Question Maliki Brothers? regarding Maliki Fiqh? [Archive]

Abdullah Abbas

9th September 2008, 12:18 PM

Abdullah Abbas

9th September 2008, 12:19 PM

Asalam 3leikoum wr wb,

Here in the North of Morocco the layman and most 'uulema do qabdh, but I noticed that many Moroccans that come here from the middle and south of Morocco hold their hands on the side.(which brother Adam addressed above).

Fiamanillah

most Malikis in the west leave their hands at their sides aswell i noticed.

Abdullah ibn Adam

9th September 2008, 12:38 PM

i just had a conversation with a maliki brother he said that they have certain ahadith wich they interpetate to proof their point aswell , he gave me this info for their stance :

The real issue is not how they interpret those ahadith (which do not clearly indicate sadl), it is how do they respond to the ahadith that clearly prove it?

Anyone can argue and debate and intepret, but in the end of the day, only one of the two sayings can be right, and that is the one with the stronger, clearer and more authentic evidence.

AbuBakr Jazairi

9th September 2008, 05:03 PM

We are Malikis here in Algeria and the majority now do Qabdh not Sadl, there is no way someone can argue that Imaam Malik Rahimahu ALLAH preferred Sadl , as it's stated in the Muwata'a like:

That he was asked (Rahimahu ALLAH) about the Sadl and he replied stating him as (Makrouh) in the Fardh and (Allowed) in Nafl (so it's like he said the formal state is Qabdh), while it's been confirmed that he (Rahimahu ALLAH) was doing the Qabdh.

the Sada Al-Malikiya who came after him took different opinions like Abi-Alqassim who preferred Sadl and others said that's the Qabdh.

There is a book called (Al-Qawl Al-Fassl Li Ihya'a Sunnat Sadl) I got a copy of it from a bro and I found it full of Fatawas & Hadeeths that I couldn't find an authentic reference to, so I don't categorize it as a Maliki Reference in anyway as they claim.

There is only a little notice, most of Suffis & Toroqis here are performing the Sadl wherever you go, North, South, Est or west, while the majority may be 90% of Straight Sunnis are doing Qabdh even at deepest south where there are plenty of Suffis & Tijanis who forbid the Qabdh by their false extremism.

As a bro said the Qabdh has tens of Ahadeeth Sahiha and it was the known and standard form of Salah at the Companions & Prophet's (Peace be upon him) time, so why to argue about it.

Abdullah Abbas

10th September 2008, 02:01 PM

Abdullah ibn Adam

10th September 2008, 02:19 PM

There a translation of the well-known Maliki Fiqh book "Al-Risalah" by Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani available on the pseudo-sufi website of Aisha Bewley from the so-called "Murabitun" movement. See:
http://bewley.virtualave.net/Risalatitl.html
Although I have huge issues with the so-called "Murabitun" and their scottish "shaykh" Abdul-Qadir, however the translations of various fiqh and hadith books available on Aisha Bewley's website are generally quite good.

Abdullah Abbas

10th September 2008, 09:21 PM

Yousef al Khattab

10th September 2008, 10:18 PM

interesting anyone knows? where i can buy some Maliki books in the english language inside of london , can anyone recommend some titles aswell , BarakAllahu Feek

[CENTER]Why buy? :)

Very Informative Book Based on Maliki Fiq

(Note I Don't agree with The Ashari aqeedah Section nor do I promote it)*

Ibn Ashr's Guiding Helper (http://mac.abc.se/~onesr/d/gh_e.pdf)

__________________________________________________ _______________

The Risala - A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh (http://www.islamicthinkers.com/index/files/books/fiqh/The%20Risala%20-%20A%20Treatise%20on%20Maliki%20Fiqh.pdf)

by Shaikh Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani

Abu Muhammad 'Abdullah, a Maliki faqih known as "Shaykh al-Faqih" and "little
Malik". He was the head of the Maliki school in Qayrawan. He wrote ar-Risala
and an-Nawadir and several other books.

Ash-Shirazi said, "He(al-Qayrawani) was known as 'little Malik'. Abu'l-Hasan al-Qabisi
mentioned him and said that he was a reliable imam in his perception and
transmission. Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali ibn 'Abdullah al-Qattan said, 'I did not imitate Abu
Muhammad ibn Abi Zayd until I saw as-Saba'i imitated him.'"

Abdullah Abbas

10th September 2008, 10:43 PM

[CENTER]Why buy? :)

Very Informative Book Based on Maliki Fiq

(Note I Don't agree with The Ashari aqeedah Section nor do I promote it)*

Ibn Ashr's Guiding Helper (http://mac.abc.se/~onesr/d/gh_e.pdf)

__________________________________________________ _______________

The Risala - A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh (http://www.islamicthinkers.com/index/files/books/fiqh/The%20Risala%20-%20A%20Treatise%20on%20Maliki%20Fiqh.pdf)

by Shaikh Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani

Abu Muhammad 'Abdullah, a Maliki faqih known as "Shaykh al-Faqih" and "little
Malik". He was the head of the Maliki school in Qayrawan. He wrote ar-Risala
and an-Nawadir and several other books.

Ash-Shirazi said, "He(al-Qayrawani) was known as 'little Malik'. Abu'l-Hasan al-Qabisi
mentioned him and said that he was a reliable imam in his perception and
transmission. Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali ibn 'Abdullah al-Qattan said, 'I did not imitate Abu
Muhammad ibn Abi Zayd until I saw as-Saba'i imitated him.'"

thanks for the ebooks bro , am gonna study them , barakAllahu feek ,

Abdullah ibn Adam

11th September 2008, 09:56 AM

as sufi and the al murabitun are they normal sufis or the shirki type of dancers with shirk kufr beliefs

They're not as bad as the haqqani naqshabandis, however they do like to sing and dance and jump up and down. And they loooove Ibn 'Arabi, and Aisha Bewley has even translated his infamous "Fusus al-Hikam" in which he says that Fir'awn was not a kafir and died as a believer. Their good point is that they have some excellent articles about the importance of gold/silver currency, zakah, and some political issues.

Abdullah Abbas

11th September 2008, 11:41 AM

They're not as bad as the haqqani naqshabandis, however they do like to sing and dance and jump up and down. And they loooove Ibn 'Arabi, and Aisha Bewley has even translated his infamous "Fusus al-Hikam" in which he says that Fir'awn was not a kafir and died as a believer. Their good point is that they have some excellent articles about the importance of gold/silver currency, zakah, and some political issues.

i noticed a few things after reading Abdal Qadir as Sufis books:
1.mention of sufism
2.always only mentioning the Maliki madhhab (i get a sense of Madhhab Nationalism in it aswell when i read it)
3.he wants the Maliki madhhab to dominate and to unite the ummah upon this madhhab etc etc

him mentioning ibn Arabi and his pupils is like mentioning khomeini ,they make grave aqeedah errors by honoring ibn arabi the heretic

Abdullah ibn Adam

11th September 2008, 12:24 PM

i noticed a few things after reading Abdal Qadir as Sufis books:
1.mention of sufism
2.always only mentioning the Maliki madhhab (i get a sense of Madhhab Nationalism in it aswell when i read it)
3.he wants the Maliki madhhab to dominate and to unite the ummah upon this madhhab etc etc

him mentioning ibn Arabi and his pupils is like mentioning khomeini ,they make grave aqeedah errors by honoring ibn arabi the heretic

I would not recommend anyone at all to read AQ as-sufi's books, except for when he talks about the importance of zakah and gold and silver currency ONLY.

This man is a certified ignoramus when it comes to the deen, whose monstrous and shameless mistakes in nearly all of the elementary branches of Islamic knowledge are as clear as the sun at midday. No wonder the vast majority of his followers are new Muslim converts who have little or no real Islamic education.

Abdullah Abbas

11th September 2008, 02:56 PM

I would not recommend anyone at all to read AQ as-sufi's books, except for when he talks about the importance of zakah and gold and silver currency ONLY.

This man is a certified ignoramus when it comes to the deen, whose monstrous and shameless mistakes in nearly all of the elementary branches of Islamic knowledge are as clear as the sun at midday. No wonder the vast majority of his followers are new Muslim converts who have little or no real Islamic education.

true one of his books i read was written in an actor script style of maliki propaganda with all respect for the maliki madhhab , but it was like if a 9 year old child wrote something about his favorite action character for the school journal

the book was called ROOT ISLAMIC EDUCATION
and he was promoting the maliki madhhab a childish and supremacist nationalistic way.

i dont want to backbite or slander him he does a lot of good work aswell i guess but he shouldnt be so extreme in his madhhabism and he is not qualified to write books and give fatawa

Abdullah ibn Adam

12th September 2008, 07:41 AM

I am half-way through compiling a comprehensive list of examples of the compound-ignorance of Abdul-Qadir as-Sufi, in order to expose and refute this charlatan. I started it with the intention of showing it to our brother Suhaib Jobst who it seems has been mislead by him, however brother Suhaib has since disappeared from this forum, so I put it on hold. In sha' Allah after Ramadhan, if I have time, I will continue with it and post it on the forum.

Abdullah Abbas

12th September 2008, 02:56 PM

Husayn ash Shafi'iy

13th September 2008, 01:58 AM

Assalamu Alaykum

Imam Malik preferred Sadl, and to say anything else is proof of total ignorance of the mathab. Yes, there is a narration in Muwatta. But it is also known to anyone with atleast some knowledge of the school that Imam Malik acted upon the amal of Madinah and therefore sometimes left hadiths. Because he rather take what is physically transmitted through tawatur than something ahad. It has been clearly narrated by his students that he preferred sadl.

wassalam
husayn

Abdullah ibn Adam

13th September 2008, 05:28 AM

Imam Malik preferred Sadl, and to say anything else is proof of total ignorance of the mathab.

So why did so many of the great maliki ulama think otherwise?

Yes, there is a narration in Muwatta. But it is also known to anyone with atleast some knowledge of the school that Imam Malik acted upon the amal of Madinah and therefore sometimes left hadiths. Because he rather take what is physically transmitted through tawatur than something ahad. It has been clearly narrated by his students that he preferred sadl.

So what about those of his students from the madaniyyin and others who narration from him his preference of qabdh? Do a bit more research instead of relying on 2nd-rate articles written by the likes of Yasin Dutton and co.

kamals

13th September 2008, 07:11 AM

Many of the prominent maliki scholars did qabdh (right hand over left), it is narrated from Malik himself as well. Today, the "official" Maliki scholars in Morocco agree with this view....

