The End - 2000 to 2009

The rise and fall of the ‘salafi dawah’ in the US

  • Author: MR
  • Filed under: Islam
  • Date: Jan 31,2007 | 12:11 AM

I found this 10-post series entitled “The rise and fall of the ‘salafi dawah’ in the US” on Umar Lee’s blog.

It’s interesting. Check it out.

Before all my wasabi brothers and sisters start barraging me with comments, I want to say that the 10-post series was written by a salafi and he did not bash them, just simply laid down the historical facts of it’s rise and decline in the US. So relax! Breath! haha


  • RSS feed for comments on this post

  • 27 Responses for "The rise and fall of the ‘salafi dawah’ in the US"

    1. random question January 31st, 2007 at 7:41 am

      completely off the topic..whats happened to the forum pages?

    2. jinnzaman January 31st, 2007 at 11:19 am

      Assalamu alaikum

      His posts were excellent, but he completely ignored the role of Traditional ‘Ulema in the process of the marginalization of the Salafi dawah.

      I address this point on my blog:
      http://jinnzaman.blogspot.com

      masalama

    3. shab January 31st, 2007 at 12:34 pm

      whats up with ur obsession of SALAFIS? man, its high time that u leave them alone..

    4. Mujahideen Ryder January 31st, 2007 at 12:52 pm

      shab on January 31, 2007 at 12:34 pm said:

      whats up with ur obsession of SALAFIS? man, its high time that u leave them alone..

      No obsession, in fact, the 10-post series was written by a salafi.

      He’s not bashing salafis, but its a historical insight to the salafi dawah in the US only.

    5. ali January 31st, 2007 at 3:50 pm

      shab on January 31, 2007 at 12:34 pm said:

      whats up with ur obsession of SALAFIS? man, its high time that u leave them alone..

      Lets face it … salafis make the ‘best’ headlines 😉

    6. Al January 31st, 2007 at 5:53 pm

      link check these trinisalafis in denial of the narrative from their american kindred spirits

    7. Samir January 31st, 2007 at 8:24 pm

      MR, I think you can understand why Al Maghrib chooses not to label itself as Salafi especially from what you saw from those posts. The label, Salafi has such a horrible stigma attached to it these days that it is not wise to use it. + It is most definitely wrong to use labels in Islam when those labels lead to divides.(Using term Ansar and Muhajir were fine until those people started fighting amongst one another.) We should call our Muslim brothers by what they would like to be called.

    8. jinnzaman February 1st, 2007 at 3:51 pm

      Samir

      Al Maghrib bashes Asharis/Maturidis and some Sufis in their classes, its a law of self-defense.

      Here’s an Idea: if Salafis don’t want stigma, then perhaps they should stop attaching stigma to others! (gasp! Its so simple, its logical!)

      masalama

    9. MR Fan February 1st, 2007 at 5:18 pm

      Samir on January 31, 2007 at 8:24 pm said:

      MR, I think you can understand why Al Maghrib chooses not to label itself as Salafi especially from what you saw from those posts. The label, Salafi has such a horrible stigma attached to it these days that it is not wise to use it. + It is most definitely wrong to use labels in Islam when those labels lead to divides.(Using term Ansar and Muhajir were fine until those people started fighting amongst one another.) We should call our Muslim brothers by what they would like to be called.

      jinnzaman on February 1, 2007 at 3:51 pm said:

      Samir

      Al Maghrib bashes Asharis/Maturidis and some Sufis in their classes, its a law of self-defense.

      Here’s an Idea: if Salafis don’t want stigma, then perhaps they should stop attaching stigma to others! (gasp! Its so simple, its logical!)

      masalama

      just to reinforce what was said.

      jinnzaman is correct.

