What are other scholars saying of Hosni Mubarak’s Shaykh’s (Tantawi) anti-Niqaab fatwa
- Filed under: Islam
- Date: Oct 7,2009 | 10:51 AM
Shaykh Yasir Qadhi wrote a nice sarcastic article on the issue here. I highly recommend everyone to read it. SeekingIlm has also posted a nice response here. I’ve also posted a news article below from AlJazeera sharing other scholars views:
Muslim scholars have questioned plans by the head of Egypt’s most famous university to ban female students from veiling their faces on its premises and affiliated educational establishments.
Shaikh Ali Abu al-Hasan, the former head of the Fatwa Council at the Islamic Studies Institute (ISI) in Cairo, said although it was not required by Islam for women to cover their faces, Al-Azhar University should allow women to chose what they want to wear.
“No official has the right to order a young lady to remove a form of dress that was sanctioned by none other than Umar ibn al-Khattab, except for the purposes of identification for security reasons,” he said.“The niqab [face veil] is not in contravention of the sharia or Egyptian law.”
Shaikh Safwat Hijazi, a scholar and preacher, said he would personally sue anyone who prevented his daughter or wife wearing full niqab from going about her daily life, including entering government offices.
“Preventing a woman from wearing what she wants is a crime,” Hijazi said. “Whoever says the niqab is a custom is not respectable.”
Husam Bahgat, of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, said the series of government decisions against the niqab are “arbitrary” and while designed to combat extremism, only end up being discriminatory against women.
“[Veiled female students] are barred from government subsidised housing and nutrition because they are considered extremists,” he said.
Other opinions
But other Egyptian scholars, such as the ISI’s Abd ul-Hamid al-Atrash, said there would be nothing wrong with such a ruling at a time when the anonymity afforded by the face veil was being abused by people intent on causing trouble.
“There have even been instances of men entering [schools for girls] under cover. So there is no reason why a ruling that benefits the people and the nation cannot be issued”, al-Atrash said.
And Abd ul-Moati Bayumi, a scholar in an al-Azhar affiliated research centre, said most scholars would back Tantawi if he issued the order.
“We all agree that niqab is not a religious requirement,” Bayoumi said. “Taliban forces women to wear the niqab … . The phenomena is spreading” and it has to be confronted.
“The time has come.”
Some scholars, such as Shaikh Abd ul-Dhahir Ghazala, were so surprised by the debate that they refused to believe that the chief Egyptian mufti, Muhammad Tantawi, would ever ban an article of clothing.
But security officials have reportedly told police that there are standing verbal orders to bar girls covered from head to toe from entering al-Azhar’s institutions, including middle and high schools, as well as the dormitories of several universities in Cairo.
The measure is aimed at a minority of women, as a vast majority of Egyptian women wear the headscarf only.
Constitutional support?
Tantawi’s plans came to light when he told a middle school student in a class he was visiting earlier this week to take off her niqab, according to details of the visit published by the independent daily AlMasry AlYoum.
However, a previous directive by the minister of religious endowment to ban women preachers wearing the niqab from mosques was hotly contested. A ban on nurses wearing full veil was announced last year, but not enforced.
A researcher wearing the niqab prevented from using the library at the American University in Cairo in 2001 took her case to the Egypt’s supreme court and eventually won. The court ruled a total ban on the niqab to be unconstitutional.
The court did recommend that women wearing the niqab be made to uncover their faces before female security guards to verify their identity.
On Saturday, scores of female university students protested outside al-Azhar university dormitory calling for the repeal of the decision banning fully veiled women from entering. There were similar demonstrations at Cairo University.
Related posts:
- We shouldn’t hate on Shaykh al-Azhar Tantawi on his opinion, instead Protest against the Egyptian Universities ban on Niqab
- Saudi Salafi Scholars: Women not allowed near the Kaaba
- McCain’s Pastor Is Anti-American!
- US Scholars Planning Islamic College
- Fort Hood Victims Speak out against Anti-Muslim Sentiment
67 Responses for "What are other scholars saying of Hosni Mubarak’s Shaykh’s (Tantawi) anti-Niqaab fatwa"
Satire is not the same as sarcasm buddy.
Shaykh YQ should be outraged. This is a serious issue for all Muslim women and Men should show more concern!… I expected more from him.
I’m very disappointed!
I see the controversy behind this, however, the idea to decrease the number of niqabis is not a bad idea. The Shaykh is right on that fact: the niqaab is not mandatory/fardh. I don’t think it should be banned, but he should instead channel his energies in educational programs that will bring about a truer representation of Islam.
@ PakistaniMD
According to only Imam Abu Hanifa (rh) was the Niqaab not wajib upon women. The rest of the four great Imams; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Malik, Shafie, all agreed that the niqaab is wajib or fard upon women.
Even when one analysis Imam Abu Hanifa’s opinion regarding the niqaab, you will see even according to it a majority of women would be obligated the wear it.
It is a matter of madhab. Muhammad Tantawi made the claim during the incident with the young Muslimah that he understands Islam better than her our her parents, but yet he lacks the knowledge to know that the niqaab was agreed upon to be wajib by three of the four great Imams? Subhana’Allah.
I have written a response/article at http://www.thehanbalirevival.wordpress.com where I presented the evidences explaining how to many the niqaab is wajib and that the real issue here is Tantawi lacks the basic knowledge of fiqh and is attempting to change the Sunnah of RasulAllah (saw), and Allah knows best.
JazakAllahuKhair
I am no scholar or religious student, but I can use logic!
You say that 3/4 say it is fardh upon women…. then why is that most moderate-conservative women in such places where the three schools are widely followed, do not wear the niqaab?
I don’t believe the niqaab is mandatory and should most def. not be propagated here in the west. You can criticize the scholar for HOW he went about engaging w/ the student, but the underlying point has some merit: most Muslim females do not wear the niqaab (except in SA; thank god women feel welcome in Mecca and Medina b/c they are not obliged to wear an abaya!)
@um::: Those who associate with Shaykh Yasir Qadhi at a more personal rather than at an international (teacher, etc) level know that his outrage was adequately unleashed through the article’s pooling – and perfectly legitimate – sarcasm.
Alhamdulillaah.
@PakistaniMD Shaykh YQ is *of the opinion* that it is not fard, but there are other equally reputable and well known, well respected scholars who advocate that the niqab is fard. Its all about how our scholars go about interpreting the various ahadeeth and their evidences showcased. Whether one follows the opinion of one over the other, it is best not to play the “My shaykh is bigger than your shaykh card” and instead follow the evidence. The evidence never lies.
Wa aakhiru da’waana an Alhamdulillaahi Rabbil ‘Aalameen.
Al-Albani’s opinion on the niqab is available here:
http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/women/albani_niqab.htm
Can you Imagine being a woman in all this nonsense? not only are the Kuffar against you but your own brothers and sisters are against you. AT LEAST this is a permissible action so WHY does everyone have an opinion about it? If a sister feels like this is for her deen and wants to do it then leave her alone. If this is a cultural practice then it is not one that clashes with the values of Islam..clearly no one was forcing that girl to wear it.
Why is this such a big deal? I think this is b/c the niqab is probably a lost sunnah and its revival is a sign of the growing Iman in this defeated Muslim Ummah. The shaytan is using the weak among us to attack the strong. Thats my personal opinion…i could be wrong but I obviously dont think so.
Dawud – wow that really sucks.
At first when I started reading the article I was like “so what? Nu’man [ra] used to drink so much and Sa’ad ib Abi Waqqas punished and jailed him, and yet Nu’man continued to fight for, and serve Islam. No one’s perfect, take the good, leave the bad, etc etc”
But by the end of that article – wow I’m left with a bad taste in my mouth. Even though I had heard of Oktar’s shortcomings before, nothing to this level of detail. Although of course who knows how much of the article is true and how much is conjecture.
@Dawud – How depressing. I used to love his book on Perished Nations. Bummer.
This is so sad! Just today I read an article on how a muslim organization is urging Ottawa to ban niqabs and burkas in Canada. I am speechless and pray that Allah protects us from and punishes those who create fitnah. http://news.ca.msn.com//canada/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22128929
@ PakistaniMD
Let me put it like this brother, everyone knows if you use crack cocaine it is harmful your your body and mind. Yet we see thousands of people using it a day. Does this make crack cocaine a good thing now just because a majority of the people do it?
Muhammad (saw) once said “Those who are upon the haqq will one day be so hard to find it will be like locating a white hair on a black OX”, subhana’Allah it seems today as if that prophecy is coming true.
It does not matter if only one Muslimah wears Niqaab in the world. The evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah is very clear on this issue Al-Hamdulillah. We should learn that logic is not our deen, Islam is our deen. Logic is not the answer to everything, Islam is the answer to everything. Our logic is not evidence when Islam has evidence that contradicts it.
JazakAllahuKhair
A scholar and graduate from al-Azhar used to hold halaqas at my masjid on a daily basis, and this is what he mentioned once:
Ahl us-Sunnah scholars have two opinions regarding the niqab. 1) It is fardh, and 2) it is mustahabb/recommended. Nowhere from amongst Ahl us-Sunnah should you find a scholar saying it is bad an unislamic, or that it should be reduced.
So even those sunni scholars that don’t believe niqaab is fardh, aren’t AGAINST it in the way that Tantawi is against it… Keep in mind that Tantawi has said in his Tafsir of the Quran the exact same thing that I said above – that niqab is either fardh or at least recommended. Clearly he has been affected negatively by politics. Also, remember that Tantawi also issued a fatwa saying that Riba in banks is okay.
@Dawud – beware of spreading lies especially if you haven’t confirmed the article. You don’t want to be standing on the Day of Judgement trying to defend yourself against spreading the lies of one of Harun Yahya’s enemies. It’s just not worth it.
Which eminent scholars in Islam said that sarcasm is permitted in Islam.
What truly amazes me is how much energy Yasir Qadhi, his team, and followers spend on Muslim Matters. If Tantawi did something wrong, he did. But should this be an excuse to analyze Tantawi’s character and make such sweeping judgments about him?
If sarcasm is allowed — I have yet to see the evidence — then surely there’s a fine line that separates sarcasm from unlawful gossiping, slandering, and backbiting. Instead of directly addressing the matter in a simple Islamic format with adab (etiquette), Yasir Qadhi, literally makes fun of a Muslim and justifies it by saying sarcasm is allowed.
So, maybe Yasir Qadhi can tell us the difference between sarcasm and gossiping/backbiting. Is there a difference when sarcasm is being used to talk about a Muslim behind his back?
And if Yasir Qadhi thinks sarcasm is okay, then why was he against Tantawi’s sarcasm of that girl? Completely hypocritical, I say.