However there is a widespread view common throughout many Maliki lands that sadl (putting the hands by the sides) is sunnah, based on a particular intepretation of some words of Imam Malik narrated in al-Mudawwanah....

Also, the people who argue for sadl refer to the fact that the practice of sadl has been narrated from a group of the Salaf, like al-Hasan al-Basri, Ibn Sirin, and others, so they argue it was the "accepted" practice....

Why put accepted practice in quotes? It is an opinion from the Salaf that should be respected.

I am Maliki, this is my limited understanding of where our madhab stands in the matter, I am not a student of knowledge, nor a scholar, though may Allah make us all from their ranks. For the record I make qabd in my Salat.

Both views are correct in our madhab, the historical emphasis and the jumhur opinion IN the Maliki Madhab favors sadl but even still qabd is also viewed as correct and mustahab even by many Maliki Shuyukh who favor sadl.

The Jumhur opinion of the Ahl ul-Sunnah collectively prefers qabd.

The Jumhur opinion in the Maliki madhab favors Sadl due in part to the authority of the Mudawwana over the Muwatta in the madhab, the opinions that Ibn Qasim (rh) and Sahun (rh) record in the mudawwana ARE the dominant opinions of Imam Malik (rh)

As you note many Maliki fuqaha have favored qabd, but the jumhur opinion is that Sadl is preferred in fard salats, but qabd is acceptable in Nawafil and Sunna salats.

Most Sunni scholars who prefer sadl state that qabd is mustahab and thus one is rewarded for it IF it is not done for support, but rather is done with the intention of a fadhila, and it should be made above the navel, and not below.

The understanding of the Sunnah is different among the Malikis from the rest of the Ahl ul-sunnah. The Malikis derive the Sunnah not only from Ahadith but also the fatawa of the Khulafa Rashidun, as well as other Amirs from the Sahabah like Abdullah Ibn Zubair (ra), and the 'amal of the scholars and people of knowledge in Madina from the first 3 generations. This is a METHODOLOGICAL difference and can not be criticised. These were the people Imam Shafi (rh) took a good deal of his knowledge from, and though later scholars like him differed from this it should still be respected.

The 'amal of Madina was Sadl. Most of the people of knowledge in Madina practiced Sadl.

As it is noted that salat done with sadl is accepted in all four madhahib, though it may be disliked and Allah knows best. A salat is valid among all the ahl ul-sunnah even if done with Sadl, it may or may not be makruh according to a certain faqih, but it is at least valid.

As for the hadiths regarding qabd, this has to be understood but there are differences in the methodology of the malikis and other Sunnis in how rulings are derived, that stem from Imam Malik and other of the Salaf in Madina themselves.

They were well aware of the hadiths regarding qabd, and it is even related in the Muwatta, however when as to imam Malik's statement in the mudawwana that "we don't know of it" regarding qabd in the wajib prayers, he is referring to the normative practice of the folk of knowledge of Madina. Qabd wasn't known to be practiced by them, and Allah knows best, therefore this indicates that the living Sunnah in the city in which the greatest number of the Sahabah of knowledge died (Allah be pleased with them all) was sadl. This is transmitted, as you indicated, regarding other salaf such as Hasan al-Basri.

Also there is the matter of whether a certain sahih hadith is ahad, or mutawatir, or other aspects of its status that STRONGLY affect how the mashaykh use it in deriving a hukm. A continuously practiced established practice transmitted from one of the scholars in Madina from the sahabah (not all of the Sahabah are considered to have been scholars, and not all of then are ahkam taken from) to his students and put into widespread practice is weighed more strongly than a strongly sahih hadith which was not put into practice by the majority of the Sahahab and tabien in Madina.

There is NO bida in this, these men were giants among the Salaf and all of the Ahl ul-Sunnah praise them, if one disagrees with Sadl it is best to stick with what one does agree with (qabd), which HAS been transmitted from the earliest generations and is regarded as normative by the jumhur opinion of the other 3 madhahib. But one must be fair to sadl, far greater men than any alive today practiced it, were convinced it was Sunnah, KNEW the Hadiths about qabd, and still did Sadl because they were convinced it was sunnah.

Abdullah Ibn Zubair during his Caliphate (ra) made sadl, this has been transmitted and he ruled Madina and was among the men of knowledge of Madina.

The end shot is that both Sadl and Qabd are Sunnah, according to some of the greatest men of the Ummah among the Salaf, it is simply not appropriate for it to be a cause of division in today's ummah. The scholars who approved of sadl KNEW the texts favoring qabd, and due to their methodology of deriving ahkam and their textual analysis judged these texts were not to be relied on in this particular matter in spite of their authenticity. If the manhaj that one follows favors qabd then do it, it is Sunnah, if it favors sadl and you are convinced of it, then do it for it is Sunnah and Allah knows best.

And in all of this, Allah and his messenger know best.

Abu_Abdallah

13th September 2008, 09:54 AM

Barakallahu fik brother.

Abdullah ibn Adam

13th September 2008, 10:12 AM

The 'amal of Madina was Sadl. Most of the people of knowledge in Madina practiced Sadl.

It is not as simple as that. The people of al-Madinah differed with each other on many issues. I understand that al-Layth ibn Sa'd brought this up in his famous correspondence with al-Imam Malik.

To claim sadl was the 'amal of ahl al-madinah or most of ahl al-madinah is a claim without much evidence. In fact, one of the arguments brought by those Maliki ulama who favour qabdh is that it was qabdh which was in fact the 'amal of ahl al-madinah, not sadl. Also note that it is the madinan students of Malik, Mutarrif and Ibn Majishun, who narrated from him the view of qabdh being preferable in both fardh and nafl.

Abdullah Ibn Zubair during his Caliphate (ra) made sadl, this has been transmitted and he ruled Madina and was among the men of knowledge of Madina.

It has been transmitted, yes. But it has also been transmitted from his own statement that "from the Sunnah in salat is placing the right hand over the left." So if he did sadl, then the most that can be said is that it was he left something preferable (qabdh), not that he did sadl "because it was the sunnah".

Abdullah Abbas

13th September 2008, 12:55 PM

Why put accepted practice in quotes? It is an opinion from the Salaf that should be respected.

interesting discussion well written stance , i am personally interested in the Maliki Madhhab , can you recommend any good english maliki fiqh manuals , me being a revert from the netherlands its not that easy to find maliki fiqh material , the books bro yusuf's posted look great

Husayn ash Shafi'iy

13th September 2008, 02:49 PM

Abdullah ibn Adam

Certain ulama reached other conclusions (i.e regarded qabdh as favourable).
But this has always been a minority opinion within the mathab, and only recently did it start to spread. I don't see why you go mentioning articles and what not, as you do not have any clue whatsoever about my education in the mathab. The relied-upon opinion is that which is found in Mudawana - sadl. And if you do not like it, then you will have to show us why all the ulama have made such an erroneous judgement. The ulama said it's mubah in ones nawafil, while some said that it's mustahab in the nawafil. But Imam Malik (rahimullah) concidered it makruh to fold arms in the obligatory salaahs.
Anyways, to complain about sadl due to reasons like the Imam being aware of a hadith is only ignorance of the methodology of the Malikiyah.

It is well known that many of the fuqaha of Madinah (and Iraq) practiced sadl. One such giant was Imam Said Ibn al-Musayab, who was a master in both fiqh and hadith. He met many of the Sahaba al-Kiram (may Allah be pleased with them).

And from the decendents of the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon them) those who practiced sadl include: Imam Zayd al-Shahid and his half-brother Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. It's very probable that their father Imam Zayn al-Abidin did it aswell, as they took knowledge from them.
Now Imam Zayn al-Abidin took their knowledge from their father, Sayyiduna al-Husayn. So to say that sadl is a weak practice is a weak statement in itself. Unfortunatly the Malikiyah usually do not use these narrations due to the Nasibi tendencies they would face in doing so.

wassalam
husayn

Abdullah ibn Adam

13th September 2008, 03:47 PM

Now Imam Zayn al-Abidin took their knowledge from their father, Sayyiduna al-Husayn. So to say that sadl is a weak practice is a weak statement in itself. Unfortunatly the Malikiyah usually do not use these narrations due to the Nasibi tendencies they would face in doing so.

"Nasibi tendencies"? You're not a closet shi'i are you?

Abdullah Abbas

13th September 2008, 07:45 PM

Why put accepted practice in quotes? It is an opinion from the Salaf that should be respected.

do you have references that ibn zubayr and members of the ahlul bayt , did Sadl ,?

Abdullah ibn Adam

14th September 2008, 07:51 AM

do you have references that ibn zubayr and members of the ahlul bayt , did Sadl ,?

It is mentioned in many well-known books, I think it is discussed in some detail in Nayl al-Awtar by ash-Shawkani.

Abdullah Abbas

14th September 2008, 01:08 PM

It is mentioned in many well-known books, I think it is discussed in some detail in Nayl al-Awtar by ash-Shawkani.

but are the quotes authentic? if so i think the Malikis have a strong stance , Ahlul Bayt are noble people and extremely knowledgable.

Abdullah ibn Adam

14th September 2008, 01:32 PM

but are the quotes authentic? if so i think the Malikis have a strong stance , Ahlul Bayt are noble people and extremely knowledgable.

Not all of the ahl al-bayt preferred sadl, the same source (Nayl al-Awtar) mentions that others among them preferred qabdh.

Anyway, regarding the authenticity of the quotes, Allahu a'lam, because it's well-known that many of the quotes attributed to the ahl al-bayt are unreliable because they tend to come from shi'i sources.

Abdullah Abbas

14th September 2008, 08:35 PM

Not all of the ahl al-bayt preferred sadl, the same source (Nayl al-Awtar) mentions that others among them preferred qabdh.

Anyway, regarding the authenticity of the quotes, Allahu a'lam, because it's well-known that many of the quotes attributed to the ahl al-bayt are unreliable because they tend to come from shi'i sources.

interesting didnt know that , i dont think sunni scholars would accept shii sources althrough especially not in the past

Abdullah ibn Adam

15th September 2008, 08:48 AM

interesting didnt know that , i dont think sunni scholars would accept shii sources althrough especially not in the past

Nayl al-Awtar is an interesting book in that the author, al-Imam ash-Shawkani, mentions many of the shi'i (mainly zaydi) fiqh positions alongside the sunni ones. This is because ash-Shawkani himself came from a zaydi shi'i background before he converted to ahl as-sunnah.

