Reblogged from The Hanbali Blog:

Following a Madh-hab

The four traditional schools of fiqh have come under much attack in the past few hundred years by those who attempt to re-interpret traditional Islam and establish a new order. With the takeover of our holy lands and the wealth that the vampires gain by sucking of the blood of the earth, many books have been published and propagated for free promoting the false notion that the four traditional schools of fiqh are bid’ah and at worst, kufr and shirk.

This claim has arisen under the …

The recent attacks on me has been nothing more than the same old character assassination we have seen many times before when people cannot handle the very subjects that are placed before them, they simply resort to attacking the character of those who presented the points. This is known as the logical fallacy of ad-hominem, which is to avoid the main issue at hand and resort to insults, name calling, character defaming etc.

When I was searching for truth in my Wahhabi days, I did not focus on the bad character of so and so, the cutting of a birthday cake with the Christians by such and such. In-fact, I looked at the very crux of the issues at hand. I realized it was pointless looking at such and such character as they are soon to be buried and forgotten, and this is important to keep in mind as a new generation will arise, as they did before, and have to go through the cycle of looking and researching through all these points yet again.

It will not concern them who Andrew Sanders is or was, yet the issues and the main topic at hand will be important for them. Therefore I find all this “he said, she said” style of debate childish and pathetic. Now I could be the biggest liar and still stand here and tell you the truth today. Refuting Andrew Sanders does not mean that if you can prove Andrew Sanders to be a liar, then you have successfully refuted the topic of one tawheed, the classical understanding of Bid’ah, the permissibility of madh-habs, the permissibility of madh-habs and so forth. No, some people need to realize that these issues will still be in their faces begging sincere research long after I am dead and buried. Therefore why should the subject be about me?

One cannot even use Mustalah al-Hadeeth and ilm ur-Rijaal as an issue and this is simply due to the fact that they are not scholars, they have not the qualification to look into biographies, sanads and matns and even make conclusions about such and such, you will find they do not even know Arabic. So the damage is only done to themselves. Besides the very first principle in Mustalah al-Hadeeth, as found in Imaam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani’s Nukhbaat al-Fikr is to verify the news of a Faasiq, NOT totally reject the news of a Faasiq as the opposition to my writings would have you believe. So even if I was a Faasiq, they cannot escape the issue by simply proving that I am a liar. The issue still faces them and there is no escaping it

They do not realize that when they talk about Andrew Sanders that they are making themselves look suspect. As I said before I could be the greatest criminal to walk this earth and exposing that would not debunk the issues that I have spoken about. If you debate me, my character, my grand-ma and grand-dad and manage to convince the people, fair enough, but the issues still exist, the Ahl us-Sunnah still stands strong. I am nothing, I do not know why these pathetic souls even waste their time on me and give me all this fame that they have been doing.

However, it is like this people, and I have noticed this, and I want you to notice this too. I have to admit right now, I am not a scholar of Islam, I am a simple student who studies and then presents sincere research to the people, I am simply a servant of Allah and a servant of the people. Now, I have seen the very same style attacks not just on me, but on the scholars. I have had the privilege to share the same internet page in being slandered alongside Shaykh Tahir al-Qadri and Sidi al-Hajj Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali, and I see these same people slandering and backbiting the very likes of Hamza Yusuf Hanson, Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi, even I have witnessed the fitnah and evil of the words they have about the 19th century Mujaddid Imaam Ridaa Khan al-Barelwi. So when I see the attacking these noble characters it makes me think, will they ever stop? Do these people have any manners, respect for their elders or the scholars? Simply put no.

Then I am not all surprised on their attacks on somebody comparatively as small as I am. I am simply the dirt of the dirt of the shoe of these great people they slander and I am actually somewhat pleasured that I mentioned in the same breath as them. I have been honored by these Wahhabis that they call me a Sufi, not that I attribute purity to myself, no, but i do indeed aspire to be like the Sufis, and be from amongst them on Yawm ul-Qiyaamah. They have also honoured me with the title Barelwi, even though I am not from the subcontinent, these Wahhabis have grouped me with a Shaykh ul-Islam and a true Mujaddid of his time, so I am tickled with pleasure by some of the insults of late.

To throw insults is in their nature, in-fact I can safely say it is their minhaj. It is the minjaj of Dhul Khuwasaira who stood in the Prophet’s blessed face and accused him of doing injustice with the very words “Fear Allah”. Therefore I am not at all surprised if these Wahhabis accuse me of having bad adab, or the fact they call me a liar etc. When the books released they are going to call me a whole lot but, Hasbi Allah wa Ni’mal Wakeel.

                            Sincerity in Research and the Shaykh Google Challenge

In order to study into the Wahhabi cult and what they truly belive I have had to go and purchase the books, read them first hand, analyze the arguments and see if they stand true. I have not just read the books in plain English, no, I have also gone through the Arabic text as terminologies are important to understand and can be to easily overlooked and at worst, misunderstood. Without boast I have acquired all of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s works in Arabic, even the texts that have not been translated into English as of yet. Therefore, in order to know what I am talking about I have made great purchases of Wahhabi books here and there and have read them for myself.

Not only Wahhabi books, I have had to invest in many classical books on creed, tafseer, hadeeth etc just to find and verify what has been said here and there, I spend many hours reading, translating, cross referencing and taking notes. The most important thing about my research is that I am dedicated to eye verification and having the satisfaction of knowing I have seen such evidences for myself.

When dealing with the Wahhabi books and the mention of such and such scholars, I have always marked down these scholars, the day there were born and the day that they died and then I would seek out their biography and see what other scholars affirmed their authenticity and then I would go to their books and see what they actually said. By doing this I have filtered the information given to me by the Wahhabiyyah to simply put it under the spotlight of investigation.

Can my opposition say the same? Have they gone out and spent their hard-earned cash on books, verified information for themselves, or have they simply resorted google.coming any and everything they can find on forums throughout the internet? One such group who called themselves the “Fakehead Report Team” penned a refutation upon me, but when I analyzed every evidence they had used, I found them to have plagiarized they’re so called refutation partially from Dar us-Salaam’s edition of al-Aqeedah ul-Wastiyah by Ibn Taymiyyah, the Salafi publications forum, and so forth.