    10. Abdur Rehman February 2nd, 2007 at 12:46 am

      Assalamu ‘alaikum,

      in all of these flavored discussions, rather something more amazing comes to mind about what can solve problems,

      labeling is not the problem, because some people have signified the problems by labeling themselves, such as i am hanafi,i am shafi, i am maliki, or hanbali, or maturidi, ashari, and all say ahlas sunnah wal jamaah,

      all labels are accepted and their associations have to be addressed by all scholars if they disagree with them,

      sunnipath will attack salafis in their corrupt ideas, almaghrib will attack sufis in their corrupt ideas, but jinnzaman is correct the ending of this has to start from your side, whatever side you are on…

      but what would Rasulullah have done? He would have looked at all the muslims and seen who was correct in their ideology and who was wrong? So this is my plan. Unite sufis and salafi the way of the sunnah: Command the good and forbid the evil…

      so if sufis say go worship their auliya of allah or say thsi scholar is an auliya of allah, i will say to them, how do you worship anyone other than Allah and hwo do you know a scholars relationship with Allah???

      and if salafis say their manners of dealing with the sufis are correct, i will say to them since when did Sheikh ul-Islam, much less Rasulullah, use takfeer and use insults and use arrogance to convince people? i will say aren’t there good sufi scholars who don’t have shikr in their ibaadah and have ikhlaas? who cares if they follow a madhab,the madhabs still have opinions according tothe Qur’aan and Sunnah…

      There must be a balance and equity, because we are all brothers and sisters… and the balance is what the Prophet (S.A.W) had, ilm and hikmah,he made his companions unite,

      We can’t be like him nor do we care to try,
      this is why hating each other, sufis and salafees will die…

      Wassalam,

      Abdur-rehman

    11. Samir February 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 pm

      I don’t see how disproving the Ashari/Maturdi Opinion is bashing at all. Thats like saying that Sunnipath bashes Al Maghrib when it defends its viewpoints.
      Why would Al Maghrib call itself a Salafi institute? That would imply that its only for Salafi’s and people like me would never go there. I would also never go to Zaytuna if it were called a Sufi institute. To ask Al Maghrib to call itself a Salafi institute is stupid. To ask Sunnipath to rename itself to Sufipath would be pretty stupid as well.

      Labeling was not accepted in the Prophet’s(Peace Be Upon Him) time when it lead to disunity. If you would like to be called Sufi then I will call you Sufi. But if that will lead to us fighting one another then it should be abandoned.

    12. anon February 3rd, 2007 at 2:12 am

      Abdur Rehman on February 2, 2007 at 12:46 am said:

      Assalamu ‘alaikum,

      in all of these flavored discussions, rather something more amazing comes to mind about what can solve problems,

      labeling is not the problem, because some people have signified the problems by labeling themselves, such as i am hanafi,i am shafi, i am maliki, or hanbali, or maturidi, ashari, and all say ahlas sunnah wal jamaah,

      all labels are accepted and their associations have to be addressed by all scholars if they disagree with them,

      sunnipath will attack salafis in their corrupt ideas, almaghrib will attack sufis in their corrupt ideas, but jinnzaman is correct the ending of this has to start from your side, whatever side you are on…

      but what would Rasulullah have done? He would have looked at all the muslims and seen who was correct in their ideology and who was wrong? So this is my plan. Unite sufis and salafi the way of the sunnah: Command the good and forbid the evil…

      so if sufis say go worship their auliya of allah or say thsi scholar is an auliya of allah, i will say to them, how do you worship anyone other than Allah and hwo do you know a scholars relationship with Allah???

      and if salafis say their manners of dealing with the sufis are correct, i will say to them since when did Sheikh ul-Islam, much less Rasulullah, use takfeer and use insults and use arrogance to convince people? i will say aren’t there good sufi scholars who don’t have shikr in their ibaadah and have ikhlaas? who cares if they follow a madhab,the madhabs still have opinions according tothe Qur’aan and Sunnah…

      There must be a balance and equity, because we are all brothers and sisters… and the balance is what the Prophet (S.A.W) had, ilm and hikmah,he made his companions unite,

      We can’t be like him nor do we care to try,
      this is why hating each other, sufis and salafees will die…

      Wassalam,

      Abdur-rehman

      Assalamu ‘Alaykum,

      Wallahi this issue is one that is never ending and until this point in my life I dont think anyone was ever more brief and perfect in their answer. We must learn to drain the bad and keep the good, and subhanAllah what better example than that of the Prophet (SAW)…

      And in this issue its sad that Muslims sisters and brothers have turned to each other with assumptions about what the other believes, not leaving them with the benefit of the doubt that we are taught through the SEVENTY excuses…

      Almaghrib and Zaytuna are both very dear to me, may Allah SWT reward both institutions for their efforts in struggling for this deen at such a time…may Allah SWT help all of us to unite not as salafis or sufis…but as Muslims.

