Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

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

    Originally posted by ZeeshanParvez View Post
    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.
    The problem is that the thread was originally made to discuss the extremism of sheikh MIAW, it then diverted into him promoting asharism
    ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
      This ^ is the actual topic, don't know from where tawassul/istigatha etc., came.
      Read the first post if the thread
      The thread is regarding the takfeer of sheikh MIAW mainly, meaning whether it had a valid basis or not
      ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
        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
        but you posted a quote which doesn't exist.
        "Europe died in Bosnia and was buried in Syria. Bodies of innocent children washing ashore are the
        western civilization's tombstones"


        Rajab Tayyab Erdogan

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
          Read the first post if the thread
          The thread is regarding the takfeer of sheikh MIAW mainly, meaning whether it had a valid basis or not
          I still will be more interested if someone refutes the refeences OP posted which relates to violence/takfir/killing etc.,
          i give my words, if someone refutes or proves that the references he gave are fake and no such thing happened, i will never ever criticize Najdi movement again.
          "Europe died in Bosnia and was buried in Syria. Bodies of innocent children washing ashore are the
          western civilization's tombstones"


          Rajab Tayyab Erdogan

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
            This is what happens when someone blindly starts copy/paste Job.
            @abufulaans you are going no where with this.
            It's very interesting because hanbali scholars not long after him say he did tawbah and retracted his support for Sufis and Hallaj,
            But if course asharis will ignore this just as they ignore the tawbah of Abul Hasan Al-Ashari from his corrupt aqeedah

            Again I will bring the quotes in the longer reply
            ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
              I still will be more interested if someone refutes the refeences OP posted which relates to violence/takfir/killing etc.,
              i give my words, if someone refutes or proves that the references he gave are fake and no such thing happened, i will never ever criticize Najdi movement again.
              There is some deception in the posts of his, for example he doesn't mention a number of things such as the Sufis around him making takfeer on him before he made takfeer on them, and how the Sufis once surrounded a house of the Muslims and killed them people inside (without the Muslims attacking them or even planning to)

              But the point is yes, MIAW did fight those who insisted upon grave worship, he even sent many refutations to them, they are still available to read, yet the sufis arrogantly remained upon their batil

              No one is denying that it wasn't pacifist movement
              ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
                There is some deception in the posts of his, for example he doesn't mention a number of things such as the Sufis around him making takfeer on him before he made takfeer on them, and how the Sufis once surrounded a house of the Muslims and killed them people inside (without the Muslims attacking them or even planning to)

                But the point is yes, MIAW did fight those who insisted upon grave worship, he even sent many refutations to them, they are still available to read, yet the sufis arrogantly remained upon their batil

                No one is denying that it wasn't pacifist movement
                Majority of Salafis are in denial.
                "Europe died in Bosnia and was buried in Syria. Bodies of innocent children washing ashore are the
                western civilization's tombstones"


                Rajab Tayyab Erdogan

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Abu Kamel View Post
                  @Abu Sulayman, are you Sunni or Shii? And if you are Sunni, are you part of a sufi order? If so, which one?
                  Are you serious? Seems like you haven't read a single post in this thread. And no I'm not part of any Sufi order, I do however accept Tasawwuf as an Islamic science to attain Ihsan just like the classical scholars of this Ummah have accepted it.

                  Originally posted by ZeeshanParvez View Post
                  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.
                  Yes, I am Ash'ari wa lillahi al-hamd. But I don't know why you're saying "hardcore". It's not like I'm going around making Takfir of those who disagree with the Asha'irah.
                  As for the mentioned person: I've nothing to do with him.
                  By the way: Acting as if a person who was rejected by pretty much all scholars of his time is "a great Imam and reviver of the religion" and putting the words of that person above everything else is what one could call as personality worship. It's almost as if these "Salafis" have taken Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab as their Rabb min dunillah. We ask Allah ta'ala for well-being.