Even their footnotes were stolen, as they did not even take care to tidy up the refutation and make sure all the spelling was consistent, so in one footnote they made it look like they quoted from Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen’s al-Mughni but had spelled it al-Moghni and Mughni in the other footnote. When I threw their evidences in the google search engine, I knew exactly where they had been stealing their answers from.

Did they actually go back to the evidences and verify them for themselves? no. Moreover are they prepared to look into my research and verify? No. Thus their refutation is nothing but asbaiyyah, group mentality and as Allah says in the Qur’an: “But the people divided their religion among them into sects – each faction, rejoicing what it has with them” Surat Al-Mu’minun, ayah 23. So their efforts can be narrowed down to a simple tribalisitic attempt to defend their group, which is in fact the Jahiliyyah trait known as Asbiyyah. I had hoped for better from a people claiming to be sincere students of the deen, and furthermore a “Report Team” who have done taqleed of the nearest Wahhabi apologetic paper they could get their hands on.

Well, at least I can boast that all of my research has been of my own back and i have not had to rely on Shaykh ul-Islam google.com to aid me at all. The challenge is to throw the work that is done in the google search engine, and you will most certainly find, that I am not a copy and paste clown.

                                           What is a Barelwi?

The Wahhabis often through the term Barelwi around and pin it to those who disagree with their false creed. But what is a Barelwi? Well according to the the Wahhabis [who often pose the question what is a Wahhabi but are too dumb to get it], a Barelwi is anybody who follows the creed of the great subcontinent reviver of the deen [Mujaddid] Imaam Ridaa Khan who was from the in Bareilly district, Uttar Pradesh, India. Hence the name al-Barelwi.

In simple terms, Barelwis are named after the Imaam who was from a location by the same name. However, the claim what we should be really looking at right here is did Imaam Rida Khan al-Barelwi bring anything new? Did he innovate? Was he the founder of a new creed? Or can this creed be found within the chain of revivers that have been sent every 100 years to revive the deen and dispell the bid’ah? Can Imaam Rida Khan al-Barelwis creed be proven from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and the classical understanding of the first three generations? The following videos shed light who the reviver [al-Mujaddid] Imaam Raza Khan al-Barelwi rahmatullah alayhi is and clear him from some of the false accusations

Furthermore, the one of the Mujaddidun of this era, Shaykh al-Haqq, Muhammad al-Yaqoubi has the following to say about Imaam Raza Khan al-Barelwi:

In otherwords, Imam Raza Khan s the touchstone of today, if you love him your a Sunni, if you hate him your a deviant!!

In some weeks to come inshaAllah , in a number of separate threads we will be going through the Wahhabi’s Ehsan Elahi Zaheer’s “The Reality of  Barelwi-ism” book and refute the many lies therein that fakehead Wahhabis insincere in their research tend to brandish against the Imaam without verifying the facts

Salamun ‘alaykum, the following notes are a scribble up from my read of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s Kitaab ut-Tawheed. They are short and breif, and I do not go in depth nor offer refutation. However, one can clearly see the theological blunders, discrepancies, bad opinions, takfeer, and permissability to spill the blood of innocent Muslims.

You can discuss any point you wish where I can touch on the subject further, and offer a solid refutation from the people of knowledge who have already refuted the self proclaimed mujtahid.

• Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab claimed to know the issue of tawheed better than the majority of the Sahaabah. Chapter 1, Kitaab ut-Tawheed

• Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab claims that the Ash’ariyah have denied the Attributes of Allah but gives no explanation to what Attributes, how they have denied them, etc. he just makes a claim and offers no explanation to back his claim. See chapter 2, point no. 12 Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, in chapter 2, point 12 of his Kitaab ut-Tawheed. His grandson does not even care to explain in Fath ul-Majeed, p. 49. Again in chapter 16, point no. 20 Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab repeats the same accusation but does not explain. Such a matter of tawheed merits an explanation.

• Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab blindly follows Ibn Taymiyah and Ibn Qayyum in their dividing tawheed into two. Fath ul-Majeed, English translation p.8, the Prophet nor the Sahaabah nor anybody from the first three generations ever categorized tawheed in this fashion. Indeed the first three generations was on the complete teaching of tawheed, whereas the innovators have introduced matters into tawheed and then used their innovated theology as a springboard to takfeer and kill innocent Muslims, past and present

• In Chapter 23, Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab argues that Muslims worship idols. By using An-Nisaa ayah 51, however who was this ayah revealed about? Also the ayah in al-Maa’idah ayah 60, again who was this revealed about? Point no. 7 of this same chapter claims that Muslims will practice idol worship.

• According to Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab and the understanding he passed down to his grand-sons, those who do tawassul via the Prophets and the Righteous are in a depth of kufr much worser than the depth of kufr than that of the pagans of Makkah. p. 37 – 38, Fath ul-Majeed. This understanding is seen further in chapter 18 where Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab argues that Abu Jahl knew and understood the kalimah better than Muslims who understand the principles and essentials of Islam, see Fath ul-Majeed, p. 206. Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab demonstrates his understanding further in point no. 5 when he claims that that “The disbelievers are more guided than the faithful believers” see Fath ul-Majeed p. 240

• By misinterpreting the hadeeth “the supplication [du’a] is worship” to mean “all and every du’a is worship” Wahhabis promote the idea that whosoever “calls upon other than Allah” are complete mushrikeen and disbelievers. Therefore those who call upon the Messenger by saying “Yaa RasulAllah” or the righteous by saying “Ya ‘Abdul Qaadir” are complete disbelievers according to the Wahhabi creed. See Fath ul-Najeed p. 67, p. 86, p. 93; Kitaab ut-Tawheed, Chapter 14: point no. 10 and 11. In fact, the whole of chapter fourteen is dedicated to those who call upon Prophets and saints, labeling such people who “call upon them” as kuffar and mushrikeen.

