I follow the religion of love wherever it takes me, so all religion is my religion and belief

Ibn `Arabi

Dr. GF Haddad

Ibn 'Arabi says in Dhakhaairul-A'laaq (p.93):

"Before today, I used to criticise my companion if my religion was not the one which he followed.
But my heart changed to accept every image,
so pastures for the carefree lovers and convents for the monks.
A house of idols and the idol house at Taa'if,
the tablets of the Torah and the mushaf of the Qur'aan.
I follow the religion of love wherever it takes me,
so all religion is my religion and belief."

The above is an adaptation from lines of poetry from Ibn `Arabi's work Tarjuman al-Ashwaq ("The Translator of Yearnings"). Its style is highly lyrical and meaning evidently metaphorical. It would be very unfair or rather strange for this slim book to be adduced as precise evidence of a particular belief or used as a proof against Ibn `Arabi's own statement of doctrine in his massive Futuhat al-Makkiyya.

The meaning of these lines would be -- and Allah knows best --
that one's involvement in worshipping Allah can experience a perception of Allah's embracing power and mercy such that one is no longer able to see any escape from true monotheist belief in Him even in ostensibly untrue, idolatrous aberrations. So one becomes overwhelmed by thanks and praise, "love," temporarily forgetting fear and repentence. This is an elated state of mind expressed poetically in very broad terms, not a creed.

He also wrote in Al-Fusoos al-Hikam (1/95):

"So the person with complete understanding is he who sees every object of worship to be a manifestation of the truth contained therein, for which it is worshipped. Therefore, they call it a god, along with its particular name, whether it is a rock, or a tree, or an animal, or a person, or a star, or an angel."

Our principle in brief is that anything in the Fusus that contradicts Ibn `Arabi's Aqida as set forth in the Futuhat (his later work) must be dismissed as spurious unless it can be interpreted to conform to it. However, in the above excerpt I see nothing unorthodox, and Allah knows best. Its gist is that nothing in existence can exist without the sustaining directive of the Creator, and pagans have mistaken this act of His and its result for divinities when such a result is only the focus of a divine act. They have misnamed it, yes. But in their own confused way they have nevertheless acknowledged its embodiment of "a manifestation of the truth." And Allah knows best.

Commenting upon the Sufism of Ibn 'Arabee, Shaykh Muhammad al-Madkhalee writes in Haqeeqatus-Soofiyah (p.30 of the English translation):

Does this man not attack also al-Junayd, al-Gilani, and Shah Naqshband in his book? There are some books in Islam which are Proofs against their authors rather than against those he wrote against. The above is probably such a book. Yet even if one is among those who respect such books out of ignorance of anything better, they should try to progress from blindly and exclusively relying upon them to hearing what other, _established_ scholars have said on the issue. I have translated many opinions to that effect concerning Ibn `Arabi. One isolated attack from a rabid anti-Sufi contemporary should not faze anyone endowed with reason and fairness.

"This is because ibn 'Arabee held that all pagans and idol-worshippers were upon the truth since Allah is in his view everything. Therefore, whoever worshipped an idol, worshipped a stone, or a tree, or a human, or a star, then he has worshipped Allah."

Ibn `Arabi said in the beginning of his `Aqida that that text is his final belief and that every reader of this `Aqida is responsible to convey it on his behalf, which al-hamdulillah we have done. And his `aqida flatly contradicts the above allegations. As a result it is my belief that the likes of Shaykh Muhammad al-Madkhalee and their endorsers will stand accused of grave calumny of Muhyi al-Din Ibn `Arabi on the Day of Judgment. We have nothing to lose, at least, in not hastily endorsing the unverified second- and third-hand accusations of anti-Sufis against Shaykh Muhyi al-Din.

Shaykh al-Madkhalee goes on to say (p.22, footnote):
"Despite all the gross deviations of ibn 'Arabee and the fact that the scholars declared him to be an Unbeliever, yet he is revered by the Sufis and others who do not distinguish between the truth and falsehood..."