                  Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
                  He himself admits the hanbalis differed alot with asharis in the past, and he is promoting asharism, something which clearly has numerous errors
                  What for God's sake has the issue of this thread to do with Hanbalis and Ash'aris? Your IAW was against both of them and he was rejected by all Hanbali scholars of his time. In fact he even made explicit Takfir upon major Hanbali scholars of his time (go and read his letters if you don't believe me). He did not even spare the Shaykh Muhammad bin Fayruz (d. 1216 AH) (who was a fan of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim).
                  Do you know that according to him even someone like the Shaykh Muhammad al-Saffarini (d. 1188 AH) (a Hanbali Athari scholar) had not understood Tawhid! Should I qoute your IAW regarding this?

                  By the way: Hanbali is a Madhhab of Fiqh and they were not a monolithic group when it came to 'Aqidah. Most of the Hanabilah were people of Tafwidh regarding the Sifat (even your Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) admits that most Hanabilah of his time were upon Tafwidh), even though many of them still didn't like the Ash'aris that much. These Hanabilah were Sunnis just like the Ash'aris.
                  Among the Hanbalis were also a group who were either close to Tashbih and Tajsim or already from among the Mushabbihhah and Mujassimah (you'll even find people among them who regarded it as correct to describe God with curly hair and other such Kufri statements).

                  Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
                  The problem is that the thread was originally made to discuss the extremism of sheikh MIAW, it then diverted into him promoting asharism
                  You and your likes started to divert the topic. I said more than once that this thread is about the Takfir and bloodshed that was caused by IAW and his followers.
                  And by the way: Seeking intercession through the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - unto one's Lord (which your IAW regards as one of the nullifiers of Islam) is not specific to Ash'aris. Atharis also supported that.
                  In fact even the Hashwiyyah prior to Ibn Taymiyyah supported it! And those after him were few and still would not go around making Takfir because of it!

                  Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
                  It's very interesting because hanbali scholars not long after him say he did tawbah and retracted his support for Sufis and Hallaj,
                  But if course asharis will ignore this just as they ignore the tawbah of Abul Hasan Al-Ashari from his corrupt aqeedah
                  This is your next mistake. What he did according to Imam Ibn Qudamah (d. 620 AH) is to repent from Kalam and Ta`wil. As for Tasawwuf, then know that many classical Hanbalis were part of Sufi orders and that they in general supported Tasawwuf. The classical scholars in general supported the science of Tasawwuf, they would just correct those who teach wrong things (unlike you "Salafis" who threw away Tasawwuf as an Islamic science). Please go and read a little bit of Islamic history.
                  And as for the so-called "Tawbah" of Imam al-Ash'ari (d. 324 AH): There was one repentence and that was from I'tizal and that is it. In the book Maqalat al-Islamiyyin (which is among his last books) his positions are no different from the early Asha'irah (and that's even the case for the the book al-Ibanah). He did not believe in Sifat 'Ayniyyah Dhatiyyah (which is basically to believe that God made up by unseperable parts, which can be pointed at) or that Allah ta'ala is Mahall for Hawadith (i.e. subject to change) as your "Salafi" Mashayikh believe.
                  You people basically have no idea about the Asha'irah, but still love to speak a lot against them.

                  Let me remind you that the majority of classical scholars were Asha'irah. The best books regarding every Islamic science is written by them. The heroes of Islam like the Salajiqah (the Seljuks) or Sultan Salah al-Din or other than them were Asha'irah.
                  Were does your sect even have a history like that of the Ash'aris?! So don't dare to talk down upon the Ash'aris while you don't have anything in your history to be proud of.
                  Killing other Muslims at the same time the colonialists where invading our countries is nothing to be proud of!
                  Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 20-09-17, 01:24 PM.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
                    There is some deception in the posts of his, for example he doesn't mention a number of things such as the Sufis around him making takfeer on him before he made takfeer on them, and how the Sufis once surrounded a house of the Muslims and killed them people inside (without the Muslims attacking them or even planning to)

                    But the point is yes, MIAW did fight those who insisted upon grave worship, he even sent many refutations to them, they are still available to read, yet the sufis arrogantly remained upon their batil

                    No one is denying that it wasn't pacifist movement
                    Assalamu alaykom

                    What grave worship?

                    1) Tawasul is not shirk akbar
                    2) Ta'shaffa is not shirk akbar
                    3) Tawaf around graves is not shirk akbar
                    4) Tabbaruk is also not shirk akbar

                    If anything , I thought you agreed that MIAW had an unprecedented view , and fell in to extremes in his understanding of Haram vs Shirk.

