Front Page Magazine Bashes Al Maghrib Institute

[jinnzaman]

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26768

[Abuz Zubair]

The article is too detailed to be composed by a bunch of scaremongering right-wing behind FrontPage.

It seems to be, like the Dispatches, another Campaign Sufinova in the Sky

[jinnzaman]

They plan and plan, but Allah is the best of planners.

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) expose the plots of the plotters and grant victory to the Ummah. Ameen.

[Abu_Adam]

Wow... I bet the UK Sufis are just kicking themselves for not getting a mention! still, they did alright on dispatches, so that publicity should satisfy themselves for a while...

[jinnzaman]

Wow... I bet the UK Sufis are just kicking themselves for not getting a mention! still, they did alright on dispatches, so that publicity should satisfy themselves for a while...

Thats very distasteful.

By castigating Sufis as a group, you fall into the hegemonic discourse of the kuffar.

Divide and conquer.

[Abu Harun]

I don't think that it is from wisdom to interfere too much in political issues while one attempts to educate islam. Ofcourse they are two things that are inherently binding to each other. But that doesn't mean that one with no power to change something politically should mix Islamic education with affairs that belong to the rulers, even when one proclaims some political views with the intend to nurture the audiance, then still I don't think that one has put the thing in it's proper place.

Someone like Ahmadinejad may scream as much as he likes about whatever he thinks he should talk about, but his position is different then that of someone who is inviting to Islam. Not to speak about the isolated position of Ahmadinejad as a head talker of the biggest Shi'a country, which presumably makes his statements more understandable in the light of regional acceptance and feelings.

But back on topic, I don't like that article and I don't like what they have found out about them. Although I like Almaghrib Institute. I have read that there were different kind of views among the Salaf regarding politics. One which addresses to be as far as possible away from political interference, which would necessitate getting in contact with the leader, while the other standpoint is that one should interfere and advice the leader with wisdom and be carefull not to get influenced by the worldly things that come to pass. For us, here in the West, I think that it would fit us best, in many many ways, to be a-political in those things that belong to the politicians and that have no beneficial relevance in the process of learning and teaching the fundamentals of Islam. I do think that the more one expands in his reachability in teaching the people in the West, the more one should restrict his political views publicly.

This is my opinion.

Wallaahu a'lem.

Wa salaam

[Abuz Zubair]

to be a-political in those things that belong to the politicians and that have no beneficial relevance in the process of learning and teaching the fundamentals of Islam.

Render unto God what is God's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's. This is what destroyed Christianity, and in turn made the Westerners hate religion.

Islam is an invitation to reforms on all levels, from spiritual to political.

Secularism is also a heresy, and a very dangerous one, indeed. Perhaps, more prevalent and strong than Ash'arism.

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

Thats very distasteful.

By castigating Sufis as a group, you fall into the hegemonic discourse of the kuffar.

Divide and conquer.


why did abdul-hakim murad come on to the programme on "Despatches" and talk about "wahabiyyah" and hence adding more fuel to the fire the kuiffar throw at these muslims?

Who started this "boycott al-Maghrib" campaign and how do they feel that the concequences of such a move added more fuel to the fire of non-muslims writing such articles?

Will there be co-operation amongst the salafis and sufis on this issue or will they leave each opther to rot, so while one section (sufis) are invited by non-muslim groups, goverments etc to represent Islam at the cost of castigating wahabis/salafis as "militants" etc and while the salafis still debate about where to put the hands during the salah?

wa ALLAHU Musta'an!

[Abu Harun]

Render unto God what is God's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's. This is what destroyed Christianity, and in turn made the Westerners hate religion.

Islam is an invitation to reforms on all levels, from spiritual to political.

Secularism is also a heresy, and a very dangerous one, indeed. Perhaps, more prevalent and strong than Ash'arism.

I totally agree, but you have to put the things in their right context. We live in the west, not in the countries of the former Khilafa. Also, we talk about the ones who carry the da'wa, not just someone who is talking one on one. Besides, what is the use of imitating the jews as being pigs, or pondering upon what happened during WW2 on specifically the jews, or to insinuate that major sinners like homosexuals should be thrown of a mountain, or whatever. There is no fruitful link between statements like these and the goal to clean the religion from bid'a and inviting them to Tawheed in the West.

Ofcourse we are humans and we make mistakes. But those who have a big public that listens to them, they should choose their words more carefully. It is understandable that people with less islamic and secular education or less life experience are more inclined and sensitive when they are confronted with polemics between scholars and populistic speeches. But we want to have the upper hand, don't we?

