Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's lack of qualifications and the disasters that resulted from it!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

    As far as I know most of al-Funun of Imam Ibn 'Aqil (d. 513 AH) has not reached us, because it was originally a very very long work and regarding many Islamic sciences. It was a masterpiece.
    But Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) quotes from his al-Funun every now and then and the quote youโ€™re referring to has been also quoted by him.

    It should be noted here that the quote is NOT regarding Tawassul, but rather regarding a number of forbidden and disliked actions and those who address the creation in the manner one should only address one's Lord.

    Both Imam Ibn 'Aqil and Imam Ibn al-Jawzi would be "polytheists" according to the Najdi logic.

    Please read this:

    - Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ๏ทบ



    Iโ€˜ve made thread on this issue here:

    "Seeking intercession with the Prophet (s): Its ruling according to classical scholars"

    And HERE is the table contents to find the relevant posts faster.

    Note that one could post hundreds of classical scholars on this issue (all supporting it!), but due to time reasons I only could post this much until now.
    Yes he mentions a number of things, but I'm confused how it's not regarding Tawassul as well? The Arabic literally says: ูˆุงู„ุชูˆุณู„ ุจู‡ู… ุฅู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡. I've read your comment on the other thread and that is specifically about making Tawassul through the prophet ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู…. Does Imam Ibn Aqeel perhaps differentiate?

    Edited to add: this quote was taken from al-Furoo

    Leave a comment:


  • AmantuBillahi
    replied
    Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post
    Btw did you know that there are Salafis that actually advise against studying at the Uni of Medina?

    I'm familiar with Muhammad (Mufti) Muneer and I think he and his affiliates have a more laxe approach than other type of Salafis when it comes to making Tabdee on people and sitting/mixing with Ahlul-Bid3ah. That's why some Salafis accuse him of Tamyee.
    I would personally consider him more of a hardliner Salafi. Mind you, I also classify Yasir Qadhi as a "Salafi" or "Salafi-inclined" despite being somewhat of an enemy from their perspective. Anyone who sympathizes with the methodology of Ibn Taymiyyah concerning Allah's Names & Attributes falls under the general umbrella of Salafi-Athari.

    What makes me view Mufti Muneer as a hardliner is his identification with the Salafi label, methodology in Fiqh, reverance of the modern Salafi scholars, sympathy for Ibn Abdul Wahhab, etc. I guess the term is better suited for the Madaakhilah but it depends on how you look at it. In any case, he's definitely someone who claims to be Salafi regardless if the gatekeepers have thrown him off the Manhaj.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abu Sulayman
    replied
    Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post
    So I was just checking a piece in defence of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab's stance on Tawassul. It was by posted by Abu Iyaad of spubs. Anyway, they were citing Ibn Aqeel al-Hanbali to defend Ibn Abdul-Wahhab's stance on it. I assume they posted from his words what would defend their stance the best. And when actually reading his words on it taken from al-Funoon he never mentioned it be Shirk. Rather what I understood from it is that he mentions that these matters are disliked and shouldn't be done. If that's the best they got in defence then the matter becomes only more clear..

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹
    As far as I know most of al-Funun of Imam Ibn 'Aqil (d. 513 AH) has not reached us, because it was originally a very very long work and regarding many Islamic sciences. It was a masterpiece.
    But Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) quotes from his al-Funun every now and then and the quote youโ€™re referring to has been also quoted by him.

    It should be noted here that the quote is NOT regarding Tawassul, but rather regarding a number of forbidden and disliked actions and those who address the creation in the manner one should only address one's Lord.

    Both Imam Ibn 'Aqil and Imam Ibn al-Jawzi would be "polytheists" according to the Najdi logic.

    Please read this:

    - Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ๏ทบ

    Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
    Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ๏ทบ

    He said in his al-Tadhkira (p. 117) that one should say the following in the context of the visitation:

    ุงู„ู„ู‡ู… ุฅู†ูƒ ู‚ู„ุช ููŠ ูƒุชุงุจูƒ ู„ู†ุจูŠูƒ ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู…: {ูˆูŽู„ูŽูˆู’ ุฃูŽู†ู‘ูŽู‡ูู…ู’ ุฅูุฐู’ ุธูŽู„ูŽู…ููˆุง ุฃูŽู†ู’ููุณูŽู‡ูู…ู’ ุฌูŽุงุกููˆูƒูŽ ููŽุงุณู’ุชูŽุบู’ููŽุฑููˆุง ุงู„ู„ู‘ูŽู‡ูŽ ูˆูŽุงุณู’ุชูŽุบู’ููŽุฑูŽ ู„ูŽู‡ูู…ู ุงู„ุฑู‘ูŽุณููˆู„ู ู„ูŽูˆูŽุฌูŽุฏููˆุง ุงู„ู„ู‘ูŽู‡ูŽ ุชูŽูˆู‘ูŽุงุจู‹ุง ุฑูŽุญููŠู…ู‹ุง} [ุณูˆุฑุฉ ุงู„ู†ุณุงุก] ูˆุฅู†ูŠ ู‚ุฏ ุฃุชูŠุช ู†ุจูŠูƒ ุชุงุฆุจู‹ุง ู…ุณุชุบูุฑู‹ุง ูุฃุณุฃู„ูƒ ุฃู† ุชูˆุฌุจ ู„ูŠ ุงู„ู…ุบูุฑุฉ ูƒู…ุง ุฃูˆุฌุจุชู‡ุง ู„ู…ู† ุฃุชุงู‡ ููŠ ุญูŠุงุชู‡ุŒ ุงู„ู„ู‡ู… ุฅู†ูŠ ุฃุชูˆุฌู‡ ุฅู„ูŠูƒ ุจู†ุจูŠูƒ ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู… ู†ุจูŠ ุงู„ุฑุญู…ุฉุŒ ูŠุง ุฑุณูˆู„ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุฅู†ูŠ ุฃุชูˆุฌู‡ ุจูƒ ุฅู„ู‰ ุฑุจูŠ ู„ูŠุบูุฑ ู„ูŠ ุฐู†ูˆุจูŠุŒ ุงู„ู„ู‡ู… ุฅู†ูŠ ุฃุณุฃู„ูƒ ุจุญู‚ู‡ ุฃู† ุชุบูุฑ ู„ูŠ ุฐู†ูˆุจูŠ

    "O Allah, You have indeed stated in Your book to Your Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam: { If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allahโ€™s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful } [4:64] and I've come to your Prophet repenting [from my sins] and seeking forgiveness, so I ask you [my Lord] that you grant me forgiveness just like you granted it to the one who came to him (i.e. the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) during his life.
    O Allah I approach you through your Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, the Prophet of Mercy. O Messenger of Allah I approach my Lord through you that He forgives my sins. O Allah, I'm asking you that you forgive my sins for his sake."

    - end of quote -


    If you look into the footnotes on the same site (scanned page), you'll see that the atheist-minded "Salafi" editor could not hold himself back from claiming that this is "greater polytheism", which is not just an attack against Imam Ibn 'Aqil, but rather against the divine law itself, because this wording is established from it!

    The scholars of the Shafi'iyya have already been quoted more than enough (one could easily bring even more quotes from them!), so insha`Allah more classical Hanbali scholars will be quoted to show that this issue is established from all 4 Madhahib.
    Iโ€˜ve made a thread on this issue here:

    "Seeking intercession with the Prophet (s): Its ruling according to classical scholars"

    And HERE is the table contents to find the relevant posts faster.

    Note that one could post hundreds of classical scholars on this issue (all supporting it!), but due to time reasons I only could post this much until now.
    Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 18-11-20, 11:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    So I was just checking a piece in defence of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab's stance on Tawassul. It was by posted by Abu Iyaad of spubs. Anyway, they were citing Ibn Aqeel al-Hanbali to defend Ibn Abdul-Wahhab's stance on it. I assume they posted from his words what would defend their stance the best. And when actually reading his words on it taken from al-Funoon he never mentioned it be Shirk. Rather what I understood from it is that he mentions that these matters are disliked and shouldn't be done. If that's the best they got in defence then the matter becomes only more clear..

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post


    There is nothing wrong with studying at a Salafi institute as long you keep your mind open and don't become completely indoctrinated by their program. The same would apply if you were to study at a non-Salafi university or institute. Some of the Salafi scholars (Abdul Mohsin al-Abbad if I'm not mistaken) and students of knowledge have permitted studying at al-Azhar with the condition of not being influenced by their Aqeedah.

    I guess it really depends on the level of the institute and what you're actually studying. Both strands have their positives and negatives which they excell one another in. If you could study Asma wa-Sifat in depth with a qualified teacher than that wouldn't be something to pass out on, but generally I would prefer studying Fiqh in the traditional sense through a single Madhhab.

    Here's a video by Mufti Muneer (Salafi) comparing studying at Madinah with al-Azhar:



    Although he is considered more of a "hardline Salafi", he doesn't shy away from praising certain qualities of al-Azhar and advising against being a "sheep" at Madinah. You could potentially go astray if you lack integrity at either institute.

