Wahhabism
Jun 9th, 2008
To see things clearly, with focus and in perspective one needs two eyes. Then things appear in three dimensions. We have been looking at the matter of terrorism with one eye. That is why our actions are ineffective. The first eye must look on the history of Islam, and in this case the history of wahhabism. The second eye must look on something in Europe, because we have been here before. In the nineteenth century and early twentieth we had an almost identical phenomenon. That was clearly identified by European intellectuals, Dostoyevsky and others, as nihilism, but the nihilism of the parents’ generation acted out by the young people who in effect say to them, “If you don’t believe in anything, why not do whatever you want? Why live boring respectable lives?”
First, before we approach the story of wahhabism, we must locate it within Islam itself. As it has reached us, Islam comprises three distinct dimensions.
First, outward practice such as both the acts of worship and ordinary transactions, i.e. law, covering all aspects, commercial, civil and criminal, etc. This is the Shari’ah which has been transmitted by the four accepted legal schools.
Second, a rational science which encompasses what is necessarily true about the Divine, what is inconceivable for Him and what conceivable, and similarly for the prophets, the angels, etc. This is transmitted by two acceptable schools.
Third, the spiritual path which is generally known as Sufism, which is transmitted by a number of different tariqas. All three of these dimensions with their different schools were universally agreed upon. All of this exists under the umbrella of governance by a known contract. That contract has clauses for muslim subjects and non-muslim subjects. All of this is sustained by a very necessary scholarship involving deep knowledge of Arabic, Qur’anic commentary and exposition of legal cases.
Wahhabism was originally an eighteenth century movement among desert Arabs who rose in insurrection against the Ottomans. Their teaching was characterised by being:
simplistic and literalist, i.e. it rejected all the above three dimensions and their schools in favour of directly deriving theology and law from a literalist understanding of the Qur’an and books of traditions,
insurrectionary; they overthrew legitimate governance and began an insurgency movement against the Ottomans who were forced to stamp them out,
fanatical; I use this word advisedly, but intend by it their declaration of Muslims who disagreed with them beyond the pale of Islam. In our time, this is evidenced by the fact that huge numbers of the victims of suicide bombers are Muslims.
The first phase of wahhabism ended with their containment as a movement to the eastern area of the Najd.
We pick up the thread again, when in the early twentieth century, an inheritor of the ruling wahhabi clan, ‘Abd al-Aziz ibn Sa’ud, a remarkably talented and adventurous man, embarked on the exploit of restoring his family’s fortunes. Along the way to that he met the remnants of the wahhabi sect, and saw the advantage their steely ruthless fanaticism gave him in his fight. He set in process the conversion of the desert tribes to their creed. None of that might have made any enduring impact on history if it had not happened when it did, when the eyes of European foreign policy makers were glued on the fortunes of the Ottomans. I pass no judgement on this, but simply want to tell it as factually as possible.
Thus, Ibn Sa’ud, who was a wily and worldly-aware man, understood what none of his rather simple followers did, that on the international stage he would have to be under the patronage of one of the great world powers. It was initially the British. They fostered him. Although undecided for some period between him and Sharif Hussain of Mecca, in the end his undoubted intrepidness won the day and he became the undisputed ruler of the Arabian peninsula. Saudi oil came to prominence. British influence wained. The patronage of the now Saudi Arabia passed to the USA, at the time of Roosevelt who personally met Ibn Sa’ud. Built into the new state, however, was Ibn Sa’ud’s courtship of the wahhabis and the manner in which he transformed the desert Arabs into wahhabis and then used them as the force to underpin his kingdom, as he and his family and their doctrine were not widely liked in Arabia.
Given the centrality to Muslims of Mecca and Medina, and the astonishing oil wealth after the price hikes of the seventies, Muslims from all over the world went to Saudi Arabia to find donations for all the worthy projects they had, most importantly the building of mosques. The donations they received had an implicit price: sing the wahhabi tune in your countries and in your mosques, which many did. The great majority of British mosques, however, are from small Pakistani communities often hostile to wahhabism and funding their mosques from their own hard-earned cash.
The second matter that affected us here in Britain were the graduates of Medina university who returned as propagandists for wahhabism.
The result was that both a strong and a dilute form of wahhabism spread, based on a primitive fundamentalist idea, in a christian sense, that anyone could take the divinely revealed book and make judgements from it and from traditions by reading them literally, although now with non-Arabs this interpretation was dependent on translations, which were often atrociously bad.
Within this new form, the dissatisfactions of some of the youth were vented by their fighting in Afghanistan, and later Chechnya and Bosnia, or by their going to Medina to get a programming in a more erudite kind of wahhabism.
