Saturday, September 24, 2011



From the Layman’s Desk-14.
Part 26:   Visiting Grave is Not Grave Worship – Continued:
Branding the real Muslims who visit the Holy Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wassallam) in Madinah Munawwara and the graves of Prophets (a.s.), the Awliya-Allah, the Martyrs, the Pious, and those of ordinary Muslims  as grave worshipers is slanderous and a blatant lie because no Muslim from the time of the Holy Prophet [sal Allahu alayhi wasallam] till now ever considered these graves as places of worship.
   There is not in any of these practices one thing which calls for labeling as an unbeliever a Muslim bearing witness that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. I do not think that even the uneducated and gullible among people, not to mention the learned person versed in Islamic Law, is ever so impelled by his ignorance as to intend, by his visitation of a grave, to worship it; nor that he would ever believe that the grave itself accomplishes his need and creates what he wants.   No one has ever seen any Muslim praying towards a grave while considering it as a Qibla which is the direction faced during prayers.  The people at the Awliya’s tombs are engrossed in remembrance of Allah  They have not changed their deity nor do they say there are two gods.  They worship Allah at this place because it is a blessed and purified place. The place is associated with one of the beloved ones of Allah. It is a sign that reminds us of this great personality who is the dweller of this place.  They do not consider Awliya Allah as Idol gods. 

Billions of Muslims prayed in Madina near the Noble Grave. As for the licitness of praying in a mosque that contains or is located near the grave(s) of one or more righteous persons, it is established in the hadith of the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam): "In the Mosque of al-Khayf there is the qabr of seventy Prophets."  Narrated from Ibn `Umar by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and al-Bazzar with a chain of trustworthy narrators according to al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id (#5769, #5965).
The same Nabi Muhammad, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, who instructed us to destroy all the idols also instructed us to kiss the black stone - not for worship - but because of the stones closeness to Allah, subhana Hu wa Ta`ala. We draw an analogy between this stone and the tombs of the Awliya.  The Ka'bah is also a stone building. We pray towards it and do the tawaf around it. Does that imply worship? No!  The Ka'bah represents the presence Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, just as the shrines of the Awliya are places where Allah's, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, Rahmah descends.  We also pray at the Maqam Ibrahim, as we are clearly instructed to in the Holy Qur'an (1:125):  "And take Maqam Ibrahim as a place of Prayer" (wat takhizu min Maqam Ibrahima Musalla ) .  Maqam Ibrahim is merely a large slab of stone containing the footprints of Nabi Ibrahim, `alayhi-s-salam.  It is thousands of years old, and is not even a grave, nor the physical feet of Nabi Ibrahim, `alayhi-s-salam.  Is praying there Shirk or Kufr?  If not, then why condemn praying at the tomb of Nabi Muhammad, (sal Allahu `alayhi wasallam), and the Awliya of his Ummah!  Also just because there is a grave in the mosque does not mean that Muslims are worshipping the grave. 
There are so many relics and structures around Ka’ba.The Hajar el Aswad (the blackstone) . Opposite the N.W. a semi circular wall of white marble where the graves of Prophet Ismael (a.s.) and his mother Bibi Hajara are located.  To the N.E. , is the Maqam-e- Ibrahim where marks of his feet are miraculously preserved.  Just because they are   in the vicinity of Ka’ba; it does not make them objects of worship. They just happen to be there.   Even Kaaba is a Qiblah. The direction God told us to face when we pray to Him.  We just worship Him...

Ibn Hisham narrates that when Nabi Muhammad (sal Allahu `alayhi wasallam) had passed away, Sayyidina Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, radi Allahu `anh, went to kiss his forehead and said, "How blessed and perfumed are you when you are alive, and how blessed and perfumed are you when you have passed away."  Was he making Shirk?
Prophet (sal Allahu `alayhi wasallam) said: "You gain no victory or livelihood except through (the blessings and invocations of) the poor amongst you". (Exact words of the Saudi Validated translation by Muhsin Khan).  Yes, ultimately Allah is the only Protector and Helper but the Anbiya and the Awliya are the attracters and the reflections of His help and protection.  Only an ignoramus can deny this.

It would be relevant to also point out an excerpt from the March 22, 1980 Fatwa of  Shaykh Salih al-Na`man, of Syria:  "The Community has reached consensus on the fact that tawassul is permissible when belief is sound (idha sahhat al-`aqida), and the consensus of the Community is a legal proof (ijma` al-umma hujjatun shar`iyya); as the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) said: "My Community shall not agree on an error.”  As for the claim of some extremists (ghulat) of the Wahhabiyya whereby the law's position with regard to the person who makes tawassul is that it is shirk (worshipping other than Allah together with Him): there is no proof for such a claim either legally or rationally, because the person who makes tawassul does not contravene the Prophet's order: "If you ask, ask Allah, and if you seek help, seek help from Allah." Rather, he is asking Him through one beloved to Him in order that his supplication be answered, and this is what our Lord Glorious and Majestic likes from us. How then can we judge that he is committing shirk when he is not a mushrik (one who commits shirk). Such act the law considers abominable and our religion declares itself innocent of it, because it has been said: "Whoever declares a believer to be an disbeliever has committed disbelief."  After giving certain examples, he concludes:  From this and other narrations we conclude that some of the Wahhabis today may be guilty of hastening to accuse others of disbelief (takfir), as they have done in the past with hundreds of thousands in the Hijaz whom they massacred even as they were saying La ilaha illallah, and as the Kharijis have done in the time of our Master `Ali -- may Allah ennoble his face.  "In short, tawassul is not prohibited, rather it is legally commendable (mustahsanu shar`an), and it is not permitted (la yajuz) to cast the label of shirk on the believer. This is what will be found in the established books of Islamic law. And Allah knows best."
Imam Ramli,  for example,  holds the position that should a man throw himself onto the grave of a saint, and he is clearly motivated by a spiritual condition (hal) or the man is overwhelmed by an emotion, this act of his is neither munkar, makruh nor, least of all, "shirk". His condition, the Imam says, is like the situation of Sayyidna Bilal who rubbed his face on the grave of the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam)  upon his return from Syria.  Bilal ® was in Syria when the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) passed away. The implication here is that the practice of throwing oneself onto a grave becomes an abuse (munkar) if people ritualize it. But even here the ruling of "shirk" is absent.  The view to  declare these practices "acts of shirk" betrays a basic confusion between the concepts of "act" and of " belief". The truth is "acts" can never become "shirk" unless they are accompanied by a polytheistic mindset. Even then the "act" as such is not "shirk" - the "belief" or "mental orientation" is. The "act" is called "shirk" figuratively. It is simply flawed to call any "act" that looks like a bow or a prostration "shirk".  If this was true, Bilal ® is also a mushrik. The angels in bowing or prostrating before Nabi Adam (a.s.) and the brothers of Nabi Yusuf in performing sujud, as the Quran says, before him will have to be similarly judged.

No doubt, some of todays "petro-dollar shaykhs" would label Sayyidina Bilal ® a "Mushrik", claiming that he was worshipping the Prophet, sal Allahu `alayhi wa sallam!  Astaghfirullah.   For example, an astonishing  deviation of Ibn Baz is in his remarks on Fath al-Bari  by his characterizing the visit of the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harth - Allah be well-pleased with him - to the grave of the Prophet - Allah bless and greet him - and his tawassul for rain there as "aberrant" (munkar) and "an avenue to polytheism" (wasîla ilâ al-shirk).”  Al-Albani's and Bilal Philips' opinions only represent the wahhabi  minority.   As Sunni Shaykhs tell us, it is also a fact that Al-Albani is "self-taught" and that he never had a Shaykh to teach him the knowledge of hadeeth.  He does not possess a continuous chain of knowledge that goes back to the Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wasallam) as the other true Sunni huffaz, like Imams Nawawi, Baihaqi, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi, Nisa'i, and Ibn Hajar do. Hence, Al-Albani's interpretations and understanding that "tawassul done by an intermediary who is in his grave is Islamically unlawful" is false and meaningless.  The hadeeth of Ibn Mas'ud, related by Imam Ahmad in his "Musnad," states: "Whatever the majority of Muslims see as right, then that is good to Allah, and whatever the majority of Muslims see as wrong, it is wrong to Allah."  By this dalil, Al-Albani becomes among the stray and lost sheep because his opinions oppose that of the scholarly Sunni majority.

