Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab - Seeking clarification

[SirZubair]

Asalam Alaikum.

Before we start... i want to make one thing clear.

I DO NOT want this thread to turn into a SUFI VS SALAFI warzone, ok?

So if anyone wishs to have a battle, start another thread.

And also, i don't want anyone to post any links to any Extreme SUFI or Extreme SALAF ( Such as Alla####kbar.net ) in this thread.

Alrite, with that off my chest, lets get back to the topic..

..Just today, i was crusing through another forum and i read something which made me wonder "...Hmmm.... Maybe i/we were wrong all along,.. maybe it is just the saudi government...

Anyway, i'll let you all read it for yourselves, Feel free to post your opinions.

Brother in all honesty (according to my opinion as only Allah knows all facts) - i dont beleive this is so. I used to think the same as you but then the great Mufti of Makkah Sayyid bin Abbas al Maliki al Makki (rahimahu Allah) i saw him put (ra) after the words of Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahab(ra) and say good things about it. I was then confused and it seems to me on more investigation.

The despicable saudi regime and ulema have NOTHING TO DO with the original teachings of Mohammad bin abdul Wahab(rahumahu Allah). If he was here now he would be on earth and they would be on Pluto. Read some of his works, from siding with the kuffar (he disallowed this) - to his praise of Sufism (and his son also, i beleive he was only against the extreme rafidite sufism of Shia Iran,this is bolsstered by the fact that he spent years in Isfahan/Iran - so it must be true), and also the works of the 4 madhabs. Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahab(ra) followed Hanbali fiqh AND REQUIRED HIS SUBJECTS TO DO SO.

man that is complete opposite of current saudi doctrine, which proves my point that they have nothing to do with him.

See i told you, complex subject - and Allah knows best.


Please, whatever you post, post it only if you know that it is a fact. Otherwise, please, try not to post any rubbish smile.gif I want opinions which are based on Facts..

Wasalaam

-Zubair

 

[Malaikah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?



Hey man even I knew all that, and thats saying something cos I dont really now much on these issues lol....

 

[Malaikah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?



You probably should have just not mentioned sufis in your post lol they werent relevant anyway.

 

[Hijrah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Hijrah, could you PLEASE edit your post? Please respect my request and stay on topic.

I see double standards in what you say, and what i've quoted above.. but we will not be discussing that in public. It is against the forum rules to discuss sects. If you wish to have a discussion, please PM me your email address and we can do this via Email or msn, insha'allah.

He isn't the only one that is Confused. a mod has issued me a ' infraction notice : Reason: talking about sects again'.

Can somebody please point out where i went wrong?

Did i not make it very clear at the very beginning that this is not a SECT RELATED THREAD?

And people say i need to 'cool down'.. with this type of irrational warnings being dished out Left right and centre,.. yeah,... i'll 'cool down' alrite.. laying: laying:

Actually the post does explain to you what it is, it does mention soofis but it also answers your question

but ok here is something else

http://www.the*******myth.com/

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

You probably should have just not mentioned sufis in your post lol they werent relevant anyway.

Why not? :uhwhat Is 'sufi' a taboo word? since when?

I simply QUOTED a SALAFI from a SALAFI forum.

And yes, Sufism is relevant, what the Salafi bloke from the other forum goes against what i've heard the Majority of Salafis say.

So i am simply asking PEOPLE OF KNOWLEDGE to please help me clear out any misconceptions that i may have.

It is better to ask a question (even though it will mean that you are issued with 20% warning (UNFAIRLY)) than be ignorant for the rest of your life, right?

 

[Malaikah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?



have you ever seen the thread on ******s (<-- thats the W word.. it got censored for some reason:?) in the sects n divisions section? might help inshaallah:
http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-d...eption-response-*******-myth-salafi-path.html

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Actually the post does explain to you what it is, it does mention soofis but it also answers your question

but ok here is something else

http://www.the*******myth.com/

Hijrah, ONCE AGAIN, i will nicely ask you to PLEASE Edit your previous post.

...So there seems to be some confusion about these names... if it is the case that some Soofees are saying that they are the Sunnees while they are actually Soofees, then this is a big form of deception that must be warned against.