The Afghanistan fighting entered into the arena of modern geopolitics. The Mujahidun leaders went to Washington and then the CIA reciprocated and trained fighters, like Bin Laden, who would later turn out to be the core of the new threat. It did not stop in Afghanistan. There was Chechnya, another land on the frontier between different geo-political interests. When the Bosnian crisis erupted, brigades of these young fighters were recruited by the Americans for Bosnia, thus cementing their sense of identity as an international movement.
When the geopolitical winds changed, they of course, found themselves on the outside. In many cases they either went on as lone volunteers to new conflicts or returned disgruntled to their own countries or to other lands.
An international culture had been created, whose fruits we see today. However, that movement ought better to be seen as an expression of the natural idealism of young people and their frustration with the political processes of the age. Every society and every generation is confronted with that, and it is a measure of the wisdom of a society how it deals with it.
To return to our other theme.
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries young Europeans tied dynamite to themselves and blew themselves up in crowded public places. Our greatest intellectuals looked closely at this phenomenon, and diagnosed it clearly as nihilism. They saw nihilism as the result of a high idealism, so high as to be unattainable. The idealist despises other people for not having and striving for ideals, and in the end comes to despise himself for not attaining his own. Thus, the suicide bomber can blow up men, women and children, and he can also blow himself up. Wahhabi idealism is marked theologically by the elevation of God literally high above the seven heavens, a creed which, if believed literally and physically, removes them from the community of Islam.
However, it is important for us to recognise that this phenomenon is as much and perhaps more a product of our late capitalist society as it is of a particular sect. Understood within the context of societal breakdown in terms of our mounting criminal statistics – wife-beatings, rapes, murders, child abuse and more – then it is a part of a complete symptom picture of the nihilism of our age.
As a sect it has to be seen that a rather weak signal from an extremely peripheral movement was greatly amplified first by oil wealth, and then later by its usefulness to geo-political considerations of other powers. Otherwise, we might have seen it die away of its own accord long ago. This strange seed found some soil in which to sprout in our society.
Thus seen, it is for the Muslims to deal with by restoring that picture of Islam which I outlined at the beginning. That deprives this sect of its oxygen. The process is both a restoration of Islamic learning and of Islamic social mores and key aspects of shari’ah such as zakat, the charitable tax.
Undoubtedly police activities to find and prevent terrorist activities must proceed. These people are merely criminals and Muslims must help the authorities to detain them and prevent them. In that the terrorist is no different from a murderer, rapist or robber.
But possibly the gravest danger of the terrorist threat is that it distract us from the genuinely deep crisis of the chronic nihilism of modern society, which extends a great deal further than the activities of a few madmen. It is the nihilism of our age at all levels of our society that is the matter facing us, and it has disturbing consequences. In that we rely on Dostoyevsky’s key insight: that the destructiveness of the anarchists of his time was their expression of the nihilism of the previous generation. In that, the suicide bomber is also a symptom of a deeper malaise of British society. In these circumstances, perhaps the Muslim community might render a deeper service to Britain, and certainly stand ready to do so.
Abdassamad Clarke, Norwich
Salaamz,
Wahabism existed long before the period your article mentions, only that it existed under a different guise.
Please email us if you would like the article on ‘Origins of Wahhabism’.
Masalama
Assalamu Alaykum wa rahmatullah,
first thing comes to mind after reading this article is there is not a single reference, so for all I know this could be the thoughts of someone who is biased and hates the dawah of the shaykh.
I have been to this Masjid before and the people looked very intelligent and were friendly thats why this article came as a shock to me.
Allah azza wa jall said to the Jews & Christians “produce your proof for if you truthful” (Baqara 2:111)
secondly I would like to ask you what does Wahhab mean?
most people who can see past the hatred they have for Salafi’s, they will realise that Al-Wahhab is an attribute of Allah azza wa jall, and Abd means slave…. so Abdul-wahhab means slave of Wahhab, who is this Wahhab?
The word Wahhabi is the attributive derived from al-Wahhaab (the Bestower), who is Allaah, as The Qur’an says:
“Our Lord! Let not our hearts deviate (from the truth) after You have guided us, and grant us mercy from You. Truly, You are the Bestower [al-Wahhaab]”
[Al Imraan 3:8]
Would you agree that Allah is Wahhab?
Just so you know the Shaykhs name was Muhammad, not Wahhab because Allah is Wahhab,
also how can you write an article about Wahhabism and not write about the life of Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab?
The writer very sneakily crept in the word suicide bombings, he/she forgot to write is that the Saudi Salafi’s were the 1st muslims to condemn suicide bombings, please show us when did Shaykh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab teach suicide bombings.
I dont have enough time to write down all my thoughts but inshAllah I will soon,
I look forward to your reply.
