Wahhabism

[AbuQuteiba]

I have met brothers who claim to be wahabis. Some are more radical than others. Like in the Shia, there are some who are not as radical in teachings as others. And i have heard from scholars who condemn their philosophy. Why because some of them want to be the ruling class in Islam meaning they want the Khilafah. When it is not a specific title or group which will remain supreme. It is the method of the practice of the relgion. Are they doing what is in the sunnah and Quran if yes then it is O.K. to learn from them but I would not adopt the title. Why the Prophet himself did not want us to label ourselves it creates division. We as muslims know this. Just like some Salafis scholars some give you what is correct and some do not. Take what is good and leave the rest.

But do not doubt their are some who have taken this idea and ran with it some a little farther than others. You know look at the sufis Some practice deen correctly however they still give themselves this title. And then you have some like the dirvish sect of sufi who do some interesting bida. spinning around in circles. But it is like I said take what is good and leave the rest. Guide those who lack the knowledge. We know what we should do and what is correct. So if they choose to go with a specific ideology other than the Messenger his Companions and the successors then we will see because we have the evidence.

I'm sorry, but as a student living in Mecca, the home of Muhammed ibn AbdulWahab (Rahmat Allahi 'alayhi), i know of no one, who follows the teachings of Muhammed Ibn AbdulWahab, that calls himself a WAHABBI(Or for that matter people that call themselves BAZI for example, because they follow Ibn Baz, or Albanees because they follow Muhammed Al Albany). Muhammed Ibn Abdulwahab was a great scholar of Islam. His books show that he is a follower of the Qur'an and Sunna, with the understanding of the salaf (PBUT). He also followed many great scholers like Ibn Taymiya and Ibn il Qayim etc.

It would be foolish to give yourself a title other than muslim UNLESS ITS TO SHOW YOUR MANHAJ. For example, Al imam Ahmed and the people of his time, called themselves Ahl Al Hadeeth. Which meant they were a people of the sunnah (as they're were many people back then trying to remove the sunna as a source of Islam). Today most scholars of the sunna, that are on the same track of Muhammed ibn AbdulWahab and the great scholars before him, call themselves Salafiyoon. As in they abide by the explanations (of the Wur'an and sunna) of the salaf.

I disagree with your last statement, "take whats good and leave the rest". I'm not saying that one should agree with everything a certain scholar says, BUT, if we knew what was good, and what was bad, we would'nt be studying sharia under these scholars now would we? I think the best way to handle these situations is to learn from a scholar who has been universally approved of ( by the correct Sunni muslims i mean). Like Ibn Baz, Ibn Othaimeen, Al Albany, Saleh Al Fowzan, Ibn Jibreen, etc. Or before them Ibn Taymiyah, Ibn Al Gayim, Ibn HabdilWahab, Ibn Hajar etc..(Btw, im not saying that these are the only approved scholars, NO, they're are hundreds more. Im saying that these are SOME of the universally approved of scholars, and rarely have misunderstandings between them).

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

I'm sorry, but as a student living in Mecca, the home of Muhammed ibn AbdulWahab (Rahmat Allahi 'alayhi), i know of no one, who follows the teachings of Muhammed Ibn AbdulWahab, that calls himself a WAHABBI(Or for that matter people that call themselves BAZI for example, because they follow Ibn Baz, or Albanees because they follow Muhammed Al Albany). Muhammed Ibn Abdulwahab was a great scholar of Islam. His books show that he is a follower of the Qur'an and Sunna, with the understanding of the salaf (PBUT). He also followed many great scholers like Ibn Taymiya and Ibn il Qayim etc.

Brother that does not mean there are people out there who have done this though look at Christianity look what they do in his name can not the same be said for Abdul Wahab. Did Jesus pbuh do all the things they claim of course not.

It would be foolish to give yourself a title other than muslim UNLESS ITS TO SHOW YOUR MANHAJ. For example, Al imam Ahmed and the people of his time, called themselves Ahl Al Hadeeth. Which meant they were a people of the sunnah (as they're were many people back then trying to remove the sunna as a source of Islam). Today most scholars of the sunna, that are on the same track of Muhammed ibn AbdulWahab and the great scholars before him, call themselves Salafiyoon. As in they abide by the explanations (of the Wur'an and sunna) of the salaf.