The so-called scholars  from the petro-dollar financed madrassas in response to their Master’s Voice do what they are best at: Spilling venom and hatred at the Sunni Muslims while many get going with their attempt to undermine the traditional Islam by altering the books of the great classical scholars of Islam and expunging from the books of  hadiths  all those sound traditions that are  not agreeable to the innovated  creed.   Such a list goes on and on headed by creating divisions in the Muslim Ummah by threats, fear and export of terrorism to many countries of the world. 
According to Yusuf Hamza, “Unfortunately, the West does not know what every Muslim scholar knows; that the worst enemies of Islam are from within. The worst of these are the khawaarij who delude others by the deeply dyed religious exterior that they project. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said about them, “When you see them pray you will consider your own prayers insignificant. They recite the Quran but it does not exceed the limits of their throat.” In other words, they don’t understand the true meanings. The outward religious appearance and character of the khawaarij deluded thousands in the past, and continues to delude people today. The Muslims should be aware that despite the khawaarij adherence to certain aspects of Islam, they are extremists of the worst type.”

In India, generally speaking,  the unsuspecting  Muslims fall an easy prey to the sophistry and chicanery of the Wahhabi-inspired  sects without investigating their claims.  When a Wahhabi oriented person accosts an ordinary or uneducated  Sunni Muslim, especially in India confronting him with the Holy Qur’an and its verses the latter is almost won over because here, and as elsewhere,  we have great reverence for anything that is attached to the Deen of Islam and it is this emotional nature which is exploited by those who have hardened hearts.  An ordinary Indian Muslim, because he doesn’t know the meaning of the Arabic words and doesn’t even know for whom the said verses are intended or that the translations being made before him are loaded with words that advance the Wahhabi creed don’t realize that they are falling into a deep chasm of heresy.   Then there is this technique of baiting the boys of impressionable age and extolling their intelligence and making them believe that they are wiser and smarter than their parents and then indoctrinating them into the Wahhabi creed.  As a result of this many Muslim homes stand divided.      

I am astonished that the subject of Aqida is hardly discussed in the Friday sermons or other gatherings to the extent that it should be done in the Sunni Masjids in our cities.   Or even if it is discussed it is just on an emotional level and not on intellectual level.  It is true that the ordinary people like me would not understand the “intellectual level”.    That is not even required!  Just give us some hints that are required to pre-empt the traps set up by a Wahhabi scholar and the sects that follow him.  A small lesson about the Ruh (Spirit/Soul),  life of Barzakh,  punishment and pleasures of the grave world, the Seerat and the teachings of our Beloved Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and the respect and the awe of the Sahaba for him (s); the life of our beloved Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) in grave, the true Aqida behind Tawassul/Istigatha, about the imperative need of love for Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and how the Sahaba loved him;  the merits and benefits of  Durud-o-Salaam; about the Surahs  and verses in Qur’an and their true meaning; and the refutations of the Wahhabi scholars by the Sunni Ulema of the past and the present.  Examples must also be given of how the texts of the Islamic books are being altered, expunged, interpolated, etc., by the Wahhabi scholars.   It cannot be over-emphasized that this subject is the need of the hour and must be given top priority by the Pesh-Imam of the Sunni Masjids in their Friday sermons and special gatherings.   Before the advent of Fitnah there was no need for all this and everyone went about the best one could do in the way of Islam. 
The Trustees of the Masjids should be good Muslims and true lovers of our Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and the Ahle-Bayt and the Awliya-Allah,  and they should never seek financial assistance from the Wahhabi funds.  Most of the Sunni Masjids are in state of disrepair so that the Wahhabis offer funds by persuading the Trustees to appoint their own Imam whereafter they take over the Masjids.    As for the poor Muslims, they are attracted by the prospect of assured “Daawat” (meal-parties) that are doled out and a chance to roam about in the country and abroad in the name of Daawah where  boarding and lodging in their own local mosques are of common occurrence.   

Islamic scholars point out that “Even today, if a person or a number of people were to petition the country of Saudi Arabia, they would receive funds or grants if they promise that a Masjid or Madrassah would be built - to teach the Wahabi cirriculum. Or if a magazine would begin to circulate then, it too would receive funds to propagate the Wahabi beliefs.  It is in this way, and by currently owning large, well equipped publishing houses, that the Wahabis have been able to mass-distribute and mass-circulate misinformation about the Ahle As Sunnah Wal Jammat and propagate their own beliefs passing them under the guise of “Salafi” Islam.  Many, if not all, of their publications are beautifully designed but, this cannot hide the fact that they are continually trying to break Sunni Muslims from a scholarship that has flourished for over 1400 years. The head office of this “organisation” is in the Najd region, that was where Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab was born.” (Alahazrat.net)
According to B. Raman, a former intelligence official in Indian Government, says that there is an attempt at spreading Wahhabism through funding from Saudi Arabia.  When a clean-shaven Muslim was not allowed to offer prayers in a Deoband mosque in Saharanpur, leading to clashes late last year, Sultan Shahin, editor of newageIslam.com, said: “The Wahabi onslaught on Sunni Indian Muslims is now acquiring overtones of Talibani extremism and violence.”

It is interesting to note that as posted on PBS.Org. (Frontline House of Saud) about 26 Saudi theologians,  including missionaries, Professors and Attorneys  addressed the Iraqi people in an open sermon at Friday prayers on Nov. 5, 2004.  Among other things they stated:
“One of the conventions of the divine law (sharia'a) -- no contentions about it among Muslims -- is the preservation of the blood of Muslims, their wealth and their honor. In the Quran, the biggest sin after apostasy is the willful killing of another believer. God said: "If a man kills a Believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (forever). And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him" (Al Nisa'a, 93).  In the book Sahih Al Bukhari [about the teachings and sayings of the prophet] "If two Muslims meet with their swords, the killer and the killed will go to hell." And in the Sahihine [another book of the prophet's sayings], Jarir said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) in his farewell hajj said to him: "And the people listened," and then said, "Do not become after me infidels hitting on each others necks [killing each other]".   And in the Sahih Al Bukari, Omar said that the Prophet (peace be upon him), said, "One is always free in his religion as long as he has not killed willfully." [The meaning of this saying is one can repent from all other sins but not from willful murder.]”

Imam Muhammad Amin Ibn Abidin, a Hanafi scholar who passed away in 1836 CE, said in his "Hashiyya radd al-Mukhtar," volume 3, page 309: "In our time Ibn Abdl-Wahhab (Najdi) appeared, and attacked the two noble sanctuaries (Makkah and Madinah). He claimed to be a Hanbali, but his thinking was such that only he alone was a Muslim, and everyone else was a polytheist! Under this guise, he said that killing the Ahl al-Sunna was permissible....."

