546 takes the mic. He starts accusing me of being unfair and that I’m not following the discussion and that i’m rude for just barging in the conversation like how I did. After all those compliments he said “no, you see I don’t reject those hadiths, they’re right and true. The Prophet s.a.w is alive in his grave. But the question that arise now is how is he alive? is he alive like us?”(I already informed the room about this that when we say the prophet s.a.w. is alive in the grave we’re not saying that he is alive exactly as how we the living on earth are alive) He then said, we have to know that he died like any other man and thereafter presented some verses from the Qur’an speaking about Prophet Muhammad’s s.a.w. humanity. In the meanwhile, on text I was asking him, okay fine you agree with the hadiths and that the Prophet s.a.w is alive in his grave, in ‘alam barzakh in another what exactly is the issue?(as I stated earlier I thought the issue was this person rejecting the fact that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. is alive in his grave). Without answering my questions, he just droned on until he reached the part where things became clear. He started saying you see..”Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. died and those who have died cannot help you or intercede for you.” He added that intercession from the Prophet s.a.w. is only valid when he was alive and in the hereafter not after he passed away and when he’s dead(the ahl sunnah wal jama’ah usually do not say he’s dead since the Sunnah attests that he’s alive[plus we agreed that he’s alive in his grave], what’s going on here is common wahabi script). He then produced some Qur’anic verses to support his case without giving references or proper translations for the people in the room who do not understand arabic(i don’t either in fact, well not perfectly anyway). He went on and on until he got dotted yet again.

I took the microphone and congratulated him in affirming the fact that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. is alive in his grave. I went straight to the point and said akhi…about your claim that the dead cannot pray(help) or intercede for us here are some ahadith that may shed some light on the issue:

1st Hadith:

Ibn Mas’ud reported that the Messenger of Allah said,”Hayâti khayrun lakum tuHaddithuna wa yuHaddathu lakum fa idha muttu kânat wafâti khayran lakum tu`raDu `alayya a`mâlukum fa in ra’aytu khayran hamidtu allaha wa in ra’aytu ghayra dhâlik istaghfartu Allaha lakum”

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

Sharh provided by brother superfaa:
The hadith has a sound chain as stated by al-Suyuti in Manahil al-Safa (p. 31 #8) and al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (2:281), and a sound chain according to al-Haythami (9:24 #91), and a sound chain according to al-`Iraqi in Tarh al-Tathrib (3:297), also Shaykh `Abd Allah al-Talidi said in his Tahdhib al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (p. 458-459 #694) that this chain is sound according to Muslim’s criterion, and Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf`al-Minara (p. 156-169) discusses it at length and declares it sound. Their shaykh, al-Sayyid `Abd Allah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari (d. 1413/1993) declared it sound in his monograph Nihaya al-Amal fi Sharh wa Tashih Hadith `Ard al-A`mal.), Al-Munawi also declared it sahîh(Al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir (3:401), and so did al-Zurqani in his commentary on al-Qastallani’s al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya, and Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji in Al-Khafaji, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102), al-Mulla `Ali al-Qari adding: “Al-Harith ibn Usama narrated it in his Musnad with a sound chain.” (Al-Qari, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102), referring to the mursal hadith of Bakr al-Muzani.). Ibn Hajar also mentioned it in al-Matalib al-`Alya.(al-Matalib al-`Alya (4:22). This hadith also came to us through another, mursal way from [the Tabi`î] Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani. The muhadith Isma`il al-Qadi also narrated it in his monograph on the invocation of blessings on the Prophet.


2nd Hadith :
From the Sahabi Malik al-Dar:
“The people suffered a drought in `Umar’s khilafa, whereupon a man[Bilal ibn al- Harith – according to ibn Hajar] came to the grave of the Prophet (alayhi salaat wa salaam) and said: “Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished.” After this the Prophet(alayhi salaat wa salaam) appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: Be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter wept and said: “My Lord! I spare no effort except in what escapes my power.”

