Announcement

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 15-11-20, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

The author in the first article admitted that he had no idea why Yasir Qadhi switched his views on this issue. He even went as far as saying he might have did for worldly benefits.

I'm not trying to be hasty in judgement but the second article seems to indicate how they intend on proving their case. What is missing in the new YQ from the old YQ is his consideration of the widespread 'Shirk' during that period.

Anyway this is the crux of the argument for the Najdis. You have to somehow justify the statements and "Ghazwat" of MIAW and the early Najdiyya.

I didn't like when they assumed that about YQ and I personally don't like to assume how they're intending to prove their case. Though one is obviously less harmful than the other.

I do like to say that the author said that after having done extensive research he couldn't find a rational explanation as to why he has changed his views. That sounds quite different than you saying he admitted he has no idea why YQ changed his views. Either way it doesn't condone his statement on YQ.

**AmantuBillahi** · 15-11-20, 10:11 PM

These are quotes from the second article:

"This situation was not only specific for the Najd region, but paganism, polytheism and the worshipping of saints and tombs was a widespread phenomenon in the Islamic world under Ottoman rule. To give an example of 18^th and 19^th century Damascus."

"So after more than 400 years of Ottoman rule in Arabia and the Najd region specifically, this was the situation. An area filled with tribal rivalry, rampant polytheism, insecurity and instability, was the reality Shaykh Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhâb was confronted with."

"So it is proven beyond the slightest doubt that al-Imaam Muhammed bin ‘Abd al-Wahâb – rahiemahullâh – was confronted with a society that was filled with shirk and unislamic customs."

Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

You're speaking now about Muslims nullifying their Islaam and becoming Mushrikeen as if any of that has been mentioned yet, which so far hasn't been the case*. And per my own understanding even though the Shaykh used to regard those actions as Shirk, he also excused them due to ignorance. We've had a discussion on this topic before where I shared some of his words on this topic, if I have the time I'll try to look them up and re-share them - in shaa Allaah. So yes, the people did fall into Shirk according to them, but even the Shaykh himself didn't make absolute Takfir on them.

What I meant is that nobody should derive this conclusion after reading Prof. Sulaiman's account. The Najdi movement considers those actions as major Shirk and they differ with regards to Uder bil-Jahl.

The point I'm making though is that Yasir Qadhi does not consider the default of those action to be Shirk. When Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab went on his expeditions he did so under the guise that those who engaged in these practices were esseentially Mushrikeen. This is where he deviated regardless if he established the Hujjah upon them.

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 15-11-20, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

These are quotes from the second article:

What I meant is that nobody should derive this conclusion after reading Prof. Sulaiman's account. The Najdi movement considers those actions as major Shirk and they differ with regards to Uder bil-Jahl.

The point I'm making though is that Yasir Qadhi does not consider the default of those action to be Shirk. When Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab went on his expeditions he did so under the guise that those who engaged in these practices were esseentially Mushrikeen. This is where he deviated regardless if he established the Hujjah upon them.

I see, I get your point now.

**Abu Sulayman** · 15-11-20, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

These are some from the other thread:

Having posted that, I'd like to say that I don't like to discuss it. I did a bit on the other thread and I just don't want to do any of it anymore. I posted this to show you what my understanding is from the Shaykh's works. Now I know there are quotes that may indicate otherwise, but I think they hang together in the end. Anyway, I'm ignorant. I'm not eligible to discuss this in any way. And Allaah knows best.

The statement you quoted is from Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's (d. 1206 AH) letter to the people of al-Qassim - which by the way was later on attacked by his followers! - and it proves that he did not shy away to LIE OPENLY. I showed in this comment here that almost every single point that he denied in this letter was a lie:

- Proving that the scholars were truthful regarding Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and that IAW himself was the liar!

The scholar whom he accused of making a "great slander" against him was a Hanbali scholar (I've quoted him here: "'Allama Ibn Suhaym al-Hanbali (d. 1181 AH) regarding the extremism of IAW"). MIAW went on to make Takfir upon this scholar and upon his father and upon his whole tribe (i.e the 'Aniza tribe). Is this how scholars react to criticism?
He also made OPEN Takfir upon the two top Hanbali scholars of the whole region (alongside other Hanbali scholars!): 'Allama Ibn Fayruz (d. 1216 AH) and 'Allama Ibn 'Afaliq (d. 1164 AH). The 'Allama Ibn Fayruz even fled from Ahsa` to Basra, because IAW followers were trying to actively kill all scholars of the region!

Instead of defending this man, try to inform yourself more about this person. And please don't assume that Muslims were committing "Shirk akbar" - as IAW falsely claimed! - and that you now have to "excuse them" for this in order not to look extreme. The issue is not like this! These people whom he was making Takfir of where not upon "Shirk akbar" in the very first place! He redefined Shirk and Tawhid in order to be able to declare war on other Muslims! Please understand this.

Our Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - has been given knowledge by Allah ta'ala regarding what will happen in the future and what dangers his Umma will face until the day of judgement. He - 'alayhil salatu wal salam - warned us what he feared for us and what not!
And we know that he did NOT fear that we will become polytheists, because he stated so! Why are the words of the Chosen One - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - thrown behind ones back and the false claims of some person appearing more than 1000 years after the Hijra are put above his blessed words?
It's only in the end of times that the people in the Arabian peninsula will return to real Shirk and not before!

Anyways if you want to see how extreme MIAW and his early followers were, then it has already been proven by using their own books:

- The results of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's ignorance and extreme ideas on a theoretical level (includes Takfir against scholars, cities, whole regions and basically the whole Umma!):
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
- The results of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's ignorance and extreme ideas on a practical level (includes terrorizing, robbing, burning down fields, cutting trees and mass-killing the Muslims of the Arabian peninsula and surrounding regions; Part 12 is specifically regarding what they did to the people of the Haramayn al-Sharifayn and their stopping of the Hajj!):
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13
- Different examples of stealing, killing and destruction caused by Wahhabis according to 'Unwan al-Majd
- Translations of some of the examples given on the theoretical and practical results of MIAW's extremism and ignorance

The sources that I used are by the Najdis themselves:
- al-Durar al-Saniyya fil Ajwiba al-Najdiyya, which is praised by leading "Salafis" despite its ugly Takfiri content
- Tarikh Najd by Hussayn bin Ghannam (d. 1225 AH), who is a direct student of IAW
- 'Unwan al-Majd fi Tarikh Najd by 'Uthman bin Bishr (d. 1288 AH) (here is also the 2nd volume) (hardcore supporter of IAW) (Tahqiq and footnotes by 'Abd al-Latif bin 'Abd al-Rahman (d. 1292 AH), the great-grandson of IAW)

The whole problem is that people nowadays don't want to read. If they would simply read these sources - while being a normal Muslim - they would NOT try to defend a man whose followers STOPPED the Hajj and who would OPENLY make Takfir upon the people of Makka al-mukarrama and upon whosoever does not make Takfir upon them and made other such crazy Khariji statements and were actively involved in mass-killing Muslims.