We have seen some of the sound hadiths that say it is forbidden to commit atrocity upon Muslims and that their blood, honour and wealth are inviolable.  There is also a hadith shareef that says:  Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari reported: I asked the Messenger of Allah (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam): “Who are the most excellent among the Muslims?” He said, “One from whose tongue and hands the other Muslims are secure.” [Sahih Bukhari and Muslim]  Yet if one is sincere, one only needs to look into the History Najd and how Saudi Arabia  was carved out after slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims in Hijaz, including Makkah, Madina Munawwara, Taif and  even Karbala,  and how it gained the tacit approval of the murderers’  imperialist masters.  Even as late as in 1924 when thousands of Sunni Muslims from Taif were ruthlessly killed, plundered and religious books thrown on the streets.   We need not repeat all those incidents  here.   The History is there for all to see.  Warning: Even the history is being changed by the Wahhabi scholars.  So get your copy of the true history before it vanishes! But it may be stated that regarding the hadith 'I have been commanded to fight against disbelievers until they say La ilaha illa'llah, this hadith shows that it is not permissible to kill Muslims.   The sixth ayat al-karima of Surat at-Tawba  declares, 'Free them who make tawba and perform salat and give zakat.'  The twelfth ayat al-karima of Surat at-Tawba declares, 'They are your brothers in Islam.'  It is declared, 'We judge according to the appearance we see. Allahu ta'ala knows the secret,' in a hadith.  Another hadith  declares, 'I am not ordered to dissect the hearts of men and see their secrets.'  Hadrat Usama ® killed a man who had been heard to have said, 'La ilaha illa'llah'; when Usama claimed that the man had not had iman in his heart, Rasulullah declared, 'Did you dissect his heart?'

As stated before, the fact of the matter is they quote ayah’s like the Khawaarij because they are the Khawaarij.  Do they even  consider Surah Fusssilaat, ayah 40, where Allah says:  “Indeed, those who misinterpret Our ayat are not concealed from Us. So, is he who is cast into the Fire better or he who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection?  Do whatever you will; indeed, He is Seeing of what you do.” Do they ponder over the very words of the beloved Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wasallam when he said: “What I fear most in my community is a man who interprets passages of the Qur’an out of their context”.  Do they reflect over the words of Ibn Abbas, the one who was given direct understanding of the Qur’an three times over when said: “Do not be like the Khawarij, interpreting the ayat of the Qur’an about the common Muslims and it was only sent down regarding the People of the Book and the idol worshippers.  So they were ignorant of its knowledge and they used it to spill the blood, seize wealth and make the charge of astrayness against Muslim Orthodoxy. You must have the knowledge of what was sent down by way of these things in the Qur’an.”  But one needs to remember that “ It is striking that not one of the great muhaddiths, mufassirs, grammarians, historians, or legists of Islam has emerged from the region known as Najd, despite the extraordinary and blessed profusion of such people in other Muslim lands.” 

The Wahhabis claim that in practicing the religion and in explaining and interpreting its laws, one must take inspiration from the conduct and practice of the caliphs, the Companions {sahabah} and Followers {tabi'un} because they are closer to the time of revelation and the Prophet (s). We know that this is nothing but an empty claim and their beliefs regarding ziyarah is contrary to the sayings and practice of the Companions because even after conquering new territories, the Sahaba and the Muslim army never destroyed any graves but in fact preserved them.  For instance, when Syria was conquered during the reign of the Hadhrat Umar ® the second caliph, the Muslims preserved the graves of Hadhrat Zakariyya (Zechariah) and Yahya (John the Baptist), peace be upon them,  considering them as holy. Similarly, when Jerusalem was surrendered to Hazrat Umar (R), the graves besides the Masjid al-Aqsa were not destroyed or demolished.  It is significant to note that in Jordan there are many graves of prophets with domes erected over them.  In the occupied land of Palestine, there is the grave of Ibrahim (a.s.).  and the graves of Ishaaq (a.s.), Yaqub (a.s.) and Yusuf (a.s.); in Iraq there are the graves of Dhul Kifl (a.s.), Hud (a.s.) and Salih (a.s.).  These graves have always been there.   These graves have been there with all the Muslims for a thousand years.  The question is, if this were misquidance, why did the Muslims not demolish them?  The city wall of Constantinople was very high. The Romans were sending fireballs from the top of the wall, which did not let the Muslims make a breach in the wall and enter the city. During the siege, Hazrat Ayub Ansari, who was then 80 years old, fell very ill. He advised his companions that he should be buried as much inside the enemy territory as possible. Following the instructions, the Muslims sent a message to the Romans that if they ever tried to disrespect or mutilate the body of the companion of the Holy Prophet, they would never let them rest. The body of Hazrat Ayub was taken close to the city wall and buried there. But the expedition failed due to the strong fortification of the city.   Sultan Mohammad Fateh earned the unique honour of annexing it to the Muslim empire. He thus fulfilled the forecast of the Holy Prophet (peace by upon him): “Verily you shall conquer Constantinople. What a wonderful the leader and his army would be.” The Sultan came to be known as the conqueror of Constantinople. He was only 21 years old at that time.  After the victory, the Sultan extended liberal treatment to the city’s Christian population and renamed the city as Istanbul. The first thing the Sultan did after conquering the city was to build a mosque, near the Golden Horn, at the tomb of Hazrat Ayub Ansari, who had died during the Islamic assault on Constantinople.
So who has given permission to the Wahhabis to destroy the Islamic heritages and the graves and shrines of Muslims? Is this the way of taking inspiration from the Salaf-as-Saliheen, namely,  to eradicate Islamic legacy and heritage and to systematically remove all its vestiges so that in the days to come Muslims will have no affiliation with their religious history!  This is definitely a reprehensible innovation (Bidah) by the Wahhabis.  

Sayyid Yusuf ar-Rifa’I, the contemporary Islamic scholar from Kuwait, has in fact tendered advice to the ulema of Najd.  He states in Nasiha Li Ikhwanina ‘Ulama Najd (Advice to our brothers, the scholars of Najd): “What shamelessness  in his (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) presence the Day we come to drink from his blessed Basin! Alas! Woe and misery for a Sect that hates its Prophet whether in words or in deed, holding him in contempt and trying to eradicate his traces!” The Shaykh further thunders righteously: “You left none but yourselves as  those who are saved – forgetting that Prophet’s (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) saying: ‘If anyone says the people have perished then he has perished the most’.” This hadith shareef was narrated from Abu Hurairah by Malik, Ahmad, Muslim, al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-mufrad, and Abu Dawood.

It is further painful to note that while Islamic heritages have been destroyed by the Wahhabis,  the topographies of Makkah and Madina Munawwara are changing.  According to The Independent:   "Yet growing numbers of citizens, particularly those living in the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina, have looked on aghast as the nation’s archaeological heritage is trampled under a construction mania backed by hardline clerics who preach against the preservation of their own heritage. Mecca, once a place where the Prophet Mohamed insisted all Muslims would be equal, has become a playground for the rich, critics say, where naked capitalism has usurped spirituality as the city’s raison d’être."  According to Sami Angawi, a renowned Saudi Expert on the region's Islamic architecture:  “Both [Mecca and Medina] are historically almost finished. You do not find anything except skyscrapers.”  Therefore, the Newspaper's headline shrieks: "Islam's holiest site turning into Vegas."   As Umar bin al-Khataab (RA) said: "We were the most disgraced of people, and Allah granted us honor with Islam. No matter how much we seek honor in other than that which Allah honored us with, Allah shall disgrace us (once again)."