And of course Allah the bestower (Al-Wahhab) knows best.
wa alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah,
First, thank you for your post. You are quite right: the term Wahhabism is a misnomer and an inappropriate use of one of the names of Allah in this context. It was used in the journalistic sense to denote the well-known modern movement, and is only used here so as to be understood by the type of person who comes to the site. We might have used salafi, but that is also an inappropriate term since all Muslims refer themselves back to the noble salaf. Then we might have referred to the Najdi movement, but that would have been too obscure for the majority of our readers, who include non-Muslims not well versed in the ins and outs of Muslims’ history.
I do not doubt that Muhammad ibn ‘Abdalwahhab did not teach suicide bombing. However, I suspect that you have not read part two of the article. If so, please read it, and then give me your comments.
As-salamu alaikum,
Abdassamad
The two parts of the article have been merged, and are to be found above.
The Term Wahabi is a missnomer. But in reality, the origin was well documented by well known Indian Scholars.The question is admitting the wrong. Many indian scholars often labelled as wahabi commented on Shaykh Abdal wahab movement on heresay. They based it on what they heard but never approved of them. All their view concurs with statment made by Imam Abadasamd Clark. You will get the gist of the political situation of Arabia if you read through the biography of Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni
http://www.azharacademy.com/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=1004 and their imprisonment by Sharif of the city siding with the British colonial power. What can be said is that Wahabi movment either played part knowingly or became the tool of breaking of Khilafat by then colonial power. We demand christian to listen to reason when dealing with their relegious philisopy, let us demand the same from muslims as well.
As-salamu alaikum,
Thank you for your post on this.
I would only reiterate the part played in the whole story by the enigmatic drive to nihilism, whose origins lie in exalting the ideal over the real. The truth for many Muslims today is that Islam has become an ideal, indeed THE ideal, and so we no longer have access to the mercy of the Sunnah which is based on transmitted practice. Islam is not an ideal, because it is attainable. It is attainable because it was attained. It is attainable because it was attained not only by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who transmitted it, but all of the very ordinary people of Madinah, who by his presence were transformed into the most extraordinary generation the earth has seen, and who themselves transmitted that transformative Islam so that it passed from generation to generation to our time.
The other process, which we witness all too much today, is that young men and women living in the wastelands of the new world disorder reach around for something to cling to and find it in texts, and of course the texts are true, but they have not been transmitted with the mercy and wisdom without which they can be bent to any purpose one wishes.
May Allah guide those who are sincere to His ways.
Abdassamad
aoa,
what sufi silsila (order) you follow and which zikar you do please?
As-salamu alaikum,
Ajeer,
We are Junaydi Qadiri Shadhili Darqawi insha’Allah.
Abdassamad
asalam alaikum
whats your view about the bareilvi and deobandi issues in the indian sub continent they both claim to be sufis and followers of hanafi madhab,
wa alaikum as-salam,
Yes, it is sad, but look on the bright side: it makes our enemies very happy, so at least someone is enjoying themselves.
Abdassamad
asalam alaikum
can you please advice me on who is right im confused dont know who to follow i sit with both barelvi and deobandi bareilvi say some ulema of deoband have got fatwa of takfir on because the insult the noble prophet sallallalaiwasalam n deobandis say dat is all a lie so please advice me
jazakallah khair
Wa alaikum as-salam,
Both are right and both are wrong, and that is the problem. They both go to extremes in insulting each other and that is the problem. They both distract from the real issue and that is the real problem.
The real issue is not the differences of these two schools of fiqh, but amirate, leadership. These two schools appeared in the collapse of Moghul leadership in Delhi. The issue will only be healed with the appearance of leadership. You cannot have allegiance to a leader because he has the madhhab you like. You choose a leader and he appoints the imams and qadis who decide by the madhhab. Because of their madhhabism, these two schools only cause division. You have to abandon both of these groups.
Ma’a salamah,
Abdassamad
And you have to have good adab with both of these groups and maintain good relations with them, without getting involved in their controversies.
Abdassamad
The author of this article did not include any sources or references for his claims which makes this piece, at best, nothing but a rant.
‘Terrorist’
‘Bin Laden’
‘Chechnya’
‘Suicide Bombing’
One could be forgiven if they thought they’d stumbled onto the Fox News website by mistake.
I also noticed the subtle way he makes takfeer on these so called ‘wahhabis’.
Very poor indeed.
There was not so much need to provide sources since I relied mostly on matters that are common knowledge.
As to ‘rant’, I am not immune from ranting and recognise it when I do it, but do not think that I did so in this piece.
As to ‘takfeer’, all I can find is this: “Wahhabi idealism is marked theologically by the elevation of God literally high above the seven heavens, a creed which, if believed literally and physically, removes them from the community of Islam.” That “if” is a big one, so this is not takfeer.
The rest of the article often leans more towards sympathy, particularly for the radicalised young men who found themselves swept up in treacherous geo-political currents and then betrayed. But in the end, the foreboding presence is not that of wahhabism but nihilism, but few are they who want to tackle that theme.
There is way too much ambiguity in the article.
