The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than ISIS

[abufulaans]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Ah , excuse me. I misunderstood what you said above.

When you get a chance , can you mention any scholar who criticized Istighatha in particular , prior to Ibn Taymiyyah ? According to Brother Abu Sulayman , he was the first to do so ( and I was also under this impression )

Here is one

Ibn 'Aqeel said:

قال الإمام أبو الوفاء علي بن عقيل الحنبلي رحمه الله : إن من يعظم القبور ويخاطب الموتى بقضاء الحوائج ، ويقول : يا مولاي ويا سيدي عبد القادر : (إفعل لي كذا) ؛ هو كافر بهذه الأوضاع ، ومن دعا ميتا وطلب قضاء الحوائج فهو كافر

''Indeed the one who venerates the graves and adresses the dead asking them to fulfill his needs by saying ''O sayyid Abdul Qadir do this for me'' is a kafir....''

He was born a few 100 years before Ibn Taymiyyah and I will try to bring more scholars after I reply to Abu Sulaymaans posts later on. It should also be noted that the istighatha done today to the dead is an even bigger shirk then whats said above.

Once we get into deeper discussions of what shirk and ibaadah actually are, you will see how the asharis contradict themselves, this in no way means sheikh MIAW was free from error, however I believe he did a good job in fighting shirk and made some very good arguments, if it wasnt for him by the will of Allah, arabia today would have been completely different,

[Diego007]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab(rahimahullah ta'ala) was an extinguisher of kufr and shirk. He hated bid'ah and kufr and he fought against those practices in the 18th century Arabian peninsula

Because he hated kufr, shirk and bid'ah, 99.99% of his enemies are
1. Deviant sufis
2. Rafidah
3. Qadianis
4. Modernist munafiqun
5. Kuffar who don't even know who he is
6. Barelvis who believe the Nabi(saw) is everywhere

There are plenty of fairly orthodox Sunni Muslims who oppose Salafism, whether rightly or wrongly is an entirely different question. Salafism was, and remains, a very puritanical variety of Islam, AND it IS a politically oriented variety, again, whether rightly or wrongly is another issue. Saudi Arabia is a pretty radically variety of Islam generally. Not that it is the only one. Pakistan has some radicalism in it as well.

The problem, as I see it, is that countries like the USA spend money training the Mujahedeen to fight the Soviets in places like Afghanistan, and then, when the war was over, left them high and dry. Of course they were going to be mad! The USA all too often creates the very enemies it later fights. We, as a country, have contributed to, even created, the "Islamic" extremists we profess to dislike.

[abufulaans]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

There are plenty of fairly orthodox Sunni Muslims who oppose Salafism, whether rightly or wrongly is an entirely different question. Salafism was, and remains, a very puritanical variety of Islam, AND it IS a politically oriented variety, again, whether rightly or wrongly is another issue. Saudi Arabia is a pretty radically variety of Islam generally. Not that it is the only one. Pakistan has some radicalism in it as well.

The problem, as I see it, is that countries like the USA spend money training the Mujahedeen to fight the Soviets in places like Afghanistan, and then, when the war was over, left them high and dry. Of course they were going to be mad! The USA all too often creates the very enemies it later fights. We, as a country, have contributed to, even created, the "Islamic" extremists we profess to dislike.

Brother please stick to the topic, if we keep going off track we will get no where,

This thread specifically is regarding the dawah of MIAW and not the current Saudi state nor or any muhajideen anywhere today

[Abu Sulayman]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Ibn 'Aqeel said:

قال الإمام أبو الوفاء علي بن عقيل الحنبلي رحمه الله : إن من يعظم القبور ويخاطب الموتى بقضاء الحوائج ، ويقول : يا مولاي ويا سيدي عبد القادر : (إفعل لي كذا) ؛ هو كافر بهذه الأوضاع ، ومن دعا ميتا وطلب قضاء الحوائج فهو كافر

''Indeed the one who venerates the graves and adresses the dead asking them to fulfill his needs by saying ''O sayyid Abdul Qadir do this for me'' is a kafir....''

Could you explain to me why "Salafis" and those who are influenced by them love to qoute things without proper source as long as it suits their cause, while at the same time rejecting anything that doesn't suit them even if their Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) has actually not rejected it (like the Hadith of the man in need!)?