      Your sister in islam.

    13. Yursil February 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 pm

      Samir on February 2, 2007 at 6:31 pm said:

      I don’t see how disproving the Ashari/Maturdi Opinion is bashing at all. Thats like saying that Sunnipath bashes Al Maghrib when it defends its viewpoints.
      Why would Al Maghrib call itself a Salafi institute? That would imply that its only for Salafi’s and people like me would never go there. I would also never go to Zaytuna if it were called a Sufi institute. To ask Al Maghrib to call itself a Salafi institute is stupid. To ask Sunnipath to rename itself to Sufipath would be pretty stupid as well.

      Labeling was not accepted in the Prophet’s(Peace Be Upon Him) time when it lead to disunity. If you would like to be called Sufi then I will call you Sufi. But if that will lead to us fighting one another then it should be abandoned.

      Al-Maghrib is a Salafi Institute because it teaches the Salafi point of view on Aqeedah.

      Sunnipath is a Sunni institute because it teaches what Sunni’s have believed for 1400 years regarding aqidah.

      Sunnipath doesn’t teach Tassawuf, so I’m not sue what makes it a Sufi institute. It teaches Madhabi fiqh and the aqeedah of the Sunni majority.

    14. Yursil February 3rd, 2007 at 7:25 pm

      As far as abandoning labels.. sounds GREAT to me.

      When will you suggest to the MSA that we can invite a speaker to your college who has learned the subject of Tassawuf?

      Or will you stand in the way of that?

      Will you work to stop Mawlids when you are in charge of a Musjid?

      Which one have you done already or which one is yet to be written in your book of deeds?

    15. Saracen February 4th, 2007 at 4:19 pm

      Yursil on February 3, 2007 at 7:16 pm said:

      Al-Maghrib is a Salafi Institute because it teaches the Salafi point of view on Aqeedah.

      Sunnipath is a Sunni institute because it teaches what Sunni’s have believed for 1400 years regarding aqidah.

      Sunnipath doesn’t teach Tassawuf, so I’m not sue what makes it a Sufi institute. It teaches Madhabi fiqh and the aqeedah of the Sunni majority.

      Yursil-

      You say there is a “Salafi point of view on Aqeedah” as if those proclaiming to be on Salifiyya have their own, anachronistic perspective on the names and attributes of Allah (swt). In truth, the Aqeedah they adopted is the same one accepted by Imams Ahmed and Ibn Taymiyyah, among many other great scholars of Islam. Similarly, turning to more recent years, this is the same Aqeedah that Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen adhered to.

      Thus, if the scholars that many ulama consider to be the greatest of their generation were not adherants of Ashariyyah, perhaps you should rethink making an all-encompassing statement regarding what “Sunni’s have believed for 1400 years regarding aqidah.”

      Wasalamualaikum

    16. jinnzaman February 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pm

      Saracen

      Imam Ahmad and Ibn Taymiyyah weren’t from the Salaf, they were from the Khalaf. Perhaps the movement should be renamed to the Khalafiyyah?

      This discussion has proved the point that being made above: Salafis only want unity when they need people to defend them; they aren’t willing to defend other Muslims.

      So really, this entire topic of ‘unity’ is idiotic.

      If Salafis wanted unity with Asharis/Maturidis and Sufis, then they’d stop referring to them innovators and people of kufr and shirk.

      Unity is a two-way street buddy.

      masalama

    17. Saracen February 5th, 2007 at 8:35 pm

      Jinnzamen

      A couple of things:

      First, my statement was only meant as a matter-of-fact refutation of Yursil’s implicit claims that 1) the Salafi perspective on Aqeedah is provincial and 2) that the whole of Sunnidom throughout the past 1400 years has been Ashari. I did not assert anything beyond that.

