REFUTATIONS & Q&A

Salaamun ‘Alaykum

This page has been created for those who ask questions seeking knowledge. Any questions that already carry a conclusion, or any form of snide remark will be dismissed.

117 thoughts on “REFUTATIONS & Q&A

  1. Assalamu ‘alaykum

    Could you enumerate the sacred texts tampered by the Wahhabiyy/Salafiyy?

    Tampering by omitting certain parts, adding, mistranslation like “Visiting the mosque of the Prophet” for “Visiting the rawda of the Prophet”, etc.,

    Jazakallah

  2. @wahhabi threat..salaamualaykum

    today i am posting a hadith that will be very useful to you to refute wahhabis

    It is narrated in Sahih Bukhari, by Abu Mas’ood Al Badri, that the prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) pointed to Yemen with his hand and said:
    Verily Iman is towards this side, and harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels who drive them behind their tails (to the direction) where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabia and Mudar

    this hadith is about nejd…here 2 tribes named rabia and mudar are mentioned..
    these two tribes lived in nejd..bani hanifa is subtribe of rabia
    bani hanifa lived in wadi hanifa which is in modernday riyadh

    also here in this hadith it is given horn of satan will rise amongst arab bedouins
    not iraaqis..also tribe names are given mudar and rabia…

    this will help you out..

  3. Assalamualaikum wa Rahmatullah,

    a sunni friend of mine read a fabricated hadith from a wahhabi source and now thinks that our blessed Master ﷺ didnt see Allah (Azz wa Jall) ,
    when i confronted that friend of mine, i was replied

    “who said Rasoolullah ﷺ saw Allah Ta’ala ? where is it written?can you show me an authentic book, i’d read ”

    please, its a humble request, plz give a detailed reply to above question posed by my friend, may Allah (Azz wa Jall) reward you for the same…

  4. Assalamu Alaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakaatu

    Alhumduillah this s a very beneficial website as far as the Salafiyyah CULT is concerned, however as a Hanafi coming from the ILLUSTRIOUS Isnaad via the Deobandi AULIYAH, I can’t help to notice that there’s many misleading statements regarding my illustrious Akaabireen. My intention is NOT to debate NOR is this message for those who desire to, this message is merely for the ‘administrator’ of this site. BELOW is a link translated in ENGLISH where the same Arabian Ulama who passed takfir on the Ulama-e-Deoband BASED ON WHAT THEY WERE TOLD RETRACTED & ABROGATED THEIR PASS FATAWAAS based on the dialogue they had with the Ulama-e-Deoband of that time. Anyone possessing ILM or had been in contact with the people of ILM knows that they answer questions based on how it’s asked.

    BELOW is the LINK & to download it is FREE.

    My only reason for sharing this with you besides the sin of spreading false information is based on the Hadith of our beloved Nabi {Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam} that ALLAH TA’ALA said: “Whoever takes a Wali of Mine as an enemy, I {Allah Ta’ala} WILL WAGE WAR ON HIM”

    My question is who can win a war against Allah Ta’ala, many tried & my Allah Ta’ala to this day is still undefeated. Despite what a small minority residing in a certain locale has stated, what if they were wrong, what of the Ulama-e-Deoband are accepted WALIS of Allah Ta’ala, and being one sided we didn’t look into the matter further due to our ‘blind following’, is this not the same case with the Wahaabi cult, whatever slander their miscreant scholars of bidah tell them, they spread it until it reaches all corners of the globe WITHOUT investigating what they’ve been told

    Read the transcript below & you can be the judge for yourself, you owe yourself that much

    http://themajlis.co.za/books/Al-Muhannad_%27ala_al-Mufannad_Translation.pdf

    Surely my job is merely to convey the message

    Wasallam

    “Af’Waun”

  5. Salaam. I would like to ask whether you have any resources and opinions on Muslims in India during the days of the British Raj. Wahabis influencing people? Ahmadiyyas? Resistance against British rule? Deobandi – Barelwi relations? The Shi’ites? Anything.

      • All this brelevi/deobandi issue is in reality just a propaganda tool used against the Sunni Muslims and the Ahlus Sunnah of the Indian Subcontinent. The Sunni Muslims of India were always on the path of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah because the sufi saints who were Islamic scholars preached Islam in this region and reverted millions of people thousand years back, this all changed when Wahabissm was imported to Indian Subcontinent a few centuries ago. This happened when certain sunni/sufi shaykhs travelled to Saudi Arabia but got influenced by Ibn Abdul Wahabi Najdi teachings and they came back to preach this new version of Islam. The top Sunni scholars of that time issued fatwa of kufr against this because they disrespected the Holy Prophet Peace be upon him, also tried to degrade the Prophet Peace be upon him and rejected the Islam that has been in the Indian subcontinent and in Arabia for 1000s of years. This all happened before Imam Ahmed Raza Brelevi Rahimullah were even born so how can people now claim oh its only a brelevi/deobandi issue or even claim Indian people are brelevis because in reality Imam Ahmed Raza Rahimullah only defended the Islam that was already there before he was even born. The wahabis of India labelled the Sunni/Sufi Muslims as brelevis (i.e a new sect) to fool the innocent Muslims. Below i will share with you some important information regarding deobandis because alot of people belief it was Imam Ahmed Raza Rahimullah who stood up against the deobandis or wahabis, this is untrue because before Imam Ahmed Raza Rahimullah were even born, many top Indian Shaykhs issued fatwas on those Shaykhs who accepted the wahabi teachings. Then later on Imam Ahmed Raza Rahimullah were born and the disagreement continued between those who wanted to follow the new version of Islam (Deobandis, AhleHadith) and those who claim that Islam that was in the world for 1000s of years is the true Islam (Sunni/Sufis). The wahabis cleverly labelled the Sunnis/Sufis as brelevis so that they can claim, look this is a new Indian sect, even though its a fact that it was the people of tasawuff many centuries back who came to Indian Subcontinent from the outside who reverted us to Islam. Imam Ahmed Raza Rahimullah were not even born then, they were only born in 1856 and passed away in 1921. So even before he was born, the sunni shaykhs of Indian subcontinent issued fatwas on the wahabis and deobandis. The deobandis are even cunning than Ahle Hadith because they kept the same fiqh but changed the Aqeeda. The more cunning tactic by the deobandis is that they tell the Arab shaykhs that they are sunnis/sufis and they never tell them their true aqeeda, only those who do a deep research and learn the history know the truth.

        Information regarding early Deobandi history: (Dont forget these personalities below were not known as deobandi back then because Darul Uloom Deoband was not founded then. They were simply scholars of the Indian subcontinent who refused the beliefs of the Ahlus sunnah wal jamaah)

        The great scholar of Ahlus Sunnah Mufti Hashmat Ali khan (ra), sent this fatwa of Hassamul Harmayn to all the scholars of Indian subcontinent of that time (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh being one at that time)
        Two hundred and sixty eight (268) leading Muftis of Indian subcontinent of that time issued the fatwa on these 5 personalities:

        1. Mirza qadyani (founder of the qadiani/ahmadiyya sect )
        2. Rashid Ahmed Gangohi
        3. Khaleel Ahmed Anbethawi
        4. Qasim Nanotvee
        5. Asharf Ali Thanvee

        It should be noted that 268 Muftis were all leading muftis from the madarsa of Firang mahal , Rampur , Hyderabad ( deccan) , Sindh , Lahore. Agra , Surat… etc.
        He published those fatwa under the name of ‘As sawahir rul Hindiya’

        Imam Ahmed Raza Khan (d.1340H) was not the originator of refutations of the Deobandis! Many had written against the `Ulama’ of Deoband prior to him, such as:
        Mawlânâ Fadl al-Haqq Khayrabâdî (r) in”Tahqîqul-Fatâwâ”
        Hadrat Fadl al-Rasûl Badayûnî (r) in “Sayful-Jabbâr” and others.

        Imam Fadl Haq Khairabadi al Chishti (Rh) took strong objection on maulvi Ismail Dehlavi on the matter of Imakn al Kidhb, Imtina’ al Nazir and on the matter of shafa’at ( intercession) of the Holy Prophet (sal allahu alayhi wa sallam)

        (1) In 1240A.H (1824CE) Imam Fadl Haq Khairabadi al Chishti along with thirteen (13) other leading scholars issued the fatwa of kufr upon Ismail Dehlavi. All these fourteen (14) scholars were the leading students of Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi (Rh)
        The fatwa was published in Tahqiq al Fatwa, signed by all fourteen (14) scholars:

        In fact, Ahmed Raza Khan had not yet been born when Imam Fazle Haq khairabadi (rh) wrote Tahqeeq al-Fatwa fi Ibtal al-Taghwa

        Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad writes:

        “Mawlana Muhammad Isma’il Shaheed was a classmate of Mawlana Munawwaruddin. After the passing of Shah Abdul Aziz, when he wrote Taqwiyatul Iman and Jilaul‘Ainayn and his creed spread throughout the land, all the scholars rose up against it. The person who refuted these books the most was Mawlana Munawwaruddin who wrote several books and in 1240 AH, the famous dialogue happened at the Jamia Mosque of Delhi. All the scholars of India were asked to effect a ruling [fatwa] and thereafter a fatwa was also beseeched from the Haramayn.

        From his writings it is evident that initially Mawlana Munawwaruddin tried to convince Mawlana Isma’il and his son-in-law Mawlana Abdul Hay and their friends and tried all means to persuade them. However, when all his attempts came to nothing, he was forced to debate and refute. The famous debate at the Jamia Mosque of Delhi was organised where on one side were Mawlana Isma’il and Mawlana Abdul Hay and on the other side were Mawlana Munawwaruddin and all the scholars of Delhi.

        ( Ref: Azad ki kahani, page 48. Maktaba Khalil, Urdu bazaar, Lahore. Mawlana Abdur Razzaq Maleeh Abadi)

        Mawlana Makhsoos Ullah bin Shah Rafiuddin Dihlawi, Mawlana Muhammad Musa bin Shah Rafiuddin Dihlawi, Mawlana Fazle Haq Khairabadi (student of Shah Abdul AzizMuhaddith Dihlawi), Mufti Sadruddin Aazurdah (student of Shah Abdul Aziz MuhaddithDihlawi), Muhammad Fazle Rasool Uthmani Badayuni, Mawlana Ahmad Saeed Naqshbandi Dihlawi, Mawlana Rasheeduddin Dihlawi, Mawlana Khairuddin Dihlawi,
        Hakeem Sadiq Ali Khan Dihlawi (grandfather of Masih-ul-Mulk Hakeem Ajmal Khan),Mawlana Sayyid Ashraf Ali Gulshan Abadi, Mawlana Mukhlis-ur-Rahman Chatgami, Mawlana Qalandar Ali Zubairi Panipati and numerous other Ulema of the Ahlu’s Sunnah refuted these new beliefs and doctrines via speeches and writings.

        Ismail Dehalvi passed away many years before Imam Ahmed Raza Khan’s (ra) time. Therefore, although Imam Ahmed Raza wrote in his book refuting the writing of Ismail Dehalvi that some of Dehalvi’s writings were of kufr; he did not pass kufr fatwa on the Ismail Dehalvi because Dehalvi was deceased (dead) and Ismail Dehalvi could obviously not write defence or explanation of himself.