Sharh by brother superfaa:

Related by Ibn Abū Shaybah in al-Musannaf (12:31-2#12051); Bayhaqī, Dalā’il-un-nubuwwah (7:47); Ibn ‘Abd-ul-Barr, al-Istī‘āb fī ma‘rifat-il-ashāb (2:464); Subkī, Shifā’-us-siqām fī ziyārat khayr-il-anām (p.130); ‘Alā’-ud-Dīn ‘Alī, Kanz-ul-‘ummāl (8:431#23535); and Abū Ya‘lā Khalīl bin ‘Abdullāh Khalīlī Qazwīnī in Kitāb-ul-irshād fī ma‘rifat ‘ulamā’-il-hadith (1:313-4), as quoted by Mahmūd Sa‘īd Mamdūh in Raf‘-ul-minārah (p.262).
(Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah vol.12 pg.31-32; Dalaailun-nubuwwah of Imaam Bayhaqi vol.7 pg.47).


After finishing up I said to sam4546 that these ahadith are agreed upon by all the great muhaditheenSunnah Wal Jama’ah and their qualification is of no issue. Further more, Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. has informed us that “My Ummah will not collectively agree upon an error” and according to many hadith exegesis the term ummah here refers to learned men in the religion i.e. ulama’ and not just any tom, dick or harry. It is difficult to imagine that all these great scholars would have agreed upon a lie or a fabricated narration when they are known for their great knowledge, dedication and meticulousness. I then again asked him to please not reject the narrations before passing the mic to him.

Sam4546 takes the microphone and re-quoted the first hadith I presented. After quoting it he immediately made the bold claim that…THIS HADITH IS MAUDHU’. IT IS WEAK!!! According to Al-Sarakhshi(or someone that sounds like that, his speech was not really that understandable to me, with all due respect) and then he made the great blunder of saying AND ALSO BY SHEIKH ALBANI !! after which he was immediately dotted. I went to the microphone and exclaimed rather loudly that we shall not have THAT in this room ! How dare you cancel and debunk a hadith agreed by a bench of great muhaditheen as saheeh to be weak on the basis of what the charlatan Albani said !!! I then reminded him of the hadith I quoted “My Ummah will not agree upon an error” and asked a rhetorical question who the heck is Albani to question the authenticity of any hadith that has been declared saheeh by qualified, recognised muhaditheen of Islam!?!? I went on saying that Albani made great blunders when he attempted to analyse the hadith and you call him “Sheikhul Hadith” ??? He asked me to pass the microphone to him several times to which i sternly responded saying, “I refuse to let the fans of Albani  come to the mic”. You sam4546 will just repeat the same thing ! You’re just gonna keep saying maudhu’ maudhu’ maudhu’ because that’s what Albani said. Your people accuse us of ahl sunnah wal jama’ah of doing taqleed and even go so far as to make takfir on those who say it’s wajeeb to do taqleed on a madhab(this is qualified by the scholars of Islam to mean those without knowledge or sound knowledge in the sciences of Islam) YET you do the very same thing!!! The difference is the ahl sunnah wal jama’ah do taqleed on qualified, REAL scholars of Islam while the Wahabis follow spurious personalities like Albani. When I was saying these, I was in a sort of frenzy, excited..that I have to admit. Sam4546 said that “YOU ARE ‘HIGH TEMPERED'” in reference to my tone. If anyone has heard me talking about something that I’m very passionate about, they would not have mistaken it for anger. However,  Sam doesn’t know me, so his reaction is quite acceptable. The people were asking me to let sam4546 back on the mic and brother Tridax said that “ono, give the mic to sam even if you disagree with him please” to which I responded saying ” I shall not allow the lies of the fans of Albani spread in this room “. Anyone who does not agree with my method of administering my room, may vacate whenever they please. After all, on the banner of my is clearly mentioned that Lying is prohibited. To discredit a legitimate hadith on the basis of what a solitary unauthoritative individual has to say is quite a lie. Seeing that I will not placate and return the mic to him, sam4546 exited the room.