                    The question which remains is whether or not he is a Khariji and if the Saudi state was a khariji state.

                    Be aware , I am not promoting everything from 1-4 as being Halal. Scholars differ in their opinions and limits based on their criteria and understandings. To call something which may be bid'ah and Haram at most , to something which is Shirk and equates apostasy is extremism , if not , kharijism.

                    Wa Allahu alam

                    Do you disagree with this ? If so , why?
                    Last edited by AmantuBillahi; 20-09-17, 02:57 PM.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by noobz View Post
                      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.
                      I thought you left the forum for good after the last time they banned you for rudeness. I guess some people have a hard time sticking to their promises or following the Sunnah for that matter.
                      Last edited by ZeeshanParvez; 20-09-17, 04:09 PM.
                      Watch those eyes

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
                        Zeeshan sahab!
                        I would be more interested in someone refuting the references he gave regarding the violent Najdi movement.
                        I don't think I mentioned anything about the Najdi movement in my last post. I guess you can read the posts by other posters which refer to what you are interested in.
                        Last edited by ZeeshanParvez; 20-09-17, 04:08 PM.
                        Watch those eyes

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                          Are you serious? Seems like you haven't read a single post in this thread. And no I'm not part of any Sufi order, I do however accept Tasawwuf as an Islamic science to attain Ihsan just like the classical scholars of this Ummah have accepted it.
                          Then you are a man with sense. All praise to Allaah for that.


                          Yes, I am Ash'ari wa lillahi al-hamd. But I don't know why you're saying "hardcore". It's not like I'm going around making Takfir of those who disagree with the Asha'irah.
                          As for the mentioned person: I've nothing to do with him.
                          By the way: Acting as if a person who was rejected by pretty much all scholars of his time is "a great Imam and reviver of the religion" and putting the words of that person above everything else is what one could call as personality worship. It's almost as if these "Salafis" have taken Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab as their Rabb min dunillah. We ask Allah ta'ala for well-being.
                          How do claim their is no TaQliid in Aqiidah and at the same time label yourself an Ash'ari?

                          Anyone with any objectivity will never deny that many Salafi have fallen into personality worship, as well, of the figures they love.
                          Watch those eyes

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
                            Majority of Salafis are in denial.
                            Wouldn't say denial, it's more that they never came across certain books of his and thus won't immediately accept what an ashari brings, if a salafi on the other hand brought the same texts then they would accept it
                            The modern Saudi form of 'wahhabism' has infact been polluted to suit the corrupt agenda of the Saudi family, I have no doubt that the imams of najd would have made takfeer on saudi today and possibly even on any scholar that supports them
                            ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                              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!)?

                              [/URL][/I]
                              They assume the best that their opposition is learned enough to find the source. Here is the source of that. Anyone who knows Arabic, like you do, should be able to find the source and descredit that as opposed to the poster quite easily. I guess the author had no clue what he was talking about right?

                              Here it is from the book حكم الله الواحد الصمد on page 44.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	Quoteforibnaqiil.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	87.0 KB
ID:	10765807
                              Watch those eyes

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by ZeeshanParvez View Post
                                They assume the best that their opposition is learned enough to find the source. Here is the source of that. Anyone who knows Arabic, like you do, should be able to find the source and descredit that as opposed to the poster quite easily. I guess the author had no clue what he was talking about right?

                                Here it is from the book حكم الله الواحد الصمد on page 44.

                                [ATTACH=CONFIG]87790[/ATTACH]
                                He has made a grave mistake by becoming an ashari, if he had remained an athari and rejected some of the teachings of MIAW it would have been much better for him, he also seriously thinks that no one other then Ibn Qudaamah reported the retraction of Ibn 'Aqeel, I dont know which planet he is on.
                                ''If the bedouins and city dwellers were to fight between themselves until they wipe each other out, it will surely be less significant than them appointing a taghoot in the land which rules by that which is against the Shari'ah of Islaam which Allah sent his Messenger ﷺ with'' - Sheikh Sulayman bin Sahmaan

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X