Who is Shaykh Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab...??

[AdoonkaAlle]

I was talking about ibn saud the first king of the third Saudi state.

But you quoted @Ebuo who was referring to the 1st saud who lived during the time of miaw.

 

[Anubis]

But you quoted @Ebuo who was referring to the 1st saud who lived during the time of miaw.

"ostracised and was wanted by the whole region for his dawah and was exiled."
i got mixed up but my point was this was he was wrong in saying :
"used the deen to kill those who opposed King Saud".
He was in charge of religious affairs and Saud was in charge of political and military affairs. The system still exists in Saudi with his descendants in charge of religious affairs.
He eradicated polytheistic practices.

 

[Aurelian]

"ostracised and was wanted by the whole region for his dawah and was exiled."
i got mixed up but my point was this was he was wrong in saying :
"used the deen to kill those who opposed King Saud".
He was in charge of religious affairs and Saud was in charge of political and military affairs. The system still exists in Saudi with his descendants in charge of religious affairs.
He eradicated polytheistic practices.

The killing needs legitimacy, which abdulwahhaba provided it. And Saud used the religious militia that their inspiration was abdulwahhab.

 

[Anubis]

The killing needs legitimacy, which abdulwahhaba provided it. And Saud used the religious militia that their inspiration was abdulwahhab.

Who was killed?

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

"ostracised and was wanted by the whole region for his dawah and was exiled."
i got mixed up but my point was this was he was wrong in saying :
"used the deen to kill those who opposed King Saud".
He was in charge of religious affairs and Saud was in charge of political and military affairs. The system still exists in Saudi with his descendants in charge of religious affairs.
He eradicated polytheistic practices.

As @Ebuo stated miaw provided the legitimacy with which ibn saud would then use to spread the dawah of miaw. He came with a different understanding of tawheed & shirk and made takfir of muslims based on this.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Who was killed?

Anyone who didn't agree with his understanding, look at what he claims

And I inform you of myself – by God, whom there is none deserving of worship save Him: I sought knowledge, and those who knew me believed I had knowledge whilst I did not know the meaning of la ilaha illa’Llah at that time, nor know the religion of Islam, before this goodness that God graced me with. Such was also the case with my teachers; there was no man among them who knew [any of] this. And if someone from the scholars of this and the surrounding areas claims he knew the meaning of la ilaha illa’Llah, or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims about his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied, uttered falsehood, hoodwinked the people, and praised him with something he doesn’t possess.

(Al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 10:51. )

What do you think the practical implication would be of such a belief ? can you even imagine a scholar claiming this in our age, that no one understands meaning of shahada or islam except for himself ?

How is it possible that the entire arabian peninsular was full of mushriks and the only muslims were those who followed his teachings ?

Mufid al-Mustafid fi Kufri Tarik al-Tawhid by Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab 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.

 

[Anubis]

Anyone who didn't agree with his understanding, look at what he claims



(Al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 10:51. )

What do you think the practical implication would be of such a belief ? can you even imagine a scholar claiming this in our age, that no one understands meaning of shahada or islam except for himself ?

How is it possible that the entire arabian peninsular was full of mushriks and the only muslims were those who followed his teachings ?

Mufid al-Mustafid fi Kufri Tarik al-Tawhid by Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab 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.

The sheikh said:
"‘As for takfir, I only make takfir of whoever knows the religion of the Messenger ﷺ and thereafter insults it, forbids people from it, and manifests enmity towards whoever practices it. This is who I make takfir of. And most of the ummah, and all praise is for God, is not like this.’"

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

The sheikh said:
"‘As for takfir, I only make takfir of whoever knows the religion of the Messenger ﷺ and thereafter insults it, forbids people from it, and manifests enmity towards whoever practices it. This is who I make takfir of. And most of the ummah, and all praise is for God, is not like this.’"

There's 2 issues with that statement which prove that he did more than that

1.) What he considers to be shirk or kufr, etc is all based on his understanding of tawheed & shirk . So all those who differed with his understanding, he views them as going against islam, hence why he made takfir of them.

2.) In addition to his takfir of huraymila, and claim that only he alone knew the true meaning of la ilaha illa’Llah; miaw dawah was used as a justification – first by Ibn Sa‘ud, then his son – to kill, slaughter and assassinate multitudes of Muslims during miaw's own lifetime; there being no public word of condemnation or unambiguous dissent recorded from him.