  6. Assalamu Alaikum – Great work you are doing brothers, i just wish you could bring on more topics on Sunni Islamic Beliefs such as Waseela, Tawassul, Tabarruk, Eisal e Sawaab, Mawlid, The 4 school of thought etc. Also when will the book TheWahhabithreat will be availble on amazon? I have been waiting for it for a long time now as its never available

  7. Assalamualaikum wr wb.. i am aiko from indonesia. i am really interested in your books. we sometimes has a hardship to get english islamic books, even from amazon when delivered. well..forget.. my question is: do you have any intention to translate your books into indonesian language? because many indonesian scholarships are now poisoned by wahhabi by studying in saudis.. it really annoys alot.. you can see some indonesian wahhabis shcolarship are very famous such as Firanda, LC and indonesian teenagers get their books so easily , so they really are easy to brand another moslems as kuffar *annoys us so much*. May be by translating your books and writing your name as a foreigner scholar but you are ahlus sunnah wal jamaah, you can have a name to our heart, that actually wahhabis are dangerous creatures, even in some countries, not just in indonesia.. thanks alot… wassalamualaikum wr wb

  8. Deobandis are also kuffars and threats like the wahhabis and why didnt you mention them also what will be the price of the book.

  9. Find this hadith but can’t find the reference

    The Prophet(saw) said, “The Muslim Ummah is a UNIQUE Ummah among the whole of mankind: Their Land is One, Their War is One, Their Peace is One, Their Honor is One and their Trust is One.”(ahmad)

    • Salamun ‘alaykum, I have the Musnad, so in sha Allah I will get back to you if I find it, but what would help me find it, if you knew especially which Sahaabi narrated this, because the musnad is compiled by isnad of the companions.

  10. Esselam Aleykum great job bro and love video. I came across this hadith but can’t find source. But not sure if it is to deceive as been misused to attack mahdab etc.

    “The Muslim Ummah is a unique Ummah among the whole of mankind: Their Land is ONE, their War is ONE, their Peace is ONE, their Honour is ONE and their Trust is ONE.” Ahmad

    May Allah swt help and give you strength for your good work

    • Salamun ‘alaykum, first time I have heard this. I would not worry, I really do not see how people can use any of it’s import to attack a compiled fiqh school that has been built by a mujtahid strictly deriving from the Qur’an and the Sunnah with qualification to do so

      • We Aleykum Selam True but alot converts are befalling to these guys especially in Australia. As you said they have the resources and money etc. There hand reach as fare as they want. About the hadith i did do a research and, and i couldn’t find who narrates it :(. but they usually use it for mahdab and nationalism etc.

        Allah Kerim and thank you again brother. jzk

      • and ps i let you know how to upload your video’s so you can have a full lengh if interested and not partly? One of the bro’s does are sheik uploads on youtube. I ask him what he uses and past the message to you bro. Jzk

  11. Asalamalykum

    Could i have a detailed explanation or ruling regarding whether reading behind a Fasiq Imam is permissiable or not?

    JazakAllah Khaira.

    • Wa alaykum as-Salam

      In the Hanafi school alone there are so many differences of opinion on this, but these are fiqh issues. However, when it comes to ‘Aqeedah, we are told to pray behind the ameer, or the leader whether he is righteous or sinful.
      I do not think I am qualified to pull out the wisdoms and points regarding this, but whatever I do find I will share inshaAllah

  12. Salams, hope you are well
    Just wondering what your veiws are in regards to the ulama of deoband. If you have differences with them what may they be?

    • Salamun ‘alaykum

      I do not know Urdu to fully study into the issues, so I do like to stay away from these issues as much as I can. I do have Deobandi teachers and have ijaazah via them. The kufr as quoted by Barelwis, however, I admit to be kufr, yet I myself cannot prove that such and such said it and the issues remain very vague to me. I do not like 2nd hand information.

      However, I can say, out of the many Deobandis I have met, there has been some that hold Wahhabi beliefs.

      I have taken it upon myself to stay clear until I know Urdu well enough to actually see the writings for myself.

      I just hope that my Barelwi and Deobandi brothers take this in good faith and do not attempt to throw me out of their circles just because I refuse to gangbang along with them.

      There are certainly problems, yet I have not the ability to even conclude on every subject thrown my way.

      May Allah forgive us

    • Salamun ‘alaykum

      I do respectfully disagree with them. Ibn Taymiyyah’s life from beginning to end can be summed up by watching all six volumes of star wars. We see him as a potential Jedi who becomes the greatest Jedi, but goes wrong and embraces the darkside. Yet Darth Vader came back before his death.
      As for Imaam adh-Dhahabi, I do not think they have any grounds to accuse him, but if they have, then we will have to relook at everything in its context and how the other scholars dealt with him.

      Wa alaykum as-Salaam

    • Salamun ‘alaykum wa Rahmatullah

      No, al hamdu Lillah they have supported my writings and have attributed the article back to me, so I have no problem with them using my articles, or even rephrasing them, because knowledge is knowledge and spread it by all means if you truly understand it.

      I have indeed also benefited much from their discourse on Najd which has helped me to uncover a few buried treasures, so with a blog like that, it only complements this effort as this effort does theirs

      Wa as-Salaam

  13. As-Salaamu Alaykum.

    Can you list some scholars of the authentic Hanbali aqeedah? Also, is Shaykh Muhammad ash-Shinqitee Hanbali in aqeedah?

    • Salamun ‘alaykum, you are better of asking Shaykh abu Ja’far al-Hanbali as I have never heard of the mentioned scholar

      As for orthodox Hanbalis I can list loads, but I will only be mentioning scholars you already know to be Hanbali. do you mean present scholars?

  14. As-Salaamu Alaykum, akhi.

    I have a few questions, since you are Hanbali and said you won’t use kalaam in the atheism section.

    1) Do you reject Kalaam because it makes us distant from Allah (i.e. Allah becomes a concept, not a Reality)? http://asadullahali.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/kalaam-fails/

    2) Is this a good argument for Allah’s existence?
    “There are two steps in the Ash’ari argument: first, that since there
    ‘is’ something there must have been One Who brought it into being
    because its bringing itself into being from nothingness is
    unthinkable; second, the intricacy of the thing indicates the
    wonderful knowledge and wisdom of He Who brought it into being.”- Hajj Abdassamad Clarke

    • Wa alaykum as-Salam

      It is just not in the madh-hab at all. We have been advised to leave it alone. To be truthful, I am more ignorant than knowledgeable about it.

      As for arguing against atheists, Imaam Abu Hanifah gave an example. The atheist section is going to be pretty much what you have heard before. Taking a look at creation and using the creation to prove that there is a creator.

      Wa as-Salaam

  15. Asalam ‘Alaykum

    Are we permitted to use calculations to determine Salah Times and Moon Sighting?
    And how is our timetable calculated?

    • Wa alaykum as-Salaam

      It is best to know the Shariah in regards to watching the skies and the movement of the shadows, and sighting the moon and recording the days. Timetables are really an innovation, but not all blameworthy. I hope this helps inshaAllah

      Wa as-Salam

  16. As-Salaamu Alaykum.

    Have any Hanbali scholars of the past presented arguments for the existence of Allah like the Ash’aris have (e.g. Imam al-Ghazali in his Ihya)? If so, what are such arguments like?

    • Salamun ‘alaykum

      If you are talking about the creed on the Qur’an, then the Hanabilah and the Ash’ariyyah have always had their differences. One group saying the Qur’an is the Eternal Speech of Allah revealed without sound and letters and the other saying the Qur’an is the Eternal Speech of Allah revealed with sound and letters. The only difference between the Hanaabilah and the Ash’ariyyah with the creed of kalam is the issue of sound and letters. Imaam al-Ghazali believes the Qur’an is revealed without sound and letters. So does Imaam al-Bukhari, so does Imaam Abu Hanifah. You have to be careful of the false arguments on this part because they spring from both sides, and there are extremes on both sides. Imaam at-Tahaawi did the moderate thing and said bilaa kayf.

      The false arguments from the Neo Hanaabilah extremists is that the Ash’ariyyah are denying the Qur’an as the Eternal speech of Allah and are saying the Qur’an is created. I know myself that the Ash’ariyyah do not believe this, and it is enough to refute this silly claim with the works of Imaam al-Ghazali

      The false argument from the Neo Ash’ariyyah extremists is that we somehow believe Allah has a mouth, tongue and larynx because we say He speaks with voice and sound. This is not the case [although the Neo-Hanaabilah have held this creed, such as the Saudi scholar Abdullah Ibn Baz] We say Allah can speak without the use of such organs. The Hanaabilah argument in refutation to this is that your body limbs and other non living physical objects we be made to bear witness and speak on yawm ul-Qiyaamah, why is it not hard for the Lord of the worlds who is free from any defects to speak with sound and letter with His perfection?

      These arguments have led to unnecessary arguments like people saying “is my recitation of the Qur’an created or uncreated?” in which Imaam Ahmad b. Hanbal strongly adviced in stern wording to avoid such argumentation, because you will be damned if you do and damned if you dont, once you get into this line of argumentation. Sunni Hanbalis and Sunni Ash’ariyyah should both avoid such disputation as we do not need to go there.

      However, it has to be acknowledged that Allah said “Protect him [i.e. the disbeliever] so that he may hear the Kalam of Allah” [Surah at-Tawbah] in which of course would have been recited by an Imaam, or an authority as such.

      If you are on about the issue of Allah being everywhere, but beyond location, the Hanaabilah, then, have a slight ikhtilaaf with the Ash’ariyyah, however, it is not one of creed, but understanding of terminologies.

      The Ash’ariyyah say Allah is with us by His knowledge and they consider this their interpretation, whereas the Hanaabilah say Allah is with us by His knowledge and they consider this to be the actual meaning.

      The Neo-Hanaabilah poke fun out of the Asha’riyyah by saying “they believe that Allah is everywhere, so confront them, ask the question “is Allah then also in the toilet” Astagfirullah al-Azeem!! Then, in the next breath they also accuse the Ash’ariyyah of tateel, which is the total denial of the existence of Allah. We can see the discrepancies already in their mode of cut throat argumentation.

      It is the creed of both the Ash’ariyyah and the Hanaabilah to believe that Allah exists without place, location, being free from movement, and above having a bodily form and Hanbali scholars have mentioned this in their texts.

      Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali said, as came in vol 10 of his explanation of Saheeh Al Bukhari – Fat-hul Baari:

      والزيادة على ما ورد في النـزول من ذكر الحركة والانتقال وخلو العرش
      وعدمه ؛ كله بدعة ، والخوض فيه غير محمود .

      “And any addition to what has been narrated about the Nuzool, descent, like mentioning movement, relocation, and the throne becoming empty or not is all innovation! And discussion of such things is not praiseworthy.”

      We have to understand that when Hanbali scholars say Allah is above the heavens, above the throne, above His creation, they do not mean it in a physical aboveness, that that of tanzeeh, which is to free Allah from being like His creation in any sense, therefore He is above what the mushrikeen mention for Him, above our imagination and limited understanding.

      We have to watch out for the innovators who say Allah exists in an un-created space a un created location for Allah has always been One and Eternal before He created anything, and to suggest there was something else that is Eternal is kufr. Allah is in no need of creation in any sense, and He is above it in every sense. Anything He creates is created, Surat ul-Ikhlaas provides us the perfect understanding of tawheed, once understood deeply.