Rasulullah (sal-Allahu ta'ala 'alaihi wa sallam) foretold all that would happen to his umma till the Resurrection.  Among the signs of the Hour mentioned by the Noble Messenger of Allah – Allah bless and greet him and his Family and Companions – in Sahih al-Bukhari is “when the destitute (al-buhm) camelherds compete in building tall structures.” Another version in al-Bukhari has: “when the barefoot and the naked are the top leaders (lit. “heads”) of the people.” In Sahih Muslim: “you shall see the barefoot, naked, indigent (al-`âla) shepherds compete in building tall structures.” Another version in Muslim states: “when the naked and barefoot are the top leaders of the people.” A third version in Muslim has: “when you see that the barefoot and naked, the deaf and dumb are the kings of the earth.” Al-Qurtubi said: “What is meant here is the prediction of a reversal in society whereby the people of the desert country will take over the conduct of affairs and rule every region by force. They will become extremely rich and their primary concern will be to erect tall building and take pride in them. We have witnessed this in our time as well as the import of the hadith: “The hour will not rise until the happiest man will be the depraved son of a depraved father (lukka` ibn lukka`),” and also “if the leadership is entrusted to those unfit for it, then expect the hour,” both found in the authentic collections.” Ibn Hajar said in commenting this passage of the hadith in Fath al-Bari:  It was said that “bear-foot and naked,” “deaf and dumb” are their attributes by way of hyperbole, showing how coarse they are. That is, they did not use their hearing or sight in anything concerning their Religion even though they are of perfectly sound senses. The Prophet’s (saws) words: “The heads of the people” means the kings of the earth. Abu Farwas’ narration names the kings explicitly. What is meant by them is the people of the desert country, as was made explicit in Sulayman al-Taymi’s and other narrations: “Who are the barefoot and naked?” He answered: “The Bedouin Arabs.”  Al-Tabarani relates through Abu Hamza, on the authority of Ibn `Abbas from the Prophet Muhammad, sallahu alayhi wa sallam, that “one of the signs of the change of the Religion is the affectation of eloquence by the rabble and their betaking to palaces in big cities.”  Anas b. Malik narrated that the Prophet said: Dajjal will come and put a camp at a place outside Madina and Madina will shake three times whereupon every Kaafir and hypocrite will go out of the Madina towards him. [Sahih al-Bukhari Vol.9, book 88, Hadith No. 239]. 

It is worth remembering that the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) has positively and categorically stated that his Ummah will never commit Shirk as the following hadith shows:  Uqba ibn Amir reports that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) left one day and prayed for the martyrs of Uhud. Then he returned to the Minbar and said: ‘I am preceding you. And I am a witness (Shaheed) over you all. I swear by Allah! I am verily looking at the Hawdh Kauthar now. And verily, I have been given the keys to the treasures of the earth, or the keys to the earth. And verily, I swear by Allah! I do not fear that you will commit Shirk after me. But I do fear you will compete and fight with one another.’
(Sahih al-Bukhari; Book of Funerals; Chapter; Prayer on a Martyr)

This sahih hadith states that his umma will never worship idols, that he was assured of it.  This hadith ash-Sharif demolishes Wahhabism by the roots, for the Wahhabite book claims that the Ummat al-Muhammadiyya worship idols, that Muslim countries are full of idols, that tombs are idol-houses. It says that one also becomes a disbeliever by not believing that he who expects help or intercession at shrines is a disbeliever.    Why did Hadhrat Abu Bakr ® and Hadhrat Umar ® express their desires to be buried near the Rawdah al-Mutahhara of Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam)?  Any how, not believing what the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) said about his Ummah not becoming polytheists is disobedience and rebellion against him (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and against Allah (swt) whose beloved Messenger he (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) is,  and it also  falsely attributes lies  to  the one who reported this hadith.    Remember! It was Iblis  who was the first one to rebel against Allah and his commandment on the so-called ground of Tauhid.   Allah tells us how He issued an unconditional command to Iblis to leave the position he held among the highest of heights. He told him that he was an outcast, i.e., cursed, and that he would be followed by a curse that would hound him until the Day of Resurrection.  The angels who obeyed Allah and prostrated before Adam pursuant to Allah’s commandment were blessed.  Yet the Wahhabis/Deobandis  say:

“All Prophets are useless.” (maazAllah) (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 29).
 “If Allah so wishes, he can create millions like Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam).” (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 16).
The Prophet is to be respected only as an elder brother.” (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 58).
“The Prophet was at the end of his wits” (Astagfirullah) (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 55).
The Prophet of Allah doesn’t know what will become of him in the end, and he doesn’t know what lies behind the wall.” (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 51). 
“The knowledge that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has received from Allah is the kind of knowledge that animals, lunatics and children have.” (Hifzul Eeman, page 7).  10.
 “Deobandi Maulvi saved the Prophet from falling (into Hell).” (Astagfirullah) (Bulghatul Hairaan, page 8).
There is no harm in saying "La Ilaha Illalahu Ashraf Ali Rasoolullah" and "Allahuma Salli Ala Sayidina Wa Nabeeyina Ashraf Ali". (Risalah Al Imdaad page 35, month of Safar 1336 H, Roodaad-e-Munaazirah ‘geya’, Al- Furqaan V 3 page 85).
Not being content with insulting the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) they utter further blasphemy:
“Allah does not know beforehand what people will do; after people do something, Allah comes to know about it.” (Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan, page 157- 158). 
Dear Readers:  The above blasphemies are just the tips of the iceberg.  These have been cited only to show that those who degrade Allah and the prophets while at the same time extolling the Satan directly or indirectly can never be on the right path of Islam.  Get away from such groups and sects with all the haste you can.  Of course the Sunni Islamic scholars refuted all those blasphemous statements soundly.  At least some 250 books were written as a rebuttal to Taqwiyatul Iman in various languages.  As has been pointed out, In India, "The movement to protect the Ahlu's Sunnah and to reinstill the respectof the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) in the hearts of Muslims was led by the scholars of Khairabad, Badayun and Bareilly.  This movement came into prominence as an answer to the Wahabbi movement and was greatly aided by the Imam of the Ahlu's Sunnah, Maulana Ahmed Raza Hanafi Qadri Barkati of Bareilly, India (d.1340 AH/1921 c.e.) whose immense knowledge and outstanding knowledge saw to it that the creed of Ahlu's'Sunnah, the creed of our predecessors, the creed of our elders prevailed."
Lastly, we shall conclude with the warning given by the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam): The Beloved Prophet (Sal Allahu alaihi wasallam) said:

"In the period prior to the Day of Judgement, false and deceitful groups will emerge. They will say things to you, which neither you nor your forefathers will have ever heard before. Stay away from these deceitful people and do not let them come near you!  Do not be misguided by them and do not let them cause strife amongst you!" (Sahih Muslim)

Allah and his Rasool knows best!


All good is from Allah Ta’ala whereas mistakes are from this humble speck.  May Allah Ta’ala bless all readers and May He bring you closer to Him and His Rasul Allah sal Allahu alayhi wasallam.  May He accept our humble efforts and may He grant us the capacity to be good and do good.  Ameen!


O Allah pray on our Master Muhammad a prayer by means of which we will be saved from every awe-inspiring harmful thing, 
and that will take care of all of our needs,
and purify us by means of it from all of our ugly qualities and characteristics
and raise us and purify us by means of it from all of our ugly qualities and characteristics
and raise us up by means of it in Your Presence to the highest of degrees,
and cause us to reach by means of it the extremes of all goodness in our life and after our death
and this prayer be upon his family and his companions
and may he be given safety and much salaam.                                                                     

Monday, September 19, 2011


From the Layman’s Desk-14.
Part 25: Continued – Visiting Grave is not Grave Worship: 

It is a blatant and shameless lie that the Sunnis visit the grave for worship.  The deviant sects  just throw these words at Sunni Muslims to keep their own herd happy  and satisfied with self-righteousness.   The Wahhabis applied to the Muslim monotheists the Qur'anic verses that were revealed concerning the idolaters, holding on to these  for declaring Muslims disbeliever. The  Quranic verses  may be listed as follows:
"Nor call on any other than Allah such as can neither profit thee nor hurt thee: if thou dost, behold! thou shalt certainly be of those who do wrong" (10:106);
"To Him is due true prayer; any others that they call upon besides Him hear them no more than if they were to stretch forth their hands for water to reach their mouths but it reaches them not. For the prayer of those without faith is vain prayer" (13:14);

"Say: Call on those besides Him whom ye fancy; they have no power to remove your trouble from you or to change them. Those unto whom they cry seek for themselves the means of approach to their Lord, which of them shall be the nearest; they hope for His mercy and fear His wrath: for the wrath of thy Lord is something to take heed of" (17:57).