And this is the case with many of the deviant groups of today. They try to make a distinction between Salafiyyah and Ahlus-Sunnah, saying that Salafiyyah is a new sect or math-hab different from Ahlus-Sunnah. In reality, they are one in the same as the shaykh explains. This confusion comes from many different groups, like the Tableeghees, the Naqshabaandees, and other Soofee groups. While they claim that they are Ahlus-Sunnah, they are actually people of innovation far from the Sunnah.

If i was in your shoes, i would have been banned by now. laying: This is a SECT-FREE Thread.

By the way, Sufi's ARE Sunnis.

I am not waiting around and holding my breathe while www.bakkah.net decide on wether they agree with me or not. I couldn't care less for their opinion.

So once again, Please edit your post. It is NOT relevent to this thread.

I am seeking Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab's views on the matter. Not YOURs or Bakkah.net's view.

Barakallah feek.

-Zubair

 

[Hijrah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Wait a second, what i've quoted in my first post CLASHeS with what you've just said.

In my First post, it is mentioned that he (Abdul Wahab) praised Sufis/Sufism.

And ONCE again, i am seeking Abdul Wahabs views.

How many more times do i have to point that out? :hiding:



Some of them?? SOME?? ffended:

Akhi, THEY will answer to ALLAH (swt) for their AQEEDAH, as YOU will answer to ALLAH (swt) For your Aqeedah.

Heck, if i wanted to, i could W@H@bI Bash all day, but i am trying to remove the misconceptions that i have. I am being open minded, i can't say the same for you though.

MAYBE,.. just maybe you should consider researching what you talk about, rather than listening to someone and simply accepting their views?

PLEASE, do not go off topic again.

Wa'salaam

Yes, you are right, everyone will answer to Allah for their Aqeedah, but realize that some of the groups you mentioned deviated so bad, it would be considered kufr, obviously Allah knows best concerning how they will end up, As far as Abdul Wahhab, if you would at least check out that W@hhabi myth site you would know that W@hh@bi isn't the correct term either, and Abdul W@hh@b isn't exactly relevant to Salafism as a whole either...

but I found this for you either way despite your ignorance:

*******sm, on the other hand, is an Islamic movement that was named after Imam Muhammad Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab of the 19th century. Imam Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab led a reform movement in Arabia in order to retain the pure and original form of Islam and to purify it from all the innovations that the Sufis of Arabia were committing at that time. Imam `Abdul-Wahhab followed the Hanbali school of thought (madhhab), especially the opinions of Imam Ibn Taymiyah. The ******* movement (now generally called the Salafi movement) did contribute to Islam by removing a lot of mischief from the land of Arabia and, eventually, uniting it under the House of Saud, who were students of Imam Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab.

Some people mean by *******sm/Salafism, extremism and roughness in dealing with people. But this is not necessarily true. Many Salafis are very pious and kind, while other Salafis are extreme and rough.

*******s prefer to take the most cautious opinions about banning any shape or form of worship that was not literally attributed to the Prophet (peace be upon him). For example, when Sufis sit in circles and mention the name of Allah as a group or read the Qur’an as a group, *******s judge that these acts are sinful. These kinds of issues are actually areas of difference in opinions among scholars, and Muslims ought to tolerate each other when it comes to these issues.

Finally, let us judge the actions and not the labels and names.

Hope this is helpful. Thank you and please keep in touch.

Wa-salamu `alaykum.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...sh-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544184

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

but I found this for you either way despite your ignorance:

Barakallah feek.

*******sm, on the other hand, is an Islamic movement that was named after Imam Muhammad Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab of the 19th century. Imam Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab led a reform movement in Arabia in order to retain the pure and original form of Islam and to purify it from all the innovations that the Sufis of Arabia were committing at that time. Imam `Abdul-Wahhab followed the Hanbali school of thought (madhhab), especially the opinions of Imam Ibn Taymiyah. The ******* movement (now generally called the Salafi movement) did contribute to Islam by removing a lot of mischief from the land of Arabia and, eventually, uniting it under the House of Saud, who were students of Imam Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab.

So in other words, what i have posted in my Original post is not correct?

So a) the Salafi Brother who i have quoted has Lied to me, OR alot of salafis are Ignorant of the truth.

Which is it?

What sanity?

By the time i am through with you, i will be asking myself the same question.