Imama Abu Hanifas teachers teacher was the student of the Sahaba Abdullah Ibn Masood RA. If Imam Abu Hanifa deems it not fardh/wajib than it’s best to agree with him. Hanafi madhab is very close to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. I don’t want to start any madhab wars, but I think it’s logical to follow such a person. I’m sincerely not trying to offend anybody elses madhahib. May Allah forgive me if I offend anyone. Imam Malik, Imam Shafiee and Imam Hambal are one of our greatest ulemas ever.
@ Mn
You make a legit point, but allow me to expound on one way my brother.
Even among the Sahaba you will find there was a difference of opinion on some issues. I reccomend that you look a bit deeper on the evidence given to say Niqaab is wajib, you will notice it is directly from the Qur’an, Hadeeth, and the Scholars of Tafseer.
The sarcasm, gossip, and backbiting of Shaykh Tantawi by Yasir Qadhi
October 8, 2009
Yasir Qadhi’s new opinion is about Shaykh Tantawi’s behavior towards a young girl (http://muslimmatters.org/2009/10/07/with-scholars-like-these/). He had told her to remove the niqaab in a way that led Yasir to make Shaykh Tantawi a topic of discussion and ridicule.
Yasir says that the purpose of the article was not to discuss the legal rulings of the matter, but
“to prove that it existed in our tradition and is a part of Islamic culture.”
Apart from what he claimed the purpose of the article was, he also said:
“Sarcasm is allowed in our religion when the situation calls for it – and this one most certainly did,”
ending it with a smiley face to make his sarcasm clear to all.
Though sarcasm will be discussed later in this blog (whether it is allowed or not in Islam), one sees an unjudicious choice being made by Yasir and those who support him.
Even if sarcasm was allowed (and he has yet to prove it), one has to wonder why Yasir didn’t explain when sarcasm can go too far, what its limitations are, and how Muslims who comment on such an article with his ’permission of sarcasm’ can easily cross into the haraam territories of gossiping, backbiting, and slandering. One wonders: why aren’t these important Islamic matters that are directly related to our future salvation non-issues to Yasir?
Indeed, Yasir clearly ignores many outrageous comments being made on the topic, many of which can be clearly categorized as antithetical to the behavior and etiquette (adab) our beloved Prophet taught us (Allah bless him and grant him peace). Yasir is seemingly oblivious to un-Islamic responses and reactions to his article, and, as stated above, this makes one truly wonder.
It is also curious to note that while claiming the right to sarcasm in this situation, he makes Shaykh Tantawi’s sarcasm an issue worth elaborating on and heaping ridicule and criticism on him for. In other words, Yasir’s sarcasm is okay but Shaykh Tantawi’s is not. In other words, it is right for Muslims to excuse Yasir’s sarcasm but impermissible to react the same with Shaykh Tantawi’s sarcasm. This is perhaps why Yasir fails to elaborate on what good sarcasm is and how it differs from bad sarcasm. Specifying the boundaries will prevent him from attacking orthodox Sunnis. Blur the boundaries or stay silent about it, and there you have it: an open playing field to choose at will what is Islamic sarcasm and what is not, molded and influenced by his pro-Wahhabi and anti-Sunni views, of course.
The hypocritical nature of Yasir’s position only makes one wonder over and over again what his real purpose behind such articles is. Is it to discuss a very important issue in a way that generates a higher number of respectful comments in the way of adab as Islam teaches us, or is it just to have a nice big discussion irrespective of the many strands of behavior (Islamic and un-Islamic) that are generated? As long as Muslims are attentive to what Yasir wants and deems important, then anything goes. The same boundaries that are set aside when compliments are generated are raised up when those who are critical of his views voice themselves. Muslim-Matters is notorious for deleting comments by Sunnis when it can potentially lead to their “Shaykh” looking like he has no clue about many Islamic issues he discusses. This “My Shaykh is great no matter what he says” is the exaggeration and myopia that our beloved Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) told us to stay away from. While behaving in such a way, they are quick to label Hanafis, Shafi’is, Malikis, and Hanbalis for exaggerating in following a madhab and foresaking the two great sources of Islam — the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Apart from not explaining what separates the line between sarcasm and gossiping/backbiting/slander — and thus making many Muslims vulnerable to haraam — it is also an inordinate waste of time to spend on such matters. It is time taken away from what Muslims can do to genuinely better themselves. How much time does Yasir spend on sarcasm against other Muslims who are not Wahhabi, and how much time do those who comment spend on supporting this sarcasm? From the feedback his articles receive, it is clear that people are more interested in sarcasm rather than the fiqh of the matter. Yet, Yasir and his team fail to change the style of their articles.
Yasir will be responsible for generating this type of reaction — a reaction that gives him a lot of attention which he undoubtedly loves – but which takes away precious time and genuine good deeds that brothers and sisters can do instead.
Now, one can ascertain the truth of why such articles are written in such un-Islamic styles. What is Yasir’s concern? This becomes apparent when what starts off as sarcasm leads many in his group to question the character of Shaykh Tantawi. Why is this important? Beause Shaykh Tantawi is known to take many moderate/anti-Wahhabi positions in his fatawa. It was a perfect opportunity for Yasir to jump on the matter and to denigrate the entire character of this man who has spoken and done more good than bad, in spite of some of his debatable statements. In other words, Yasir used Shaykh Tantawi as a great opportunity to convince the masses to discard orthodox Sunni Islam all together, so they could stick with his pseudo-Sunni understanding of `aqeedah and `ibadaat. After all, if the orthodox Sunnis are wrong, then Yasir and his Wahhabi buddies must be the proper alternative.
But while condemning Shaykh Tantawi as a government scholar and devising a free-for-all attack on him (and what the true Sunnis stand for), he feels no need to use the same yardstick of judgement (and sarcasm) against Wahhabi scholars who were infamous for giving strange fatawa. This is hypocrisy laid bare. Examples include Ibn Baz’s fatwa on declaring that the earth was flat, or his fatwa against women driving. He also ignores Ibn al-Uthaymeen’s anthropomorphic description of Allah’s Attributes, and acknowledges and agrees with the conclusion that the term “Wahhabi” is meaningless because it is used in so many different ways by many different people. His support of bad logic aside, he emphatically embraces or keeps silent about the ridiculous statements made by Wahhabi scholars because Yasir himself follows the Wahhabi tradition.
Such a tactic is used by Yasir to generate as much support against Sunni Islam as possible by all who read his attack against Shaykh Tantawi. His aim is not to emphasize the truth of what Shaykh Tantawi said about the niqaab, but to generate a strong opposition to a man who has defended Sunni Islam for much of his life. Once Yasir’s followers discredit Shaykh Tantawi, they will go against much of what he says, most of which is truly representative of the Islam that was passed to us by the great scholars through the generations who lived before us.
It is yet a desperate and nasty attempt by Yasir and his team to degrade Sunnis and Sunni Islam and an attempt to bring Wahhabism to glory by using such twisted tactics. Pick on a questionable statement by a Sunni scholar and trash him wholesale so Muslims would never trust him again.
If this can be achieved through sarcasm, backbiting, gossiping, slander, and by assassinating the character of not just a Sunni but of a Sunni who generally represents orthodox Sunni Islam, then all the better.
(This article is constantly updated over time.)
http://sunni1.wordpress.com
Tantawi did not say that niqab is not fard! He said it has no basis in Islam!!! This is a complete lie and fabrication for which he must be held responsible for. He needs to be stripped of his post and tried in court for blasphemy!
This is certainly not the first time that Tantawi has made comments that would make even the docile Muslim’s stomach churn with cringeworthiness.
This incident may well become the last knell in the coffin of Tantawi. The little influence and following which he did have will ‘inshaa Allaah vanish and leave this so-called Imam irrelavent within the Ummah.
I thank Yasir Qadhi for not following the attritious silence shown by other students of knowledge.
you know, usually I dont do this, but zaki you leave me with little choice.
- its not “knell”, its “nail” – as in “the last nail in the coffin”
- its not “irrelavent” its “irrelevant”
- its not “attritious” its “atrocious” as in, your spelling and misuse of words are completely atrocious.
Anyhoo. No need for everyone to get their panties in a bunch. There’s a reason why the masses were warned about those scholars who associate with the rulers.
Maverick, I know very well what I wrote but thanks for your second-guessing me…
As for knell, it was in the context of ‘death knell’, perhaps the use of coffin was erroneous.
As for “attritious”, I made this word up from the word ‘attrition’ – and I know it is not a word (but it sounded right :^)
Anyway, this matter is far greater than a mere government mouth-piece wanting to change the dynamics of the niqab debate. This is an inherent attempt to impose a liberal/secular value within the Muslim world (by which even the French would be proud of!)
This matter should not remain passive within the Ummah but rather a concerted effort needs to be made to make sure this ignorant ruling by a wilfully ignorant individual does not cause hardship and tribulation for Muslim women in other parts of the world whose governments are itching to propse similar Islamophobic measures.
Wassalaam,
Zaki.
p.s. Maverick, you left the comma out of the word dont (as in don’t)
:^)
Aljazeera covering the effects of this idiot mans fatwah
zaki –
Tantawi isn’t the first person to make such outrageous comments about the niqab in the Muslim world. Previous replies from shyoukh about the need for moderation are enough to address the most recent issue of niqab-hatery.
And btw, I wasnt taking issue with your punctuation, or lack thereof.
To the Jaahil Tantaawi of Al Azhar – you are no scholar but a dog in the guise of a scholar. May Allah Subhana wa ta’ala give you in retribution for your sacrilegious act of removing the veil of an honourable Muslim girl. In fact you should be tried in a Shariah court of Islam as the Imaan of a scoundrel like you has come in to question. You sprout a stingy beard to feign you follow the Sunnah. Your appearance itself unmasks the dubious nature of your scholarship and questions the integrity (if Al Azhar has any integrity left) of Al Azhar as a place to be sanctified for its Islamic leaning. May Allah Subhana wa ta’ala save the Ummah from such bogus scholars who most probably are in the pay of the Jews and Christians like the leader of that country
Yes because insulting people is the way to go isn’t it? Ya, lets all forget adab and all that jazz.
Assalam-u-`alaykum brother Ard (in seekinilm blog) ,
JazakAllahu-khayr for your response. It is not about an “axe to grind” as you claim. It is about setting the context right and understanding his motive. We all know well what interpretations YQ holds. We also know well why he chooses to pick on certain scholars as opposed to others.
In this case, it is clear that it is YQ who has an axe to grind. If such a mistake was made by a Wahhabi/Salafi, he would never have reacted like that. Because it was made by a scholar who generally represents orthodox Sunni Islam, and who generally holds views unfavorable to the Wahhabi tradition, he was quick to make this an issue.
To me, this shows a lack of sincerity on YQ’s part because he uses a different yardstick to judge his own Wahhabi scholars. YQ knows well that picking on a matter like that will win him many supporters. It is a clever tactic not to just discredit Shaykh Tantawi, but more importantly to discredit his support of Mawlid, tawassul, tabarruk, and other views upheld by Ahl al Sunna wa’al Jama’ah.