"So call not on any other god with Allah, or thou will be among those who will be punished" (26: 213);

"And those whom you invoke besides Him own not a straw. If ye invoke them, they will not listen to your call, and if they were to listen, they cannot answer your prayer. On the day of Judgment they will reject your partnership and none, O Man! can inform you like Him who is All-aware" (35:13-14);

"And who is more astray than one who invokes besides Allah such as will not answer him to the day of judgment and when mankind are gathered they will become enemies for them, and deny having been worshipped" (46:5-6);

"Do not call on anyone along with Allah" (72:18);

The above ayahs have been revealed regarding the Arab idolaters.  But ibn Wahhab conveniently thinks differently.  He says that if someone seeks help by the Prophet, implores or calls upon Allah by means of the Prophet or someone  else among prophets, awliya or pious is considered an idolater in the light of the above verses.  According to him even if someone visits the grave of Prophet’s (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and asks for his (s) intercession is also an idolator within the meaning of the verses.   He thought he was a Hanbali.  Now see what the Imam Ahmad of Hanbali Madhhab used to do: 
Imam Ahmad made tawassul through the Prophet [sal Allahu alayhi wasallam] as a part of every Dua. This is reported by`Ala' al-Din al-Mardawi  in his book al-Insaf fi ma`rifat al-rajih min al-khilaf `ala madhhab al-Imam al-mubajjal Ahmad ibn Hanbal (3:456). The correct position of Hanbali School of Thought is that  it is permissible in one's supplication (du`a) to use as means a pious person (dead or alive), and it is desirable. 

It is also interesting to see the answer of Shaykh Abu Adam Naruiji, “The problem that Wahabis have with merely calling the name of a dead person comes from their belief that Allah is a kind of creature.  This makes it difficult for them to come up with a way of thinking of themselves as monotheists. After all, since what they worship and call Allah (but isn’t actually Allah), is simply another physical thing, all physical things become potential rivals. This leads to paranoid delusions, such as thinking that calling the name of a dead person is shirk.  For a Muslim, however, the basis for monotheism is clear. It is the belief that Allah does not have a partner, parts or a likeness to creation. As long as one believes this, one has not committed shirk by calling a dead person, because one does not believe that the dead person has any power to create at all, but is merely a creation, whose calling may or may not correlate with a desired effect created by Allah.”

Imam Shawkani is a major authority for the "salafis" due to his stance on Taqlid.  He  says in al-Durr al-nadid fi ikhlas kalimat al-tawhid:
There is no harm in tawassul through any one of the Prophets or Friends of Allah or scholars of knowledge... One who comes to the grave as a visitor (za'iran) and invokes Allah alone, using as his means the dead person in the grave, is as one who says: "O Allah, I am asking that you cure me from such-and-such, and I use as a means to You whatever this righteous servant of Yours possesses for worshipping You and striving for Your sake and learning and teaching purely and sincerely for You." Such as this, there is no hesitation in declaring that it is permitted...
He also says in al-Durr al-nadid: Regarding what those who forbid tawassul to Allah through the Prophets and the saints cite to support their position, such as Allah's sayings:
· "We only worship them in order that they may bring us nearer" (39:3)
· "Do not call on any other god with Allah, or you will be among those who will be punished" (26:213)
· "Say: Call on those besides Him whom ye fancy; they have no power to remove your trouble from you or to change them. Those unto whom they cry seek for themselves the means of approach to their Lord, which of them shall be the nearest; they hope for His mercy and fear His wrath: for the wrath of thy Lord is something to take heed of" (17:57)
These verses are irrelevant.  Rather: they support exactly the reverse of what the objectors to tawassul claim, since the verses are related to another issue. To wit: the verse "We only worship them in order that they may bring us nearer" explicitly states that they worship them for that purpose, whereas the one who makes tawassul through a scholar, for example, never worships him, but knows that he has a special distinction (maziyya) before Allah for being a carrier of knowledge; and that is why he uses him as a means.  Similarly irrelevant to the issue is Allah's saying: "Do not call on any other god with Allah." This verse forbids that one should call upon another together with Allah, as if saying: "O Allah and O So-and-so." However, the one who makes tawassul through a scholar, for example, never calls upon other than Allah. He only seeks a means to Him through the excellent works that one of His servants achieved, just as the three men in the cave who were blocked by the rock used their good works as a means to have their petition answered.  Similarly irrelevant to the issue is Allah's saying: "Those unto whom they cry..." for it refers to people who call upon those who cannot fulfill their request, at the same time not calling upon Allah Who can; whereas one who makes tawassul through a scholar, for example, never called except upon Allah, and none other besides Him. 

The above shows the reader that these objectors to tawassul are bringing forth evidence that is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Even more irrelevant is their citing of the verse:  "The Day when no soul shall have power to do anything for another: for the Command, that Day, will be all with Allah." (82:19)

for that noble verse contains nothing more than the fact that Allah alone decides everything on the Day of Judgment, and that none other will have any say at that time. However, the maker of tawassul through one of the Prophets or one of the scholars, never believes that the one through whom he makes tawassul is in partnership with Allah on the Day of Judgment! Whoever believes such a thing in relation to a Prophet or non-Prophet is in manifest error.
Equally irrelevant is their objection to tawassul by citing the verses: · "Not for you is the decision in the least" (3:128)
· "Say: I have no power over  good or harm to myself except as Allah wills" (7:188)  for these two verses are explicit in that the Prophet has no say in Allah's decision and that he has no power to benefit or harm himself in the least, let alone someone else: but there is nothing in those two verses to prevent tawassul through him or any other of the Prophets or Friends of Allah or scholars.
Allah has given His Prophet the Exalted Station (al-maqam al-mahmud) -- the station of the Great Intercession (al-shafa`a al-`uzma), and He has instructed creation to ask for that station for him and to request his intercession, and He said to him: "Ask and you shall be granted what you asked! Intercede and you shall be granted what you interceded for!" And in His Book He has made this dependence on the fact that there is no intercession except by His leave, and that none shall possess it except those whom He pleases...