      Second, based on several of your posts on this website and your blog, it seems you have a regard of Salifiyya that is colored by interaction with less-than-mu2adab Salafi brothers. I don’t blame you for harboring such feelings; Allah knows that some Salafi brothers have transgressed the proper edict of dealing with both Muslims and non-Muslims. That being said, I thought I would share a definition of Salafiyya offered by Ibn Uthaymeen (RA), which, incidently, also touches upon the notion of Unity:

      “Salafiyyah is following the way of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam) and his Sahabah for they are our Salaf (predecessors) who preceded us, so following them is Salafiyyah. As for taking Salafiyyah as a special Manhaj (Methodology) such that everyone who differs with it is considered astray even if he was on the truth; then this is beyond doubt opposite to Salafiyyah.

      All the Salaf called to Islaam and to unite upon the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger (sal-Allaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam) and they did not declare astray anyone who differs with them (in a certain issue) because of (a different) interpretation (Taweel), except in matters of Aqeedah (beliefs) because they considered him, who differed in Aqeedah as astray.

      But, in our time, some who took the path of Salafiyyah consider astray everyone who differs from them even if the truth were to be on his side. And they took a Hizbi (partisan) Manhaj, just like the other Hizbs (parties), who divide the religion. This (their way) must be rejected and not be approved of.”

      Now, as for Imams Ahmed and Ibn Taymiyyah (RA), their teachings are emblematic of the Salafi creed and that is why Salafis hold them(along with many other scholars, including the other three great imams of fiqh) in such high esteem.

      Last, Unity is all well and good. But, for my part, I’m just aiming to guard and honor my faith and that of my future wife and children, inshAllah, and hope that this contributes in some positive way to the cause of this ummah. This approach is in line with my theory of unity, namely that it will come about through jabs, rather than one knockout blow. W’Allahu Alam.

      Wasalamualaikum

    18. justme February 7th, 2007 at 2:12 am

      Im with Jinnzaman.
      ‘wasabis’ are hilarious people.

    19. Name calling February 7th, 2007 at 3:19 pm

      Wasabi is name calling also.

      I know sufis got tired of being the humble patient ones they had to respond to salafee attacks one day :)

      Also, for 1400 years, the opinions of sufis were not the only one present, they were just the majority of the cases or what the masses were doing.
      There were scholars for 1400years with ideas I should say of salafiyyah.

      I admit salafees are arrogant and obnoxious(a lot of them) and people of tassawwuf are humble(EXCEPT IF THEY ARE AMERICAN BORN AND RAISED).

      So you people are arrogant screwed bunch of american muslims, salafee or sufi.

      You guys dont even know how to be a muslim and you are going to be bickering over this and never grow up to be men and fight until your grave and until your kids are eaten alive by shaytaan, your real enemy.

    20. Ahmed.A.A February 12th, 2007 at 5:52 pm

      Salafi take upon all 4 school of thoughts ther not ignorant like hanafees who refuse to follow anything but imam hanefees teaching!!! im proud the salafis are voicing the true muslims out there unlike Sufis they water down the religion just to please the Kuffars thank god im not living in the US where the sufi council is in charge!!!!

    21. anybody February 13th, 2007 at 1:48 am

      actualy they dont really follow Imaam Abu Haneefah’s teaching, it is his school of thought and Abu Yusuf’s teaching really 😉

    22. Sal February 13th, 2007 at 6:01 am

      I think the article was one of the best i’ve read in ages. However, I think almaghrib is smart about this very issue and should not waste time in saudi arabia and whether we should support the government of saudi arabia. Nuh Keller does not talk about whether he supports or is against the Jordanian government in his website even though his institute is in Amman. Why should almaghrib talk about saudi arabia when the “traditionalist” dont talk about the countries that they are free to roam around.

      jinnzaman on January 31, 2007 at 11:19 am said:

      Assalamu alaikum

      His posts were excellent, but he completely ignored the role of Traditional ‘Ulema in the process of the marginalization of the Salafi dawah.