In that case there should be more emotional self-control and instead of rendering things unto Caesar, rendering them unto Allah by knowing Him, by knowing how to worship Him, by knowing the prophet salAllaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, by knowing the religion of Islam with its evidences. Then acting upon them in our homes and outside our homes, then inviting the people to it and having patience when difficulty overcomes us with it. There are by far more important things to talk about then for example about which specific religion might control the media or whatever thing like that. Instead, be specific about the One who controls the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. It is from the Sunnah to know the backgrond of the people you are making da'wa to, and we should not forget that even though much of the audiance are "born muslims", the non-muslims will naturally pass by and rate what they hear and see. If in matters like these, that have more to do with feelings and politics, talking is silver, then know my friend, that silence is gold.

Wallaahu a'lem

Wa salaam

[Abu_Abdallah]

They plan and plan, but Allah is the best of planners.

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) expose the plots of the plotters and grant victory to the Ummah. Ameen.

Amin Ya Rabb.

And also those involved in this I hope:

In fact, in 2006 a boycott of Al-Maghrib’s was called for when Yasir Qadhi declared a recently-deceased and universally revered Islamic scholar, Sheikh Alawi al-Maliki, a polytheist on one of Al-Maghrib’s online forums:



While it is the general policy of Al Maghrib not to quote individuals, I make exceptions in certain cases - this being one of them. Alawi al-Maliki is one of the most revered of modern Sufi personas - to speak evil of him is tantamount to apostasy in the eyes of many of his followers. For them, he is the leader of the awliya of Allah. Yet, it is no exaggeration to state that he was one of the most active proponents in our times of blatant acts of shirk (polytheism-ed.). . .



All Islamic traditions identify “shirk” as the gravest offense possible, and therefore, making Qadhi’s pronouncement a de facto condemnation to Hell for al-Maliki. But as soon as the boycott was called for, however, Qadhi’s post was removed from the Al-Maghrib’s forum without any explanation or apology.

[y-mughal]

Somebody with his family made Hijrah for the sake of his Lord insha'Allah and this Khabeeth - may Allah disfigure his face has the audacity to turn round and say -


Whatever would lead someone to destroy their family like this needs to be wiped off of this planet like `Alî bin Abî Tâlib (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him) wiped out the terrorist Khârijites in the 7th century CE at the Battle of Nahrawân.

[Ibn Adam]

http://philomantis.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-unposted-post-on-daniel-al-jughaifi/#comment-30

Shibli Zaman foams at the mouth, prasies himself, etc- as usual

Is Philomantis Shibli's blog?

[Intoodeep]

whats happening to these US muslims..they losing their bottle faster then anything.

BTW i initially thought that Auz Zubairs refutation of Shibli was too harsh..but this guy is a grade 1 a**hole who deserves a lot worse.

[abu_ibrahim]

how do you know that is his website?

[jinnzaman]

why did abdul-hakim murad come on to the programme on "Despatches" and talk about "wahabiyyah" and hence adding more fuel to the fire the kuiffar throw at these muslims?

Sufis are not a homogenous organic entity with a hive mind. Just because one "Sufi" makes a particular statement doesn't mean all "Sufis" do as well.

The Despatches program didn't attack just "Wahhabis", you are not the only victims of the oppression of the kuffar. The universe does not revolve around you and your so-called "suffering". Other Muslims who are not Salafis or Wahhabis are also being negatively portrayed in the media and being oppressed. This is not about Salafis v. Sufis and every time you overgeneralize and blame "Sufis" or "Sufism", you fall right into the hands of the Kuffar and become their play things.


Who started this "boycott al-Maghrib" campaign and how do they feel that the concequences of such a move added more fuel to the fire of non-muslims writing such articles?

See my post in the other article. The boycott was for a specific purpose for a specific event and the reason it ended so quickly was because I got naseehah from the same "Sufis" you bash all day who told me to end it. I didn't end it because some Salafi told me to, but because people who were mureeds and participated in Hadras and engaged in "Sufi" practices said that it wasn't proper to host such a boycott.

I am not a "Sufi". Therefore, the Al Maghrib boycott was not started by a "Sufi" but it was ended because of "Sufis".

Furthermore, I didn't just get up and decide to boycott Al Maghrib, it was because of something that they did and it warranted a response. Its not like I woke up one morning and said "Wow, I'm going to boycott some Salafis and sell them out in the media to the Kuffar."


Will there be co-operation amongst the salafis and sufis on this issue or will they leave each opther to rot, so while one section (sufis) are invited by non-muslim groups, goverments etc to represent Islam at the cost of castigating wahabis/salafis as "militants" etc and while the salafis still debate about where to put the hands during the salah?

wa ALLAHU Musta'an!

To me, the differences between Salafis and Traditionalists is theological and legal in nature, it is not a political problem and the political sphere is not the proper forum to discuss our differences. The differences between us should be debated on the internet, in private behind closed doors, or at conferences. It should never occur in front of lay people, let alone the kuffar.