    Yasir Qadhi was also asked about this after he claimed that neither strand was completely flawless and he admitted we cannot "reinvent the wheel". There's nothing wrong with studying either tradition and in fact it is recommended to study both of them. The problem is when you become a blind fanatic to either Hizb and remove the human element out of the equation.
    It's a bit more complicated than that for me. And it's not exactly like Salafis are known for their tolerance against anyone they see as a mubtadi. But never mind, I think it's better not to talk about my personal situation on here. Another reason I was hoping to find a sister inshaaAllaah.

    Btw did you know that there are Salafis that actually advise against studying at the Uni of Medina?

    I'm familiar with Muhammad (Mufti) Muneer and I think he and his affiliates have a more laxe approach than other type of Salafis when it comes to making Tabdee on people and sitting/mixing with Ahlul-Bid3ah. That's why some Salafis accuse him of Tamyee.

    Leave a comment:


  • AmantuBillahi
    replied
    Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

    These traditional Hanabila (like the Shaykh Muhammad al-Sayyid Mustafa al-Hanbali for example) - or al-Hanabila al-Judud ("new Hanbalis") as "Salafis" call them - are actually UPON THE VERY SAME 'Aqida and Fiqh as the classical Hanabila and teach and learn ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY their works and are even connected in their chain of knowledge to them. So when someone of them teaches Lum'at al-I'tiqad, then he does so with a chain of knowledge going back right to the author and he explains what the author intended and does not try to refute him.
    "Salafis" can not claim any of this for themselves!

    In fact their Najdi forefathers plaid the leading role in killing whatever is Hanbali on the Arabian peninsula, which explains their low number in our times!
    I have already shared my thoughts on the diversity that existed between the Hanaabilah and the Ash'ari influences on the later developed school. It is not a black-and-white issue either way you want to look at it and both parties do an injustice when they portray it as such. The Najdis are often guilty of completely dismissing the existence of the other and the "traditionalist" have their own set of inconsistencies which I find problematic.

    What is fundamentally true for virtually all of the Hanbalis/Atharis is that the Attributes are to be affirmed without making Ta'wil. Allah is to be described in the manner that He described Himself and by what has been authentically reported from the Prophet(saws). As for the details concerning the implications of the Attributes it differs to various extents depending on the circumstance. I don't deny that some of the Hanaabilah were Mufaawida (to a fault), but I also recognize the nuance in their terminologies. There was an example I quoted from an Azhari Hanbali scholar explaining the difference between the Hanbali and Ash'ari usage of "Bi la-Kayf". He also made a comment which confirmed that his negation of the "Ma'na" is literally conflated with his negation (ignorance) of the "Kayf".

    Anyways, this is something I'm continually studying and always looking for more information. I strongly sympathize with the Athari methodology of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and believe that it most accurately represents the intended theology. The descriptions pertaining to Allah's Names & Attributes are to be understood upon their apparrent/obvious meanings and Kalam-based contentions are incapable of negating the reality of the Dhahir.

    Leave a comment:


  • AmantuBillahi
    replied
    Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

    That's what I figured once I started searching, but all I could find (online at least) were Salafi sites. It's such a shame because I actually - at least up until what I've read and verified so far - feel increasingly uneasy with Ibn Abdul-Wahhab. I came here to study at a Salafi institute and I know I won't be able to stay here if I continue feeling this way about the Da3wah, and it doesn't seem like there are many if any alternatives?

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹

    There is nothing wrong with studying at a Salafi institute as long you keep your mind open and don't become completely indoctrinated by their program. The same would apply if you were to study at a non-Salafi university or institute. Some of the Salafi scholars (Abdul Mohsin al-Abbad if I'm not mistaken) and students of knowledge have permitted studying at al-Azhar with the condition of not being influenced by their Aqeedah.

    I guess it really depends on the level of the institute and what you're actually studying. Both strands have their positives and negatives which they excell one another in. If you could study Asma wa-Sifat in depth with a qualified teacher than that wouldn't be something to pass out on, but generally I would prefer studying Fiqh in the traditional sense through a single Madhhab.

    Here's a video by Mufti Muneer (Salafi) comparing studying at Madinah with al-Azhar:



    Although he is considered more of a "hardline Salafi", he doesn't shy away from praising certain qualities of al-Azhar and advising against being a "sheep" at Madinah. You could potentially go astray if you lack integrity at either institute.

