honestly we have no proof they are peaceful either tbh, its just romanticizing the past. like if you are sufi and you still fight for your clan, you aren't really much better than AS lol
Somalis were Sufi and Shafi’i for over 700 years, how did Wahhabism/Salafism wipe it out in 2 generations?
- Thread starter World
- Start date
bidenkulaha
GalYare
Nah ASWJ for example in Galgaduud used to bring together MX HG Dir etc. It was very inclusive. They defended their land from khawarij yes but they definitely are not crazy extremists. Runtii in this day and age they would be seen as liberals compared to what we have now
I'm talking about across somali history
Sufis don’t engage in politics or violence, they just teach the deen, positivity, help you better your personal relationship with Allah. Look at our history of the Qadiriyya tariqa for example. They mended ties between Somali tribes and brought peace to Somali tribes who loved fighting each other. This is the opposite of Salafism/Wahhabism who have their roots in violence, extremism, declaring takfir on Muslims, exploiting tribalism etc.
One example, Sheikh Madar who founded Hargeisa:
Saudi brainwashing
thats good that they did that, but qadriyya have a lot of problems with their aqeedah, so they aren't good people to follow. You could advocate against tribalism and violence following the sunnah, without going into any weird sects.
Qadiriyah is not related to Aqeedah. Vast majority are Ash’ari, which is a Sunni creed, just like mine (Athari). They are good people. The ones who are outside of the Sunnah are Wahhabis/Salafis.
they do some weird things though. I went to one of their masasjid and after salat they all gathered in a circle and started reading sheikh abdulqadir jelani huwa huwa huwa. LOL that was my first experience with the qadriyya people. I just don't understand sects period.
The anti-"Wahhabi" crowd might as well accept that our doctrine is simply superior.
Case in point- this perceived need to lie. If you need to lie to defend your position then clearly your position is weak.
Why do they have to lie about Salafis and claim Salafiyyah is the same thing as Al-Shabaab and all that?
Al-Shabaab people making takfir on the government and vowing to fight the government- that is the same thing as a Salafi sheikh preaching to obey the ruler and warning against protests and revolutions?
The fact is that anyone with the most basic understanding of Salafiyyah knows that Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Uthaymeem and them (as well as Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim) are completely different than and ideologically opposed to groups like Al-Shabaab.
This idea that Salafi "Wahhabis" and the Osama Bin Ladens of the world (who are actually more the spawn of the Muslim Brotherhood) are the same thing- I kind of expect it from non-Muslims but as a Muslim you are either a deliberate liar or very clueless if you paint Salafis and Al-Shabaab as the same thing.
Ibn Jawzi was basically a Salafi. This idea that we should oppose shirk and bid'ah- these ideas predate Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and go back way before Saudi ever existed.
Anyways, the Salafi minhaj is winning because its doctrine is superior and authentically in line with Quran and Sunnah and the opponents acting like they need to lie to compete just illustrates its vast superiority over its competitors. This also btw is why the anti-"Wahhabi" crowd will defend open sellouts like Yasir Qadi and such. It is out of desperation because the intellectual firepower is on our side.
I would note as well- one argument OP makes is lying about what Salafiyyah consists of and the other argument is an appeal to "muh forefathers"- the famous argument of mushrikeen throughout history. The "forefathers" argument is a famous argument of pagans and could just as easily be used by an Indian to promote Hinduism.
On side you have authentic Islam in line with Quran and Sunnah and following the understanding of the earliest generations- on the other side you have lying and appealing to the same "forefathers" arguments as pagans use.
Case in point- this perceived need to lie. If you need to lie to defend your position then clearly your position is weak.
Why do they have to lie about Salafis and claim Salafiyyah is the same thing as Al-Shabaab and all that?
Al-Shabaab people making takfir on the government and vowing to fight the government- that is the same thing as a Salafi sheikh preaching to obey the ruler and warning against protests and revolutions?
The fact is that anyone with the most basic understanding of Salafiyyah knows that Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Uthaymeem and them (as well as Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim) are completely different than and ideologically opposed to groups like Al-Shabaab.
This idea that Salafi "Wahhabis" and the Osama Bin Ladens of the world (who are actually more the spawn of the Muslim Brotherhood) are the same thing- I kind of expect it from non-Muslims but as a Muslim you are either a deliberate liar or very clueless if you paint Salafis and Al-Shabaab as the same thing.