The following is a follow up in pm(private message) :
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: sam..habibi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i know you think i’m oppressive
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and maybe even a coward
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i am not
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: you see
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i have little patience for albani fans
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: and i will not have this albani cancelling the ijma’ of the ulama’
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: let me just give you one example of this sheikhul hadith of yours
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i suggest you look it up
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in Irwa al-Ghalil, 6/251 number 1847
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: a narration from Ali r.a.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Albani had the audacity to say
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Lam aqif ala sanadih !
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: I could not find the sanad to this narration!
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: if he had only read Imam Al-Hadith Al-Bayhaqi
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: in Sunah Al-Bayhaqi 7/121
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: apparently…your hadith doesn’t know his ulum hadith very well
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: hadith master*
sam4546: you are a joke and you know it
sam4546 is now offline.
Messages will be delivered when they sign on to Paltalk.

Alhamdulillahi RABBIL ‘ALAMEEN. The truth prevails. Wassalam.

Wahabi fitnah on Paltalk

June 15, 2007

The following is a record of what occured at a wahabi owned room called “Social Issues have been hijacked by social outcasts” at about 2:20 pm Malaysian time on Thursday, 6/14/2007. It happened just a few minutes after i had the brief exchange with Sayed provided in the previous post.

abdullah stockton: lol
Shakira_07: i will not sing
abdullah stockton: wahabis

Someone came up to the microphone and made the claim that there are MANY wahabis in the room.

seekingknowledge_1: omggggggggggg
Shakira_07: hiuh?
abdullah stockton: whats that

Playing the dumb is a nice game but it really does not help one’s position.

Pan Arabist: yes frank
oneguyks: yes many wahabis
Taubah4theStrangers: wahabis?
abu ayyub al-bukhari: alhamdulilah
Sayed777_7: Wahabbies ?
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: tellytubbies
sofea_7: Ono – ada orang cakap lelaki Muslim boleh kahwin pompan kaffir
be frankk: ws
seekingknowledge_1: frank don’t get me mad
abdullah stockton: wahabbies
Ipodnutter: I am wahabis..u got a problem?
Taubah4theStrangers: Allah is Al Wahab
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol sofea
Taubah4theStrangers: Shakira???????
seekingknowledge_1: pm?
Taubah4theStrangers: dont encourage it….
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: sofea
seekingknowledge_1: lool
wwisbk: why woman talk
Taubah4theStrangers: Good!
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: ada ikhtilaf dalam isu itu
abu ayyub al-bukhari: wahhabee=Follower of Al Wahhaab=ALLAaah

How dare this person equate Ibn Abdul Wahab with Allah s.w.t. ! It has been agreed upon by the Muslims of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama’ah A WAHABI refers to the follower of Ibn Abdul Wahab and the “scholars who support him such as Ibn Baz and Albani.

Taubah4theStrangers: lol
sofea_7: ya – sebab tu banyak khawin haram
be frankk: shakira and dont sing
Sayed777_7: Ono … go back to your Tassawuf room ? or is it you get bored there ?
seekingknowledge_1: looool
wwisbk: she sing
Taubah4theStrangers: lol
be frankk: what a hipocrite
Sayed777_7: Shakira loool
abu ayyub al-bukhari: sufi cult

This cowardly fiend has been exposed, please proceed to the post “A little tea party with Paltalk Salafis” for clarification. If there is a cult among the Muslim Ummah, it would be WAHABISM.