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”):

Among that which the Shaykh, the imām, the head among heads of guidance Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhāb – rahimahullāhu ta’ālā – said: When some of those who claim to have knowledge from the people of ‘Uyaynah doubted (and) when the people of Huraymilā apostated, the Shaykh was asked to write some words with which Allāh would benefit him

........ he made takfir upon those whom he felt were kuffar and upon those whom he felt had apostatised from islam whether they were ottomans or other than ottomans, that's what i believe he did. Whether he was right or wrong it's that it was rational for him making takfir..........

Truly shocking wale, the only reason why he doesn't want to discuss it is that he's a salafi who follows the teachings of miaw so there's a conflict of interest.

Just imagine declaring muslims to be kafirs because you feel like it ? Not only did they not declare ottoman's to be kafir but also anyone who didn't declare takfir upon the ottomans, were also kafir. Look at also what they state about the people of makkah, muskrikeen who worshipped graves etc.

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 9/291

 

[reer]

@مسافر the works of sh mohaned bin abdul Wahab should be taught in somalia especially in central regions and other sufi areas like bardera

 

[Ismail99]

@مسافر the works of sh mohaned bin abdul Wahab should be taught in somalia especially in central regions and other sufi areas like bardera

are there still sufis in JL?

 

[مسافر]

are there still sufis in JL?

who better to ask than @Sheikh Sufi

 

[XaawoLuul]

There's 2 issues with that statement which prove that he did more than that

1.) What he considers to be shirk or kufr, etc is all based on his understanding of tawheed & shirk . So all those who differed with his understanding, he views them as going against islam, hence why he made takfir of them.

2.) In addition to his takfir of huraymila, and claim that only he alone knew the true meaning of la ilaha illa’Llah; miaw dawah was used as a justification – first by Ibn Sa‘ud, then his son – to kill, slaughter and assassinate multitudes of Muslims during miaw's own lifetime; there being no public word of condemnation or unambiguous dissent recorded from him.

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 made takfir upon those whom he felt were kuffar and upon those whom he felt had apostatised from islam whether they were ottomans or other than ottomans, that's what i believe he did. Whether he was right or wrong it's that it was rational for him making takfir..........

Truly shocking wale, the only reason why he doesn't want to discuss it is that he's a salafi who follows the teachings of miaw so there's a conflict of interest.

Just imagine declaring muslims to be kafirs because you feel like it ? Not only did they not declare ottoman's to be kafir but also anyone who didn't declare takfir upon the ottomans, were also kafir. Look at also what they state about the people of makkah, muskrikeen who worshipped graves etc.

The way so many young somalis believe in MIAW and the Saudi dawah is so sad when this najdi dawah really only serves the saudi patriotic cause.
Waxaad ii sheegtaa, what’s islamic scholarship like in Somalia? Could one go back home to somalia in the pursuit of knowledge?

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

The way so many young somalis believe in MIAW and the Saudi dawah is so sad when this najdi dawah really only serves the saudi patriotic cause.
Waxaad ii sheegtaa, what’s islamic scholarship like in Somalia? Could one go back home to somalia in the pursuit of knowledge?

The reason why that’s the case is because that’s what’s available to them when they want to learn more about diinta. Most litterateur out there is salafi, even in non salafi masjid you’ll find salafi books, pamphlets etc. Also majority of the popular speakers are either salafi or subscribe to their teachings in one way or the other.

Regarding dalkeena I would say that you’ll find traditional scholarship etc but ever since the war that gap has been filled more & more by those from salafi backgrounds.

However I would say that within Salafis you’ll find some more extreme than others while others even though May identify as salafi don’t simply teach from their books alone etc.

Except for major cities the most prevalent schools are the traditional ones laakin they’ve their own problems as well. Most of the people simply associate them with digri & not centres for learning.

The biggest problem they’ve is that they’re Ashari, although they don’t share the same doctrine as Salafis they nonetheless display the same bias in their teachings like only them having the correct aqeedah etc

Both claim to be represent orthodox Islam laakin due to their different understanding they both have mistakes in their teachings of Islam. This is what I’ve come to conclude after studying their doctrines etc

It maybe challenging task laakin I would advise that you take the good and leave all that you find doubtful about them.

You can learn tajweed,memorise quran, fiqh issues but when it comes to matters of refuting other groups, claiming to have the correct understanding in all aspects of the deen similar to that of the Prophet peace be upon him, sahaba then I would advise you be careful & not be swayed by them.

Hope this was somewhat helpful

 

[reer]

are there still sufis in JL?

yes i know in gedo and kismayo there are sufis.

