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

[Fais]

Your perspective is a bit skewed, I have come to realize, but lets play

Who are his followers today? Who takes commands from him today? Who worships at his grave?

I mentioned my respect for him was from the Three Fundamentals. Can you refute anything he said?

As far as warring amongst Muslims, I will let Abu Najm deal with that aspect

Its like the shia going on and on and on and on about how Ali should have been the successor, its tiring and meaningless today

but you guys go on, i am sure there is someone who is remotely interested

Skewed how?

By asking those 3 questions you clearly have a different definition of what a "follower" is.

His ideology is still existent today, as in his principles are still taught. The fact that you're mentioning his works gives credence to that. I don't understand why you're so adamant that people don't follow this man and his ideology, when you are literally quoting his works that people read and follow.



Why do I have to refute anything he says, when there are already threads created about him? One minute you complain that this person is obsessed with him and it's spamming the forum, and the next you're asking someone to post more stuff about him? Why don't you address the issues that have already been brought against him by Abu Sulayman? It's not like he's making this stuff up, he's quoting books from the movement and from people who lived at his time. If it isn't true, refute it?

Truth is, you know it's true, but it's an uncomfortable truth. And the only way you see fit for addressing it, is by trying to pressure people into not mentioning the controversial things, the killings etc ... but just stick to the stuff that everyone can agree on.

[Abu Sulayman]

The first thread (meaning this one here) is NOT about IAW (d. 1206 AH), rather you people have turned it into one!

​​​​​​As for the other two threads, then one is old and is filled with off-topic posts by your likes and without structure.
So I made a new thread (the last one) and brought much more sources and made it more structured.

Then: Yes the disbelieving heretic is dead, but many people here have some of his ideas (including yourself) without even realizing, because the Saudi state was successful in spreading his fake "Tawhid" among the people through their petro-dollars.



Great! But insulting the mother of another member seems to be allowed! Allahul musta'an!
​​​
​​​​​Peace.
​​​​​

Just to clarify:

Takfir upon Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) is not obligatory, but the classic scholars in his time agreed upon regarding him an innovator and a Khariji. Some scholars also made Takfir, especially due to the evidences that were available to them regarding the reality of this man and also after they had already established the proof upon him with very great amount of proofs.

Based upon my reading of his works and some other sources I personally can not regard such a person a Muslim even if I would not criticize someone who only regards him an innovator.

As for spreading any ideas that are special to him, then this is to be vehemently rejected and criticized.

Wallahu a'lam.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

...The first thread (meaning this one here) is NOT about IAW (d. 1206 AH), rather you people have turned it into one!...​​​​​

You mentioned him in the first and third posts, and were the only doing so for the first page or two of this thread.

In fact, search any of the following terms in this thread: Wahhab; MIAW; Najdi to see which people have mentioned them first or the most.

If you can be openly dishonest about this basic fact then you have no credibility at all.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

What about me not wanting to endorse this rabbit hole you guys have created are you not understanding?

Qadianis are kafir, clearly

You need to find a hobby

I find it hilarious that you have brushed off this fake and pretentious trick of this snake by calling you shaykh as if it's out of genuine respect.

[Fais]

Talk about clutching at straws ...

[Simply_Logical]

You are obsessed

You need professional help

In case you haven't noticed, Ibn Abdul-Wahhab is dead. Been dead for a good while. His followers are dead

People who read his books admire his stance on tawheed. I am one of those people

I have never claimed to be a follower of his. Nor anyone else I know.

You cut & paste threads upon threads on the same issue, essentially spamming the forum

We get it. You don't like him

All of that could have been said in one thread, one post

Let it go

I dont run this forum

yea i agree Abu Sulayman is a bit over the top when it comes to IAW, he needs to relax and chill a bit

but how can you say that his followers are dead?

Shaykh Asrar Rashid exposes Wahabi scholar Bin Baaz fatwa that it's permissible to celebrate and commemorate Mawlid Milad or Birthday of Ibn Abdul Wahab Najdi but on the same time they have problem celebrating Milad Un Nabi ï·º or Mawlid Un Nabi ï·º.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NkF...kodeCommission

whreres the condemnation? wheres the word 'bidah' gone now? (just generally saying)

you hear a lot of condemnation about the mawlid but what about the mawlid of IAW?

even i dont celebrate mawlid but this is a clear cut double standard, im sure AbuMubarak youre a good, nice brother but im sure youre honest enough to admit that bro

[Simply_Logical]

i told you i dont run this forum. I said IF i was an active mod, i would ban you for spamming the forum and slandering a dead Muslim

yea but brother what about those posts slandering other dead musliims like ahmad raza khan or ashrf ali thanvi? woukld you ban them too?

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

yea but brother what about those posts slandering other dead musliims like ahmad raza khan or ashrf ali thanvi? woukld you ban them too?

I hope you reported those posts. Did you?

[AbuMubarak]

I find it hilarious that you have brushed off this fake and pretentious trick of this snake by calling you shaykh as if it's out of genuine respect.

o akhi, i have been around here for a while, i can sense sarcasm in posts

however, i try to take people on their word until their intent is shown

one of the things i see that the kuffar have done is attacking Quran and Sunnah, It has been their enemy for hundreds of years (thousands if you include Noah)

But if they say that directly, no muslim would listen to them. So what they do is attack "fundamentalist" Islam, you know, wearing beards, hijab, slaves, the prophets marriages, hudud for stealing and gays

Now, who is the lightning rod for fundamentalist Islam? Saudi (and i believe they are a corrupt regime) but they start off with ibn Abdul-Wahhab as a basis. Mind you, the Sauds used ibn Abdul-Wahhab until they got what they wanted, then he was khawarij

But they used "quran and sunnah" as a basis. So instead of attacking quran and sunnah, the kuffar attack wahhabism.