”There was not so much need to provide sources since I relied mostly on matters that are common knowledge.”
Common knowledge amongst who?
”That “if” is a big one, so this is not takfeer.”
Yes, I noticed the ‘if’ hence ‘subtle’. First you define the ‘wahhabi belief’, then go on to say ‘if it is believed in…” Why describe it as a ‘wahhabi belief’ then go on to say ‘if believed in…’? Surely they have this belief for you to associate it with them, ergo you made takfeer.
”Islam comprises three distinct dimensions.” – Reference for this please.
”…This is transmitted by two acceptable schools.” Names of these ‘schools’ with reference please.
”Third, the spiritual path which is generally known as Sufism…” Known by whom? Certainly not the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) nor his companions.
As to ambiguity, then yourself please be specific and I will try to deal with it insha’Allah.
Well instead of common knowledge then let us say facts that are out in the public arena.
The “if” was there for a reason, since many of the people whom others describe as wahhabis although seeming to physically locate the Lord, would themselves deny that is what they are doing, and one must then take them at their word, so that the “if” applies to absolute literalists, who I hope are in a very small minority. Nevertheless, there is an uncomfortable flirtation with what used to be called tajseem. So, no I have not made takfeer, because that is very abhorrent to me and is a mark of kharijism, but am merely alerting to what I perceive as being quite dangerous.
References: the hadith of Jibril, peace be upon him, on Islam, Iman and Ihsan, and the commentary of Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah be merciful to him, that these three together comprise “deen”.
Two acceptable schools: al-Ash’ari and Maturidi.
Sufism: as a term known to the generations of Islam who also acknowledge words such as ‘aqidah and all the technical terms of the sciences of Islam, which do not exist in the hadith literature at all. So as a technical term it stands in exactly the same position as all the other technical terms. And as a reality, it is as Imam al-Junayd said: Sufism was a reality without a name and today it is a name without a reality. May Allah give us its reality.
Abdassamad
Takfeer is not necessarily a mark of ‘kharijism’. Takfeer is part of Islaam and it is sometimes warranted. However, in this case I don’t think it was.
Two accepted schools of Aqeedah? Where are you getting this from?
The hadeeth of Jibreel mentions Islaam, Imaan and Ihsaan. Doesn’t say anything about Sufis or Tariqahs. When and why was the word ‘Ihsaan’ subsituted for the word(s) Sufism/Tasawwuf?
—
‘Wahhabism’… it rejected all the above three dimensions and their schools in favour of directly deriving theology and law from a literalist understanding of the Qur’an and books of traditions.
—
This is a blatant lie. Not surprising though since your explanation/understanding of the hadeeth of Jibreel itself seems to be flawed.
Abu Abdullah,
If you think “Ihsaan” has been subsituted for Sufism and Sufism wasnt in the early texts then show me where the word “Aqidah” was in the early texts?
You wont find it.
Yet this is the favourit by word of the modernist Salafis. So just as Islam spread and you had to differentiate beleifs and Aqeedah came into the texts. So did Tassawwuf come in to signify ‘Ihsaan’.
Finally In my time with the Salafis (when i was misled by them) they would talk all day about Tawheed yet not one of them ever mentioned to me Surah Ikhlaas was the Surah of Tawheed. Sincerity being the foundation bedrock of Tawheed.
It was ironically Sufis who told me this.
Asalamoalaikum,
Just to clarify the difference between Breilvi and Deobandi.
Breilvi:
The term originates from Breili a place in India where I Imam Ahmed Raza Breilvi was born. These people follow Sunni Hanafi Madhab, and also Accept/practice Sufism. This is Actually the true Sunni Hanafi sect in reality. It had no political motive ever and nor is it ever involved in Politics or appointing Wadi’s or Imams. I am really interested if someone can give any evidence how they relate this to Politics? any reference for that. These are just the Lovers of Rasulullah SAW and they give the highest level of respect and regard to Sayyedul Bashar SAW.
In general this terms is used to describe Ahle Sunnat of Hanafi Mazhab , and they accept the 3 other sunni Madhabs valid.
Deobandi:
Most people are misguided by the this term and consider them sunni. These originated are from Madraasa of Deoband in India and very highly inspired by the Wahabi movement of Saudi Arabia. The only Difference being they do not do rafayadain in prayer.So interms of Madhab they are a Hybrid between Wahabis and Sunnis. They Aqidah is however pure Wahabi and they reject the Intercession by Sayedina Muhammad (SAW).
In gerneral the followers of Abdul Wahab Najadi are known by the following names:
Wahabi = Ahle Hadeeth = Deobandi = Salafi
wa alaikum as-salam,
Sidi Khizer,
I re-read the posts concerning Deoband and Brailvi and am not sure that your letter relates to what is written there.