Equally irrelevant is their adducing as proof against tawassul:
 "And admonish your nearest kinsmen" (26:214)
whereupon the Prophet said: "O So-and-so son of So-and-so, I do not have any guarantee on your behalf from Allah; and O So-and-so daughter of So-and-so, I do not have any guarantee on your behalf from Allah."
For in the preceding there is nothing other than the plain declaration that he cannot benefit anyone for whom Allah has decreed harm, nor harm anyone for whom Allah has decreed benefit, and that he does not have any guarantee from Allah from any of his close relatives, let alone others. This is known to every Muslim.  There is nothing in it, however, that prohibits making tawassul to Allah through the Prophet, for tawassul is a request from the One Who holds power to grant and deny all requests. The petitioner who makes tawassul only desires to place, at the front of his petition, what may be a cause for the granting of his petition by the One Who alone gives and withholds, the Owner of the Day of Judgment.
So the views of Imam Shawkani are in favour of Tawassul and visiting the graves of prophets and awliya-Allah and the pious.  In other words, time and again it has been proven that the Wahhabis have no real evidence but by showing those aforesaid Quranic verses to the Muslim laity they try to fool the Muslims into believing that the aforesaid verses are against Tawassul and visiting of the graves – the claim that has been made hollow by the Imam whom they hold dear.  Even the arch innovator and Salafi scholar Al-Albani could not wriggle out on the validity of Tawassul.  He states in his in ‘Al-Tawassul’: “Even though some of them have been allowed by some of the Imams, so for instance Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal allowed tawassul through the Prophet alone, and others such as Imam Al-Shawkani allowed tawassul through his [pbuh] and through others from the Prophets and the righteous.”
Let us now check out some other Quranic verses that are cited by those who are against Tawassul/Istigatha:
And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort, (An-Najm 53:39)
“…Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another’s load…..” (Al-Anam, 6:164)
Allah tasketh not a soul beyond its scope. For it (is only) that which it hath earned, and against it (only) that which it hath deserved….(al-Baqra, 2:286)

Plainly and tersely,  the above verses are related to the deeds of a person concerned and their consequences – whether good or bad – and the burden of sin that each one of us have to bear individually and give accounts for our sins of commissions and omissions.  There is no reference there about intermediation.     As is known, involving someone else, i.e. a  beloved person or beloved object forms the subject-matter of Tawassul.   Hence, to borrow the word from Imam Shawkani, they are “irrelevant” for the purpose of disproving intermediation because they are not even remotely connected with Tawassul about which they object.  Once again, it is seen that quoting Quranic verses out of context is also the usual pastime of the opponents of Tawassul. 

To continue Insha Allah…

Tuesday, September 13, 2011


From Layman's Desk-14.
Part 24: Continued:

Calling Grave Visitation as Grave Worship is a filthy slur cast by Wahhabis on the Majority Muslim Ummah (Very Briefly):

Some of the characteristics of the Muslim majority, who are called Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jama’ah, can be distinguished from the following prophetic traditions:   When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam) replied, "The group on the right path, which will enter Paradise, will be the group which follows my Sunna and that of my Sahaba and this will be the largest group of Muslims."  [Tirmidhi, Imam Ahmad, Abu Daud, Mishkat]  There are many such ahadith in favour of Ahl as- Sunna wal Jama’ah.  The Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam) said "Without doubt my Ummah will never be gathered in misguidance.  Whenever you see disagreement, then hold fast to the Sawad-e-A'zam (the great majority)" [Ibne Majah].  

Now, the above-mentioned orthodox or real Sunnis have their roots in the Salaf as-Saliheen who have been praised by Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) as the best of  generations who lived during the period of first three hundred years after the Hijrah (622 c.e.) or emigration of the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) to Madina Munawwara.  The Sunnis   follow one of the four surviving Madhhabs or the Schools  of Thought represented by  the four great Imams of Jurisprudence:  Imam Abu Hanifa ® (80 - 150 A.H ); Imaam Malik ® (93-179 A.H.);  Imam Idris Shafi ®(150 - 240 A.H); Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal ® (164 - 241 A.H). The overwhelming majority of scholars have adhered to a Madhhab loyally with only a handful of dissidents who have failed to make a significant  impact on the Sunni Islam.  ‘The proof that taqlid is obligatory is the ijma` of the Companions. For they used to give fatwas to the ordinary people and did not command them to acquire the degree of ijtihad for themselves.

In his book,  Mujarribaat,  Imam Ghazzali ® (450 AH-505 AH) states:  “The Ahl as-Sunnah Wal Jama'ah is the sucessful group and it is this group which weighs or determines its thoughts and its mind according to the scales of the Noble Quran." 
Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dehlwi (Radi Allahu anhu) states in his book Fatawah Azeezi " The various parts of the Ahl as-Sunnah Wal Jama'ah in Aqaa'id (belief) such as the Ash'ariyah, the Maaturdi; in Fiqh (Law) such as the Hanafi, the Shaafi, the Hanbali, the Maaliki; in Tassawaf (Sufi Orders) such as the Qadiri, the Chisti, the Naqshabandi, the Suharwardi; this servant considers all of them to be the truth." 

The Wahhabis/Salafis have strayed away from  the main body of the Muslim Majority, i.e. the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jama’ah.   The Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam) said "Follow the way of the largest group of Muslims!  For, he who deviates from this group will be thrown into Hell!" [Ibne Majah]   The Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam) said " He who deviates from the largest group of Muslims, even as much as a hand span, has himself cut off his connection with Islam." [Abu Daud, Imam Ahmed].  Therefore, in the light of these ahadith and in conjunction with the aforementioned ahadith it is abundantly clear that they do not qualify to be considered as Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jama’ah.  There is no fifth Madhhab by the name of Salafiyya in the Ahl as-Sunna wal Jama’ah; nor there ever was during the time of Salaf-as-Saaliheen and thereafter.  These new sects are only of recent origin. 

For example, Ibn Taimiyya compares Allah to Moon.  Ibn Taymiyyah says Allah (SWT) needs, He is divisible and Settles in a Place.  According to Islamic scholars:  Ibn Taymiyya nowhere explicitly rejects limit and dimension for Allah. In fact he says in his answer to Razi ('al-Ta'sis') that the rejection of limit (Hadd) and dimension (qadr) for Allah is nowhere found in the Book and the Sunna (as quoted in Kawthari's 'Maqaalaat' p. 351), whereas the Sunni `aqeedah explicitly states: "The Glorious and Exalted Lord is above and beyond sharing in the properties of having directions or spatial limits: thoughts cannot measure Him, locations cannot contain Him, dimensions cannot encompass Him" (Imam al-Juwayni in 'Lam` al-adillat fi qawaa`id `aqaa'id ahl al-sunna' [The Radiance of Proofs Concerning the Bases of the Beliefs of Ahl al-Sunna]). Ibn Taymiyya even says that there are two kinds of tashbeeh [likening of God], one of which "whose meaning it would be improper to disallow" (Beirut edition of 'Majmoo` fataawa shaykh al-islam...' 3:172, and again in the 'Ta'sis' that "the Book, the Sunna, and the Consensus nowhere say that all bodies are necessarily created, nor that Allah Himself is necessarily not a body" (quoted in Kawthari p. 350).] 

The Salafi scholar Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips says:  He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit.  He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.    The great Sunni Ash`ari scholar, Imam al-Bayhaqi, in his Manaqib Ahmad relates with an authentic chain that Imam Ahmad said:  A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says:  Allah is a body but not like other bodies.