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 15-11-20, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

Regarding the Hadith of Najd and the tribulations that will appear from the East and its connection to MIAW's "Najdi call"::

From the authentic narrations we know that the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - has informed us that tribulations will appear from the East and the scholars of the past spoke concerning this and mentioned different possibilities to understand this.
It can be understood to be referring to whatever is East of al-Madina al-munawwara (starting with Najd!) and beyond it (i.e. Iraq, Khurasan, etc.).
The very first tribulation that happened after the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - passed away was that of the apostasy of some of the Arab tribes and the center of all of this was central Arabia (i.e. Najd!) and among the greatest leaders of these apostates was the false prophet and liar Musaylima (who was from Najd and so were his supporters!)! Trying to categorically (!) exclude Najd (!) from the very Hadith of Najd (!) (o the irony!) and those narrations regarding what will appear from the East is therefore absolutely unacceptable and only the followers of false prophets will insist upon excluding it stubbornly in order to defend their false ideas!

Shaykh Sulayman bin 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Hanbali (d. 1208 AH) said (see al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya):

ومما يدل على بطلان مذهبكم ما في الصحيحين عن ابي هريرة رضي الله عنه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم انه قال رأس الكفر نحو المشرق وفي رواية الايمان يماني والفتنة من هاهنا حيث يطلع قرن الشيطان وفي الصحيحين ايضا عن ابن عمر رضي الله تعالى عنه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم انه قال وهو مستقبل المشرق ان الفتنة هاهنا وللبخاري عنه مرفوعا اللهم بارك لنا في شامنا ويمننا اللهم بارك لنا في شامنا ويمننا قالوا و في نجدنا قال اللهم بارك لنا في شامنا ويمننا قالوا وفي نجدنا قال الثالثة هناك الزلازل والفتن ومنها يطلع قرن الشيطان ولاحمد من حديث ابن عمر مرفوعاً اللهم بارك لنا في مدينتنا وفي صاعنا وفي مدنا ويمننا وشامنا ثم استقبل مطلع الشمس فقال هاهنا يطلع قرن الشيطان وقال من هاهنا الزلازل والفتن (انتهى) اقول اشهد ان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لصادق فصلوات الله وسلامه وبركاته عليه وعلى اله وصحبه اجمعين لقد ادى الامانة وبلغ الرسالة قال الشيخ تقي الدين فالمشرق عن مدينته صلى الله عليه وسلم شرقا ومنها خرج مسيلمة الكذاب الذي ادعى النبوة وهو اول حادث حدث بعده واتبعه خلائق وقاتلهم خليفته الصديق (انتهى) وجه الدلالة من هذا الحديث من وجوه كثيرة نذكر بعضها (منها) ان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ذكر ان الايمان يماني والفتنة تخرج من المشرق ذكرها مراراً (ومنها) ان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم دعى للحجاز واهله مراراً وابى ان يدعو لاهل المشرق لما فيهم من الفتن خصوصاً نجد (ومنها) ان اول فتنة وقعت بعده صلى الله عليه وسلم وقعت بارضنا هذه

That which indicates the falseness of your [deviant] way is what can be found [reported] in the Sahihayn (see Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) on the authority of Abu Hurayra - may Allah be pleased with him - who narrated from the Prophet ﷺ that he said: "The summit of unbelief is towards the East."

In another narration (see Sahih Bukhari): "Belief is Yemenite while afflictions appear from there (the east) from where the side of the head of Satan will appear."

It's also [reported] in the Sahihayn (see Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) on the authority of Ibn 'Umar - may Allah be pleased with him - narrating from the Prophet ﷺ that he said while facing the East: "Behold, turmoil would appear from this side[, from where the horns of Satan would appear.]"

In [Sahih] al-Bukhari (see HERE too) also on his authority: "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen. O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." [People] said, "Our Najd as well." [The Prophet again] said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said [again], "Our Najd as well." On that [the Prophet (ﷺ)] said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the head of Satan."

In the [Musnad] Ahmad there is [also] a narration on the authority of Ibn 'Umar [narrating from the Prophet ﷺ that he said]: "O Allah, bless us in our city and our Mudd and our Sa' and our Yemen and our Sham." Then he turned towards the direction were the sun rises (the east) and said "[From] there the horn of satan will appear, [from] there earthquakes and afflictions will appear.", end [of the narrations].

I say: I testify that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was indeed truthful, so may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and all of his family and companions! He indeed fulfilled the trust and conveyed the message!
The Shaykh Taqi al-Din said: "The East to his Madina (the city of the Prophet) ﷺ is where Musaylima - who claimed prophethood - came out and it's the first incident that happened after him. A [lot of] people started to followed [Musaylima] and his Khalifa [Abu Bakr] al-Siddiq faught against him.", end [of his statement].
The proof in these narrations is from many directions and we shall mention some of them:
From it: That the Prophet ﷺ mentioned that belief is Yemenite while afflictions will appear from the east and he said this repeatedly!
From it: That the Prophet ﷺ supplicated for the Hijaz and its people repeatedly, while he refused to supplicate for the people of the east because of the afflictions that appear from them, especially Najd!
From it: The first tribulation (i.e. the false prophet Musaylima causing apostasy among the people) that happened after [the Prophet] ﷺ [had passed away] happened in our land (i.e. Najd)!
- end of quote -

Then he said:

فنقول هذه الامور تالتي جعلون المسلم بها كافر من لم يكفره ملاءت مكة والمدينة واليمن من سنين متطاولة (بل بلغنا) ان ما في الارض اكثر من هذه الامور في اليمن والحرمين وبلدنا هذه هي اول من ظهر فيها الفتن ولا نعلم في بلاد المسليمن اكثر من فتنها قديماً وحديثاً وانتم الأن مذهبكم انه يجب على العامة اتباع مذهبكم وان من اتبعه ولم يقدر على اظهاره في بلده وتكفير اهل بلده وجب عليه الهجرة اليكم وانكم الطائفة المنصورة وهذا خلاف هذا الحديث فان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم اخبره الله بما هو كائن على امته الى يوم القيمة وهو صلى الله عليه وسلم اخبر بما يجري عليهم ومنهم فلو علم ان بلاد المشرق خصوصاً نجد بلاد مسيلمة انها تصير دار الايمان وان الطائفة المنصورة تكون بها وانها بلاد يظهر فيها الايمان ولا يخفى في غيرها وان الحرمين الشريفين واليمن تكون بلاد كفر تعبد فيها الاوثان وتجب الهجرة منها لاخبر بذلك ولدعى لاهل الشرق خصوصاً نجد ولدعى على الحرمين واليمن واخبرانهم يعبدون الاصنام وتبرأ منهم اذ لم يكن الاضد ذلك فانه صلى الله عليه وسلم عم المشرق وخص نجد بان منها يطلع قرن الشيطان وان منها وفيها الفتن وامتنع من الدعاء لها وهذا خلاف زعمكم وان اليوم عندكم الذين دعى لهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كفار والذين ابا ان يدعولهم واخبر ان منها يطلع قرن الشيطان وان منها الفتن هي بلاد الايمان تجب الهجرة اليها وهذا بين واضح من الاحاديث ان شاء الله