*Sigh* Allah swt, have mercy on me, save me from this mind boggling Rhode Islander :giggling: ;D

 

[Hijrah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Barakallah feek.



So in other words, what i have posted in my Original post is not correct?

So a) the Salafi Brother who i have quoted has Lied to me, OR alot of salafis are Ignorant of the truth.

Which is it?



By the time i am through with you, i will be asking myself the same question.

*Sigh* Allah swt, have mercy on me, save me from this mind boggling Rhode Islander :giggling: ;D

Ehhh...go herd some sheep New Zealander, but anyway I gave you that site as far as whatever that person told you, most scholars, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Katheer etc. have condemned sufism, that's what you have to realize, Sufi wasn't even a word known until much later in Islamic history, what you have to realize is that Salafi's abide by what the Prophet said, the way of him , his companions, their successors (Tabi'in) and the generation after that (salaf)



lol, you're thru with me, still on the sanity thing, huh? Just after you thanked me for that article?

As far as sufism, I know sites like allaahuakbar.net are harsh, but you cal look at a more moderate view on it over here:

http://islamtoday.com/show_quest_section.cfm?main_cat_id=37&sub_cat_id=157

islamonline has some very good articles on it as well. Check it Out!

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Ehhh...go herd some sheep New Zealander

I hope you didn't take it to heart Akhi, i was just joking

but anyway I gave you that site as far as whatever that person told you, most scholars, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Katheer etc. have condemned sufism,

I know about Ibn Taymiyyahs views on Sufism, could you provide me with more info on Ibn Katheers views on Sufism?

that's what you have to realize, Sufi wasn't even a word known until much later in Islamic history

,

It was known as Tassawuf.

what you have to realize is that Salafi's abide by what the Prophet said, the way of him , his companions, their successors (Tabi'in) and the generation after that (salaf)

I know the views of the SALAFIS, i am seeking the views of Abdul Wahab

As far as sufism, I know sites like allaahuakbar.net are harsh

I Dislike Allahuakbar.net not because they are harsh, but because they are Self righteous. They have condemned Half of the Ummah to hell just so they can wake up in the morning and feel all high and mighty because they feel as if they are the 'saved sect'.

Now please, stay on topic. I don't want to recieve a warning.

Someone please provide me with the answers that i am seeking, no more side tracking

 

[Hijrah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

I hope you didn't take it to heart Akhi, i was just joking



I know about Ibn Taymiyyahs views on Sufism, could you provide me with more info on Ibn Katheers views on Sufism?


,

It was known as Tassawuf.



I know the views of the SALAFIS, i am seeking the views of Abdul Wahab



I Dislike Allahuakbar.net not because they are harsh, but because they are Self righteous. They have condemned Half of the Ummah to hell just so they can wake up in the morning and feel all high and mighty because they feel as if they are the 'saved sect'.

Now please, stay on topic. I don't want to recieve a warning.

Someone please provide me with the answers that i am seeking, no more side tracking

Are u a soofi brother? As far as what Ibn Kathir said, I'm not sure where I read it and I apologize if I offended u in anyway either

 

[chacha_jalebi]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

lol @ zubair bro

whenever Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab names is mentioned, its either followed by a deviant or a great sheikh and opposer of bidah

now wot someone has to analyse is what is considered bidah in his eyes, correct moi if im wrong, didnt wahhab play a large role in makin the graves of jannah tul baqi flattened? because people used to go there and do shirk? and he played some sort of part in makin the graves get flattened?

also lol people shouldnt use the term ******* as in surah al hujuraat we are told not to use nicknames, and wahhab is 1 of the 99 names of Allah (swt) so to like make a nickname out of it is baaaaad

and and and lol if someone has knowlegde and is considered a scholar by other scholars, then we should respect them as it says in surah al zumar

"Are those who know equal to those who know not?'''

 

[Hijrah]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Here is some more on tasawwuf though...

http://islamlife.com/news.php?readmore=121

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...sh-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

 

[Muhammad]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?



It is probably best to close this thread at the earliest opportunity to prevent any sectarian debate arising as we have just seen.

Regarding the information that you found, I don't know if it is completely true, and I also don't know why the saudi government is seen as representing the teachings of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, when all of us probably agree that no government today is 100% Islamic and that the person we are speaking of was a very noble scholar of Islam.