      Wa as-Salam, I hope this short answer has sufficed inshaAllah

  17. As-Salaamu Alaykum.

    I have two questions. 1, what is the difference between the Athari aqidah and the Salafi Aqidah.
    2, Was Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani an Athari? 3, are you a scholar?

    • Wa alaykum as-Salaam

      The Difference between the Athaari Aqeedah and the Salafi Aqeedah is that we follow Imaam Ahmad b. Hanbal’s creed as he compiled it, Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah as he repeated it and Imaam Abdur Rahmaan ibn al-Jawzi as he defended it [from the evolution of the Salafi creed].

      The first difference is the approach to Allah’s Attributes. Please look up the texts Kitaab al-I’tiqaad by Imaam Ahmad b.Hanbal and Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad by Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen where we are given the following instructions of how to deal with Allah’s Attributes, and this is basically the creed and it’s approach paraphrased:

      1. Affirm the principle as found in the ayah laisa ka-mithlihi Shay, there is nothing like Him whatsoever.

      2. Affirm all the Attributes that have came in the Athaar, being the Qur’an and the Saheeh statements of the Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wasallam

      3. Know that is Waajib to submit to these Athaar and abandoning any style of refutation in regards to the matter of Allah’s Attributes

      4. Not to do taweel, trying to explain their definite meanings as we do not know their meanings

      5. As already stated, not to do tashbeeh, likening Allah to His creation in any way, such as Attributing body limbs to Him, etc.

      6. Not to liken anything at all to Him, there is nothing similar to Him, He does nothing like His creation, like move around, sit on chairs etc

      7. Affirm all the Athaar by expression of the tongue

      8. Do absolute tafweed of the true meanings of Allah’s Attributes knowing that this knowledge is untouchable and unreachable, as Allah says in His Qur’an:

      Wa ar-Raasikhun fiy al-‘ilm, yaqulun “amanaa bi-hi wa kullum-min ‘3ndi Rabbi-naa

      Those who are firmly grounded in the knowledge say “We believe in [the knowledge] yet all of it is WITH our Lord” i.e. “We believe in it but possess none of it”

      Those who are firmly grounded in knowledge are Imaam Ahmad B. Hanbal and Imaam ash-Shaafi and they are quoted as saying:

      To concrete this understanding further, Imaam Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi quoted from Imaam Ahmad b. Hanbal as saying in regards to the ambigious:

      Imaam Ahmad: We are to believe in them and to give confirmation of them, without giving modality [saying how], and without giving a meaning to them, and we do not say anything [we should not say] about them.

      Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad, pgs 28-29

      Imaam Ash-Shaafi’ says:

      “I believe in Allah and what has come to us from Allah however Allah intends them, and I believe in the Messenger of Allah , and what has come to us from the Messenger of Allah however the Messenger of Allah sal allahu alayhi wasallam intended their meaning”Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad, p. 30

      Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi after setting the concrete to this careful approach in the creed then refers to bid’ah as going against what has been mentioned is indeed so.

      Please note how all Imaam’s here did not claim to know the meaning, but rather they affirmed and consigned the meaning without knowing the intended meaning. This is indeed Tafweed al-Ma’ana.

      To drive the nail further, Imaam Barbahaaree, one of the earliest Hanbali authorities says this in his creedal treatise Sharh us-Sunnah:

      “The saying ‘Allah created Adam in His image’ and the saying “I saw my Rabb in the most beautiful form” and the likes of such ahaadeeth, then we accept them, affirm them and perform tafweed [of their meaning]. We do not explain any of them by desire and to have imaan in them is waajib. Anybody who explains them according to his personal opinion or denies them is a Jahmi”

      Sharh us-Sunnah, pgs 116-117, Makatabah al-Furqaani print, 1429ah.

      I would also like to note here that “His image” uses the same word as a painted picture, and the picture does not always look like the painter but is still “His image – His painting” and Allah knows best

      But with knowing the above facts, you will now first know the first key difference between the Salafis and the Athaariyyah I have just mentioned.

      These poeple try to claim our scholars and our madh-hab, but they are in for a big refuting.

      The Salafis claim they know the meanings and that Zaahir means to them keeping the text on its’ apparent meaning, however the true Hanbali priciple of Zaahir is to affirm the wording as seen, so when we see the word “yad” for Allah, we affirm it without giving it a meaning and without saying how. This is passing it by on its apparent wording rather than “apparent literal meaning”.

      We know the Salafiyyah cannot claim to be upon the Hanbali creed in this regard as they openly call Imaam Muwaffaw ud-Deen misguided, whereas they try to convince us that he is one of their scholars. Just more trick propaganda from them. Uthaymeen rivals against the Hanbali madh-hab in Aqeedah, and we can clearly see this when he said:

      “As for what is stated here in al-Lum’ah, then it is in conformity with the views of tafweed and that is from the most evil and vilest of views”. P. 29

      We see clearly from this statement that he is disagreeing with Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen on his act of assigning the true knowledge back to Allah regarding His Mutashaabihah Attributes.

      Not only this, but this also demonstrates that the Wahhabis are not upon the creed of Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen who is classified in consensus to be one of the greatest scholars and representatives of the Hanbali madh-hab. Thus the Wahhabis are not Hanbalis is creed like they would like you to think.

      They have much anthropomorphism happening in their creed, whereas we Hanbalis are safeguarded. Here are just a few examples:

      In the commentary of Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad by Muhammad Bin Saleh al-Uthaimeen, we find the commentator saying:

      “with regards to the texts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, it is obligatory (concerning Allah’s Names and Attributes) to leave their proofs and implications upon their literal meanings without changing them. This is because Allah revealed the Qur’an in a plain ‘Arabic language and the Prophet (salAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) used to speak with the ‘Arabic language. Therefore it is obligatory to leave the implications of the words of Allah and the Messenger as they are in that language.” P. 16

      This is problematic due to the fact that the real meaning of hand is a literal hand and this is the implication that the Salafi creed teaches. They are placing physical descriptions into the minds of people when they imply that Allah has real physical hands, and this is more of an innovation than delving into the howness and modality of Allah’s hand.

      It shall be echoed again and again through that the traditional Hanbali madh-hab teaches to accept the wording of the text and pass it by, even if we do not know the meaning! We are to accept the meaning even if we do not know the meaning in the sense that Allah intended it, without knowing how.

      The Salafi creed teaches that they know the real meaning of Allah’s Attributes and do not enquire into the modality whereas Muslim orthodoxy teaches that we may know the linguistic meanings of the Attributes that Allah has mentioned for Himself, however, we cannot reach the knowledge of what Allah means by His Hand, His Face, etc. to apply the linguistic meanings to Allah’s Attributes would be to expose the how, the modality etc. again such knowledge is impossible to know in this lifetime.

      Never once have any of the Salaf [the first three generations] ever said that the Attributes of Allah should be understood in the haqeeqah [literal] sense. In fact they have said again and again that the wording of the text kept upon it’s prima facie [Zaahir] and passed by without seeking it’s meaning.

      To say that Zaahir [prima facie] means haqeeqah and haqeeqah means Zaahir only exposes their folly in misunderstanding what Zaahir means.

      When discussing Surah 5 ayah 64, al-Uthaimeen wrote:

      “Indeed, what is literally apparent from this ayah is that Allah has two actual hands…” p. 17

      One can clearly see the cogs of the Salafi thinker at work. It is obvious he is using his mind for what should not be imagined! This is none the less anthropomorphism. Did he even understand the very first page of Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad when Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen mentioned the word tasweer?

      Commenting on the Istiwaa, al-Uthaimeen manages to contradict the whole teaching of Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen’s Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad by saying in point 10:

      “The rising of Allah over His throne, which means His elevating and settling over it in a manner that is befitting for Him”.

      What al-Uthaimeen has done here is that he has made ta’weel by attempting to explain the meaning and modality in which is his very own interpretation of the Istiwaa. One who reads the text Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad with an orthodox understanding will notice that there is a great difference between the creed and principles of author and the creed and principles of the commentator.

      The Istiwaa could have only been known by Imaam Maalik in the linguistic sense, for to know the true intended meaning of the Istiwaa would be to know the modality, and this is not what Imaam Maalik meant.

      One Wahhabi book actually got it right when it was written:

      “Maalik said: the Istiwaa is known – in the linguistic sense – but how it happened is unknown, and asking about it is bid’ah [innovation], as Umm Salmah has said. And this is sufficient”.

      This passage may have been translated from Imaam al-Qurtubi’s tafseer, 2/219. However, it is also found in p. 269 of the Islamic Creed Series, vol . 1 by ‘Umar S. Al-Ashqar’s Belief in Allah.

      Take note however, to how it has been translated on p. 29 of the Explanation of the Sufficiency in Creed, where it is clearly written
      “The rising is well known… “ this type of translation is ta’weel within itself!

      This translation is problematic for two reasons:

      a. The translator has delved into literal interpretation [ta’weel al-haqeeqah – describing the reality] by expressing a definite action and a meaning to al-Istiwaa

      b. He has grammatically erred in his translation. What has been translated as well known should in fact be translated as “not unknown” [ghayr majhul].

      Such Wahhabi deliberate tampering and mistranslation of terms demonstrate their agenda. This also demonstrates the author to lack command in the ‘Arabic lauguage and it’s related grammar rules. The translator seems to make his own Ism Mubaalaghah [noun of exaggeration] in his translated sentence where as in the original ‘Arabic there is no noun of exaggeration.

      He places his own words “well known” which either demonstrates he is highly mistaken and has an agenda to boost and twist the intended meaning and context of Imaam Maalik’s statement. The translator took his statement from Muhammad Ibn Ibraheem book Fatawaa wa Rasaa’il

      There are said to be 15 different linguistic meanings for the ‘Arabic word al-Istiwaa. They are as follows:

      1. Istaqraa – meaning to settle. We can see this from the passage in Surah [11], ayah 4, in which the Ark of Noah came to rest [Istaqraa] upon mount Judi
      2. Irfafaa’ meaning to rise or to ascend. This is the meaning according to Ibn Abbas [? Is it? See Tanweer ul-Miqbaas on the passages of al-Istiwaa]
      3. ‘Alaa – meaning above, over or upon, to rise above or tower upon. See Tafseer Mujaahid, and see the statement of Mujaahid found within Saheeh al-Bukhaari, 20:5
      4. Istiqama – to be steadfast or to be firm, this can be seen from Surah [48], ayah 29
      5. To attain maturity as in Surah [28] ayah 14
      6. Qahara, Istiwala – meaning to subdue, or conquer, prevail or overcome. The Mu’tazilah say this in regards to Surah 20, ayah 5
      7. To mount [Saida] as found in Surah 23, ayah 38 and Surah 43, ayah 13

      One of the forerunners of the Ash’ariyah in this day of age is Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kayybani who said regarding the meaning of al-Istiwaa:

      “The best explanation of any ayah is its recitation; leaving it as it was revealed and unexplained. This was the way of Malik, al-Shafi’, al-Awzai, Ahmad, and the rest of the Salaf with regard to this ayah. However, due to the influence of those who have continued to impose physical limitations on the Creator since the time of the Salaf, it has been, and is still an obligation of the Muslims to clarify the ambiguities that may otherwise be used to lead believers astray”. P. 99-100, Islamic Doctrine, vol. 1, Beliefs.