If YQ thinks he can make fools of Muslims, then he should think twice. I will never backbite a scholar, use sarcasm against him, and make fun of him just because he has a few debatable statements. And I would certainly not call him a “taghut” as someone in this blog has.
We, as Sunnis, must NOT fall for YQ’s attempt to disunite Muslims and discredit a man who, in spite of a few matters, generally represents the Sunni tradition that YQ rails against.
It is people like YQ who we should be warned from. It is people like him who wants Muslims to use their energy discrediting a person who is against the Wahhabi tradition. And it is people like him who use such opportunities to deflect criticism of pseudo-Sunni Wahhabi interpretations and keep Muslims busy slandering and gossiping about a man who he had never agreed with in the first place, even when he spoke the truth.
Be careful who you support and don’t miss the context. It is yet another attempt by YQ to disunite orthodox Sunnis and make them fight against one another. It is only YQ who will be discredited and I will certainly make sure of that.
Wassalam,
Muhammad
To Muhammad, Tantawi does not represent the “orthodox Sunni” viewpoint; unless of course “orthodox Sunni” in your vocabulary means anti-Ahlus Sunnah. Your own hatred for the Ahlul Hadeeth (read: Salafi/Wahabi if you wish) has become apparent.
Tantawi did not claim ikhtilaf on the matter of niqab, he strongly states that there is no basis for it in Islam!! This is a clear lie and a fabrication of our texts. If this is the level of his scholarship, then you and your brand of Islam can keep him and his weird and wonderful fatwas from the past and present!
Tantawi’s behaviour towards the teenage girl was a reflection of his hatred and intolerance towards the Ahlul Hadeeth. In Egypt I know that that most niqabi Muslimah generally identify themselves with this jama’ah. Keeping in mind the history of Tantawi’s and Al Azhar’s attitude towards the Ahlul Hadeeth, this is a good opportunity for him to show “who’s boss” and proceed to ban a very powerful symbol of da’wah Ahlul hadeeth.
Maverick, this matter is far greater than being a mere government mouth-piece (tantawi) and wanting to change the dynamics of the niqab debate. This is an inherent attempt to impose a liberal/secular value within the Muslim world, which even the French would be proud of!
This matter should not remain passive within the Ummah but rather a concerted effort needs to be made to make sure this ignorant ruling by a senile individual does not cause hardship and tribulation for Muslim women in other parts of the world whose governments are itching to propse similar Islamophobic measures.
Unfortunately the trials have just started! Islamophobic organisations in Canada and Italy are already extracting political mileage from Tantawi’s “fartwa”:
http://bikyamasr.com/?p=4599
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091007/muslim_ban_091007/20091007?hub=Canada
Courtesy of a dirty old man who likes to taunt teenage girls and wants to look at their face! Allahu musta’an.
subhaanAllah, the niqab has to be banned, but not the ultra-tight pants and bikini-over-skintight-shirt outfits that another half of egyptian girls wear? what a ridiculous mistake in priorities if we’re trying to establish a dress code.
Looks like there is a basis for my suspicion:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1254573381310&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
“There are (also) government concerns about Salafism,” Rashwan notes. Salafis put the emphasis on spreading the puritan creed of emulating the practices and beliefs of early Muslims.
They are reportedly gaining more grounds in many Muslim countries, particularly Egypt, and have major theological differences with Al-Azhar, the highest seat of religious learning in the Sunni world.
“Al-Azhar has always had a cautious dislike towards other trends that challenge its legitimacy,” Rashwan said.
___________________
“challenge its legitimacy”? Legitimacy (and respect for that matter) need to be earned; they are not handed out like on a platter as is the case with Tantawi. There are a number of good scholars at Azhar, but the Mubarak government will never allow them to assume leadership. Tantawi serves their purpose very well.
Maverick, this matter is far greater than a mere government mouth-piece (tantawi) wanting to change the dynamics of the niqab debate. This is an inherent attempt to impose a liberal/secular value within the Muslim world, which even the French would be proud of!
This matter should not remain passive within the Ummah but rather a concerted effort needs to be made to make sure this ignorant ruling by a wilfully ignorant (or senile) individual does not cause hardship and tribulation for Muslim women in other parts of the world whose governments are itching to propse similar Islamophobic measures.
It seems that the tribulations for our Muslim sisters, daughters and mothers has already begun as news is coming in of MPs from Italy who are suggesting to enact a law, based on Tantawi’s comments, which would ban the niqab from public places. And the ‘progressive’ Muslim Canadian Congress have also lobbied the Canadian government to ban the niqab, once again based on Tantawi’s statements.
Several points:
—Tantawi’s claim that face covering is not part of the Deen belies the Religion. Intentionally belying the Religion is kufr.
—The overall argument needs to reversed upon the globalists/secularists. If it is illegal for women to cover their faces in the West in the name of so-called “gender equality,” then why is it required for women to cover their chests, when men can walk about topless without any legal repurcussions? Either one believes in genuine “gender equality”–or one does not. We know the secularists don’t believe in “gender equality.” They just use it as a slogan to attack Muslims and the few non-secularized traditional Christians that are left.
—If you want to attack extremism, you don’t attack the Sunnah. You attack the BELIEFS of the extremists. The Qutbis and the Wahhabis have kufri beliefs pertaining to Allah (such as, believing Allah is a body with limbs and organs/occupying space or in the pantheism of Sayyid Qutb). By attacking the beliefs of the radical extremists, you reinforce the correct `Aqidah in the hearts of the masses, while isolating the deviants. By attacking the niqaab, this will encourage MORE PEOPLE to join the ranks of the Wahhabis/Qutbis in Egypt and elsewhere.
“Keep reminding yourself of the reality of death, for it is the interuptor of desires and the terminator of pleasures.”
With Allah is the success.
Yes Zaki, I agree that the response to this incident should not be passive.
Your comments that you copy and pasted from MM are in the same discussion thread as my comments and thoughts. Scroll down to near the bottom to read more.
http://muslimmatters.org/2009/10/07/with-scholars-like-these/#comment-51111
ANd MR bro –
I wouldn’t exactly classify “SeekingIlm” as a scholarly site.
I know Ata’, and while I believe he strives for sincerity in his pursuit of knowledge, he is in no way a “scholar”.
Muhammad, just because you have an axe to grind with the “Wahabis” doesn’t mean Qadhi was wrong to condemn Tantawi for his actions. Instead of condemning Tantawi, who is well-known for being a stooge for the Egyptian government, you condemn Qadhi. Clearly, you have your priorities messed up. Are you going to defend Tantawi for shaking the hand of the Zionist war criminal, Peres, or his absolute silence when the Egyptian government handed over some Muslims sisters(who converted) back to the Coptic Church?!
Swarthmoor, before you accuse the “Wahabis” of tashbeeh and tajseem, why was your group, the Ahbash, backed by the mujassimah Nusayris and not one Habashi shaykh has condemned the Nusayris? Can you explain this hypocrisy for me? Also, your group is well-known for their toadiness to the Arab tawagheet and their pathetic position towards the secularists.
Saarim,
If you know Qadhi and have read his and his team’s articles on Muslim-Matters, you will see that all of them have axes to grind against Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jam’ah. They condemn Abdal Hakim Murad, Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, and other intellectuals who they should only emulate.
Using this context, it should make you wonder why Qadhi picked on a scholar who he has never fully agreed with — because he’s not a Wahhabi like Qadhi. Had Shaykh Tantawi said that tawassul is good and Mawlid is permissible, Qadhi would still have jumped on him for saying something wrong because it wouldn’t match his Wahhabi understanding of those issues. What Qadhi does instead is he chooses a specific action of an orthodox Sunni scholar to condemn his entire character. This is far from what the Qur’an and Sunnah teaches us. Qadhi, instead of asking people not to backbite and get carried away with this matter, instead keeps silent or agrees with the unIslamic behavior. He serves to disunite Muslims by such petty matters and makes mountain out of a molehill.
What shows his lack of sincerity is that he doesn’t pick on Wahhabi scholars who say questionable statements. Ibn Baz’s flat-earth fatwa, for example, is so ludicrous it need not be elaborated on. Wahhabis anthropomorphizing Allah and condeming what the vast majority of scholars have agreed to be permissible is something that does not bother Qadhi. The ease with which he accuses Imam Busiri and his beautiful al-Burdah poem of shirk shows where he is coming from, and sets the context of his current attack on Shaykh Tantawi. If you can’t see this, then you are one of the victims of Qadhi’s techniques to divide Sunni Muslims.
Let Qadhi write an article on questionable matters said by Wahhabi scholars, and let’s see how much he will be willing to do it.
His hypocrisy is laid bare and his article reflects his true intentions. Trashing a scholar, his character, and making fun of him through what he calls permissible sarcasm is only an attempt to indirectly attack orthodox Sunni Islam of which Qadhi has always been an enemy of.
Qadhi’s Muslim Matter blog shows extreme immaturity, he resorts to sarcasm and justifies it, and stays silent when his followers and those who give commentary go into Islamic realms of behavior.
Qadhi should be shunned for the fraud he is and for making such a big deal out of a scholar who, in spite of his questionable statement, is from Al-Azhar — an institution that has for the most part taken anti-Wahhabi positions throughout much of its Sunni history.
Qadhi should fear Allah and repent for he will be responsible for all the gossip, bickering, backbiting, slander, and name-caling that he generated because of his article.
It is best that you become more familiar with his writings and views before judging and interpreting this most recent article of his.
Muhammad
Saarim,
As we used to say back in the day: Get off my j***! The Wahhabis pray to a big (imaginary) bipedal body with fingers, eyes, a tibia, and smiling face that they think is somewhere above their heads. And, yet, they claim to be Sunni Muslims. The Nusayris, like the Wahhabis, are mujassimah–their `aqidah is even MORE GROSS. The difference between the Wahhabis and the Nusayris is that the Wahhabis are ACTIVELY spreading their kufr (and terrorism) in the guise of Sunni Islam. MANY Sunnis are EVIDENTLY confused about who/what the Wahhabis are. I’ve never met, and chances are few here have ever met a Nusayri–much less, seen a Nusayri giving da`wah for their deviance.
You seem fixated on the Ahbash. I don’t know of the Ahbash going around saying Allah is a smiling faced body mounted on the `Arsh (some of the time) or that Allah lives in the Heavens with the Angels (some of the time). And i don’t know of the Ahbash going around detonating themselves and blowing up little babies, like the Wahhabis and Qutbis do. The problem is that some Muslims want to focus on radical extremists, but they are not recognizing that the thing that these extremists share in common is the same literalist-corporealist doctrine. Expose the absurdities of the Wahhabi doctrine, and you’ll inform/strengthen the Muslim masses about the correct `Aqidah, and you’ll turn the Muslim masses against the extremists. If that is done, the extremists won’t be able to recruit because the common Muslims will see that the Wahhabi doctrine is straight up and down tajseem, tashbeeh, and kufr. It’s as simple as that.
