What really is Wahhabism?

[AdoonkaAlle]

This is a problem. The Salafis go by what is actually in the Sheikh's books and the Sufis go with these unverified claims of him doing this and him doing that in history.

Can you refute him on the basis of what is actually in his books?

It’s only unverified to salafi laymen like you who only get spoon fed bits & pieces of miaw’s history & legacy by the higher ups. All of that I mentioned of his takfir is from actual salafi sources.

From his books like kashf shubuhat, explanation of the kalimah, 10 nullifiers of islam, even more explicit is the treatise he wrote after making takfir of the people of huraymila & al ahsa. His brother sulayman was the qadhi of huraymila at the time he declared takfir on them.

It’s called Mufid al-Mustafid Fi Kufr Tarik at-Tawhid Benefit of the beneficiary regarding the kufr of the one who leaves Tawhīd”


You can keep on ignoring all that I’ve already written here and in the other thread but it won’t change the reality that his teachings & understanding of what tawheed is contradicts revealed texts.

Imagine adhering to the doctrines of an individual who ascribes a belief to Christians that you know without a doubt is false.

 

[Omar del Sur]

It’s only unverified to salafi laymen like you who only get spoon fed bits & pieces of miaw’s history & legacy by the higher ups. All of that I mentioned of his takfir is from actual salafi sources.

From his books like kashf shubuhat, explanation of the kalimah, 10 nullifiers of islam, even more explicit is the treatise he wrote after making takfir of the people of huraymila & al ahsa. His brother sulayman was the qadhi of huraymila at the time he declared takfir on them.

It’s called Mufid al-Mustafid Fi Kufr Tarik at-Tawhid Benefit of the beneficiary regarding the kufr of the one who leaves Tawhīd”


You can keep on ignoring all that I’ve already written here and in the other thread but it won’t change the reality that his teachings & understanding of what tawheed is contradicts revealed texts.

Imagine adhering to the doctrines of an individual who ascribes a belief to Christians that you know without a doubt is false.

Ok. You mention some book names. And I've read the 10 Nullifiers of Islam.

Why don't you actually post content from his books and refute him on that basis?

And how am I an adherent of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab? I am not a follower of any Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect. I believe it's haraam to pray to dead people. That's not some concept made up by the sheikh in question.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Ok. You mention some book names. And I've read the 10 Nullifiers of Islam.

Why don't you actually post content from his books and refute him on that basis?

And how am I an adherent of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab? I am not a follower of any Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect. I believe it's haraam to pray to dead people. That's not some concept made up by the sheikh in question.

What do you think I was doing when I was citing his views on ascribing tawheed Rububiyyah to mushriks, stance on asking for intercession ? Do you think I’m making it up ?

You state that you read the 10 nullifiers, what does the 2nd & 3rd nullifiers entail ?

According to miaw & his followers the ottomans were mushriks so by not declaring the ottomans to be kafirs or even doubting their kufr you were considered to be a kafir. (3rd nullifier)

Also providing any support or aid to the ottomans was deemed to be kufr (8th nullifier)

As you can see miaw’s takfir wasn’t simply limited to actions of shirk that you keep on repeating but was more encompassing than that. If you doubted the kufr of anyone he declared to be a kafir or even gave support in any way you were also a kafir.

This was the legacy of his dawah and you can see it through the actions of groups like isis who follow his dawah to the letter not the watered down version that’s on display by today’s salafis.

If you didn’t follow miaw understanding you wouldn’t be accusing me of promoting worshiping or praying to the dead when I mentioned the permissibility of tawassul with deceased.

That and also the videos that you post regularly on here from salafis proves that you’re follow his doctrine. Given how you disavowed yourself from sh assim recently despite promoting him previously tells you follow the madkhali branch of salafis as they’re the ones who attack their fellow salafis and kick them off the manhaj.

Allah guided you to Islam in order for you to improve yourself and not to accuse your fellow muslims of shirk the worst type of sin. Take heed and remove yourself from such circumstances before it’s too late

 

[Omar del Sur]

What do you think I was doing when I was citing his views on ascribing tawheed Rububiyyah to mushriks, stance on asking for intercession ? Do you think I’m making it up ?