The Imam Abu Mansur `Abd al-Qaahir al-Baghdaadi says in his book 'al-asmaa' wa al-Sifaat' that al-Ash`ari and most of the theologians (mutakallimeen) have pronounced every innovator whose innovation consists in or leads to disbelief, a disbeliever. This is the case for one who declares that the One he worships has a form/image (Sura), or that He has a limit or a boundary (Haddan wa nihaaya), or that movement and stillness may be applied to Him. There is no ambiguity for anyone endowed with a conscience that they are unbelievers, the Karrami anthropomorphists of Khurasaan who said that "God is a body with a limit and an end under Him" (inna Allaha jismun lahu Haddun wa nihaayatun min taHtihi) and that "He is in contact with His Throne" (wa innahu mumassun li `arshihi), and that "He is the locus of newly occurred events" (wa innahu mahallu al-Hawaadith), and that "His speech and His will are created in Him" (wa annahu yaHduthu feehi qawluhu wa iraadatuhu).
Dr. Ahmad al-Hijazi al-Saqqa points out that Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymeen differentiates between the 'kursi' and the '`arsh'.   He says ('SharH al-`aqeeda al-waasiTiyya' p. 15): "The kursi is the place of the two feet, and the `arsh is that upon which Allah made istiwaa'." The meaning of his words is that Allah sits on the `arsh and then places His Feet on the kursi. This is anthropomorphism (tajseem).  It is not permitted to differentiate (between kursî and `arsh), for the one who sits on the `arsh does not place his feet on the kursî; also, there are many texts adducing that the `arsh is the kursî.  Dr al-Saqqa gives other pieces of evidence to show how the late Saudi scholar ‘Uthaymeen  consolidates Tajseem.   "Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymin reinforces his anthropomorphism by saying (Sharh p. 42):  "It is established that Allah Most High has feet (al-qadam thâbit lillâhi ta`âlâ), and Ahl al-Sunna have explained the leg and foot (al-rijl wa al-qadam) as being literal according to what befits Allah (haqîqatan `alâ al-wajhi al-lâ'iq billâh); whereas the "People of Figurative Interpretation"16 (Ahl al-Ta'wîl) have explained al-rijl as being the group which Allah will place in the Fire, and al-qadam as being those who are sent forth (muqaddamîn) to the Fire... and I reject and return their explanation to them on the grounds that it contravenes the external meaning of the words (mukhâlifun li zâhir al-lafz)." 

Shaykh Gibril Haddad writing again on `Uthaymin: In his commentary on Ibn Taymiyya's `Aqida Wasitiyya, `Uthaymin commits tamthîl - making up similes - by comparing Allah Most High to the sun, stating that "Allah is in the heaven in person (bi dhâtihi) but despite this He draws near to the servant during the latter's prayer, just as the sun is in the heaven, while its rays reach creatures on earth."

In his books, Imam Ghazali refutes the deviance of those who apply to Allah Ta`ala some attributes which only befit created entities.  In one of his books he  writes:  - "He [Allah Ta`ala] is not a body with a form, or a limited, quantitative substance, not resembling bodies in quantifiability or divisibility, or in being a substance or qualified by substance, or in being an accident or qualified by accidents. He does not resemble anything that exists, nor does anything that exists resemble Him. There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, nor is He like unto anything. He is not delimited by magnitude, contained by places, encompassed by directions, or bounded by heavens or earth." (Qawa'id, 1.3)


Just a cursory mention here since this is not our subject proper.     An Islamic scholar points out on his website:   Today some people claim to teach us Tawhid. We have to remember that there are two types of Tawhid - the true Tawhid, and the false tawhid. We have to beware of the false tawhid, which is the tawhid of Iblis, as it started with him.Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, ordered Iblis (Shaytan) to Sujud (prostrate) before Nabi Adam, `alayhi-s-salam, out of veneration. Iblis responded that he only venerates Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, and nobody else. What is Iblis's fate? Hell.The cursed Iblis was the first 'Aalim' who thought that venerating a friend of Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, is against Tawhid. So those who do not want us to honour the people who Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, has honoured by making them His Awliya, are like Iblis - claiming to honour Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, exclusively, and not honouring the friends of Allah, subhanahuwa Ta`ala.  The Malaika (Angels) knew that true belief in Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, means loving, respecting, and venerating all those close to him, so they bowed to Adam (a.s), and were blessed.

The prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) is related to have said in Sahih Muslim:  “O Allah, You are the first: there is nothing before You; and You are the last: there is nothing after You. You are the Manifest (al-Zahir): there is nothing above You. You are the Hidden (al-Batin): there is nothing below You.”
[ Sahih Muslim, kitab al-dhikr wal-du`a wal-tawba wal-istighfar, bab ma yaqulu `ind al-nawm wa-akhd al-madhja,

In an interesting analysis of Tawheed,  as understood and practised by the Wahhabis, a modern Islamic scholar, Abu Muhammad Ibraheem al-Hanbali provides us with penetrating insight.  He says:   The Wahhabis are in great kufr concerning their creed. They say:
1. The mushrikeen were upon tawheed ur-Rububiyyah – Yet this is refuted by the simple fact they took Lords besides Allah, they worshipped a pantheon of deities besides Allah, and considered Allah to be the top ranking god of this pantheon. Yet the Wahhabies suggest their tawheed would have been perfect if they had not CALLED UPON others besides Allah. This is because their understanding of shirk is flawed within itself.
2. The Wahhabis define tawheed ul-Uluhiyyah to single Allah out in worship, and at the same time they define shirk to CALL UPON others besides Allah. They say the ONLY thing that negated the faith of the mushrikeen is that they CALLED UPON others besides Allah. Wahhabis do not take into account that the mushrikeen BELIEVED in 360 gods and attributed to them powers of divinity. All they were called to do [according to Wahhabi Islam] is to stop calling upon them and SINGLE OUT Allah in WORSHIP. This is the shirk in the Wahhabi creed, because to define tawheed as to SINGLE OUT ALLAH IN WORSHIP is like saying, “there is a moon god, a sun god, a hubal god, hmmm i think I will pick the Allah god to worship, I still believe in those gods, but I will just single out Allah today in my pantheon of taghut”. Let it be known, that the mere belief of another god of the possibility besides Allah merits disbelief, not to believe in 360 gods and then all of a sudden it only becomes shirk when they are CALLED UPON. This is the folly of Wahhabi creed.
“Do they consider the words of Ibn Umar who said about people who use ayahs in the very fashion that they do:  ‘They are the most evil of Allah’s creation for they re-interpret the passages that were revealed about the Kuffar and use them upon the [Muslim] believers’[Saheeh al-Bukhaari, vol. 9, p. 50; Fath ul-Baari, vol. 12, Kitaab Istitaabat ul-Murtadeen, p. 397]
“They accuse the believers of shirk and kufr by re-interpreting the passages that were revealed for  the Kuffar and then applying them to the believers. The Holy Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam said to the effect that they would not understand the Qur’an when he said “They will recite the Qur’an but it will not go past their throats”  Do they consider? No! They are dumbstruck!”

Classical terminologies have been given new meanings to suit their creed and thus changing the meaning of Tawheed, Shirk, Ilah, Ibaadah, and Dua’about which an entire post was devoted before in explanation that Dua’ does not always mean “worship”. 

As stated above, Sunni Muslims believe in four imams of fiqah or Islamic laws such as Hanfi, Hanbali, Malaki and Shafi’i  whereas Wahhabis don't follow any Imam in Fiqh and are therefore called La-Madhhabi. The threat lies in their hatred of the Imams, especially Imam Abu Hanifa.    Salafis and the like minded groups , in particular,  stop people from following of four Imams of fiqh, but they do follow Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul Wahhab blindly.  Sometimes in order to delude Muslims, they say they also follow the four Imams in Fiqh or that they follow the Hanbali Fiqh.  The later scholars have even distanced themselves from being Hanbalis.  The psuedo-Salafis also attack Hadrat Imam Ghazali (d.1111 c.e.), accusing him of being a deviant Sufi despite the fact that Tasawwuf is an integral part of the Deen of Islam as emphasized in the Hadith-e-Jibreel where it is abundantly made clear that the 'Deen' comprises of Islam, Eeman and Ihsan - the last word being the original Arabic word for Tasawwuf. 

Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi states:  Ibn Taymiyyah's deviance paved the way for many sects which are today active in making propaganda, and in diverting many uneducated Muslims from the Path of Sunnah and Jama`ah.  Sects like Wahhabis (pseudo-Salafis), Deobandis, Mawdudiyyun, Ikhwan al-Muslimin, Albaniyyun, Qaradawiyyun are nothing but a contemporary consequence of the fitnah which was caused by the diffusion of the heresies of Ibn Taymiyyah and of his student Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, the same heresies that - during the twelfth century of hijrah - were resurrected and aggravated by Muhammad Ibn `Abdi 'l-Wahhab an-Najdi.”
A prominent Islamic Scholar of  Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s time, Muhammad Amin Ibn Abidin wrote in his famous work ‘Hashiyya Radd Al-Mukhtar’ (Vol. 3, Page 309).  as follows:
“In our time Ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi appeared and attacked the two noble sanctuaries (Makkah and Madinah). He claimed to be a Hanbali, but his thinking was such that only he alone was a Muslim, and everyone else was a polytheist! Under this guise, he said that killing the Ahle Sunnah was permissible.”

