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

  • Was anything concluded from this thread?

    ''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


    • Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
      Was anything concluded from this thread?
      Insha Allah more info to follow. But in part due to this thread, I revisited my studies of the Uthmani khilafah and its reliance upon the sufi orders and come to greater understanding that one of the internal demises of the Uthmani khilafah and its adoptions of Darul Islam are based on the 'Dalalah' within the Sufi orders who were in turn entrusted on running and guiding the societies. Quite literally, committing shirk, engaging and relying upon Sihr, allowing fahsha to corrupt society because it was practiced by othe sufi orders, and so forth.

      The Door o ijtihad was closed, and the Sufi orders monopolized and manipulated Muslims to serve their corrupted interests, and sometimes debaucherous, and kufr desires.

      And in Arabia in particular, where Sufis empowered the Sharifs in Hijaz, but ignored the Najd, Asabiyah returned to Arabia in such a way that it brought a different kind of FASADUL ARD that is not spoken of, but which existed. It is not so terrible that Arabs of Arabia were silent about it. Believers understood that Arab tribes would never independently revive and renew themselves, so they supported the Salafi Dawah and the mujaddid imam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab (rh). That's why his Dawah received so much support from laymen, youth, common folks who were powerless to oppose their tribes and tribal leaders, but wanted to revive and renew Islam to save Arabia.

      Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
      " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

      Comment


      • One should not underestimate the deviancy of the SUFI ORDERS. The Uthmani rulers were themselves permanently bound and adherents of the Mawlawi sufi order, that that was based on the model and teachings of Jalaludeen ar Rumi. Rumi appeared to carry with him elements tied to Tengriism, the Jahiliyah preIslamic Turkish mushrik beliefs/religion. Tengriism promotes belief in a Sky God, Tengri, and then all kinds of false demigods and so forth under him. Tengriism, which was prominent in Central Asia among Turk tribes.

        Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
        " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

        Comment


        • Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
          Was anything concluded from this thread?
          Yes, that it is very easy to get under the skin of the Ashaa'irah by reminding them of the inauthentic things they have in their books. Also, it demonstrated how a person goes from calling you brother when he hopes to get to you to using aggressive language when the right cords are plucked.

          Finally, it also showed that while the majority say there is no taqliid in Aqiidah (something used by the OP during an argument to defend his position) the OP himself is a muqallid in Aqiidah of the Ashaa'irah. Double standards.
          Watch those eyes

          Comment


          • Ibn Qudaamah actually said something very true about the Ashaa'irah which I have noticed after reading their books and discussing issues with them:


            We do not know of any group among the people of the bid'ah who hide their sayings and do not have the audacity to openly declare their sayings except the zanaadikah and the 'ashaa'irah while Allaah ordered his Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to make apparent the Diin, call towards it, and give tabliigh of that which was revealed to him...


            حكاية المناظرة

            Page 35
            Watch those eyes

            Comment


            • Originally posted by abufulaans View Post
              Was anything concluded from this thread?
              Op is a numpty who has been peddling the antics of the Kuffar/Munafiqun.

              http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

              "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abu Kamel View Post
                One should not underestimate the deviancy of the SUFI ORDERS. The Uthmani rulers were themselves permanently bound and adherents of the Mawlawi sufi order, that that was based on the model and teachings of Jalaludeen ar Rumi. Rumi appeared to carry with him elements tied to Tengriism, the Jahiliyah preIslamic Turkish mushrik beliefs/religion. Tengriism promotes belief in a Sky God, Tengri, and then all kinds of false demigods and so forth under him. Tengriism, which was prominent in Central Asia among Turk tribes.
                How interesting.

                There seems to be a trend among Sufis to have links which can be traced back to polytheistic Religions.

                Take the subcontinent for example. You have the Hindus who lived here long ago.

                The Sufis, here, have many practices and beliefs which seem to have roots in Hindu polytheism
                Watch those eyes

                Comment


                • Looks like there was some benifit then
                  very long thread, we on page 56 now!

                  ''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


                  • What can be learned from this thread?

