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

[Abu Sulayman]

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

how can the bloodshed be justified?

Well, that's exactly the issue. It can not be justified.
I mean he can accuse the scholars and laymen of that time as much of Shirk as he wants, but he'll not be able to show that they had rejected anything that is necessarily known to be from the religion.
And this simply means: He's making Takfir upon Muslims without clear-cut proofs against them and that is a major sin.

I want to add something: Using the understanding of IAW one could do Takfir upon pretty much all muslims today (including most "Salafis", because they're not extreme enough according to real Najdi standards). Let it also be known to abufulaans that if he doesn't make Takfir upon me, he would be a disbeliever according to Najdi standards.

[imran1976]

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

Then you are a man with sense. All praise to Allaah for that

Means someone following a sufi tariqa is not a man of senses - so what will you say about people like Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi?

[imran1976]

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

For God's sake are Ibn Taymiyyah's words revelation that we have to argue based upon his words?
This is the same person who according to his own very student (i.e. Ibn Qayyim) had accepted the position of the extinction of the hellfire and one of his last books contain such type of statements. According to classical scholars this is disbelief by concensus.
So why are you trying to argue with me based upon his words?

[/B]

I don't understand Arabic but, since I have read few translated quotes of ibn Taymiyyah from his book Minhaj us Sunnah, I have stayed away from his works.

[ZeeshanParvez]

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

I don't understand Arabic but, since I have read few translated quotes of ibn Taymiyyah from his book Minhaj us Sunnah, I have stayed away from his works.

Do you expect to be taken seriously? Try re-reading what you wrote.

[ZeeshanParvez]

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

This is the same person who according to his own very student (i.e. Ibn Qayyim) had accepted the position of the extinction of the hellfire and one of his last books contain such type of statements. According to classical scholars this is disbelief by concensus.
So why are you trying to argue with me based upon his words?

There is no explicit text of Ibn Taymiyyah in his later books where he says what you accuse him of. This is in stark opposition to the Sufis who are explicit in their nonsense of Allaah being everywhere even in animals, may Allaah save us from such disgusting remarks. Then, the Sufi lovers have to run to find interpretations to safe face of their loved Sufi sheikhs.

What we do have is explicit texts from Ibn Taymiyyah where he mentions that the Fire will not come to an end. These can be found in many of his books.

وقال أهل الإسلام جميعاً: ليس للجنة والنار آخر، وإنهما لا تزالان باقيتين، وكذلك أهل الجنة لا يزالون في الجنة يتنعمون، وأهل النار في النار يعذبون، ليس لذلك آخر


وقد اتفق سلف الأمة وأئمتها وسائر أهل السنة والجماعة على أن من المخلوقات ما لا يعدم ولا يفنى بالكلية، كالجنة والنار والعرش وغير ذلك، ولم يقل بفناء جميع المخلوقات إلا طائفة من أهل الكلام المبتدعين، كالجهم بن صفوان ومن وافقه من المعتزلة ونحوهم، وهذا قول باطل يخالف كتاب الله وسنة رسوله وإجماع سلف الأمة وأئمتها



His student Ibn al-Qayyim had two opinions on the matter. He retracted from the incorrect opinion. If you choose not to accept that and accuse him of disbelief, I for one am not going to lose any sleep because I know I do not believe the Fire will come to an end. Nor do those who follow the Salaf. On a side note it is ironic that according to you Ibn Taymiyyah held the view but you know full well that the Salafis of today do not hold the view, yet you keep referring to Ibn Taymiyyah as "their Ibn Taymiyyah."

You can present us with an explicit statement where he said that. If you can please do so. If you cannot then you are grossly misinformed and misinforming. At times I wonder if you actually have read his books or take your information from forums such as this one or websites like this one.

What Ibn Taymiyyah did do was transmit sayings of those who claimed that the Fire will come to end. If you equate transmitting sayings to believing in them [like me transmitting the false beliefs of the Ashaa'irah and then being accused of believing them] then you have bigger issues.

[ZeeshanParvez]

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

At the end of the day the incorrect information propagated regarding the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah [though the thread was about someone else but you can always expect him to be dragged into it] is no surprise because it seems to always come from the Istigaatha lovers from among the Ashaa'irah Shaafi'i which is no surprise as they take most of what they get from al-Haythami and Subki both of whom were known to hate Ibn Taymiyyah and love asking the dead.

Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) removed Khalid bin Waliid (may Allaah be pleased with him) because he feared people would give him credit for victories as opposed to Allaah, and here you have people telling you it is recommended to go to the grave of dead men regarding whom there is no proof to begin with if they were even walis as only Allaah knows what their true intentions were and ask them to help "with a correct aqiidah."

And then you have that crazy alaharzart website which says hey look in Suurah al-Faatiah Allaah separated asking help and worshiping so they are two different things. He wanted to show that you can ask the dead for help as it is different from worship. What he forgot was that while Allaah separated the two in the Verse, He put them in the exact same format by putting the pronoun before the verb to signify restriction. Allaah alone you worship. Allaah alone you ask for help.

As if for some people asking Allaah alone is just not enough. No wonder the Ummah is in the state it is in.

Anyway, Ill let the OP continue on with his discoveries about MIAW. : )

[Linkdeutscher]

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

At the end of the day the incorrect information propagated regarding the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah [though the thread was about someone else but you can always expect him to be dragged into it] is no surprise because it seems to always come from the Istigaatha lovers from among the Ashaa'irah Shaafi'i which is no surprise as they take most of what they get from al-Haythami and Subki both of whom were known to hate Ibn Taymiyyah and love asking the dead.

Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) removed Khalid bin Waliid (may Allaah be pleased with him) because he feared people would give him credit for victories as opposed to Allaah, and here you have people telling you it is recommended to go to the grave of dead men regarding whom there is no proof to begin with if they were even walis as only Allaah knows what their true intentions were and ask them to help "with a correct aqiidah."

And then you have that crazy alaharzart website which says hey look in Suurah al-Faatiah Allaah separated asking help and worshiping so they are two different things. He wanted to show that you can ask the dead for help as it is different from worship. What he forgot was that while Allaah separated the two in the Verse, He put them in the exact same format by putting the pronoun before the verb to signify restriction. Allaah alone you worship. Allaah alone you ask for help.

As if for some people asking Allaah alone is just not enough. No wonder the Ummah is in the state it is in.

Anyway, Ill let the OP continue on with his discoveries about MIAW. : )

Muhammad was an evil lunatic who made mass takfeer and slaughtered Muslims, hence we should ask the dead for help and adopt Ash'arism.

-OP

[noobz]

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

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.

my rudeness for sending lanat on someone who accused me of insulting the Prophet Muhammad(sws) is as well placed as like i somewhat started insulting ur mother here and then talk bout a response from you and call it 'rudeness'.

some people do have a hard time sticking to the topic and not engage in personal banter of accusing others of what hes following.

What a cheap excuse to avoid the arguments at hand.

[noobz]

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

OP is yet to be refuted

well there was a simple explanation provided ,MIAW did dawah , sufis did takfeer on him , fighting took place and he killed the heretics.

Look at the hollywood style writing there, now they only need a lead actress to add to the love story of the khariji's killing in the name of dawah.

[Linkdeutscher]

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

some people do have a hard time sticking to the topic and not engage in personal banter of accusing others of what hes following.

What a cheap excuse to avoid the arguments at hand.

Oh the irony.

[imran1976]

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

Do you expect to be taken seriously? Try re-reading what you wrote.

I re-read --------- So ?

[imran1976]

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

Do you expect to be taken seriously?

i don't care.

Did ibn Taymiyyah tried to undermine the status of Ahl al-Bayt by rejecting authentic Hadiths in his book minhaj us sunnah ?

[abufulaans]

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

his OP hasnt been refuted yet

And why should it be refuted?

[Simply_Logical]

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

And why should it be refuted?

so are you justifying the bloodshed?

one thing i dont get is even if the peeps were commiting shirk for argument sake wouldnt it be better to educate them instead of killing them?

[Simply_Logical]

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

well there was a simple explanation provided ,MIAW did dawah , sufis did takfeer on him , fighting took place and he killed the heretics.

Look at the hollywood style writing there, now they only need a lead actress to add to the love story of the khariji's killing in the name of dawah.

lol