The orthodox Sunni scholar Shaykh Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi said that the teachers of Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, including two teachers he had studied with in Madina – Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi and Shaykh Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi – became aware of his anti-Sunni Wahhabi creed and warned Muslims about him. His shaykhs, including the two aforementioned shaykhs, used to say:  “God will allow him [to] be led astray; but even unhappier will be the lot of those misled by him.” Moreover, Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab’s own father had warned Muslims about him, as did his biological brother, Sulayman Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, an orthodox Sunni scholar who refuted him in a book entitled al-Sawa’iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd `ala al-Wahhabiyya [“Divine Lightnings in Refuting the Wahhabis”].  Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab was refuted by the orthodox Sunni scholars for his many ugly innovations. Perhaps his most famous book, Kitab at-Tawheed (Book of Unity of God) is widely circulated amongst Wahhabis worldwide, including the United States. His book is popular in Wahhabi circles, although orthodox Sunni scholars have said that there is nothing scholarly about it, both in terms of its content and its style.

Shaykh Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi al-Hanbali al-Makki also states in his Al-Fajr as-Sadiq: “Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab claimed absolute ijtihad for himself and charged with error whoever preceded him belonging to the Mujtahids -- those great figures who dipped from the sea of knowledge of the Prophet -- and declared disbeliever their followers.  He did not permit imitating the opinions of anyone other than himself, although he allowed anyone his of his ignorant followers to interpret the Qur'an in whatever mode their limited understanding gave them access, and to derive legal rulings from them on the basis of their weak grasp of its meaning. It was as though he permitted any one of his followers to be a mujtahid. Look at the way he played with religion and toyed with the Shari`a of the Faithful Messenger of Allah!  As for his claim of absolute ijtihad, it is pure silliness on his part and shameless impudence with regard to the Arab language since he was not in his time one of those recognized for being foremost in knowledge. On the contrary, he was not even numbered among those who were considered by masters in the Hanbali madhhab as having any weight whatsoever, not to mention being considered an absolute mujtahid in the religion.”

The learned Sayyid al-Haddad al-Alawi said: "In our opinion, the one element in the statements and actions of Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab that makes his departure from the foundations of Islam unquestionable is the fact that he, without support of any generally accepted interpretation of Qur'an or Sunna (bi la ta'wil), takes matters in our religion necessarily well-known to be objects of prohibition (haram) agreed upon by consensus(ijma`) and makes them permissible(halal). Furthermore, along with that he disparages the prophets, the messengers, saints and the pious. Willful disparagement of anyone failing under these categories of person is unbelief( k u f r ) according to the consensus reached by the four Imams of the schools of Islamic law.

Remember also that Islam is facing one of the greatest threats in history and this threat is from within.  The Four Schools of Thought (Madhhabs) have survived  the specters  of Fitna and disunity in early history of Islam and have emerged as the greatest binding factor that has kept the Muslim Ummah united.  The schisms in the early period of Islam had been predicted by the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) when he said:  Whoever among you outlives me shall see a vast dispute" (Imam Tirmidhi).   As Abdal-Hakim Murad (born 1960) points out:  Only the inherent sanity and love of unity among scholars of the ummah assisted, no doubt, by Providence overcame the early spasms of factionalism, and created a strong  and harmonious Sunnism which has, at least on the purely religious plane, united ninety percent of the ummah for ninety percent of its history

However, does it require any intelligence to understand that the Wahhabi stance of anti-madhabism is but playing into the hands of the enemies of Islam aided and abetted by enormous financial and oil resources!   Imam Zahid al-Kawthari has refuted anti-Madhhabism in his book al-la Madhhabiyya Qantaratu al-Ladiniyya (Anti-Madhabism is the Archway of Atheism).  So have other Sunni scholars.  Some Sunni scholars, however, have taken a positive stance in the sense that La-Madhhabiyya gives an idea of anti-traditional trends inside Islam and fulfills the prediction of the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) who said:  “The last of this Umma will curse and disparage the first.”  
A befitting reply has been given by Hajj Gibril at http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=890&CATE=1
Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti has also articulated the orthodox response to the anti-Madhhab trend in his book: Non-Madhhabism: The Greatest Bida Threatening the Islamic Shari`a.  
Is it not reasonable to hold that everyone cannot be one's own Mufti just as everyone cannot be one's own doctor?  If this were not so, then it would not have been stated in Qur'an al-kareem:

"So you should ask people of knowledge if you yourselves do not know (about something)."
[Qur’an (an-Nahl) 16:43]

There are rigorous conditions for the persons wishing to do Ijtihad for himself:  According to Shaykh Abdul-Hakim Murad these conditions include:  (a) mastery of the Arabic language, to minimise the possibility of misinterpreting Revelation on purely linguistic grounds; (b) a profound knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah and the circumstances surrounding the revelation of each verse and hadith, together with a full knowledge of the Quranic and hadith commentaries, and a control of all the interpretative techniques discussed above; (c) knowledge of the specialised disciplines of hadith, such as the assessment of narrators and of the matn [text]; (d) knowledge of the views of the Companions, Followers and the great imams, and of the positions and reasoning expounded in the textbooks of fiqh, combined with the knowledge of cases where a consensus (ijma) has been reached; (e) knowledge of the science of juridical analogy (qiyas), its types and conditions;  (f) knowledge of ones own society and of public interest (maslahah); (g) knowing the general objectives (maqasid) of the Shariah; (h) a high degree of intelligence and personal piety, combined with the Islamic virtues of compassion, courtesy, and modesty.
“There have been a number of examples of such men, for instance Imam al-Nawawi among the Shafi'is, Qadi Ibn Abd al-Barr among the Malikis, Ibn Abidin among the Hanafis, and Ibn Qudama among the Hanbalis. All of these scholars considered themselves followers of the fundamental interpretative principles of their own madhhabs, but are on record as having exercised their own gifts of scholarship and judgement in reaching many new verdicts within them.[46] It is to these experts that the Mujtahid Imams directed their advice concerning ijtihad, such as Imam al-Shafi'i's instruction that ‘if you find a hadith that contradicts my verdict, then follow the hadith’.[47] It is obvious that whatever some writers nowadays like to believe, such counsels were never intended for use by the Islamically-uneducated masses. Imam al-Shafi`i was not addressing a crowd of butchers, nightwatchman and donkey-drovers.
"The remaining categories can in practice be reduced to two: the muttabi (follower), who follows his madhhab while being aware of the Quranic and hadith texts and the reasoning, underlying its positions,[49] and secondly the muqallid (emulator), who simply conforms to the madhhab because of his confidence in its scholars, and without necessarily knowing the detailed reasoning behind all its thousands of rulings.[50]"

As stated above, we would not like to go into the details of this aspect but the question before the Readers are:  Are you going to listen to the deviant sects whose Aqaid (Beliefs) themselves are wrong?  Remember: Wrong Aqida=Wrong Imaan= Wrong Amaal!  Therefore,  a short elicitation of the above background  was necessary.  

Let us now directly take up the other objections of those who live in glass houses but throw stones at the Muslim Majority Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jama'ah, accusing them of Grave Worship.

To be concluded, Insha Allah…