    Yasir Qadhi was also asked about this after he claimed that neither strand was completely flawless and he admitted we cannot "reinvent the wheel". There's nothing wrong with studying either tradition and in fact it is recommended to study both of them. The problem is when you become a blind fanatic to either Hizb and remove the human element out of the equation.

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

    I understand your reasoning. I would however like to mention that this a public forum and we're speaking about religious and historical issues without any inappropriate behavior between the genders whatsoever. There are some other threads - especially in the marriage section - where I personally dislike the interactions of some users, but in this section there is no such behavior as far as I can tell.
    As far as I know Umm al-Mu`minin 'A`isha - radhiallahu 'anha - used to teach other people from behind a veil and this was also done by other female scholars after her.
    If you're uncomfortable then this is different, but it's really not like it's forbidden.

    By the way: The work al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya has also been printed under the name Fasl al-Khitab.
    Here is a link to the pdf:
    https://naseemalsham.com/uploads/Com..._AlIlaheeh.pdf
    I think it's mostly my feelings on the matter which has also been influenced by my environment. I was actually kind of hoping you would know someone perhaps, inshaaAllaah khayr.

    Anyway, I can continue reading the threads even if I were to stop responding inshaaAllaah. Your comment to AmantuBillahi above has actually been quite helpful as was the book reference of Shaykh Sulayman. ุฌุฒุงูƒู… ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุฎูŠุฑุง

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹Edited to add: I meant the comment to AmantuBillahi where you mentioned Ibn Taymiyyah and his stance on Tawassul.
    Last edited by TazkiyyatunNafs; 18-11-20, 12:48 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abu Sulayman
    replied
    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    There are not too many Athari opponents of the Najdi Da'wah outside of what some people refer to as the "traditionalist Hanabila".
    These traditional Hanabila (like the Shaykh Muhammad al-Sayyid Mustafa al-Hanbali for example) - or al-Hanabila al-Judud ("new Hanbalis") as "Salafis" call them - are actually UPON THE VERY SAME 'Aqida and Fiqh as the classical Hanabila and teach and learn ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY their works and are even connected in their chain of knowledge to them. So when someone of them teaches Lum'at al-I'tiqad, then he does so with a chain of knowledge going back right to the author and he explains what the author intended and does not try to refute him.
    "Salafis" can not claim any of this for themselves!

    In fact their Najdi forefathers plaid the leading role in killing whatever is Hanbali on the Arabian peninsula, which explains their low number in our times!
    Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 18-11-20, 12:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    There are not too many Athari opponents of the Najdi Da'wah outside of what some people refer to as the "traditionalist Hanabila". However, the Salafi/Najdi Da'wah is already on the decline and I suspect that many will soon identify with a Salafi-Athari approach (i.e. pro Ibn Taymiyyah) similar to Yasir Qadhi.

    The Shaykh is expected to publish an academic book on the historical evolution of Salafism/Atharism before the end of this year. I'll be sure to post a link on the forum once it is available to the public inshaAllah.
    That's what I figured once I started searching, but all I could find (online at least) were Salafi sites. It's such a shame because I actually - at least up until what I've read and verified so far - feel increasingly uneasy with Ibn Abdul-Wahhab. I came here to study at a Salafi institute and I know I won't be able to stay here if I continue feeling this way about the Da3wah, and it doesn't seem like there are many if any alternatives?

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹

    Leave a comment:


  • Abu Sulayman
    replied
    Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

    ุฌุฒุงูƒู… ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุฎูŠุฑุง will have a look ุฅู† ุดุงุก ุงู„ู„ู‡
    I answered your question in my comment above.
    I understand your reasoning. I would however like to mention that this a public forum and we're speaking about religious and historical issues without any inappropriate behavior between the genders whatsoever. There are some other threads - especially in the marriage section - where I personally dislike the interactions of some users, but in this section there is no such behavior as far as I can tell.
    As far as I know Umm al-Mu`minin 'A`isha - radhiallahu 'anha - used to teach other people from behind a veil and this was also done by other female scholars after her.
    If you're uncomfortable then this is different, but it's really not like it's forbidden.