I agree but I already said we should stop labeling ourselves and that includes these quote un quote great imams. What did Imam Ahmed call himself what did Imam Malik call himself what did Ashafie call himself. I do not and you should not care what people say or they titles they accept. Did the Messenger do it or his companions. That is the question. Why are they creating these titles and what is their evidence of support for them in the sunnah and Quran. The only thing that does is create more division and more fitna. You have to see that. It is as if sunni is not enough we have to break the sunni's into different groups now. How can anyone call themself a salaf when they are nothing like the true salafs.

I disagree with your last statement, "take whats good and leave the rest". I'm not saying that one should agree with everything a certain scholar says, BUT, if we knew what was good, and what was bad, we would'nt be studying sharia under these scholars now would we? I think the best way to handle these situations is to learn from a scholar who has been universally approved of ( by the correct Sunni muslims i mean). Like Ibn Baz, Ibn Othaimeen, Al Albany, Saleh Al Fowzan, Ibn Jibreen, etc. Or before them Ibn Taymiyah, Ibn Al Gayim, Ibn HabdilWahab, Ibn Hajar etc..(Btw, im not saying that these are the only approved scholars, NO, they're are hundreds more. Im saying that these are SOME of the universally approved of scholars, and rarely have misunderstandings between them).

No because not all scholars had access to all the hadith, remember. Some hadith that Hanifi had make Malik did not because they were in different areas. That is wisdom to take what is good and leave the rest because people make mistakes. If it is all good cool but people make mistakes even the scholars. They differed on issues. Even Ibn Hajar some of his statement were looked at as very harsh even amongst some scholars. I mean some of his books were burned. So you take what is essential in the application of the relgion and if the evidence is authentic you accept it. If not reject it. But anything that is based on the ijma is accepted. How did many of the students of the great Imams come to decisions about certain rulings they had concensus. Some people have even questioned bin baz. Why because of some of his opinions and they have an evidence. Brother you know there are alot of factors involved. But my point is we know how to derive what is true and not. we know what is authentic and what is not. We know alot of people say alot of things many without evidence. That is why we have books alot older than some of the scholars you mentioned to give us the previous rulings according to the companions and successors. And many of the rulings contained are from the ijma. My sheihk who was trained in Medina gave us the evidence of where Ibn Hajar opposed some rulings that had a concensus from earlier scholars. Does that mean you reject everything no you take what is good and leave what is bad. The mistakes are few and generally it is due to the fact that the scholar did not know the hadith or this ruling because he had not heard it. But you know and I know for the most part the concensus is there. My teacher there is a video Arees Institute

 

[AbuQuteiba]

Brother that does not mean there are people out there who have done this though look at Christianity look what they do in his name can not the same be said for Abdul Wahab. Did Jesus pbuh do all the things they claim of course not.

I agree but I already said we should stop labeling ourselves and that includes these quote un quote great imams. What did Imam Ahmed call himself what did Imam Malik call himself what did Ashafie call himself. I do not and you should not care what people say or they titles they accept. Did the Messenger do it or his companions. That is the question. Why are they creating these titles and what is their evidence of support for them in the sunnah and Quran. The only thing that does is create more division and more fitna. You have to see that. It is as if sunni is not enough we have to break the sunni's into different groups now. How can anyone call themself a salaf when they are nothing like the true salafs.