Abdullah Abbas

15th September 2008, 11:46 AM

Nayl al-Awtar is an interesting book in that the author, al-Imam ash-Shawkani, mentions many of the shi'i (mainly zaydi) fiqh positions alongside the sunni ones. This is because ash-Shawkani himself came from a zaydi shi'i background before he converted to ahl as-sunnah.

as far as i know , Zayidee are our brothers and their Madhhab is valid , they are swimming in shirk like the Rawafidh and dont share aqeedah with them , dr Bilal Philips in his evolution of fiqh writes quite well of them , i dont see a reason why not to accept zayidi sources , after all Imam Zayd was an accepted scholar ,

Abdullah ibn Adam

15th September 2008, 01:22 PM

as far as i know , Zayidee are our brothers and their Madhhab is valid , they are swimming in shirk like the Rawafidh and dont share aqeedah with them , dr Bilal Philips in his evolution of fiqh writes quite well of them , i dont see a reason why not to accept zayidi sources , after all Imam Zayd was an accepted scholar ,

It is true that Imam Zayd was a respected imam etc., and that the Zaydiyyah are closer to ahl as-sunnah than the rafidhah, HOWEVER the zaydi madhhab rulings are based on many weak and untraceable narrations that cannot authentically be traced back to Imam Zayd himself. I think Nuh Keller explained this in some detail somewhere in his book "Reliance of the Traveller".

In this respect the Zaydiyyah are similar to the rafidhah, whose madhhab is falsely claimed to go back to Ja'far as-Sadiq, but Ja'far as-Sadiq is free from their lies upon him.

Abdullah Abbas

15th September 2008, 02:11 PM

It is true that Imam Zayd was a respected imam etc., and that the Zaydiyyah are closer to ahl as-sunnah than the rafidhah, HOWEVER the zaydi madhhab rulings are based on many weak and untraceable narrations that cannot authentically be traced back to Imam Zayd himself. I think Nuh Keller explained this in some detail somewhere in his book "Reliance of the Traveller".

In this respect the Zaydiyyah are similar to the rafidhah, whose madhhab is falsely claimed to go back to Ja'far as-Sadiq, but Ja'far as-Sadiq is free from their lies upon him.

true akhi , did the zayidis btw contribute anything to scholarship in the sense of fiqh works or specialities ,

hearandobey

15th September 2008, 02:25 PM

true akhi , did the zayidis btw contribute anything to scholarship in the sense of fiqh works or specialities ,

there are fiqh encyclopedias that quote their opinions.

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 04:59 AM

As Salaam Alaykum,

However, there is a difference between someone merely doing sadl on one hand, and going to far-fetched and extreme lengths to try to negate all of the ahadith of qabdh - the latter of which has unfortunately been attempted by many muta'assibin of the malikiyyah.

This is merely selective, as you are obviously engaging in your own efforts to weaken the opinion of Sadl. This is the dominant view within our madhhab, our scholars do not negate it and indeed have allowed us to pray with Qabd among other Muslims so as to maintain unity and brotherhood.

Why can't you just accept this is the dominant view among the Malikiyya and we respect each other's opinions on the matter without trying to criticize the other view? There are continued efforts by some Salafis to push Qabd as the only acceptable view, so there are clear extremities here.

I will leave it there without speaking on the issue of Sadl, which has already been covered by brothers kamals and Husayn ash Shafi'iy, masha'Allah.

as sufi and the al murabitun are they normal sufis or the shirki type of dancers with shirk kufr beliefs

I fail to see the connection between Hadra and Shirk. It is upon you to decisively establish the connection before throwing around a word with grave implications. By what stretch of the imagination can Dhikrullah be twisted as "shirk"?! Even if there is absolutely no proof for Hadra - and I consider this point for the sake of argument, thinking rationally - how can it be considered as shirk?

they do like to sing and dance and jump up and down.

Ali ibn Abi Talib (radiallahu anhu) narrated: "I visted the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) with Ja'far [ibn Abi Talib] and Zayd [ibn Haritha]. The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said to Zayd, 'You are my free-man (mawla'i),' whereupon Zayd began to Hajala (hop on one leg) around the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) then said to Ja'far: 'You resemble me in my physical form and character' (Khalqi wa Khuluqi), whereupon Ja'far began to do the same behind Zyad. The Nabi (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) then said to me, 'You are a part of me and I am a part of you' (anta mini wa ana mink), whereupon I began to do the same behind Ja'far."

- (Imam Ahmad, Musnad, 1/537, no. 857; Al-Bazzar, Musnad; Imam al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Kubra, 8/6, nos. 15548, 20816; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf; and Ibn Sa'ad, Tabaqat, 4/22. It has been authenticated by Shaykh Ahmad Shakir in his checking of Musnad Imam Ahmad, and also by Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Majma' az-Zawa'id, 5/157).

Anas ibn Malik (radiallahu anhu) narrated that some Abbysinians danced in front of the Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) while saying 'Muhammad is a Righteous Slave' (in Ethiopian), upon which he asked, 'What are they saying?' And they responded in Arabic, 'Muhammadun 'Abdun Salihun'." (Imam Ahmad, Musnad. It was authenticated by Shaykh Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut in his ta'liq of the Musnad).

A'isha (radiallahu anha) narrated that the Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) put her cheek on his shoulder while looking at the Abbysinians dance." (Sahih Muslim, no. 1483; and Imam Ahmad, Musnad, no. 23709).

In both instances, our Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) did not criticize their action, rather he would not have been silent about something which was either Haram or even Makruh. And we know from the sciences of Hadith about the acceptance and approval (Iqraar) of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), which included his silence.

How can one possibly condemn making dhikr, whereas we have been commanded by Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) to do so either standing, sitting or laying on our sides (Qur'an, 3:191)? It is clear that in each of these instances, their dancing (raqs) was based upon their profound spiritual ecstasy, yet some contemporary groups seem to know better than the Sahaba. Allahu musta'an.

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 05:22 AM

As Salaam Alaykum,

Aisha Bewley has even translated his infamous "Fusus al-Hikam" in which he says that Fir'awn was not a kafir and died as a believer.

Translating a book is not tantamount to an endorsement of everything contained therein, especially when it is a commentary. In all actuality, many statements have been falsely attributed to Ibn Arabi, a fact which we know because these assertions contradict those statements that have been authentically transmitted from him.

Sister Aisha Bewley is known as a leading translator of classical Islamic works into English. She has done nothing different than what many scholars from the past have done when it comes to Fusus al-Hikam, which is to reject those statements which clearly go against our 'aqida and which were likely attributed falsely to Ibn Arabi but nonetheless write commentaries on the work.

always only mentioning the Maliki madhhab

Shaykh Abdalqadir studied among Maliki fuqaha in Morocco and Libya, so it is only natural he would lean towards that madhhab. However, the reason is deeper in that the shaykh regards the practice of the people of Madina ('Amal Ahl al-Madina) as implementing Islam in its primal form, which is the Sunna of the early generations of Muslims going back to the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) via the Sahaba and Khulafa ar-Rashidun.

He has not done anything other than what the Hanbali scholar Ibn Taymiyya (rahimahullah) has done, which is to testify to the superiority of the practice of Madina over those of Kufa. Shaykh Abdalqadir believes that the other madhahib tended to become codified, which obviously has no problems except that it merely benefited his own da'wa better to provide that direct link to the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), through the Sunna of Madina.

he wants the Maliki madhhab to dominate and to unite the ummah upon this madhhab

The other madhahib are regarded as entirely legitimate and the Murabitun is open to members of the other schools, indeed there are some Hanafi and Shafi'i members. It is not about domination, but rather a proven methodology which has worked excellently for that community and those influenced by their work. If one has a proven approach which benefits their objectives, why not remain consistent?

No wonder the vast majority of his followers are new Muslim converts who have little or no real Islamic education.

A not-too subtle effort to take a swipe at the Islamic knowledge of converts. So I guess you have no problem when 'Salafis' prey upon new converts and exploit them?

I am half-way through compiling a comprehensive list of examples of the compound-ignorance of Abdul-Qadir as-Sufi, in order to expose and refute this charlatan.

i could use some good material to refute them

I pity the ones who have nothing better to do than "refute" (translation: subjective polemics) their fellow Muslims, indeed those who have been striving to realistically break free from the clutches of the bankers and interest-slavery, restoring the lost structure of the Islamic trade and currency, and who have been engaging in extensive da'wa activities which have brought thousands to Islam with the Will of Allah (Azza wa Jall) around the world for nearly the past four decades. What have you accomplished on this magnitude to be able to pass judgement?

"Nasibi tendencies"? You're not a closet shi'i are you?

You know there is a middle-ground, but apparently you can't transcend beyond your manichean understanding. We accept the four Khulafa ar-Rashidun but likewise admit there have been some elements within this Umma that have been hostile to Ahl al-Bayt. You are drawing a false dichotomy between the Shi'a and Nasibis, whereas the middle approach of Ahl as-Sunna is between both these extremes.

Wa Allahu A'lam.

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 05:29 AM

Suhaib Jobst:

Prepare for a comprehensive refutation and exposition of "shaykh" Abdalqadir as-Sufi's compound ignorance and deviance. Coming soon to an internet forum near you!

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 05:39 AM

Prepare for a comprehensive refutation and exposition of "shaykh" Abdalqadir as-Sufi's compound ignorance and deviance. Coming soon to an internet forum near you!

As I said, I pity the one who has pumped up their ego to such an extent that they have the right to pass judgement upon other Muslims, even to "refute" and "expose" them. What have you done to even come closer to the tireless efforts of the Shaykh in da'wa, analyzing current affairs and, of course, working towards implementing the Islamic mu'amalat right in the heart of the usurious banking order? Concentrate on cleaning your own house and maybe then we can talk further, insha'Allah.

waziri

20th September 2008, 05:40 AM

As Salaam Alaykum,

Walaykum salam akhi Suhaib.

Ali ibn Abi Talib (radiallahu anhu) narrated: "I visted the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) with Ja'far [ibn Abi Talib] and Zayd [ibn Haritha]. The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said to Zayd, 'You are my free-man (mawla'i),' whereupon Zayd began to Hajala (hop on one leg) around the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) then said to Ja'far: 'You resemble me in my physical form and character' (Khalqi wa Khuluqi), whereupon Ja'far began to do the same behind Zyad. The Nabi (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) then said to me, 'You are a part of me and I am a part of you' (anta mini wa ana mink), whereupon I began to do the same behind Ja'far."