      I address this point on my blog:
      http://jinnzaman.blogspot.com

      masalama

      With all due respect quoting islamica as one of your evidence does not really prove anything. I remember when i first went on islamica i was new to the whole sufi-salafi debate. I felt that i was turned away more from traditional islam by the how the so-called “traditionalists” who mocked and laughed at the salafis who obviously were not fit to the challenge. It was basically what TROID/Spubs did but the other side of the coin. That’s why i’m sticking with Al-Maghrib; not because its the best but because anything else outthere is so far from what i feel is the truth. Both TROID/SPUBS/supersalafees and the traditionalists turned me away with their extreme sectarianism. I feel that no group on this planet is perfect. That’s what its best not to stick with any group or personality which is exactly what many of the salafis and sufis do.

    23. anybody February 13th, 2007 at 2:42 pm

      right on bro!

      each group has their setbacks and the ignorant among them.

      What is your email address, I can email you information about educational websites that will benefit you.

      And also beware of the chatrooms in any of the groups, totally psychopaths run it.

      I tell you part of the reason why salafism is so aagh! to alot of people is the converts nonsense
      and the Arab racism prevalent in people claiming to be part of the salafee crowd
      that is my two cents.

      (I am an insider I would know….)

    24. Mona February 20th, 2007 at 3:59 am

      I just want to let you guys know that…you guys are all extremely “stupid”…ignorant is merely to polite to say so i say it again “STUPID”.

      Let face the fact…Sufi is for those who love possesion. Salafi…um its not really considered a sect, but knowing that the 80% of sunni muslim around the globle follow the teachings of the prophet his sompanions and theones after him.

      So please stop the debate…USELESS…GOD has already chosn his messengers and commanders and scholars of Islam…so let them play thier purposeful duty so that they can enetr heaven in peace…as for you…?

      Also Hamzah Yusuf is a sufi…he went to possession world to learn his “so called Islam”

      trust me ppl i am from north africa…its messed up there….in other words “it would be the last place i’d go to learn my Islam”

    25. Musa Millington July 14th, 2007 at 11:54 pm

      link check these trinisalafis in denial of the narrative from their american kindred spirits

      No one is in denial. In fact I do talk with Umar Lee so that we as Trinidadians can avoid the mistakes that brothers and sisters may have made in America. And Alhamdu Lillah Umar himself is glad of the fact that the Da’wah is spreading in Trinidad.
      His series was definitely an eye opener. And I hope that it would be a lesson for brothers in Trinidad who are callers to Allah.

      Musa

    26. Saleh Al-Ifreekee July 19th, 2007 at 11:57 am

      Assalamu alaykum

      I just cant believe some of you actually believe asha’aree/matureedee is the way of the salaf. Have you ever researched how both were greatly influenced by mu3tazilah which greatly infuenced by Greek philosophy. So the chain of narration looks like this:

      Greek Philosophy > Mu3tazilah > Matureedee/Acharee

      as for the way of the salaf, the chain of narration goes back to the prophet. How do I know this? because there are so many evidences. For instance, from the Quran we have ayah like Ar-Rahman Al-3arsh istawa. From the hadith we have the hadith of the sahabi who freed the slave girl after the prophet vouched for her as believer after she said my Lord is on the 3arsh. Of course we dont know how and why but we believe in it. So there are so many evidences that proves the creed of the salaf to be correct and the way of khalaf to be wrong.

      If you are sincere in your quest for the truth, I refer you to the work of a former matrudee, Shaykh Shams as-Salafi al-Afghaanee, The Maturidi Creed. It is free e-book from salafimanhaj.com.

      May Allah gather us in Jannah, ameen!

    27. The Rise of American Salafism into Mainstream Islam | MR's Blog October 12th, 2008 at 1:31 am

      […] of the Middle East (Specifically Saudi Arabia) and the one in America?  Umar Lee described the rise and fall of Saudi Salafism in America, so what I am saying is that there is a brand new reviving movement in which I’m calling […]

Your Ad Here

MRecent Talk

MRecent Posts

MRespected

MRecognize

MReads

Syndication

Recent comments