Then we say: These issues for which you regard a Muslim as a disbeliever - when he doesn't make Takfir upon those committing them -, then Makka, Madina and Yemen have been filled with them for a long time. Rather it has reached us that in lands other than Yemen and the Haramayn these issues are even more.
Our land (Najd) is the first one where afflictions appeared and we do not know any of the lands of the Muslims in the past and the present, where more afflictions can be found.
[But] upon your [deviant] way it's obligatory upon the generality of the people to follow your way and [also] that it's obligatory for the one who follows [your way] - but is not able to show it openly in his land and make Takfir upon the people of his land - to emigrate (Hijra) to you. [You also claim] that you are the victorious group. [All of] this is in opposition to these narrations.
Indeed the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has been informed by Allah [ta'ala] regarding that which will happen to his nation (Umma) until the day of judgement and he ﷺ has informed [his nation] what will happen to them and from them. So if he knew that that the lands of the east - especially Najd, the land of Musaylima! - will become the place for [pure] belief (Dar al-Iman) and that the victorious group (al-Ta`ifa al-Mansura) will be in them and that they're lands where [correct] belief will be become apparent and it will not disappear [except] in other than it and that al-Haramayn al-sharifayn and Yemen will become lands of disbelief where idols are worshipped and that emigrating away from them [to the east] would become obligatory and so on, then he would have supplicated for the people of the east - especially Najd! - and against the people of the Haramayn and Yemen and he would have informed [us that they'll] worship idols and would have shown disavowal towards them, if the issue would not be opposite to this.
For [the Prophet] ﷺ spoke in general regarding the east and specified Najd [in this context] and [said that] the HORN OF SATAN (Qarn al-Shaytan) will come out from it and that in it and from it will appear afflictions / tribulations and he refused to supplicate for it!
[This is] in opposition to your claim, because those for whom [the Prophet] ﷺ supplicated are disbelievers today according to you, while those for whom he refused to supplicate and informed that from them the horn of satan will come out and from them afflictions will appear, they are the lands of belief [and] it's obligatory to emigrate to them [according to you].
[The falseness of] this [understanding of yours] is obvious and clear from the narrations, insha`Allah.
- end of quote -

Several proofs that the Prophet ﷺ and his companions differentiated between Iraq and Najd

- From Sahih al-Bukhari on the authority of Ibn 'Umar, radhiallahu 'anhuma:

غَزَوْتُ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قِبَلَ نَجْدٍ، فَوَازَيْنَا الْعَدُوَّ فَصَافَفْنَا لَهُمْ‏

I took part in a Ghazwa towards Najd along with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and we clashed with the enemy, and we lined up for them.
- end of quote -

The above Najd is quite obviously the Najd we all know of, because the Ghazwa on 'Iraq was after the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - had passed away.

- Also from Sahih al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Hurayra, radhiallahu 'anhu:

بَعَثَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم خَيْلاً قِبَلَ نَجْدٍ، فَجَاءَتْ بِرَجُلٍ مِنْ بَنِي حَنِيفَةَ يُقَالُ لَهُ ثُمَامَةُ بْنُ أُثَالٍ، فَرَبَطُوهُ بِسَارِيَةٍ مِنْ سَوَارِي الْمَسْجِدِ‏

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent some horse men to Najd and they brought a man called Thumama bin Uthal from Bani Hanifa. They fastened him to one of the pillars of the mosque.
- end of quote -

Note that Thumama bin Uthal was the leader of the Bani Hanifa tribe in Yamama (i.e. Najd!). The Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - let him free after the above incident, after which he came back and accepted Islam and aided the Muslims thereafter, so may Allah ta'ala be pleased with him!

- From Sunan al-Nasa`i on the authority of 'A`isha, radhiallahu 'anha:

وَقَّتَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم لأَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ ذَا الْحُلَيْفَةِ وَلأَهْلِ الشَّامِ وَمِصْرَ الْجُحْفَةَ وَلأَهْلِ الْعِرَاقِ ذَاتَ عِرْقٍ وَلأَهْلِ نَجْدٍ قَرْنًا وَلأَهْلِ الْيَمَنِ يَلَمْلَمَ

The Messenger of Allah designated Dhul-Hulaifah as the Miqat for the people of Al-Madinah, Al-Juhfah for the people Ash-sham and Egypt, Dhat 'Irq for the people Al-'Iraq, Qarn for the people of Najd and Yalamlam for the people of Yemen.
- end of quote -

The Miqat of Qarn (remember the Ahadith regarding Najd and the East said "Qarn al-Shaytan"... what a coincidence!!!) for the people of Najd and differentiating it from the people of 'Iraq is also mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, so this issue is established with certainty!!!

Proving that the Qarn al-Shaytan (the horn of satan) will appear from [the lands of] Rabi'a and Mudar (who live in Najd!)

- From Sahih al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Mas'ud, radhiallahu 'anhu:

أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏"‏ الإِيمَانُ هَا هُنَا ‏"‏‏.‏ وَأَشَارَ بِيَدِهِ إِلَى الْيَمَنِ ‏"‏ وَالْجَفَاءُ وَغِلَظُ الْقُلُوبِ فِي الْفَدَّادِينَ، عِنْدَ أُصُولِ أَذْنَابِ الإِبِلِ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنَا الشَّيْطَانِ رَبِيعَةَ وَمُضَرَ

The Prophet (ﷺ) beckoned with his hand towards Yemen and said, "Belief is there. The harshness and mercilessness are the qualities of those farmers etc, who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to the religion (is towards the east) from where the side of the head of Satan will appear; those are the tribes of Rabi`a and Mudar."
- end of quote -

- From Sahih Muslim on the authority of Ibn Mas'ud, radhiallahu 'anhu:

أَشَارَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِيَدِهِ نَحْوَ الْيَمَنِ فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ أَلاَ إِنَّ الإِيمَانَ هَا هُنَا وَإِنَّ الْقَسْوَةَ وَغِلَظَ الْقُلُوبِ فِي الْفَدَّادِينَ عِنْدَ أُصُولِ أَذْنَابِ الإِبِلِ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنَا الشَّيْطَانِ فِي رَبِيعَةَ وَمُضَرَ

The Messenger of Allah (may peace and blessings be upon him) pointed towards Yemen with his hand and said:
"Verily Iman is towards this side, and harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels who drive them behind their tails (to the direction) where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar."
- end of quote -

It's not needed to be stated here that Rabi'a and Mudar live in Najd and not in Iraq, so the issue is really absolutely clear!