      To say that Allah is sitting [bi-adh-Dhaat] in person, or in the most literal sense [haqeeqah] would be to say that we know how the Istiwaa was done, which is impossible for such a human to possess such knowledge. The consensus of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah regarding this position is that they do not know the modality, the howness. They only know the linguistic meanings according to the limited understandings of what is found in the Lexicins and Dictionaries. The fact of the matter is, words can limit Allah, yet Allah is indeed unlimited.

      One of the descendants of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, Muhammad Ibn Ibraheem Aali ash-Shaykh, commented upon Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad saying:

      “And we must believe that these Names and Attributes are in their actual literal sense… and that they bear actual meanings that are befitting to Allah’s honor and grandness. The meaning of these Names and Attributes are clear and well known from the Qur’an, just like anything else. There is no obscurity, vagueness, or mystery in them…. p 29, Lum’ah

      With this said, we can now clearly see their game, but it does not stop here

      The second key difference is that the Athariyyah do not takfeer the Ash’ariyyah. Salafis claim the Ash’ariyyah deny the Qur’an and they claim that the Ash’ariyyah say that the Qur’an is created, which would be absolute kufr. Whereas they do not belive that the Qur’an is created, they argue strongly the Qur’an is the Eternal speech of Allah, they just differ whether the Qur’an is revealed by voice and letters, and this is a permissible ikhtilaaf. Both the Athaariyyah and the Ash’ariyyah believe that the Qur’an is the Eternal speech of Allah and that it is un-created. Salafis are only seeking to cause division between the believers by confusing them with the ikhtilaaf in Aqeedah

      The third key difference is that they deny the seeing of Allah on the night of Mi’raaj by using the hadeeth of Aisha to suggest that anybody who says such as lied. But yet Imaam Ahmad b. Hanbal has made this waajib to believe in in his Usul us-Sunnah, and like wise the Hanaabilah that followed the Athaar in which clearly states that Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wasallam did see his Lord. They Salafiyyah say this hadeeth is da’eef and cannot be used for ‘Aqeedah, but Imaam Ahmad b. Hanbal used this hadeeth with strength, and even Shaykh ul-Islam Abd ul-Ghani al-Maqdasi [the compiler of Umdaat ul-Ahkaam] confirms this point when he says in his I’tiqaad that we believe that Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wasallam saw His Lord, and that we take the hadeeth of the Prophet sal allahu alayhi wasallam over the statement of Aisha radiy Allahu anhaa.

      Q2, yes Shaykh abd ul-Qaadir al-Jilaani was indeed an Athaari, however be warned that the Mujaasimah have altered his text al-Ghuyah and have inserted statements that were not to be found in the Ghunyah manuscript that Imaam adh-Dhahabi quoted from. The Mujasimah would often distort texts and even the present Salafi scholar Shaykh Mashhur Hasan al-Salman has admitted to such distortions as the people of his creed also expunged and played around with Imaam an-Nawawi’s Sharh Saheeh Muslim. [he admits this on pgs 31-32 of his text The Aqidah of Imam an-Nawawi]. This is not a new thing from the Salafiyyah, they have too done it to Ibn Katheer’s Tafseer and have altered it to make it look like he believed what they have believe. Back to Shaykh abd ul-Qaadir al-Jilaani, he was a master of the Athaari creed and Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn qudaamah al-Maqdasi and Abdur Rahman Ibn al-Jawzi took their understanding of the Hanbali Athaari creed directly from him.

      Q3. Am I a scholar?

      Well al hamu Lillah, Allah has graced me to walk the path of seeking knowledge, and the more I learn the more I realize I do not know.

      Ibn Rajab al-Hanabali quotes from Umar in his Fadl ilm us-Salaf, the following humbling statement: Umar said: Whoever says I am a scholar is an ignoramus, whoever says I am a believer is a disbeliever, and whoever says i am in the paradise is in the hell-fire”. p. 61. simply put Islamic salvation does not cater for arrogant claims.

      I hope I have answered to your benefit, Ramadan Mubarrak

  18. wa alaykum as-Salam and thank you for you participation, may Allah reward you for your questions

    I find that most Wahhabis are accepting madh-habs to a certain degree. There argument has now changed from a “we do not blindly follow” to a “We do not blindly follow an imaam, we look at his evidences before we follow”. So you will find new age Wahhabis accepting the need for madh-habs and agreeing throughout the past 14 centeruies, madh-habs have been the way that the fiqh has been preserved.

    al-Maghrib is a host to a whole range of Wahhabi taught classes. I would advice to avoid it. However, if there are some texts that interest you and you are well guided in the creed already, then there maybe some benefits, just as long as you do not fall into their traps with their clever maigical ways of trickery and rhetoric.

    Regarding Deobandis, a lot of Sunnis are unfare, especially those who claim to repersent the creed of Imaam Raza Khan al-Hindi. Deobandis are not a sect, rather Hanafi Marturidi Muslims from Deoband india who set up many schools of ta’leem in their location when India was facing a great trial of fitaan. What happened, however, a small handfull of their scholars devaiated by taking from Wahhabis, in which Imaam Raza Khan al-Hindi did the correct thing and produce these writings of the small party of the Deoband scholars before 300 scholars from all over the world, who then penned a fatawaa of kufr against these scholars and their statements. This fatawaa also said “whomsoever doubts their kufr [after seeing the evidences. of course] is a Kaafir”. The Fatawaa did not say “Every deobandi is a kaafir and a Wahhabi and we should have nothing to do with them”

    We have to keep in mind that many Deobandis are not even aware of the kufriyyah statements made by a small handful of their elders, as these statements have been taken out of their books, well most of them. However, with this said, there are problems with the Deoband, you will find some of them with corrupt Aqeedah and you will find some of them with the correct Aqeedah and Allah knows best.

    We have to desire guidance for everybody and not look to make anybody our personal enemy. We really have to grow up, even myself. I do not hate Wahhabis, I hate Wahhabism, theres a difference.

    • Your not deserving enough to know my opinion. This is due to your slanders and backbiting on facebook and other forums. You do not wish for truth you wish for fitnah. That is clearly abundantly seen from your online ranting. With this said, I hope Allah forgives you. May you benefit from the rest of your Ramaadan and not further troll Sunni sites to cause disunity between the believers in the holy month of Ramadaan.

      The Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wasallam said “One cannot be considered a liar, he who uses misinformation to bring people together”

      Reflect long on this hadeeth, as you are running around trying to tear Sunni brothers apart.

      may Allah accept your imaan, ameen Wa as-Salaam

      • 1. Your entire blog is set out to disunite Sunnis.
        2. If anyone asks, please feel free to copy and paste the ENTIRE thread of the Facebook status for them so they can judge for themselves who is the one who is an insulter and liar.
        3. What TROLLING have I done, as you claim? None. Ever since I started to post on your facebook I have been accused of everything slanderous you could probably think of. The only place you stopped at was calling me a kafir!
        4. You do not know what is my wish or what is in my heart. Do you claim to have knowledge that only Allah has? You’re true colors come out on Facebook where you use nothing but slanderous language and put people down. If anyone wants to see the real *********, they should stay subscribed to his facebook account.

        • as-Salamu alaykum dear sister

          I think you will have a great problem finding what you accuse me of on this blog on any other forum. I hate to say it like it is but you are too over emotional that you cannot take a point of benefit, instead you seem to find it an insult.

          I merely told you it is waajib to say sal Allahu alayhi wasallam after the Prophet’s name, yet you took this the wrong way and have been spreading rumors that somehow I said you have insulted the Prophet, sal Allahu alayhi wasllam. You twisted my words and my import and made me out to be a monster.

          I am not really bothered how people see me, I beg no friends nor enemies. Nor do I seek to be in the good book of the people simply because I do not worship people or the image that they think of me.

          Facebook, here or wherever it will be. The books will be opened up on Yawm ul-Qiyaamah and Allah is the best Judge, Most Wise, Most Merciful. Liars and slanderous people will be dragged on their faces to the hellfire and locked behind a steel gate in the depths of the hell-fire. Not a punishment I would wish upon anybody. So may Allah forgive your sins and guide you to the best of adab and what is right.

          Wa alaykum as-Salaam

              • Almost my entire reply has been deleted and the only part left is the question about why you blotted out your real name. Is it because you’re afraid for the public to see the numerous insults you threw at me? That’s very unfair of you. Why is the rest of my reply missing?

                • Salamun ‘alaykum, please note I am an admin, I have right to edit posts, not always “to hide” something, but rather to keep things straight to the point, and not get entangled in emotional disputation that is a waste of my time, plus my readers time. If you are insulted by me speaking, then I am sorry, but you will indeed find it hard to even quote me correctly on any “insult” that you have accused me of. I am sorry that you have made it your mission to expose my real name to the many readers of the internet, even resulted to backbiting and slandering me on one blog. Yet there is no trace or evidence that I have insulted you. Please spare me. I have other pressing matters to write about.

                  • messaged deleted by admin, as with any new messaged after this that is full of harassment and pure hatred. I am not a councilor, head doctor or a social worker, if somebody has issues, then please see a professional [edited rightfully by the admin – let the time – wasters and emotional ranters take note]

  19. Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah,
    Thanks for your work on this blog. Can you tell me where or from whom a person can find knowledge according to the authentic Hanbali madhab? From my personal experience, everyone who claims to be Hanbali is practically indistinguishable from Salafis, and those who call themselves Salafi (or who are labeled as such by others) lean toward Hanbaliyya. So where are the orthodox Hanbali scholars of today, and what are the trustable written works?
    Some Muslims claim that Salafiyya is in fact in line with (in agreement with) Hanbaliyya and those who are Salafi have not distorted the Hanbali madhab. Is this true, and why or why not?
    JazakAllah Khair.

    • wa alaykum as-salaam wa rahmatullah,

      Thanks for your support and readership.

      Can you tell me where or from whom a person can find knowledge according to the authentic Hanbali madhab?

      It is hard to find teachers who can teach the Hanbali madh-hab from a traditional standpoint as current world affairs, like the situation in Iraq, Kuwait, and the present Syria Duma civil wars have stagnated the teaching of the madh-hab to anybody in the west over skype, etc

      Please keep in mind that there are two realms to the Hanbali madh-hab, theres the creedal aspect of it and then theres the fiqh. One can be Hanbali in creed yet Hanafi in fiqh, or even Ashari in creed and Hanbali in madh-hab, or even Hanbali in both.

      For most Salafi Wahhabis they are Hanbali in fiqh for most parts, some have deviated into Albani-ism, the new madh-hab of Arabia where some Wahhabis have stuck strictly to the madh-hab as taught by Ibn Taymiyyah. They are still Hanbali in fiqh, but just not in creed.

      The orthodox Hanbali scholars of today due to their number do not have many written works. Rather they have kept certain traditional books alive and have passed them down with a certain understanding.

      The scholars of today [and their students] are Shaykh Abu Ahmad Abdellah Yusuf Ali the student of the Hanbali Shaykh Ibarheem Jarrah, and his student Dawud Sheldon, last heard to be in Duma [alive or dead] current status unknown. Shaykh Isma’el Badraani who is also in Syria. Imaam John also known as Abu Majid al-Oaklahomi, who teaches to the youth in the US at present, then we also have Musa Furber [unknown where he is] and then we have Shaykh Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali in the UK

      We also have qualified Hanbalis working for Salafi organizations who have a saheeh isand back to Imaam Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi, for example Dr Hatem al-Haj.