The division between the two aforementioned groups is one of the festering wounds that pollutes Islam not only in the sub-continent but wherever there are Muslims whose origins are there, which is all over the earth now.
It may seem a very neat conclusion to reach that group A are by definition ‘right’ and group B by definition ‘wrong’, but that still leaves most people with a festering wound and this wound is inside the body of Islam. Group A no doubt feel very virtuous in their ‘rightness’, but the real beneficiaries of this are of course the enemies of Islam who are utterly delighted at every division in Islam.
While I am open to any reasoned judgement from someone properly qualified as to the deviance of this or that group, I am less happy to hear such a judgement from people who are not competent to issue such judgements, since even great scholars tremble before issuing such a judgement. I have never heard a reasoned judgement on either the Brailvi or the Deobandi movement, but only mutual slanging.
The explanation that the two groups of Deoband and Brailvi are branches of the same school that parted when Mughal rule was destroyed violently makes a great deal of sense, particularly when you look at a little of the history of that time. Then why the division and the bitterness?
That is because with the fall of political authority, that role of leadership fell to scholars, and scholars are not competent to lead. Being scholars concerned with all the detail of the deen, they fell into disagreement over details where a ‘leader’ would have united people over major issues and would have overlooked small matters.
So the real issue facing us is not the theological and fiqh disagreements of two groups of scholars and their followers, but how to restore leadership among ourselves and restore Muslim unity. That requires submission on our part. It requires finding the best men and accepting that our task is to be obedient to them for the sake of Allah.
And the scholars? Since the deen is only implemented with knowledge, then the leader must be someone who goes to the people who know the fiqh of what is obligatory, recommended, permissible, disapproved and forbidden. And the scholars have to tell the leader sometimes even when he does not want to hear.
But scholars leading the Muslims almost always proves disastrous, the one famous exception being the movement of Shaykh Uthman dan Fodio, may Allah have mercy on him.
As-salamu alaikum,
Abdassamad
Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab was both a fellow human being and a fellow Muslim. As such, he has the right to be studied in an impartial and objective manner. That is, he has the right to a “fair trial.”
No matter how much one may oppose his teachings (Qur’an & Sunnah), one does not have the right to wrong him.
Indeed, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) has warned,
“Wrongdoing [shall be] darkness on the Day of Resurrection.”
(Recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim.)
When speaking about another person, such as ibn Abdul-Wahhaab or his followers, one should remember the Prophet’s teaching,
“All of a Muslim is inviolable to every other Muslim, with respect to his blood, wealth and honor.” (Recorded by Muslim.)
In all cases, impartiality, objectivity, scholarly integrity and
fairness are to be expected from any Muslim. This must be true even when dealing with one’s enemies or one’s opponents.
Allah has clearly instructed,
“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah, as just witnesses; and
let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just:
that is nearer to piety. And fear Allah, for Allah is well-acquainted
with all that you do”
(al-Maaidah 8).
Allah also says,
“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to
Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and
whether it be (against) rich or poor. Allah is a better protector to both
(than you). So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you avoid
justice. And if you distort your witness or decline to give it, verily
Allah is ever well-acquainted with all that you do”
(al-Nisaa 135).
The above hadiths and verses should make any true believer
shiver from speaking about others with words that are based on
falsehood or filled with unfair or unjust statements. (Jamaal zarabozo)
http://www.haqqonline.com/2009/02/muhammad-ibn-abdul-wahhab.html
Sidi Abdullah,
As-salamu alaikum,
In spite of the fact that I have not attacked Muhammad ibn ‘Abdalwahhab in any way but have referred in a shorthand manner to the movement that derives from him as ‘wahhabi’, you bring your reminder which clearly implies that I or someone else has slandered Muhammad ibn ‘Abdalwahhab. Either you have not read carefully what I have written or this is a technique to make it appear that the person you disagree with is a person of low moral character who slanders Muslims.
It is ironic that you remind me of this, because since my entrance into Islam more than thirty years ago I have endured hearing a constant stream of insults from people who claim an allegiance to Muhammad ibn Abdalwahhab directed at huge numbers of the salihun of Islam, denigrating many of the greatest scholars of Islam. Sidi, your movement is not known for its good manners or its delicacy when discussing the reputations of other Muslims who happen to disagree with its tenets so I find it deceitful for you to assume the high moral ground in this matter.
I have not slandered Muhammad ibn Abdalwahhab in what I wrote above and indeed did not write about him at all since his history is not clear to me. There is a huge amount of polemical literature on his behalf and against him, and it has made his history confusing.
If you find actual statements that I have made slandering anyone, I welcome to be corrected about that, but please do not falsely imply that I have done what I have not.
As for characterising the movement as simplistic, literalist, insurrectionary and fanatical, by insurrectionary I meant to say that it rebelled against the legitimate rulers of the Muslims, the Ottoman Turks, and this is a matter of historical record. If I am wrong show me the error of my ways.