With Allah is the success.
Muhammad,
You’re the one with an axe to grind and you clearly have your priorities messed up. Qadhi didn’t attack Tantawi because he is Sufi, but because of his ridiculous position and Tantawi is clearly a government scholar. So what if MM attacks certain Sufis or Ash’aris. Don’t Sufi sites such as SeekingIlm and Marifah attack and mock the Salafi da’wah? You Sufis do the exact same thing as Qadhi(even though I’m pretty sure he isn’t singling him out) and yet you come here with your pretentious and sanctimonious defense of Tantawi. Are you going to defend Tantawi when he shakes the hand of the war criminal Shimon Peres or his total silence when the Pharaonic Egyptian government handed over some Muslim sisters(who converted) back to the Coptic Church?! You’re just using this incident to bash the “Wahabis”. As for Abdul-Hakim Murad, do you approve of his inciting the kuffar against the “Wahabis” in the media or his(and other Sufi shuyookh) colloboration with the Radical Middle Way? You clearly don’t have a clue about current affairs or what goes on in the Arab word as many non-Salafi shuyookh have harshly condemned Tantawi, so spare me your ridiculous diatribe on the “Wahabis”
Swarthmoor,
In almost all of your posts I have seen, you have attacked the “Wahabis”. So, I think it’s fair for me to expose the hypocrisy of your Satanic group, the Ahbash, and continually bring it up as you have done with the “Wahabis”. Since your group is the most extreme Jahmi and they based their da’wah on takfeer of the “Wahabis”, then why did your group colloborate with the mujassimah Nusayris and were backed financially and security-wise by them, while the Ahbash were totally silent on the Nusayris and the criminal Syrian regime. This exposes the brazen hypocrisy of your group, so get off your high horse and spare me the ghetto jive. Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, the “Wahabis” are kuffar, while your group lionises and defends Hafez al-Assad, Ibn Arabi, Jamal Abdul-Nasser, etc.
Your group is known for their colloboration with the kuffar and the enemies of Islaam and even Judeofascist, Daniel Pipes praises your group:
http://www.danielpipes.org/312/needed-muslims-against-terror-and-not-salam-al-marayati
Since you were harping about “Rand” shuyookh at Umar Lee’s website and pretending to be holier than thou while your group fits the modus operandi of the “Rand” manhaj:
Saarim,
And as we used to say: “I guess ya just can’t get off of it.” Let make first things first: people who believe that Allah is a giant body, with real actual fingers, a smiling face, two right hands, a tibia, and a pair of feet are not Muslims. Such people are praying to an imaginary corporeal/spatial entity. They are not praying to the Lord of the Universe–the Creator of space, place, and time and all that exitsts within space, place, and time. Making takfeer upon and warning against such people is not a bad thing–it’s an obligation. You keep bringing up politics, while ignoring that the creed of the Wahhabis is straight up kufr. And i’ve already said NUMEROUS TIMES the Nusayris also have a kufri `aqidah; i’m not defending them.
Whatever are the politics of the Ahbash, they are not calling people to blasphemy. Furthermore, you are stuck on stoooopid with these ad hominem attacks. I am talking about the THEOLOGICAL ROOTS of these radical extremists and how to combat it (you combat it by teaching the correct Creed), and you keep trying to throw the discussion off track, but whatever you say doesn’t make the Wahhabis any less of a threat to Muslims, and it doesn’t make their kufr any less horrendous. I know you ain’t the sharpest tack in the box, there, Saarim, but let us try to stay focused. This radical extremism is rooted in the Wahhabi’s ludicrous and utterly literalist (mis)understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah. This is why these extremists pray to a giant bipedal being thing they think is mounted above their heads, and this is why they blow up themselves and blow up little babies. If you want to talk about the Wahhabis and their history/politics, then you can look at the origin of Wahhabism, its massacres of Muslims, rebellions against the Sultans, conspiring with the British, and holding on to power only by the support of the US. But I’m not focusing on their politics–i am talking about their `AQIDAH, because their ill `aqidah is worse than their politics. You seem unable to grasp that.
The WAHHABIS–and that is the name that Ahlus-Sunnah gave these anthropomorphist Najdi criminals from their early days–so there is no need to use “quotation marks,” need to be warned against, because their material is widespread and many Muslims are being consumed by their kufr `aqidah. Just last night a Sister told me that a Wahhabi made takfeer on her because she said she does not believe that Allah sits on top of Paradise. Now in the twisted Wahhabi mind, since this woman is (allegedly) an apostate, he has the right to kill her. This is the same Wahhabi “logic” that is being employed all over the world where these acts of terror are taking place.
Again, Saarim, i invite you to share with us how many active Nusayri da`ees there are in the States, and how many sons and daughters of Sunnis became Nusayris in the past decade. Now, we can reverse it and let’s talk about how many (former) Muslims have been diseased and have apostated by adopting the Wahhabi `aqidah. Dags, you have the SOMALI community in the States getting wrecked by these Wahhabis. And when some of these Wahhabi-influenced Somali youth–and Allah knows it’s only a matter of time–go and blow up something or start capping government officials in the States, ALL THE MUSLIMS will take the heat for that. You better believe i am going put these Wahhabis ON BLAST when they propagate kufr in the name of Ahlus-Sunnah, and they do things that will get all the Muslims in this country persecuted. You ought to be thanking me for giving the Muslims the big heads-up on these pseudo-sunni anthropomorphists and terrorists.
With Allah is the success.
An example of Wahhabi logic:
A few years back i was going through Pal Talk, and i heard a speaker describing the size of the universe (as per the description of Western science). He went on talking about the distance in light years between the stars, etc. After that he said: “If the universe is that big, then how big do you think Allah is.” (A`udhu billah!!! These people are worshippers of a giant body that doesn’t even exist.) After saying such a horrendous kufri statement, i posted a warning telling the people: “This is a Wahhabi site. Please be warned.”
As the Wahhabis are prone to do, they say: “There is no such thing as a Wahhabi.” (Although Ahlus-Sunnah wrote against the Najdis and called them “WAHHABIS”–it’s enough to look at Zayn Ad-Dahlan’s (the Mufti of Mecca), and his writing: “Fitnatul-Wahhabiyyah”–to prove the Wahhabis are liars). I responded by saying: “Of course, there are Wahhabis. These are the people who ransacked the Mosque of the Prophet, seiged and starved the people of Mecca, and massacred the Muslims of Ta’if at the beginning of the 19th century.” The person’s response was:
“THOSE WEREN’T MUSLIMS–THEY WERE GRAVE WORSHIPPERS.”
This is the mentality of the Wahhabis–those who masquerade themselves as “Salafi” Muslims, but pray to a giant smiling faced bipedal being they think sits above their heads. They fail to recognize that Allah is the CREATOR of space and direction and does not need or resemble ANY of the creations. At-Tahawi said in his universally recognized Sunni `Aqidah:
“Allah is supremely glorious from having boundaries, extremities, sides, organs, appendages, and instruments. None of the six directions contain Allah, as is the case with all created things.”
The Wahhabis say (a`udh billah): “Oh no, Allah does in deed have boundaries, extremities, sides [well, at least a right side] and real, literal, actual organs and appendages. And that Allah is in a direction, just like the creations are in directions.”
The Wahhabis don’t have the belief of At-Tahawi. They don’t have the belief of the Muslims. The Wahhabi literalist/anthropomorphists fail to realize that before there was space and direction, there was a Creator, and Allah is as He was. Allah is Perfect and Eternal and did not transform and materialize into location after bringing the universe into being. Muslims don’t pray to a spatial or corporeal being. Muslims pray to the CREATOR of space, bodies, and time.
With Allah is the success.
“If the universe is that big, then how big do you think Allah is.”
sounds like he meant Allah is bigger than the universe… if not, he would’ve said “how SMALL do you think…”
don’t you think?
Thanks Saarim, I knew there was something very dodgy about swarth moor and his intellect (or the lack thereof).
The Habashi filth emerged with ambitious heresies and a variety of rulings. They are called Ahbash or Habashies (Ethiopians, or Abyssinians), not because they come from that land, but because their leader Abdullah AlHabashy hales from Harare in Somalia. Since they first appeared the Ahbash have entered into many confrontations and disputes, and numerous debates with many of the scholars, students, and people in general. They continued in this fashion until their nefarious scheme was discovered, and their intentions became clear to every sane person, or anyone who hears or bears witness to their blasphemies.
The controversy surrounding this movement involves its peculiar origins and eclectic theological roots, which define the society’s separate identity and determine its program of religious and political action. In reality, the group is largely a propaganda tool used by Syria’s secular, Alawite-dominated regime to combat Islamic fundamentalism, manipulate the Lebanese Sunni Muslim community, and gain acceptance for the Alawite sect within Islamic religious circles.
Their founder is a “mysterious person” of Jewish origins. This would also explain why the Ahbash have emerged as important political actors in Lebanon and within the Islamic orbit with their secular and liberal agenda.
@ Um,
The point is that the Wahhabis believe Allah is a body with a size, shape, and location. Muslims don’t say Allah is bigger–or smaller–than the universe. Muslims say size is inapplicable to Allah, just as color, scent, texture, and other physical attributes are inapplicable to Allah, because Allah REALLY does not resemble the creations. Muslims believe Allah is the Creator and Al-Musawwir. Allah designates things with their respective sizes, shapes, locations, times, etc. Allah does not have a size, shape, location, and is not in time. Allah is not like the created beings. Allah existed before space and time and direction. Allah is Perfect and does not change. Hence, Allah did not transform and materialize in a location (or into a size)after bringing the universe into being.
@ Murtadha, you and Saarim are like little kids–you’re not addressing the issue… or more appropriately, you are incapable of addressing the issue. The Wahhabis, and again, that is the title that was given to the Najdis by Ahlus-Sunnah, so don’t play dumb, are responsible for most of this pseudo-sunni terrorism that is taking place. Whether it’s Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, the bombin’ babies crew in Iraq (even the Iraqis got fed up with the Wahhabis there), the Somali terrorists, ad nauseum, they share one thing in common: a love for Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab and a corporealist doctrine about Allah. Whoever finances the Ahbash, that doesn’t change the fact the terrorists have a Wahhabi doctrine, and that Wahhabism is a menace to the Muslims and non-Muslims, and that Muslims should be diligent in exposing these people before something jumps off in the US or UK or France that results in greater levels of persecution of Muslims.
Secondly, if Tantawi had some intelligence, he would counter the extremist elements in Egypt, namely the Qutbis and Wahhabis, not by telling Sisters to stop wearing niqaab, but by exposing the absurd beliefs of the Wahhabis. Allah does NOT have a bright shining face, and Allah is NOT a bipedal being with fingers and a shin. Allah is not mounted on the top of Paradise. Teach the public what their fellow Egyptian scholar taught–that is, the scholar of the Sunni Doctrine, Abu Ja`far At-Tahawi:
“Allah is supremely glorified from having boundaries, extremities, sides, organs, appendages, and devices. NONE of the six directions contain Allah, as is the case with all created things.”