      The Salafis are not in line with the hanaabilah in creed for the following reasons, and i will only give a few.

      1. The orthodox Hanaabilah do not claim they know the meanings of Allah’s Attributes whereas Salafis do
      2. The Hanaabilah was very insistent that the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam saw Allah and they rejected the hadeeth of Aisha by accepting the hadeeth of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, as seen in Imaam Ahmad’s Usul us-Sunnah and the I’tiqaad of Shaykh ul-Islam Abdul Ghaani al-Maqdasi
      3. The traditional Hanaabilah always accepted Asharis as Ahl us-Sunnah, whereas the Salafis have done nothing but takfeer them at every chance they have had

      More will be said of this in the 2nd edition of Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad which should be released in the next month or so inshaAllah

      • Assalamu alaykum,
        Thanks a lot for your reply. I appreciate your time.
        Where I live, most of the Muslims around me do not care to follow a madhab. I have even asked some of them before, and they were confused as to what the madhahib were in the first place, or they outright rejected the idea of being on a madhhab. I remember when I wanted to take on a madhab. I wanted to learn the rules of salah according to the Hanafi madhab. I went around asking Muslimahs I knew whether they could help me learn it. None of them were able to help me and only one of them knew someone who could help me learn the Hanafi salat. She said he is a shaykh, but she never gave me his name or contact info. She would relay my questions to him and then relay his response to me. I’m not sure why his identity was hidden…
        So anyway, why do you think Muslims have taken on these views/paths?
        A lot of the Muslims in my area are students of or in support of or influenced by AlMaghrib Institue. Is that a good thing?
        And on a seperate note, unfortunately it seems that more often than not when the word “Wahhabi” comes up, the word “Deobandi” is also attached to it. Why is that? Why are Barelvis so impassioned by calling Deobandis Wahhabis? Deobandis are mainly Hanafis in fiqh and aqidah, aren’t they? Why are they mixed into the group of “Najdi” or “Wahhabi”? I live in America and here we have traditionalist scholars working side by side deobandi-educated scholars. What’s the big deal? Why be against that?
        Thanks!

          • Wa alaykum as-Salaam

            Nothing has gone, it is the forum option I have chosen in which all the new questions and answers start from the top and the old are at the bottom. I did this to save me scrolling down each time I need to look at the latest replies. I apologize for any confusion. Also I have got you other posts which are yet to be approved and given an answer. I will be with you soon to answer your questions. Wa as-Salaam

  20. Assalamu Alaikum,

    Alhumdullah! The truth at last, I would never have found this site, somehow stumbled across it, personally had it been more linked with ‘Salafi’ I would have found your website.

    Brother its so difficult to deal with this ‘new’ phenononem because thats exactly what it is…… new and its misguided but so aggressive. If you could possibly write something for new practicing muslims to deal with the onslaught of Salafi idea, thoughts, knowledge and importantly the presssure it would be great. Currently i’m keeping my head down and staying shut until I know enough, not to really argue back but to keep loved ones from going there…would appreciate sources of authentic learning

    Jazakallah khair

  21. Please refute the Wahabi propaganda that The confession of a british spy is a fictitious book. They say :

    “Refuting the Notions of Hempher the ‘British spy’

    Many groups within this country have in regard a book called confessions of a British spy by Hempher. Which seems to be a plan by the British to form the ‘Wahhabi’ sect in the 18th century. And the Ikhwaan Al Mufliseen and the Sufis go all about the country preaching that the Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was funded by the British in order to destroy Islam (I myself have been accused of being a C.I.A agent who has come to Trinidad to destroy Islam). In any case this document of Hempher is rife with many contradictions and therefore this document is in truth and in fact a historical forgery. Allahu Musta’aan.

    In any case I have taken from a source named Muhammad the discreprencies which is termed as internal criticism of the document.

    1. The dates seem all wrong. For instance, if you look at the text linked to above, in Section One, Part Two, the author states:

    ‘In the Hijri year 1122, C.E. 1710, the Minister of Colonies sent me to Egypt, Iraq, Hijaz and Istanbul to act as a spy and to obtain information necessary and sufficient for the breaking up of Muslims.’

    and a few paragraphs earlier, in Part One, we are told:

    ‘Our State is relatively weak yet in its colonies in India, China and Middle East. These countries are not entirely under our domination … The Ministry of Colonies assigned a commission from each of the colonies for the execution of these two tasks.’

    Well, in 1710, Britain didn’t have any colonies in any of those areas. The first colony in India (taken by a private company, actually) was Bengal, in the 1760s. The first and only real colony we had in China was Hong Kong, taken in the 1840s (there was an Opium War involved. Not a proud moment in British history, if we’re honest). The Middle East was well out of the reach of any European colonial powers at the time, due to the strength of the Ottomans – remember, only 25 years previously, the latter had been at the gates of Vienna.

    2. The dates also don’t sit too well with the life of Mohammed Ibn Wahhab. In the preface to the book, by Waqhf Ikhlas – see here – we are told:

    Hempher, only one of the thousands of male and female agents employed and sent forth to all countries by this ministry, entrapped a person named Muhammad of Najd in Basra, misled him for many years, and caused him to establish the sect called Wahhabi in 1125 [1713 A.D.].

    This tallies with the chronology of the text. The first time we encounter Wahhab is in Section One, Part Four, in Basra:

    ‘From time to time a young man would call at our carpenter’s shop. His attirement was that of a student doing scientific research, and he understood Arabic, Persian, and Turkish. His name was Muhammad bin Abd-ul-wahhab Najdi.’

    Now, if you add up the time periods the author gives from the start of the narrative, it comes to three years. So I’ll take it that this occurs three years after 1710, i.e. 1713.

    But Wikipedia (as well as all the other biographies I’ve seen) gives Ibn Wahhab’s dates as 1703-92.

    So are we to take it that when Wahhab ‘set up’ his sect – as a ‘young man’, who looked like a science student, and spoke three languages – he was ten years old? {Do I need to add a comment???}

    3. Some of the language is also a bit suspect. Here are the first sentences in the book:

    ‘Hempher says:

    Our Great Britain is very vast. The sun rises over its seas, and sets, again, below its seas.’

    Well, anyone who’s looked at a map knows that Great Britain itself assuredly isn’t very vast. Maybe its empire was vast, at that time; but is it really very likely that someone would claim that ‘Great Britain is vast’?

    4. But the real coup de grace comes here, in Section One, Part Seven:

    ‘2- We must establish cooperation with France in demolishing the Islamic world both from within and from without.’

    Now, anyone who knows anything about the history of Britain and France at any time between about 1688 and 1815 knows that the idea of the two countries cooperating on anything is ridiculous. Even on destroying Islam. And especially as the claim seems to be that this plot was hatched in 1713, right at the height of the War of Spanish Succession. Britain and France were at war from: 1689-97; 1701-14; 1740-48; 1756-63; 1776-83 (in North America); and 1793-1815. Such was the lingering animosity between the two nations that, the first time they fought on the same side for centuries – in 1830, in trying to secure Greek independence – one old British admiral insisted on referring to the enemy (Turkey) as ‘The French’.

    5. Another commenter on the Guardian site, Khartoumi, also has this to say:

    In fact, much of the Hempher forgery looks much like the Protocols [of the Elders of Zion]. Note the persistent attempts to link the Wahabbi with Judaism. {Isn’t it strange that many ‘callers’ in this country try to make this similarity also????} The lunatic suggestion that Ibn Wahhab was descended from a Jewish family – as if this would make the slightest difference! {Very much looney because he was from the tribe of Tameem}

    (Now this is the external criticism of a document).

    The provenance of the text is also so clearly a hoax – an English text, the only known edition of which (and no-one actually knows what the edition is/was) in Arabic, translated into Turkish by a well known paid religious propagandist for a dying Ottoman empire…

    I hope this article goes some way to dispelling some of the flights of fancy to be found on the Internet surrounding the alleged British role in ‘creating’ Wahhabism. But, given the calibre of some of the websites circulating the text, with their accompanying interest in the New World Order, the Illuminati and David Icke, I guess it’ll take more than that to persuade them.

    Therefore I advise many of the callers who say this piece of nonsense which originated from forged documents to hold their tongues for verily the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) said in a Hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurairah : “Whoever believes in Allah and the last day let him say good or keep quiet”.

  22. Assalamu Alaikum.

    Wahabis are propagating that by Nazd The Holy Prophet meant Iraq, and not Nazd or present Riyadh. This claim needs exhaustive point to point refutation through irrefutable evidences and references so that Sunni Muslims can reply them befittingly . I implore you to present research-based discussion on this issue. For your kind consideration, I am quoting below the Wahabi arguments :

    1. Wahabis say,” . Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee said after quoting the words of al-Khattaabee explaining the meaning of Qarn (horn), “and others have said that the People of the East were disbelievers at that time and the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, informed us that the trials and tribulations would arise from that direction and it was as he said. And the first of the trials that arose, arose from the direction of the east and they were the reason for the splitting of the Muslim ranks, and this is what Satan loves and delights in. Likewise the innovations appeared from that direction.” [Fath al-Baaree 13/58 in commentary to the hadeeth of Najd]

    Amongst the trials that arose in Iraaq and the east was the martyrdom of Alee, the martyrdom of the grandson of the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, the first battle between the Muslims occurred in Iraaq, and many more.

    Imaam Nawawee mentions that one of the greatest trials to appear from the East will be the appearance of the Dajjaal. [Sharh Saheeh Muslim 2/29]

    From the innovations that appeared in the east and specifically Iraaq, was many of the early deviant sects amongst them the Qadariyyah (as the first hadeeth in Muslim shows), the Jahmiyyah and their offshoots etc…

    That at the time of the Prophet, sallaahu alayhis wa sallaam, there were 13 places known as Najd [according to ‘Najd Qarnu ash-Shaytaan’] depending on where one was. This because Najd linguistically means a raised/elevated land. Therefore the Arabs referred to lands that were elevated with respect to them as Najd. One of the most commonly referred to areas at that time as Najd was Iraaq.

    The Najd for those people living in Madeenah in the direction of the East would be Iraaq.

    Ibn Hajr said: “al-Khattaabee said: ‘the najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it’s regions [baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa] for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.'”

    Ibn Hajr continues, “by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that ‘Najd is in the direction of Iraaq’ [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr.” [Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59]

    Al-Mubaarakfooree endorses these words in his commentary to Sunan at-Tirmidhee (10/314 no.4212)

    2. Wahabis say, “The Hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim [4/1505 no.6943]

    Saalim bin Abdullaah bin Umar said: O people of Iraaq, how strange is it that you ask about the minor sins but commit the major sins? [The killing of al-Husayn] I heard my father, Abdullaah bin Umar narrating that he heard the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, saying while pointing his hand to the east: “Indeed the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the horns of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another…”

    The Variations in Wording of the Hadeeth of Najd that Leave no Doubt Whatsoever as to what it refers to.

    The hadeeth of ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu’aym in al-Hilya (6/133), “O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa’inaa wa muddinaa).” A person said, ” O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq” and so he turned away from him and said, “there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan.”

    Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut declares it’s isnaad to be saheeh as in his footnotes to ‘Sharh as-Sunnah’ (14/206-207 fn. 2) and he too endorses the words of al-Khattaabee quoted above.

    The hadeeth of ibn Umar reported in at-Tabaraanee in ‘al-Awsat’ that the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said, “O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our Shaam and our Yemen.” A person said, “And Iraaq O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “from there arises the horn of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves.”

    Ibn Hajr al-Haythamee says in his ‘Mujma az-Zawaa’id’ (3/305 – chapter ‘collection of du’aas made for (Madeenah)’): ‘its narrators are trustworthy and precise.’

    [This hadeeth could possibly considered to be the same as b) above, but I have included it separately due to the slight difference in wording. Allaah knows best.]

    The hadeeth of ibn Abbaas reported by at-Tabaraanee in ‘al-Kabeer’ that the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, supplicated and said, “O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Shaam and Yemen.” A person from amongst the people said, “O Prophet of Allaah and Iraaq?” He said, “indeed there is the Horn of Satan, and the trials and tribulations will come like mounting waves, and indeed harshness/coarseness is in the east.” [ Ref : Ahya.org]

    Please clear all the doubts surrounding this issue.

  23. The misguidance and radical ideas of Wahhabis against Muslims:

    – Wahhabis accuse hundreds of millions of Muslims with shirk blasphemy!
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى “فتح المجيد” ص 190. وانظر كتاب مفتي الشافعية “الدرر السنية في الرد على الوهابية” صحيفة 46

    – They permit the killing of all Muslims who oppose them!!
    See: انظر كتاب “الدرر السنية” ص42 وكتاب “أمراء البلد الحرام” ص297 وجريدة السفير الصادرة يوم السبت بتاريخ 30 حزيران سنة 2001 ص 11 كشف محمد حسنين هيكل

    – They oppose all Sunni scholars and breach the unanimous agreement of Muslims Ijma^!!
    See “Fathul-Majid” انظر كتاب القنوجي المسمى “الدين الخالص” (ج1). وكتاب “فتح المجيد” ص 190.

    – They say reciting Qur’an for the dead Muslims is punishable and devious misguidance!!
    See “Fatawa Muhimma”. انظر كتابهم فتاوى مهمة ص 32 كما أفتى بذلك ابن باز وكتابهم “توجيهات إسلامية” ص137.

    – They claim that visiting the graves of the Muslims on Eid is forbidden bid^a!!!
    See “Fatawa al-Albani”: انظر كتابهم فتاوى الألباني ص 63

    – They claim that following the four schools of Ahlus-Sunnah (taqleed) is shirk!!!
    See “ad-Deen al-Khalis” (انظر فتوى القنوجي “تقليد المذاهب شرك” في كتابه المسمى “الدين الخالص” (ج1/140

    – They claim that majority of Muslims (three quarters) today are blasphemers!
    See: انظر “فتح المجيد” ص 190 وقال ذلك مدرسهم في المسجد النبوي بعد صلاة الفجر سنة 1996

    – They made fatwa for an “unconditional lifetime peace with the Jews”!!
    See: كما على موقع ابن باز وانظر جريدة التلغراف العدد 2754 في 23/كانون الأول /1994

    – They accused Palestinians with blasphemy and order them to leave Palestine for the jews!
    See: انظر كتابهم فتاوى الألباني ص 18 و جريدة اللواء الأردنية في 7/8/1992 و شريط مسجل بصوت أحد زعمائهم

    – They accused the creed of the al-Azhar of Egypt with shirk!!
    See: كما في مجلتهم الذكرى و شريط مسجل بصوتهم

    – They claim that our master Adam was not a Prophet!!!
    See: انظر كتابهم “الإيمان بالأنبياء جملة” لعبد الله بن زيد المكتب الإسلامي، بيروت.

    – They accused our lady Eve (Hawwa’) with shirk!!
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى الدين الخالص ج1/ص 160

    – They accused the great companion Bilal bin al-Harith al-Muzaniy with kufur and shirk for touching the Prophet’s grave!!
    See: انظر تعليق ابن باز على فتح الباري طبع دار الريان للتراث ج2/575 وتعليقه على شرح البخاري ص 95

    – Ibn Taymiah accuses lady Fatimah (the Prophet’s daughter) with Hypocrisy!!!
    See: انظر كلام ابن تيمية الحراني المنحرف في كتابه المسمى منهاج السنة النبوية.

    – Ibn Taymiah objects on Abdullah bin Omar for praying in places where our Prophet prayed and claims that “it’s a reason to shirk” !!
    See: انظر كتاب ابن تيمية المجسم “اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم” ص 389ـ395

    – They declared Imam Nawawiy, Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalaniy, Imam Suyutiy as misguided in creed!!
    See: انظر كتاب ابن عثيمين “لقاء الباب المفتوح”

    – They declared Sultan Salahud-Deen al-‘Ayoubiy as misguided Aqeedah!!
    See: راجع الشريط المسجل بصوت شيخ للوهابية جاسر الحجازي وعلى موقعهم في الانترنت. ولدينا الشريط

    – They deem most of the ottoman sultans as mushrik blasphemers!!
    See: انظر نفس المصدر في الشريط المسجل بصوت جاسر الحجازي وانظر كتابهم “فتح المجيد” لعبد الرحمن حسن بن محمد بن عبد الوهاب، ص/352

    – They declared as a blasphemer Sultan Muhammad al-Fatih (whom the Prophet praised)!!
    See: انظر كتابهم “فتح المجيد” وانظر نفس المصدر في الشريط المسجل بصوت جاسر الحجازي

    – They claim that all Asharis (like Nawawiy) and Maturidis (like Nasafiy) whom are the Majority of Ahlus-Sunnah are kuffar!!
    See: انظر مقدمة محمد بن صالح الفوزان عن الكتاب المسمى “التوحيد” لابن خزيمة

    – They claim that all Islamic Sufism is shirk and must be eradicated and targeted!!
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى “المجموع المفيد من عقيدة التوحيد” ص 55 وكتاب “إعصار التوحيد” لنبيل محمد.

    – They declare Shirk on the one who says “la ilaha illallah” in the count of 1,000 times!!!!
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى “حلقات ممنوعة” تأليف حسام العقاد ص 25

    – They claim that Islam ceased to exist between Ibn Taimiyah till Ibn Abdul-Wahhab!!
    See: انظر كتاب ابن عبد الوهاب المسمى التوحيد. وانظر كلام مفتي مكة “الدرر السنية” ص 42 وما بعدها.

    – They declare most Muslim countries namely: Egypt, Libya, Morocco, India, Persia, West Asia, Syria, Nigeria, Turkey, Afghanistan, Turkistan, Sudan, Tunisia, Marrakesh and Algeria with Kufur and Shirk
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى “إعصار التوحيد” لنبيل محمد

    – Wahhabis claim that Hellfire will end as Ibn Taymiah claimed, and as confirmed by Albani!!
    انظر “رفع الأستار” تحقيق الألباني ص28 وكتاب “حادي الأرواح” لابن القيم ص256 وكتاب “القول المختار لفناء النار” لعبد الكريم الحميد، ص7، وشرح الطحاوية لابن أبي العز ص/427، المكتب الإسلامي-بيروت.

    – Wahhabis follow Ibn Taymiah who claims that this world is eternal without a beginning!!!
    See: انظر شرح الطحاوية لابن أبي العز (أثنى على كتابه ابن باز) ص132، المكتب الإسلامي، بيروت.

    – They also follow Ibn Taymiah who claims that triple divorce is not valid!!
    See: انظر كتاب الفقيه محمد بن علي الدهان “رسالة في الرد غلى ابن تيمية في مسألة الطلاق”

    – They ban women from going on the internet alone by herself!!
    See: انظر جريدة القبس يوم الجمعة نوفمبر 12, 2004 الكويت.

    – They ban women from merely driving a car!!
    See: انظر فتوى ابن باز في “فتاوى المرأة”، ص/92 ، دار الوطن ـ الرياض وكتاب شبهات في طريق المرأة المسلمة.

    – They ban women from visiting the graves of the Muslims!!!
    See: انظر فتوى ابن عثيمين المسمى “فتاوى مهمة” ص149-150، طبعة الرياض.

    – They forbid women from merely wearing pants even if it was wide or in front of her husband!!
    See: انظر فتوى ابن باز في مجلة الدعوة، عدد 1493هـ، عام 1995م، ص28.

    – They ban women from teaching kids in schools!!
    See: انظر نفس المصدر لابن باز “فتاوى المرأة” ص27 دار الوطن، الرياض.

    – They claim that the voice of the women in front of men is ^awrah and forbidden!!!
    See: انظر كتاب الوهابي المجسم ابن جبرين “فتاوى المرأة: ص211، دار الوطن، الرياض.

    – They forbid men from trimming anything from the beard at any time!!
    See: انظر فتوى ابن باز في كتابه المسمى “التحقيق والإيضاح لكثير من مسائل الحج والعمرة والزيارة” ص16

    – They claim that saying “La ilaha illallah” in group Dhiker as forbidden bid^ah!!
    See: انظر كتابهم “حلقات ممنوعة” لحسام العقاد ص/25 دار الصحابة طنطا.

    – They claim that saying “Sadaqallahul-^Adhim” after reciting Qur’an is forbidden bid^ah!!!!
    See: انظر قول ابن باز في مجلة البحوث الإسلامية/رئاسة البحوث العلمية والإفتاء، الرياض، عدد 45 عام 1416هــ وكتابهم المسمى “توجيهات إسلامية” محمد زينو ص81.

    – Their leader and founder Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab considers all his Sheikhs as Kuffar!!
    See: انظر رسالة محمد بن عبد الوهاب إلى أهل الرياض تاريخ نجد” لحسين بن غنام (2/137 ـ 138 )

    – They claim if a man does not pray in Jama^ah then he is banned from marriage!!
    See: انظر “فتاوى المرأة” ص103، دار الوطن، الرياض.

    – They claim that hanging Qur’anic verses on the neck or wall (Hirz) is Haram!!
    See: انظر فتوى ابن باز الأعمى في الكتاب المسمى “فتاوى مهمة” ص110ـ111 دار العاصمة، الرياض.

    – They forbid saying “Good Morning” and claim it’s an imitation to Jews!!
    See: انظر كتابهم المسمى “أخطاء شائعة” لمحمد زينو، ص67، دار الصميعي، الرياض.

    – They forbid saying the full “Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim” before eating!!
    See: انظر نفس الكتاب “أخطاء شائعة” لمحمد زينو، ص68، دار الصميعي، الرياض.

    – They accuse Muslims with atheism for making ta’weel interpretations to Qur’an!!
    See: انظر الكتاب المسمى “القواعد المثلى” للعثيمين، ص45 الرياض.

    – al-Albaniy objects on Imam al-Bukhariy for interpreting Surat 28, Ayah 88 {Illa Wajhah} with Dominion!!
    See: انظر كتاب “فتاوى الالباني” ص523 حيث اعترض الألباني على تأويل البخاري وقال: من يؤول هذا التؤيل لا يكون مسلما.

    – They consider Muslims visiting each other on Eid festive as a forbidden bid^ah!
    See: انظر كتاب “فتاوى الألباني” ص63 دار الجيل، بيروت.