• Chapter 14 also argues that whosoever calls upon Prophets or the righteous should “Declare his repentance or otherwise be killed”, this is also the understanding found within Fath ul-Majeed, p. 180

• It can be seen in chapter 6 of Kitaab ut-Tawheed, and the context of the chapter and the “evidences” that Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab has used the permissibility to kill Muslims who display great respect for their Elder Shaykhs and teachers, or whoever admitted to following one of the four madh-habs by labeling themselves Hanafi, Maliki, Shaafi after their respective Imaam. Both of these acts Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab deemed as shirk and from that premise declared lawful the spilling of blood of any Muslim and even the taking of their property. According to the Wahhabi creed, anybody who does not accept the hadeeth of the “Salafis” as the “stronger evidence” and continues to follow another hadeeth in favour of it, or depending on the knowledge of the scholar that transmitted and utilized this hadeeth within the madh-hab, then the Imaam and his madh-hab has committed shirk. See Pgs 369-372 Fath ul-majeed The suggestion that Muslims worship the four Imaams can be further seen on pgs. 373 to 374 of Fath ul-Majeed

• Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab contradicts the guidance of Islam which tells us that a Muslims blood is inviolable except for three cases. A. the murder of another, b. adultery, c. apostasy. Wahabi creed teachers “Merely pronouncing the statement “there is no god but Allah” cannot make ones property or blood invioliable” This is the understanding of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and his grandsons. See Fath ul-Majeed p. 102

• In great excitement at spilling the blood of Muslims who the Wahhabis deem as mushriks, Abdur Rahmaan burst out with joy “What a great issue! What a clear statement! What a decisive reason! He then further demonstrates this understanding by quoting the ayah of Allah “Kill the mushrikeen wherever you find them” see Fath ul-Majeed, P. 103. Only the Khawaarij would use a passage of the Qur’an in this fashion!

• ‘Abdur Rahmaan also makes the folly of comparing the Muslim believers who “call upon other than Allah to the apostates who denied the Zakah. We see this when he said: Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and the honorable companions of the Prophet Muhammad waged war against those people who refrained from paying the due Zakah, they must be fought as they would be regarded as renegades and apostates.” See Fath ul-Majeed pgs 104-105 The Wahhabi creed claims that the Muslims who “call upon others besides Allah” are more worthy of killing than those who denied the Zakah [Kashf ush-Shubuhaat]

• A person is allowed to by “taken by force” and even put to death should he reject the Wahhabi call, it is a case of embrace Wahhabism or die. p. 73 Fath ul-Majeed

• Wahhabis can murder anybody they deem to be a disbeliever or a hypocrite for ‘Abdur Rahmaan states “It is permissible to kill the one who shows himself to be a disbeliever or a hypocrite” See Fath ul-Majeed, p 384 chapter 39. This means Wahhabis can kill anybody they like without any ameer of governmental body. All they have to do is set up the accusation, and without any court of law, no display of mercy, a person is put to death. History shows us that not only this has happened, but will also continue to happen anytime a Wahhabi decides to have their way.

• Chapter 63 Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab uses the passages from An-Nahl to suggest that Muslims have broke their covenant with Allāh and according to Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab it is permissible to fight and kill them “as they disbelieve in Allāh” see point no. 4 in chapter 63 p. 505 of Fath ul-Majeed

• Chapter 15 argues that the Prophet is incapable of helping from beyond the grave. The Khawaarij misuse ayah 23 from Surah as-Saba [22] to argue that Allah has denied the Prophet the ability to hear. Usul ut-Tafseer shows us this ayah was revealed about the Kuffar. How can anybody use an ayah that was revealed about the kuffar and then apply it to the best of creation? Only the Khawaarij are known for such ayah misinterpretation! This is their corrupt understanding, as Wahhabi creed teaches “Because they are dead and are unaware”. See Fath ul-Majeed, p. 177, Abdur Rahmaan follows his grandfather in the corrupt opinion that the dead cannot hear when he said:“This is true regarding the living man, who can do and observe things. However, dead people cannot sense those who invoke them and also cannot bring any benefit or harm…” p. 405 chapter 42. Secondly, Tareekh [Islamic history] has shown us again and again how the Prophet has heard and came to help those who have asked for his help, even though he is in the baarzakh.

• Chapter 19 argues the false analogy of worshipping the Prophet as the Christians did with Jesus, see Fath ul-Majeed, p. 215; in Chapter 66 Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab suggests that it is shirk to call upon the Prophet with the title master, and they also argue that milaad un nabi is shirk pgs. 518-519

• Chapter 22 argues that you cannot face the grave whilst doing any form of du’a, and that you cannot make intention to visit the Prophet, but to only visit the three holy masaajid. See Fath ul-Majeed, p. 237

• loud dhickr is considered as heresy pg. 45

• Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab implies that the Prophet and the Sahaabah taught shirk by teaching people to perform ruqyah and ta’weez, see chapter 3, Kitaab ut-Tawheed, point no. 5. And chapter 7, point no. 2. And point no. 7. This is one of the many reasons why “Kitaab ut-Tawheed” should really be called “Kitaab ush-Shirk”. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s grandson also implies that whosoever uses ta’weez is a complete mushrik. See Fath ul-Majeed, p. 53

• In Chapter 44 Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab implies that a Jew corrected the Prophet in his knowledge of tawheed by brandishing a hadeeth in which a Jew came to the Prophet and accused him of doing shirk. Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, instead of refuting this Jew he takes the position of this Jew against the Prophet by brandishing the happening and making his desired points from it Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab wrote concerning this point “The Jews knew what shirk ul-asgahr is” Thus by implying that the Jews were correct in saying that the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam was upon shirk . The shirk the Prophet was accused of was swearing by the Ka’bah. Abdur Rahmaan further confirms this when he says: “This proves that swearing by the Ka’bah is shirk, and the Prophet did not reject the statement of the Jew who said to him ‘verily you commit shirk”see Fath ul-Majeed pgs 409-412

• In Chapter 50 p. 435 onwards Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab levels the accusation of shirk against Adam by using a fabricated hadeeth.

• Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab denies 800 years of authentic scholarship see Fath ul-Majeed, p. 357 however his very own grandsons correct his notion on p. 359 and correct the import of the given hadeeth

• Chapter 67 Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab certainly promoted the anthropomorphic creed, point no. five he suggests that Allah has two hands, left and right. See Fath ul-Majeed p. 523. Other Wahhabi publications argue that Allah has two right hands.

I thought I would share these valuable few pages from a translation of Ibn Katheers famous book on Tareekh al-Bidiayah wan-Nihayah. [The book of the End, Dar usSalam publishers]. Why I have chosen to share these pages is that they refute the Wahhabiyyah at a number of points, I will leave that for the people to reflect upon. Plus I would like you to comment and share your thoughts.

Knowledge Will Be Raised With The Death Of The Scholars

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr [may Allah be well pleased with him] related that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Verily, Allah does not seize knowledge by force, taking it forcefully from the people; instead, He takes away knowledge by the death of the scholars, until their remains no scholar. The people will take ignorant leaders [such as the Saudis and deviant Wahhabis with their 2 second fatawaa factories] , who will be asked, and who will rule without knowledge. They are misguided and they will misguide
others.” Saheeh al-Bukhaari

The Prophetﷺ informed Us That A Group From This Nation Will Remain Upon The Truth Until The Day Of Judgment

In another Hadeeth, the Prophet ﷺ said:

“From my Nation there shall continue to remain a group that is victorious upon the truth; they will not be harmed by those who forsake them or by those who oppose them. (This will continue) until Allah’s Matter arrives (this is referring to when the Hour is near at hand, when Allah will take the life of every male and female believer), when they will still be upon that state.”

[Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab cannot come and claim that Islam has been lost for so many hundreds of years].

A Narration Which Indicates That Every 100 Years, Will Send For This Nation He (Or Those) Who Will Revive The Affairs Of The Religion

Abu Hurairah related that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Indeed, at the beginning of every 100 years, Allah will send for this nation he (or those) who will revive for it the matter of its religion.” (Abu Daawood)

[read here for the reviver challenge]

Abu Daawood was the only one to relate this narration.

Every group says that their Imam is being referred to in this Hadeeth. Yet it appears, and Allah knows best, that it is comprehensive of a group of scholars from every group and from every branch of knowledge — such as Tafseer, Hadeeth, Figh, Arabic Grammar, the Arabic language in general, and other branches as well. And Allah knows best.

As for the Hadeeth of ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr:

“Verily, Allah does not seize knowledge by force, taking it forcefully from the people; rather, He takes away knowledge by the death of the scholars,” its manifest meaning is that knowledge is not taken from the breasts of men after Allah ie has endowed them with it.

Some Of The Signs Of The Hour The Prophet Mentioned

Qataadah reported that Anas ibn Maalik said:

“Shall I not relate to you a Hadeeth I heard from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ a which none will relate to you after me? I heard him say that, ‘from the signs of the Hour is the raising (or taking) of knowledge; ignorance will spread, fornication will become rampant, alcohol will be imbibed, men will perish, and women will remain, until there remains one male guardian for every 50 women.— (Ibn Maajah)

Knowledge Will Be Raised (Or Taken Away) From People At The End Of Time

‘Abdullah related that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Just before the Hour there will be days when knowledge will be raised, when ignorance will descend, and when there will be much killing.” (Ibn Maajah)

Hudhaifah ibn Al-Yamaan related that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Islam will perish (i.e., knowledge will perish and its traces will be effaced) like the embroideries of a garment perish, until (the time) when fasting, prayer, worship, and charity will not be known; when in one night forgetfulness will pass over the Book (the Qur’an) and not a single Verse from it will remain on the earth. A group of people will remain — the aged man and woman — who will say,’We were around when our father was upon this word: Laailaha illallaah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), but they will not know what is prayer, fasting, worship, or charity.”  Hudhaifah asked “What will ‘Laailaha illallaah‘ benefit them when they do not know what is prayer, worship, and charity?” Hudhaifah turned away from him, but he repeated the question three times, and all the while Hudhaifah turned away from him. When Silah asked for the third time, Hudhaifah approached him and said, “0 Silah, it will save them from the Hellfire.” And he repeated that statement three times. (Ibn Maajah)

This proves that knowledge will be taken from the people near the end of this world, a time when the forgetfulness of the Qur’an will pervade the earth — in the Masaahif and in the breasts of men. And people will remain without knowledge. The aged man and woman will say that they were around when people would say: ‘Laailaha illallaah,’ and they will say it seeking closeness to Allah by it.

It will benefit them even though they do not have  any good deeds or beneficial knowledge. Perhaps the meaning of “it will save them from the Hellfire” is that their saying the phrase of Tawheed
will save them from entering the Hellfire altogether; in that case, the only obligation upon them is to say it, since they are not required to do deeds. And Allah knows best. But perhaps Hudhaifah’s statement means that they are saved from the Fire after first having to enter it; so the implications of this Hadeeth may be the intended meaning of the following Qudsee Hadeeth:

“By My Greatness and Exaltedness, I will remove from the Hellfire whoever says on any day from time: Laailaha illallaah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah).’

But still, this last Hadeeth might be referring to another group of people. We will study this in more detail when discussing the levels of intercession. What is important to note here is that knowledge will be raised at the end of time and ignorance will become rampant. In the aforesaid Hadeeth we are told that ignorance will descend, which means that people will be inspired by it, and that is from forsakenness, which we seek refuge from Allah. The said state of affairs will continue as people increase in ignorance and misguidance, until life on this world ends. This we are informed of in the Hadeeth of the Prophet ﷺ

“The Hour will not arrive upon anyone who says, ‘Allah, Allah,’ and it will not arrive except upon the most evil of people.”

The first hadeeth is the following hadeeth of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam in which he said:

“The best of generations is my generation, then the one after that, then the one after that. After them will appear untrustworthy people” Saheeh al-Bukhaari, The book of the Merits of the companions of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, Volume 5, hadeeth no. 2 and 3, also of simular import in Saheeh al-Bukhari, The Book of Witnesses, Volume 3, Number 820; Volume 8, The Book of ar-Riqaaq, Number 437 and more.

