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

  • Classic thread exposing the violent history of wahabis.
    "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


    • Originally posted by imran1976 View Post
      Classic thread exposing the violent history of wahabis.
      are you barelvi? just curious

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Simply_Logical View Post

        are you barelvi? just curious
        Curiosity killed the cat.
        I am not.
        "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


        • Originally posted by imran1976 View Post

          Curiosity killed the cat.
          I am not.
          yea it did...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

            -
            When "Salafis" hear the words "Shirk" or "Mushrikin" the first people they think off are other Muslims. This is the sad state they've reached where their greatest enemies are the Muslims themselves.
            Know that this amount of disunity and hatred was not present among Muslims before the "Salafis" came into existance.



            -
            One just should ask oneself where these groups get all that equipment and weapons?!

            An example for the first statement would be Syria:Groups like ISIS - who boast with their inhumanity and ugly crimes! - are needed for the West so that they can use them as a justification to stay in our countries.


            An example for my second statement (i.e. that America uses these "Salafi" militants to destroy any justified struggle against America and the West) would be 'Iraq.

            This will be inshallah explained more in detail in the following post.
            Abu Sulayman, I am open to investigate this thing without bias but have you read this book on Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab by Jalal Abu alRub called "Biography and mission of Muhammad ibn Abdul wahab" ?

            Comment


            • So with some investigation, I found a number of things.

              1) Sheikh Yasir Qadhi has repented from favorably viewing MIAW, instead he has accepted that MIAW was a takfiri and ISIS derives its ideas from MIAW.

              2) Thats not new, a lof ot Salafi Jihadis repented after getting takfir-ed by ISIS and realizing the deeper problem at hand. Abu Yazn al Shami of Ahrar al Sham publicly repented from SJ Manhaj and called Wahhabism as the root of kharijism of ISIS.

              3) Even some top salafi scholars like Albani(rh) have at the least accepted that there was Ghulu in Najdi Da'wah, they just fall short of labelling him an outright kharijite.

              --> I dont agree with many things being said by Abu Sulayman, however his take on Najdism and takfiri mentality in it is correct.

              Comment


              • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVu9Winm7nw
                "When a man sees the road as long he weakens in his walk." Ibn Qayyim

                Comment


                • What good does this do ? The facts are there for every one to see. Even a cursory read of Tarikh al Najd would validate the claim of MIAW's gross abuse of Takfir.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by savo234 View Post

                    What good does this do ? The facts are there for every one to see. Even a cursory read of Tarikh al Najd would validate the claim of MIAW's gross abuse of Takfir.
                    It refutes your nonsense.
                    "When a man sees the road as long he weakens in his walk." Ibn Qayyim

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Musbah View Post

                      It refutes your nonsense.
                      It has done no refutation. The truth is for everyone to see. You are using follower of someone to support him, nothing impartial about it. There is a huge trend of salafi scholars accepting outright ghulu in MIAW's approach, I even have an audio of Sheikh Albani(rh), the syrian scholars like Abu Yazn(rh repented, even Abu Qatadah admits extremism among Najdis. Yasir Qadhi has come out bluntly. I guess when the ship is sinking, the Najdis have nothing except straws to hold on to.

                      Comment


                      • Yasir Qadhi is your evidence? Like the shiekh said in the video. All his writings are there for all to read. If it appears that he made too much takfir for you then know that there was a lot of kufr/shirk happening around him at the time. He called it like he saw it. And he used the Quran and Sunnah to do it. And Allah Knows Best.
                        "When a man sees the road as long he weakens in his walk." Ibn Qayyim

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by savo234 View Post
                          So with some investigation, I found a number of things.

                          1) Sheikh Yasir Qadhi has repented from favorably viewing MIAW, instead he has accepted that MIAW was a takfiri and ISIS derives its ideas from MIAW.

                          2) Thats not new, a lof ot Salafi Jihadis repented after getting takfir-ed by ISIS and realizing the deeper problem at hand. Abu Yazn al Shami of Ahrar al Sham publicly repented from SJ Manhaj and called Wahhabism as the root of kharijism of ISIS.

                          3) Even some top salafi scholars like Albani(rh) have at the least accepted that there was Ghulu in Najdi Da'wah, they just fall short of labelling him an outright kharijite.