As for what I have written about Abdalaziz ibn Saud, his deals with Churchill etc., it is extremely mild and is all from clearly documented historical sources. Is it not treachery, to make a deal with a kafir to rebel against the Muslim caliph? You tell me. You surely know what Allah, exalted is He, says about those who take the kafirun for friends in preference to the Muminun, a judgement more severe than anything I have said.
As-salamu alaikum,
Abdassamad
AS-salamu alaikum,
Ya Amir Abdassamad,I’m not opportuned to read what that so-called Abdullahi
wrote;but by your highly sound reply,I don’t fear to conclude that he is a munafiq.A true
Al-Murabitun will never,I repeat,will never, object to what an Amir has said – because,they
are not contradictory to Qur’an and Hadith and the fatwas of our Dear
Shaykh Abdalqadir.Please,ignore him next time,don’t waste your precious time on this type
of people.
About e-commerce, the brother hasn’t contacted me yet;in the alternative,can I do the
Norwich Open Trade from Nigeria,or anywhere I may be on the earth’s surface?I sent e-mail
several times to them in the past,but no reply.
Sidi Lateef
NB: I mean “to them, several times.”
He has contacted me.Jazakumullahu-khairan.
Sidi Lateef
Dear Lateef,
As-salamu alaikum,
Thank you for your post.
Abdullah has certainly never claimed to be a Murabit. He is clearly an adherent of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab’s movement who has somehow found this article. There is no harm I think in replying to his posts since they are within the bounds of civility.
As-salamu alaikum,
Imam Abdassamad
As-salamu alaikum,
Lest there be any doubt that in the above I am not making takfeer of wahhabis or salafis but rather warning against the danger inherent in certain anthropomorphic ideas, then read my Letter to a New Muslim: http://www.bogvaerker.dk/LettertoanewMuslim.htm
As salamou alaikum
Regarding the Deobandi/Brewli disagreement, this quote from Shaykh Imran Hossein seems fitting:
“The Caliphate was abolished in Turkey in March 1924. By the end of that same year the old Indian Muslim leadership, comprised of men who knew and lived Islam, went into irreversible decline. They were replaced by the secularly inclined ‘All India Muslim League’, led by men who neither knew nor lived Islam. They presided over the cleverly disguised passage from Islam as the basis of political culture, to the new European political secularism.
It was deceptively spirited in by way of religious nationalism, and emerged as a curious creature named ‘Muslim nationalism’. The passage from the one to the other was so cleverly disguised that it is still not discernible to many Muslims in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.” Taken from http://www.imranhosein.org/articles/13-joomla/29-the-return-of-the-islamic-khilafat.html
Dear Respected ones in Islam
Assalaamu ‘Alaykum Wa Rahmatullaahi Wa Barakaatuh
. I am an aalim based in the UK and I am starting a new programme, NEW HORIZONS on Noor TV based in B’ham. Would you be interested in appearing on the show and telling us your story about embracing Islam?
If so, please, get in touch with me on my email address mullah_h_din@yahoo.co.uk or on my mobile 07805 140 619.
I look forward to hearing from, Insha Allah.
Wassalaam Ma’al Ikraam,
Maulana Hafeezud Din
MEMBER OF SHARI’AH COUNCIL / IMAM
Birmingham
(07805 140 619
http://www.noortvonline.com
http://www.roadtojannah.org
AOA I am presently writing a book on Wahhabism a reply to the book THe Wahhabi myth, mine is called ‘THe Wahhabi Reality, to b published by january 2010 inshallah wihc will clear up in most cases things people dont understand between the Bareilwi and deobandi and the branches of Wahhabism.
Asalaamu ‘Alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
MashAllah, MashAllah, a piece written by our Shaikh Sidi Ad]bdus Sammad Clarke. i couldn’t fault it it all, you seem to have covered everything pretty succintly, better than I ever could. I myself do ‘admit’ to aligning or sympathising more with the Bareilwi school simply because I feel they are more authentically in tune with the traditional and classical form of Islam that you yourself ascribe to. There is a saying that i have come across, relating to Ashaikh Al Imam Ahmad Rida Khan Bareilwi that was said by one of the great scholars of the Arabs that goes like this: Whoever doesn’t realise the status and level of Imam Aham Rida Khan Bareilwi is the biggest nincompoop.
Enough said I think,
Please remember me in your kind Du’as
Brother Muhammad Umar Farouq.
(West Sussex).
Oh and one last thing that i forgot to mention in my original message.
Jazak Allahu Khiaran.
Fi Aman Illah,
Wa Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu.
wa alaikum as-salamu wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,
Thank you for your kind words. So much of the history of Islam in the sub-continent has been closed to me, and has not yet opened itself up. But I am looking.