Imam Badr al-Din al-'Ayni (d. 855 AH) said in his 'Umdat al-Qari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari 15/192:

قَوْله " فِي ربيعَة وَمُضر " يتَعَلَّق بقوله فِي الْفَدادِين أَي المصوتين عِنْد أَذْنَاب الْإِبِل وَهُوَ فِي جِهَة الْمشرق حَيْثُ هُوَ مسكن هَاتين القبيلتين ربيعَة وَمُضر

His statement "in the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar" is connected to the farmers - meaning those who are behind the tails of their camels - and it (i.e. the emergence of the horn of satan) will be from the direction of the east and it is where these two tribues - Rabi'a and Mudar - live.
- end of quote -

Now the surprise:

Muhammad bin Sa'ud (d. 1179 AH) - who is the founder of first Saudi state and the one who started all these killings of the Muslims on the Arabian peninsula after his alliance with the false prophet Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) is from Bani Hanifa - the tribe of the false prophet Musaylima! -, which is a branch of Rabi'a!

Additional information: One of the first actions that brought negative publicity to MIAW was him desecrating the grave (!) of the companion Zayd bin al-Khattab - the brother of 'Umar bin al-Khattab! - (may Allah be pleased with both of them) in his home-town 'Uyayyna. Why was his grave there?
The answer: Zayd bin al-Khattab had been martyred during the battle of Yamama (i.e. in Najd!) against the supporters of the false prophet Musaylima!

Yet, the followers of MIAW - in their shamelessness! - are trying to tell us that Najd is not included in the Hadith of Najd (!) and this while Najd was the center of apostasy in the time of the Sahabat al-kiram - radhiallahu 'anhum - and the first tribulation happened there!

One last point: Their sign is shaving [ their heads]!!

From Sahih al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Sa'id al-Khudhri, radhiallahu 'anhu:

النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ يَخْرُجُ نَاسٌ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ وَيَقْرَءُونَ الْقُرْآنَ لَا يُجَاوِزُ تَرَاقِيَهُمْ يَمْرُقُونَ مِنْ الدِّينِ كَمَا يَمْرُقُ السَّهْمُ مِنْ الرَّمِيَّةِ ثُمَّ لَا يَعُودُونَ فِيهِ حَتَّى يَعُودَ السَّهْمُ إِلَى فُوقِهِ قِيلَ مَا سِيمَاهُمْ قَالَ سِيمَاهُمْ التَّحْلِيقُ أَوْ قَالَ التَّسْبِيدُ

The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “There will come a people from the east, who recite the Quran but it does not go beyond their throats. They will go out of the religion, just as an arrow pierces through its target, and they will not return to it, just as the arrow does not return to the bow.” It was said, “What will be their sign?” The Prophet said, “Their sign is shaving.” Or he said, “It is shearing.”
- end of quote -

This is why one of the scholars of their time said that it's not needed to refute them, because them shaving their heads is enough as a proof against them!

And here we have one of the Khariji grandsons of MIAW telling us that they would indeed shave their heads "because the disbelievers of our time (he's intending Muslims as usual!) do not shave [their heads], so not shaving has become something that makes one similar to them" (from Majmu'at al-Rasa`il wal Masa`il al-Najdiyya 5/578):

وأما السؤال الخامس عن حلق شعر الرأس: فالذي تدل عليه الأحاديث النهي عن حلق بعضه وترك بعضه، فأما تركه كله فلا بأس به إذا أكرمه الإنسان كما دلت عليه السنة الصحيحة.وأما حديث كليب، فهو يدل على الأمر بالحلق عند دخوله في الإسلام إن صح الحديث، ولا يدل على أن استمرار الحلق سنة.وأما تعزير من لم يحلق وأخذ ماله فلا يجوز، وينهى فاعله عن ذلك؛ لأن ترك الحلق ليس منهيا عنه، وإنما نهى عنه ولي الأمر؛ لأن الحلق هو العادة عندنا، ولا يتركه إلا السفهاء عندنا 1 فنهى عن ذلك نهي تنزيه، لا نهي تحريم سدا للذريعة؛ ولأن كفار زماننا لا يحلقون؛ فصار في عدم الحلق تشبها بهم
- end of quote -

Is there anything more left to be said after this? Wallahul musta'an!

This has definitely given me food for thought.. Allahul Musta3an.

**Eyas Shah** · 16-11-20, 02:52 AM

I love Muhsmmad ibn Abdul Wahhab. Who cares?

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 16-11-20, 05:01 AM

I haven't been able to sleep after I started to read back in to the thread. I think it's only proper since I commented publicly, for me to also say the following publicly:

1. I shouldn't have commented without reading the thread. Some things that I brought up had already been addressed, so my apologies for not having done that before replying.

2. A lot of information stopped me in my tracks and I honestly don't feel the same about it at all. The thing is that I have his/their books from Usool at-Thalatha to Durar as-Saniyyah and I had never looked to them from this angle. I regret having said anything on this topic. I'd like to take accountability for that. And for anyone reading along to not take from my comments not here nor on the other threads where I posted on Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.

In any way, I'm confused right now and will continue reading up on it إن شاء الله. I'll bow out now.

أستغفر الله وأتوب إليه
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

**eesa the kiwi** · 16-11-20, 05:52 AM

Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

I haven't been able to sleep after I started to read back in to the thread. I think it's only proper since I commented publicly, for me to also say the following publicly:

1. I shouldn't have commented without reading the thread. Some things that I brought up had already been addressed, so my apologies for not having done that before replying.

2. A lot of information stopped me in my tracks and I honestly don't feel the same about it at all. The thing is that I have his/their books from Usool at-Thalatha to Durar as-Saniyyah and I had never looked to them from this angle. I regret having said anything on this topic. I'd like to take accountability for that. And for anyone reading along to not take from my comments not here nor on the other threads where I posted on Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.

In any way, I'm confused right now and will continue reading up on it إن شاء الله. I'll bow out now.

أستغفر الله وأتوب إليه
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Asalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu

I usually stay out of these sorts of threads, I don't like arguing and my distaste for a couple certain posters leads me to say things I could regret on qiyamah

That being said be very wary of trusting anything that comes out of these people's mouths.