Imam Ibn 'Aqil (you know the one who regarded al-Hallaj (d. 309 AH) a wali and whom some Hanbali zealots wanted to kill because of the issue of the Sifat) died 513 AH, while Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir died 561 AH. I'm just mentioning that so that you learn to see whether a qoute is authentic or not and then to use it. The above qoute has no proper source and is therefore rejected.

Let me however bring you a qoute which Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) qouted in his Talbis Iblis:

لما صعبت التكاليف على الجهال والطغام عدلوا عن أوضاع الشرع إلى تعظيم أوضاع وضعوها لأنفسهم فسهلت عليهم إذ لم يدخلوا بها تحت أمر غيرهم قال وهم كفار عندي بهذه الأوضاع مثل تعظيم القبور وإكرامها بما نهى الشرع عنه من إيقاد النيران وتقبيلها وتحليقها وخطاب الموتى بالألواح [بالحوائج] وكتب الرقاع فيها يا مولاي أفعل بي كذا وكذا وأخذ التراب تبركا وإفاضة الطيب على القبور وشد الرحال اليها وإلقاء الخرق على الشجر أقتداء بمن عبد اللات والعزى ولا تجد في هؤلاء من يحقق مسألة في زكاة فيسأل عن حكم يلزمه والويل عندهم لمن لم يقبل مشهد الكهف ولم يتمسح بآجرة مسجد المأمونية يوم الأربعاء ولم يعقد على قبر أبيه أزجا بالجص والآجر ولم يشق ثوبه إلى ذيله ولم يرق ماء الورد على القبر ويدفن معه ثيابه
- end of the qoute -

Based upon the above qoute the people that he was talking about were writing things on sheets of paper which said "O my master do this and that for me" (which is by the way is something that Shi'ah do) (and other things which are either either forbidden or disliked with the exception of one issue). The above qoute however is not about seeking intercession or aid with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alawhi wa sallam - with correct manners and correct beliefs. Other than that: We don't even have the book where Ibn 'Aqil has said the above.
We do however have his book al-Tadhkirah where he says that one should do the following while visiting the grave of Rasulallah, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam:

اللهم إنك قلت في كتابك لنبيك صلى الله عليه وسلم: {وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ جَاءُوكَ فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّهَ وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمُ الرَّسُولُ لَوَجَدُوا اللَّهَ تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا} [سورة النساء] وإني قد أتيت نبيك تائبًا مستغفرًا فأسألك أن توجب لي المغفرة كما أوجبتها لمن أتاه في حياته، اللهم إني أتوجه إليك بنبيك صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي الرحمة، يا رسول الله إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي ليغفر لي ذنوبي، اللهم إني أسألك بحقه أن تغفر لي ذنوبي

"O Allah, You spoke and your saying is the truth: { If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’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 ask you by his right that you forgive my sins."
- end of the qoute -

Conclusion: He was no different from other Classical scholars. The funny thing is that the Wahhabi editor of the book couldn't resist to accuse him of Shirk akbar because of the above statement!

Then there is another issue: Imam Ibn al-Jawzi himself qoutes a story in his book al-Wafa bi Ta'rif Fadha`il al-Mustafa of three of the early scholars and the story contains the seeking of aid with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - with the statement "O messenger of Allah, hunger, hunger!" ("يا رسول الله الجوع الجوع") upon which a man came with food and he told them that he had seen the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - in his dream who ordered him to bring them food. He mentions this under the chapter Fil Istisqa` bi Qabrihi sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, wnich means that he was supporting it.
So seeking aid with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - with the correct manners and beliefs was permitted according to his understanding too.

Here is one

Lol bro, why are you acting as if there are many qoutes? The other qoute is that of Imam al-Razi (d. 606 AH) which you people like to misuse... read simply this: So called ‘grave worship’ refutation by Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi

[Abu Sulayman]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Once we get into deeper discussions of what shirk and ibaadah actually are

I had a long discussion regarding this on IA Forums and to be honest I'm not interested in repeating that. Whatever you bring is already known to me and we both know that you took it from IAW.