The claim that "the scholars declared him to be an Unbeliever" is a good example of the unreliability of this Shaykh Madkhalee as it deliberately gives the impression that this is a matter of consensus or a majority. Al-hamdulillah I have shown the falsehood of this misrepresentation in part [2] of this series. Observe the scrupulous fairness of true scholars who said, even though they disagreed with Ibn `Arabi, that "scholars differed concerning him" then count, if numbers impress you, his numerous admirers as against those who withheld judgment and the trickle that apostatized him.

I do not have to revere Ibn `Arabi when it is enough, in order to meet my responsibility in faith and sincerity, that I respect the general sanctity and honor of a Muslim for my own soul's sake, especially since many respected ulamas have declared him to be a knowledgeable Sunni Shaykh and a major scholar; although I, like al-Suyuti, consider him a wali. Salam.

Wahda al-Wujud or Oneness of Being

Perhaps the most famous misrepresentation of the Shaykh that resulted from the Fusus is the attribution to him of the doctrine of "oneness of being" (wahdat al-wujud) in the pantheistic sense of the immanence of the Deity in everything that exists. Al-Qari cites, for example, a verse of poetry which he references to the Fusus, stating:

(Subhana man azhara al-ashya'a wa huwa `aynuha)
Glory to Him Who caused things to appear and is those very things!1

This attribution and others of its type are evidently spurious, and Ibn `Arabi's `Aqida flatly contradicts them. Furthermore, verifying scholars such as Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi in his epistles, Shaykh `Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi in al-Radd al-Matin `ala Muntaqid al-`Arif Billah Muhyi al-Din and Idah al-Maqsud min Wahda al-Wujud, and al-Sha`rani in al-Yawaqit wa al-Jawahir and Tanbih al-Aghbiya' `ala Qatratin min Bahri `Ulum al-Awliya have rephrased Ibn `Arabi's expression of "oneness of being" (wahdat al-wujud) as "oneness of perception" (wahdat al-shuhud) in the sense in which the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- defined excellence (ihsan) as "worshipping Allah as if you see Him."2 Al-Buti said:

What is the meaning of the expression "oneness of perception"?When I interact with causes with full respect to Allah's ways, His orders, and His Law, knowing that the sustenance that comes to me is from Allah; the felicity that enters my home is from Allah Almighty; my food is readied for me by Allah - I mean even the smallest details; the wealth with which I have been graced, comes from Allah; the illness that has been put in my being or that of a relative of mine comes from Allah Almighty; the cure that followed it is from Allah Almighty; my success in my studies is by Allah Almighty's grant; the results which I have attained after obtaining my degrees and so forth, are from Allah Almighty's grant - when the efficacy of causes melts away in my sight and I no longer see, behind them, other than the Causator Who is Allah Almighty: at that time, when you look right, you do not see except Allah's Attributes, and when you look left, you do not see other than Allah's Attributes. As much as you evolve in the world of causes, you do not see, through them, other than the Causator, Who is Allah. At that time you have become raised to what the spiritual masters have called oneness of perception. And this oneness of perception is what Allah's Messenger -- Allah bless and greet him -- expressed by the word ihsan [which he defined to mean]: "That you worship Allah as if you see him." You do not see the causes as a barrier between you and Allah. Rather, you see causes, in the context of this doctrine, very much like pure, transparent glass: the glass pane is present - no one denies it - but as much as you stare at it, you do not see anything except what is behind it. Is it not so? You only see what is behind it. The world is entirely made of glass panes in this fashion. You see in them Allah's efficacy in permanence, so you are always with Allah Almighty. None has tasted the sweetness of belief unless he has reached that level of perception.3

Ibn Taymiyya's Unreliability

Ibn Taymiyya is quoted in his Fatawa as being asked repeatedly about "the verdict of Islam concerning Ibn `Arabi who asserted Oneness of Being," and other similar questions. However, it seems that Ibn Taymiyya did not review the Shaykh's huge Futuhat in its totality when he answered these questions. At times, his discussions about Ibn `Arabi depend, as he puts it, on "whether these are his actual words" while at other times he attacks him outright on the basis of these unverified assumptions, or himself levels specific accusations against the Shaykh. Muhammad Ghurab - a contemporary authority on Ibn `Arabi's works - in a book published in the 1980s by Dar al-Fikr in Damascus, states having read the Futuhat several times from cover to cover without finding the expressions for which Ibn Taymiyya took the Shaykh to task while citing this work.