No because not all scholars had access to all the hadith, remember. Some hadith that Hanifi had make Malik did not because they were in different areas. That is wisdom to take what is good and leave the rest because people make mistakes. If it is all good cool but people make mistakes even the scholars. They differed on issues. Even Ibn Hajar some of his statement were looked at as very harsh even amongst some scholars. I mean some of his books were burned. So you take what is essential in the application of the relgion and if the evidence is authentic you accept it. If not reject it. But anything that is based on the ijma is accepted. How did many of the students of the great Imams come to decisions about certain rulings they had concensus. Some people have even questioned bin baz. Why because of some of his opinions and they have an evidence. Brother you know there are alot of factors involved. But my point is we know how to derive what is true and not. we know what is authentic and what is not. We know alot of people say alot of things many without evidence. That is why we have books alot older than some of the scholars you mentioned to give us the previous rulings according to the companions and successors. And many of the rulings contained are from the ijma. My sheihk who was trained in Medina gave us the evidence of where Ibn Hajar opposed some rulings that had a concensus from earlier scholars. Does that mean you reject everything no you take what is good and leave what is bad. The mistakes are few and generally it is due to the fact that the scholar did not know the hadith or this ruling because he had not heard it. But you know and I know for the most part the concensus is there. My teacher there is a video Arees Institute

Subhan Allah, you're comparing the shirk christians are doing with what muslims do with Ibn Abdul Wahab? Plus, if there are people who do this, its not here, thats for sure. Maybe where you live though.

Do not act like true salafs? Who exactly are you talking about? Plus, subhan allah, in the 2nd paragrpah you said how this causes divisions, they you went and called yourself a sunni. Did the rasool or companions call themselves "Ahl Al Sunna wal Jama'a"?

I did'nt say take everything. I said, that as we are students, we do not know whats correct, and whats not. So we should rather go to a known scholar. Plus, there is no true scholar, who does'nt use saheeh hadeeth when giving his oppinions on certain subjects. Yes, that is true, Ibn Hajar did have some incorrect thoughts when it came to Ageeda. Who pointed that out though? The scholars with the correct Ageeda.

Still, i do not agree that we know how to derive what is true and what is not. If we did, we would'nt need to study under scholars, would we?

 

[TashaN]

Brother Mujahid, the problem is that those who supposed to be called as Wahhabis never claim they are, plus that they are fighting the whole idea of Wahhabism and they always scream saying that they are not Wahhabi and there is no such a thing like that.

Subhan Allah, you're comparing the shirk christians are doing with what muslims do with Ibn Abdul Wahab?

He was just giving an example. Calm down bro. we are not debating in here.

Did the rasool or companions call themselves "Ahl Al Sunna wal Jama'a"?

Your point is?

Still, i do not agree that we know how to derive what is true and what is not. If we did, we would'nt need to study under scholars, would we?

If this was the case, we would have a sort of "Pope" to role our lives !!!

There is no clergy in Islam brother.

Yes, i agree that we should learn from the scholars but never submit your mind to one of them solely. Try to reason things and think about it and definitely you will find the source in Quran and the Sunnah, isn't it?

 

[AbuQuteiba]

Brother Mujahid, the problem is that those who supposed to be called as Wahhabis never claim they are, plus that they are fighting the whole idea of Wahhabism and they always scream saying that they are not Wahhabi and there is no such a thing like that.



He was just giving an example. Calm down bro. we are not debating in here.



Your point is?



If this was the case, we would have a sort of "Pope" to role our lives !!!

There is no clergy in Islam brother.

Yes, i agree that we should learn from the scholars but never submit your mind to one of them solely. Try to reason things and think about it and definitely you will find the source in Quran and the Sunnah, isn't it?

Are you saying Wahabissm exists or not? And should there be a bunch of people called Wahabissm? Sorry about that, did'nt mean to debate

When i said that the Prophet and his companions ,peace be upon them all, did'nt call themselves "Ahl Al sunna", as we do, i was replying to his comment about SALAFI. He said it was wrong, for the wrong reason. So i replied that if SALAFI is wrong, then sunni is wrong too.

I never said there was a clergy in Islam. Nor did i say you should submit to any scholar. My reply to Mujahid was of the point he made that we should take whats good, and leave whats bad. So i replied that no, this is incorrect, because if we knew what was good or bad, we would'nt need to study under the Scholars. Plus, if every muslim KNEW how to use the Qur'an and sunna CORRECTLY, as you claim, then we would have no need for scholars.

 

[TashaN]

Are you saying Wahabissm exists or not? And should there be a bunch of people called Wahabissm?