That single statement DESTROYS the doctrine of the Wahhabis and exposes their ignorance of the Muslim belief. Teach the Sunni `Aqidah, and in this way, you reinforce the correct creed of Ahlus-Sunnah among the common folk, AND you destroy any “legitimacy” that the Wahhabis (and Qutbis) may have previously had in the minds of others. You don’t need to become an apologist to defeat the extremists.
With Allah is the success.
Salaam All,
Sh. Tantawi is backing down on what he said. Even if he said something wrong, he is obviously denying it and this shows his good intentions.
Our Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) said to give a Muslim the benefit of the doubt many, many times over before accusing him of doing something wrong.
If a Muslim has done something wrong, and especially if he is trying to distance himself from what he said, then help him and forgive him.
Don’t trash his entire character, call him “evil”, “taghut”, etc.
Yasir Qadhi and all those who jumped on his bandwagon of sarcasm and mockery of Sh. Tantawi should repent and ask Allah for forgiveness. None of you gave Sh. Tantawi a chance to explain himself or to back off from his words.
Surely all of you have accumulated lots of sin — especially Qadhi who started this whole spectacle.
Muslims, now get over it and exert your energy on more important things. Sarcasm was never a priority as Qadhi makes it to be. Don’t waste your time listening to him.
Muhammad
He is “backing down” and claiming he never said what is being reported. There were many witnesses to this event and no doubt the sister who was taunted will come forward in due course (if she has not been bought out yet!) The point is that Tantawi is a liar and leaving aside other of his fantastical fatwas in the past, this particular one has had a global effect and no doubt will continue to impact niqabi sisters everywhere. Only today I read about a sister being thrown out of her dorm in Cairo because she was pro-niqabi.
Benefit of the doubt is given to someone whose speech and character are unknown. Tantawi is not a stranger to controvesy and I doubt this will be the last time this senile individual will play with the religion to satisfy his masters and the West..
swot moor, no one buys your lies anymore and in this information age there is ample and vast evidence to prove that the Ahlul Hadeeth are not mujassim and have never called to tajsim! They simply follow the salaf from the Sahabah and those who came after them in affirming everything that Allah SWT have affirmed for Himself with committing ta’weel, ta’teel, takyeef, tashbeeh and tamtheel. You Sufi Ashari Mutazili Ahlul Kamal can’t seem to grasp this simple fact.
In fact Tafweed which you practise is worse than all the above as you believe in the attributes of Allaah as they have come without accepting their meanings at all! Here’s a little refresher for you to get rid of your self-inflicted ignorance:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19959488/Did-The-Salaf-Practice-Taweel
http://www.asharis.com/creed/
There is a lot more to counter you lies and wilful ignorance if you continue down your deceptive path :^)
Swarthmoor,
Before you accuse anybody of tajseem and tashbeeh, you must answer the question why your Satanic group colloborated with the mujassim Nusayris who backed them with money, arms and security and why the Ahbash were totally silent on the kufr of the mujassim Nusayris. I challenge you to bring me one Habashi shaykh who has condemned the mujassimah Nusayris. You bring up the point that no Muslims are becoming Nusayris. That’s not the point. The Saudi government colloborates with the Christian Americans even though very little Saudis have become Christians. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be criticised. Likewise, you Ahbash colloborated with the mujassimah Nusayris and had total allegiance towards them. Since your Satanic group claims to be the most harsh against tashbeeh and tajseem, then their treachery does matter and this will always be like a millstone around their neck. All your Jahmi accusations and istilzamaat(necessitations) are moot unless you are willing to confront this issue. I don’t care what you have said about the Nusayris, but what your shuyookh have said as you clearly learned your aqeedah from them. You say I bring up politics, yet you Sufis have always accused the “Wahabis” of being agents for the kuffar, and no doubt there are “Wahabis” who are like this, but the majority of the “Wahabis” aren’t and it is your group which is one of the most treacherous groups in the Muslim world and the West as they almost always colloborate with the kuffar and the enemies of Islaam everywhere they go. You can’t come cry “politics” when you can’t respond to the treacheries of your Satanic group. Since you hate “Wahabis”, why don’t saddle up and join the kaafir American army and fight the “Wahabis” on the battlefield. Incite the kuffar against the “Wahabis” like your shaykh Nachef who has a tazkiyyah from the Shaytaan, Daniel Pipes. Spy on the “Wahabis” like the Ahbash used to do in Lebanon. This is the manhaj of your Satanic group. You were attacking other shuyookh at Umar Lee’s blog for their Rand manhaj. Yet, it is your group which has colloborated with the kuffar and enemies of Islaam everywhere they have went. That’s why the enemies of Islaam love your group and praise it. Why the hypocrisy, Swarthmoor?!
Isn’t this thread supposed to be about the nonsense of Tantawi, why is there so much talk about the So-called Wahhabi/So-called Salafis and the Ahbash? I find it very impractical to display concrete proof in detail about the reality of this two groups. If someone is sincere and he wants to learn about who are wahhabis and what they believe in then let them look in to their books and compare what they say to what the most famous among the scholars of Islam have said for the past 1400 years. And let them do the same for the Ahbash. There is no benefit in throwing rumors and accusations around without any proof. I personally have spent time checking into the background of both of these groups and I compared what they say to the what the classical scholars have said. While it is very clear which one is guided and which one is misguided for the sincere and mindful person, we should stay focused on one issue at a time.
As for Tantawi is concerned let us all look at the Rules of Islam and apply them to his case. Forget about all the personal and emotional mumbo jumbo. Firstly, neither the TV nor the internet is an acceptable replacement for two trustworthy muslim witnesses. Therefore, unless we were there and heard him say those statements or it was conveyed to us by two trustworthy muslim male witnesses then we shouldn’t accuse him of actually making those outlandish statements. We should instead hope that he didn’t say them, but take the opportunity to clarify the correct possible of the Niqab in Islam. In brief it is a matter which is mandub (optional and rewardable if done with the sincere intention). I really don’t think there is a need to say more than that. Now Tantawi said those statements then at best he didn’t know at all about the rulings of the Niqab because he is not really a scholar but a fake and an ignorant person who has no business being the Mufti of Al-Azhar and he should be sacked immediately. Now, if he said those statements while knowing the Niqab is an Islamic tradition that both common muslims and scholars alike know that it is a rewardable act for a woman to wear one including the wifes of the Prophet. Yet he chose to belie this out arrogance or whatever motive me may have had then he is a blasphemer. For denying anything from the Religion which is commonly known about the muslims from the laymen to the scholar while knowing that that matter is apart of the Religion, the person who does such a thing blasphemes regardless of his social, economic or perceived religious status may be.
Batil,
Believing that Allah–the Creator of space–exists within space is tajseem. It’s not a case of failing to grasp what the Wahhabis/quasi-Salafis say–i know perfectly well what they say. They say:
“Allah is mounted (or SITTING IN PERSON) on the Ceiling of Paradise.” They say: “Allah has fingers, a shin [which is a bone in the lower leg], a pair of feet, a pair of hands.” They say Allah has a face and smiles [you can't smile without a mouth]. The Wahhabis say that Allah moves about in the last third of the night (of course, the Wahhabis don’t consider the reality of time zones). Then the Wahhabis say: “Allah has those real-literal-actual things [i.e., limbs, appendages, and organs]… but they are not like our’s.” The statement itself is an absurdity. You can’t have a real-literal-actual shin, and it’s not a bone in the leg. All that aside, the bottom line is that the Wahhabis pray to a spatial entity they believe is located above their heads, and again, that in itself is tajseem/kufr.
Regarding the Ash`ari-Maturidi debate, simply ask yourself why do the Wahhabis quote:
An-Nawawi, As-Suyuti, Ibn Hajar, Al-Bayhaqi, Qadi `Iyad, Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi, Al-Qurtubi, scholars ALL OVER the Muslim world–but fail to mention that these scholars were Ash`ari-Maturidis? It’s called an absence of intellectual integrity. They can’t speak the truth–because to do so would expose that the Wahhabi `aqidah is a bid`ah, and that the scholars discredited such a doctrine centuries ago. The fact of the matter is that if you were to look at the Islamic curricula of the various learning institutions throughout the Islamic world for the past 800 years, you will find the Ash`ari-Maturidi books of `Aqidah being taught therein. This is just a fact of history (that the Wahhabis/quasi-salafis like to conceal). Do some investigation and let us know what your results are.
With Allah is the success.
Saarim,
I know a doctor who does psychological counseling; i can get you in touch with him. I say that not in jest, for it is evident you have some psychological imbalances, and i don’t want you to cause harm to others. First thing we have to understand is that Allah ABSOLUTELY does not resemble OR need the creations. You and i, the things we see, and the images we imagine all occupy the dimension of space. Allah is not like those things which exists in space, because Allah does not exists within a place. Furthermore, space, place, and direction are not Allah. They are other than other Allah; hence they are creations. Given that space, place, and direction are creations, and Allah does not need the creations; then, Allah does not exists in space, place, or direction.
On the other hand, the Wahhabis (no quotation marks for irony needed–for this is the epithet Ahlus-Sunnah gave to the Najdi movement–and i am sure you are familiar with the Hadith about Najd) are corporealists. The Wahhabis/quasi-salafis ascribe to Allah the properties of bodies, such as, a size, a location(s), motion, and shape. This is blasphemy-kufr. Warning kaafirs about the harm that other kaafirs might cause is a service to the society–and it protects the interests of the Muslims. Not that i do it for your sake, but you should be thanking me for speaking out against the Wahhabis.
The Wahhabis are VERY active in spreading their kufr. The Wahhabis are engaged in terrorism. The Wahhabis/quasi-salafis pose two, well three, harms to the Muslims: (1) they murder Muslims, (2) The Wahhabis commit acts of terror, which causes many Muslims, including those who are not even affiliated with the Wahhabis (not that the Wahhabis are Muslims) to be persecuted by various dhaalim regimes, and also their terror hampers efforts to make da`wah to the non-Muslims. (3) The Wahhabis propagate kufr–which is the worst of their crimes. They insult Allah and claim that He is a smiling faced bipedal spatial entity mounted on top of Paradise with real-actual-literal fingers, eyes, and a tibia. The one who dies on such a belief will be in HELL FOREVER. Consequently, it is a VERY GOOD THING to warn against the Wahhabis.