The late hadith scholar of Damascus Shaykh Mahmud al-Rankusi similarly affirmed that Ibn Taymiyya answered questions about Ibn `Arabi without confirming them against his actual writings, and that the sharp temper of the former further complicated his attitude towards the Shaykh. On the basis of these opinions and in the light of Ibn Taymiyya's occasional reservations and his otherwise apparently correct approach to ambiguous expressions, it seems that the misquotations of Ibn `Arabi became so numerous in Ibn Taymiyya's time that it became inconceivable to him that they were all incorrect, whereupon he treated them as facts. The errors causing these misquotations can also be inferred from the fact that since the misquotations revolved around issues of doctrine - in which misunderstandings are fraught with grave dangers - and in light of the Shaykh's complex style and obscure expressions, queries would be commonly sent to muftis concerning what some people thought they had read, without actually citing nor understanding the expressions in question. All this could have been avoided by the due observance of faithfulness (amana) in textual citation, as the early scholars insisted with reference to hadith transmission. Yet many later scholars, beginning with Ibn Taymiyya and after him, relied on second and third-hand paraphrases and attributions, endorsing the accusations against Ibn `Arabi and even generalizing them so as to target all tasawwuf. Finally, Ibn Taymiyya in his letter to al-Munayji actually states his admiration for the Futuhat and reserves his criticism only for the Fusus!4

Other Critics of Ibn `Arabi

Among the scholars cited by al-Qari as condemning Ibn `Arabi as an innovator or even an outright heretic (zindiq) and disbeliever because of Fusus al-Hikam:

Ibn `Abd al-Salam,
al-Jazari,
Sharaf al-Din ibn al-Muqri,
Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi,
Sa`d al-Din al-Taftazani,5
Jamal al-Din Muhammad ibn Nur al-Din,6
Siraj al-Din al-Bulqini who supposedly ordered his books burnt,7
Burhan al-Din al-Biqa`i,
Ibn Taymiyya,8
and his student al-Dhahabi who said:

"He may well have been one of Allah's Friends Whom He strongly attracted to Himself upon death and for whom He sealed a good ending. As for his words, whoever understands them, recognizes them to be on the bases of communion-with-the-divine (ittihadiyya), knowing the deviation of those people and comprehending theirs expressions: the truth will be apparent to him as against what they say."9

The Hanafi shaykh `Ala' al-Din al-Bukhari, like Ibn al-Muqri, went so far as to declare anyone who did not declare Ibn `Arabi a disbeliever to be himself a disbeliever. This is the same `Ala' al-Din al-Bukhari who said that anyone that gives Ibn Taymiyya the title Shaykh al-Islam is a disbeliever.

Al-Haytami's Response

Al-Haytami said in his Fatawa Hadithiyya:

Our shaykh [Zakariyya al-Ansari] said in Sharh al-Rawd... in response to Ibn al-Muqri's statement: "Whoever doubts in the disbelief (kufr) of Ibn `Arabi's group, he himself is a disbeliever":

The truth is that Ibn `Arabi and his group are the elite of the Umma. Al-Yafi`i, Ibn `Ata' Allah and others have declared that they considered Ibn `Arabi a wali, noting that the language which Sufis use is appropriate among the experts in its usage and that the knower of Allah (`arif), when he becomes completely absorbed in the oceans of Unity, might make some statements that are liable to be misconstrued as indwelling (hulul) and union (ittihad), while in reality there is neither indwelling nor union.

It has been clearly stated by our Imams, such as al-Rafi`i in his book al-`Aziz, al-Nawawi in al-Rawda and al-Majmu`, and others:

"When a mufti is being asked about a certain phrase that could be construed as disbelief, he should not immediately say that the speaker should be put to death nor make permissible the shedding of his blood. Rather let him say: The speaker must be asked about what he meant by his statement, and he should hear his explanation, then act accordingly."10

Look at these guidelines - may Allah guide you! - and you will find that the deniers who assault this great man (Ibn `Arabi) and positively assert his disbelief, are riding upon blind mounts, and stumbling about like a camel affected with troubled vision. Verily Allah has blocked their sight and hearing from perceiving this, until they fell into whatever they fell into, which caused them to be despised, and made their knowledge of no benefit. The great knowledge of the Sufis and their utter renunciation of this world and of everything other than Allah testify to their innocence from these terrible accusations, therefore we prefer to dismiss such accusations and consider that their statements are true realities in the way they expressed them. Their way cannot be denied without knowing the meaning of their statements and the expressions they use, and then turning to apply the expression to the meaning and see if they match or not. We thank Allah that all of their deniers are ignorant in that kind of knowledge, as not one of them has mastered the sciences of unveilings (mukashafat), nor even smelled them from a distance! Nor has anyone of them sincerely followed any of the awliya' so as to master their terminology.