So far on this site I have seen ahlul kalam justify Dua to other than Allah, excuse sujud made to other than Allah. I've seen them twist and say despicable things. Look at comparative religion section just about every thread attempting to call Christian's to Islam has been derailed into "the wahabis are evil"

Ahlul kalam's time on this site you don't see them giving dawah to non Muslims you don't see them calling to good it's just wahabi this and wahabi that. Ibn taymiyah is attacked and Ahmed Raza Khan of the barelvis is defended.

Ask them whether they believe the Quran is the speech of Allah and the convulted argument you get should tell you to be careful

I ask you my sister to not learn your religion from ummah.com. go study with ulema not from people that copy paste from Wikipedia

If you are interested https://www.youtube.com/user/KalemahUAE
Has a series on qawidh arbah in which many of these points are addressed
The scholar ibn Mubarak one had someone from ahlul bidah offer to read some quran to him. He refused lest a fitnah entered his heart. If that was Abdullah ibn Mubarak then what about people of our calibre not listening to Quran but getting into debates about kalam

Finally this post is addressed to you alone I have no intention of getting dragged into an argument. Normally I stay away but I can't watch another person get led astray by these shayateen either

Abu sulaym Muhammad Hasan etc reply if you will but I won't respond I have better things to do with my time than respond to worthless individuals. Make Dua for Allah to judge between us if you want I really care nothing about you

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 16-11-20, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

Asalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu

I usually stay out of these sorts of threads, I don't like arguing and my distaste for a couple certain posters leads me to say things I could regret on qiyamah

That being said be very wary of trusting anything that comes out of these people's mouths.

So far on this site I have seen ahlul kalam justify Dua to other than Allah, excuse sujud made to other than Allah. I've seen them twist and say despicable things. Look at comparative religion section just about every thread attempting to call Christian's to Islam has been derailed into "the wahabis are evil"

Ahlul kalam's time on this site you don't see them giving dawah to non Muslims you don't see them calling to good it's just wahabi this and wahabi that. Ibn taymiyah is attacked and Ahmed Raza Khan of the barelvis is defended.

Ask them whether they believe the Quran is the speech of Allah and the convulted argument you get should tell you to be careful

I ask you my sister to not learn your religion from ummah.com. go study with ulema not from people that copy paste from Wikipedia

If you are interested https://www.youtube.com/user/KalemahUAE
Has a series on qawidh arbah in which many of these points are addressed
The scholar ibn Mubarak one had someone from ahlul bidah offer to read some quran to him. He refused lest a fitnah entered his heart. If that was Abdullah ibn Mubarak then what about people of our calibre not listening to Quran but getting into debates about kalam

Finally this post is addressed to you alone I have no intention of getting dragged into an argument. Normally I stay away but I can't watch another person get led astray by these shayateen either

Abu sulaym Muhammad Hasan etc reply if you will but I won't respond I have better things to do with my time than respond to worthless individuals. Make Dua for Allah to judge between us if you want I really care nothing about you

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته

I think you may be misunderstanding my comment.
I didn't come to learn my religion on here. But I can't say I regret deciding to actually read some of the comments today. Of course everything needs to be verified. But honestly, some points deserve my attention. Me saying this doesn't mean I accept everything that is being said on here or that I completely distance myself from everything I've known. But it does mean I feel at unease with some things and I like to seek the truth and do deeper research regarding those matters. I took public accountability because I don't want to speak without knowledge nor do I want to be the reason for others to go astray. It was not necessarily me saying I completely agree with the opposing opinion. But it's true that I'm confused on some matters now.

When I came on here one of my first comments was precisely about what you're saying now. That you shouldn't lend your ears to Ahlul-Bidah and have discussions with them. Maybe I'm being punished for lending my ears to Ahlul-Bid3ah and the guidance is being snatched away from me or maybe there's truth to what is being said and I have some serious things to reconsider. Either way it's frightening and I'll not be participating on here anymore إن شاء الله. I had left earlier and only came back because I found the site again through browsing a certain student which was a couple of days ago. قدر الله وما شاء فعل

Forgive me, but it's not proper to refer to your brothers as Shayateen and worthless. May Allah forgive us all. Our brothers have rights over us even if we disagree on matters. Please know that every word is either for or against you. I'm saying this not to put you on the spot so I hope you don't feel that way after your well meaning comment and concern, but because I wish the best for you too.

I ask Allah to guide us all to the truth and that we may accept it from whomever it comes from. May Allah reward you for your good intentions. I appreciate your concern.

**Fuad Himeji** · 16-11-20, 10:55 AM

Jazakumullah khair....

**Abu Sulayman** · 16-11-20, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

Abu sulaym Muhammad Hasan etc reply if you will but I won't respond I have better things to do with my time than respond to worthless individuals. Make Dua for Allah to judge between us if you want I really care nothing about you

You mean Abu Sulayman, right?

May Allah ta'ala guide us all to the truth and not let us die except upon it.
It's unfortunate to see how one man managed to cause so much hatred and division between the Muslims to the degree that more than 200 years after his death we're unable to speak to each other like normal Muslims. At the same time he seems to have managed to cause a lot of confusion and mixed the issues up and stopped people from referring to the classical scholars, which is apparent from your post.

I will respond to some of your points mainly because I think there maybe some benefit for the readers in doing so and not to get into any discussion with you.

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

ahlul kalam

This thread is not connected to the issue of 'Ilm al-Kalam, The scholars of Ahl al-Sunna in general - be they Hanbali / Athari or Ash'ari / Maturidi - were opposed to Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and his new invented ideas.
Most of the scholars I quoted in this thread were Hanabila [upon the Athari creed] and these Hanabila ALL respected someone like the Hafidh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) [even if they did not agree with some of his abnormal views]. In fact Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) explicitly mentions in his Takfir against the 'Allama Ibn Fayruz (d. 1216 AH) that he used to give a lot of importance to the words of Ibn Taymiyya!
And most of the scholars whom Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab made Takfir of by name were Athari Hanabila!

These were the scholars quoted until now (there is only one Shafi'i in the list with the rest all being Hanabila!):

- 'Allama Ibn Suhaym al-Hanbali (d. 1181 AH) regarding the extremism of IAW
- 'Allama al-Saffarini al-Hanbali (d. 1188 AH) regarding IAW being a Mujtahid in destroying the divine law!
- 'Allama Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi'i (d. 1194 AH) advising his student IAW to stop his Takfir against the Umma of Islam
- 'Allama Sulayman bin 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Hanbali (d. 1208 AH): Some of his statements in response to the ignorance of his brother IAW
- 'Allama 'Abdullah bin Dawud al-Hanbali (d. 1225 AH) regarded IAW a FALSE PROPHET in his "Lightnings and Thunders in Response to the Wretched Ibn Sa'ud"
- 'Allama Ibn Humayd al-Hanbali (d. 1295 AH): Praising the father and brother of IAW and criticizing IAW as "the founder of the mission whose evil had spread across the horizon" and mentioning his attempt to assassinate his brother
- Shaykh Mustafa bin Ahmad al-Shatti al-Hanbali (d. 1348 AH): Idolatry and its forms (contains criticism of MIAW by the 'Allama Hassan al-Shatti al-Hanbali (d. 1274 AH))

Remember: These scholars quoted were ALL much more knowledgeable than Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, who did not even properly know a basic science of the Arabic language like 'Ilm al-Balagha!