Ibn Jawzi was basically a Salafi. This idea that we should oppose shirk and bid'ah- these ideas predate Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and go back way before Saudi ever existed.
Anyways, the Salafi minhaj is winning because its doctrine is superior and authentically in line with Quran and Sunnah and the opponents acting like they need to lie to compete just illustrates its vast superiority over its competitors. This also btw is why the anti-"Wahhabi" crowd will defend open sellouts like Yasir Qadi and such. It is out of desperation because the intellectual firepower is on our side.
I would note as well- one argument OP makes is lying about what Salafiyyah consists of and the other argument is an appeal to "muh forefathers"- the famous argument of mushrikeen throughout history. The "forefathers" argument is a famous argument of pagans and could just as easily be used by an Indian to promote Hinduism.
On side you have authentic Islam in line with Quran and Sunnah and following the understanding of the earliest generations- on the other side you have lying and appealing to the same "forefathers" arguments as pagans use.
anyone with the most basic understanding of Salafiyyah knows this is false. I am glad that you have to lie because it means you are desperate and lack real arguments. it is an illustration of how Salafiyyah is superior.
You look at Sheikh Rabee al-Madkhali for example... I have a fatwa from him against suicide bombing. The salafi scholars have come out against suicide bombing. They also are constantly warning against revolting against the rulers.
meanwhile the whole basis of Al-Shabaab is they are fighting the government, yes?
it's one thing to have an honest disagreement but it's another when you lie and make stuff up to smear the other side. anyone who knows anything about Salafiyyah knows that Salafis and khawarij are not the same thing. being against shirk and bid'ah doesn't mean you're the same thing as Al-Shabaab.
I’ve got no reason to lie. Everything is written in al-Darur al-Saniyyah, it is written by wahhabis themselves detailing everything. Muhammad ibn Abdul wahabb proudly admit that the majority of people Makkah, Madinah, iraq, Syria, Yemen were majority non-Muslim and idol worshippers, that the people of Makkah apparently rejected resurrection, anyone who doesn’t declare them to be non-Muslim is also a non-Muslim, that Ottoman’s are polytheists, that anyone living outside of the land controlled by Wahhabis must make hijrah or else they are kuffar. It’s all there. Al Shabab are not even this extreme.
Sheikh Fawzan addresses this accusation here:
This is a common thing- people accusing Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. But according to this line, the modern Salafi scholars must be teaching a different form of Salafiyyah. If you look at Sheikh Fawzan and them, they clearly are not the same thing as groups like Al-Shabaab.
The Salafi scholars are staunchly against the ideology of groups like Al-Shabaab. They're against suicide bombing and they warn against revolt.
Also if Saudi Arabia was built on Al-Shabaab type ideology... why isn't it filled with Al-Shabaab???? It's a pretty peaceful country.
Anyways, I don't know all the details of the history of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab but it is lying to claim that Al-Shabaab and Salafiyyah are the same.
Salafiyyah means you try to follow Islam as the earliest generations understood it. And this isn't a concept invented by Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah was a Salafi I think about five hundred years before Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab was alive.
The original Wahhabis are the same as if not worse than modern terrorist groups, they were labelled as khawarij by scholars from all 4 major madhabs. As for the modern day Wahhabis, some of them are likewise khawarij, as they follow directly from him. Madkhalis do preach against revolt, but they are controlled by the Saudi state who obviously don’t want to jeopardise their own power. I don’t think they are khawarij, but their teachings must be banned.