You may object: "I disagree that their expressions refer to a reality rather than being metaphorical phrases, therefore show me something clearer than the explanations that have been given."
I say: Rejection is stubborness. Let us assume that you disagree with what I have mentioned, but the correct way of stating the objection is to say: "This statement could be interpreted in several ways," and proceed to explain them. You should not say: "If it meant this, then... and if it meant that, then..." while stating from the start "This is kufr"! That is ignorance and goes beyond the scope of sincere faithfulness (nasiha) claimed by the critic.

Do you not see that if Ibn al-Muqri's real motivation were good advice, he would not have exaggerated by saying: "Whoever has a doubt in the disbelief of the group of Ibn `Arabi, he himself is a disbeliever"? So he extended his judgment that Ibn `Arabi's followers were disbelievers, to everyone who had a doubt as to their disbelief. Look at this fanaticism that exceeds all bounds and departs from the consensus of the Imams, and goes so far as to accuse anyone who doubts their disbelief.

"Glorified are You, this is awful calumny" (24:16)

"When you welcomed it with your tongues, and uttered with your mouths that whereof you had no knowledge, you counted it a trifle. In the sight of Allah, it is very great" (24:15).

Notice also that his statement suggests that it is an obligation on the whole Community to believe that Ibn `Arabi and his followers are disbelievers, otherwise they will all be declared disbelievers - and no one thinks likes this. As a matter of fact, it might well lead into something forbidden which he himself has stated clearly in his book al-Rawd when he said: "Whoever accuses a Muslim of being a disbeliever based on a sin committed by him, and without an attempt to interpret it favorably, he himself commits disbelief."Yet here he is accusing an entire group of Muslims of disbelief.11 Moreover, no consideration should be paid to his interpretation, because he only gives the kind of interpretation that is detrimental to those he is criticizing, for that is all that their words have impressed upon him.

As for those who do not think of Ibn `Arabi and the Sufis except as a pure light in front of them, and believe in their sainthood - how can a Muslim attack them by accusing them of disbelief? No one would dare do so unless he is accepting the possibility to be himself called a disbeliever. This judgment reflects a great deal of fanaticism, and an assault on most of the Muslims. We ask Allah, through His Mercy, to forgive the one who uttered it.

It has been narrated through more than one source and has become well-known to everyone that whoever opposes the Sufis, Allah will not make His Knowledge beneficial, and he will be inflicted with the worst and ugliest diseases. We have witnessed this taking place with many naysayers. For example, al-Biqa`i - may Allah forgive him! - used to be one of the most distinguished scholars, blessed with many meritorious acts of worship, an exceptional intelligence, and an excellent memory in all kinds of knowledge, especially in the sciences of tafsir and hadith, and he wrote numerous books, but Allah did not allow them to be of any kind of benefit to anyone. He also authored a book called Munasabat al-Qur'an in about ten volumes, about which no-one knows except the elite, and as for the rest, they never heard about it. If this book had been written by our Shaykh Zakariyya [al-Ansari], or by anyone who believes [in awliya'], it would have been copied with gold because, as a matter of fact, it has no equal: for "Of the bounties of thy Lord We bestow freely on all, these as well as those: the bounties of thy Lord are not closed to anyone" (17:20).