Dear champion, i'm fully aware of this issue. I was born and raised in Saudi Arabia and our essential part in Tawheed and some other cources since the primary school is from the thoughts of Shikh Mohammed bin Abdul Wahab. Saudi's for instance would deny the concept of being Wahabi (me as well) because it doesn't exist, but people outside tend to call them Wahabis for following the teaching of this great shikh.

Got it now?

When i said that the Prophet and his companions ,peace be upon them all, did'nt call themselves "Ahl Al sunna", as we do, i was replying to his comment about SALAFI. He said it was wrong, for the wrong reason. So i replied that if SALAFI is wrong, then sunni is wrong too.

I don't know where did he say Salafi is wrong !!! are you sure about this?

I never said there was a clergy in Islam. Nor did i say you should submit to any scholar. My reply to Mujahid was of the point he made that we should take whats good, and leave whats bad. So i replied that no, this is incorrect, because if we knew what was good or bad, we would'nt need to study under the Scholars.
Sorry but i have to disagree with you. Scholars have no authority on people unless people ask them.

If people knew and understood the Quran so why they should go to any scholar to ask?

Plus, if every muslim KNEW how to use the Qur'an and sunna CORRECTLY, as you claim, then we would have no need for scholars.

So what if people understood everything, is it bad?

Brother clam down, you seem so excited. Don't throw words here and there. I never said every muslim KNEW how to use the Qur'an and sunna CORRECTLY and yet, you said "as you claim".

Just relax and discuss it. Take it easy bro.

I said, if i, for instance could understand the Quran and Sunnah by myself so should i go to any scholar to teach me?

What do you think?

 

[AbuQuteiba]

Dear champion, i'm fully aware of this issue. I was born and raised in Saudi Arabia and our essential part in Tawheed and some other cources since the primary school is from the thoughts of Shikh Mohammed bin Abdul Wahab. Saudi's for instance would deny the concept of being Wahabi (me as well) because it doesn't exist, but people outside tend to call them Wahabis for following the teaching of this great shikh.

Got it now?



I don't know where did he say Salafi is wrong !!! are you sure about this?

I never said there was a clergy in Islam. Nor did i say you should submit to any scholar. My reply to Mujahid was of the point he made that we should take whats good, and leave whats bad. So i replied that no, this is incorrect, because if we knew what was good or bad, we would'nt need to study under the Scholars.
Sorry but i have to disagree with you. Scholars have no authority on people unless people ask them.

If people knew and understood the Quran so why they should go to any scholar to ask?



So what if people understood everything, is it bad?

Brother clam down, you seem so excited. Don't throw words here and there. I never said every muslim KNEW how to use the Qur'an and sunna CORRECTLY and yet, you said "as you claim".

Just relax and discuss it. Take it easy bro.

I said, if i, for instance could understand the Quran and Sunnah by myself so should i go to any scholar to teach me?

What do you think?

Al salam Alaikum. I really don't understand why you keep telling me to calm down, hehe. I mean, we're talking through the PC, i don't think you can really tell whether i'm excited or calm.

Yes i understand what you're saying now. (about Wahabissm that is)

Yes, i am sure. Read his posts. He said I do not believe in the name Salafi (btw, if he had'nt had said it, i would'nt have felt the need to reply to that comment).

I'm sorry, i did'nt mean to say as you claim, i meant to say as HE claims. (sorry about that).

Secondly, if you wanted to understand the Qur'an and sunna correctly, it would have to be from the scholars. Because to understand the Qur'an, you would need TAFSEER (and that belongs to a certain scholar right?) And if you wanted to understand the Sunna, you would need books that explain hadeeth (like Fath Al Bary, for instance. And that belongs to a certain SCHOLAR right?) The scholars of Islam do not advise people to study by themselves. Yes, i think that if you have a TRUE scholar to teach you, it would be better than studying it by yourslef.

Now, it seems you are the one who is throwing words here and there , when did i say that scholars have ANY authority on people. I'll restate my statement (and opinion) clearly. If a person wishes to understand the Qur'an or sunna CORRECTLY, he should do it with the help of a well renowned scholar of Islam (I really don't see how any muslim can disagree with what i'm saying).