Abdassamad
Asalaam ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
Thankyou and Jazak Allahu Khairan for your kind reply. Unfortunately what has happened at the present time is rather regrettable and sad in the fact that it seems that the Deobandis have conciously decided to align themselves with the Wahabbi methodology. Altough, they are not strictly ‘Salafis’ per se, in fact in many ways they are doctrinally and opposed to them in quite a few areas, they have nonetheless decided to take the ‘wahabbi way’. I wiouldn’t doubt that this has a lot to do with the fact that as you mentioned in your article, they are bieng funded officially and unoficially by the Saudi Department for Religious Affairs amongst others. As one of the brothers put it on another forum or thread ‘it was as if every book I encountered was printed in Saudi Arabia’. I’m not going to and don’t want to resort and fall into ‘name dropping’ but I find it quite surprising that my local Masjid (that, incidentally I have stopped attending regularaly due to my dissatisfaction with and dissaproval of their methodology, ‘Wahabbi/Deobandi’), what I find quite surprising even funny in a sad sort of way is that there is a link on their website to the Norwich Mosque/Muslims of Norwich site. Even though they are opposed to the methodolgy of traditional Islam that is practised by your organisation, they see fit to have a link to that on their own site! How strange! What strabge times we live in, indeed. Another point to mention, or a couple, hopefully I will try and be as precise and to the point as is possible, for brevity’s sake, is that the issue of declaring ‘Ya Rasul Allah’ as well as another ‘bone of contention’ between the two what can only be described as doctrines, that old one that countless arguments are fought over, the celebration of the Prophet SAAWAS’s Birthday/Maulid Un Nabi SAAWAS or as it is known in the Asian community ‘Milad Sharif or Milad Un Nabi SAAWAS. Now, apparently a certian ‘luminary’ from the ‘Ulema of Deaboand at one time permitted and even actively encouraged this practice, but suddenly one day decided it was wrong, Shirk, Bid’ah betc and forbade it amongst his followers and strated to write refutations about pratctising and celebrating this Auspicios day. One theory is that as the Saudi money flowed in and was bieng channeled to certain organisations, the ‘pressure’ was there and was being applied influencing those who used to celebrate The Prophet SAAWAS’s Birthday to stop doing so, as what was actually happening, as you also eloquently mentioned in your article was the conditions laid down to receive that finance were that such things were abandoned and that these groups would be obliged to follow the ‘official Saudi line’. I have had discussions with a few peole on this matter, one particular Brother, who is responsible for members of a Tariqah in the West Midlands area mentioned that’ Why did this particular Maulana/Scholar used to approve of Milad Un Nabi SAAWAS and allow peole to participate in and celebrate it, then turn around and strat telling people ‘Oh no, don’t do that, very bad, very bad’. It can only be that the paymasters were dictating that such practices be abolished in ored to propagate their methodology, the same can be said of calling ‘Ya Rasul Allah’ SAAWAS, but this is to some extent a slightly different argument as this involves docrtinal differences in Aqidah between the two ‘factions’. That is why in my previous post I said I felt more comfortable ‘allying’ myself with the Braielwis, simply because I feel, personally they are closer to the embodiment of traditional Islam love for Rasul Ullah SAAWAS amongst other reasons. We can see that the Bareilwis activley encourage and court the attendance of great personalities of Traditional and Classical Islam, from places such as Syria, Yemen, Mauritania etc, which I don’t think the ‘Deobandis’ would or ever could do, simply due to their disagreement with and opposition to the beliefs and practices of such people. There is the issue of ‘personality cults’ surrounding certain ‘Pirs, Maulanas, Na’at Singers, etc amongst the Barelwis which I can agree does to a certain extent put peole off their methodology, but I think, well in my opinion (and Allah Ta’ala ultimately knows best), they are closer to the Right Path as far as I am concerened than the Deobandis, who have unfortunately sold out all their principles to the Petro-Dollar.
Wa Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
Fi Anamillah Wa Rasulihi,
Please remember me in your kind Du’as, Wa Jazak Ullahu Khairan,
Muhammad Umar Farouq,
West Sussex.
wa alaikum as-salamu wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,
What sums it all up is the position that Imam Malik held to that it is not permissible to call oneself anything but Muslim. For me it is a double betrayal that people import these futile disputes from other countries and then imperil the establishment of Islam here. I think treachery is not too strong a word to use.
Salams,
Abdassamad
Asalaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
Ramadan Kareem, Ramadan Mubarak,
Please remember me in your kind Du’as of Khair, especialy at the time of breaking the fast,
Your Brother in Islam,
Muhammad Umar Farouq
West Sussex.
Asalaam ‘Alaikum,
Eid Mubarak to everyone at Norwich and everyone else, all Brothers and Sisters wherever you may be.
May Allah bless us and grant us Taufiq to perform the good and stay far away from the bad, to basically continue the path of good ‘Amaal not just at Ramadan but for the whole year.