Al-Biqa`i went to extremes in his denial and wrote books about the subject, all of them clearly and excessively fanatical and deviating from the straight path. But then he paid for it fully and even more than that, for he was caught in the act on several occasions and was judged a disbeliever. It was ruled that his blood be shed and he was about to get killed, but he asked the help and protection of some influential people who rescued him, and he was made to repent in Salihiyya, Egypt, and renew his Islam.12

Al-Dhahabi's Warning to Critics of Sufis

Al-Dhahabi voiced something similar to al-Haytami's warnings against those inclined to attack Sufis:

Our Shaykh Ibn Wahb [= Ibn Daqiq al-`Id] said - may Allah have mercy on him: `Among the predicaments that mar the discipline of narrator-discreditation are the divergences that take place between the followers of tasawwuf (al-mutasawwifa) and the people of external knowledge (ahl al-`ilm al-zahir); animosity therefore arose between these two groups and necessitated mutual criticism.'

Now this [animosity against Sufis] is a plunge from which none escapes unscathed except one thoroughly knowledgeable with all the evidentiary proofs of the Law. Note that I do not limit such knowledge to the branches [of the Law]. For, concerning many of the states described by the people of truth (al-muhiqqin) among the Sufis, right cannot be told from wrong on the mere basis of knowledge of the branches. One must also possess firm knowledge of the principles of the Law and be able to tell apart the obligatory from the possible, as well as the rationally impossible from the customarily impossible.

It is, indeed, a position fraught with danger! For the critic of a true Sufi (muhiqq al-sufiyya) enters into the hadith: "Whosoever shows enmity to one of My Friends, I shall declare war upon him."13 While one that abandons all condemnation for what is clearly wrong in what he hears from some of them, abandons the commanding of good and the forbidding of evil.14

Some of Ibn `Arabi's Sayings

It is remarkable that there were very few contemporaries of Ibn `Arabi among his accusers, although he travelled and taught all over the Islamic world and, as Ibn Hajar stated, "he made his mark in every country that he entered"15 while his admirers among the authorities of Islam lived both in his own lifetime and later. Among the Shaykh's sayings:

"Whoever is truthful in something and pursues it diligently will obtain it sooner or later; if he does not obtain it in this world, he will obtain it in the next; and whoever dies before victory shall be elevated to the level of his diligence."

"The knower of Allah knows through eyesight (basar) what others know through insight (basira), and - he knows through insight what virtually no-one knows. Despite this, he does not feel secure from the harm of his ego towards himself; how then could he ever feel secure from what His Lord has foreordained for him?"
- "The knower's declaration to his student: 'Take from me this science which you can find nowhere else,' does not detract from the knower's level, nor do other similar declarations that appear to be self-eulogy, because his intention is only to encourage the student to receive it." - "The discourse of the knower is in the image of the listener according to the latter's powers, readiness, weakness, and inner reservations."
- "If you find it complicated to answer someone's question, do not answer it, for his container is already full and does not have room for the answer." - "The ignorant one does not see his ignorance as he basks in its darkness; nor does the knowledgeable one see his own knowledge, for he basks in its light." - "Whoever asks for a proof for Allah's oneness, a donkey knows more than him."

His Tarjuman al-Ashwaq ("The Interpreter of Desires") is a masterpiece of Arabic poetry translated in many languages. The following poem to the Ka`ba is taken from the Futuhat:

1. In the Place of refuge my heart sought refuge, shot with enmity's arrows.

2. O Mercy of Allah for His slaves, Allah placed His trust in you among all inanimate forms.

3. O House of my Lord, O light of my heart, O coolness of my eyes,b O my heart within,

4. O true secret of the heart of existence, my sacred trust, my purest love!

5. O direction from which I turn from every quarter and valley,

6. From subsistence in the Real, then from the height, from self-extinction, then from the depths!

7. O Ka`ba of Allah, O my life, O path of good fortune, O my guidance,

8. In you has Allah placed every safety from the fear of disaster upon the Return.

9. In you does the noble Station flourish, in you are found the fortunes of Allah's slaves.

10. In you is the Right Hand that my sin has draped in the robe of blackness.

11. Multazam is in you - he who clings to love for it, will be saved on the Day of Mutual Cries.

12. Souls passed away longing for Her, in the pain of longing and distant separation.

13. In sorrow at their news she has put on the garment of mourning.e

14. Allah sheds His light on her court, and something of His light appears in the heart.

15. None sees it but the sorrowful whose eyes are dark from lack of sleep.

16. He circumambulates seven times after seven, from the beginning of night until the call to prayer.

17. Hostage to endless sadness, he is never seen but bound to effort.

18. I heard him call upon Allah and say, beside the Black Stone: "O my heart!

19. Our night has quickly passed, but the goal of my love has not passed!"

Ibn `Imad said: "He died - may Allah have mercy on him! - in the house of the Qadi Muhyi al-Din ibn al-Zaki and was taken to Qasyun [Damascus] and buried in the noble mound, one of the groves of Paradise, and Allah knows best."16

Next installments will present the full translation of Ibn `Arabi's `Aqida from al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya.