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

So far on this site I have seen ahlul kalam justify Dua to other than Allah

I think you're intending the following thread:
"Seeking intercession with the Prophet (s): Its ruling according to classical scholars"

The statement that performing Tawassul with the Chosen One - peace and blessings be upon him - unto one's Lord is allowed and that one should seek his intercession (Tashaffu') during the visitation is the relied upon position of all 4 Madhahib and this is established beyond any doubt. If you want to accuse Muslims of "Shirk" based upon this, then this an attack against Islam in itself because this is established in the Shari'a!

These are the table of contents of the above mentioned thread:

- OP: Summary of its ruling by 'Allama 'Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad al-Mashhur (d. 1320 AH) and 'Allama Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi (d. 1194 AH)

- Some proofs from the Qur`an al-karim and the Sunna regarding the permissibility of seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

- MIAW's son admitting that the main reason why they killed Muslims was the issue of seeking intercession, which the classical scholars allowed!
- Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 1)
- Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 2)

- Imam Malik's (d. 179 AH) response to al-Mansur (d. 158 AH): Rather face him and seek his intercession!

- Imam 'Abdullah bin al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH), Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 241 AH), Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) and other scholars from the Salaf and Khalaf ACTED UPON the Hadith "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"
- One of the supporting routes of the narration "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"

- Imam Ibn Abi Dunya (d. 281 AH): The Salaf acted upon the Hadith of the blind man and performed Tawassul!

- Imam al-Mawardi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 450 AH) recommends visitation of the blessed grave and seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Ghazali [al-Shafi'i] (d. 505 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Ibn al-Salah [al-Shafi'i] (d. 643 AH) regards the fullfillment of one’s needs when one performs Tawassul with the Prophet ﷺ among the miracles (Mu'jizat) that Allah granted to our Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Nawawi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 676 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ and mentions that this is the position of his Shafi'i colleagues in general!
- Imam Kamal al-Din Ibn al-Zamlakani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 727 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in poetry
- Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki [al-Shafi'i] (d. 756 AH): The permissibility and goodness of performing Tawassul, Istighatha and Tashaffu' with the best of creation ﷺ
- Scholarly support for the work Shifa` al-Siqam of Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH)
- Imam Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 852 AH) asking the Prophet ﷺ for intercession in his poetry (+ his comment on the Tawassul of 'Umar through al-'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them)
- Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni [al-Shafi'i] (d. 829 AH) on seeking aid with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Samhudi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 911 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha
- Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 926 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Qastallani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 923 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha (+ his own experience)
- Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami [al-Shafi'i] (d. 974 AH) regarding Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Shihab al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 957 AH) and his son Imam Shams al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 1004 AH) regarding the seeking of aid with the Prophet ﷺ by saying "Ya Rasulullah!"

- Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani [al-Hanbali] (d. 561 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi [al-Hanbali] (d. 620 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ (+ recommendation to act on the Hadith of bling man when in need)
- Imam Yahya bin Yusuf al-Sarsari [al-Hanbali] (d. 656 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in his poetry

- Imam 'Abdullah bin Mahmud bin Mawdud al-Mawsili [al-Hanafi] (d. 683 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

- Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) ADMITTING that the Hadith of the blind man was acted upon by the Salaf al-salih and that Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) permitted Tawassul!
- Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) exact position on Tawassul and Tashaffu'
- Who was the [leader of] state and who were the scholars who stood against Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) abnormal Fatawa?
- Imam al-Jazari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 711 AH) and Imam al-Tufi [al-Hanbali] (d. 716 AH): On seeking aid with the best of creation ﷺ and responding to Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) objections

- Famous incident that proves silent consensus (Ijma' sukuti) among the Sahabat al-kiram - radhiallahu 'anhum ajma'in - on the issue of Tawassul bil Dhat
(+ supporting evidences) (+ correction of mistranslation)

- A good series of short lectures / videos regarding Tawassul and connected issues

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

The scholar ibn Mubarak one had someone from ahlul bidah offer to read some quran to him. He refused lest a fitnah entered his heart. If that was Abdullah ibn Mubarak then what about people of our calibre not listening to Quran but getting into debates about kalam

Great and Imam Ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH) was one of OUR scholars and NONE of the people you follow can claim that their chain of knowledge goes back to him!
Don't also forget that he was upon "Shirk akbar" according to Najdi logic, because he ACTED UPON the Hadith "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"! Najdis slaughtered Muslims for much less than that!

And by the way: I only told the sister to read the Najdi sources that I linked to. These three books were written by Najdis themselves and are praised and supported by the people you follow. So what's the problem? You should recommend her to read these books.

**Abu Sulayman** · 16-11-20, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

excuse sujud made to other than Allah.

I guess you mean the statement that making Sujud (prostration) to other than Allah ta'ala is a major sin in our law and in some of it forms it's disbelief (Kufr). As for prostration for an idol or the sun, then it's disbelief in itself.
This differentiation was mentioned by the classical scholars (including by the Hafidh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH)), so I don't understand how you can dare to attack this position. If you're trying to say that it's disbelief and polytheism no matter what, then this is disbelief in itself, because this would mean that you're accusing Allah ta'ala of allowing disbelief to the nations before us (while this is impossible!). So fear Allah!

Please also refer to this here (from another thread):

_____

As for your first question:

As already mentioned: It's stated in the Qur`an al-karim - which is the revelation of Allah and His speech - that Allah ta'ala commanded the angels to prostrate in front of Adam - peace be upon him - and it's also stated how the parents of Yusuf - peace be upon them - and his brothers fell down in prostration before him. The father of Yusuf is the Prophet Ya'qub, peace be upon both of them.

Know that this type of prostration (i.e. that of showing respect and not that of worship) was allowed from the Shari'a of Adam - peace be upon him - on until the Shari'a of 'Isa - peace be upon him - and then became forbidden in our Shari'a as mentioned by Imam Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH) in his Tafsir.