You state that you read the 10 nullifiers, what does the 2nd & 3rd nullifiers entail ?

According to miaw & his followers the ottomans were mushriks so by not declaring the ottomans to be kafirs or even doubting their kufr you were considered to be a kafir. (3rd nullifier)

Also providing any support or aid to the ottomans was deemed to be kufr (8th nullifier)

As you can see miaw’s takfir wasn’t simply limited to actions of shirk that you keep on repeating but was more encompassing than that. If you doubted the kufr of anyone he declared to be a kafir or even gave support in any way you were also a kafir.

This was the legacy of his dawah and you can see it through the actions of groups like isis who follow his dawah to the letter not the watered down version that’s on display by today’s salafis.

If you didn’t follow miaw understanding you wouldn’t be accusing me of promoting worshiping or praying to the dead when I mentioned the permissibility of tawassul with deceased.

That and also the videos that you post regularly on here from salafis proves that you’re follow his doctrine. Given how you disavowed yourself from sh assim recently despite promoting him previously tells you follow the madkhali branch of salafis as they’re the ones who attack their fellow salafis and kick them off the manhaj.

Allah guided you to Islam in order for you to improve yourself and not to accuse your fellow muslims of shirk the worst type of sin. Take heed and remove yourself from such circumstances before it’s too late

Can you just post some actual content from his books and refute him on that basis?

The Sufis don't do this. I've seen videos refuting Khomeini for example- they use actual passages from his books, they show you what's in his books and they refute it. I've seen content where they refute the Shia- they use what's actually in the books or quotes from the Shia scholars, etc. That's the real way of scholarly refutation.

But you never see this with Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. Why? Because what are the Sufis going to refute? Are they going to open the chapter in Kitab at Tawheed warning against amulets and say "see!".

There is no Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect and there is no Madkhali sect. Madkhali has been backed by Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Ibn Baz, Sheikh Uthaymeen, Sheikh Madkhali is just a Salafi scholar. He just gets slandered a lot because he refuted the ikwaanis and Sayyid Qutb and this made people angry at him.

As for the ten nullifiers of Islam, here they are.

https://i.redd.it/rb2vt2dtm1381.jpg

(putting the url because the img wouldn't upload)

 

[Omar del Sur]

According to miaw & his followers the ottomans were mushriks so by not declaring the ottomans to be kafirs or even doubting their kufr you were considered to be a kafir. (3rd nullifier)

Would you mind doing me a favor? Can you prove in the words of the Sheikh himself that Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab made takfir on the Ottomans? You're not making that sort of claim without having verified it, right? You have some proof in his own words that he made takfir on them right?

 

[Omar del Sur]

here's what Sheikh Ibn Baz has said:

"Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab did not rebel against the Ottoman Caliphate as far as I know, because there was no area in Najd that was under Turkish rule. Rather Najd consisted of small emirates and scattered villages, and each town or village, no matter how small, was ruled by an independent emir. These were emirates between which there were fighting, wars and disputes. So Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab did not rebel against the Ottoman state, rather he rebelled against the corrupt situation in his own land, and he strove in jihad for the sake of Allaah and persisted until the light of this call spread to other lands"

@AdoonkaAlle but according to you, I'm just a brainwashed person.... so surely- you have some proof in his own words of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab making takfir of the Ottomans right? I mean, this campaign against the Sheikh is pretty important to you Sufis so.... you've done your homework on this and you have the smoking gun proof, right?

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

@Omar del Sur
I already provided examples from miaw’s own work (removal of doubts ) in the very same thread that you quoted my post about intercession. You didn’t bother to address it then so I hope you that this time it’ll be different. I’ll repost it again

From them is their statement: “We do not associate any partners with Allaah – rather we bear witness that none creates nor provides sustenance nor brings benefit or harm except Allaah alone, having no partner – and that Muhammad sall Allaahu ‘alaiyhi wa sallam does not possess the ability to bring benefit to himself nor harm – let alone ‘Abdul Qaadir or other than him! However... I am a sinner, and the righteous people have a lofty status with Allaah, so it is through them that I ask of Allaah.”