NOTES

1In al-Qari, Risala fi Wahda al-Shuhud (p. 55).

2Narrated from Abu Hurayra by Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah; from `Umar by Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, and al-Nasa'i; and from Abu Dharr by al-Nasa'i, all as part of a longer hadith.

3From Dr. Sa`id al-Buti's unpublished commentary on Ibn `Ata' Allah's Hikam.

4"I was one of those who, previously, used to hold the best opinion of Ibn `Arabi and extol his praise, because of the benefits I saw in his books, such as al-Futuhat, al-Kanh, al-Muhkam al-Marbut, al-Durra al-Fakhira, Matali` al-Nujum, and other such works." Ibn Taymiyya, Tawhid al-Rububiyya in Majmu`a al-Fatawa (2:464-465).

5In his epistle entitled Risala fi Wahda al-Wujud, a title also used by al-Qari. Al-Taftazani was answered by the Hanafi jurist Isma`il Kalnabawi in a fatwa cited in full in al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 18-22).

6As named by al-Qari in his Risala fi Wahda al-Wujud (p. 61).

7In al-Qari, Firr al-`Awn (p. 144). Al-Fayruzabadi said: "If the report whereby Ibn `Abd al-Salam and our shaykh al-Bulqini ordered Ibn `Arabi's books burnt were true, not one of his books would have remained today in Egypt or Sham, and no-one would have dared copy them again after the words of these two shaykhs." In Hilmi, al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 32). Al-Hilmi adds (p. 34) that a further proof that al-Subki changed his position concerning Ibn `Arabi is that he wrote many refutations against the heresies of his time but never wrote against Ibn `Arabi, although his books were widely read in Damascus and elsewhere.

8He wrote al-Radd al-Aqwam `ala ma fi Fusus al-Hikam but is on record as not objecting to Ibn `Arabi's other works, as showed.

9Mizan al-I`tidal (3:660). Al-Dhahabi in the same chapter makes derogatory comments and reports a strange story which Ibn Hajar cited in Lisan al-Mizan. Al-Qari also attributes negative comments on Ibn `Arabi to al-Suyuti in the latter's al-Tahbir li `Ilm al-Tafsir and Itmam al-Diraya Sharh al-Niqaya.

10Al-Khadimi wrote in the introduction to his Sharh Ma`ani al-Basmala: "It was stated in al-Bazaziyya that if a certain question has a hundred aspects, ninety-nine of which entail disbelief and one precludes it, the scholar must lean towards the latter and not give a fatwa to the apostasy of a Muslim as long as he can give his words a good interpretation. Also, in al-Usul: No preference is given in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary." As cited in al-Burhan al-Azhar (p. 17-18). In Bustan al-`Arifin al-Nawawi states, after reporting Abu al-Khayr al-Tibyani's apparent breach of the Shari`a: "Someone that imitates jurists without understanding may imagine wrong and object to this, out of ignorance and stupidity. To imagine wrong here is plain recklessness in giving vent to suspicions against the Friends of the All-Merciful. The wise person must beware from such behavior! On the contrary, if one did not understand the wisdoms from which they benefited and their fine subtleties, it is his duty is to understand them from one who does. You may witness such occurrences about which the superficial person gets the illusion of deviation, but which are actually not deviant. On the contrary, it is obligatory to interpret figuratively the actions of Allah's friends." As cited in al-Suyuti's Tanbih al-Ghabi (p. 45-46) and Ibn `Imad, Shadharat al-Dhahab (5:194). The rules spelled out by al-Nawawi, al-Haytami, and al-Khadimi refute the presumption that only the statements of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- may be interpreted figuratively (cf. al-Qunawi in al-Qari's Risala fi Wahda al-Wujud p. 110 and al-Suyuti's Tanbih al-Ghabi p. 44-45, as against `Ala' al-Din al-Bukhari in al-Qari's Firr al-`Awn p. 153; cf. al-Munawi in Ibn `Imad, Shadharat 5:194) or that "every truth that contravenes the outward rule of the Law consists in disguised disbelief (zandaqa)" (al-Qari, Firr al-`Awn p. 152). The most shining refutation of the latter claim lies in the Prophet's -- Allah bless and greet him -- hadith of the straying desert traveller who, finding his mount and provisions after having lost them, is so overwhelmed by joy that he exclaims: "O Allah, You are my slave and I am Your master!" Narrated from Anas by Muslim in his Sahih.