We know from this that the best of generations in knowledge of Sunnah are the Prophet’s companions, those that followed the companions and then those that followed the students of the companions. In otherwords the first three generations which ended at 400AH. 400 years after the Hijrah the era of the Salaf had finished and the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wassalam warned that from this period would arrise scholars that lie. Untrustworthy people, but before we think we cannot trust anybody, read the next hadeeth:

The holy Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam said “This knowledge will be carried by the trustworthy ones of every generation – they will expel from it the alterations made by those going beyond bounds, the false claims of the liars, and the false interpretations of the ignorant” Mishkaat ul-Masaabeeh, hadeeth no. 248 and classified as authentic

The Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wassallam is telling us that there will be trustworthy scholars that confirm the Sunnah and refute the people of bid’ah, likewise read the next hadeeth:

The Holy Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam said “At the head of every one hundred years, Allah will send to this nation one who will reviver for it its Religion. ” Sunan Abu Dawuud, Kitaab ul-Malaaham, hadeeth no. 4291 and even the Wahhabi scholar Albaani has classified this hadeeth as Saheeh in his Silsilah as-Saheehah 2/148, hadeeth no. 599.

The import of this hadeeth is crucial to understand, as the word in Arabic for reviver is mujaddid, meaning somebody who renews the religion by enjoining the Sunnah and forbidding the bid’ah. Also notice how the Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wasallam said that Allah would send a mujaddid every hundred years!

This has to mean that any reviver that comes must affirm the message of the reviviers that have gone before. This means that they would have enjoined the Sunnah and refuted the innovations of each age. Here lays the challenge to the very claim of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab being a reviver, because for him to be a reviver, the Wahabis have to present a reviver from each century that came with the very same message as Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, and what was the message of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab?

1. He claimed that the mushrikeen of Makkah were upon tawheed ur-Rabubiyyah and that their tawheed would have been perfect had they of not called upon others besides Allah.
2. He also taught that the Muslims have declined from the 4th century onwards and fell into idolatry and that idoltry was rapamt in Makkah and Madinah
3. He also taught that the Muslims of his age were in the depth of kufr and shirk even more than that of the Musrikeen of Makkah
4. He taught that it is permissable to spill their blood and loot their property and that their testimony of faith [recitation of the kalimah] was invalid
5. He taught that the four madh-habs were shirk as the Muslims were worshipping the Imaams as the Jews and the Christians worshipped their priests and Rabbis
6. He taught that the annual celebration of Milaad un-Nabi was shirk because the people who do so were raising the Prophet to the level of god-hood as the Christians did with Jesus

The problems that the Wahhabiyyah have, is producing such revivers of each century who came foward and preached the same message of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.

Wahhabis cannot ever produce any revivers of each century who said the same things as Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and ultimately their claim of Islamic purity falls to the ground.

Thus, we can then safely conclude that it is Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab is an innovator and that he bought something new that was unknown to the previous revivers. This is another valid reason why I am not a Wahhabi!

ZIA-UN-NABI - Life of Prophet Muhammad, Peace & Blessings upon him

Hardback – 4 VOLUME SET  Total 1728 pages

By Ziya al-Ummah; Justice Pir Muhammad Karam Shah al-Azharirahmatullahi ‘alayhi

Translated into English by : Muhammad Qayyum Awan
This book is the historic work of the late Shaykh Muhammad Karam Shah al-Azhari, rahmatullahi ‘alayh, a renowned Islamic scholar and Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

These 4 volumes of major historical research, are a piece of literature and manifestation of love and reverence the author had in his heart for the Beloved Prophet Muhammad, May Allah bless him and grant him peace.

  Zia-un-Nabi - Light of the ProphetMuhammad,May Allah Bless him
& Grant him Peace.

”The special feature of this biography of the Beloved Prophet, May Allah
bless him and grant him peace, is that the author has gathered, after
sifting through all the original sources of Islamic history, the facts that
reflect real and the most enchanting picture of the Noble Prophet, May   Allah bless him and grant him peace,  in all aspects of his life. Thus he
succeeds in proving that the Beloved Prophet, May Allah bless him and   grant him peace, was the deliverer of humanity. He, with his cogent   reasoning and solid arguments, washes away dusts of suspicion and   shadows of doubt the western scholars, by their prejudice, vanity and   so-called impartiality, cast over the matchless personality of the Beloved   Prophet of God.” —Muhammad Qayyum Awan

Pir Muhammad Karam Shah [d.1418] was a famous saint of the Chishtiyya order, a learned theologian, a commentator of the Noble Qur’an, a biographer of the Beloved Prophet, May Allah bless him and grant him peace, a jurist, an educationist and Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He belonged to such ulama and ‘saints’ who worked for the independence of Pakistan. His teacher ofhadith was (Sadr al-Afaazil) Mawlana Shaykh Naeem al-Din Muradabadi and his Murshid; Shaykh al Islam, Khawaja Qamar-ud-Din Sialvi, May Allah be pleased with them, were supporters of the Pakistan movement.

Vol [1] : 375 pages    |    Vol [2] : 408 pages    |    Vol [3] : 405 pages   |      Vol [4] – 540 pages

Salamun ‘alaykum

Here is an issue that the enemies of Islam fish out the toilet every now and again to cast doubts into the hearts of the believers and potential Muslims to be. This is not a new claim that originated with Salmun Rushdie. No, in fact the enemy of Islam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab also used the same arguement in his Mukhtasar Seerat ur-Rasulillahi. So it is nothing new. However, by the grace of Allah this argument has been totally demolished, but before we get into that I would like to provoke some thought about preservation of history.

Robin Hood is a world famous character. Loved and treasured. We have seen many films and cartoons made about him, yet when we study Robin Hood as an historical figure, we find discrepancies in the historical accounts. Even some historians considered him a highway robber, a cut throat thieve. However, the historical works when all laid out and placed under the microscope of examination all fail the test of authenticity and have no transmission to where such and such historical accounts can be attributed. In fact, we will find that the mystery figure of Robin Hood to be nothing more than a myth, and cannot be proven by fact.