So answer them with what preceded and it is: “That those against whom the Messenger of Allaah sall Allaahu ‘alaiyhi wa sallam fought were people who affirmed what you have just mentioned, and they affirmed that their idols did not have the ability to control anything – and that they (the mushriks) only wanted (to use) their lofty position and their intercession.”


And recite to him that which Allaah has mentioned in His Book and which He has made clear.

So if he says: “These aayaat were revealed with regards to those who worship al asnaam (the idols) – so how can you equate the righteous people with idols? Or how can you equate the prophets with idols?”

Then answer him with what has preceded. And if he affirms that the kuffaar (disbelievers) used to testify that all the ruboobeeyah (Lordship) is for Allaah, and that they sought only shafaa’ah (intercession) from the ones that they turned to – but he wishes to distinguish between their action and his action, with what he has mentioned, then mention to him that from the kuffaar were some who would call upon the idols, and some who would call upon the awliyaa (beloved servants of Allaah) about whom Allaah says:

«Those upon whom they call seek a means to Allaah, as to which of them should be the closest.»

And His Statement, subhaanahu wa ta’aala:

«And when Allaah will say, “O ‘Eesaa ibn Maryam! Did you say to the people, “Take me and my mother as ilah instead of Allaah?”” He will say, “How free from all imperfections are You! It was not for me to say that which I had no right to say! If I had said that then you would certainly have known it. You know what is in my nafs and I do now know what is in Your nafs. Indeed You are the Knower of the Hidden and Unseen.”»


And say to him, “Do you know that Allaah has declared the person who seeks (the intercession) of the idols to be a kaafir, and He has also declared to be a kaafir the person who seeks (the intercession) of the righteous people, and Allaah’s Messenger fought against them?”

So if he says: “The kuffaar (disbelievers) sought from them - whereas I bear witness that Allaah is the One who brings benefit, and the One who brings harm and the One who controls all the affairs, and I do not seek anything from anyone other than Him, and (that) the righteous people do not have any part in this matter. However, I turn to them and I hope from Allaah for their intercession.”

Then the answer is: “That this is exactly the same as the statement of the kuffaar!” And recite to him His Statement, He the Most High:

«And those who take awliyaa (protector/guardian) besides Him (say), “We worship them only so that they may bring us close to Allaah!”»

Source: kash shubuhat (removal of doubts )pg 10-13 link: https://download.ilmussalaf.com/Books/Kashfush-Shubhaat-Eng.pdf

As for takfir of the ottomans & others read the following excerpt

The second issue: To disbelieve in that which is worshipped instead of Allah, and this means to make Takfir (declare as disbelievers) upon the polytheists (Mushrikin) and the disavowal from them and that which they worship alongside Allah.
So whoever does not make Takfir upon the polytheists of the turkish state (i.e. the Ottomans!) and the grave-worshippers like the people of Makkah (!!!) and [upon] others from those who worship the righteous (Salihin) and left the Tawhid (monotheism) of Allah for Shirk (polytheism) and exchanged the Sunnah of his Messenger – sallalalhu ‘alayhi wa sallam – with innovations, then he is a disbeliever like them even if dislikes their religion und hates them and loves Islam and its people.
This is so because the one who does not declare the polytheists to be disbelievers has not accepted the Qur`an. The Qur`an declares the polytheists as disbelievers, and commands to declare them as such and to show enmity towards them and to fight them.”

Source: al-Durar al-Saniyya vol 9 pg 291.

So anyone who doesn’t make takfir of the ottomans, people of Makkah etc is a a disbeliever like them even if he dislikes their religion and hates them and loves Islam and its people. What do you say to this ?


The followers of miaw attacked hijaz, ahsa, as sham, yemen areas that were under ottoman rule.