Ameen.
Wa Bibarakatihi
Inn Allaha Wal Malaikiatuhu YuSaloona ‘Alan Nabi (Haq Nabi)
Ya Ayahul Ladheena Amanoo Salloo ‘Alaihi Wa Salimu Tasleema.
Allahummsa Salli ‘Ala Sayidinna Wa Maulana Muhammadin Wa ‘Ala Alihi Wa Sahbihi Ajma’in.
Birahmatika Ya ARhamurahimeen.
Wa Salaam
Br. Umar
Asalaam ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu.
I think all that needs saying now is to reciite and send prayers and Salaams upon the Best of Creation, Muhammad Ibn Abdillah, The Master and seal of all the Prophets. Peace and Salaams be upon him and upon his People, Companions and Blessed Family, the people of his House.
Please watch this and recite along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GviThGNW2n4&feature=related
The most quintessential piece of wahhabism I have ever read. Mind if I forward onto some friends?
You are welcome.
As Salaam Alaikum wa Rahmatullah
Alhamdullilah after a long search i finally refound this website
but the khutbah from Imam Shaykh Ali Laraqi delving into the hadith of jibreel alayhi salaam i cannot find on the site
insha Allah i will appreciate help to locate it again
and insha Allah i read in earlier post on this link that a book called the wahhabi reality was going to insha Allah come out 1/2010?
sorry im new to this site and dont know my way around
did the book come out yet ?
i posted this message here because i did not find another way to post my inquiry
jazak Allahu khairun
wa alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah,
If I come across that khutbah, I will let you know insha’Allah.
But as to the book on ‘the wahhabi reality’ I know of no such book for which we are responsible.
As-salamu alaikum,
Abdassamad Clarke
Asalaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
Dear Brother Abdassamad and All at The Ihsan Mosque and All Muslims of Norwich,
May the Peace and Blessings of Allah Ta’ala be upon you all and The Blessings of The Last Prophet Muhammad Rasul Allah Sall Allahu ‘Alaihi wa Alihi Wa Ashabihi wa Ahli Baitihi wa Sallem,
Sorry it’s a bit late and we have nearly reached the end of Rabi’ Ul Awwal, Rabi’ Un Noor Mubarak.
I juat wanted to send my congratulations for the Month of Rabi’ Ul Awwal, Rabi’ Un Noor, Mubarak to everyone there, the Month of The Arrival of The Best of Creation, Muhammad Ibn Abdillah, Rasul Allah, Khatam ul Ambiya wa Rusul, Khairul Bashar, Saheb Ut Taj w’Al M’raj, Sultan Ul Konian, Nabi uth Thaqalayn, Abbaz Zahra, Jaddil Hasanain, Nabi Il Haramain, Nabi Ul Haq wa Yaqeen. May Allah’s Peace, Blessings and Salutations be upon him, the Chief and Master of All the Messengers and Prophets, The Prophet of Mercy, The Prophet and Messenger of Light, The Light Incarnate.
Congratulations to All on the occasion of Mulaid un Nabwi Ashareef, and I trust everyone had a memorable and momentous 12th Rabi’ Ul Awwal,
Wa Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,
Umar Farouq.
Asalaamu ‘Alaikum,
I was just wondering, I left a message on here last night that was ‘awaiting approval’ as it were. Upon checking this page today I find it hasn’t been approved. Could you kindly explain what it was that wasn’t of my message. Do you think I am some sectarian trying to ‘subverse’ your site. If you do, i can honestly assure you that’s not the case. Or do you think I am ‘flooding’ your comments/mesages page. Could you kindly explain what it is you don’t agree with or like about me or my messages?
Jazakullah Khairan,
Umar.
P.S. By the way if you think that I am some ‘undercover’ Wahabbi or Salafi then you are very much mistaken.
With Salaams.
wa alaikum as-salam,
My goodness, Umar you are impatient.
Abdassamad
Asalaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa brakatuhu,
That’s more like it! Haha, it wasn’t me ( it was my nafs) Lol, well it was, really wasn’t it?
Sorry, Dear Brother it must have been me in one of my ‘crankies’ as usual. Also, the name ‘Umar’ isn’t renonwed for causing it’s bearer to be particulart patient although I must admit, it is these diseases of character and of the Heart that I must really resolve to make at least more of an effort on.
I think I am in for a long journey! Well, may the wind at least be upon my back.
Allah’s Peace & Blessings be upon you and all at Norwich, Ameen.
Also, what it was that I sent in last nights mail/comment was that I wished a Blessed Rabi’ Ul Awall to everyone there, so Mubarak to you all on this joyous month of the arrival of The Best of Creation, Peace and Blessings be upon Him, His Noble and Purified Family Companions and Blessed Household.
Wa Salaamu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu.
(P.S. No more strops! Insha Allah! ).