This akh would be evidence that to hop on one leg when hearing something that pleases you is allowed.I dont see how it relates to someone incorporating it into an act of ibadah

Anas ibn Malik (radiallahu anhu) narrated that some Abbysinians danced in front of the Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) while saying 'Muhammad is a Righteous Slave' (in Ethiopian), upon which he asked, 'What are they saying?' And they responded in Arabic, 'Muhammadun 'Abdun Salihun'." (Imam Ahmad, Musnad. It was authenticated by Shaykh Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut in his ta'liq of the Musnad).

A'isha (radiallahu anha) narrated that the Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) put her cheek on his shoulder while looking at the Abbysinians dance." (Sahih Muslim, no. 1483; and Imam Ahmad, Musnad, no. 23709).

Ok is the word danced found in the narration? Even if the word danced is as stated the Abbysinians were not intending an act of worship by it.

In both instances, our Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) did not criticize their action, rather he would not have been silent about something which was either Haram or even Makruh. And we know from the sciences of Hadith about the acceptance and approval (Iqraar) of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), which included his silence.

Again akhi it was not intended as a act of worship,so it can not be used as evidence for what the sufis do when they jump and dance around whilst doing dhikr.

Also maybe some of the more knowledgeable brothers can elaborate but from what I remember of the above narration is that Umar Ibn Khattab (Allah is pleased with him) picked up some stones and was about to throw them at the Abbysinians but the Rasul of Allah salalahu alayhi wasalam told him not to.I remember the shaykh I heard commenting on this narration made an important point about this but I cant recall right now

How can one possibly condemn making dhikr, whereas we have been commanded by Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) to do so either standing, sitting or laying on our sides (Qur'an, 3:191)?

No one is condemning dhikr ahkhi,what is being condemned is the way in which some sufis perform dhikr

It is clear that in each of these instances, their dancing (raqs) was based upon their profound spiritual ecstasy,

No the Abbysinians were not "dancing"out of "profound spiritual ecstacy"rather they were performing some type of war training which might be described as a kind of war dance.I remember when shaykh Riyadh Ul Haq commented on this narration he was reluctant to use the word dance to describe what they were doing.

yet some contemporary groups seem to know better than the Sahaba. Allahu musta'an.

No conteprorary groups know better that the Sahaba Allah is pleased with them.

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 05:49 AM

As I said, I pity the one who has pumped up their ego to such an extent that they have the right to pass judgement upon other Muslims, even to "refute" and "expose" them. What have you done to even come closer to the tireless efforts of the Shaykh in da'wa, analyzing current affairs and, of course, working towards implementing the Islamic mu'amalat right in the heart of the usurious banking order? Concentrate on cleaning your own house and maybe then we can talk further, insha'Allah.

Typical murabitun cult mentality. For the record, I have stated already that Abdulqadir as-Sufi has done a great and commendable job in the area of explaining the issues of riba, banking, gold and silver coins etc. Some of his analyses of current affairs are interesting too. But then so are those of some kafir journalists.

I used to be with the murabitun myself, perhaps a long time before you had even heard about them.

However, the problem is when his followers get so attached to him that they follow him blindly and hang onto his every word as if it is wahy that came down from the heavens (I know they don't actually believe that, but that is how they behave in practice). Yes, SAQ has made a lot of good points about economics, but in practically every other aspect of Islamic knowledge - whether 'aqidah, fiqh, histroy, sirah, tafsir, you name it - he is an utter ignoramus who unfortunately thinks that he knows it all. Just read his lamentable "tafsir" of Surat al-Waqi'ah, half of which he bases on a simple linguistic error of his that a primary-school kid who knows Arabic would never fall into!

So he ends up making a fool and laughing-stock of himself, but his blind followers like Suhaib Jobst and the other converts who don't know Arabic and have no background in knowledge follow him all the way. I remember once I questioned a "high-ranking member" of the murabitun about a certain statement of SAQ, and he said: "Well, the shaykh said it, so it must be true!"

Take whatever good he has brought, but don't let that blind you to his reality!

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 06:27 AM

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam,
and siyam mubarak

This akh would be evidence that to hop on one leg when hearing something that pleases you is allowed. I dont see how it relates to someone incorporating it into an act of ibadah

What it demonstrates is that dancing out of joy when it comes to a religious matter at least has a proof to support it. In this case it was the confirmation of both the status of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and also their profound love for him. But please don't take my word for it....

"It is permissible to stand and dance during gatherings of dhikr and Samaa' (audition) according to a number of great scholars including Shaykh al-Islam Al-'Izz ibn Abdus-Salaam" (Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Fatawa Hadithiyya).

"Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar [al-Asqalani], the great Muhaddith, was asked regarding the raqs of the Sufis: 'Is there a premise (asl) for it. Did anyone perform raqs in the presence of the Messenger, salawatullah 'alayh wa Aalihi wa Sahibih?'

"He said: 'Yes! Verily Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, radiallahu anhu, did raqs in the presence of Rasulullah when he told Ja'far, 'You resemble me in my created form and in my character.' It would have been necessary for the Nabi (alayhis sallam) to clarify whether it was halal or haram, yet the Nabi (alayhis sallam) did not reject it. This is known in Mustalah al-Hadith as 'Iqraar', or the acceptanc and approval of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). And the Nabi (alayhis sallam) would not have remained silent regarding the Haram or the Makruh'" (Quoted in Imam as-Suyuti, as-Sayf al-Qaati').

"And regarding Ar-Raqs, based on it being a type of deficiency, a group forwarded the opinion that it is hated and another group stated that it is permitted. From those who stated it was permitted were Ar-Raafi'i, Al-Ghazali, and An-Nawawi. A group differentiated between cultivating the spiritual states and they stated it was permitted while others stated it was makruh. This statement is what is agreeable according to the majority of them, and the majority of the Sufis are upon it" (Mullah Ali al-Qari, Rasaa'il, vol. 1, p. 141).

Even if the word danced is as stated the Abbysinians were not intending an act of worship by it.

Of course, because only Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) is worshipped. They were merely showing their love and praise for the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Hadra is worshipping Allah (Azza wa Jall) through His Asmaa' was-Sifaat, it has been approved by these aforementioned 'ulama and is a manner of getting closer to Him collectively.

Also maybe some of the more knowledgeable brothers can elaborate but from what I remember of the above narration is that Umar Ibn Khattab (Allah is pleased with him) picked up some stones and was about to throw them at the Abbysinians but the Rasul of Allah salalahu alayhi wasalam told him not to.

You are indeed correct, at least when it comes to the dancers dispersing upon the approach of Sayyidina Umar (radiallahu anhu). I have not read about the stones, which I neither confirm nor deny. In any case, this incident was mentioned in the versions of Imam at-Tirmidhi and Imam al-Bayhaqi, rahimahumullah.

No the Abbysinians were not "dancing"out of "profound spiritual ecstacy"rather they were performing some type of war training which might be described as a kind of war dance.I remember when shaykh Riyadh Ul Haq commented on this narration he was reluctant to use the word dance to describe what they were doing.

The spiritual connotations are nonetheless there. Furthermore, this issue is a matter of ikhtilaaf among the people of Tasawwuf. I am merely putting forward one view as I see it, based upon the evidences - without discounting the other view.

No conteprorary groups no better that the Sahaba Allah is pleased with them.

Obviously not! This was a satirical statement about the implications of those who condemn raqs outright whereas the hadith indicates it to be practiced by three Sahaba. Wa Allahu A'lam.

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 06:39 AM

Take whatever good he has brought, but don't let that blind you to his reality!

Then I guess let us agree to disagree. I obviously have something to say on the claim of "blind following" and his alleged lack of knowledge, but there are more important matters than getting dead-locked in a debate where we will obviously remain entrenched on our respective sides without convincing the other.

I used to be with the murabitun myself, perhaps a long time before you had even heard about them.

Former members of a group will obviously seek to disprove that group's views. It just goes without saying. As a zealous and active 'Salafi' and then 'Jihadi' youth for six years, I wouldn't expect one to take my own views on those groups as anything other than my own personal experiences and leave it at that for them to make up their own minds.

his blind followers like Suhaib Jobst and the other converts who don't know Arabic and have no background in knowledge follow him all the way.

The second attack you made on converts in this thread. Obviously I am not even close to being a scholar, but I am not as ignorant as you think. My Arab friends can certainly vouch for me, yet you merely assume as a convert then I must be ignorant and easily deceived. You don't know me personally, so please guard your tongue from anything which may be counted against you on Yawm al-Qiyama.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 06:54 AM

Former members of a group will obviously seek to disprove that group's views. It just goes without saying.

It's got nothing to do with having something against a particular group. The issue is the deen itself. SAQ is speaking without knowledge of nearly every aspect of Islam, falling into major blunders and making a laughing-stock of himself, yet his followers consider him a supreme authority in everything that he talks about, and follow him blindly. That is the problem, it has nothing to do with having it in for any particular group or individual.

I was never a "member" of the murabitun, I never made "bay'ah" to their shaykh, I used to associate with them and attend their meetings. That's what I meant when I said I was with them, in the sense of I was close to them and had a lot of interaction with them. Despite the good that I took from SAQ I always was uncomfortable with his clear errors.

As a zealous and active 'Salafi' and then 'Jihadi' youth for six years, I wouldn't expect one to take my own views on those groups as anything other than my own personal experiences and leave it at that for them to make up their own minds.

And now you are in the "zealous and active murabit" phase, in sha' Allah after more experience and reflection you will simply just calm down and become a normal Muslim who follows what is clear from the Kitab and Sunnah, avoiding what is controversial or doubtful, without getting caught up in cultism, taqlid of personalities, and fads.

عُبَيْدُ رَبِّهِ

20th September 2008, 09:16 AM

Asking questions about following a madhab from someone like Ibn Ajiba (having had some personal touch with this person) is not a sign of any knowledge, weather he is right in his answer or not.

Abdullah Abbas

20th September 2008, 10:34 AM

Suhaib Jobst:

Prepare for a comprehensive refutation and exposition of "shaykh" Abdalqadir as-Sufi's compound ignorance and deviance. Coming soon to an internet forum near you!

akhi are you planning to publish it on this forum soon?

justabro

20th September 2008, 11:16 AM

his article that he wrote against niqab is quite amusing... not to mention his deliberate deception about what ibn Atiyyah actually says on the issue in his Tafsir.

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 05:00 PM

akhi are you planning to publish it on this forum soon?

I am about to start right now, in sha' Allah!

isha-h

20th September 2008, 05:05 PM

his article that he wrote against niqab is quite amusing... .

Bro, any idea where i can find this article ???

asharee_salafi

20th September 2008, 05:06 PM

as wr wb Abdullah.

1. is muarabitun like a cult then?
2. do they do shirk, like ask the Prophet Salallahu alahiwasallam to go and ask Allah things on their behalf?