11Al-Sakhawi in al-Daw' al-Lami` similarly points out this contradiction between al-Biqa`i's expressed principles and his actual practices.

12Al-Haytami, Fatawa Hadithiyya (p. 331). For the account of the condemnation of al-Biqa`i himself as a kafir see al-Sakhawi's al-Daw' al-Lami` and al-Shawkani's al-Badr al-Tali`.

13The complete hadith states: "Whosoever shows enmity to one of My Friends, I shall declare war upon him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes, his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask something of Me, I would surely give it to him. Were he to seek refuge in Me, I would surely grant him it. Nor do I hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take back the believer's soul, for he hates death and I hate to hurt him." Narrated from Abu Hurayra by Bukhari. Ibn `Abd al-Salam in al-Ishara ila al-Ijaz (p. 108) said: "Allah's 'hesitancy' in this hadith is a metaphor of the believer's superlative rank in Allah's presence and connotes a lesser hurt to prevent a greater harm, as in the case of a father's severance of his son's gangrened hand so as to save his life."

14Al-Dhahabi, al-Muqiza (p. 88-90).

15Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan (5:311 #1038). See also his words in al-Intisar li A'imma al-Amsar and in al-Qari's Risala fi Wahda al-Wujud (p. 113).

a Ibn `Arabi, Futuhat (original ed. 1:701).

b The mere sight of Ka`ba is considered worship.

c The hadith "The Black Stone is Allah's right hand" is narrated from Ibn `Abbas, Jabir, Anas, and others by Ibn Abi `Umar al-Ma`dani in his Musnad, al-Tabarani, al-Suyuti in al-Jami` al-Saghir (1:516), Ibn `Asakir in his Tarikh (15:90-92), al-Khatib in his (6:328), and others. Al-`Ajluni stated that it is sahih as a halted report from Ibn `Abbas as narrated by al-Quda`i in the wording: "The Corner is Allah's Right Hand on earth...," and declared it hasan as a hadith of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him --. Ibn Qutayba in Mukhtalaf al-Hadith (1972 ed. p. 215) attributes it to Ibn `Abbas and relates a saying of `A'isha that the Stone is the depository of the covenant of souls with Allah. Its mention in the Reliance of the Traveller (p. 853b) as "narrated by al-Hakim, who declared it sahih, from `Abd Allah ibn `Amr," is incorrect.

d Multazam is the space between the Black Stone and the Ka`ba's door (including the two) where prayers are surely answered.

e An allusion to the kiswa or black cloth covering the Ka`ba.

16Main sources: Hilmi, al-Burhan al-Azhar; Ibn `Imad, Shadharat al-Dhahab (5:190-202); al-Suyuti, Tanbih al-Ghabi.

 

Allah's Blessings and Peace on our Prophet Muhammad, his Family, and all his Companions, and the great imams, ulamas, and awliya of his Community until the Day of Judgment.

 

 

WAHHABISM

 
WAHHABISM: 
UNDERSTANDING THE ROOTS AND ROLE MODELS
OF ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

by Zubair Qamar*
(condensed and edited by ASFA staff)
 
Introduction

The most extremist pseudo-Sunni movement today is Wahhabism (also known as Salafism). While many may think that Wahhabi terror is a recent phenomenon that has only targeted non-Muslims, it will surprise many to know that the orthodox Sunni Muslims were the first to be slaughtered in waves of Wahhabi massacres in Arabia hundreds of years ago. One only has to read the historical evolution of Saudi Arabia to know the gruesome details of the tragedy – a tragedy in which thousands of Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims perished at the hands of Wahhabi militants.