We cannot say this about Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wassallam, the one who said: “The best of generations is my generation, then the one after that, then the one after that. After them will appear untrustworthy people” Saheeh al-Bukhaari, The book of the Merits of the companions of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, Volume 5, hadeeth no. 2 and 3, also of simular import in Saheeh al-Bukhari, The Book of Witnesses, Volume 3, Number 820; Volume 8, The Book of ar-Riqaaq, Number 437 and more.

The Holy Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam also said: “At the head of every one hundred years, Allah will send to this nation one who will revive for it its Religion. Mishkaat ul-Masaabeeh, hadeeth no.  248 and classified as authentic

He also said: “This knowledge will be carried by the trustworthy ones of every generation – they will expel from it the alterations made by those going beyond bounds, the false claims of the liars, and the false interpretations of the ignorant” Sunan Abu Dawuud, Kitaab ul-Malaaham, hadeeth no. 4291 and even the Wahhabi scholar Albaani has classified this hadeeth as Saheeh in his Silsilah as-Saheehah 2/148, hadeeth no. 599

We see from the three above Ahaadeeth that the knowledge’s of Islam, including biography and history, would be preserved and carried forth by the trustworthy scholars, but yet the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam also warned us that there would also be untrustworthy people.

But despair not, Allah has preserved this deen through trustworthy scholars and isnaad in which ‘Abdullah Ibn Mubarrak said:

“The Religion is isnaad [authentic unbroken transmission], and if it was not for isnaad, people can say whatever they wish [about this deen]”. 

Therefore we should only take reports about our religion from the righteous known revivors of each century who have had the knowledge passed down and preserved through them.

No historian can ever boast a greater preservation than the knowledge’s that the Muslims scholars have compiled. Whereas they cannot proof if Robin Hood existed, we can proof that the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, his companions and all the Islamic scholars [including Ibn Qudaamah al Maqdasi who was from the same years as Robin hood is said to have lived] existed. This is a miracle of the Prophet’s words “”This knowledge will be carried by the trustworthy ones of every generation”

And the words of the Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wasallam indeed ring true when he said “they will expel from it the alterations made by those going beyond bounds, the false claims of the liars, and the false interpretations of the ignorant” 

Well, here he is, a 5th/6th century theologian, the revivor of the deen and accepted authority of his time. His name is Qadi Iyad Ibn Musa al Yahsubi [544 AH/ 1149CE]. He refuted this nonesensical claim of the Satanic verses hundreds of years ago. He was indeed, according to the Prophets words, one who expelled the alterations, refuted the false claims of the liars, and corrected the false interpretations, and this can be seen on in his following discourse on the alleged Satanic verses. Enjoy….

———————————–

ln this section we will deal with certain questions posed by calumniators.

One of them is what is related about the Prophet’s recitation of the sura enti­tled “The Star” (53). It is said that he recited, “Have you seen al-Lat and al- ‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?” (53:19)

and then added, “Those are the high-soaring cranes whose intercession is hoped for.” Transmitted by Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir and Abu Hatim with a broken isnad from Sa’id ibn Jubayr.

When the Prophet finished the sura, he prostrated, and the Muslims prostrated and so did the unbelievers since they had heard him praise their gods.

One of the transmissions says that Shaytan cast it on the Prophet’s tongue while he was hoping for something to be sent down on him to bring his people nearer.

Another version says he was hoping that nothing would be sent down on him which would alienate them.

This story goes on to say that Jibril then came to him and the Prophet recit­ed the sura to him. When he reached these words, Jibril said to him, “I did not bring you these.”

The Prophet was distressed because of this and Allah sent down the following ayat to console him,

“We did not send any Messenger or Prophet before you, but that Shaytan cast into his recitation when he was reciting but Allah abrogates what Shaytan casts and then Allah confirms His signs. Allah is Knowing, Wise,” (22:52)

and

“They very nearly deceived you away from what We revealed to you, that you might forge lies other than it against Us, and then they would have taken you as a friend.” (17:73)

Know that we have two approaches for discussing the problems posed by this hadith. One approach considers its root to be weak and the other considers it sound.

As for the first approach, it is enough for you to know that this hadith is not related by any of the people of sound hadith, i.e. the authors of the Six Books, nor does anyone reliable relate it with a sound direct isnad.

It is only commentators and historians who are fasci­nated by strange things, be they sound or faulty, that are fond of this kind of thing. Qadi Bakr ibn al-’Ala’ al-Maliki spoke the truth when he said that people were put to the test by some sectarians and commentators and the heretics con­tinued to adhere to the story in spite of the weakness of its transmission, the disarray of the various versions of it, the gap in its isnad and the discrepancy in its words.

One variant says that it took place during the prayer while another says that it was sent down on him while he was summoning the people. Another says that he said it happened while he was sleepy and yet another says that his self spoke to him and made him forgetful.

Another variant says that Shaytan said it on his tongue and when the Prophet recited it to Jibril, he said, “This is not how I recited it to you.” Another says that Shaytan told them that the Prophet had recited it and when the Prophet heard that, he said, “By Allah, it was not sent down like that.”

None of the commentators who relate this story, Like Ibn Jarir, Abu Hatim and Ibn al-Mundhir, nor the Followers, Such as az-Zuhri and Qatada, gave it an isnad or traced it back to one of the Companions. Most of its paths of trans­mission are weak.

The marfu’ hadith containing it from Shu’ba from Abu Bishr from Sa’id ibn Jubayr from Ibn ‘Abbas, says, “I imagine (showing the doubtful­ness of it) that the Prophet was in Makka.”

Abu Bakr al-Bazzar says that this hadith is not known with a direct con- nected isnad except from Shu’ba and he was unsure about it.[ There is a lengthy discussion on the weakness of its isnad which is omitted.]

As for the implications, it has already been clearly shown, proof has been established and the community is in agreement that the Prophet was protected and free from things like this, both from any desire for something like this to be revealed to him, in which there is praise for other gods than Allah – which is disbelief – and also from Shaytan being able to overcome him and make the Qur’an obscure to him in such a way as to make him put in it what is not actu­ally part of it.