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 05:13 PM

Abdullah Abbas

20th September 2008, 06:01 PM

They don't exactly promote shirk, but they very blindly follow a guy who although he has some good articles on riba, Islamic economics etc. is extremely ignorant about nearly everything else in the religion and has made some fairly monstrous errors in things that are well-known to be from the deen.

but they are associated with sufism , translating books by ibn arabi ,
shadhili etc , one of their members even promotes the website marifah.net

arent they close to Nuh Keller aswell?

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 06:26 PM

I think they don't really get along well even with people like Nuh Keller. If you look at some of the forums like "sunni"forum and others like it, you'll see that the murabitun are not much liked even by other sufis. It's interesting to see how many "ex" murabitun who left the group are out there, one of them (according to what one of the murabitun told me) is Hamzah Yusuf!

al-omari

20th September 2008, 07:12 PM

So this is permissible Suhaib?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySCgk8PGyl8

Imam Malik was right when he called these people majaneen. Reminds me of the Pentacostals and Holy Rollers.

Abdullah ibn Adam

20th September 2008, 07:50 PM

Imam Malik was right when he called these people majaneen

Don't be surprised if some of them make some kind of sufistic "ta'wil" of his words, and claim that they are the "majaneen" of "Layla"!

Suhaib Jobst

20th September 2008, 09:55 PM

As Salaam Alaykum,

They very blindly follow a guy who....is extremely ignorant about nearly everything else in the religion and has made some fairly monstrous errors in things that are well-known to be from the deen.

That is merely your perception and I will work on responding to some of the points you made in that article, insha'Allah. If you want to squander your good deeds in this blessed month of all times, then that is your perogative. But you come across as a self-publicist who likes to stroke his ego from time to time. This is what has come across from your other posts, at least this is my observation (which may either be accepted or rejected).

I think they don't really get along well even with people like Nuh Keller. If you look at some of the forums like "sunni"forum and others like it, you'll see that the murabitun are not much liked even by other sufis. It's interesting to see how many "ex" murabitun who left the group are out there, one of them (according to what one of the murabitun told me) is Hamzah Yusuf!

1 - There are no problems between the Murabitun and Shaykh Nuh Keller, rather the former will readily take from the latter. Some of the latter's students don't get along well with Murabitun, but this is not reflective of the teacher.

2 - On Sunni Forum, there have been some rude and close-minded people from time to time, but the dominant trend has been an increasing understanding of what Murabitun has been trying to accomplish. Notice also that some of the recent individuals who started fitna against Murabitun have been banned there, due to their despicable manners.

3 - It was Shaykh Abdalqadir who advised Shaykh Hamza Yusuf to study in Mauritania. The latter indeed left Murabitun but not due to any fundamental disagreement. The Shaykh just wanted to make his mark and presence felt elsewhere, as he was needed. Indeed if you look at his da'wa the stamp is unmistakable. Even to this day, there continues to be cooperation and I will just leave it there.

So this is permissible Suhaib?!

I never said that all practices of Hadra are considered legitimate. It should be judged on an individual basis. The entire Interfaith program has been exposed as an esoteric tool by Murabitun leaders, including Sidi Umar Vadillo. Shaykh Abdalqadir has said, "Inter-faith dialogue is a door leading to kufr." The statements of Vadillo concerning the leaders of the Haqqanis are too well-known to even mention.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Abdullah Abbas

20th September 2008, 10:17 PM

As Salaam Alaykum,

That is merely your perception and I will work on responding to some of the points you made in that article, insha'Allah. If you want to squander your good deeds in this blessed month of all times, then that is your perogative. But you come across as a self-publicist who likes to stroke his ego from time to time. This is what has come across from your other posts, at least this is my observation (which may either be accepted or rejected).

1 - There are no problems between the Murabitun and Shaykh Nuh Keller, rather the former will readily take from the latter. Some of the latter's students don't get along well with Murabitun, but this is not reflective of the teacher.

2 - On Sunni Forum, there have been some rude and close-minded people from time to time, but the dominant trend has been an increasing understanding of what Murabitun has been trying to accomplish. Notice also that some of the recent individuals who started fitna against Murabitun have been banned there, due to their despicable manners.

3 - It was Shaykh Abdalqadir who advised Shaykh Hamza Yusuf to study in Mauritania. The latter indeed left Murabitun but not due to any fundamental disagreement. The Shaykh just wanted to make his mark and presence felt elsewhere, as he was needed. Indeed if you look at his da'wa the stamp is unmistakable. Even to this day, there continues to be cooperation and I will just leave it there.

I never said that all practices of Hadra are considered legitimate. It should be judged on an individual basis. The entire Interfaith program has been exposed as an esoteric tool by Murabitun leaders, including Sidi Umar Vadillo. Shaykh Abdalqadir has said, "Inter-faith dialogue is a door leading to kufr." The statements of Vadillo concerning the leaders of the Haqqanis are too well-known to even mention.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

so as Sufi has issues with Haddad but he has a friendly connection with Nuh Hah Meem al Mushrik keller? and why the respect towards Hamzah Yusuf a person quite close to western governments?

also why did Muhammed Shareef leave the al murabitun i think he had his reasons for it.

the dancing of the sufis btw is ridiculous especially in turkey when you see their dancing halls decorated with big pictures of their idol Ataturk.

Abdullah Abbas

20th September 2008, 10:18 PM

As Salaam Alaykum,

That is merely your perception and I will work on responding to some of the points you made in that article, insha'Allah. If you want to squander your good deeds in this blessed month of all times, then that is your perogative. But you come across as a self-publicist who likes to stroke his ego from time to time. This is what has come across from your other posts, at least this is my observation (which may either be accepted or rejected).

1 - There are no problems between the Murabitun and Shaykh Nuh Keller, rather the former will readily take from the latter. Some of the latter's students don't get along well with Murabitun, but this is not reflective of the teacher.

2 - On Sunni Forum, there have been some rude and close-minded people from time to time, but the dominant trend has been an increasing understanding of what Murabitun has been trying to accomplish. Notice also that some of the recent individuals who started fitna against Murabitun have been banned there, due to their despicable manners.

3 - It was Shaykh Abdalqadir who advised Shaykh Hamza Yusuf to study in Mauritania. The latter indeed left Murabitun but not due to any fundamental disagreement. The Shaykh just wanted to make his mark and presence felt elsewhere, as he was needed. Indeed if you look at his da'wa the stamp is unmistakable. Even to this day, there continues to be cooperation and I will just leave it there.

I never said that all practices of Hadra are considered legitimate. It should be judged on an individual basis. The entire Interfaith program has been exposed as an esoteric tool by Murabitun leaders, including Sidi Umar Vadillo. Shaykh Abdalqadir has said, "Inter-faith dialogue is a door leading to kufr." The statements of Vadillo concerning the leaders of the Haqqanis are too well-known to even mention.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

why do you promote marifah.net they promote the extreme shirki style of sufism

Abdullah ibn Adam

21st September 2008, 12:39 AM

That is merely your perception and I will work on responding to some of the points you made in that article, insha'Allah. If you want to squander your good deeds in this blessed month of all times, then that is your perogative. But you come across as a self-publicist who likes to stroke his ego from time to time. This is what has come across from your other posts, at least this is my observation (which may either be accepted or rejected).

Well, it is precisely answers like this that makes it look like the cult mentality has sunk into you. The whole point of me compiling that long list of Abdalqadir's mistakes was to wake up the cult followers to the fact that despite his many good works one particular field (economics), he has totally gone out of his depth in nearly everything else, and that he should not be considered by any means an authority in those areas in which he falls into horrible blunders, and that this should be realised by people in order to have a balanced position towards the man! But do the cultists understand? No, they just keep following the party-line, and simply closing their eyes to Abdalqadir's irresponsible and dangerous approach to the deen.

If you think that defending the deen and refuting people who clearly lie upon Allah and His Messenger counts as "squandering your good deeds in Ramadhan", then you have some serious issues my friend. It is not from the deen to remain silent when people are making deviant comments about Allah and His Messenger.

And I wonder why you are so quick to jump on anyone who highlights the clear and obvious errors of your "shaykh", and make all sorts of accusations at them. Do you also show the same kind of defense for those slandered and defamed by your shaykh, I wonder?

I don't know what you are referring to when you accuse me of being a "self-publicist" who likes to "stroke my ego". Nobody's perfect of course, but I think that those accusations are more applicable to Abdalqadir as-Sufi, if you look at the kind of position he has put himself into, and the kind of attitude he shows.

Suhaib Jobst

21st September 2008, 02:44 PM

As Salaam Alaykum,

so as Sufi has issues with Haddad but he has a friendly connection with Nuh Hah Meem al Mushrik keller?

You should fear Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) before throwing the "Mushrik" accusation upon another Muslim.

I understand that you are a revert. As one who has been there and done that, I strongly discourage you from believing these 'Salafi' claims against the Sufis and Ash'aris. They have their own agenda, so obviously they will not stop at any lengths to make false accusations.

and why the respect towards Hamzah Yusuf a person quite close to western governments?

I used to feel the same way you're feeling now, believe me. But I have since found out that he was advised to go to the White House by Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah (hafidahullah) in an effort to discourage them from attacking Afghanistan.

One should understand the brother's reason before attacking their honor. He is not "close" to these governments, it was a couple of visits. You don't know about the Muslim community in the U.S., so you have little understanding of what he was trying to accomplish.

also why did Muhammed Shareef leave the al murabitun i think he had his reasons for it.

Muhammad Shareef, of the Sankore' Institute of Islamic-African Studies, left due to race. He said that he didn't want to have white men in a position of authority over him (i.e., the three leaders and most of the public figures from Murabitun are European reverts to Islam). The brother has his own conception of what it means to be a Muslim of black African origin, so it is beyond our concern here.

the dancing of the sufis btw is ridiculous especially in turkey when you see their dancing halls decorated with big pictures of their idol Ataturk.

Haven't you been reading anything I have written? These elements which make a mockery of Hadra and Raqs, earn nothing but my criticism. Sidi Vadillo has rightly exposed them as indicative of the esoteric, perennialist deviation. May Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) help and guide them. Amin.

The whole point of me compiling that long list of Abdalqadir's mistakes....