Taubah4theStrangers: shiaa or sufi
Sayed777_7: hhh
Pan Arabist: so what if someone is shia
wwisbk: haram
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: lol Sayed
Sayed777_7: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: tsk tsk
be frankk: lol
seekingknowledge_1: lol shakira
Ipodnutter: But i am not a wallaby like u people who always spending time bashing wahabi

Ah, we have a bashful maiden in our midst. Wah wah wah, you guys bash wahabis!!! Well what about the bashing and LIES upon LIES the WAHABIS hammer on Muslims i.e. sufis of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. DO unto others what you want others to do unto you.
Anyway, Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama’ah do not go around bashing wahabis and concoct lies about them. This is actually what the average wahabi does on Muslims and Islam. Oh and apprently this person Ipodnutter does recognise the existence of wahabis? lol

Taubah4theStrangers: Masha’Allah Shakira
abu ayyub al-bukhari: Pan arabist, shia
be frankk: lol
Sayed777_7: hhhhhhhhhhhh
Shakira_07: loool
Sayed777_7: looooooooooooool
wwisbk: woman no talk
seekingknowledge_1: that’s not funny
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: Radical;
Pan Arabist: Abu Shia are ppl to
Justice33: assalamualaikum
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what is the Ijaza of Albani?

A person by the name Radical Arab who went to the microphone after the person who spoke of wahabis relinquished it started rebuking him and said that he is a mufti of paltalk and has an ijaza from paltalk. Hearing this, I enquired sincerely what Ijaza did Albani have???

Taubah4theStrangers: ya Allah
be frankk: song is haram
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: would you like telling me about that?
sofea_7: Ono banyak orang jantan Muslim khawin pompan nasrani
abu ayyub al-bukhari: Pan Arabist shia creed
Legendarella: justice
Ipodnutter: w’salam wr wb
Legendarella: ws
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: who gave Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab Ijaza?
seekingknowledge_1: be frank uskoot
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: what ijazas did this person have?
Pan Arabist: Abu sectarianism is bad
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: i would very much like to know
Pan Arabist: why do u fall for Zionist ploys?
Ipodnutter: Do u need ijazas?
abu ayyub al-bukhari: Onomat. who GAVE YOU ijaza?

I do not have an Ijaza since I am not a scholar nor have I ever claimed to be. An Ijaza is owned by a qualified traditional scholar of Islam.

seekingknowledge_1: and yet you played it?
Taubah4theStrangers: lol
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: traditionally..yes Ipodnutter

It has been the practice of the scholars of Islam since time immemoriam to have Ijazas i.e. recognition of eminent teachers in Islam before he is regarded as one qualified in the field of ‘ilm. This is to avoid “self-made” scholars like Albani who became a scholar by reading books at a library.

Pan Arabist: zionists like to make ppl hate each other
Paltalk: (PS) Your text messsages are currently disabled in this room.
Onomat Al-Sufi Al-Shafie: to be qualified
Taubah4theStrangers: @ whisper

Failing to respond to my queries, the owner of the room cowardly puts me on dot.

Paltalk: (PS) Your text messsages are currently disabled in this room.
Sayed777_7: Ono ……. enjoy your hindu dot

This is the Sayed who’s exposed on this blog. Even if one is disatisfied about something, is it warranted to say something like that to a fellow brother? I cannot help but wonder if he just made takfir on me.

Ipodnutter: Don’t like to talk about contraversy issues
abu ayyub al-bukhari: Pan Arabist, we hate those whom God hates.
Shakira_07: what?

—————–END OF TEXT—————-

Wahabism is bankrupt of any proof. Alhamdulillahi RABBIL ‘Alameen. Allah s.w.t. exposes the liars and their deceit. Wassalam.

When truth is hurled against falsehood, falsehood perishes, for falsehood is by its nature, bound to perish.” Qur’an Al-Isra 17:81

Does Wahabism and Wahabis exist?
Check out these works :
al-Shaykh Muhammad bin `Abdi-l Wahhâb fî Marrât al-`Ulamâ’ al-Sharq wa-l Gharb,
Fasl al-Khitab fi Rad Dalalat Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Kashf al-Hijab an Wajh Dalalat Ibn al-Wahhab.

Sidi Shibli Zaman have written a very interesting article on this very issue. You may read it here