It is not conceivable that the Prophet could believe that some­thing which was not part of the Qur’an was part of it so that Jibril would have to inform him of it. All of this is impossible for the Prophet. It is impossible for the Prophet to have said this from himself intentionally. That would amount to either disbelief or forgetfulness and he is protected from both these things.

It has been confirmed both by proofs and by consensus that the Prophet is protected from any disbelief coming into his heart or onto his tongue, either intentionally or through forgetfulness, or that what the Angel cast into him should resemble anything that Shaytan can cast, or that Shaytan should have a way to get to him, or for him to forge lies against Allah intentionally, or through forgetfulness regarding something that had not been revealed to him.

Allah says,

“Had he invented any sayings against us, We would have seized him by the right hand…”(69:44-45)

and He says,

“Then We would have made you taste the double of life and the double of death. Then you would not have found any helper against Us.” (17:75)

The second point to be made is the general impossibility of this story. If these words had been as they are related, it would have been incongruous, con­tradictory, mixing praise and censure, and feeble. That would not have been hidden from the Prophet and the Muslims and leaders of the idol-worshippers who were with him. It is not concealed from the most insignificant person who reflects on it, so how could it have been hidden from people who had great knowledge and were thoroughly versed in the science of eloquent, sound Arabic?

The third point is that it is known that the habit of the hypocrites and the idolworshippers, those who were weak of heart and the ignorant Muslims was to bridle at the first opportunity. His enemies would use the slightest excuse to cause confusion about the Prophet and abuse the Muslims. They gloated over them time after time. Those with a sickness in their hearts who had professed Islam abandoned it at the least doubt.

However, in spite of this, no one related anything about this story other than the weak version that has already been mentioned. If the story had actually been true, Quraysh would definitely have used it to attack the Muslims, and the Jews would have used it as a proof against the Muslims as in the haughtiness they used regarding the relation of the Night Journey which led to the apostasy of some of the Muslims who were weak. The same thing also happened in relation to the circumstances of the Treaty of Hudaybiyya. [Some people were upset by this treaty because they thought it put the Muslims in a weak position.]

There would have been no temptation or trial greater than this affliction if it had really occurred. There would have been nothing which the enemy would have used to provoke dissension more than such an event if it had been possi­ble to do so, but not a single word of it is related, neither from the recalcitrant nor from any Muslim.

This shows that the whole story is false and not to be accepted, and there is no doubt that one of theshaytans of men or jinn foisted this hadith onto one of the heedless people of hadith in order to cause confusion among weak Muslims.

The fourth point is that the people who transmitted this story maintained that Allah’s words,

“They very nearly beguiled you away from what We revealed to you, that you might forge lies other than it against Us, and then they would have taken you as a friend,” (17:73)

were sent down about it. These two ayats in fact refute the tradition they have related because Allah says that they only very nearly beguiled to make him forget. If it had not been that He had majde him firm, he would have relied on them.

The contents of this ayat and what is understood from it is that Allah pro­tected him from forging a lie and made him firm so that he did not rely on them at all, let alone a lot. They relate in their weak traditions that, in addition to the reliance and the forging, the Prophet added praise of their gods and that he said, “I have forged against Allah and said what He did not say.”

This is contrary to what is to be understood from the ayat and would make the hadith weak, even if it had been sound. This is similar to what He says in another ayat,

 “Had it not been for the bounty of Allah upon you and His mercy, a group of them wanted to mislead you but they only mislead themselves and they do not harm you at all.” (4:113)

It is related from Ibn ‘Abbas, “All the things about which the Qur’an says ‘almost’ or ‘nearly’ did not occur.”

Allah says,

“The radiance of His lightning nearly snatches away the sight.” (24:43) It does not in fact do so. When “He nearly hid it,” He did not do so.

Qadi al-Qushayri said that when the Prophet passed by their gods, Quraysh and Thaqif tried to make him look at them and promised him that they would believe in him if he did. He did not and would not do it. Ibn al-Anbari said that the Messenger did not go near them nor rely on them. Other tafsirs on the meaning of this ayat have mentioned what we have mentioned regarding what Allah said about His Messenger being protected which shows that this matter is without basis.

All that remains to be learned from the ayat is that Allah strengthened His Messenger by protecting him and making him firm regarding what the unbe­lievers were about to do when they wanted to beguile him. What is meant by that is that the Prophet was protected and free from it. This is what should be understood from the ayat.

The second approach is based on considering the hadith to be sound. In which case, the Imams of the Muslims have different responses to that, of vary­ing strengths.

One from Qatada and Muqatal is that the Prophet was dozing when reciting this sura and these words flowed on his tongue as if he were asleep. This would not be not valid for the Prophet in any of his states nor would Allah have creat­ed that on his tongue nor could Shaytan overcome him either while asleep or awake because the Prophet was completely protected.

Al-Kalbi said that the Prophet was speaking to himself when Shaytan said that on his tongue. In Ibn Shihab’s version from Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abdu’r-Rahman, he said that he forgot and when told about it said that it was from Shaytan. All of these things are impossible for the Prophet in any state. Shaytan has no power to make him say things.

It is said that perhaps the Prophet said it, while he was reciting, by way of rebuke for the unbelievers in the same way that Ibrahim said, ”This is my Lord,” (6:76) according to one of the interpretations and as Ibrahim also said, “Rather the greatest of them did this.” (21:63) After a silence and then a clari­fication of the words, he returned to his recitation. This is possible if the sepa­ration was clear and the context indicated what was meant. In this case what he said was not part of what is recited. This is one of the things that Qadi Abu Bakr has mentioned. There is no argument against this interpretation in what is related about him being in the prayer. It is not impossible that the words occurred before the prayer.

That which appears to be true in Qadi Abu Bakr’s opinion, and that of oth­ers among precise people who hold the same opinion, regarding the interpreta­tion of this hadith, if indeed it is sound, is that the Prophet was reciting the Qur’an slowly as his Lord had commanded him to, making the ayats distinct and precise in his recitation as has been reliably related about his practice. It was possible that Shaytan was lurking nearby and during the silence slipped in different words which were attuned to the voice of the Prophet, so that the unbelievers present thought that the Prophet had said them and so publicised them. As far as the Muslim is concerned, this does not impair the preservation of the sura,which occurred before that incident, as Allah revealed. They were certain about the Prophet’s censure of idols.