                          --> I dont agree with many things being said by Abu Sulayman, however his take on Najdism and takfiri mentality in it is correct.
                          albani had irja in aqeedah
                          second of all he is not an aqeedah specialist he is a muhadith

                          aimmah najd did not have ghulu in takfir
                          maybe you think that because they said the people who do istigatha to the dead are committing shirk or they made takfir on ottomans or people in jazeera
                          (who at the time were committing shirk)

                          of course many asharis and matureedis think istigatha to the dead is permissable and some think its haram so they would consider it extreme but its not
                          they were just wrong (asharis and matureedis)

                          yasir qhadi is a scholar for dollar
                          his aqeedah is all over the place from someone who went from hating shia to loving them
                          and saying wala wal bara is not needed until you have a state(or something along those lines)
                          dawah man also exposed him for more mistakes

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abu julaybeeb View Post

                            albani had irja in aqeedah
                            second of all he is not an aqeedah specialist he is a muhadith

                            aimmah najd did not have ghulu in takfir
                            maybe you think that because they said the people who do istigatha to the dead are committing shirk or they made takfir on ottomans or people in jazeera
                            (who at the time were committing shirk)

                            of course many asharis and matureedis think istigatha to the dead is permissable and some think its haram so they would consider it extreme but its not
                            they were just wrong (asharis and matureedis)

                            yasir qhadi is a scholar for dollar
                            his aqeedah is all over the place from someone who went from hating shia to loving them
                            and saying wala wal bara is not needed until you have a state(or something along those lines)
                            dawah man also exposed him for more mistakes
                            Have you even read Tarikh al Najd by Ibn Ghannam, you have no idea of what you are talking about. The Najdis have made takfir of Ottomans and not just Ottomans, they made takfir of anyone who did'nt make takfir of Ottomans. They made takfir of people of Huraymila led by Sulayman Ibn Abdul Wahhab who merely DISAGREED on takfir and were not themselves involved in any of bidah. If that is not extremism then I do not know what extremism is.

                            These "aimah" clearly followed kharijite path. Infact in Tarikh al Najd, Ibn Ghannam always refers to his jamah as THE MUSLIMEEN and opposition as MURTADEEN/MUSHRIKEEN. This was the path of ISIS khwarij who made takfir of every sunni group in Shaam, called their own group THE JAMAH of MUSLIMEEN .

                            Unless you have same beliefs as these dwaish, there is no way someone can justify gross stuff like that.

                            How about you people have some wala towards thousands of muslims from the Ummah of Muhammad(sa) who were butchered by the likes of GIA in Algeria, ISIS in Syria and Iraq ? How about you have some wala for the people of Huraymila who were takfir'ed by MIAW ?

                            Plus you clearly avoided the quote of ABU QATADAH who himself has been on the edge..... Even he admitted ghulu among Najdis....Syrian Salafi Jihadis and founders of Ahrar al Sham like Abu Yazn al Shami called out this Najdi manhaj for what it is.
                            Last edited by savo234; 16-03-19, 09:57 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Musbah View Post
                              Yasir Qadhi is your evidence? Like the shiekh said in the video. All his writings are there for all to read. If it appears that he made too much takfir for you then know that there was a lot of kufr/shirk happening around him at the time. He called it like he saw it. And he used the Quran and Sunnah to do it. And Allah Knows Best.
                              Have you assumed that MIAW is Ma'sum that if he makes takfir then the the one takfired upon must be a mushrik. What an absolutely despicable argument that is. MIAW made chain takfir and yes that is for everyone to see in his writings. He made takfir of people of Huraymila who merely disagreed with takfir and had nothing to do with bad practices and venerating grave.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                                An example for my second statement (i.e. that America uses these "Salafi" militants to destroy any justified struggle against America and the West) would be 'Iraq.

                                This will be inshallah explained more in detail in the following post.
                                The events in 'Iraq:

                                In 2003 the United States of America - a state that originally was build upon oppressing, terrorizing and killing the native American population - decided to send its criminal troops to 'Iraq - the land of the two rivers - based upon the lie that 'Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction.
                                The American state knew of course that there were no such weapons, but used this lie as a justification to occupy the land of the two rivers and this was their first major step in changing the borders and the demographics in the Middle East. In accordance with the Zionist Yinon Plan this occupation would lead to the partition of the 'Iraqi state into many parts based upon the different ethnicities, schools of thoughts and religions. After that the other states in the Middle East would follow in this plan (and what we're seeing today in Syria is part of this plan!).
                                Know that 'Iraq was once the strongest Arab country in the region and that is why they started with 'Iraq

                                After 'Iraq's occupation the American troops started to oppress the people of 'Iraq and try to humiliate its people. Soon resistance groups were formed to fight the criminal American occupiers and to free the land of the two rivers from their oppression and disbelief.
                                The members of these resistance groups were first and foremost the local people. In regions like Diyala, Mosul, al-Anbar and Salah al-Din they were mostly Sunni Arabs, while in the south they were mostly Shi'a Arabs. In the regions of Tal A'far, Kirkuk and Diyala there were also Turkmen fighters (who are also either Sunni or Shi'a).
                                Kurds (other than some belonging to Ansar al-Islam) took almost not part in this resistance, because they were still dreaming of their independent state and thought that serving the American interests would bring them nearer to their goal.
                                The only 'Iraqi "Salafi" resistance group was Ansar al-Islam. Then there was another "Salafi" group which was al-Qa'ida in 'Iraq. In the beginning it was almost exclusively made off foreign fighters.
                                So in the beginning the absolute majority of the resistance fighters were 'Iraqis and the absolute majority of them were non-Salafis (because until the occupation "Salafism" was something completely alien to 'Iraqis).