As for your second question:

The following was narrated in Sunan Ibn Majah:

عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي أَوْفَى، قَالَ لَمَّا قَدِمَ مُعَاذٌ مِنَ الشَّامِ سَجَدَ لِلنَّبِيِّ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ قَالَ ‏"‏ مَا هَذَا يَا مُعَاذُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَتَيْتُ الشَّامَ فَوَافَقْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لأَسَاقِفَتِهِمْ وَبَطَارِقَتِهِمْ فَوَدِدْتُ فِي نَفْسِي أَنْ نَفْعَلَ ذَلِكَ بِكَ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏"‏ فَلاَ تَفْعَلُوا فَإِنِّي لَوْ كُنْتُ آمِرًا أَحَدًا أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ لأَمَرْتُ الْمَرْأَةَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِزَوْجِهَا
...

Abdullah bin Abu Awfa said “When Muadh bin Jabal came from Sham, he prostrated to the Prophet who said: 'What is this, O Muadh?' He said: 'I went to Sham and saw them prostrating to their bishops and patricians and I wanted to do that for you.' The messenger of Allah said: 'Do not do that. If I were to command anyone to prostrate to anyone other than Allah, I would have commanded women to prostrate to their husbands.
...
- end of qoute -

Know that Mu'adh bin Jabbal - radhiallahu 'anhu - was from among the scholars of the companions and he obviously knew the difference between Tawhid and Shirk. The only thing here was that he assumed that the prostration to show respect is still allowed - as it was in the laws before us -, but the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - prohibited him doing this again, so it became understood that it's not allowed anymore in our Shari'a.

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) stated in his book Mu'jam al-Shuyukh:

ألا ترى الصحابة من فرط حبهم للنبي –صلى الله عليه وسلم- قالوا: ألا نسجد لك؟ فقال: لا، فلو أذن لهم لسجدوا سجود إجلال وتوقير لا سجود عبادة كما سجد إخوة يوسف عليه السلام ليوسف، وكذلك القول في سجود المسلم لقبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم على سبيل التعظيم والتبجيل لا يكفر به أصلا بل يكون عاصيا. فليعرف أن هذا منهي عنه وكذلك الصلاة إلى القبر

Do you not see that the companions in their excessive love for the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - said: "Should we not prostrate for you?". So he said: "No".
If he had allowed them to prostrate, they would have prostrated with the prostration of respect and awe and not the prostration of worship just like the brothers of Yusuf - peace be upon him - prostrated for Yusuf.
Likewise is the statement regarding the prostration of a Muslim for the grave of the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - in order to show veneration and respect (for the Prophet): He does not become a disbeliever because of this in any way, rather he becomes sinful. It should be known that this has been forbidden, likewise is [the ruling for] the prayer to the grave.
- end of quote -

Note that the classical scholars have mentioned that to prostrate to other than Allah ta'ala is a major sin in our law and in some of its forms it becomes disbelief. If it's wished I can post their differentiation regarding this issue. (This issue has been discussed in classical Fiqh books.)
_____

_____

If someone is a Muslim, then it's not speculation to assume that he's not intending to worship other than Allah ta'ala, but rather doing this out of ignorance (in this case: that this has been forbidden in the Islamic Shari'a). What happened to assuming the best of other Muslims and finding excuses for them and not rushing towards Takfir?

Yes if someone were to prostrate in front of an idol or make fun of Islam or insult the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then this is obvious disbelief. But you can't equate these issues with something that was even allowed in prior divine laws.

There is another thing here: The reason why I concentrated on prostration is because it's quite an extreme case and clearly connected - as an action - to worship in our minds, yet the classical scholars did not simply rush towards making Takfir upon the Muslim who does this out of ignorance.
This should be enough to show how much their mindset differed with that of the Najdis, who would not just rush towards calling things as disbelief and polytheism and follow it by Takfir, but even went on to do chain-Takfir of people who had never committed these actions!
(Note: In Taqwiyatul Iman rushing towards calling things as polytheism is also done. As for chain-Takfir, then I don't know the position of the author.)

Some quotes from classical sources regarding the issue of prostration to other than Allah ta'ala:

From the Hanafi Fiqh book al-Ikhtiyar li Ta'lil al-Mukhtar [by Imam al-Mawsilli (d. 683 AH)]:

وتقبيل الأرض بين يدي السلطان أو بعض أصحابه ليس بكفر لأنه تحية وليس بعبادة ، ومن أكره على أن يسجد للملك الأفضل أن لا يسجد لأنه كفر ، ولو سجد عند السلطان على وجه التحية لا يصير كافرا

Kissing the ground before the Sultan or some of his companions is not disbelief, because it's [a form of] greeting and not worship. As for the one who gets forced to prostrate for the king, [then] it's better for him not to prostrate, because it is disbelief, but if he prostrates in front of the Sultan as a form of greeting then he does not become a disbeliever.
- end of quote -

From the Shafi'i Fiqh book Rawdhat al-Talibin [by Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH)]:

وليس من هذا ما يفعله كثيرون من الجهلة الضالين من السجود بين يدي المشايخ فإن ذلك حرام قطعًا بكل حال سواء كان إلى القبلة أو غيرها وسواء قصد السجود لله تعالى أو غفل , وفي بعض صوره ما يقتضي الكفر عافانا الله تعالى والله أعلم

That which does not belong to it is which is done by many of the ignorant deviants from the prostration in front of the Mashayikh, because this is definitely forbidden (haram qat'an) in every case no matter whether this is done in the direction of the Qibla or other than it and no matter if the intention of the prostration is for Allah ta'ala or if it was [done] thoughtlessly; and in some of its forms it implies disbelief. We ask Allah ta'ala for well-being and Allah knows best.
- end of quote -

From the Maliki Fiqh book al-Furuq [by Imam al-Qarafi (d. 684 AH)]:

اتفق الناس على أن السجود للصنم على وجه التذلل والتعظيم له كفر ولو وقع مثل ذلك في حق الولد مع والده تعظيما له وتذللا أو في حق الأولياء والعلماء لم يكن كفرا

The people are agreed upon that prostration for an idol with submission and veneration for it is disbelief, but if the like of it would happen from the son for his father with submission and veneration or for the Awliya or the scholars then this would not constitute disbelief.
- end of quote -

From the commentary of Imam Ibn al-Shatt [al-Maliki] (d. 723 AH) regarding the above statement:

سجود من سجد للأصنام لم يسجد لها لمجرد التذلل والتعظيم بل لذلك مع اعتقاد أنها آلهة وأنها شركاء لله تعالى ولو وقع مثل ذلك مع الوالد أو العالم أو الولي لكان ذلك كفرا لا شك فيه وأما إذا وقع ذلك أو ما في معناه مع الوالد لمجرد التذلل والتعظيم لا لاعتقاد أنه إله وشريك لله عز وجل فلا يكون كفرا وإن كان ممنوعا سدا للذريعة