This isn't the first time that the kuffar have pitted Muslim groups against one another. When the Salafis first arose out of najd, the Orientalists loved them and they were supported by Western governments as being the ones who would "raise Islam out of decadence". Just like they attempted to pit the Sunnis and the Shias. Their program is to pit all Muslim groups against each other and fund both sides. This is what their strategy has been since the cold war. If you want to fall into their trap, be my guest bro.

[AbuZakariyya]

regardless of how much I disagree with Jinnzaman, I'd have to agree with him here.

wassalam

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

"When the Salafis first arose out of najd, the Orientalists loved them and they were supported by Western governments as being the ones who would "raise Islam out of decadence"

Not true at all- from history, the British were actually supporting the Ottomans, and they continued to do so until the Suez canal was built. I have never heard the Orientalists say this, and think you are making it up...

The extremist sufis love to slander the dawah of Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab with this insane lie.

[miskeen]

salaam

ibn sa'ud (d. 1930's) cooperated with the British in gaining control of the Hijaz (thus throwing out the Hashemites). I think that's what jinzaman is referring to.

[jinnzaman]

No, I wasn't referring to a government, I was referring to the Orientalists of the German and French persuasion who studied Islam in order to denigrate it. A lot of the pertinent Orientalists saw wahhabism as a the savior of Islam. They saw the classical traditions as being decadent.

Many of the Orientalists today, however, hold the opposite view.

My point is that what the kuffar think and what they side with is irrelevant. In the late 1970s, the Shias were the enemies, and now they might end up being our allies in Iraq. The Kuffar don't care about the theological supremacy of a particular group, they care about preserving their hegemony. If siding with Sufis or Salafis or Shias or Sunnis accomplishes their goals, then they don't care.

[Abd al-Haqq Marshall]

No, I wasn't referring to a government, I was referring to the Orientalists of the German and French persuasion who studied Islam in order to denigrate it. A lot of the pertinent Orientalists saw wahhabism as a the savior of Islam. They saw the classical traditions as being decadent.


Who? Who ever said this?

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

Sufis are not a homogenous organic entity with a hive mind. Just because one "Sufi" makes a particular statement doesn't mean all "Sufis" do as well.


and so where are the sufis correcting this act of treachery on the part of mr winters?

The Despatches program didn't attack just "Wahhabis", you are not the only victims of the oppression of the kuffar. The universe does not revolve around you and your so-called "suffering". Other Muslims who are not Salafis or Wahhabis are also being negatively portrayed in the media and being oppressed. This is not about Salafis v. Sufis and every time you overgeneralize and blame "Sufis" or "Sufism", you fall right into the hands of the Kuffar and become their play things.



oh so now i'm a wahabi? So who is falling into the plans of who?

I'm not talking about "wahabis suffering" I'm asking you why is it we constantly see your "shuyukh" be it kabbani or winters or hanson seeking to "get in" with the kuffar! and thus attacking other muslims publically in various ways and formats?

The Despatches Programme attacked Islam, but targeted "wahabis"/salafis sppecifically that is why they could have mr winters on the programme bigging up your manhaj, when infact he was just showing how idiotic his "anti-wahabi" approach was!


See my post in the other article. The boycott was for a specific purpose for a specific event and the reason it ended so quickly was because I got naseehah from the same "Sufis" you bash all day who told me to end it. I didn't end it because some Salafi told me to, but because people who were mureeds and participated in Hadras and engaged in "Sufi" practices said that it wasn't proper to host such a boycott.

fair enough, You can't really be to blame for the stupid boycott move being used by the kuffar, but Lets see what these people will say in relations to the latest atttakc on al-maghrib and others, but to be honest they don't really have to.

I am not a "Sufi". Therefore, the Al Maghrib boycott was not started by a "Sufi" but it was ended because of "Sufis".

Furthermore, I didn't just get up and decide to boycott Al Maghrib, it was because of something that they did and it warranted a response. Its not like I woke up one morning and said "Wow, I'm going to boycott some Salafis and sell them out in the media to the Kuffar."

:)


To me, the differences between Salafis and Traditionalists is theological and legal in nature, it is not a political problem and the political sphere is not the proper forum to discuss our differences. The differences between us should be debated on the internet, in private behind closed doors, or at conferences. It should never occur in front of lay people, let alone the kuffar.

I agree

This isn't the first time that the kuffar have pitted Muslim groups against one another. When the Salafis first arose out of najd, the Orientalists loved them and they were supported by Western governments as being the ones who would "raise Islam out of decadence". Just like they attempted to pit the Sunnis and the Shias. Their program is to pit all Muslim groups against each other and fund both sides. This is what their strategy has been since the cold war. If you want to fall into their trap, be my guest bro.

I'm not falling into their trap by siimply highlighting the stupidity and treachory of your "people of knowledge" so get a grip of yourself.

Also if we look at many article now we see them supporting the 'ash'aris and attacking the salafis/"wahabis"