                                The resistance was getting stronger day by day and America was losing members of their troops every day. Especially in Sunni regions they saw hell on Earth, because they could not trespass these regions without getting attacked.
                                At this point the Americans were basically losing the war and started to think of a new strategy. What came to their mind was the classical divide-and-conquer-strategy and the best group for that was Zarqawi's group (i.e. al-Qa'ida in 'Iraq) and that was because of two main reasons: One of them is that they were non-'Iraqis and the other was them being "Salafis". So there was two main points which made them different from all the other resistance fighters.

                                America started to highlight the role of al-Qa'ida in 'Iraq and to exaggerate their strength beyond limits (with the above mentioned divide-and-counqer intention of course!). The foreign "Salafi" fighters started now to think of themselves even greater than they already did. Just imagine: Their average member thought of himself of being much more knowledgable than 'Iraqi Sunni scholars, who had studied the religion in a classical way for years upon years. This is the amount of Kibr that "Salafism" had put into their minds!

                                Zarqawi's group started doing two things:
                                1) Instead of concentrating on fighting the occupiers like the rest of the resistance fighters, they started to try to control the different Sunni regions of 'Iraq. When they would control a region they would put some idiotic and ignorant youngsters as leaders and as judges and claim that this is how Islam should be implemented. Add to this: They had a lot of corrupt people among them, who would use their positions in order to steal from the local people and do other corrupt things.
                                2) They started targeting the Shi'a without any justified reason. This included attacking normal civilians, religious leaders and their religious sites. This made the Shi'a in 'Iraq ask help from Iran.

                                From there on everything went downwards. In the Sunni regions the resistance fighters were getting more and more displeased with the actions of the foreign fighters, who now were hellbent on ruling over the local population and acting as if everyone has to follow their views and obey them. Zarqawi's group then started attacking the other resistance groups and killing Sunni scholars and Mashayikh who critisized their wrong behaviour and actions. At the same time Zarqawi's group kept on and on targetting the Shi'a population, which led to the formation of Shi'a death squads.
                                In 2005 in the Sunni regions the Sahwa was formed in order to fight against these foreign fighers, who had started to terrorize the 'Iraqi population as a whole. America started to give money to the Sahwa fighters, because this was serving their divide-and-conquer-strategy even further.
                                What had started as a fight against the occupiers was getting more and more a fight between the resistance groups.

                                2006 al-Qa'ida formed a fake Majlis al-Shura and proclaimed their fake "Islamic State of Iraq". They went as far as disallowing the rest of the resistance fighters to fight against the occupiers if it was not under their command and their rule. They demanded Bay'a by force from the Sunni tribes and started killing more and more Sunni tribal leaders and scholars.

                                (On a side note: When they proclaimed their fake "Islamic State" they proclaimed a Saudi guy in his 20s as the head judge of the state. How for God's sake is it possible to turn such a young person into a head judge?! This should be enough for you to know that they lacked profession in every aspect to lead a State.
                                And even this Saudi guy - who was extreme in his views like them and there is even a video where he burns (!) some 'Iraqi Sunnis whom he accused of apostasy! - could not bear the corruption of this so called "Islamic State" (he wrote a letter to the central al-Qa'ida where he mentions some of the corruptions) and left them and went to Afghanistan.)

                                At this stage the people started to forget about the occupation forces and the fight had become a full-scale civil war: Sunnis vs Shi'as, Shi'as vs Salafis, Sunnis vs foreign Salafis, ISI (formerly al-Qa'ida in 'Iraq) vs resistance groups, Sahwa vs ISI, Sahwa vs Shi'a death squads, etc.

                                This is exactly what the Americans had hoped for. From there on the number of their troops being killed and injured got lower and lower and their control got stronger and stronger again. The rest is history.

                                Do you now see how these foreign "Salafi" groups destroyed a justified struggle and turned it into a civil war? And this is something that these foreign "Salafis" always do.
                                That is why I'm saying that America uses them for their own goals!
                                Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 16-03-19, 01:44 PM.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X