Now for myself, i have NUMEROUS times unequivocally condemned all forms of tashbih (resembling Allah to the creations) and tajseem (believing Allah is a body/spatial entity–which is itself a type of tashbih). I’ve made it clear, Saarim, that the Nusayris are kuffaar, for the same reasons the Wahhabis are kuffaar: they both pray to a corporeal and spatial entity. Given the level of ignorance and confusion about traditional Islamic `Aqidah here in the West amongst the sons and daughters of Sunnis–AND the prevalence of Wahhabi literature and websites masquerading themselves as “Sunni” (and the fact, these Wahhabis here are likely to do something REAL STUPID–as in commit acts of terrorism), it seems more prudent to warn about the Wahhabis more frequently than it is to warn against the Nusayris. All the rest of your post is ad hominem attacks that don’t deal with the core issue: IF YOU WANT TO REFUTE EXTREMISM, THEN YOU DEAL WITH THE DOCTRINES OF THE EXTREMISTS!
With Allah is the success.
swart moor, to the contarary, I know an anesthetist who is happy to put fabricators like you to ‘sleep’ for good!
Here’s for examples of how decrepid individuals like you play with words:
tinyurl.com/yzxjo4e
This website is actually a thorn in the side of tafawids like you.
@ murtadha
what you are saying about habashis is pretty serious. i know a few of them and havent seen anything to support your accusations of jewish origins and conspiracies etc. in fact whenever i asked about an issue they produced proofs from the sayings of the earlier reliable scholars and quran and hadith of course
it would be better for all of us to stop spending our time going back and forth and instead endeavor to learn authentic knowledge.
I agree completely with true muslimah. This type of discussion is going no where; especially with all of the name calling.
UPDATE: The sarcasm, gossip, and backbiting of Shaykh Tantawi by Yasir Qadhi
In a sudden turn of events, Shaykh Tantawi denied the mockery he was accused of by Salafis/Wahhabis against the young girl about her niqaab, though he said he still believes niqaab is cultural.
Yasir Qadhi’s sarcastic article (below) generated a host of responses from Muslims, calling him all sorts of names from “evil” to “dog” to wishes from a Muslim that he die in a toilet, akin to Mirza Goolam Qadiani.
Unfortunately, Yasir and his followers didn’t bother to verify Shaykh Tantawi’s statements and instead reacted immediately against him based on a dubious source that reported the news about the incident. Yasir and his cohorts should know better that a Muslim should be given a chance to speak and defend himself, and repent if he indeed was in the wrong. They did none of this.
Yasir and his team should also have given a Muslim the benefit of doubt many times before writing such an article against him and generating a long series of sarcasm, gossip, slander, backbiting, and collective sin.
After Shaykh Tantawi denied what he was accused of, one saw two main reactions in response as noted in comments in Muslim-Matters:
(1) The stubborn Wahhabis decided to prioritize their egos over truth and etiquette and continued to try to justify their gossip, backbite, and slander against Shaykh Tantawi. To cover up for their foolishness, rashness, and quick accusatory attacks with unconfirmed information, they continued to justify their sinful behavior even after knowing the facts. Yasir had unleashed such a fury of arrogance and judgement against Shaykh Tantawi that many still continue to eat their brother’s flesh. One can only imagine how many of their good deeds were granted to Shaykh Tantawi who had to endure all of this, and how much sin Yasir and his followers earned.
Just as I noted in my original article on the topic below, many Wahhabis (starting with Yasir) used the niqaab incident to chart a wholesale character assassination of Shaykh Tantawi — not primarily because of his views on niqaab but mainly because of his standing as a generally anti-Wahhabi scholar who has never supported the views of Wahhabism on issues of `aqeedah and `ibadat.
Indeed, the hateful Wahhabis who continue to persist in their mockery of Shaykh Tantawi have used his past fatawa and perspectives to justify their current reaction against him. In other words, they wish to criticize and slander Shaykh Tantawi using every opportunity at their disposal – by hook or crook – even if when their behavior has no basis on currently available facts on the matter. They go back in the past to ridicule Shaykh Tantawi when they see that some of their fellows have backed off on attacking him after verifying the real facts of the matter.
As I type these words, many stubborn Wahhabis still persist in trying to justify their initial unIslamic behavior against Shaykh Tantawi. These hardened souls who have no mercy for Muslims should ponder over whether they will be granted mercy for their ruthless behavior on the Day of Judgement or not. This, I believe, is of little concern to them even though Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) has warned them of such backward and unforgiving attitudes toward Muslims.
(2) One could see a change in perspective or at least tone in the words of some commentators in Muslim-Matters. After they verified the facts, they ceased the unIslamic slander against Shaykh Tanatawi and said that others needed to stop and relax their anger. Their guilty conscience was apparent and humility and forgiveness were weighing in on them.
After all, if one argues with the facts after they’re made clear, it is clear that their behavior is not a defense of Islam but an unreligious defense of their arrogance. So, the tide turns when the real facts are known. It is good to know that at least some Muslims realized their mistakes. They must exert more effort now asking Allah for forgiveness.
And when Yasir saw the tide turning — when a higher number of commentators started disagreeing with him and the exaggerated, unIslamic reactions his article caused – Yasir responded with an “update” in which he said the following:
UPDATE #2: Following the release of Shaykh Tantawi’s personal reflection of the incident, in which a much more benign version of the story is stated, where the Shaykh asks the girl why she is so strict and eventually tells a teacher to remove her niqab, and in which he expressly denies telling her that she was unattractive, we will accept his rendering at face value. Allah knows what happened, and there is no need to get involved in judging which of the two versions is correct (the other version, upon which this article was written, was narrated by eyewitness journalists, and links to their videos can be found in the comments).
We leave his affair to Allah; the information that this article was written on was based on credible sources (even the Shaykh’s office released a statement the next day that affirmed something along the lines of the story occurred, and the Shaykh’s silence since the incident, especially in light of world reaction to it, seemed outwardly to affirm the veracity of the story). No matter how credible the sources, I will give the Shaykh the benefit of the doubt since he clearly stated his version. I would also hope that the Shaykh corrects some of the damage done because of this incident (regardless of which version is correct).
Lastly, Yasir says:
I ask Allah’s forgiveness if I stepped beyond bounds.
Just as Yasir was able to initiate his unIslamic accusations and sarcasm against Shaykh Tantawi based on a single dubious source and without verification of the facts from Shaykh Tantawi himself, he just as easily backed off when he saw the higher number of negative responses against him increase over time when the real facts were known. One reader in his comment even expressed surprise that Yasir resorted to such a low level of behavior that was, according to him, unbecoming of him.
Yasir did an aboutface on the matter with rapidity. He saw that his own reputation and standing as a scholar were at stake. His popularity as a proper Muslim with good guidance and manners was plummeting at rocket speed and he had to do something about it – quickly.
What further strengthens this point is that Yasir still has not acknowledged that what had transpired overall was not good for any Muslim and contrary to the etiquette our Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) taught us.
In spite of calls for forgiveness, Yasir did not dare to confess that his article resulted in a chain reaction of a wide assortment of unIslamic behavior and sin. The harm far exceeded the benefit, yet Yasir fails to admit or express himself about it.
Yasir did not admit that his article was too quick to be written based on ‘facts’ that had not been verified by other sources.
Yasir did not apologize for taking Shaykh Tantawi to task without allowing him to first explain or defend himself.
Yasir did not care to give Shaykh Tantawi the benefit of the doubt as a Muslim should for another Muslim, in complete contradition to the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Though Yasir asked for Allah’s forigivness if he had overstepped boundaries, he has yet to ask forgiveness for the sins that others accumulated because of his article.
And, if Yasir is as genuine and true a Muslim as he portrays to be, he should immediately ask for Shaykh Tantawi’s forgiveness for all the backbiting and gossiping he first initiated against him and the barage of name-calling and pre-Islamic behavior that followed from others as a result.
Yasir will likely not do that because it is clear that his pride and popularity are more dear to him than his Islamic behavior.
Finally, Yasir Qadhi should write another article that will be much more important than his first one: a follow-up to this Muslim-bashing-escapade entitled, “Lessons Learned: Why I Was Wrong and Why I Ask Shaykh Tantawi For Forgiveness”, in which he should give a detailed exposition of why his behavior was contrary to Islamic behavior and common Muslim decency. Moreover, his realization that he, along with his fans, had been eating the flesh of their own brother all along since he wrote his first article against Shaykh Tantawi. This calls for a letter of apology and forgiveness from Yasir and his fans to Shaykh Tanatawi himself who was the target and object of master backbiting and slander.
Indeed, Yasir’s and his ilk’s sincerity to Islam will be shown ever more clearly in how they choose and decide to respond.
But optimistic I am not. I surmise that Yasir will try not to repeat such a blunder again and will be more careful next time. Yet, even when the clouds disperse and the facts are as clear as the sun, his poisonous vitriole against Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah and his baseless accusations of shirk and bid’ah will continue against them unabated.
http://sunni1.wordpress.com/2009/10/08/the-sarcasm-gossip-and-backbiting-of-shaykh-tantawi/
Of course he is going to deny it! He’d not going to admit his fault is he? Otherwise he wouldn’t be Tantawi. He realised the global backlash and he is trying to do some damage control. Those who were present and witness to his farce know very well what happened.
Al Azhar is very much like the Vatican where there are layers of secrets and protocols. Except in the case of Vatican, it is independent from the Italian government.
Exposing batil wherever it may be is not called slander nor backbiting when the realities are known and proven. Keeping Tantawi’s track record firmly in mind, there is little he is not capable of.
@exposing_batil, while you are not entirely wrong, you comments are totally misleading. From the time of Salahud-Din Al-Ayyubi until about 50-75 years ago Al-Azhar has been a beacon of light for the Muslim world. And by muslim world I mean the vast majority of the muslims because I know that the Shia and the so-called wahhabis do not like Salahud-Din because he was an Ashari, the vast majority of the scholars historically have been Ashari or Maturidi.
In any case, despite the infiltration of some radicals and simply old fashion ignorant people into the faculty at al-Azhar, most of the teachers there adhere to the teachings of the 4 Imams in Fiqh and to the 2 Imams of belief. So one should not dispraise al-Azhar by using general statements like you (exposing_batil) have used because by that you would be including upright people as well and this is not permissible.
I’ll share something with you. One of my teachers attended al-Azhar in the 60′s I believe, I don’t remember the exact dates. While he was there one of his teachers told the class to “write an “essay” about the good things and the bad things about Islam”. If course they told him “there is nothing bad about Islam”. So this ignorant guy responded by saying “then write your opinion”. This took place at a time when Shaykh Abdullah Al-Ghummari and Shaykh Muhammad Zahid Al-Kawthari were there, both of them were great, real, traditional scholars. They weren’t people like Zaid Shakir or Yasir Qadhi. My point is that, we should not dispraise all of Al-Azhar in an effort to expose corrupt individuals within its walls.
Baatil,
I came across that website a couple of months ago. It contains the usual Wahhabi disinformation. It reflects the inability of the Wahhabis with their corporealist mentality to grasp the Sunni positions. Not only do the Wahhabis fail to understand the Sunni positions, they lie and distort them. One of the principles that makes one a good (and honest) debater is that he (or she) can explain the opponents position better than the person he is debating against. Also, if your opponent is wrong, you don’t need to lie on him to expose him.
It’s like this. When the Sunnis say:
“Laysa kamithlihi shay’” (There is absolutely nothing like Allah whatsosever.–Ash-Shuraa, 11)
They REALLY mean it. We don’t mean that Allah is kinda-sorta unlike the creations, or for the most part unlike the creations. We mean that Allah is Glorfied and Great from having the attibutes of any material, physical, or spatial beings. This is what Tanzih means: Allah is Supremely Holy and Sublime from having any similarity or need for the creations. Consequently, we do not read the Qur’an or Hadiths without using our common sense. Verses or Hadiths that some people might MISconstrue to believe that Allah is a light, is close to our throats, was in the cave with the Prophet and Abu Bakr, inside or in the direction of the Ka`bah, in all places, below us while we make sujood, etc. are NOT TAKEN LITERALLY. And you know what? The Wahhabis don’t take such Verses and Hadiths literally–although they claim that one must take the Verses and Hadiths at “face value.”
The Sunnis start from the premise: Allah does not resemble/or need anything; ergo, Allah is not a body (i.e., not a spatial entity). The Wahhabis start with the assumption: Allah is sorta like us, and that He can’t exists without being in a place. These two assumptions lead to very different conclusions regarding the Creator of the Universe–the Creator of time, place, space, and direction and all that exists therein. Because of the Wahhabi assumption that Allah is in some form (literally) sort of like other spatial entites, the Wahhabis SELECTIVELY insist on taking certain Verses and Hadiths literally that obviously shouldn’t be taken literally. This is why the Wahhabis believe Allah is a giant smiling faced bipedal entity with ocular organs, a tibia, and fingers. This is why the Wahhabis believe that after Allah created space and direction, Allah transformed and materialized inside of a place. Allah, however, does not undergo change or development. Allah is Perfect. Allah did not materialize in a place, because Allah does not need the creations. Creating the creation did not cause Allah to change from being without a place to being within a place. This is very easy to understand–and it is intellectually invincible.
In summary, the Wahhabis are PETRIFIED of the Maturidi/Ash`ari method of explaining and defending the Sunni Doctrine, because it EXPOSES the absurdities, contradictions, KUFR and outright LIES of the Wahhabi belief. This is why the Wahhabis put forth a vicious slandering campaign against the Maturidis and Ash`aris. The Wahhabis know that MANY of the Muslims today have not learned traditional `Aqidah, and as a result are susceptible to becoming confused by Wahhabi rhetorc. However, when a person learns and understands traditional Sunni `Aqidah–and the rationale for its positions–it is not likely such a person would convert to Wahhabism with its gross anthropomorphic and corporeal doctrines.
With Allah is the success.
swort moor, I hope you see the irony in your post. Furthermore, no one case what YOU think. ashari . com is fully referenced. Nothing is personal, all is about exposing the batil of the jahmi ash’ari deception of their taqiyyah. Don’t get me started on cutting and pasting from the site to disprove your fabrications.
I really hate to jump in the middle of [Swarth Moor] and [exposing_batil] but this is really bothering me
.
You have to stop cursing the Asharis by referring to them as “Jahmis”. This is sinful for sure. Salahud-Din Al-Ayyubi, the one who freed Jerusalem from the crusaders was an Ashari. He was a hero and a pious person. Muhammad Al-Fatih was a Maturidi Hanafi. He was also a hero and a pious person. Moreover, the Prophet himself praised the ruler and the army what would conquer Constantinople in the hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad and every muslim knows that Muhammad Al-Fatih is the one who did it. If you accuse the Asharis/Maturidis of being misguided then are you accusing people whom the Prophet praised. This is unacceptable! Please stop!!!
Asmarani, I think you are misunderstanding the various strands of the Asha’irah. It is a documented fact that the history of the Asha’irah creed is based on Jahmi theology; however it was the Muta’zilah who had a greater impact on them. I am not making specific charges on individual cases as you keep repeating, but a historical fact can NOT be changed by mere whims and wishful thinking:
asharis . com / creed
I challenge you to disprove anything from the site. If you can, I will be interested to know; if you can’t then this will be my last post on this thread!
I have no interest in disproving what is in that site nor do I have any interest in debating you as [Swarth Moor] has been doing.
My only point is that if you label the Asharis as Jahmiyyah then you are by default saying that Salahud-Din Al-Ayyubi was a Jahmi and Muhammad Al-Fatih was also a Jahmi. Now if the truth dictates that that is what they were then that is what they were. The truth is the truth. However, no says such a thing because both of those individuals were guided in their deeds and in their beliefs. Certainly the Prophet would not have praised Muhammad Al-Fatih is he was a misguided Jahmi. So I am only advising you to refrain from using this term because you are grouping the elites of the scholars and righteous people under this label “Jahmi”.
…One thing you can help me with is finding a comprehensive list of the top scholars in each century since Abul-Hasan Al-Ashari and Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi. I think it would be useful for people to see one generation after the other and what they adhered to. Since we know that the muslim nation as a whole does not become misguided, if the majority of those considered elite scholars were following the same methodology of the Anti-Asharis then we would know that they are in the right. However if the majority them were following the methodology of the Asharis/Maturidis then we know that they are in the right. Although, it seems I already know what the outcome will be.
In fact, maybe I’ll just try to compile a list myself…
Hooked on Baatil,
I will give you an example of the lies and deception coming from the site. The Ash`aris say that the Qur’an or Kalaam (i.e., “Communication”) of Allah may refer to two things: the Eternal Attribute of Allah, or the expressions of Allah’s Eternal Attribute. The former (Allah’s Attribute) is UNCREATED; whereas, the expressions, such as, the words in the Kitaab-Al-Qur’an, are CREATED. So to say that the Ash`aris claim: “The Qur’an is created,” is an intentional distortion and misrepresentation of the truth. We say the physical book and the letters and words therein are created, but not Allah’s Eternal Attribute. To the contrary, the Ash`aris were EXPLICIT in saying the Qur’an (meaning the Eternal Attribute of Kalaam) is NOT created. They said this in particular to distinguish themselves from the Mu`tazilah. The authors of the site, i am confident, know this issue. But they chose to lie.
To make this easier–because i seriously doubt you understand this issue–the WORD “Allah,” that is, the letters A-L-L-A-H and the sound we pronounce is a creation; obviously, the letters and the sounds come in a sequence–hence, they can’t be eternal (i.e., beginningless). The word “Allah” is a created EXPRESSION used to refer to the Perfect, Eternal, Everlasting, Incomparable Creator of the Universe. We clearly do not worship the letters or the sound “A, L, L, A, H.” We worship the One Whom this expression refers to. The letters, and the word, CLEARLY have a beginning–however the EXPRESSION refers to the One Who has no beginning. Similarly, the Qur’an (meaning Allah’s Eternal Attribute of Kalaam) has no beginning, but the Qur’an, meaning the letters and words found in the Qur’an-Book have a beginning. So to make it simple fo ya’, the word Qur’an has TWO meanings: one refers to Allah’s Eternal Attribute of Kalaam, and the other refers to the created expressions in the Book revealed to Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam). This is what At-Tahawi mentions in his `Aqidah. (Incidentally, At-Tahawi mentions EXPLICITLY that Allah does not exists in a direction and is clear of all boundaries, limits, and bodily characteristics–this statement alone dismantles the Wahhabi doctrine.)
The problem here for the Wahhabis (so-called Salafis) is that the Wahhabis believe that Allah “talks with a voice” that emanates from a place. Some go to the point of thinking that Allah is repeatedly say “Kun” (as in “Be!”) from moment to moment to make the creations come into existence. The Sunnis were between the two extremes: the Mu`tazilah on one end of the spectrum, who denied some of the Attributes of Allah; and the Mushabbihah (of whom the Wahhabis represent one of their more recent incarnations) who resemble Allah to the creations. That’s why the wahhabis believe that Allah is a giant smiling faced bipedal being with fingers, eyes, a tibia, and talks with a voice. The Sunnis affirm Allah’s Attributes while being certain that Allah has ABSOLUTELY no similarity to created beings. Hence, the Sunnis do not pray to a temporal or spatial entity. In a nutshell, the Sunnis worship the CREATOR of space and time. The Wahhabis, on the other hand, pray to a body that exists WITHIN space and time. In other words, the Wahhabs (so-called Salafis) worship a creation.
With Allah is the success.
Swat moor,
>> The Ash`aris say that the Qur’an or Kalaam (i.e., “Communication”) of Allah may refer to two things:
This is a typical lie. And to prove this point, I bring the statements of one of Asha’irah’s top hierarchy; Fakhr ud-Din ar-Razi. The Saying of Fakhr ud-Din ar-Razi – There is No Difference Between Us and the Mu’tazilah Except in the Definition of the Word “Mutakallim”:
tinyurl.com/yg7v6wb
I will continue to clean out these secret hideouts and take the prisoners who are pretending to be upon the creed of the Salaf when in fact they are upon the creed of the Jahmiyyah and Mu’tazilah and Kullaabiyyah.
Please do continue swaty, I have swatted many a tafawids like you and your ilk.
Hooked on Baatil,
Yes, that’s what the Muslims say: the WORDS RECITED in the Qur’an are created. I know, for sure, you don’t think that the letter and sound of the “Baa’” and then the letter and the sound of the “Seen” and the letter and the sound of the “Meem” in the Basmalah are all beginningless… but then they come in sequence. When a person recites the Qur’an, the letters and words come in an order, that is, one word comes AFTER the other. Something that comes AFTER something else cannot be beginningless. Got that? The One Who is Eternal (i.e., Allah) does not have anything before His existence.
Like i said, i didn’t think you understood the issue; hence, it is very easy for the Wahhabis to fool you with their out-of-context quotes (and outright lies and fabrications). You are not understanding the theological controversies of the later days of the Salaf era. Simply because the Ash`aris studied the positions of their opponents does mean that they adopted their positions. As i told you, a sincere debater studies his opponent’s positions, so that he can demonstrate their internal contradictions. He acknowledges the merits his opponent may may have. In some cases, he may agree with his opponents–when his opponents are right! He doesn’t disagree with them simply for the sake of disagreeing. He doesn’t lie upon them to in an effort to discredit them. This is the habit of the people of fitnah.
I will explain this to you again: the phrase “Kalaam of Allah” (or “Qur’an of Allah”) is used with two meanings: one meaning refers to Allah’s Eternal, Everlasting, Unchanging Attribute of Communication (often, the word is translated as “Speech”). Allah’s Eternal Attribute of Qur’an (or Kalaam) is NOT composed of letters, sounds, voices, words, language, etc. (for all the aforementioned are created and temporal). The other meaning of “Qur’an” (or Kalaam) refers to the physical Book revealed unto Prophet Muhammad. The Qur’an-Book contains the CREATED EXPRESSIONS of Allah’s Eternal Kalaam. Common sense tells you and me that the sounds, letters, and words of the Qur’an-Book that are recited come in a sequence–they have a start and then come to an end–hence, they cannot be Eternal.
Perhaps you are not understanding a basic concept regarding language. A “word” is an expression (that is agreed upon by the speakers of a given language) used to refer to a thing, action, or concept. Consequently, if you told me that you are starving, and i wrote on a piece of paper the letters, C-H-I-C-K-EN, and then offered it to you to relieve you of your hunger, you’d think i am crazy. Why? Because the word (“chicken”) is not the thing itself. It is an EXPRESSION used in the English language to refer to a tasty little critter (that i prefer broiled–or sometimes fried) that is halaal to eat (when slaughtered properly). If you can grasp the above, it will make it a lot easier to understand the Kalaam controversy that occured between the Mu`tazilah, Mushabbihah, and the Sunnis.
Let’s see what the Asha’irah say:
http://www.asharis.com/creed/index.cfm
I’ll leave it to the discerning readership of this thread to make up their own minds.
Good bye and good riddance.
@ Hooked on Baatil,
Incapable of responding, the Wahhabi gives out a last yelp and with tail between the legs runs away.
@ Concerned Muslims and those who seek the Truth
The problem with the site is that it INTENTIONALLY distorts the positions of Ahlus-Sunnah. Let us summarize the difference between the Sunnis and the Wahhabis (so-called Salafis).
The Sunnis say Allah REALLY-REALLY-REALLY does NOT resemble or need the creations. Why do the Sunnis say so? Because Allah revealed Verses such as:
Laysa kamithlihi shay’ (There is absolutely nothing like Allah whatsoever. 42:11)
and: Innallaha laghaniyyun `anil-`aalameen.” (Certainly, Allah does not need ANY of the creations. 29:6)
When Allah revealed the above mentioned Verses, they were understood by the early Muslims that Allah CATEGORICALLY AND ABSOLUTELY IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER has any likeness to–or neediness for–the created things. Hence, since you and i, the sun the air, the lights, the oceans, the earth, the sounds, the heat, the cold, the molecules, the galaxies, etc. all exist within the dimensions of space, direction (and time), then Allah–Who is not like us, at all–does not exist within the dimensions of space, directions, (or time). Again, Allah does not resemble anything.
Muslims say Allah has no beginning. Allah was before the creation; hence, Allah has no need for the creation. Everything that exists other than Allah is a creation. Space and direction are not Allah–they are creations. Allah does not need the creations; hence, Allah does not need space or direction for His existence. Allah is Perfect and Eternal and not subject to change. Hence, after Allah created space and direction, Allah did not transform and materialize inside of space or direction. In other words, Allah is not a body–that is, Allah is not a spatial entity.
Any Verses or Hadiths that some might misconstrue and think that Allah is literally everywhere, or on earth, inside of or literally close to us, or in the Heavens, or above the Heavens are not to be understood in a most literal fashion. Likewise, Verses or Hadiths that a person might misconstrue and think that Allah has ocular organs, a tibia, fingers, a pair of feet, hands, a face, etc. are also not understood in their most literal sense. This is all consonant with the saying from the famous Sunni `Aqidah of Abu Ja`far At-Tahawi:
“Allah is supremely glorfied from having boundaries, extremities, sides, organs, appendages, and devices. NONE OF THE SIX DIRECTIONS contain Allah, as is the case with all created things.”
This is the Sunni belief.
The Wahhabis (so-called Salafis), on the other hand, are literalists. They read certain Verses and Hadiths, but did not understand the depth and vastness of the Arabic language and its figures and tropes, and they did not use their common sense. And worst of all, they start with gross erroneous assumptions about the Creator. Hence, the false creed that the Wahhabis call people to is filled with absurdities and contradictions. That is why they say things, such as, “Allah is Eternal,” but then claim Allah changes. Or they say: “Allah is located above the creations,” but then they say in the last third Prophet Jesus is above Allah (Jesus is in the second Heaven–the Wahhabis believe Allah is in the First Heaven). The concept of time zones is also OBVIOUSLY lost upon the Wahhabi. This is why the so-called Salafis say: “Allah has placed His two [alleged] Feet on the Kursiyy,” but fail to understand that the Kursiyy is like a ring (worn on the finger) in the middle of a vast open territory compared to the `Arsh. In other words, they are claiming that Allah has a pair of comparatively tiny feet–or they are saying Allah’s (alleged) feet are proportionate to the rest of His (alleged) body–and as a result, Allah would be like a small speck in comparison to the `Arsh. Either way, the Wahhabi belief is gross and anthropomorphic.
As one can see, the Wahhabi doctrine is absurd–and it’s kufr.
May Allah guide us, and protect us. May Allah make us among the knights of this Deen who stand up and defend this Ummah.
With Allah is the success.
@All,
Abul-Hasan Al-Ash’ari died in the year 324 A.H.
Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi died in the year 333 A.H.
These two scholars are the primary targets for the so-called wahhabis/salafis. I have come up with a very imperfect list of wolrd famous scholars who died between 400 A.H. – 1200 A.H. in order to demonstrate that the fast major of the well know scholars were not on the side of the so-called wahhabi movement rather they were Ash’aris or Maturidis.
400 – 500 A.H.
Al-Halimi Ash-Shafi’i, 403 (Ash’ari)
Al-Baqillani Al-Maliki, 403 (Ash’ari)
Sahl Ibn Muhammad Ash-Shafi‘i, 404 (Ash’ari)
Al-Hakim An-Naysaburi, 405 (Ash’ari)
Ibn Furak, 406 (Ash’ari)
Husayn Al-Istarabadhi Ash-Shafi‘i, 412 (Ash’ari)
Abu Mansur Al-Baghdadi, 429 (Ash’ari)
Ibn Battal, 449 (Ash’ari)
Abu Uthman As-Sabuni, 449 (Ash’ari)
Al-Bayhaqi, 458 (Ash’ari)
Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi, 463 (Ash’ari)
Abul-Qasim Al-Qushayri, 465 (Ash’ari)
Abul-Mudhaffar Al-Isfarayini, 471 (Ash’ari)
Al-Hafidh Al-Isma‘ili, 471 (Ash’ari)
Abu Ishaq Ash-Shirazi, 472 (Ash’ari)
Imamul-Haramayn Al-Juwayni, 478 (Ash’ari)
Al-Mutawalli Ash-Shafi‘i, 478 (Ash’ari)
500 – 600
Ar-Rajib Al-Asfahani, 502 (Ash’ari)
Al-Ghazzali, 505 (Ash’ari)
Abul-Ma‘in An-Nasafi 508 (Maturidi)
Ibn ‘Aqil Al-Baghdadi Al-Hanbali, 513 (Ash’ari)
Abun-Nasr Al-Qushayri, 514 (Ash’ari)
Najmud-Din An-Nasafi, 537 (Maturidi)
Abuth-Thana’ Al-Hanafi, 539 (Maturidi)
Ibn Al-‘Arabi Al-Maliki, 543 (Ash’ari)
Al-Qadi ‘Iyad, 544 (Ash’ari)
Ash-Shahrastani, 548 (Ash’ari)
Abdul-Qadir Al-Jaylani, 561 (Ash’ari)
Ibn ‘Asakir, 571 (Ash’ari)
Ahamd Ar-Rifa’i, 578 (Ash’ari)
Salahud-Din Al-Ayyubi, 589 (Ash’ari)
Ibnul-Jawzi, 597 (Ash’ari)
Tajud-Din Ibn Hibatullah Al-Makki, 599 (Ash’ari)
600 – 700 AH
Ibnul-Athir, 606 (Ash’ari)
Fakhrud-Din Ar-Razi, 606 (Ash’ari)
Ibn ‘Asakir, 620 (Ash’ari)
Sayfud-Din Al-Amidi, 631 (Ash’ari)
Jamalud-Din Al-Hasiri Al-Hanafi, 636 (Maturidi)
Ibnul-Hajib, 646 (Ash’ari)
Najmud-Din Mankubars, 652 (Maturidi)
Al-Mundhuri, 656 (Ash’ari)
Ibn ‘Abdus-Salam, 660 (Ash’ari)
Al-Qurtubi, 671 (Ash’ari)
Ahmad Al-Badawi, 675 (Ash’ari)
An-Nawawi, 676 (Ash’ari)
Al-Qarafi, 684 (Ash’ari)
Qadi Al-Badawi, 685 (Maturidi)
Al-Baydawi, 685 (Maturidi)
Ibnul-Munayyir, 695 (Ash’ari)
Ibn Abi Jamrah, 699 (Ash’ari)
700 – 800
Ibn Daqiq Al-‘Id, 702 (Ash’ari)
Ibn ‘Ata’ullah, 709 (Ash’ari)
Abdullah An-Nasafi, 710 (Maturidi)
Ibn Mandhur, 711 (Ash’ari)
Al-Baji Ash-Shafi‘i, 714 (Ash’ari)
Safiyyud-Din Al-Hindi, 715 (Maturidi)
Ibnul-Murahhal, 716 (Ash’ari)
Ibnul-Mu‘allim Al-Qurashi, 725 (Ash’ari)
Az-Zamalkani, 727 (Ash’ari)
Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, 728 (????)
Badrud-Din Ibn Jama‘ah, 733 (Ash’ari)
Ibn Jahbal, 733 (Ash’ari)
Ibnul-Hajj Al-Maliki, 737 (Ash’ari)
Al-Khazin, 741 A.H. (Ash’ari or Maturidi – not sure)
Al-Mizzi, 742 (not sure because he was harmed by Ibn Taymiyah)
Al-Jawjazani Al-Hanafi, 744(Maturidi)
Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi, 745 (Ash’ari)
Adh-Dhahabi, 748 (not sure because he was harmed by Ibn Taymiyah)
Taqiyyud-Din As-Subki, 756 (Ash’ari)
‘Adadud-Din Al-Iji, 756(Maturidi)
Al-Hafidh Al-‘Ala’i, 761 (Ash’ari)
Badr Ar-Rashid, 768(Maturidi)
Tajud-Din As-Subki, 771 (Ash’ari)
Ibn Batutah, 779 (Ash’ari)
At-Taftazani, 791(Maturidi)
Az-Zarkashi, 794 (Ash’ari)
to be contiuned…
Did I leave out any scholar that was more knowledgeable or more famous then the ones I mentioned above? Are we to say that all of those Ash’aris and Maturidis were not on the Creed of the Prophet and only Ibn Taymiyah among the 76 individuals I mentioned was guided? Even if someone wants to group Adh-Dhahabi, Ibn Kathir and Al-Mizzi together with Ibn Taymiyah then at best they are saying the only about 5% of the Islamic scholars over a period of 400 years (400 – 800AH) were guided and the rest were misguided.
(wa la hawla wa la quwwata illa billah)