Upon advice from a brother whose opinion I deeply respect, I don't want to squander my own good deeds in this blessed month by debating. I would like to say, however, that you 'Salafis' should work upon cleaning your own house before accusing others of being 'cultists'. You have the cult-mentality prevalent among some groups of 'Salafis'. If you point the finger, you have three pointing back at you.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Abu Shu'aib

21st September 2008, 03:35 PM

Ya Muqallib al quloob thabit qalbi 'ala deenik

O Controller of the hearts make my heart steadfast in Your religion

Yousef al Khattab

21st September 2008, 03:59 PM

Asalam 3leikoum wr wb,

In regards to Sheikha Hamza Yousef, I do know the situation of Muslims in the USA and Younes Abdullah Muhammad, Solar,and myself went to Hamza Yousef at Columbia University in New York. That eve he(Hamza Usless) stated that trying to establish a Khalifa state is a bida3h,amongst other smack that he spoke. The whole lecture basically became a Obama plug by his friend Ms. Mehdi a secularist half American Nasarah 1/2 Iraqi capitalist pig. Sheikha Hamza ended the lecture fast and would not take any questions from us. Brother Abu Sabaya from this forum) also confronted him on the Bush issue at another engagement and he refused to answer. Akhi if your gonna be a Sufi that is your choice, but don't be a sucker. I know many Sufi brothers that would love to gauge out Hamza Yousef's eyes.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VTVHFptrRO0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VTVHFptrRO0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Hamza Yusuf LOVES Britain (http://www.revolutionmuslim.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=951&hl=hamza+yusuf)

<embed src="http://blip.tv/play/AcawfwA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="320" height="270" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed>

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/7573/itshamzaqueen1tucopylt6.jpg

isha-h

21st September 2008, 04:13 PM

That picture of 'sufi qeen Hamza' on the bank note just nearly made me fall off my chair i laughed so much !!!!!

Suhaib Jobst

21st September 2008, 04:21 PM

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuh,

In regards to Sheikha Hamza Yousef, I do know the situation of Muslims in the USA and Younes Abdullah Muhammad, Solar,and myself went to Hamza Yousef at Columbia University in New York.....

My point was that he believed he was helping the interests of the American Muslim community and should not be faulted for intending to do something he felt was beneficial. Obviously, his efforts failed and the terror-bombing of Afghanistan was carried out, but at least he tried to accomplish a good.

He has not done anything different than the vast majority of American Muslim leaders and public figures. We have not seen what is in his heart, neither have we approached the brother to ask about his intentions. And immature graphics are definitely not going to benefit you on Yawm al-Qiyama.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Yousef al Khattab

21st September 2008, 04:26 PM

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuh,

My point was that he believed he was helping the interests of the American Muslim community and should not be faulted for intending to do something he believed was beneficial. Obviously, his efforts failed and the terror-bombing of Afghanistan was carried out. But at least he tried to do something.

He has not done anything different than the vast majority of American Muslim leaders and public figures. We have not seen what is in his heart, neither have we approached the brother to ask about his intentions.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Asalam 3leykoum wr wb,

Yes akhi brother Abu Sabayah did approach him and ask him. Dear akhi we judge by the apparent not by the heart in this day and age. Please watch the above videos I posted and click on the link.

Barek Allah tala Feek

Abdullah Abbas

21st September 2008, 05:14 PM

As Salaam Alaykum,

You should fear Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) before throwing the "Mushrik" accusation upon another Muslim.

I understand that you are a revert. As one who has been there and done that, I strongly discourage you from believing these 'Salafi' claims against the Sufis and Ash'aris. They have their own agenda, so obviously they will not stop at any lengths to make false accusations.

I used to feel the same way you're feeling now, believe me. But I have since found out that he was advised to go to the White House by Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah (hafidahullah) in an effort to discourage them from attacking Afghanistan.

One should understand the brother's reason before attacking their honor. He is not "close" to these governments, it was a couple of visits. You don't know about the Muslim community in the U.S., so you have little understanding of what he was trying to accomplish.

Muhammad Shareef, of the Sankore' Institute of Islamic-African Studies, left due to race. He said that he didn't want to have white men in a position of authority over him (i.e., the three leaders and most of the public figures from Murabitun are European reverts to Islam). The brother has his own conception of what it means to be a Muslim of black African origin, so it is beyond our concern here.

Haven't you been reading anything I have written? These elements which make a mockery of Hadra and Raqs, earn nothing but my criticism. Sidi Vadillo has rightly exposed them as indicative of the esoteric, perennialist deviation. May Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) help and guide them. Amin.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

thanks for the verification of the Shareef issue , akhi i am indeed a revert and like many people on this forum my knowledge is very limited but you dont need to be a scholar to recognize certain types of corruption and deviation.

i am not a member of the pseudo salafi hezb i dont belong to a hezb either i am allergic to the bidah and evil deviations of todays sufism(kullerism/Jifri-ism,Hanson-ism,Haddad-ism-Snake Nazimism-Snake Kabbani-ism) these people are modernists and some of them invite to kufr and shirk(nazim does kabbani does , haddad does and keller does)

so i dont understand why the al murabitun hezb criticizes Haddad,Nazim etc but has friendly connections to keller(a person who calls to a shirk type of tawassul and other extreme sufic practices)

i read the ebook the esoteric deviation written by sidi umar wich was quite interesting if you could publish it here on the forum would be nice since other brothers requested it and i dont have it anymore because my pc crashed a while ago.

again my question akhi Suhaib why do you promote Marifah.net a site that is bareilvi influenced and promotes shirki type of sufism.

regarding the asharis they were exposed and refuted by shaykhul islaam ibn taymiyya a mujtahid imam

i use to like the hamza yusuf before 9-11 but now he is a mouthpiece of western government and modernism , you can see him attending a musical type of concert by yusuf islam , he calls to broterhood with shiites on one of his lectures , he lied about jihad etc etc the list goes on

Nu7

21st September 2008, 10:07 PM

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuh,

My point was that he believed he was helping the interests of the American Muslim community and should not be faulted for intending to do something he felt was beneficial. Obviously, his efforts failed and the terror-bombing of Afghanistan was carried out, but at least he tried to accomplish a good.

He has not done anything different than the vast majority of American Muslim leaders and public figures. We have not seen what is in his heart, neither have we approached the brother to ask about his intentions. And immature graphics are definitely not going to benefit you on Yawm al-Qiyama.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

What kind of a jaahil statement is this? SubhanAllah, now you have sunk so low that you will even defend Hamza Yusuf?? Someone who has become a tool of the Americans.

Looks like certain brothers were right about you all along, it's sad to see you in this state.. may Allah guide us all.

al-omari

21st September 2008, 10:17 PM

What kind of a jaahil statement is this? SubhanAllah, now you have sunk so low that you will even defend Hamza Yusuf?? Someone who has become a tool of the Americans.

Looks like certain brothers were right about you all along, it's sad to see you in this state.. may Allah guide us all.

Many of these former Salafis who become Sufis begin to have selective amnesia, especially in issues of current affairs and al-Wala wal Bara.

عُبَيْدُ رَبِّهِ

21st September 2008, 10:28 PM

Brother Suhaib: You'll get over it insha-Allah. It may take a year, two or three, but eventually you'll be alright if you just

1) keep your intention pure,

2) act humble, and

3) do not lead others to think you are more knowledgable than you really are (not to say that you are doing that, but rather it's vital in gaining understanding on these forums to look like a seaker, not like a judge).

And believe me, I know just how you feel about all of this. Have a blessed Ramadan.

Yousef al Khattab

21st September 2008, 10:55 PM

Abdullah ibn Adam

22nd September 2008, 07:42 AM

Upon advice from a brother whose opinion I deeply respect, I don't want to squander my own good deeds in this blessed month by debating. I would like to say, however, that you 'Salafis' should work upon cleaning your own house before accusing others of being 'cultists'. You have the cult-mentality prevalent among some groups of 'Salafis'. If you point the finger, you have three pointing back at you.

Dear Suhaib, for your information I do not belong to any particular "strand" or "group" of "salafism". I don't know where you picked up that assumption, and if you are at all familiar with my posts you will know enough about me to be certain that I do not 100% blindly support any of the "strands" of "salafiyyah" today. I don't even like to use the word "salafi" without defining exactly what I mean by the term.

Like you, and like many reverts, I did - once upon a time - go through almost exactly the same thing that you went through: firstly inclined towards the madakhilah, then hot-headed "salafi-jihadi", then got influenced by the works of Abdalqadir al-Murabit. But brother, like I already told you in the PM I sent you, one needs to step out of not only the "cults" but also the "cult mentality". Just because you feel you have passed beyond the "phase" of what you viewed to be "salafiyyah", it doesn't mean that you are "there" yet just because you have now found the "murabitun" and you feel comfortable with them.

I can only reiterate what I already told you in that PM, plus the following:

Just be yourself, and don't let any group, sufi tariqah or charismatic personality dictate what kind of a Muslim you should be! Only the Qur'an, the Sunnah and the path of the Muslims of the first 3 generations should dictate what kind of Muslim you should be.

You might perhaps at this point ask why I "assume" that you agree 100% with the murabitun? Simple, because from my personal experience, I know that is how it is in that group, and it is the same for nearly all contemporary sufi "tariqahs". To be a "murabit", you have to agree with everything that SAQ says and does, not question it, and there's so much peer pressure to conform to the "party line", and no room for dissent. If you do question anything, then they will either be wary of you, discipline you (this is only for the hard-core "murids"), or ostracise you.

Tell me, Suhaib, have you ever seen a woman from the murabitun deviating from the "party line" and covering her face with a veil? If you are married, ask your wife to start wearing a niqab and just see their reaction, trust me they won't be impressed.

And have you ever seen one of their people dare to point out any of the glaring mistakes of Abdalqadir such as the ones that I listed in the Abdalqadir refutation thread on this forum? Even though many of those mistakes are absolutely inexcusable coming from a person who styles himself as a "shaykh"?

Have you ever met a single murabit who disagrees with the official "party line" regarding groups like Hamas and Taliban?

Have you ever met a single murabit who has been bold enough to stand up and question WHY the book fusus al-Hikam was lovingly translated by one of the prominent murabitun, complete with the story of Fir'awn's alleged tawhid and death on iman, without even a single footnote of explanation? Don't you realise that if Aisha Bewley really believed that those were not truly the words of Ibn Arabi (as you have previously argued in her defence), then it was her responsibility to point that out? As it is, she is only showing consent of such a belief with her silence.

Several years back, I sent a request to Aisha Bewley asking her to please explain. Not surprisingly, I never recieved an answer.

I am advising you because I am concerned about you like an older brother, because I can see my old self in you at the moment, and because I know that you have it in you to come back to the "middle of the road", as al-Ghazali did before he died. It is not because I have something personal against you, or because I want to "publicise" myself... good God, if I wanted to publicise myself I would have my own blog and website and be writing under my real name!