Anyway, brother Kadafi provided a link some time ago for a detailed look at the life of Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab, which is an eBook by Jamal ad-Din Zarabozo available here:

http://www.islamhouse.com/en/books/pdf/en3957.pdf

Read some of his works, from siding with the kuffar (he disallowed this) - to his praise of Sufism (and his son also, i beleive he was only against the extreme rafidite sufism of Shia Iran,this is bolsstered by the fact that he spent years in Isfahan/Iran - so it must be true), and also the works of the 4 madhabs. Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahab(ra) followed Hanbali fiqh AND REQUIRED HIS SUBJECTS TO DO SO.

I tried to verify if the above was mentioned in the biography, but so far I have only found the following information:

Before discussing Huraimilaa, it is important to note that the most trustworthy and relied upon works concerning Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab state that he only traveled to Hijaz, Basra, al-Zubair and al-Ahsaa (all shown in Figure 1).There are a number of other less reliable worksthat state that ibn Abdul-Wahhaab ventured to a number of other areas. For example, the European traveler Niebuhr stated that ibn Abdul-Wahhaab traveled to Baghdad and Persia. Al-Shashtari said that he also went to Isfahan.​

The unidentified author of Lam’ al-Shihaab fi Seerah Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab (“The Brilliance of the Meteor in the Life of Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab”) states that ibn Abdul-Wahhaab also traveled to Baghdad (wherein he married a rich woman who later died and left him a good fortune), Kurdistan, Hamadhan, Isfahan, Rayy, Qum, Aleppo, Damascus, Jerusalem and Egypt, returning via the Suez through Yanbu, Madinah and Makkah. It also states that he studied Aristotelian philosophy and Sufism in Isfahan and that he was also proficient in Turkish and possibly Farsi. He later went to Qom where he became a follower of the Hanbali school. Furthermore, it states that he did not begin his travels until he was thirty-seven years old. That work also claims that Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab changed his name many times during those travels (being Abdullah in Basra, Ahmad in Baghdad and so forth).1​

1 Cf., Al-Uthaimeen, Al-Shaikh Muhammad, p. 37. A refutation in English of these claims may be found in Vassiliev, pp. 65-66.​

This is on Pg. 26-27 of that link, and the author explains the problem with the work from the unidentified author in the footnotes.​

​

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Are u a soofi brother? As far as what Ibn Kathir said, I'm not sure where I read it and I apologize if I offended u in anyway either

No, no i am not a Sufi.

Here is some more on tasawwuf though...

http://islamlife.com/news.php?readmore=121

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...sh-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

Akhi, i can post LINK after LINK after LINK defending Sufism. But i am not doing that for a reason.

Because this is a, as made clear at the beginning, Sufi/Salafi-bashing Free Zone.

Akhi, PLEASE, stop posting Off Topic Links.

And please, edit the post(s) i've asked you to edit over and over.

Wa'salaam

-Zubair

 

[SirZubair]

Re: W@H@BISM - was I wrong all along?

Another brother (On another forum) has been more help then THIS entire thread put together...

Now regarding Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab's stance on tasawwuf (sufism). Its funny you know because salafis condemn sufism while Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab praised it. He said "Know -- may Allah guide you -- that Allah Almighty has sent Muhammad, blessings and peace upon him, with right guidance, consisting in beneficial knowledge, and with true religion consisting in righteous action. The adherents of religion are as follows: among them are those who concern themselves with learning and fiqh, and discourse about it, such as the jurists; and among them are those who concern themselves with worship and the pursuit of the Hereafter, such as the Sufis. Allah has sent His Prophet with this religion which encompasses both kinds, that is: fiqh and tasawwuf." This is from page 31 of the Fatawa wa rasa'il published by Ibn Sa`ud University.

 

[Far7an]

Maybe he did praise tasawwuf, but what type of tasawwuf did he praise? You do know that there are different types of tasawwuf? Some which they regard permissible, others which they don't.

 

[SirZubair]

Maybe he did praise tasawwuf, but what type of tasawwuf did he praise? You do know that there are different types of tasawwuf? Some which they regard permissible, others which they don't.

Care to give me some examples, Banta Claus?

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

:salamext:

So ibn Abdul Wahab followed the hanbali madhab and never sided with the apostate rulers?

Alhamdulillaah.

:wasalamex