 

[Ismail99]

The way so many young somalis believe in MIAW and the Saudi dawah is so sad when this najdi dawah really only serves the saudi patriotic cause.
Waxaad ii sheegtaa, what’s islamic scholarship like in Somalia? Could one go back home to somalia in the pursuit of knowledge?

The reason why they follow it is because they were the only ones who fought back against ethiopia when everybody else ran away

 

[Aurelian]

The way so many young somalis believe in MIAW and the Saudi dawah is so sad when this najdi dawah really only serves the saudi patriotic cause.
Waxaad ii sheegtaa, what’s islamic scholarship like in Somalia? Could one go back home to somalia in the pursuit of knowledge?

Exsacatly, the scholars now and in the past, go along the monarchs decisions, woman driving is haram, the monrarch says it is ok, woman driving is halal.

 

[Anubis]

The reason why that’s the case is because that’s what’s available to them when they want to learn more about diinta. Most litterateur out there is salafi, even in non salafi masjid you’ll find salafi books, pamphlets etc. Also majority of the popular speakers are either salafi or subscribe to their teachings in one way or the other.

Regarding dalkeena I would say that you’ll find traditional scholarship etc but ever since the war that gap has been filled more & more by those from salafi backgrounds.

However I would say that within Salafis you’ll find some more extreme than others while others even though May identify as salafi don’t simply teach from their books alone etc.

Except for major cities the most prevalent schools are the traditional ones laakin they’ve their own problems as well. Most of the people simply associate them with digri & not centres for learning.

The biggest problem they’ve is that they’re Ashari, although they don’t share the same doctrine as Salafis they nonetheless display the same bias in their teachings like only them having the correct aqeedah etc

Both claim to be represent orthodox Islam laakin due to their different understanding they both have mistakes in their teachings of Islam. This is what I’ve come to conclude after studying their doctrines etc

It maybe challenging task laakin I would advise that you take the good and leave all that you find doubtful about them.

You can learn tajweed,memorise quran, fiqh issues but when it comes to matters of refuting other groups, claiming to have the correct understanding in all aspects of the deen similar to that of the Prophet peace be upon him, sahaba then I would advise you be careful & not be swayed by them.

Hope this was somewhat helpful

What doctrine do you follow

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

What doctrine do you follow

I follow the doctrine that has been passed down to us excluding the asharis & salafi interpretation & understanding when it comes certain matters of aqeedah like for example salafi classification & understanding of tawheed, ashari understanding of Allah’s sifaat etc

Basically I don’t believe that every aspect of their tradition is exactly the same as that of Prophet peace be upon him or his companions.

What they claim to be from orthodox Islam in the above examples that I mentioned is simply the interpretation of the texts from their own scholars & not the understanding of the Prophet peace be upon him.

 

[XaawoLuul]

The reason why that’s the case is because that’s what’s available to them when they want to learn more about diinta. Most litterateur out there is salafi, even in non salafi masjid you’ll find salafi books, pamphlets etc. Also majority of the popular speakers are either salafi or subscribe to their teachings in one way or the other.

Regarding dalkeena I would say that you’ll find traditional scholarship etc but ever since the war that gap has been filled more & more by those from salafi backgrounds.

However I would say that within Salafis you’ll find some more extreme than others while others even though May identify as salafi don’t simply teach from their books alone etc.

Except for major cities the most prevalent schools are the traditional ones laakin they’ve their own problems as well. Most of the people simply associate them with digri & not centres for learning.

The biggest problem they’ve is that they’re Ashari, although they don’t share the same doctrine as Salafis they nonetheless display the same bias in their teachings like only them having the correct aqeedah etc

Both claim to be represent orthodox Islam laakin due to their different understanding they both have mistakes in their teachings of Islam. This is what I’ve come to conclude after studying their doctrines etc

It maybe challenging task laakin I would advise that you take the good and leave all that you find doubtful about them.

You can learn tajweed,memorise quran, fiqh issues but when it comes to matters of refuting other groups, claiming to have the correct understanding in all aspects of the deen similar to that of the Prophet peace be upon him, sahaba then I would advise you be careful & not be swayed by them.

Hope this was somewhat helpful

Agree 100%.
Shukran walaal, I’ll take that all onboard. Allaha noo kaa daayo.

 

[Royalflush]

read fathul majeed sharax kitaab at tawheed which was written by sheikh abdul wahhab

it is the basis for the understanding of tawheed and the different forms of takfir i recommend it 100% it will strengthen your understanding.

@Ebuo the scholars are human if theyve made mistakes we reject that and we take what they have done as right. to insult the shoyookh is a major sin in islam.