    By the way: The work al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya has also been printed under the name Fasl al-Khitab.
    Here is a link to the pdf:
    https://naseemalsham.com/uploads/Com..._AlIlaheeh.pdf

    Leave a comment:


  • AmantuBillahi
    replied
    Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

    I didn't mean sisters on this forum but perhaps sisters outside of it, teachers etc. With Salafi inclined I meant anyone under the 'Salafi Community' umbrella, which would exclude Yasir Qadhi. I actually have been a 'Salafi' misfit for the past year and wasn't sure who I was agreeing with anymore. There's a lot of ta3assub, hizbiyyah among the Salafis. For the past year I've tried to take a more neutral stance towards all those groups and simply tried to stick to the big and past away Salafi scholars. Anyway, I was looking for a preferably Athari opponent of the Najdi Da3wah.
    There are not too many Athari opponents of the Najdi Da'wah outside of what some people refer to as the "traditionalist Hanabila". However, the Salafi/Najdi Da'wah is already on the decline and I suspect that many will soon identify with a Salafi-Athari approach (i.e. pro Ibn Taymiyyah) similar to Yasir Qadhi.

    The Shaykh is expected to publish an academic book on the historical evolution of Salafism/Atharism before the end of this year. I'll be sure to post a link on the forum once it is available to the public inshaAllah.
    Last edited by AmantuBillahi; 17-11-20, 07:03 PM. Reason: Typo

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

    Hmm, why don't you post the questions here as the brother AmantuBillahi said?
    I would also recommend you to read al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya by the 'Allama Sulayman bin 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Hanbali al-Athari (d. 1208 AH) (especially because you understand Arabic), because he clarifies a lot of things and he basically destroys the so called "Da'wa" of his brother and shows also that he completely misunderstood al-Hafidh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH).
    (By the way: Some people lie and claim that he "accepted the call of his brother", but they don't have a single proof for this claim! In fact the "Salafi" researcher 'Abdullah al-Bassam - who by the way is in no way as extreme as the original Najdis, because he prays for the very Hanbali scholars that IAW made Takfir by name! - clarified why this claim is wrong and mentioned his proofs for this.)

    Just so that you know how strong this refutation is: When MIAW's (d. 1206 AH) followers caught Sulayman bin Khuwaytir transporting a letter by the Shaykh Sulayman, IAW commanded him to be killed. This very letter later on became known as the work al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya!
    See:



    Some passages can be found translated here:

    - 'Allama Sulayman bin 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Hanbali (d. 1208 AH): Some of his statements in response to the ignorance of his brother IAW
    ุฌุฒุงูƒู… ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุฎูŠุฑุง will have a look ุฅู† ุดุงุก ุงู„ู„ู‡
    I answered your question in my comment above.

    Leave a comment:


  • TazkiyyatunNafs
    replied
    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

    I don't think there are many on this website that can help you with these issues. Why don't you just post your questions in this thread and see where that takes you?

    Also, what exactly do you mean by "Salafi inclined"? Are you referring to someone who is Ash'ari or an Athari opponent of the Najdi Da'wah? By the way, I would still classify Yasir Qadhi as being "Salafi inclined" because he agrees with the Aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah.
    I didn't mean sisters on this forum but perhaps sisters outside of it, teachers etc. With Salafi inclined I meant anyone under the 'Salafi Community' umbrella, which would exclude Yasir Qadhi. I actually have been a 'Salafi' misfit for the past year and wasn't sure who I was agreeing with anymore. There's a lot of ta3assub, hizbiyyah among the Salafis. For the past year I've tried to take a more neutral stance towards all those groups and simply tried to stick to the big and past away Salafi scholars. Anyway, I was looking for a preferably Athari opponent of the Najdi Da3wah.

    โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹โ€‹I'd prefer to find a sister instead of posting on here because I don't want to mix more than I already did. When I first started posting everyone called me brother, I never pretended I was but it made me feel a bit better about being here. And now that it's out I'm a sister I feel highly uncomfortable. Either way I shouldn't have been posting on here, and when Abu Sulayman and Eesa mentioned "sister" I felt really embarrassed that this is what I had brought upon myself. I'm literally the only sister on these topics if it wasn't already bad enough that I'm here to begin with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • AmantuBillahi
    replied
    TazkiyyatunNafs

    Have you watched the 'Chain Takfir of the Early Najdiyya' series by brother Hajji?


    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Chain Takfir of the Early Najdiyya - Part 1 | Bro Hajji



    Chain Takfir of the Early Najdiyya - Part 2 | Bro Hajji

    Part 3 should be coming out soon inshaAllah Ta'ala.

    Note: Brother Hajji's error is that he still agrees with the Tawhid of Ibn Abdul Wahhab but rejects his application of Takfir. Other than that, it is filled with a lot of information and easy to follow.

    Leave a comment:

Collapse

Edit this module to specify a template to display.

Working...
X