Some parting advice in sha' Allah:

Look for the book "In Pursuit of Virtue" by TaHa publishers. It is the english translation of "al-akhlaq was-siyar" by Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi. Carry this book with you wherever you go, and whenever you have a moment of free time, in your break or on the train or wherever, just sit down and read this book, several times if you need to. This book will be much more beneficial for the purification of your heart and soul, and finding your own direction in life, than the ways of most of the contemporary claimiants to sufism.

And may Allah be with you all the way. Wassalam

Abdullah Abbas

22nd September 2008, 10:38 AM

And may Allah be with you all the way. Wassalam

May Allah be with all the muslims , Ameen

i found the book by ibn hazm online so akhi Suhaib :

Al-Akhlâq wa’l-Siyar (Morals and Behaviour)

By Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi

Extracted with slight modifications from "In Pursuit of Virtue" © 1990 TA-HA Publishers

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hazm/akhlaq/index.html

Abdullah Abbas

22nd September 2008, 10:39 AM

Abdullah Abbas

22nd September 2008, 11:26 AM

i found this information from another forum about Sadl:

As for what he mentioned about Imam Malik, then this is incorrect and another Salafi claim that is unsupported. We wonder why he is “glad it came up” when he does not even possess the prerequisite knowledge to tackle such an issue. Folding the hands is a minority opinion in the Maliki School As stated in Ibn Tahirs Madhab al Maliki wa adillatuh.

Ibn Rushd mentions in his Bidayat in a long discussion:

- ( المسألة الخامسة ) اختلف العلماء في وضع اليدين إحداهما على الأخرى في الصلاة، فكره ذلك مالك في الفرض، وأجازه في النفل. ورأى قوم أن هذا الفعل من سنن الصلاة وهم الجمهور. والسبب في اختلافهم أنه قد جاءت آثار ثابتة نقلت فيها صفة صلاته عليه الصلاة والسلام، ولم ينقل فيها أنه كان يضع يده اليمنى على اليسرى، وثبت أيضا أن الناس كانوا يؤمرون بذلك. وورد ذلك أيضا من صفة صلاته عليه الصلاة والسلام في حديث أبي حميد فرأى قوم أن الآثار التي أثبتت ذلك اقتضت زيادة على الآثار التي لم تنقل فيها هذه الزيادة وأن الزيادة يجب أن يصار إليها. ورأى قوم أن الأوجب المصير إلى الآثار التي ليس فيها هذه الزيادة، لأنها أكثر، ولكون هذه ليست مناسبة لأفعال الصلاة، وإنما هي من باب الاستعانة، ولذلك أجازها مالك في النفل ولم يجزها في الفرض، وقد يظهر من أمرها أنها هيئة تقتضي الخضوع، وهو الأولى بها.

- Scholars have differed regarding placing the hands, one of them on the other during Salah. Malik considered that makruh (disliked) during the obligatory prayer, and permitted it during the voluntary prayers. And some people considered this action to be from the Sunnah of Salah. They are the majority. The reason for their difference is that some established traditions (of the companions and successors) have come (in which) the description of the Prophet’s prayer – may Allah grant him peace – has been related in them and nowhere in them was it related that he placed his right over his left. It also has been confirmed that the people were commanded to do that (i.e. fold their hands). The former has also been mentioned as part of the description of his prayer – may Allah bless and grant him peace – in the hadith of Abu Hamid. And some people saw that the traditions that have been confirmed necessitated an addition upon the traditions which this (latter) addition was not related in them, and that the addition must be followed. Others saw that the more worthy obligation was to follow the traditions that don’t contain the addition, because they are more numerous, and since this doesn’t suit the actions of prayer. Rather, they fall under the category of seeking support. Therefore, Malik permitted it in voluntary prayers, and did not permit it in the obligatory.

Then Ibn Rushd mentions the hadith of Abu Hamid, which is Sahih, present in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Bukhari and others, and it states:

- When the Messenger of Allah stood for prayer, he raised his arms until they were level with his ears, said the takbir and did not begin reciting until all of his limbs had rested in their natural position…. In the end when he finished the description of the prayer the people (who were the companions) said, “You are truthful, this is the way the he (the prophet) prayed.”

In The Mudawanah المدونة it is clearly shown that Imam Malik disliked grasping the hands, unless in the Nafl prayers if one stands for a long time:

(الاعتماد في الصلاة والاتكاء ووضع اليد على اليد ) ( قال ) وسألت مالكا عن الرجل يصلي إلى جنب حائط فيتكئ على الحائط ( قال ) أما في المكتوبة فلا يعجبني وأما في النافلة فلا أرى بذلك بأسا ( قال ابن القاسم ) والعضا تكون في يده بمنزلة الحائط ( قال ) وقال مالك ان شاء اعتمد وان شاء لم يعتمد وكان لا يكره الاعتماد وقال ذلك على قدر ما يرتفق به فلينظر ما هو أرفق به فليصنعه ( قال ) وقال مالك في وضع اليمنى على اليسرى 1 في الصلاة قال لا أعرف ذلك في الفريضة ولكن في النوافل 2 إذا طال القيام فلا بأس بذلك يعين به على نفسه ( سحنون ) عن ابن وهب عن سفيان الثوري عن غير واحد من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أنهم رأوا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم واضعا يده اليمنى على يده اليسرى في الصلاة (السجود على الثياب والبسط والمصليات والخمرة والثوب يكون فيه النجاسة ) ( قال ) وقال مالك أرى أن لا يضع الرجل كفيه الاعلى الذي يضع عليه جبهته قال وان كان حرا أو بردا فلا بأس أن يبسط ثوبا يسجد عليه ويجعل كفيه عليه ( قال ابن القاسم ) قال مالك بلغني أن عمر بن الخطاب وعبد الله بن عمر كانا يفعلان ذلك ( قال ) وقال مالك تبدأ المرأة كفيها

- Malik said about placing the right hand over the left during Salah. He said: (“I don’t know (of) that in the obligatory (prayer).” And he used to dislike it. “However, in voluntary prayers (nawafil), when the standing is extended, there is no harm in that (for one to) aid himself by it.”

Imam Shawkani says in his Nayl Al Awtar:

والرواية الأولى عنه هي رواية جمهور أصحابه وهي المشهورة عندهم

- And the narration (of irsal laying the arms straight in prayer) is the narration of the majority of his students, and it is famous among them (referring to Imam Malik and the scholars of the Maliki Madhab).

He also states right before this:

الجمهور وروى ابن المنذر عن ابن الزبير والحسن البصري والنخعي أنه يرسلهما ولا يضع اليمنى اليسرى

- Ibn al-Munthir narrated that Ibn Zubayr, Hasan al Basri and Nakhai all used to lay their arms straight in the prayer, and not put the right hand over the left.

And then:

ونقله النووي عن الليث بن سعد

He then says:

ونقل ابن سيد الناس عن الأوزاعي التخيير بين الوضع والإرسال‏.‏

- Awzai said: “(A person has) a choice between placing and releasing (the hands).”

There are number of hadith present in the Musanaf of Ibn Abi shaibah and even the Sunans stating the Sunnah being Sadl and not Qabd. I currently do not have the time to find the arabic for all these hadith, but will do so if asked.

i find it amazing how some ''salafis'' and hanafis claim that imam malik only did sadl because he was lashed this is clear ignorance?

عُبَيْدُ رَبِّهِ

22nd September 2008, 02:36 PM

Arguing about small issues like sadl is ridiculously sad.

Abdullah Abbas

22nd September 2008, 08:53 PM

Arguing about small issues like sadl is ridiculously sad.

we are not arguing akhi , its more research i concider myself to be a comparative fiqh student so i would like to get as much information about certain madhhabs , and their opinions , i find the Sadl opinion very interesting , its sad that most people associate Sadl with Shiism

Brother_Mujahid

22nd September 2008, 08:59 PM

Arguing about small issues like sadl is ridiculously sad.

It is not arguing and it is not a waste of time to try to learn about and understand a particular fiqh issue. We don't say that Imam Malik was "ridiculously sad" for commenting on this issue.

Abdullah Abbas

22nd September 2008, 09:08 PM

It is not arguing and it is not a waste of time to try to learn about and understand a particular fiqh issue. We don't say that Imam Malik was "ridiculously sad" for commenting on this issue.

true akhi ,

Suhaib Jobst

23rd September 2008, 03:48 AM

As Salaam Alaykum,

i am not a member of the pseudo salafi hezb i dont belong to a hezb either i am allergic to the bidah and evil deviations of todays sufism....

The rhetoric you use would indicate otherwise. You have obviously been affected by them so at least don't try to hide it. This is the basic direction of some brothers on this forum, who will deny they are 'Salafi' when talking with those who aren't but clearly their rhetoric and ideology express the party-line. At least I show everyone where I'm coming from without trying to sugar-coat it.

so i dont understand why the al murabitun hezb criticizes Haddad,Nazim etc but has friendly connections to keller(a person who calls to a shirk type of tawassul and other extreme sufic practices)

Those who believe in Tawassul would strongly deny the claim of shirk, as they would point out that Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) is the Only Provider of the thing they're asking for, they are merely asking Allah (Azza wa Jall) for the intercession of these righteous people from the past. Even many of those past scholars who rejected it would consider it less than Shirk. But this is not really your issue with them, is it?

I have not seen anything from Shaykh Keller which is like the esoteric and perennialist heresy of certain other groups and/or individuals. You are merely lumping them together with labels which really have no discernable meaning.

again my question akhi Suhaib why do you promote Marifah.net a site that is bareilvi influenced and promotes shirki type of sufism.

You are obviously getting affected by the company you're keeping here on this forum, so obviously you will express their same agenda. I have heard the same talking-points before, but there is nothing new in the accusations.

regarding the asharis they were exposed and refuted by shaykhul islaam ibn taymiyya a mujtahid imam.

Most of the greatest scholars from this Umma were Ash'aris and I highly doubt that the great Hanbali scholar Ibn Taymiyya (rahimahullah) "exposed" and "refuted" them. He obviously had 'aqida disagreements with them, but this didn't stop him from befriending their scholars and fighting jihad behind their leaders. He once intervened in a dispute between Ash'aris and Hanbalis, since he obviously saw the points of contention between the two as largely minor.

i use to like the hamza yusuf before 9-11 but now he is a mouthpiece of western government and modernism , you can see him attending a musical type of concert by yusuf islam , he calls to broterhood with shiites on one of his lectures , he lied about jihad etc etc the list goes on

I don't care to discuss Hamza Yusuf, for that wasn't even the purpose of my message. I just wanted to clarify that we have to look at the reasons why he has met with kaffir governments. It was his expressed desire to persuade them to change their hostile policies, he failed in that task but shouldn't be blamed for at least trying.