                    There are prejudices that underlie the criticisms of the Salafi Dawah that arise NOT from Deen- no one can argue with Tauhid- but from the political and strategic interests of the Sufi orders who the shaykh confronted and challenged.

                    The Sufi orders shared in the leadership of the Uthmani state and their bidah was the norm, the accepted way throughout the state and Uthmani controlled society, or Darul Islam. And between each other, competing or differing Sufi orders allowed various kinds of fasad and fahsha- Sufi Orders were tolerant of deviancies from other Orders as way of balancing the political powers of the society. One can see the "balance" in how they had different prayer times at the masjidul Haram for each fiqh school.

                    One can see this as the "reality of Arabia and the Uthmani khilafah state at the time of shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (rh)".

                    And this "balance of powers" between the Sufi Orders was the very basis of the Uthmani regime. In fact, Uthman himself received his "anointment" from the Mawlawi Sufi order when he married the daughter of a Mawlawi imam. Soon after, when Uthman attacked the city of Konye, the headquarters of the Mawlawi order, the Mawlawi permanently bonded with the Uthman clan and would remain at the top of the Uthmani society for roughly 600 years until the Kemalists and zanadeeq Masons (with the misguidance of Western Tawaghit powers) abolished the Uthmani dynasty and its khilafah in 1924 CE ( and consequently outlawed Sufi orders in Kemalist Turkey).

                    After the Uthmans allied and bonded with the Mawlawis, they would later ally with the Naqshbandis, Qadiris, Bektashis. The Bektashi Order was granted the dominance and power over the Uthman military, the Naqshbandi Order was granted dominance and power over the Uthmani judiciary and imams, the Qadiri Order was granted power over the bureaucrats and administration of the khilafah. Other sufi orders contended with various other aspects, such as the Rifai, Beyrami, etc over merchant and craft guilds. And this continued for centuries- 100s of years.

                    There are several internal problems that contributed to the downfall of the Uthmani khilafah and its version of the Islamic society. One of the most important was the "closed door of ijtihad" and how this effectively solidified the hierarchy of the sufi orders, enabling the Sufis to monopolize, or oligopolize, Islamic knowledge to be used to further their dominance over the Muslim people and Muslim society. It was the Sufi Orders who initiated the "authoritarian manipulation of Islamic knowledge" by forming a Sufi clergy over the Muslim masses.

                    And when a Sufi order deviated, other orders engaged in politicking, compromising, to gain advantages over each other.
                    One of the most grieves deviancies tolerated among these Sufi orders was the worship of wilayat at graves, shrines, etc. If an excuse could be made for how another Order believed about Allah- Bektashiism believed Allah manifested in Ali ibn Abi Talib (rah) because there was not sufficient proof to establish this shirk in court, the action of worshipping at a grave, and worshipping wilayat themselves, was a clear act of shirk that could be witnessed and verified.

                    And many such grotesque crimes and deviations amassed over centuries, all while each Order kept condemnations within their own ranks, or in private, while running the society.

                    And one of the most grievous deviation was the incorporation of SIHR in the functions of governance of the society. SIHR was used by Orders, including the Naqshbandi who apparently adopted use of the work by the convict and criminal shaykh al Buni who was tried in a Shariah court and executed for practice and teaching of Sihr. And yet, the Naqshbandis revived his work. As did other Orders.

                    In terms of GRIEVOUS CRIMES AND SINS, Shirk and Sihr being two of the most heinous that take one out of Islam completely.



                    In order to better understand the importance of the shaykh and his dawah and the "movement", one needs to have a better understanding of the reality in which he lived. The OP of this thread intentionally obfuscated the reality, attempting to prejudice his readers' through rhetorical tricks.

                    Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
                    " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

                    Comment


                    • Allahumma, aranee al haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba`ahu, wa aranee al baatilu baatilaan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu.Oh Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.
                      " Do you know what destroys Islam? A mistake made by a scholar, the argument of a hypocrite in writing and the ruling of leaders who wish for people to stray

                      Comment


                      • Salamun ’alaykum,

                        what we‘ve learnt from this thread is that Ibn ’Abd an-Wahhab and his early followers were bloodthirsty criminals who fought against Islam and its people.