 

[Omar del Sur]

@Omar del Sur
I already provided examples from miaw’s own work (removal of doubts ) in the very same thread that you quoted my post about intercession. You didn’t bother to address it then so I hope you that this time it’ll be different. I’ll repost it again


Source: kash shubuhat (removal of doubts )pg 10-13 link: https://download.ilmussalaf.com/Books/Kashfush-Shubhaat-Eng.pdf

As for takfir of the ottomans & others read the following excerpt


Source: al-Durar al-Saniyya vol 9 pg 291.

So anyone who doesn’t make takfir of the ottomans, people of Makkah etc is a a disbeliever like them even if he dislikes their religion and hates them and loves Islam and its people. What do you say to this ?


The followers of miaw attacked hijaz, ahsa, as sham, yemen areas that were under ottoman rule.

Refuting The Doubt: Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhāb Revolted Against The Ottoman State​

so.... obviously, different people will say different things. There was some fighting. I'm sure the Sufis will say Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab started it. The Sheikh in the video above says the Sheikh fought in legitimate self-defense.

The Sheikh may or may not have been involved in a Suficaust. So like I've said, the Sufis hate him. To the Sufis, he is like Hitler, he is the person who may have carried out a Suficaust and the Sufis constantly want to bring up this possible Suficaust.

Myself, I respect Sheikh ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab raheem Allah.

Whatever happened, happened. I am not a follower of any Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect. Being against grave-worship isn't something he invented. He is a Sheikh from the past and I respect him like I respect other great Sheikhs from the past.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Refuting The Doubt: Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhāb Revolted Against The Ottoman State​

so.... obviously, different people will say different things. There was some fighting. I'm sure the Sufis will say Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab started it. The Sheikh in the video above says the Sheikh fought in legitimate self-defense.

The Sheikh may or may not have been involved in a Suficaust. So like I've said, the Sufis hate him. To the Sufis, he is like Hitler, he is the person who may have carried out a Suficaust and the Sufis constantly want to bring up this possible Suficaust.

Myself, I respect Sheikh ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab raheem Allah.

Whatever happened, happened. I am not a follower of any Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect. Being against grave-worship isn't something he invented. He is a Sheikh from the past and I respect him like I respect other great Sheikhs from the past.

You ask for evidence but when I present it you completely ignore it. Why ask for it if you know you’re going to simply dismiss it ?

Islam has existed for more than 1400 yrs while najdism/wahabism became established in the 18th century. Leaving najidsm doesn't equal to leaving islam, so don't let it blind you.

 

[Omar del Sur]

You ask for evidence but when I present it you completely ignore it. Why ask for it if you know you’re going to simply dismiss it ?

Islam has existed for more than 1400 yrs while najdism/wahabism became established in the 18th century. Leaving najidsm doesn't equal to leaving islam, so don't let it blind you.

I accept that the Sheikh may have been involved in a Suficaust. Maybe he was attacked and it was self-defense. Maybe he was the attacker. I don't know.

Regardless, I'm still not interested in worshipping graves or saints and I'm not convinced those things are part of Islam. And I think this is a problem with the Sufi approach of focusing on history with a Remember The Suficaust campaign- rather than focusing on the actual ideas.

And the actual ideas were things like "don't worship graves," "don't pray to saints" and things like that.

 

[Periplus]

U man are the ones doing takfir on all these Muslim leaders and then you say we takfir anyone who opposes us lol

What do you mean “we”?

I swear you’re in and out of jail and do haram on the regular.

You ain’t no sheikh.

 

[Djokovic]

What do you mean “we”?

I swear you’re in and out of jail and do haram on the regular.

You ain’t no sheikh.