And my clarification of this matter is not tantamount to an endorsement of all his statements or actions since 11th September 2001. On the contrary, I have heard some things which I don't like. But at least seek out his reasons for meeting with Western governments. He has explained himself so I believe in giving him the benefit of the doubt without resorting to insults.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Suhaib Jobst

23rd September 2008, 04:22 AM

As Salaam Alaykum,

I do not belong to any particular "strand" or "group" of "salafism". I don't know where you picked up that assumption, and if you are at all familiar with my posts you will know enough about me to be certain that I do not 100% blindly support any of the "strands" of "salafiyyah" today. I don't even like to use the word "salafi" without defining exactly what I mean by the term.

You may not use the term but you express the same rhetoric and ideology. Clearly this is your own perogative, but at least don't try to hide it.

Like you, and like many reverts, I did - once upon a time - go through almost exactly the same thing that you went through: firstly inclined towards the madakhilah, then hot-headed "salafi-jihadi", then got influenced by the works of Abdalqadir al-Murabit.

You contradict yourself for a third time. Towards the beginning of our discussion you basically insinuated you were an actual member. Then you clarified it was actually some meetings you attended. But now you were "influenced" by his writings? So what's it going to be?

But brother, like I already told you in the PM I sent you, one needs to step out of not only the "cults" but also the "cult mentality". Just because you feel you have passed beyond the "phase" of what you viewed to be "salafiyyah", it doesn't mean that you are "there" yet just because you have now found the "murabitun" and you feel comfortable with them.

Your efforts to psycho-analyze me, even though you neither know me personally nor have you actually set down to know what goes on in my mind or what are my intentions, come across as quite patronizing and will not fool the honest observer.

Tell me, Suhaib, have you ever seen a woman from the murabitun deviating from the "party line" and covering her face with a veil? If you are married, ask your wife to start wearing a niqab and just see their reaction, trust me they won't be impressed.

It is not about "deviating from the party line", rather you appear to make the niqab obligatory whereas the vast majority of scholars from this Umma were all agreed that the hijab was sufficient. I accept there are differences of opinion, while you seem to insinuate that the niqab is more praiseworthy.

And why is it our business as men to dictate what the women wear? Are there not more important factors facing the Muslims? Should we not focus on ourselves before worrying about others? The tendency to obsess over women issues comes with the territory of neglecting greater responsibilities.

I realize this issue of the niqab has been misunderstood, but the Shaykh was trying to use a controversial statement in order to shake the Muslim community out of its collective stupor. He was making a statement which should be viewed in its political context rather than literally. He was making a point about how those same groups which are uncompromisingly puritan when it comes to what women wear or "isolating" them, are strangely liberal when it comes to issues such as Ribaa and the process of "Islamizing" various kaffir concepts or institutions.

I am advising you because I am concerned about you like an older brother, because I can see my old self in you at the moment, and because I know that you have it in you to come back to the "middle of the road", as al-Ghazali did before he died.

Be honest, you consciously believe that you are upon the right path so you obviously would like me to be on the same path. I have yet to see any real evidence aside from 'Salafi' claims when it comes to Imam al-Ghazali (rahimahullah) accepting the Athari creed before his death.

It is not because I have something personal against you, or because I want to "publicise" myself... good God, if I wanted to publicise myself I would have my own blog and website and be writing under my real name!

Your intention is apparently what I have explained. You seem sincere and believe that you are on the right path so you have a duty to call me to that same path. As for publicizing yourself, then it just comes across that way when you boast about your "refutation" several times in the same thread and talk about "going ahead with it". All the signs are there, you're just too presumptuous to recognize it.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam

Nu7

23rd September 2008, 05:58 AM

Wallahi it is scary how Allah changes the hearts of His slaves.

Abdullah ibn Adam

23rd September 2008, 07:59 AM

You may not use the term but you express the same rhetoric and ideology. Clearly this is your own perogative, but at least don't try to hide it.

OK bro, if you say so!

You contradict yourself for a third time. Towards the beginning of our discussion you basically insinuated you were an actual member. Then you clarified it was actually some meetings you attended. But now you were "influenced" by his writings? So what's it going to be?

Upon closer reflection there's no contradiction at all. I already clarified that I was not a "full" member, i.e. I had not made "bay'ah" to Abdalqadir. The fact is, brother, that I was influenced by his writings, and that was what led me to become close to some members and attend their meetings. Is that so difficult to understand?

Your efforts to psycho-analyze me, even though you neither know me personally nor have you actually set down to know what goes on in my mind or what are my intentions, come across as quite patronizing and will not fool the honest observer.

Well, put it this way, it's very easy to analyse you because you are saying exactly the same sort of things as I used to say, and responding exactly the same way that I did to this very same kind of advice. If you won't take the advice of someone who has already been through what you've been through, then I guess you'll just have to learn the hard way, through experience. I just hope that when you do learn, it's not too late for you...

It is not about "deviating from the party line", rather you appear to make the niqab obligatory whereas the vast majority of scholars from this Umma were all agreed that the hijab was sufficient. I accept there are differences of opinion, while you seem to insinuate that the niqab is more praiseworthy.

Did I ever say that I believe the niqab to be wajib? Because I don't believe it to be wajib. Stop these knee-jerk reactions and jumping to conclusions, Suhaib.

As for the niqab/face covering to be more praiseworthy, then this is what all ulama agree, they only differ as to whether it is wajib or mustahabb. Unlike your "shaykh" who has invented a new opinion: that it is an "evil hinduisation" on the same level as suicide bombing! La hawla wa-la quwwata illa billah.

And if you claim to deny following the party-line, then here's a simple test for you: Tell us which of the errors of Abdalqadir that I mentioned on the refutation thread that you do indeed disagree with.

And why is it our business as men to dictate what the women wear? Are there not more important factors facing the Muslims? Should we not focus on ourselves before worrying about others? The tendency to obsess over women issues comes with the territory of neglecting greater responsibilities.

There you go again, repeating the same murabitun mantra. Just because someone objects to Abdalqadir's outrageous claims about the niqab, you accuse him of being "obsessive". And just because someone comments in one place about the importance of hijab, proper women's clothing etc. does not mean that this is his constant occupation and obsession that distracts him from other more important priorities. Everything has a different priority, that is true, but this does not at all mean that we simply ignore lesser priorities altogether with the excuse that "we haven't yet completely established all of the major priorities".

I realize this issue of the niqab has been misunderstood, but the Shaykh was trying to use a controversial statement in order to shake the Muslim community out of its collective stupor. He was making a statement which should be viewed in its political context rather than literally.

What planet are you living on, Suhaib? Has all of the jumping up and down and repeating "Hayy, Hayy, Hayy" addled your perception??? Haven't you read all the things that he has repeatedly said about face covering? Haven't you seen the way that he has unmistakably mangled and raped the Tafsir of Ibn 'Atiyyah and distorted the hadith of Asma' bint Abi Bakr? Aren't Abdalqadir's own words clear enough for you?

He was making a point about how those same groups which are uncompromisingly puritan when it comes to what women wear or "isolating" them, are strangely liberal when it comes to issues such as Ribaa and the process of "Islamizing" various kaffir concepts or institutions.

For God's sake Suhaib, the man was saying that women's faces must be uncovered because it is a bid'ah and an evil hinduisation and a defiance of the Messenger of Allah and the Qur'an! Stop being such a brainwashed cultist! Has your obsession with this man actually blinded your eyes to the very words that he has clearly written in black and white?

And I know what Abdalqadir's "point" his - or at least what he claims is his point - however it is a gross exaggeration! From his articles, anyone can see that Abdalqadir is so horrendously uninformed about other Muslim groups and individuals, and already bears towards them an unhealthy amount of enmity and envy, that it is only natural that he should make such inaccurate and wide-sweeping generalisations about those outside his little club.

Be honest, you consciously believe that you are upon the right path so you obviously would like me to be on the same path. I have yet to see any real evidence aside from 'Salafi' claims when it comes to Imam al-Ghazali (rahimahullah) accepting the Athari creed before his death.

Well, I suppose that since that you are too blind to see even the words of your new mentor Abdalqadir as-Sufi whom you love so dearly, there would be even less hope for you if you were shown the proof for al-Ghazali's death on the Sunnah!

As for publicizing yourself, then it just comes across that way when you boast about your "refutation" several times in the same thread and talk about "going ahead with it". All the signs are there, you're just too presumptuous to recognize it.

I think the only reason that you are saying this is simply because I have highlighted the clear and plain errors of your newfound mentor - which are already as clear as the sun at midday to any honest person with a smattering of knowledge of the deen!

Tell me, Suhaib, what is wrong with simply taking the good that the man has brought - i.e. his good ideas about the dinar, dirham, zakah, and Islamic economics - and leaving the rest of his errors? Why do you have to insist on this "all-or-nothing" approach?

And when somebody simply points out the reality of Abdalqadir's ignorance of the deen and that he is unfit to be followed and revered to the extent that his followers do to him, you simply turn a blind eye to the facts, and start making weak excuses for him!

Tell me, Suhaib, if one sees a Scottish ex-movie-actor layman with some in-depth knowledge of Islamic economics but clear ignorance of nearly all other aspects of the deen, who then claims himself as a "shaykh", giving out disastrous and outrageous fatawa to his blind-followers, distorting history, giving his own tafsir without even having basic knowledge of the Arabic language (let alone the other sciences of tafsir), slandering and defaming and ridiculing some of the best people in this Ummah (I'll never forget the day that he described Khattab, Abu'l-Walid and the other mujahidun in Chechnya as a bunch of "wahhabi low-life mercenaries") arrogantly claiming to have "re-discovered the true Islamic fiqh" that has somehow eluded the greatest scholars of the Ummah for perhaps several centuries now... tell me, Suhaib, if one sees a person with this description, how on earth should he react except to expose and refute him?!

Suhaib, can't you wake up to the fact that you still have the same essential problem as you did in the days when you were a zealous and stubborn "jihadi-salafi"? Look at yourself, look into your heart and be honest with yourself, dear Suhaib! Will you indeed have to learn things the hard way?

My dear younger brother, I hope that you learn soon, before you get yourself stuck into circumstances that will be very difficult for you to extricate yourself from, because when that happens, it will be very difficult to change even if you really want to.

Wallahi, Suhaib, you will one day remember what I am saying to you now...