                        What we also learn from this thread is that the so called ”Salafi” laymen have no idea whom they‘re following and are just repeating what they‘ve read on ”Salafi” websites or heard from ”Salafi” Shuyukh.

                        The reality is that the ”Salafi” definition for Tawhid and Shirk is wrong and not based upon classical Islam.
                        In fact ”Salafi” Mashayikh regard some things as obligatory to believe (like believing that God is subject to changes and has physical attributes), while all previous scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah have called it as Kufr. At the same time they call Tashaffu’ with our beloved Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - as Shirk, while the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah throughout the centuries regarded it as good and permissable.
                        They have no real knowledge and are hasty in making Takfir, while they themselves are wrong.

                        As for the above posts: Keep this ”Sufi this and Sufi that”-talk for yourself. Don‘t you get tired repeating the same wrong informations?


                        There is no justification for attacking Muslim cities and villages, killing their inhabitants, terrorizing them and taking their wealth (as the early Wahhabiyyah have done). Whoever is saying otherwise is in reality an enemy of this religion.

                        Comment


                        • Lol
                          Has the time not come for those who have believed that their hearts should become humbly submissive at the remembrance of Allah and what has come down of the truth? And let them not be like those who were given the Scripture before, and a long period passed over them, so their hearts hardened; and many of them are defiantly disobedient. (57:16)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                            Salamun ’alaykum,

                            what we‘ve learnt from this thread is that Ibn ’Abd an-Wahhab and his early followers were bloodthirsty criminals who fought against Islam and its people.

                            What we also learn from this thread is that the so called ”Salafi” laymen have no idea whom they‘re following and are just repeating what they‘ve read on ”Salafi” websites or heard from ”Salafi” Shuyukh.

                            The reality is that the ”Salafi” definition for Tawhid and Shirk is wrong and not based upon classical Islam.
                            In fact ”Salafi” Mashayikh regard some things as obligatory to believe (like believing that God is subject to changes and has physical attributes), while all previous scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah have called it as Kufr. At the same time they call Tashaffu’ with our beloved Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - as Shirk, while the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah throughout the centuries regarded it as good and permissable.
                            They have no real knowledge and are hasty in making Takfir, while they themselves are wrong.

                            As for the above posts: Keep this ”Sufi this and Sufi that”-talk for yourself. Don‘t you get tired repeating the same wrong informations?


                            There is no justification for attacking Muslim cities and villages, killing their inhabitants, terrorizing them and taking their wealth (as the early Wahhabiyyah have done). Whoever is saying otherwise is in reality an enemy of this religion.

                            The only enemy of Islaam are you lying 'Ashaa'irah. You are absolute liars. Ibn Qudaamah rightfully calls you out for your deceit.


                            Ibn Qudaamah actually said something very true about the Ashaa'irah which I have noticed after reading their books and discussing issues with them:


                            We do not know of any group among the people of the bid'ah who hide their sayings and do not have the audacity to openly declare their sayings except the zanaadikah and the 'ashaa'irah while Allaah ordered his Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to make apparent the Diin, call towards it, and give tabliigh of that which was revealed to him...


                            حكاية المناظرة

                            Page 35



                            Here is an example of how you hide your lies. al-Bayjuuri says below


                            Click image for larger version

Name:	liesofashaairah.jpg
Views:	73
Size:	124.3 KB
ID:	12572961



                            The Qur'aan when understood to mean the Kalaam which resides inside the Nafs of Allaah is not created.

                            But the Qur'aan when referring to the words you recite than that is created.

                            However, it is impermissible to say that the Qur'aan which is recited is created except in places of teaching lest people take it to mean that the Kalaam which resides inside the Nafs of Allaah is created.


                            Ibn Quduaamah was spot on labeling you waht he labelled you.

                            What a joke.
                            Watch those eyes

                            Comment


                            • Everyone can see in this thread how desperate the OP has been.



                              He let loose his dirty tongue about great Muhadiithuun of the past.



