why did the go agaisnt sufis and shias? bcos the sufis and shias went against the Sunnah and brought there own ways of worship in Islam.
yr on abt tombs n that the "wahhabis" destoryed them? oh ignorant 1! do u even know whjat the Prophet(saw) said abt having tombs? obviously u dnt! i suggest u go study abt it.
go and study abt what the Prophet(saw) said abt building a tomb over his grave and maybe if you had some sense and an open mind you will learn what these so called "wahhabis" were doin. if you cant seem to find anythin then let me know and me and brother ABKmujahid can giv u a history lesson.
Thats exactly what the sufi and shia school of thought say about wahabis. Depends on which side of the fence are u sitting. Rest assured only Allah has the power to decide whose faith is right and who’s wrong, I for one will certainly not dare call another muslim who beleives in Tawhid, Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) as the last messenger and last of judgement to be anything else but a muslim.
Reason for Abdul Wahab’s rebellion against family and society can be debated on its merits and demerits, but those who choose to be against his kinda theocracy will never agree and vice verca.
Best example posted here and also reminds me of M A Jinnah’s response when he was asked about his Fiqh, his response same as Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). Thus the question why even call ypurself as Salafite? Is their need to be recognized? Differentiated? pBe part of a elite club? Or exclude others?
I encourage reading the links i posted. They will answer the questions and confusion people have.
The link posted by stu is very anti-wahabbi. Also, repeating myself, for a clear perspective on this issue, try reading the book i posted- WHY? just read the reason i posted.
You're probably right that it depends on what side of the fence your on, but not completely because i have a lot of friends who used to be anti-wahabbi, but they changed their opinion on him. Some of them told me that the only reason they were like this was because there parent were like that (typical of desi people like myself, and the last link i posted will explain why). Others said they did such because the molvis they followed said so or the community in which they lives felt that way in general. Basically, none of them had even taken a chance ot read what muhammad ibn abdul wahhab wrote. Also, about the book i posted, just read the link where the book notes are. Someone I knw wrote that, and the person explains why they changed their stance on this issue. The person also publicly said, "I never knew how biased I was until.." So that shows that people do start agreeing with shaykh wahhab.
"Reason for Abdul Wahab's rebellion against family and society can be debated on its merits and demerits, but those who choose to be against his kinda theocracy will never agree and vice verca. "
come debate it with me then, wot u say? lets settle this "wahhabi" thing.
what my forefathers and your’ have not been able to solve, u think our two minutes will make any difference? Lets be realistic and try to be tolerant with each other viewpoints which is probably the first step towards understanding and mutual respect.
Forgive me for saying this, but your self-praise and promotion (propaganda) of wahabi teachings are blatantly obvious. Picking a few converts here and there really doesnt make any difference to all those millions of followers who u very readily dismiss. Hundreds, thousands of Islamic scholars have written against the teachings and practices of abdul Wahab, which ofcourse u have never bothered to research except for the propaganda literature posted by pro-wahab websites.
Fatguru. hav u read any of his books? such as kitaab al Tawheed? the four fundamental principles etc?
also you say "what my forefathers and your' have not been able to solve, u think our two minutes will make any difference? Lets be realistic and try to be tolerant with each other viewpoints which is probably the first step towards understanding and mutual respect."
1stly our forefathers didnt hav much knowledge. dnt no abt yrs so i wont comment as i hav not met them. my forefathers are not against him.
2ndly u say lets b tolerant towards each others viewpoints. i dnt c u bein tolerant towards Muhammad ibn abdul wahhab. show me what abt u dnt agree with?
btw i didnt say it takes 2 mine. 4 all i care it can take 2 yrs aslng as we get the truth out.
Akhee, I have a sufi friend who is anti-wahabbi and has given me so many references to books and articles on anti-wahabbi literature. So how can you accuse me of something when you don't even knwo who I am or what I do in my personal time. I am tolerant of his views, and thus I am still his friend. But every time, now and then, I still try to explain to him why I agree with the Shayookhs opinions. It is because when I give him some literature, he does not even bother to read it. And when he does, he dismisses it saying it is false without any proofs except that his saying 'it is false' is enough (this is done all the time) Also, what made you think of converts?
Besides, most of the literature he gave me was by non-muslims. Not to say all history from western perspectives are corrupt.
Really? The website discusses the history of the wahabbi movement. Please let me know if any of these events are inaccurate:
Ibn Abd al-Wahhab… declared holy war (jihad) on other Muslims (neighboring Arab tribes), an act which would otherwise have been legally impossible under the rules of jihad.
Wahhabi zealots tried to destroy the tomb of the Prophet in Medina and were narrowly prevented from doing so through the intervention of King Abd al-Aziz al-Saud.
In 1802, the Wahhabis captured Karbala in Iraq and destroyed the tomb of the Shiite Imam Husayn. In 1803 the Wahhabis captured Mecca.
The Wahhabis went on a rampage throughout the peninsula at this time smashing the tombs of Muslim saints and imams, including the tomb of the Prophet’s daughter Fatima.
Brother, Point well taken.
I do not know u niether do I know your friend but take your word for it. All I can say is that your friend is expressing emotional attachment rather than enter into intelectual discourse. There are books availablle from great sufi writers but do not get the same recognition of writers who find financial and political support from petrodollars. History is replete with examples where different idealogies have dominated at one time or the other, this day and age sufi writings do not enjoy the same coverage what it used to back in their glory days. My point is that Muslims should not confine themselves to just one viewpoint which is popular, we have a responsibility to find truth and for that it is important we allow freedom of expression.
Non-Muslims have shown interest in sufi order because of their historical significance and immense contribution to Islamic history. There is nothing wrong reading well written books irrespective of the writers religion.
Yes, I have read his writings and was at one time of my life an ardent fan of his teachings, until I made the extra effort to read other literature which I must say is not easy to find anymore.
Point about forefathers was used in a rhetorical term meaning all those great scholars who have made their contribution with no avail.
Technically speaking, I’m Christian but I’m not particularly “adherent”. I’m definitely not a fan of any sort of fundamentalism. Regardless, I’d like to hear your input on the accuracy of those events I posted earlier.
So? Does that the give you people the right to kill innocent Shias and Sufis? The above post proves that Islam is not a religion of peace, but far from it. Islam is a religion of hate, violence and oppression.
What? I said Salafis are cool (I mean Salafis as in those who hate the Dictators in the lands of the Muslims like 'Abdullah in the Peninsula of Muhammad sallallahu 'alaihi wassallam, like Hosni Mubarak, Busharraf, and all the rest).