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

Dear champion, i'm fully aware of this issue. I was born and raised in Saudi Arabia and our essential part in Tawheed and some other cources since the primary school is from the thoughts of Shikh Mohammed bin Abdul Wahab. Saudi's for instance would deny the concept of being Wahabi (me as well) because it doesn't exist, but people outside tend to call them Wahabis for following the teaching of this great shikh.

Got it now?



I don't know where did he say Salafi is wrong !!! are you sure about this?

I never said there was a clergy in Islam. Nor did i say you should submit to any scholar. My reply to Mujahid was of the point he made that we should take whats good, and leave whats bad. So i replied that no, this is incorrect, because if we knew what was good or bad, we would'nt need to study under the Scholars.
Sorry but i have to disagree with you. Scholars have no authority on people unless people ask them.

If people knew and understood the Quran so why they should go to any scholar to ask?



So what if people understood everything, is it bad?

Brother clam down, you seem so excited. Don't throw words here and there. I never said every muslim KNEW how to use the Qur'an and sunna CORRECTLY and yet, you said "as you claim".

Just relax and discuss it. Take it easy bro.

I said, if i, for instance could understand the Quran and Sunnah by myself so should i go to any scholar to teach me?

What do you think?

Asalamu alaikum, We cleared up the misunderstanding. My issue is or was some people claim they are Wahabiis. When they are actually giving a title undeserved because Abdul Wahab never ascribed to what they say. I gave the example of the christians and how they do the same with the prophet issa. There truly are no Wahabbi in context yet there are people who claim to be. All of us. myself, Champion, and you understand it the same way. There are no "true wahabiis" for Wahab never wanted it. so they who call themself this are incorrect. Irrelevant of whatever evidence they bring for we have the evidence. We all agree and we are all students of knowledge. so let us stop even discussing the issues that will not benefit any of us or anyone else. Because we all know the answer. Abdul Wahab was a great scholar and if people are claiming to be a title attibuted to him they are really tripping. They need to go and learn from the recognized scholars of the sunnah and stop creating more division. Anyways the number of them has to be really small because this is something new.

 

[AbuQuteiba]

Asalamu alaikum, We cleared up the misunderstanding. My issue is or was some people claim they are Wahabiis. When they are actually giving a title undeserved because Abdul Wahab never ascribed to what they say. I gave the example of the christians and how they do the same with the prophet issa. There truly are no Wahabbi in context yet there are people who claim to be. All of us. myself, Champion, and you understand it the same way. There are no "true wahabiis" for Wahab never wanted it. so they who call themself this are incorrect. Irrelevant of whatever evidence they bring for we have the evidence. We all agree and we are all students of knowledge. so let us stop even discussing the issues that will not benefit any of us or anyone else. Because we all know the answer. Abdul Wahab was a great scholar and if people are claiming to be a title attibuted to him they are really tripping. They need to go and learn from the recognized scholars of the sunnah and stop creating more division. Anyways the number of them has to be really small because this is something new.

I agree :yes:

 

[TashaN]

It wasn't so hard to get to the point after all isn't it?

Well done brothers.

 

[hanif]

some of the belief of wahhabism is true for ex someone pray to tombs/this in vorrect and shirk/but tekfir for everyone is not good/

 

[AbuQuteiba]

some of the belief of wahhabism is true for ex someone pray to tombs/this in vorrect and shirk/but tekfir for everyone is not good/

This is what i have a problem with. Everybody saying "wahabissm" is only spreading an incorrect thought. Wahabissm should not be a sect. with their own beliefs (I know some have said they are in some places like the U.S.) but that does not excuse the fact that we can't start saying "Wahabissm". This only gives these people what they want. Of course "tekfir for everyone" is incorrect. But did Muhammed Ibn AbdulWahab do that? NO. You see? If these people are doing that, they are not, in fact, followers of Ibn AbdulWahab, nor the Prophet (PBUH) for that matter. So whether or not they call themselves Wahhabis is'nt important (actually it is inaccurate).

Thank you.