                              He defends the fairy tales of his baatil sect. A sect which hides facts from the public because as al-Ghazaali admitted that not everyone has the "ability" to accept the truth.



                              He went on to say this is why the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) did not uncover the secrets of understanding like the Ashaa'irah did because otherwise no one would accept Islaam.



                              Lies. Nothing but lies and baatil assumptions is what their sect has.



                              They are no different from the Jahmiyyah.



                              Everyone knows what the ahl al-Sunnah think of those heretics.



                              Now let's see what Imaam al-Tirmidhi says and how this OP once again lets his vile tongue loose in regards to a great muhaddith.


                              The OP wants us to reject the great Muhaddithuun of the past for his theologians who have no knowledge of hadiith.


                              وَأَمَّا الجَهْمِيَّةُ فَأَنْكَرَتْ هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَاتِ وَقَالُوا: هَذَا تَشْبِيهٌ، وَقَدْ ذَكَرَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ فِي غَيْرِ مَوْضِعٍ مِنْ كِتَابهِ اليَدَ وَالسَّمْعَ وَالبَصَرَ، فَتَأَوَّلَتِ الجَهْمِيَّةُ هَذِهِ الآيَاتِ فَفَسَّرُوهَا عَلَى غَيْرِ مَا فَسَّرَ أَهْلُ العِلْمِ، وَقَالُوا: إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ يَخْلُقْ آدَمَ بِيَدِهِ، وَقَالُوا: إِنَّ مَعْنَى اليَدِ هَاهُنَا القُوَّةُ



                              As for the Jahmiyyah then they have denied these narrations and have said this is TASHBIIH. And Allaah has mentioned in many places in His Book al-Yad, al-Sam', and al-Basar. The Jahmiyyah made taw'ill of this Ayaah and gave it tafsiir which was opposed to the Tafsiir of the people of knowledge. And they said Allaah did not create Adam by means of His Hand. They said: The meaning of Hand here is al-quwwa.


                              That is how al-Timidhi described the Jahmiyyah.

                              That is what the baatil Ashaa'irah say.

                              Everyone knows what the ahl al-Sunnah said about the Jamiyyah.


                              Last edited by ZeeshanParvez; 11-08-18, 12:47 PM.
                              Watch those eyes

                              Comment


                              • Matters of Ijtihaad have resulted in fighting and killing by those better than Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhaab.


                                Have you forgotten the Battle of Siffiin?


                                That was based on a matter of Ijtihaad. That was fought between groups which compromised of the Companions (may Allaah be pleased with all of them).



                                Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhaab, you, and I aren't even worth the dust on the feet of Companions (may Allaah be pleased with them).



                                Yet, it is a fact that they fought. People were killed. This was because of Ijtihaad.



                                Here you have had scholars prior to Muhammad bin abd al-Wahhaab declare the likes of the Ashaa'irah as kaafirs.



                                Ibn Khuzaimah said:

                                He who does not attest that Allaah has made istiwaa above His 'arsh above the seven Heavens then he is a kaafir in his Lord. He will be told to repent. If he does, good, otherwise he will be killed


                                Imaam al-Tabari said anyone who thinks that the Qur'aan we recite is created then his wealth and blood is halaal.


                                You have seen that the 'Ashaa'irah say it is fine to say that the words we recite are created, and it is perfectly valid to say this in teaching environments.


                                Ibn Qudaamah has included the Ashaa'irah among heretics.


                                Ahmad bin Hanbal considered those who indulged in ilm al-Kalaam as heretics.

                                And there is an entire book here which mentions early scholars who considered the Ashaa'irah as kaafirs.


                                Takfiir al-'ashaa'irah



                                Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhaab knew of all these sayings of classical scholars.

                                He made Ijtihaad. He was knowledgeable enough to do so.



                                Was he right? Was he wrong? We will find out on the Day of Judgment.


                                Just remember that matters of aqiidah are considered to be of utmost importance as they decide if you are a kaafir or Muslim.


                                Those better than him have fought and killed based on Ijtihaad in matters not related to aqiidah.


                                They fought and people died when they believed their Ijtihaad was the truth.

                                Watch those eyes

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X