    – Wahhabis accuse people of Egypt as worshipers to Imam Ahmad al-Badawiy!!
    See: انظر تعليق ابن باز على كتابهم “فتح المجيد” ص216، دار أولي النهى.

    – They accuse people of Sham (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine) as Mushriks worshiping Ibn ^Arabi!!
    See: انظر تعليق ابن باز على كتابهم “فتح المجيد” ص217، دار أولي النهى.

    – They accuse people of Hijaz and Yemen as “grave and stone worshipers” !!
    See: انظر تعليق ابن باز على كتابهم “فتح المجيد” ص217، دار أولي النهى.

    – They claim saying Tawheed kalimah (Wahhidullah) in funerals as forbidden!!
    See: انظر كتاب “الموت عظاته وأحكامه” لعلي عبد الحميد ص29، المكتبة الإسلامية، الأردن.

    – They ban using a vehicle to transfer the dead to cemetery!
    See: انظر كتابهم “الموت عظاته وأحكامه” لعلي عبد الحميد ص30 و43، المكتبة الإسلامية، الأردن.

    – They claim that using the Masbahah beads for dhiker as forbidden bid^ah!!!
    See: انظر كتاب المتمحدث الألباني الوهابي المسمى ” سلسلة الأحاديث الضعيفة “، رقم الحديث/83.

    Our response to all these accusations is that the Prophet peace be upon him said in the hadith:
    “لا يجمع الله أمتي على ضلالة”

    Which means: “Allah protected my nation from straying unanimously”. However, Wahhabis declare the majority of the Muslims as blasphemers and thus promote chaos in communities. And this is a portion of their deviated beliefs that every sane Muslim disagrees with. We have the full references from their books to each and every saying we mentioned here, and we have not exaggerated a bit in exposing their false claims. We find these radical beliefs in the books of the Wahhabis that are floating around specially in poor countries labeled “Free Books, Not to be Sold” with attractive paintings but full of poisonous devious ideologies. One must warn from their books that that ruin the thoughts of our communities just like inserting poison in the honey and feeding it to people.

    We warn as our Prophet sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, warned us against those who deviate from him in a hadith related by al-Bukhariyy and Muslim:
    “أناس من جلدتنا، يتكلمون بألسنتنا، تعرف منهم وتنكر، دعاة على أبواب جهنم من أطاعهم قذفوه فيها”.

    which means: “There are people whose skin is the same color as ours, who speak the same language as we speak, they mix correct matters which you know with bad matters which you denounce [they mix the correct statements with the deviated ones]. They stand by the gates of Hellfire inviting others to enter. If one listens to them, they push him in.”

    It is of utmost importance for the Muslims and people in communities to look thoroughly at whom they acquire knowledge from, and so beware of Wahhabis. Imam Muslim related in his Sahih the saying of the highly esteemed follower of the companions, Muhammad Ibn Sirin: إن هذا العلم دين فانظروا عمّن تأخذون دينكم

    which means: “This knowledge contains the rules of the Religion, so look thoroughly into the person from whom you acquire the knowledge of your Religion.”

    I ask Allah to guide us to what is acceptable, enable us to be always steadfast on the path of the Prophet, and to be always protectors and defenders of the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah that the Prophet brought to the people. And Allah knows best.

  24. Sir, Assalamu Alaikum.

    Wahabis say, as per hadeeth of Sahihul Jameush Shagir [ vol 1, H.N- 3675] Amir Hamzah is ” Sayedus Shuhada”. So, it is wrong to call Imam Hussain “Sayedush Shuhada”

    Sir, Is the isnad of the above-mentioned hadith srtong enough to be accepted and is it indeed wrong to call Imam Hussain “Sayedush Shuhada” ?????

    Please answer in details with reference.

    • Salamun ‘alaykum

      When I pass a course in Nukhbat ul-Fikr, I may be able to answer this question, until then, hadeeth verication is not my specialty. However, I will say this. All because Hamza is Sayed ush Shuhaadah, it does not imply they can be only one, just with the same case that Allah will send a mujaddid every 100 years. Ibn Katheer in his al-Bidaayah has pointed out that Allah sent many each 100 years.

  25. Asalamalykum
    To defend the concept of Bidda only being bad, the wahabis say Masala Wa Mursalah. Can you please explain this terminology?

  26. Asalamalykum

    We Asharis quote from books called Al Firq Bayn Al Firaq by Imam Abu Mansur Baghdadi RahimAllah and from Risalah Al Qurayshiya.
    The so called salaafis object by saying that these are books which have no sanad and therfore can not be relied upon. Is this true?
    JazakAllah Khaira.

  27. assalamu alaikum..

    In sri lanka one of ahle sunnat thariqa people (nabaviyathul qadiriya) get ramalan from nujum calculation becoz the shaik get ramalan and eid that calculation..plz explain me

    • Salamun ‘alaykum

      All calculations should be based upon the moon and its phase. Using the stars anything for other than guidance for a traveller on a dark night is blameworthy. Stars should only be use for navigational purposes. This is all I can say for now. Wa as-Salam

  28. AlaihiSalam* RidhwanAllahiAlaihiAjmaeen.

    One other question:

    Was Ibn Arabi AL Maliki a nasibi, as i was emailed a copy from al awasim mil al kawasim in whcih you can clearly see his nasibi beliefs. Also it is said that IN Jami Saghir pg 365 Imam Suyuti RehmatullahiAlai spoke against him.

    • Salamun ‘Alaykum wa Rahmatullah

      Ibn Arabi al-Maliki is not a scholar that the Muslim laity should take from. His books are intended only for the great Ulemaa of mukhaashif, otherwise laymen will be misguided by his statements as they fly above their heads. Imaam as-Suyuti rahimahullah maybe spoke against him for permissible reasons, sometimes the Ulemaa would criticize each other. But they would only do so in a respectful way. My own personal opinion is that the Sufis of today should leave the books of Ibn al-Arabi alone as they are only becoming misguided by them, and misguiding others. It takes Awliyyah of Allah to explain their import. Even I do not touch these books. Wa as-Salam

      • As-Salaamu Alaykum, akhi.

        I believe Qasim was referring to Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki, hence his mention of “nasibi” tendencies (as the Qadi once wrote that Husayn ibn Ali was an enemy of the Muslims as he was “killed by the sword of his grandfather”). You seem to be talking about Shaykh al-Akbar, one of the greatest Sufis who ever lived. I do agree with you that his works might be unsuitable for laymen as I have seen Perrennialists/Universalists take his words out of context to support their deviant doctrines. And Allah knows best.

  29. Asalamalykum

    The Salafis say that Imam Shafi RadiAllahuAnh cudnt have been approving of Bidda Hasanah as he refused to believe in Istishaan.
    Please shed some light on this topic.
    JazakAllah.

    • Wa alaykum as-Salam

      They hate the fact that Imaam Ash-Shaafi said this statement. They pepper the statement with the word “alleged” to trick peoples mind into thinking the statement is false and merely attributed to Imaam ash-Shaafi. Its their eloquence and magic at work.

      But the fact still remains, Ibn Taymiyyah quoted Imaam ash-Shaafi as saying this, Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali hinges his whole discourse upon the statement of Imaam ash-Shafi when he comments about the bid’ah lughwiyyah in his Jami al Ulum wal-Hikaam, hadeeth 28, and Ibn Hajar al-Asqaalani mentions it in his Fath ul-Baari. Yet none of them have ever tried to refute this statement, or claim that it is “alleged”.

      Infact it is the Salafis that make many allegations of evil and corruption against 1100 years of Saheeh scholarship in which a reviver of the deen has been sent by Allah at the head of every decade. We find that the things that the Salafi cult deem as bid’ah infact go back many years without even a hint of deviation by the revivers. For example, nobody had a complaint against Milad un-Nabi until these desert Arabs appeared with their new invented dry self made interpretation of Islam. the revivers actually spoke in favour of it!! and the hypocrisy of the Salafi cult as that they try to claim these revivers as ther scholars only when it is convenient, but yet in the next breath insult their creed, their statements and even their faith.

      The thing is, Salafis cannot even claim istishan when it comes to good innovations, because no good innovation clashes with the shari’ah whatsoever. In fact we will find that any good bid’ah is rooted with in the Shari’ah and is more commonly known in the Hanbali school as a bid’ah lughwiyyah. A linguistic bid’ah that has it’s evidences in the Shari’ah. The bid’ah looks new, but in fact it is not new, like the gathering for Taraaweeh behind one Imaam. All the actions are present within the Sunnah but Umar bought them all together into one package and said “What an excellent bid’ah” See Sahih al-Bukhaari, vol. 3 hadeeth no. 227.

      Thus the Salafis are simply refuted, KO’ed ! Had any “good” bid’ah contradicted the Shari’ah at any point, we would have known about it, like for example, the Shi’as slapping themselves in mourning of Imaam Hussein and other things alike. It contradicts the Shari’ah because we are taught by the Shariah not to do self harm, not to harm ourselves or others.

      If I know something to be good from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, I will practice it, even if the first three generations did not practice it in such a way. Putting the Qur’an on cd, yes I will do that, but painting ayah’s of the Qur’an on a surfboard, or a walkway, a wall in which animals urinate, I do not think so. Sometimes these things are just common sense.

      Thank you for your question, I hope this helps inshaAllah

  30. Assalamu alaikum,

    Where did you learn Hanbali fiqh?

    Where can one learn Hanbali fiqh today?

    Who are the top Hanbali scholars alive today?

    Wa salam

    • Wa alaykum as-Salaam
      I am currently learning the Fiqh from Shaykh Dawud Sheldon, the student of Shaykh Abdalellah Ali al-Kuwait who is the student of Shaykh Ibraheem al-Jarrah al-Kuwaiti. One can learn Hanbali fiqh from the mentioned if they offer skype lessons, or you can travel to Syria Duma at your own risk and enter the ma’hd ul-ta’deeb or one can contact Hajj Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali of the Lote Tree Institute via http://www.htspub.com. Some of the top Hanbali scholars of today are only alive because their names are not often mentioned, and they like to keep it that way. I hope this has helped you. Wa as-Salam

  31. SA,

    Could you provide a tafsir for what the hanbali scholars meant by the following statement in iqna and other hanbali books regarding apostasy that:

    قَالَ: أَوْ جَعَلَ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ اللَّهِ وَسَائِطَ يَتَوَكَّلُ عَلَيْهِمْ

    “Whoever takes an intermediary between himself and Allah, invoking them, asking them and relying on them has disbelieved by consensus.”

    • Wa alaykum as-Salaam

      So far I have only come across this Arabic sentence three times, and that was in Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s Nawaaqid ul-Islam and either in his al-Qawaa’id al-Arbah, Masaa’il al-Jaahiliyyah, or his Usul uth-Thalaathah. However, I do know that the context is discussed in Sulaymaan Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s radd entitled as-Sawaa’iq a-l-Ilahiyyah in which a whole section is dedicated to exposing his brothers trickery concerning the exact quoted statement. its worth buying and has been translated into English by al-Hajj Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali

      JazakAllah Khayr and Muharram Mubarrak

      • Jazakallah khair. The statement is taken from books of that of al buhuti, al hajawi and others. The madkhali running wahhabis.com site has used such statements to defend Muhammed ibn Abdul Wahab. Perhaps, you could clarify the reality of those quotes in context with the hanbali madhab.