Musa ibn ‘Uqba related something similar in his book The Raids, saying that the Muslims did not hear these words. Shaytan cast them into the ears of the idol-worshippers and into their hearts. What is related about the Prophet’s sor­row was because of the publicity given to the incident and the uncertainty which made it a cause for trial.

Allah says, “We did not send any Messenger or Prophet before but that Shaytan cast into his fancy when he was fancying…” (22:52) “Fancying” here means recitation. Allah also says, “They only know fancies of the Book,” (2:78) i.e. recitation. He further says, “Allah will abrogate what Shaytan cast,” (22:52) meaning, take it away and remove all doubt concerning it and make the ayat clear.

It has been said that the ayat means that a state of forgetfulness came over the Prophet when he was reciting and then he became conscious of it and returned from it. This is roughly what al-Kalbi was indicating about the ayat, when he said that he was speaking to himself, taking “when he was fancying” to mean “was speaking to himself.” Something similar to this is related in the transmission of Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abdu’r-Rahman.

This forgetfulness in the recitation is valid only if it in no way alters the meaning, changes the phrases or adds something that is not part of the Qur’an. It might constitute omitting an ayat or a word of it. However, the Prophet never remained in this state of forgetfulness. He was conscious of it and reminded of it immediately as we will mention when discussing what sorts of forgetfulness are permitted for him and what are not.

Part of what is known regarding the interpretation of this incident is that Mujahid related this story of the “high-soaring cranes.” If we consider the story to be valid, then we must say that it is not impossible that this was part of the Qur’an. According to this version, what is meant by the high-soaring cranes and their intercession being hoped for is that they are angels. Al-Kalbi says that they are angels. The unbelievers used to believe that the idols and the angels were the daughters of Allah. This is refuted in this sura by His words, “What! Have you males and He females?” (53:21)

By this Allah denies their assertion. It is correct to hope for intercession from the angels. When the idol- worshippers interpreted it as referring to their gods, Shaytan made it ambigu­ous to them, decked it out to them in their hearts and cast that impression into them. Then Allah abrogated what Shaytan cast and made His ayat clear and cancelled the recitation of the two phrases which Shaytan had been able to make unclear, in the same way that many other parts of the Qur’an were abro­gated and their recitation cancelled.

There is a wisdom in Allah’s sending it down and there is a wisdom in its abrogation. ”By it He misguides whomever He wills and guides whomever He wills. He only misguides the iniquitous by it,” (2:26) and ”…so that He may make what Shaytan casts a trial for those in whose hearts there is sick­ness and the hard-hearted. The wrongdoers are in a far schism, and so that those who have been given knowledge know that it is the Truth from your Lord so they believe in Him and their hearts are humble to Him.” (22:53-54)

Another explanation is that when the Prophet recited this sura and reached the mention of al-Lat, al-’Uzza and Manat, the third, the other, the unbelievers feared he would bring something that censured them and they preceded him in praising them with these words. They then mixed them in with the recita­tion of the Prophet and publicised it as was their custom.

They said, “Do not listen to this Qur’an and talk about it. Perhaps you will be overcome.” (41:267) This action was ascribed to Shaytan since he pro­voked them to do it. They announced the interpolated passage and publicised it saying that the Prophet had said it. He was distressed about it because they had lied and they had forged lies against him. Allah consoled him when He said, “We did not send before you…” (22:52) He made clear for the people the truth from the false and the Qur’an was preserved and its ayats were made exact. He repudiated what the enemy had made obscure and Allah ensured this by His words, “We sent down the remembrance and We preserve it.” (15:9)

Taken from Qadi Iyad’s Ash-Shifaa, translated by Aisha Bewly and titled Muhammad, Messenger of Allah Sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, pgs 300-306 in the chapter of the Protection of the Prophets

Wahhabis teach there are three types of tawheed. After a deep study of their definition of three tawheeds, you will no doubt conclude that their creed teaches that the mushrikeen are upon tawheed, and it is o.k to believe in the existence of other gods just as long as you single out Allah in worship, and furthermore, you are required to believe He has a physical location, body and limbs. This is the very first reason why I am not a Wahhabi.
The call to tawheed was clear and has never required such an explanation. Allah perfected and completed this deen with the very teachings of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam. The three types of tawheed was not taught by the Prophet, the Sahaabah, nor the Tabi’een.
One can quote the Qur’an and Sunnah until in great abundance, but if one cannot prove his creed to be directly from the understanding of the first three generations, then his understanding of the Qur’an and the Sunnah is flawed, and such a person ultimately stands with the false cults that have tried before by proof-texting the Qur’an and Sunnah in a futile attempt to demonstrate “the validity” of their false belief. Any new teaching is indeed an innovation, and innovations as such are in hell.
We look at the evidences upon how they are understood by the first three generations, and we should strictly adhere to the understanding of the first three generations as their understanding is the rightly guided.

If you have not already

then join the group “Why I am not a Wahhabi Salafi”!

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_170242109667309&id=217635088261344&notif_t=group_activity

The focus of this group is help and inform those lost in the wilderness of Wahhab-ism, those who sit on the sidelines unsure, and also to help the Sunnis from their most common attacks.

This group has been set up by more than three ex Wahhabis, who have experienced the dryness of this cult first hand.

This forum is not a forum for mockery and insults. The term Wahhabiyyah or Wahhabi is used for the very same reason the scholars used the term Karaamiyyah.

Although it is derived from one of Allah’s divine names it is permissable in the Shari’ah of the Ahl us-Sunnah to use such a term to describe a person and his following.

For those that disagree have disagreed with Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Imaam Barbahaari, Shaykh ‘Abdul Qaadir al-Jilaani, Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi and many other scholars who used the term Karaamiyyah to refer to those who follow the innovator Muhammad Bin Karaam.

With the very same reason we use the term Wahhabi or Wahhabiyyah for those who follow Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab. It is not intended as a mock or an insult. Wahhabis exist and they are a reality.

We do not hate Wahhabis, all Wahhabis are welcome to discuss with us