Better than doing shirk and bidah

 

[InaShaqalle]

@Omar del Sur what are the pros and cons of the Muslim Brotherhood

 

[Omar del Sur]

@Omar del Sur what are the pros and cons of the Muslim Brotherhood

let me get back to you, I have a book somewhere that goes into some detail on the subject and I'll upload a bit from it later insha'Allah

 

[Djokovic]

 

[Omar del Sur]

@Omar del Sur what are the pros and cons of the Muslim Brotherhood

okay, I posted a thread with some resources about them

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/fifty-scholastic-observations-regarding-the-muslim-brotherhood.129808/

there's a lot to discuss when it comes to them. but the bottom line is they are a deviant, masonic group and people should stay away from them. they're supposedly a Muslim group but rather than be concerned with things like tawheed, their main focus basically is trying to get people to go out and get involved in revolutions. I believe they are a tool of anti-Islamic forces to try to destabilize Muslim countries and incite civil wars and chaos in Muslim countries.

I don't know that much about Al-Shabaab's ideology but if you look at their ideology, I can pretty much guarantee that the Muslim Brotherhood is like the ideological grandfather of Al-Shabaab. This is because the Muslim Brotherhood is like the ideological grandfather of groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shabaab, these kinds of groups. The Muslim Brotherhood ideology is like the octopus and these other groups are like the tentacles. They promote themselves as being these defenders of Islam and then they go and incite people to go out and commit violence. They also are very strongly connected with Masonry. So they claim to be these hardcore defenders of Islam but weirdly they have beliefs that are very strange and are not actually in line with Islam. I've heard they are structured like a secret society and they have hidden beliefs at the top that the ordinary members are not taught until and unless they rise through the ranks. They're a weird, dangerous group and I think they should be outlawed. At the top I don't even think they're Muslims. I think at the top they are some of sort of weird occultist types. I think that's why you had weird stuff like them trying to unite the religions... you'll see them espousing these kinds of weird beliefs and it's because at the top they are a Freemason group.

 

[Qeelbax]

Idk why y’all act dense. We are talking about these so called muslims that wouldn’t think twice about supporting the mass killing of Muslims/Non Muslims that don’t follow Islam to the T, or at least there extreme version of Islam. I know we say that these terrorist groups are funded by ajnabi but yet there is major support for groups like Alshabaab, don’t like y’all haven’t seen that list of clans supporting/opposing alshabaab. These people have influence and they’ve influenced some muslims to believe their shit. All this stemmed from the Nejd Desert.

 

[Qeelbax]

To be fair though, let’s represent Salafis accurately. If i’m not mistaken, Salafis see a difference between Tawwasul and Istigatha. What Salafis are against isn’t only Tawwasul (Modern Salafis consider that to be a bid’ah) but what they make Takfir over is Istigatha, calling directly upon the saints with the belief that help comes from Allah alone.

Huh??? They are against tawwasul?

War ilaahi yaqaano, isn’t there hadith of the Sahaba practicing tawwasul?

 

[Qeelbax]

Can you just post some actual content from his books and refute him on that basis?

The Sufis don't do this. I've seen videos refuting Khomeini for example- they use actual passages from his books, they show you what's in his books and they refute it. I've seen content where they refute the Shia- they use what's actually in the books or quotes from the Shia scholars, etc. That's the real way of scholarly refutation.

But you never see this with Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. Why? Because what are the Sufis going to refute? Are they going to open the chapter in Kitab at Tawheed warning against amulets and say "see!".

There is no Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab sect and there is no Madkhali sect. Madkhali has been backed by Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Ibn Baz, Sheikh Uthaymeen, Sheikh Madkhali is just a Salafi scholar. He just gets slandered a lot because he refuted the ikwaanis and Sayyid Qutb and this made people angry at him.

As for the ten nullifiers of Islam, here they are.

https://i.redd.it/rb2vt2dtm1381.jpg

(putting the url because the img wouldn't upload)

Do you ever stfu about sufis. Sufis are mashallah group outside of the subsect that do bidah, they are a huge factor in the growth of Islam. Your kind on the other hand…

 

[Qeelbax]

But you never see this with Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. Why? Because what are the Sufis going to refute? Are they going to open the chapter in Kitab at Tawheed warning against amulets and say "see!".

You are really defending the man that was completely ostracized from all the madhabs. The man that claimed for the past 800 years no one was following islam and therefore they were kuffar. The man that massacred hundreds if not thousands of muslims whether they just be average people or sheikhs or imams because they didn’t follow him.