Here are big parts of the discussion:

What is Ibadah? (Discussion Part-1)
What is Ibadah? (Discussion Part-2)

And I've one request: Please bring me a definition of 'Ibadah that is jami' and mani' (good look with that, because the Wahhabiyyah do not have this!). This is a definition given by Shaykh Hatim al-'Awni, which is actually jami' and mani':


فـ(العبادة) بمعناها الخاص : هي تعظيمُ الذي بيده الخلقُ أو الملك أو التدبير أو المتصفُ بالكمال المطلق ، وهذه هي خصائص الربوبية
أو قل : العبادة هي : تعظيمك (بالحب والخوف والرجاء) المتصفَ بشيء من خصائص الربوبية

"So 'Ibadah (worship) with it's specific meaning is: The veneration (Ta'dhim) of the one in whose hands creating (Khalq) or dominion (Mulk) or disposal (Tadbir) lies or of the one who is characterized with absolute perfection (Kamal mutlaq). And [what has been mentioned] are the attributes / characteristics of lordship (Khasa`is al-Rububiyyah).
Or say: 'Ibadah (worship) is your veneration with love, fear and hope for the one who is characterized with anything of the attributes of lordship (Khasa`is al-Rububiyyah)."

Source: العبادة: بوّابةُ التوحيد.. وبوابة التكفير

[Abu Kamel]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

[MENTION=122148]Abu Sulayman[/MENTION], are you Sunni or Shii? And if you are Sunni, are you part of a sufi order? If so, which one?

[imran1976]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Could you explain to me why "Salafis" and those who are influenced by them love to qoute things without proper source as long as it suits their cause, while at the same time rejecting anything that doesn't suit them even if their Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) has actually not rejected it (like the Hadith of the man in need!)?

Imam Ibn 'Aqil (you know the one who regarded al-Hallaj (d. 309 AH) a wali and whom some Hanbali zealots wanted to kill because of the issue of the Sifat) died 513 AH, while Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir died 561 AH. I'm just mentioning that so that you learn to see whether a qoute is authentic or not and then to use it. The above qoute has no proper source and is therefore rejected.

This is what happens when someone blindly starts copy/paste Job.
@abufulaans you are going no where with this.

[ZeeshanParvez]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

[MENTION=122148]Abu Sulayman[/MENTION], are you Sunni or Shii? And if you are Sunni, are you part of a sufi order? If so, which one?

He is a hardcore Ash'ari [sorry I can't answer which sufi order though if he believes in the legitimacy of nazim haqaani I am going to laugh like I did on his YouTube channel where he "predicts" the future]. I do not understand why abufulaans wastes his time with those bent on asking the dead for help. Let them enjoy their falsehood. On the Day of Judgment all will be clear. History has never had a shortage of personality worship. Since this Ummah was to follow in the footsteps of the Christians and Jews, you are bound to see what they did.

[noobz]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

He is a hardcore Ash'ari [sorry I can't answer which sufi order though if he believes in the legitimacy of nazim haqaani I am going to laugh like I did on his YouTube channel where he "predicts" the future]. I do not understand why abufulaans wastes his time with those bent on asking the dead for help. Let them enjoy their falsehood. On the Day of Judgment all will be clear. History has never had a shortage of personality worship. Since this Ummah was to follow in the footsteps of the Christians and Jews, you are bound to see what they did.

same old ahle hadeeth diatribe , lets attack him for being ashari instead of refute the arguments he brang forth.

such a waste of space when others are trying to read and the crows try to scream for some shock value.

[imran1976]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

He is a hardcore Ash'ari [sorry I can't answer which sufi order though if he believes in the legitimacy of nazim haqaani I am going to laugh like I did on his YouTube channel where he "predicts" the future]. I do not understand why abufulaans wastes his time with those bent on asking the dead for help. Let them enjoy their falsehood. On the Day of Judgment all will be clear. History has never had a shortage of personality worship. Since this Ummah was to follow in the footsteps of the Christians and Jews, you are bound to see what they did.

Zeeshan sahab!
I would be more interested in someone refuting the references he gave regarding the violent Najdi movement.

[imran1976]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

^th

[MENTION=118642]abufulaans[/MENTION]
You forgot to respond to this post.

[abufulaans]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

This is what happens when someone blindly starts copy/paste Job.
@abufulaans you are going no where with this.

I'm here to discuss and find the truth, if I do find that sheikh MIAW was mistaken in some issues then I will accept it,
He himself admits the hanbalis differed alot with asharis in the past, and he is promoting asharism, something which clearly has numerous errors

[noobz]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Zeeshan sahab!
I would be more interested in someone refuting the references he gave regarding the violent Najdi movement.

violence for most , love and kindness for others.

[abufulaans]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

[MENTION=118642]abufulaans[/MENTION]
You forgot to respond to this post.

I will soon, even though it's off topic

[imran1976]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

I will soon, even though it's off topic

This ^ is the actual topic, don't know from where tawassul/istigatha etc., came.