The prostration of the one who prostrates for the idols is not just because of submission and veneration [for it], rather also with the belief that they are gods (Aliha) and partners of Allah ta'ala and if the like (i.e. with this belief) would happen for ones father or a scholar or a Wali, then it would be disbelief without any doubt.
But if this [prostration] or what is similar in meaning happens for ones father with submission and veneration only and not with the belief that he's a god or a partner of Allah - 'azza wa jall -, then it does not constitute disbelief even if it's forbidden in order to block the means (to disbelief).
- end of quote -

From the Hanbali Fiqh book Matalib Uli al-Nuha [by Imam al-Ruhaybani (d. 1243 AH)] which is the explantion of Ghayat al-Muntaha [by Imam al-Karmi (d. 1033)]:

أو سجد لصنم أو كوكب ) كشمس أو قمر ؛ كفر ؛ لأنه أشرك به سبحانه وتعالى .( ويتجه السجود للحكام والموتى بقصد العبادة كفر ) قولا واحدا باتفاق المسلمين ( والتحية ) لمخلوق بالسجود له ( كبيرة ) من الكبائر العظام ، والسجود لمخلوق حي أو ميت

"Or if one prostrates for an idol or a star" like the sun or the moon [then this is] disbelief, because he has associated [partners] with [Allah] subhanahu wa ta'ala. "What differs is the prostration for the ruler or the dead: [If it is] with the intention of worship [it] is disbelief" by agreement of the Muslims "and [if the intention is] greeting" a created being by prostration for it "[then it is a] major sin" from among the very great sins.
- end of quote -

And since we were talking about the subcontinent, let's also quote the famous al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya [which is authored by a number of Hanafi scholars]:

من سجد للسلطان على وجه التحية أو قبل الأرض بين يديه لا يكفر ولكن يأثم لارتكابه الكبيرة هو المختار

The one who prostrates for the Sultan in order to greet him or kisses the ground in front of him: He does not become a disbeliever, rather he becomes sinful, because he has committed a major sin; and this the preferred [position].
- end of quote -
_____

**AmantuBillahi** · 16-11-20, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by TazkiyyatunNafs View Post

I haven't been able to sleep after I started to read back in to the thread. I think it's only proper since I commented publicly, for me to also say the following publicly:

1. I shouldn't have commented without reading the thread. Some things that I brought up had already been addressed, so my apologies for not having done that before replying.

2. A lot of information stopped me in my tracks and I honestly don't feel the same about it at all. The thing is that I have his/their books from Usool at-Thalatha to Durar as-Saniyyah and I had never looked to them from this angle. I regret having said anything on this topic. I'd like to take accountability for that. And for anyone reading along to not take from my comments not here nor on the other threads where I posted on Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.

In any way, I'm confused right now and will continue reading up on it إن شاء الله. I'll bow out now.

أستغفر الله وأتوب إليه
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Alhamdulillah. May Allah guide you and help distinguish truth from falsehood.

One thing to remember for anyone who comes from a Salafi/Najdi background is that rejecting the Da'wah of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab doesn't automatically result in justifying the rituals he considered to be Shirk. Practices like Istighatha and Shafa'a could still be condemned as Bid'ah and Haram without MIAW.

Also, one should not be confused by thinking that confirming the radical elements of the Najdi Da'wah somehow proves the validity of Ash'ari Aqeedah. The two are not related with one another. You can still believe in Allah’s Names & Attributes according to how Allah described Himself while at same time being a critic of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.

**Abu Sulayman** · 16-11-20, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by eesa the kiwi View Post

I've seen them twist and say despicable things.

That which despicable is to say disrespectful statements regarding Allah ta'ala and His Messenger, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.

One example for each:

- Ibn 'Uthaymin (d. 1421 AH) - one the leaders of the modern-day "Salafis" - uttered the following words:

نقول مثلاً وجه الله ولم نقل وجه وأطلقنا فوجه الله يكون لائقا لذاته أو لائقا بذاته ، كما لو قلت وجه الفرس ووجه القط الهر هل تفهم من قولك وجه الفرس أنه مثل وجه الهر ؟ أبداً

We say for example "face of Allah" and we do not just say "face" in general [terms], because the face of Allah is befitting to His essence or befitting His essence.
Just like when you say "face of a horse" and "face of a cat": Do you understand from your statement "face of a horse" that it is like (mithl) the "face of a cat"? Never...
- end of quote -

Mentioning the BODY PARTS of ANIMALS (!!!) while speaking about the divine attributes of absolute perfection is nothing but disrespectful! Add to this the fact that these two body parts are not like each other, but similar to each other. So is this what he's trying to establish?

- Sulayman bin Sahman (d. 1349 AH) - whom the "Salafis" regard as a "leading Najdi scholar" - wrote (p. 7) the following while trying to defend the ignorance of MIAW regarding 'Ilm al-Balagha (science of rhetoric):

Based upon the second (i.e. that they would have not been able to answer!): Then the Shaykh [Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab] - may Allah ta'ala have mercy upon him - has a good example in these major leaders [of the Islamic nation].
[Based upon] the first (i.e. that they would have been able to answer): [This is] very unlikely, because the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - did not know anything (!!!) about Haqiqa Shar'iyya, Haqiqa Lughawiyya, Haqiqa 'Urfiyya, Majaz Mursal and other issues mentioned in the question [of Ibn 'Afaliq], likewise his companions and his family - may Allah be pleased with them - and likewise....
- end of quote -

Accusing the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - of IGNORANCE and this in order to defend the ignorance of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab is not nothing but disrespectful!

These are the people that Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab produced as followers! Mindless people, who do not even know how to speak with respect regarding Allah ta'ala and His Messenger, salllahu 'alayhi wa sallam.
Now this is indeed despicable!

**TazkiyyatunNafs** · 16-11-20, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

Alhamdulillah. May Allah guide you and help distinguish truth from falsehood.

One thing to remember for anyone who comes from a Salafi/Najdi background is that rejecting the Da'wah of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab doesn't automatically result in justifying the rituals he considered to be Shirk. Practices like Istighatha and Shafa'a could still be condemned as Bid'ah and Haram without MIAW.

Also, one should not be confused by thinking that confirming the radical elements of the Najdi Da'wah somehow proves the validity of Ash'ari Aqeedah. The two are not related with one another. You can still believe in Allah’s Names & Attributes according to how Allah described Himself while at same time being a critic of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.

Ameen. Even though I had already spend time thinking about what you just said today, I still needed to hear that. Jazakum Allahu khayran.

Abu Sulayman, I've read your last comment to me. Jazakum Allahu khayran, please forgive me for my rather stubborn interactions with you.

Announcement

Announcement

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

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment