The Simonist

Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani is the arch-innovator of the Wahhabi propagandists in our time. A watch repairman by trade, al-Albani is a self-taught claimant to hadith scholarship who has no known teacher in any of the formal Islamic Sciences and has admitted not to have memorized the Quran nor any book of ahadith, fiqh, ‘aqidah, usul, or grammar. He achieved fame by attacking the great scholars of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama'ah and reviling the science of fiqh with special malice towards the school of his father who was a Hanafi jurist.

A rabid reviler of the Friends of Allah and the Sufi sheikhs, he was expelled from Syria, then Saudi Arabia and lived in Amman, Jordan, under house arrest until his death in 1999. He remains the Qibla of the People of Innovation, self-styled reformers of Islam, and other Wahhabi sympathizers, and the preferred author of book merchants and many uneducated Muslims. Most of the contemporary Sunni scholars warned of his heresy and many of them wrote articles or full-length works against him such as:

• The Indian ahadith scholar, Habib ‘Abdur-Rahman al-A`azami who wrote
• al-Albani Shudhudhuh wa Akhta'uh, al-Albani's Aberrations and Errors, in four volumes
• The Syrian scholar, Sheikh Muhammad Sa`id Ramadhan al-Buti who wrote the two classics,
• al-Lamadhhabiyya Akhtaru Bid`atin Tuhaddidu ash-Shari`a al-Islamiyya;
  Not Following A School of Jurisprudence is the Most Dangerous Innovation Threatening Islamic Sacred Law
• as-Salafiyya Marhalatun Zamaniyyatun Mubaraka la Madhhabun Islami;
  Way of the Early Muslims was a Blessed Historical Epoch, Not an Islamic School of Thought
• The Moroccan ahadith scholar, Sheikh ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn as-Siddiq al-Ghumari who wrote
• Irgham al-Mubtadi’ al-Ghabi bi Jawaz at-Tawassul bi an-Nabi fi ar-Radd
  `ala al-Albani al-Wabi;
  The Coercion of the Unintelligent Innovator with the Licitness of Using the Prophet as an Intermediary in Refutation of al-Albani the Baneful
• al-Qawl al-Muqni` fi ar-Radd `ala al-Albani al-Mubtadi`;
  The Persuasive Discourse in Refutation of al-Albani the Innovator
• Itqan as-Sun`a fi Tahqiq Ma`na al-Bid`ah;
  Precise Handiwork in Ascertaining the Meaning of Innovation
• The Moroccan ahadith scholar, Sheikh ‘Abdul-`Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn as-Siddiq al-Ghumari who wrote
• Bayan Nakth an-Nakith al-Mu`tadi;
  The Exposition of the Treachery of the Rebel
• The Syrian ahadith scholar, Sheikh ‘Abdul-Fattah Abu Ghudda who wrote
• Radd `ala Abatil wa Iftira'at Nasir al-Albani wa Sahibihi
  Sabiqan Zuhayr ash-Shawish wa Mu'adhirihima;
  Refutation of the Falsehoods and Fabrications of Nasir al-Albani and his Former Friend Zuhayr ash-Shawish and their Supporters
• The Egyptian ahadith scholar, Sheikh Muhammad `Awwama who wrote
• Adab al-Ikhtilaf;
  The Proper Manners of Expressing Difference of Opinion
• The Egyptian ahadith scholar, Sheikh Mahmud Sa`id Mamduh who wrote
• Wusul at-Tahani bi Ithbat Sunniyyat as-Subha w'ar-Radd `ala al-Albani;
  The Alighting of Mutual Benefit and Confirmation that
  the Beads are a Sunna in Refutation of al-Albani
• Tanbih al-Muslim ila Ta`adhdhi al-Albani `ala Sahih Muslim;
  Warning to the Muslim Concerning al-Albani's Attack on Sahih Muslim
• The Saudi ahadith scholar Isma`il ibn Muhammad al-Ansar who wrote
• Ta`aqqubat `ala Silsilat al-Ahadith adh-Dha`ifa w'al-Mawdhu`a li al-Albani;
  Critique of al-Albani's Book on Weak and Forged Ahadith
• Tashih Salat at-Tarawih `Ishrina Rak`atan w'ar-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tadh`ifih;
  Establishing as Correct the Tarawih Salah in Twenty Rak`at and
  the Refutation of Its Weakening by al-Albani
• Ibahat at-Tahalli bi adh-Dhahab al-Muhallaq li an-Nisa' w'ar-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tahrimih;
  The Licitness of Wearing Gold Jewelry for Women Contrary to al-Albani's Prohibition of it
• The Syrian scholar, Sheikh Badruddin Hasan Diab who wrote
• Anwar al-Masabih `ala Zhulumat al-Albani fi Salat at-Tarawih;
  Illuminating the Darkness of al-Albani over the Tarawih Prayer
• Director of Religious Endowments in Dubai, Sheikh `Isa ibn `Abdullah ibn Mani` al-Himyari who wrote
• al-‘Ilam bi Istihbab Shadd ar-Rihal li Ziyarati Qabri Khayr al-Anam;
  The Notification Concerning the Recommendation of Travelling to Visit
  the Grave of the Best of Creation
• al-Bid`ah al-Hasanah Aslun min Usul at-Tashri`;
  The Excellent Innovation is One of the Sources of Islamic Legislation
• Minister of Islamic Affairs and Religious Endowments in the joint nation of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khazraji who wrote the article
• al-Albani Tatarrufatuh;
  al-Albani's Extremist Positions
• The Syrian scholar Sheikh Firas Muhammad Walid Wais in his edition of
• Imam ibn al-Mulaqqin's Sunniyyat al-Jumu`ah al-Qabliyya;
  The Sunnah Prayers That Must Precede Salah al-Jumu`ah
• The Syrian scholar, Sheikh Samir Islambuli who wrote
• al-Ahad, al-Ijma`, an-Naskh
• The Jordanian scholar, Sheikh As`ad Salim Tayyim who wrote
• Bayan Awham al-Albani fi Tahqiqihi li Kitab Fadhl as-Salat `ala an-Nabi;
  False Declarations of al-Albani in His Investigations into the Book of Obligatory Prayers upon the Prophet.
• The Jordanian scholar, Sheikh Hasan `Ali as-Saqqaf who wrote
• Tanaqudhat al-Albani al-Wadhiha fi ma Waqa`a fi Tashih al-Ahadith wa Tad`ifiha min Akhta' wa Ghaltat;
  Albani's Patent Self-Contradictions in the Mistakes and Blunders He Committed While Declaring Ahadith to be Sound or Weak
• Ihtijaj al-Kha'ib bi `Ibarat man Idda`a al-Ijma` fa Huwa Kadhib;
  The Loser's Recourse to the Phrase: `Whoever Claims Consensus Is a Liar!’,
• al-Qawl ath-Tabtu fi Siyami Yawm as-Sabt;
  The Firm Discourse Concerning Fasting on Saturdays
• al-Lajif al-Dhu`af li al-Mutala`ib bi Ahkam al-‘Itikaf;
  The Lethal Strike Against Him Who Toys with the Rulings of ‘Itikaf
• Sahih Sifat Salat an-Nabi;
  The Correct Description of the Prophet's Prayer
• ‘Ilam al-Kha'id bi Tahrim al-Qur'an `ala al-Junub wa al-Ha'idh;
  The Appraisal of the Meddler in the Interdiction of the Qur'an to those
  in a State of Major Defilement and Menstruating Women
• Talqih al-Fuhum al-`Aliya;
  The Inculcation of Lofty Discernment
• Sahih Sharh al-`Aqida at-Tahawiyya;
  The Correct Explanation of at-Tahawi's Statement of Doctrine.

al-Albani's innovations in the religion were many. Below are some of them:

• In his book, Adab al-Zafaf, he prohibits women from wearing gold jewelry, despite the ijma’ permitting it.
• He claims that Zakat is not due on money obtained from commerce, the main activity whereby money circulates among Muslims.
• He absolutely prohibits fasting on Saturdays.
• He prohibits ‘itikaf in any but the Three Mosques.
• He claims that it is lawful to eat in Ramadhan before maghrib as defined by the shari’ah, and similarly after the true dawn.
• He compares Hanafi works of fiqh to the Gospel in his commentary of Imam al-Mundhiri's book Mukhtaswar Sahih Muslim, 3rd Edition (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 1977, p. 548).
  This phrase was removed from later editions.
• He calls people to imitate him rather than the a’immah of the salaf such as the founders of the four madhahib, and his followers invalidate the ahadith that contradict his views.
• He prohibits the makeup performance of prayers missed intentionally.
• He claims that it is permissible for menstruating women and those in a state of major defilement, junub, to recite, touch, and carry the Qur'an.
• He claims over and over that among the innovations in religion existent in Medina is the existence of the Prophet's grave in Masjid an-Nawabi.
• He claims that whoever travels intending to visit the Prophet or to ask him for his intercession is a misguided innovator.
• He claims that whoever carries dhikr-beads in his hand to remember Allah is misguided and innovating.
• He invented a location to Allah above the Throne for which he innovated a new name al-makan al-`adamî, "the non-existent place."
• He claims in Tamam al-Minna that masturbation does not annul one's fast.
• He published "corrected" editions of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, which he deceitfully called ‘abridgments,' mukhtasar, in violation of the integrity of these mother books.
• He published newly-styled self-altered editions of Imam al-Bukhari's al-Adab al-Mufrad,
  Imam al-Mundhiri's at-Targhib w'at-Tarhib, and Imam as-Suyuti's al-Jami` as-Saghir, each of which he split into two works, respectively prefixed Sahih and Da`if in violation of the integrity of these mother books.

Sheikh Nasiruddin Albani said, among many things,

"Many of those who interpret figuratively [the Divine Attributes] are not heretics (zanadiqa), but they say what heretics say; figurative interpretation is the very same as nullification (at-ta'wil `ayn at-ta`til)."

This is found in Fatawa (p. 522-523) and Mukhtaswar al-`Uluw (p. 23f.).

He suggests that Imam al-Bukhari is a disbeliever for interpreting the Divine Face as Dominion or Sovereignty (mulk) in the Verse:

...Everything will perish except His Face...
[Quran 28:88]

In the Book of Tafsir in his Sahih, Imam al-Bukhari wrote,

"Except His Wajh means except His Mulk, and it is also said:
Except whatever was for the sake of His Countenance."

Albani blurts out,

"No true believer would say such a thing.
We should consider al-Bukhari innocent of that statement."

[Fatawa p. 523]


In imitation of the Mu`tazila, he declared tawassul, istighatha and tashaffu` through the Prophet or one of the Awliya’ harâm and tantamount to shirk in his booklet at-Tawassul. His friends, Sheikh ibn Baz and those who obey them such as al-Qahtani in al-Wala' wa al-Bara' and others did so. This is in flat rejection of the numerous sound and explicit narrations to that effect, such as Imam al-Bukhari's narration of the Prophet from ibn `Umar:

"Truly the sun shall draw so near on the Day of Resurrection that sweat shall reach to the mid-ear, whereupon they shall ask (istaghathu) help from Adam, then from Moses, then from Muhammad who will intercede (fa yashfa`u)... and that Day, Allah shall raise him to an Exalted Station, so that all those who are standing [including the unbelievers] shall glorify him (yahmaduhu ahlu al-jam`i kulluhum)."

al-Albani denies that the name of the Archangel of Death is `Azrâ'îl and claims such a name has no basis other than Israelite reports, although Qadhi `Iyadh reports the ijma’ of the ummah on it in ash-Shifa'.

Akin to the rest of the Wahhabi innovators, he declares Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis to be outside the fold of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama'ah and even outside the fold of Islam, although Allah and His Prophet praised them.

O ye who believe! If any from among you turn back from his Faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom He will love as they will love Him ― humble with the Believers, mighty against the Rejecters, fighting in the Way of Allah, and never afraid of the reproaches of such as find fault.
That is the Grace of Allah, which He will Bestow on whom He pleases:
Allah encompasses all and He knows all things.
[Quran 5:54]

Upon the Revelation of the above Verse, the Prophet pointed to Abu Musa al-Ash`ari and said:

"They are that man's people."

This is narrated from Qadhi `Iyadh by Imam ibn Abi Shaybah and al-Hakim who said it is sahih by Imam Muslim's criterion, and by Imam at-Tabarani with a sound chain as stated by al-Haythami.

Imam al-Qushayri, Imam ibn `Asakir, Imam al-Bayhaqi, Imam ibn as-Subki, and others said that the followers of Imam Abul-Hasan al-Ash`ari, who were mostly Sufis, are included among Abu Musa's people, for in every place that a people are affiliated to a Prophet, what is meant is the followers of that Prophet.

As for Maturidis, they are referred to in the narration of the Prophet from Sheikh Bishr al-Khath`ami or al-Ghanawi with a sahîh chain according to Imam al-Hakim, Imam adh-Dhahabi, Imam as-Suyuti, and Imam al-Haythami:

"Truly you shall conquer the city of Constantinople and truly what a wonderful leader will her leader be [Mehmet Fatih Sultan], and truly what a wonderful army will that army be!"

Both the leader and his army were classic Hanafi Maturidis and it is known that Mehmet Fatih loved and respected Sufis, practiced tawassul and followed a sheikh. Moreover, enmity against Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis, is nifaq and enmity against the Ummah of Islam as most of the ‘ulama of Islam are thus described.

In at least five of his books, Sheikh al-Albani calls for the demolition of the Green Dome of the Prophet's Mosque in al-Madina al-Munawwarah and for taking the Prophet's grave outside the Mosque. This is found in Ahkam al-Jana'iz wa Bida`uha, Talkhis Ahkam al-Jana'iz, Tahdhir as-Sajid, Hijjat an-Nabi, and Manasik al-Hajj w'al-`Umrah.

He states:

"I have found no evidence for the Prophet's hearing of the salaam of those who greet him at his grave. I do not know from where ibn Taymiyyah took his claim that he hears the salaam from someone near."

This and the previous item are among his greater enormities and bear the unmistakable signature of innovation and deviation. Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah wrote such in Majmu`a al-Fatawa (27:384). This claim of al-Albani is found in his notes on Sheikh Nu`man al-Alusi's al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 80) and his Silsila Da`ifa (#203).

He considers it an innovation to visit relatives, neighbors, or friends on the day of Eid and prohibits it. This is found in Fatawa (p. 61-63).

He gave the fatwa that Muslims should exit Palestine en masse and leave it to the Jews as it is part of, what he calls, the Abode of War, Darul-Harb. This is found in Fatawa (p. 18).

He advocates in his Salawat an-Nabi, the formula "Peace and blessings upon the Prophet" instead of the traditional "upon you, O Prophet" in the tashahhud in contradiction of the four madhahib, on the basis of a hadith of ibn Mas’ud whereby the companions used the indirect speech formula after the passing of the Prophet. However, the Prophet himself instructed them to pray exactly as he prayed saying "Peace and blessings upon you, O Prophet" without telling them to change it after his death, nor did the major companions whose sunnah we were ordered to imitate together with that of the Prophet, such as Abu Bakr and `Umar, teach the companions and successors otherwise.

He prohibits praying more than eleven rak`at in salatul tarawih on the grounds that the Prophet never did and in blatant rejection of his explicit command to follow the sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs after him.

He declares in Fatawa (p. 315-316) that adding more to eleven supererogatory rak`at in the tahajjud is an innovation rather than an act of obedience on the grounds that the Prophet "never ever prayed one hundred rak`at in his whole lifetime" although the ‘ulama agree that there is no prescribed limit to something which the Prophet commanded without specifically quantifying it, and he said in three authentic narrations:

• Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Thawban with sound chains by Imam ibn Majah and Ahmad. Imam Malik cites it in his al-Muwatta that the Prophet said,
  "Know that the best of your good deeds is prayer."
• As part of a longer hadith narrated from Abu Malik al-Ash`ari and Ka`b ibn `Asim by Imam Muslim, Tirmidhi, an-Nasa'i, ibn Majah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and ad-Darimi as either hasan or sahîh, the Prophet said, "Prayer is a light."
• Narrated from ibn `Umar in the Nine Books, the Prophet said, "The night prayer is in cycles of two and when one of you fears the rising of the dawn, let him pray a single one."
  It is also established in many authentic narrations collected by Imam `Abdul-Hayy al-Laknawi in the second part of his Iqamat al-Hujja `ala Anna al-Ikthar min at-Ta`abbudi Laysa bi Bid`ah that the companions and salaf prayed hundreds if not thousands of rak`at in every twenty-four hours.

al-Albani considers it an innovation to pray four rak`at between the adhan of Jumu`ah and the adhan before salah, although it is authentically narrated that "the Prophet prayed four rak`at before Jumu`ah and four rak`at after it," with a fair chain from Imam ‘Ali and ibn `Abbas as stated by Imam al-‘Iraqi in Tarh at-Tathrib (3:42), Imam ibn Hajar in Talkhis al-Habir (2:74), and Imam at-Tahanawi in ‘Ila' as-Sunan (7:9).

He declares in Fatawa (p. 53), that it is haram and an innovation to lengthen the beard over a fistful's length although there is no proof for such a claim in the whole shari’ah and none of the ‘ulama ever said it before him.

He gives free rein to his propensity to insult and vilify the ‘ulama of the past as well as his contemporaries. As a result it is difficult to wade through his writings without being affected by the nefarious spirit that permeates them. For example, he considers previous editors and commentators, learned scholars, of Imam al-Bukhari's al-Adab al-Mufrad, Book of Manners "sinful," "unbearably ignorant," and even "liars" and "thieves." Of one he says:

"There are so many weak hadith [in his choice] that it is an anti-Islamic practice."

Of another he says:

"It is ignorance which must not be tolerated."

And of another he says:

"Forgery and an open lie... His edition is stolen [from a previous one]."

All this from his Sahih al-Adab al-Mufrad (Introduction, p. 15, 20, 26). Such examples actually fill a book compiled by Sheikh Hasan `Ali as-Saqqaf and titled Qamus Shata'im al-Albani wa Alfazhihi al-Munkara al-Lati Yatluquha `ala `Ulama' al-Ummah, Dictionary of al-Albani's Insults and Heinous Words He Uses Against the Communal Scholars.

al-Albani revived Sheikh ibn Hazm's anti-madhhabî claim that differences can never be a mercy in any case but are always a curse on the basis of the verse:

Do they not ponder on the Qur'an? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
[Quran 4:82]

In as-Silsila ad-Da`ifa (1:76 #57), Imam an-Nawawi had long since refuted this view in his commentary of the book Sahih Muslim where he said:

"If something is a Mercy, it is not necessary for its opposite to be the opposite of Mercy. No-one makes this binding and no-one even says this, except an ignoramus or one who affects ignorance." 

Similarly, Imam al-Munawi said in Faydh al-Qadir,

"This is a contrivance that showed up on the part of some of those who have sickness in their heart."

In his introduction to Imam as-San`ani's Raf` al-Astar (p. 24-25), al-Albani expresses hatred for those who read Imam al-Busiri's masterpiece, Qasida al-Burda, and calls them cretins, mahabil. This would encompass millions of Muslims past and present including the likes of Imam ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani, Imam as-Sakhawi and Imam as-Suyuti who all included it as required reading in the Islamic curriculum.

al-Albani perpetuates lies if they detract from Ash`ari’s, such as his remark that Imam Sayfuddin al-Amidi did not pray, in his notes to Imam Nu`man al-Alusi's al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 88) although Dr. Hasan ash-Shafi`i in his massive biography entitled al-Amidi wa Ara'uhu al-Kalamiyya showed that the story that Imam al-Amidi did not pray was a forgery put into circulation during the campaign waged by Imam ibn as-Salahuddin al-Kurdi against him for teaching logic and philosophy in Damascus.

He perpetuates, in Mukhtaswar al-`Uluw (p. 277), the false claim first made by Munir Agha the founder of the Egyptian Salafiyya Press, that Imam Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni, the father of Imam al-Haramayn "repented" from Ash`ari doctrine and supposedly authored a tract titled Risala fi Ithbat al-Istiwa' wa al-Fawqiyyah, Epistle on the Assertion of Establishment and Aboveness. This spurious attribution continues to be promoted without verification, for obvious reasons, by modern-day Salafis who adduce it to forward the claim that Imam al-Juwayni embraced anthropomorphic concepts. The Risala in question is not mentioned in any of the bibliographical and biographical sources nor does Imam adh-Dhahabi cite it in his encyclopedia of anthropomorphic views entitled al-`Uluw. More conclusively, it is written in modern argumentative style reflecting contemporary anthropomorphic obsessions.

He derides the fuqaha of the ummah for accepting, in their massive majority, the hadith of Mu`adh ibn Jabal on ijtihad as authentic then rejects the definition of `ilm in Islam as pertaining to fiqh but claims that it pertains only to hadith, although the ‘ulama of the salaf explicitly said that a hadith master without knowledge of fiqh is a misguided innovator. This is found in his notes on Imam al-Qasimi's al-Mash `ala al-Jawrabayn (p. 38). And he defines the `alim in Tahrim Alat at-Tarab (p. 160) as "meaning, of course, the Salafi `alim, not the `Khalafi Ghazali'!"

Imam al-Qurtubi, in his Tafsir (7:191) said,

"One of the knowers of Allah said: A certain group that has not yet come up in our time, but shall show up at the End of Time, will curse the scholars and insult the jurists."

— Sheikh Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad, transmitted via Terence Helikaon Nunis of A Muslim Convert Once More

Cult of the Salafi

The word salafi or "early Muslim" in traditional Islamic scholarship means someone who died within the first four hundred years after the Prophet Muhammad, including scholars such as Abu Hanifa, Malik ibn Anas, Idris Shafi'i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Anyone who died after this is one of the khalaf or "latter-day Muslims".

The term "Salafi" was revived as a slogan and movement, among latter-day Muslims, by the followers of the late Muhammad Abduh some thirteen centuries after the Prophet Muhammad's time, approximately a hundred years ago. Like similar movements that have historically appeared in Islam, its basic claim was that the religion had not been properly understood by anyone since the Prophet, the early Muslims, and themselves.

In terms of ideals, the movement advocated a return to a shari'a-minded orthodoxy that would purify Islam from unwarranted accretions, the criteria for judging which would be the Qur'an and hadith. Now, these ideals are noble, and I don't think anyone would disagree with their importance. The only points of disagreement are how these objectives are to be defined, and how the program is to be carried out.

It is difficult in a few words to properly deal with all the aspects of the movement and the issues involved, but I hope to publish a fuller treatment later this year, insha'Allah, in a collection of essays called "The Reformers of Islam".

As for its validity, one may note that the Salafi approach is an interpretation of the texts of the Qur'an and sunna, or rather a body of interpretation, and as such, those who advance its claims are subject to the same rigorous criteria of the Islamic sciences as anyone else who makes interpretive claims about the Qur'an and sunna; namely, they:

1. Must show that their interpretations are acceptable in terms of Arabic language; 
2. Must show that they have exhaustive mastery of all the primary texts that relate to each question, and 
3. Must show that they have full familiarity of the methodology of usul al-fiqh or "fundamentals of jurisprudence" needed to comprehensively join between all the primary texts. 

Only when one has these qualifications can one legitimately produce a valid interpretive claim about the texts, called ijtihad or "deduction of shari'a," from the primary sources. Without these qualifications, the most one can legitimately claim is to reproduce such an interpretive claim from someone who definitely has these qualifications; namely, one of those unanimously recognized by the Ummah as such since the times of the true salaf, at their forefront the mujtahid imams of the four madhahib or "schools of jurisprudence".

As for scholars today who do not have the qualifications of a mujtahid, it is not clear to me why they should be considered mujtahids by default, such as when it is said that someone is "the greatest living scholar of the sunna" anymore than we could qualify a mere school-child on the playground as a professional physicist simply by stating, "He is the greatest physicist on the playground".

Claims to Islamic knowledge do not come about by default. Slogans about "following the Qur'an and sunna" sound good in theory, but in practice it comes down to a question of scholarship, and who will sort out for the Muslim the thousands of shari'a questions that arise in his life. One eventually realizes that one has to choose between following the ijtihad of a real mujtahid, or the ijtihad of some or another "movement leader", whose qualifications may simply be a matter of reputation, something which is often circulated among people without a grasp of the issues.

What comes to many peoples minds these days when one says "Salafis" is bearded young men arguing about deen. The basic hope of these youthful reformers seems to be that argument and conflict will eventually wear down any resistance or disagreement to their positions, which will thus result in purifying Islam. Here, I think education, on all sides, could do much to improve the situation.

The reality of the case is that the mujtahid imams, those whose task it was to deduce the Islamic shari'a from the Qur'an and hadith, were in agreement about most rulings; while those they disagreed about, they had good reason to, whether because the Arabic could be interpreted in multiple ways, or because the particular Qur'an or hadith text admitted of qualifications given in other texts, some of them acceptable for reasons of legal methodology to perhaps one mujtahid but not another, and so forth.

Because of the lack of hard information in English, the legitimacy of scholarly difference on shari'a rulings is often lost sight of among Muslims in the West. For example, the work Fiqh as-Sunna by the author Sayyid Sabiq, recently translated into English, presents hadith evidences for rulings corresponding to about ninety-five percent of those of the Shafi'i school, which is a welcome contribution, but by no means a "final word" about these rulings, for each of the four schools has a large literature of hadith evidences, and not just the Shafi'i school reflected by Sabiq's work.

The Maliki fiqh school has the Mudawwana of Imam Malik ibn Anas, for example, and the Hanafi fiqh school has the Sharh ma'ani al-Athar and Sharh mushkil al-Athar, both by the great muhaddith Imam Abu Jafar at-Tahawi, the latter work of which has recently been published in sixteen volumes by Mu'assasa ar-Risala in Beirut. Whoever has not read would usually be condemned to be ignorant of the hadith evidence for a great many Hanafi fatawa.

What I am trying to say is that there is a large fictional element involved when someone comes to the Muslims and declares to them, "No one has understood Islam properly except the Prophet and early Muslims, and our sheikh". This is not valid, for the enduring works of first-rank imams of hadith, fiqh, tafsir, and other shari'a disciplines impose upon Muslims the obligation to know and understand their work, in the same way that serious comprehension of any other scholarly field obliges one to have studied the works of its major scholars who have dealt with its issues and solved its questions. Without such study, one is doomed to repeat mistakes already made and rebutted in the past.

Most of us have acquaintances among this Umma who hardly acknowledge another scholar on the face of the Earth besides the imam of their madhhab, the Sheikh of their Islam, or some contemporary scholar or other. And this sort of enthusiasm is understandable, even acceptable in a non-scholar, but only to the degree that it does not become ta'assub or bigotry, meaning that one believes they can insult Muslims who prefer to follow other qualified scholars. At that point it is haram, because it is part of the sectarianism among Muslims that Islam condemns.

When one gains Islamic knowledge and puts fiction aside, one sees that superlatives about particular scholars such as "the greatest" are untenable; that each of the four schools of classical Islamic jurisprudence has had many many luminaries. To imagine that all preceding scholarship should be evaluated in terms of this or that "Great Reformer" is to ready oneself for a big letdown, because intellectually it cannot be supported.

I remember once hearing a student at the University of Chicago say: "I am not saying that Chicago has everything. Its just that no place else has anything." Nothing justifies transposing this kind of attitude onto our scholarly resources in Islam, whether it is called "Islamic Movement", "Salafism", or something else, and the sooner we leave it behind, the better it will be for our Islamic scholarship, our sense of reality, and for our deen.

— Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, transmitted via the blogsite Masud

Seeds of Extremism

The Blind Heretic

`Abdul-`Aziz ibn `Abdullah ibn Baz is the late nescient mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, government scholar par excellence, and major innovator whose influence on spreading deviant beliefs is incalculable. The present crippling of Islam and the Muslim community took place under his leadership and as a direct result of his policies as listed by Sayyid Yusuf ar-Rifa`i in his Nasiha li Ikhwanina `Ulema’ Najd:

• Calling the Muslims “Pagans”
• Calling the Muslims “Apostates”
• Calling the Muslims “Deviants”
• Calling the Muslims “Innovators”
• Monopolizing teaching in the Hejaz
• Falsifying our scholarly heritage
• Libeling `ulema’ who disagreed with Wahhabi Doctrine
• Imposing the style of the Najdi dialect in the Calling of the Adhân
• Shutting the Mosque in Medina at night
• Posting hoodlums at the Noble Grave
• Obstructing and scolding women in Medina
• Blocking women from visiting Jannatul Baqi`
• Policing interrogation centers
• Razing the Mosque of Hazrat Abu Bakr
• Razing Abu Ayyub al-Ansari’s house
• Destroying historical Mecca and Medina but preserving Khaybar
• Replacing Khadija’s house with latrines
• Outlawing nasiha to rulers
• Interdiction of Dala’ilul-Khayrat and other books
• Forbidding Mawlid Gatherings

As former overall president of the Directorships of Scholarly Research, Iftâ’, Da`wa, and Irshâd, ibn Baz is on record for issuing a fatwa declaring as anti-Islamic the Palestinian people’s uprising against the Zionist State of Israel, whereas he never condemned the practices, in his own country, of gambling, horse-racing, and usury.

In the late sixties he declared any and all forms of cooperation with the kuffâr prohibited and cast a judgment of apostasy on `Abdul-Nasr for employing a civilian force of a few hundred Russian engineers to build the Aswan dam. In the early nineties he then made it halâl for forces of the kuffâr to come under their flag and sovereignty in hundreds of thousands to occupy Muslim lands and destroy Iraq because of, as he had termed it, “necessity.” Apparently, there was also no problem for them to stay after the “necessity” was over.

In his infamous al-Adilla an-Naqliyya w'al-Hissiyya `ala Jarayan ash-Shamsi wa Sukuni al-Ard, he asserted that the Earth was flat and disk-like and that the sun revolved around it.

Like all the anthropomorphists of his school, ibn Baz added modifiers to the Divine Attributes, asserting, things such as, Allah Most High and Exalted “istawâ `alâ al-`arsh haqqan” – variously translated as “He established Himself over the Throne in person” or “actually” or “literally” – "haqqan" being an innovated addition which violates the practice of the true Salaf consisting in asserting the Divine Attributes bilâ kayf – without “how” – any modifier being by definition a modality. What is worse is that such an innovated addition is an avenue to anthropomorphism.

In his footnote to article 38 of Imam at-Tahawi’s `Aqida which states,

“He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. He is not contained by the six directions as all created entities are,”

ibn Baz asserts,

“Allah is beyond limits that we know but has limits He knows.”

This is, like "haqqan," a true innovation of misguidance and innovated phrase as stated by adh-Dhahabi and others, utterly unsupported by the Qur’an, the Sunna, and the 'Ijma of the scholars, violating the practice of the true Salaf who refrained from indulging in speculations of modality whenever they mentioned the Divine Attributes.

ibn Baz’s Najdi friends commit the same ugly innovation: `Abdullah al-Hashidi in his edition of the commentary of Imam al-Bayhaqi’s al-Asma’ wa as-Sifat – written in rebuttal of al-Kawthari’s landmark edition – states,

“As for us we affirm a form for Allah unlike forms,”

While al-Albani in his commentary approvingly quotes Muhammad ibn Mani`’s remonstration of Imam at-Tahawi for this particular article and his pretense that the imam, perhaps, did not write it in the first place,

“The imam and author was in no need at all for these invented, wrongly suggestive words, and if someone were to say that they are interpolated and not his own words, I would not think it improbable, so as to keep a good opinion of him.”

ibn Baz also suggests corporal limbs for Allah Most High and Exalted in his statement in Taliqat Hamma `ala ma Katabahu ash-Shaykh Muhammad `Ali as-Sabuni fi Sifat Allah that,

“To declare Allah transcendent beyond possessing body, pupils, auditory meatus, tongue, and larynx is not the position of Ahlus-Sunna but rather that of the scholars of condemned kalâm.”

By his phrase “the scholars of condemned kalâm” he disparages great Muslim luminaries such as Imam ibn Khafif, ibn `Abdus-Salam, ibn al-Juwayni, ibn Hibban, ibn `Arabi, Muhammad al-Ghazali, Fakhruddin ar-Razi, al-Qadi `Iyad, al-Maziri, an-Nawawi, al-Pazdawi, Bayhaqi, Qurtubi, al-Khatib, ibn al-Jawzi, ibn Daqiq al-`Id, ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani, Shah Waliullah, the absolute entirety of the Ash`ari and Maturidi schools of aqeedah and, lately, as-Sabuni, all of whom assert transcendence in similar terms. As ibn Hajar stated in Fath al-Bari,

“The elite of the mutakallimûn said: `He knows not Allah, who attributes to Him any sort of resemblance to His creation, or attributes a hand to Him, or a son.”

Contrary to this the doctrine of the Literalists consists in attributing an actual hand to the Creator. But ibn Baz in his notes on Fath al-Bari charges al-Qadi `Iyad and ibn Hajar with abandoning the way of the Ahlus-Sunna for stating that the Hand of Allah does not pertain to a bodily appendage. This is similar to the pretext of the anthropomorphist who said:

“We expelled ibn Hibban from Sijistan for his lack of faith: he used to say that Allah is not limited!”

ibn Baz’s acolyte Muhammad Zinu mumbles a similar claim of corporeality in his book Tanbihat Hamma `ala Kitab Safwat at-Tafasir. As-Sabuni blasted both of them in his 1988 rebuttal, Kashf al-Iftira’at fi Risalat Tanbihat Hawla Safwat at-Tafasir.

ibn Baz explicitly attributes a geographical direction to Allah Most High and Exalted, and affirms that such was the belief of “the Companions and those who followed them in excellence – they assert a direction for Allah, and that is the direction of height, believing that the Exalted is above the Throne.”

In his tract translated into English as Authentic Islamic Aqeedah and What Opposes It, page 16, ibn Baz calls those who visit the graves of saints “unbelievers” who commit kufr ar-rubûbiyya. This fatwa compounds three innovations:

1. the dreadful sin of indiscriminately declaring millions of Muslims kâfir without the proofs and due process required by the purified Shari`a
2. the blind, wholesale dismissal of the numerous orders of the Prophet in the authentic Sunna to visit the graves for they are reminders of the Hereafter
3. the branding of Muslims with an innovated classification of disbelief he calls kufr ar-rubûbiyya

The weakness of ibn Baz’s doctrinal positions can be inferred from the very title of one of his tracts purportedly designed to champion true doctrine: Iqamat al-Barahin `ala Hukmi man Istaghatha bi Ghayr Allah. For the licitness of istighâtha or calling for help of a creature qualified is patently established in the Qur’an and Sunna, as shown by the Verse,

And his countryman sought his help against his enemy...
[Quran 28:15]

And al-Bukhari’s narration of the Prophet from ibn `Umar – Allah be pleased with him – already quoted:

“Truly the sun shall draw so near on the Day of Resurrection that sweat shall reach to the mid-ear, whereupon they shall ask help from Adam – upon him peace; then from Moses – upon him peace; and then from Muhammad – upon him be peace, who will then intercede.”

Furthermore, ibn Baz directly contradicts Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s words in Majmu`at at-Tawhid, page 232:

“We do not deny nor reject the invocation of help from the creature insofar as the created can help, as Allah Most High said in the story of Moses – upon him peace: And his countryman sought his help against his enemy.”

An inveterate deprecator of the Prophet and principal enemy of the Sufis, in one of his fatwas he asserts,

“Among other things, the Messenger of Allah, after his death, never appears in a vision to a wakeful person. He of the ignorant Sufis who claims that he sees, while vigilant, the vision of the Prophet, or that that vision attends the Mawlids or the like, is guilty of the foulest error, and exceedingly deluded… the dead never rise out of their graves in this world save on the Day of Judgement.”

The above is a claim to know in their entirety:

1. the Unseen
2. the wherewithal of the Prophet in Barzakh
3. the states of the servants of Allah Most High

In addition to an impious reference to the Prophet  as “the dead.” Surely, it is ibn Baz who is dead while the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him, as stated by Sheikh Muhammad ibn `Alawi in Manhaj as-Salaf, “is alive with a complete isthmus-life which is greater and better and more perfect than worldly life – indeed, higher, dearer, sweeter, more perfect, and more beneficial than worldly life.”

It is also related from one of the great Sufi sheikhs, Sheikh Abul-Hasan ash-Shadhili – may Allah have mercy upon him – who, unlike ibn Baz, was only physically blind, whom the hadith master ibn al-Mulaqqin mentioned in his Tabaqat al-Awliya' and concerning whom ibn Daqiq al-`Id said, “I never saw anyone more knowledgeable of Allah;” that he said:

“If I ceased to see the Prophet  for one moment, I would no longer consider myself a Muslim.”

His teacher Abul-`Abbas al-Mursi said the same. Ghawth `Abdul-`Aziz ad-Dabbagh said something similar, as reported from him by his student Ahmad ibn al-Mubarak in al-Ibriz. Assuredly, Sheikh Abdul-Aziz shall have to answer for his calumny of these Sufi elders among many others on the Day of Judgment, in addition to having issued legal judgments and spoken of the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him – without knowledge.

As for attending Mawlid, “a vision” does not attend or do anything, but the spirits of the believers who passed away, together with the angels and the believing jinn, are certainly related to attend the gatherings of the pious all over the Earth. ibn al-Kharrat in al-`Aqiba, ibn al-Qayyim in ar-Ruh, al-Qurtubi in at-Tadhkira, ibn Abi ad-Dunya in al-Qubur, as-Suyuti in Sharh as-Sudur, ibn Rajab in Ahwal al-Qubur, and others relate from many of the Salaf as-Saleh – including Imam Malik in al-Muwatta’ – that the spirits of the believers in Barzakh are free to come and go anywhere they please. This is all the more possible for our Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him – as we celebrate Mawlid specifically to remember him and invoke blessings upon him.

ibn Baz passed a fatwa that,

“It is not permissible to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet, in fact, it must be stopped, as it is an innovation in the religion.”

His sole proof for this declaring an act illicit and an innovation in Islam is that it did not take place in the early centuries of Islam, whereas ash-Shafi`i and the Imams and scholars of the principles of jurisprudence defined innovation in the religion as “that which was not practiced before and contravenes the Qur’an and Sunna.”

It is noteworthy that the heads of the Salafi movement and those of their offshoots who propagate their views are always careful, through either ignorance or duplicity, to omit this second, indispensable precondition in their definition of bida`: Deobandis, Tablighis, Tahriris, Muhajiris, Jama`is, Ikhwanis, and other Wahhabis.

Furthermore, the majority of the scholars of Ahlus-Sunna – and Allah knows best – concur either out loud or tacitly on the licit character of the celebration of the Mawlid provided the usual etiquette of Islam in public gatherings is kept. Lastly, the Hanbali school in its entirety has never declared forbidden the celebration of the Mawlid and even the Salafi favorite, Sheikh ibn Taymiyya stated that one who celebrates it with sincere intentions will be rewarded.

ibn Baz revived the innovation and invalid fatwa of ibn Taymiyya to the effect that it is forbidden to travel with the intention of visiting the Prophet in his notes on ibn Hajar’s Fath al-Bari, book of Fadl as-Salat fi Makka w'al-Madina, where ibn Hajar comments on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travel for Ziyara,

“ibn Taymiyya said: `This kind of trip – traveling to visit the grave of the Prophet is a disobedience, and salât must not be shortened during it.’ This is one of the ugliest matters reported from ibn Taymiyya.”

ibn Baz reacts to this in a footnote:

“It is not ugly, and ibn Taymiyya was right.”

ibn Hajar’s teacher, Zaynuddin al-`Iraqi, rightly called it in his Tarh at-Tathrib 6:43, “a strange and ugly saying.”

ibn Baz also reduplicates verbatim and without the least critical analysis or original understanding of the evidence the pretense of ibn Taymiyya whereby it states,

“The ahadith that concern the desirability of visiting the grave of the Prophet are all weak and forged.”

By the Grace of Allah, this pseudo-bold and fashionable claim among Salafis has been laid to its final resting-place by Sheikh Mahmud Mamduh’s superb work titled Raf` al-Minara fi Takhrij Ahadith at-Tawassul w'az-Ziyara.

Another astonishing deviation of ibn Baz in his remarks on Fath al-Bari is his characterizing the visit of the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harth – Allah be well-pleased with him – to the grave of the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him – and his tawassul for rain there as “aberrant” and “an avenue to polytheism.”

One of his innovations in usûl is his public declaration – in the Saudi periodical al-Majalla – that he does not adhere to the Hanbali madhhab “but only to the Qur’an and Sunna,” whereas ibn Taymiyya himself asserted in his Mukhtasar al-Fatawa al-Misriyya that the truth is not found in the whole Shari`a outside the four schools. Nor have any two Sunni 'ulema' on the face of the earth agreed on the qualification of ibn Baz as a mujtahid capable of extracting his own rulings from the Law. On the contrary, his understanding of fiqh is superficial even when compared to his subordinate ibn `Uthaymin, his bent for taqlîd is evident, his blunders, numerous, and his innovations, countless.

Among the other innovations of ibn Baz in doctrine, he tried to rectify whatever did not please him in Fath al-Bari by the imam and hadith master ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani with interspersed remarks that do not qualify as commentary but as an attempt to substitute ibn Hajar’s Ash`ari Sunni doctrine with anthropomorphism as the Islamic creed.

Under his leadership, ibn Taymiyya’s Majmu`a al-Fatawa al-Kubra received a new altered edition from which they removed the tenth volume on tasawwuf. Similar examples of unreliable editorship and blatant tampering of the scholarly heritage abound at the hands of Wahhabis are:

1. In the book of al-Adhkar by Imam Muhyiuddin an-Nawawi as published by Darul-Huda of Riyadh in 1989 and edited by `Abdul-Qadir al-Arna’ut of Damascus, page 295, the chapter-title, “Section on Visiting the Grave of the Messenger” was substituted with the title, “Section on Visiting the Mosque of the Messenger of Allah” together with the suppression of several lines from the beginning of the section and its end, and the suppression of al-`Utbi’s famous story of intercession which Imam an-Nawawi had mentioned in full.

When al-Arna’ut ad-Dimashq was asked about it, he replied that it was the Riyadh agents who were the ones to change and tamper with the text. A facsimile of his own hand-written statement to that effect was printed in full in Sheikh Mahmud Mamduh’s Raf` al-Minara, page 72-75.

2. Suppression of as-Sawi’s words on modern-time Kharijites in his super-commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn titled Hashiya `ala Tafsir al-Jalalayn, “namely, a sect in the Hejaz named Wahhabis” from all new editions post-eighties.

3. Zuhayr ash-Shawish’s suppression of the word “substitute-saints” from the book al-Maktab al-Islami, third edition of ibn Taymiyya’s `Aqida Wasitiyya in the following passage:

“The true adherents of Islam in its pristine purity are Ahlus-Sunna wa al-Jama`ah. In their ranks are found the truthful saints, the martyrs, and the righteous. Among them are the great men of guidance and illumination, of recorded integrity and celebrated virtue. And among them are the substitute-saints – the Imams – concerning whose guidance and knowledge the Muslims are in full accord. These are the Victorious Group…”

This is found in the Cairo Salafiyyah edition, page 36, and the Majmu`a ar-Rasa’il al-Kubra 3:159.

4. Suppression of the chapter that concerns the Awliyâ’, the Abdâl, and the Sâlehîn from ibn `Abedin’s Epistles.

Removal of Abu Hayyan’s denunciation of ibn Taymiyya as an anthropomorphist from his two tafasir, al-Bahr al-Muhit and an-Nahr al-Madd min al-Bahr in the passage concerning the Ayatul-Kursi.

Interpolation of the phrase bidhâtihi into al-Gilani’s mention of Allah Most High establishing Himself over the Throne as well as the takfîr of Imam Abu Hanifa in his classic al-Ghunya.

Interpolations among the same lines as well as the takfîr of Imam Abu Hanifa in al-Ash`ari’s al-Ibana.
Alterations along anthropomorphist lines in an-Nawawi’s Sharh Sahih Muslim from as early as ibn as-Subki’s time.

Anthropomorphist additions to al-Alusi’s Ruh al-Ma`ani transmitted by his Salafi son Nu`man as shown by a comparison with its autograph manuscript.

Commissioning Muhammad Muhsin Khan and Muhammad Taqiuddin al-Hilali with English translations of the mother books of Islam such as the Noble Qur’an, al-Bukhari’s Sahih, az-Zabidi’s at-Tajrid as-Sarih, an-Naysaburi’s al-Lu’lu’ w'al-Marjan etc. when Khan was only trained as a chest doctor while the late Moroccan-born Hilali had no more than a poor mastery of the English language. Hence, their translations are clumsy, inelegant, filled with gaps and approximations, and further corrupted by deliberate manipulations of meaning along doctrinal lines as shown by the following example in their Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 549:

“Narrated Ibn `Abbas: `The Prophet said,

“The people were displayed in front of me and I saw one prophet passing by with a large group of his followers, and another prophet passing by with only a small group of people, and another prophet passing by with only ten (persons), and another prophet passing by with only five (persons), and another prophet passed by alone. And then I looked and saw a large multitude of people, so I asked Gibril,
“Are these people my followers?’
He said, `No, but look towards the horizon.’
I looked and saw a very large multitude of people.
Gibril said. `Those are your followers, and those are seventy thousand (persons) in front of them who will neither have any reckoning of their accounts nor will receive any punishment.’
I asked, `Why?’
He said, `For they used not to treat themselves with branding (cauterization) nor with ruqya (get oneself treated by the recitation of some Verses of the Qur'an) and not to see evil omen in things, and they used to put their trust (only) in their Lord.’” 

On hearing that, `Ukasha bin Mihsan got up and said (to the Prophet), “Invoke Allah to make me one of them.” The Prophet said, “O Allah, make him one of them.” Then another man got up and said (to the Prophet), “Invoke Allah to make me one of them.” The Prophet said, `Ukasha has preceded you.””

As demonstrated in the text of the Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine (6:137-149) on ta’wîz, there is a Jahili ruqyâ, and there is a Sunna ruqyâ. The former is made with other than what is allowed in the religion, such as amulets, talismans, spells, incantations, charms, magic and the like: and that is what the Prophet meant in the above hadith. But the translator Khan miscategorized it, in his parenthetical gloss, as the Sunna ruqyâ consisting in using some verses of the Qur’an or permitted du’â for treatment. Thus he suggests, in his manipulation, exactly the reverse of what the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him – said and practiced, and the reverse of what the Companions said and practiced both in the time of the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him – and after his time. One famous probative example of the Sunna ruqyâ is the use of the Fatiha by one of the Companions to heal a scorpion-bite – and the Prophet approved of it – as narrated by al-Bukhari in his Sahih.

The 1999 translation of an-Nawawi’s Riyadh as-Salehin published by Darussalam publications out of Riyadh makes a similar interpolation distorting the meaning of the words of the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him:

“They are those who do not make ruqyah (blowing over themselves after reciting the Qur'an or some prayers and supplications the Prophet used to say).”

Observe their equating something the Prophet used to do with an act that those who enter Paradise do not do. The same book, in page 88, calls al-Albani “the leading authority in the science of hadith”, in page 31 declares that “in case of breach of ablution, the wiping over the socks is sufficient, and there is no need for washing the feet”, and in page 515 declares that “ours should not be the belief that the dead do hear and reply (our greeting)”, and that expressing the intention (niyya) verbally before salât “is a Bid`ah (innovation in religion) because no proof of it is found in Sharî`ah.”

Other manipulations of meaning along anthropomorphist lines and dilly-dallying can be seen in Khan-Hilali’s discrepant, multiple translations of the meanings of the Qur’an into English. An example of this confusion is in the footnote to Ayatul Kursi for the word kursiyyuhu, translated as “His Throne.” In a later edition by the same M.M. Khan and his friend M. Taqiuddin al-Hilali, the word is left untranslated, giving “His Kursî,” with a footnote stating:

“Kursî: literally a footstool or chair, and sometimes wrongly translated as Throne. ibn Taimiyah said,
(a) To believe in the Kursî. (b) To believe in the `Arsh (Throne) [sic]. It is narrated from Muhammad bin `Abdullâh and from other religious scholars that the Kursî is in front of the `Arsh (Throne) and it is at the level of the Feet. [Fatawa ibn Taimiyah, Vol. 5, Pages 54, 55]”

None of the above explanations is authentically related from the Prophet – Allah bless him and greet him, least of all the astonishing mention of “the Feet” – and who is “Muhammad bin `Abdullâh” and these “other religious scholars”? Nor is the call for imitating what “ibn Taymiyya said to believe” other than a bankrupt innovation. Nor is the translation of Kursî as “Throne” wrong when called for in certain cases, as in the narration:

“On the Day of Resurrection your Prophet shall be brought and shall be made to sit in front of Allah the Almighty, on His Kursî.”

Some of the Salaf, among them Hasan al-Basri, even explicitly said that the Kursî is the `Arsh. Furthermore, it is authentically related from ibn `Abbas that he said,

“His Kursî is His Knowledge.”

This is the explanation preferred by the Imams of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama'ah such as Imam Sufyan ath-Thawri, al-Bukhari, at-Tabari, al-Bayhaqi, and others.

Other examples of Khan-Hilali’s bamboozled translations:
“Then he rose over (Istawâ) towards the heaven” as compared to Pickthall’s "Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke" (41:11) and Yusuf `Ali’s over-figurative “Moreover He comprehended in His Design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke” [Quran 41:11];
“...and then He rose over (Istawâ) the Throne (really in a manner that suits His Majesty)”as compared to Pickthall’s simple "then mounted He the Throne" and Yusuf `Ali’s typical “then He established Himself on the Throne (of authority)” [Quran 7:54];
“Do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allâh)” as compared to Pickthall’s literal "Have ye taken security from Him Who is in the heaven (fî al-samâ’)?"and Yusuf `Ali’s “Do ye feel secure that He Who is in Heaven”
[Quran 67:16-17];

Khan-Hilali's translation of Verse 2:200 states:

“So when you have accomplished your Manaasik, remember Allâh as you remember your forefathers or with a far more remembrance.”

Did ibn Baz, “The Presidency of Islamic Researches, Ifta, Da`wa, and Irshâd,” and the “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an” all think so cheaply of the Book of Allah and so dearly of their own agenda that the basic grammar and syntax of the translation of its meanings into the most heavily spoken language on Earth did not deserve to be double-checked and edited by a competent English proofreader at least before being printed on the best bible paper, sewn-bound, and distributed freely at huge cost?

ibn Baz did his best to aid and abet the main innovators of our time such as al-Albani, on whom he bestowed the King Faisal Prize “for services rendered to Islam” the year before their respective deaths; al-Albani’s student and deputy in Kuwait, `Abdur-Rahman `Abdul-Khaliq authored the despicable attack on the Friends of Allah which he titled Fada’ih as-Sufiyya and which al-Buti termed an exercise in calumny.

Other notables of the Wahhabi movement include Muqbil ibn Hadi al-Wadi`i who asked that the Noble Grave be brought out of the Mosque and the Green Dome destroyed, and roamed the land in Yemen with armed loon thugs, digging up graves with spades; Abu Bakr al-Jaza’iri; ibn Jamil Zeno; `Abdur-Rahman ad-Dimashqiyya, and their ilk…

As Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifa`i said to the `ulema’ of Najd:

“You left none but yourselves as those who are saved, forgetting the Prophet’s – Allah bless him and greet him – saying: `If anyone says, `The people have perished,’ then he has perished the most.”

— Sheikh Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad, transmitted via the blogsite Asharis: Assemble 

Plague of the Wahhabi Curse

The Horn of Satan

Narrated ibn 'Umar as recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari:

The Prophet said,
"O Allah! Bestow Your Blessings on our Syria! O Allah! Bestow Your Blessings on our Yemen."
The people cried, "And also on our Najd."
The Prophet repeated,
"O Allah! Bestow Your Blessings on our Syria! O Allah! Bestow Your Blessings on our Yemen."
The people cried again, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd."
Then, the Prophet said,
"There is the place of earthquakes and afflictions; from there comes out the Horn of Satan."

The accursed Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab an-Najdi is credited with founding the Salafi/Wahhabi movement whose pact with Muhammad ibn Sa'ud helped to establish the first Saudi state and began a dynastic alliance and power-sharing arrangement between their families which continues to the present day. The descendants of the heretic, the Ahl ash-Shaykh, have historically dominated the state's clerical institutions.

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab is generally acknowledged to have been born in 1703 into the Arab tribe of Banu Tamim in 'Uyayna, a village in the Najd region of the Saudi Arabia, the very land of fitnah, the Prophet warned against.

He was thought to have started studying Islam at an early age, primarily with his father, Sheikh ‘Abdul-Wahhab as his family was from a line of Hanbali scholars. ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was educated in Najd, Basra and Damascus.

Although, his brothers and parents were of the ‘aqidah of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama’ah, through reading selected works of Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah, he chose to differ in belief with the rest of his family, who were not pleased with him. His brother, Sheikh Sulayman wrote a book against him called ‘Sawa’iq al-Ilahiya’, the Divine Thunderbolts, in which he refuted all his brother’s innovations and heresy.

In Mecca, the Hanbali mufti, Sheikh ibn Humaydi, noted ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab to be a poor student, and arrogant and defiant with his teachers. He was infamously known to be lacking in adab. This upset his father greatly. Consequently, ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab did not complete his studies. It was likely he was expelled or dropped out. In Medina, he studied under Sheikh Mohammad Hayya as-Sindi. His heresies were formulated in Basra. He returned to 'Uyayna in 1740.

After his return home, ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab began to attract and rally up followers, including the ruler of 'Uyayna, 'Uthman ibn Mu'ammar. With ibn Mu'ammar's support, ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab began to implement some of his heresy. First, citing Islamic teachings forbidding grave worship, he persuaded Uthman ibn Mu'ammar to level the maqam of Zayd ibn al-Khattab. Secondly, he ordered that all adulterers be stoned to death, a practice that had become uncommon in the area. He personally organized the stoning of a woman who confessed that she had committed adultery. This is not in line with the teachings of the Prophet.

Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab considered his movement an effort to purify Islam by returning Muslims to what he believed were the original principles of the religion, as typified by the Salaf, rejecting what he regarded as corruptions introduced by bida' and shirk. In this, he was the originator of the greatest bida’, the Salafi movement.

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was criticized for disregarding Islamic history, monuments, traditions and the sanctity of human life. His father disowned him. His own brother, Sheikh Sulayman ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab, was particularly critical of him, claiming he was ill-educated and intolerant, classing ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab's views as fringe, extreme and fanatical. Sheikh Sulayman rightly pointed out that his brother was selective with the juristic predecessors, to the point of being ignorantly dismissive towards some and treating others as divinely infallible. Sheikh Sulayman and ibn Humaydi, both, showed that ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was even selective with the works of Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah, whose views otherwise closely influenced the Salafi.

The Wahhabi sect is named after Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab. It is often believed, that ibn 'Abdul-Wahhab started the Wahhabi movement. He merely began its latest incarnation. In reality, it began in the time of Imam ‘Ali. Throughout history there have been different names for this sect, but in the eighth century, one of their leaders used to call himself Salafi. Today, this sect has many names and incarnations all over the world.

Where once they were called the Khawarij, now, they know themselves as the Salafi, the Wahhabi, the Najdi, Muhammadiyyah, the Ghayr Muqallidin and even Ahl-e-Hadith. They are not the followers of the Salaf of Muhammad since they follow a different ‘aqidah. An explanation on the differences of the ‘aqidah of the Wahhabi heresy and the ‘aqidah of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama’ah would take an entire article or a book. It is interesting to note that the deceiving false prophet, Musaylima al-Kadhab was also born in Najd.

Hafiz ibn Kathir writes in Tarik ibn Kathir, when the kuffar of Mecca had a meeting concerning the Prophet, Satan came in the form of a Najdi elder. The old man came claiming,

“I am a Najdi. Whatever you want to know, I will be helpful.”

This Najdi sheikh then gave his view against the Prophet, throughout the meeting.

It is recorded by Imam Bukhari in Kitab al-Fitnah, the Prophet stated,

“I fear from the Najdi.”

Imam Bukhari also recorded that the Prophet stated,

“Tribulation will emerge from the east.”

The brother of the heretic, Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab an-Najdi, Sheikh Sulayman ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab, said about his brother,

“The Horn of Satan which the Prophet referred to is you.”

This was recorded in Sawa’iq al-Ilahiya.

Muhammad Hasni wrote in Tarik Ahlus-Sa'ud, that ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab said,

“When I went to study in Basra, mushrikin would ask me questions and I would leave them very surprised with my answers.”

Sheikh Juri stated,

“Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab an-Najdi called the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama’ah kafir and mushrik apart from himself and his blind followers.”

The proof for this is he himself said that about the ‘mushrikin’ in Basra asked him questions. These people were Muslims and thus ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab is guilty of takfir. It is the disease of the entire movement until today.

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was quoted in Kashf ash-Shubhat that people who ask for intercession from the Prophet and make du’a through the wasila of awliya’ to get closer to Allah are guilty of shirk. Thus, it is permitted to kill them and to take their possessions. Sheikh Attar wrote that the Najdi heretic said,

“I declare war on these people as the Prophet declared war on the kuffar of Mecca, against those people with corrupt beliefs.”

This is found in ‘Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’, page 55.

Just like the Khawarij, he considered all other Muslims to be kafir. The Khawarij were people who considered all other Muslims to be kafir. They believed any person who has committed a major sin was a non-believer. They called the Sahabah kafir and killed or tried to kill them, as they did with ‘Uthman, Talah, Muaviye and Zubayr. They killed ‘Ali. The Khawarij only took the literal meaning, zahir, of the Qur’an. This is also the trait of the Wahhabi.

The greatest crime of the Wahhabi ilk is their attack on the Prophet Muhammad in their supposed defense of Islam. The following is adapted from Khulasah al-Kalam fi Bayan al-Umara w'al-Balad al-Haram, by Imam Ahmad ibn Zayni ad-Dahlan al-Makki ash-Shafi’i. The sheikh passed away on 1304 AH / 1886 CE.

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab used to insult the Holy Prophet Muhammad Mustafa in various ways because he believed that this was the best method to safeguard his flawed interpretation of tawhid. The following are a few examples of his appalling disrespect and insolence towards the exalted personhood of the Holy Prophet: 

He referred to the Holy Prophet as ‘tarish’, which in Najdi speech means a lowly messenger boy or a mere postman. 

He used to say that the incident at Hudaybiyyah is full of lies and rejected the bay’ah. Hence, when his followers and acolytes used to speak against the incident, he felt pleased with them. 

One of his blind followers once remarked in his presence that his walking stick is better than Muhammad because his stick can still be used for killing a snake or such reptiles whereas Muhammad is not in any way beneficial anymore. He was just a postman who is dead.
That follower is blind in dunya and akhirah.

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab hated the recitation of salawat upon the Prophet. He also felt upset to hear the salawat recited in the mosques. The followers of the heretic are resentful of the recitation by visitors to Jannat al-Baqi in Medina even today. He also opposed the recitation of salawat on Friday eve and especially from the minarets of the mosques. If he found someone reciting it loudly and publicly, he used to punish him. 

He used to often say that recitation of salawat from the minarets of the mosques is by far a graver sin than a prostitute playing musical instruments in her brothel. He used to tell his followers that this will protect monotheism. Clearly this was a man who did not love the Prophet and worshiped his nafs. 

He destroyed the Dala'ilul-Khayrat and many other valuable books of salawat by setting them ablaze. His followers trampled the unburnt portions underfoot, notwithstanding the fact they held the Names of Allah and His Messenger. 

He also destroyed the books of fiqh, ahadith and tafsir penned by renowned and authentic Muslim scholars of the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama’ah. These included the works of eminent theologians such as the likes of Imam Ghazali and Sheikh ‘Abdul-Qadir Jilani among many others. 

He allowed his companions to interpret the verses of Qur'an as per their whims and fancies always taking the literal approach, going so far as to ascribe anthropomorphic qualities to Allah. 

He used to ascribe to Muslims Verses of the Qur’an revealed about the munafiqin and the mushrikin. The Khawarij also followed the same modus operandi. In effect, they were the Khawarij reborn. 

ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab used to instruct his officers to do ijtihad in matters of religion and issue the ahkam of sharia according to their personal opinion without regard to the precedence of the pious predecessors. He also stopped them from referring to religious books saying that these contain mixtures of right and wrong both. As a matter of fact, all his officers were absolutely ignorant of religious laws. The ignorance of the inner dimensions of Islam is the hallmark of the movement.

Those scholars and pious people who did not embrace his newly-innovated religion were immediately put to sword. He is a brutal murderer and a thief, desecrator of the maqam of the sahabah and awliya’. His followers attacked Mecca and Medina and almost burnt the Kaaba. They killed hundreds of pilgrims and desecrated Masjid an-Nabawi. Whatever booty he recovered after looting Muslims was distributed as zakat to his followers.

The followers of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab do not follow any of the madhahib of fiqh or ‘aqidah. They pride themselves in being called as Ghayr Muqallidin. To deceive foolish Muslims, they claim to follow the Hanbali madhhab.

He used to instruct people against supplications after salah, justifying it by asking,
“Do you expect wages of worship from Allah?”
This, from a man who knows nothing of Allah!

In short, he is the enemy of Allah and His Messenger. Were it not for the fact that his followers control the Haramayn, they would be considered apostates of Islam. As it is, they have declared war on the Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jama’ah and the awliya’.

Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Prophet relayed in a hadith qudsi that Allah said,

Whoever harms any of My Deputies, I shall declare war on him.
The striving of My servant to please Me does not receive any Reward greater than that of fulfilling what I have commanded him to do. My servant volunteers in his perseverance, offering supererogatory devotion to please Me and to earn My Love.
Once I cast over My Divine Love upon the servant, I become the very hearing with which he hears, sight with which he sees, hand with which he exacts justice, and feet that carries him.
Should My servant pray for something he needs, I will answer his prayers and should he seek refuge in Me, I will protect him.
Indeed, there is nothing that I have decreed, which I hesitate to do for the sake of a believer except causing him to experience death. He dislikes it, and I hate to displease him, but I have thus ordained.

— Sidi Terence Helikaon Nunis of A Muslim Convert Once More