        NOTE:
        This is a personal comment and not meant for public view nor leading to advertising the madkhali website. So you can delete this comment.

    • Wa ‘alaykum as-Salaam wa Rahmatullah

      Thank you for your question and may Allah reward you immensely.

      Athaar is a word specifically used for hadeeth, the closest meaning I can translate is narrations. Imaam Abu Hanifah’s student has compiled a hadeeth compilation by the name of Kitaab al-Athaar, which holds the hadeeth upon which the Hanafi madh-hab is baed upon.

      Athaari, is used in Aqeedah to denote the Ahl ul-Hadeeth, those who followed Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his methodology of looking at evidences from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The Athaari madh-hab is also known as the Hanbali madh-hab which is passed down to us from Ali ibn Abu Taalib – Allah is well pleased with him – and is a valid school of Aqeedah alongside the Ash’ari and Marturidi school.

      Wa as-Salaam

  32. Asalaamualaikum Br Andrew,

    jazakAllah ta’ala khaira for the first part of your response.

    I noted you mentioned the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas that is available only in Arabic; I thought, for the purpose of potential benefit to direct you to; http://www.fonsvitae.com/

    This group of scholars (approved of by the likes of Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad for their translatory skills) is in the process of translating the whole Ihya Ulum id-Din (hopefully to abrogate the useless translation by Faiz) however, my main purpose for directing you there is the full 19 volume hadith collections available (currently out of stock) and more importantly; if you examine the tafsir collections – that of Ibn Abbas and many others are available.

    Hope you find some benefit there.

    Salaam.

    Br. Esa

  33. Allahu akbar ! May allah make things easy for you I love what you are doin and I am doing the samething in the usa ….inshallah we can have you come talk to help revive the hanbali mathab !

  34. Sallams habibi, I am confussed u said wahhabi /deoband I also read a couple months back that you had some issues with the deoband scholars what issues do you have with the deoband ulama ? Only out of respect I am asking you this I admire what you are doing , but at the same time I love the deoband shuyuk…… they are ahul sunnah and they have the correct creed.

  35. Asalaamalaikum Br. Abu Muhammad,

    I’m wondering if you can clarify the chief points of difference in three Creeds of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah – Maturidi, Ashar’i & Athari.

    I’m wondering if you might also clarify the points as to whether these points of divergence are larger than just linguistics.

    Finally; Imam Ahmed Raza Khan (rahmatullah) is often criticised and I know you stated you don’t follow him on matters of Aqeeda or Fiqh (for the obvious reasons that he is a Hanafi jurist and also an Ashar’i) – care to clarify where his Aqeeda is a ‘Bid’ah’ and misguiding to follow? Or his status as an Ahle Sunnah wal Jammah scholar?

    JazakAllah ta’alah Khaira

    Br. Esa

    • Salamun ‘alaykum,

      Thank-you for your question, may Allah reward you in seeking knowledge and increase us both in that. I apologize that I have took a very long time to reply, but such a question merited going back to the books.

      It is important to note that the Ash’aris and Maturidis are the same in creed and approach, except for a few minor points like saying “I am a believer insha’Allah”, whether the people that never heard the message of Islam will go to the fire or not, and a few other points. However, they are considered the same, so when you hear a Hanbali talking about the Ash’aris, then we are often talking about the Maturidis too.

      It is also important to note that both methodologies are from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, as this is stated by the 12th century Hanbali master, Imaam as-Safaarani who said in so many words that the Ahl us-Sunnah consist of the Ash’ariyyhah, Maturidiyyah and the Athaariyyah [the Hanbalis]. However, it is not true that the early Hanbali scholars accepted Imaam Ash’ari as an authority as he had just stepped out of a cult, and by such the early Hanbali scholars considered him as a layman no matter how much the Imaam knew.

      The Ash’ari or Maturidi methodology did not begin with the birth and education with Imaam Maturidi or Imaam Ash’ari, but was passed down to them from students who had the knowledge passed down to them from the Sahaabah, particularly the exegete of the Qur’an, the Sahaabi Ibn Abbas whose tafseer ul-Qur’an is available in ‘Arabic. Likewise, the Hanbali creed and madh-hab did not begin with the education of Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal, but was passed down to him from the students who have a chain leading back to ‘Ali. Thus, there is nothing new or bid’ah about these three methodologies and whosoever has rejected them has rejected the way of the Salaf, i.e. the first three generations.

      The first difference that I know of between the Hanbalis and the Ash’aris, is the issue of ta’weel. Although, ta’weel is understood differently by Hanbalis and Ash’aris in that some aspects overlap in some cases. For example when the Ash’ari says that Allah is with us by His Knowledge, bi-‘ilmihi, they consider this a form of ta’weel. When the Hanbali says Allah is with us bi’ilmihi, the Hanbali considers this as the Zaahir meaning.

      Ta’weel according to the Hanaabilah is understood as interpreting what should not be interpreted, whereas Ash’aris undertand ta’weel as the possible meaning or explanation, and I emphasize the possible meaning or explanation, possible not definite.

      For example, the ayahs of the Qur’an which give mention to Allah’s mutashaabihah Attributes such as Yadyan [In the ‘Arabic lexicon, the first meaning that comes to the mind is hands] or Allah’s sight, the Hanbalis will read the ayah and see the word “Yadayn” and affirm it as being true, and pass it by without any rejection, interpretation, anthropomorphist thoughts, knowing that it is waajib to believe in Allah’s Attributes, even if we do not know what Allah intended by the meaning. We consign all knowledge to Allah which is to perform absolute tafweed.

      Ash’aris on the otherhand, read the ayah’s the speak of the Mutashaabihah and they say “this could possibly mean such and such, because Allah said elsewhere in the Qur’an so and so, but Allah knows best and we consign all knowledge back to Him” this is known as partial tafweed.

      For example, the Ash’ariyyah will say let us take a look at the ayah where Allah says:
      “Mention our servants, Ibraheem, Ihsaaq, and Ya’qub. They are men of power [ar. Ayadin, lit. hands] and vision [ar. Absaar, lit. Eyes] Surah Saad [38] ayah 45

      Notice here that Allah mentions hands and eyes, however according to classical ulemaa this ayah is not understood in the literal senses. Ibn Abbas, Mujaahid, Qataadah, Ibn Da’mah, Mansur, ath-Thaqafi, Sufyaan ath-Thawri, all explain this ayah of Allah to be figurative speech which means “They are men of power and insight”. Therefore the Ash’aris present possible meanings but then conclude Allah knows best. They do not give definite interpretation.

      This is the first issue where the creeds differ.

      In my next post I will speak about another difference, regarding the nature of the Qur’an, but my time has run short for now. I will get back to you inshaAllah.

      Wa-as-Salaam

  36. In response to the backbiters and slanderers found on the thread here:

    http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?66920-What-are-the-good-traditional-(non-Salafi)-Hanbali-resources

    Yes, Ibn Taymiyah for 99% of his life was a Hanbali scholar, not only a Hanbali scholar but he had the greatness of doing ijtihaad. He was a great scholar of the madh-hab in certain aspects and has penned many beneficial works that the Hanaabilah do not deny. However, he is rejected in creed and some fiqh issues where he vied against the consensus of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. Such issues led him to be imprisoned by the Ash’aris of Egypt, which resulted in a number of debates in which Ibn Taymiyah was defeated until the point he denounced all of his mistakes and announced that he was now an Ash’ari in creed. He died upon this state and the very same scholars who imprisoned him led his janaazah and buried him as a Muslim believer.

    Secondly, Imaam Raza Khan [who I do not take from in any ‘Aqeedah issues, nor fiqh issues, nor am I in habit of reading his books] is noted to be a great reviver of the deen in the indo pak subcontinent and their beliefs are side by side with other great scholars of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. Imaam Raza Khan has nothing to do with the Hanbali madh-hab, but yet Wahhabi/Deobandi hypocrites expect me to reject this man as a mubtadi based purely on their bias and self conceited nafs.

    The person on the Sunni forum who has claimed to have spoken with me on facebook hides his face and pretends to be a Sunni promoting texts on the ‘Aqeedah Imaam Ghazali on his facebook whilst sitting and agreeing with Wahhabi views on forums such as Islamic Awakening. Then he emails me pretending to be somebody else, but I know his style and all of his different faces. He is like a rabbit between two holes, you do not know which hole he is going to appear from next.

    wa-as-Salaam

  37. Salaamun ‘Alaykum,

    Thank you for your question.

    In terms of Shari’ah and capitol punishments the fiqh is practiced without any Mercy. Daily women get acussed of indecency without the witnesses, and moreover the goverment have this habit of beheading some people who they have deemed mujrimeen.

    It was only a while a ago somebody was beheaded whilst the Sa’udi king was having a cup of tea at 10 Downing st. Such beheadings are not sanctioned by the Shari’ah whatsoever and are a great innovation to be practiced as “part of the Shari’ah”. Therefore the fiqh used is “Saudi Arabia” is practiced without compassion and mercy.

    We also see their “ijtihaad” in play as they banned women from driving, permitted the breastfeeding of grown men, and even lately have banned women from using the internet.

    As for the Hanbali claim, very few of them are Hanbali in fiqh, such as Uthamain and the late Ibn Jibreen. However to say they are Hanbali in ‘Aqeedah would be a different matter altogether. The divergence from the madh-hab is strongly found and reflected throughout Albani’s works, who in effect calls to his own madh-hab, and his own misguided ijtihaad.

    I hope this helps, wa as-Salaam

  38. As salaamu alaikum,

    Can you explain to us briefly how the fiqh used in Saudi Arabia, although they claim to be Hanbali, has departed from the actual fiqh of the Hanbali madhhab?

  39. Q. Are you implying that all and every Kharijite is an absolute Kaafir?

    A. Salamun ‘Alaykum

    There are three levels of al-Khuruwj

    1. The rebellion against valid Muslim authority which renders one Ahl ul-Bid’ah
    2. Counting the believers as disbelievers, which is dangerous and puts them on the edge of Islam
    3. The creed that it is permissible to spill the blood of Muslims by deeming them as apostates and then killing them which takes them totally out of Islam

    Imaam Bukhari placed all the hadeeth relating to the Khawaarij in the book of apostates, and the great Sahaabi muhadith Abu Umaaamah heard from the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam more than seven times that the third type of Khawaarij are Kuffar, the dogs of hell, the worst of creation etc.

    In answer to such a question, no, not all of the Khawaarij are kuffar, only the most extreme element from amongst them, which unfortunately includes the Wahhabi cult. However, do not get me wrong. I am not saying all Wahhabis are Kuffar when I say this. However, their leaders, their scholars, their founders know the truth just as Abu Jahl KNEW that Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wasallam is the Prophet of Allah, but still yet denied it.

    As for the common laity of the Wahhabi Khawaarij, only Allah knows best about their Imaam. They are, however, on the brink of destruction and it is important to save as many as we can from the depths of the lowest fire with good naseehah, and moreover satisfactory evidences.

    Wa as-Salaam

    Wa as-Salaam

You are welcome to comment and ask a valid questions, however there are a few guidelines and conditions to your comments being approved. Messages like "your a heretic, you do not know what you are talking about, you have no knowledge, you are an enemy of Islam, stupid Sufi" are usually rejected. Consider your words carefully..

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s