I have seen Muslims link Quran & Sunnah evidences as "being wahhabi"

Why are you following the literal meanings of Quran & hadith? that is so .....wahhabi

Sadly, many Muslims have fallen into that mindset, I saw a shia woman on twitter saying she would rather be a kafir than a wahhabi and her followers said....its the same thing

But what is the issue? the core issue? adherence to Quran and Sunnah

So these minions think they are cute, by cutting and pasting all sorts of attacks in "wahhabis" as if that is a thing, and it is just an illustration of where their understanding of Islam is

It doesnt phase me. call me sheikh, shaykh, shake, salafi, wahhabi, fundamentalist, radical, extremist, etc, it phases me ZERO

What bothers me is that Muslims dont see that attacking the core of islam (not ibn abdul wahhab, not wahhabi, not salafi) but attacking Quran and sunnah is actually destroying any unity and strength Muslims may have

This is true for progressive muslims, secular muslims, modernist muslims, and a host of other categories

Go thru the 3 Fundamentals and find a word or sentence and BINGO Ibn Abdul Wahhab as a shaytan

These people know little of the history of battles, killings, punishments for the past 1400 years and how good scholars viewed such actions

But they cut and paste nonsense and expect us to sit and read thru it so we can agree with their perspective

Aint happening.

[Simply_Logical]

I hope you reported those posts. Did you?

bro we're talking about observations throughout the years of being on the forum, even brother Fais mentioned it and hes a mod too

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

bro we're talking about observations throughout the years of being on the forum, even brother Fais mentioned it and hes a mod too

Did you report the posts? Fais is more of a participation mod, he doesn't do any actual work.

[Simply_Logical]

Did you report the posts? Fais is more of a participation mod, he doesn't do any actual work.

not at the time but besides what wouldve been the use when even the mod Fais saw the double standard happening and as an active mod at the time even he couldnt stop it or make the forum members refrain from it

p,s yea i appreciate hes taken more of a back seat in regards to moding now but im on about a fair few years ago when he and also other brother mod yasser were active

Fais im sure you can recall what im on about bro?

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

o akhi, i have been around here for a while, i can sense sarcasm in posts

however, i try to take people on their word until their intent is shown

one of the things i see that the kuffar have done is attacking Quran and Sunnah, It has been their enemy for hundreds of years (thousands if you include Noah)

But if they say that directly, no muslim would listen to them. So what they do is attack "fundamentalist" Islam, you know, wearing beards, hijab, slaves, the prophets marriages, hudud for stealing and gays

Now, who is the lightning rod for fundamentalist Islam? Saudi (and i believe they are a corrupt regime) but they start off with ibn Abdul-Wahhab as a basis. Mind you, the Sauds used ibn Abdul-Wahhab until they got what they wanted, then he was khawarij

But they used "quran and sunnah" as a basis. So instead of attacking quran and sunnah, the kuffar attack wahhabism.

I have seen Muslims link Quran & Sunnah evidences as "being wahhabi"

Why are you following the literal meanings of Quran & hadith? that is so .....wahhabi

Sadly, many Muslims have fallen into that mindset, I saw a shia woman on twitter saying she would rather be a kafir than a wahhabi and her followers said....its the same thing

But what is the issue? the core issue? adherence to Quran and Sunnah

So these minions think they are cute, by cutting and pasting all sorts of attacks in "wahhabis" as if that is a thing, and it is just an illustration of where their understanding of Islam is

It doesnt phase me. call me sheikh, shaykh, shake, salafi, wahhabi, fundamentalist, radical, extremist, etc, it phases me ZERO

What bothers me is that Muslims dont see that attacking the core of islam (not ibn abdul wahhab, not wahhabi, not salafi) but attacking Quran and sunnah is actually destroying any unity and strength Muslims may have

This is true for progressive muslims, secular muslims, modernist muslims, and a host of other categories

Go thru the 3 Fundamentals and find a word or sentence and BINGO Ibn Abdul Wahhab as a shaytan

These people know little of the history of battles, killings, punishments for the past 1400 years and how good scholars viewed such actions

But they cut and paste nonsense and expect us to sit and read thru it so we can agree with their perspective

Aint happening.

If you follow some of the CVE stuff you'll see that kufaar have latched onto the term. Some of them now, when talking about things like banning the niqab, will say they are not against Islam but 'Wahhabi Islam' and 'tradional Sunnis' lap it all up.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

not at the time but besides what wouldve been the use when even the mod Fais saw the double standard happening and as an active mod at the time even he couldnt stop it or make the forum members refrain from it

p,s yea i appreciate hes taken more of a back seat in regards to moding now but im on about a fair few years ago when he and also other brother mod yasser were active

Fais im sure you can recall what im on about bro?

Seems weird that you're suddenly concerned about those posts after not saying anything for years.

[Simply_Logical]

Seems weird that you're suddenly concerned about those posts after not saying anything for years.

well when you spend time in certain places for years, you kinda learn to observe things and tend to notice them too

besides let me ask you as probably the most active mod on the forum,
those posts slandering other dead musliims like ahmad raza khan or ashrf ali thanvi? woukld you ban them too?