I have never claimed that Ibn Taymiyyah was a Salafi, he is a respected scholar however he was rightfully imprisoned due to his beliefs by all major scholars from the 4 madhabs at the time. Though, he would likewise label Wahhabis as khawarij if he was alive. Nobody followed Ibn Taymiyyah after his death, his beliefs all died out until the khawarij MIAW who was an ignorant wrongfully interpreted his works due to his lack of intellect and declared takfir on the majority of the people of Syria, Iraq, Makkah, Madinah and killed thousands of Muslims.
what's funny is you use this term "Madkhali"... well who pushes this term? the ikwanis, the Muslim Brotherhood. they hate Sheikh Madkhali because he refuted them and Sayyid Qutb.
and it's this same Muslim Brotherhood which is the precursor to pretty much all the modern day terrorist groups. Al Shabaab, Al Qaeda, they have an ideology which flows directly from Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
What I don't get about your line of reasoning is
A- the original Salafi ideology was khariji (supposedly)
B- this ideology is not being taught by the modern-day Salafi scholars
C- they are somehow spreading this original Salafi khariji ideology which they are not teaching???????
anyways, you look at these groups like Al Qaeda, Al Shabaab and them.... their ideology all traces back to the Muslim Brotherhood. they might have some superficial resemblances with Salafis. for example, they might have beards and Salafis tend to have beards. or they might be against worshipping saints.
but if you look at the overall structure of their ideology it traces back to the Muslim Brotherhood. if someone wants to understand where these groups come from, they'd be much better off looking into the Muslim Brotherhood than Salafiyyah.
also this thing about not revolting against the ruler..... this is something you'll see from pretty much all the Salafi scholars... there isn't a Madkhali sect and it isn't specific to some particular group of Salafis
AdoonkaAlle
Ragna qowl baa xira, dumarna meher baa xira.
The video itself establishes the proof, since fawzan indeed affirms that miaw made takfir, question is what's the difference between their actions and that of groups like isis, alqaeda who also use the quran & sunnah to justify their takfir of muslims ?
The original khawarij who killed Uthman RA & Ali RA also used the quran & sunnah to justify their actions, what then ? Anyone person or group can make the claim that their actions are in line with the shariah while going against it, that's why it's important to establish if that claim of theirs is true or not by comparing it to the shariah. Only then can one establish if their actions are valid or not.
If i were to ask you where in the Quran or Sunnah does it say if a muslim seeks intercession from the deceased this is kufr or shirk ? since you agree with what fawzan said that miaw ONLY made takfir of those that Allah and His Messenger made takfir of, i want you know to bring explicit evidence where Allah and His Messenger say that intercession with the deceased is shirk/kufr
One of the most explicit examples that indicate miaw's deviation, is the claim that ONLY he alone knew the true meaning of la ilaha illa’Llah; not even his teachers who taught him the deen. Forget his teachers no one knew what the shahadah meant before his time (ie before he was miraculously graced by God)
(Al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 10:51. )
What do you think the practical implication of such a belief is ? can you even imagine a scholar claiming this in our age, that no one understands meaning of shahada or islam except for himself ?
Miaw says the following in the introduction of his book Mufid al-Mustafid fi Kufri Tarik al-Tawhid (“Benefit of the beneficiary regarding the kufr of the one who leaves Tawhīd”):
He wrote this book after he had made Takfir upon a whole town in Najd (i.e. Huraymila`) and tried to justify it. Mind you the people of this city were supporters of his dawah, waged war on his behalf etc but after they changed their decision and stopped supporting his unjustied takfir this was enough to warant their kufr. Shockingly enough his brother sulayman was the qadi of this town.
Some examples of what miaw's dawah entailed
CHAIN TAKFIR
(Al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 9/291 )
Killing the people of al-Ahsa`
Ibn Bishr (d. 1288 AH) said while speaking about the incidents of the year 1210 AH:
'Unwan al-Majd 1/216-217
The above is just tip of the iceberg as the najdi dawah led to mass takfir & killing of muslims in the arabian peninsular. Anyone who didn't accept the "teachings" of miaw was declared to be kafir, i ask how is this any different to what isis , alqaeda & alshabab are doing ?
Fawzan want's us to believe that the people of makkah, al ahsa etc were mushriks and wants to distinguish between the actions of najdis & that of daesh who believe exactly the same ie that current day makkah is a land of mushriks & kuffar.
When miaw & his followers made takfir of muslims the najdis were not khawarij but when daesh & co do it suddenly they're deemed to be khawarij ? what sort of nonsense is this ?
NordicSomali
VIP
When we began to send ulema to Medina.
evidence
one whos dead cant hear you nor can he answer ur dua
Trending
-
-
BREAKING NEWS US and China reach deal to transfer TikTok ownership, trade- Started by Sigmundd
- Replies: 31
-