The extremist interpretations of Wahhabism, although previously confined to small pockets of people in Arabia, has survived to this day under the protection, finance, and tutelage of the Saudi state religious organs. This has transformed Wahhabism – and related Salafi groups that receive inspiration and support from them – from a regional to a global threat to be reckoned with by the world community. To a Wahhabi-Salafi, all those who differ with them, including Sunni Muslims, Shi’ite Muslims, Christians, and Jews, are infidels who are fair targets.

Do the majority of Sunnis support Wahhabism? Are Sunnis and Wahhabis one and the same?
 
What is a Wahhabi?
 
 Because Wahhabis claim to be “true Sunnis,” it is difficult for one who is unfamiliar with Wahhabism to distinguish it from orthodox Sunni Islam. If a Wahhabi is asked if he/she is Sunni, he/she will always reply in the affirmative. When asked if they are Wahhabis, they reply with an emphatic “no” as they consider it an insult to what they believe and stand for:  “Purity of worship and reverence to God alone. The authentic carriers of Islam from the time of the Prophet (s)[1] until now.” Calling them Wahhabis implies that they learned ideas from a man – Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab – instead of the Qur’an and Sunnah – the two great sources of Islam. Irrespective of what they think, they are not following the Islamic sources authentically, but the wrong interpretations of the founder of the Wahhabi movement who appeared in the 1700s. Sunnis and other Wahhabi detractors have labeled them as Wahhabis to differentiate them from orthodox Sunnis.
 
Wahhabis as Salafis: deceptive semantics
 
Wahhabis differentiate themselves from orthodox Sunnis by labeling themselves Salafis, which refers to the word salaf – the time period in which the early Muslims lived in the first 300 years after the Hijra, or emigration, of Prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Medina in 622.  The Companions (Sahaba), those who followed the Companions (Tabi’een), and those who followed those who followed the Companions (Taba al-Tabi’een) who lived in the time period of the Salaf are exemplars par excellence of what Muslims should be, as Prophet Muhammad (s) had praised these Muslims as being the best of Muslims.  Therefore, it has been the aim of every Muslim since the time of Prophet Muhammad (s) to adhere to and to follow the footsteps of the adherents of the salaf.  This means that when a Wahhabi calls himself a Salafi, he claims to be a genuine follower of pristine Islam. This, however, is far from the truth.

Orthodox Sunni Muslims believe that they are the true bearers of pristine Islam since the time period of the Salaf. Because there were time gaps between the noble period of the Salaf and centuries that followed, the authentic positions of the early Muslims were passed by scholars in those times and afterwards to later generations via meticulous, systematic, and methodological means of preservation. The knowledge was passed from qualified scholars to other qualified scholars through the centuries, who passed it to the masses.  This uninterrupted chain of knowledge from the time of the Salaf until now has been authentically preserved by the orthodox Sunnis.  Orthodox Sunnis, therefore, have roots in the Salaf, and are represented today by the four surviving authentic schools of Islamic jurisprudence:  Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools (madhahib).

The Wahhabis, by calling themselves Salafis, not only claim to follow the footsteps of the early Muslims, but also use semantics to fool and allure less informed Muslims into accepting Wahhabism. Wahhabis say, “You must follow the Muslims of the Salaf.” (This is undoubtedly true.) Then the Wahhabi semantics: “Therefore you must be a Salafi and nothing else. Following anything else means you’re following a path that is different from the Muslims of the Salaf.” By such deceptive semantics, the less informed Muslims believe that Salafis must truly represent the pristine interpretations of the early Muslims of the Salaf.  After all, the word Salafi sounds like Salaf, so it must truly be representative of it. Far from it.  When the less informed goes beyond semantics and blind faith and investigates what a Salafi believes, the truth unveiled is that the understanding of Salafis (Wahhabis) is different and contradictory to the understanding and positions of the pious Muslims who lived in the Salaf – and the majority of Muslims who have ever lived (Sunnis).
 
Wahhabi-Salafi variety
 
The Wahhabi-Salafis believe that Sunnis have been vehemently wrong for the past 1,000+ years and aim to bring the Muslims out of a state of ignorance (jahilliyya) that has existed, in their minds, since the time of the pious adherents of the Salaf.  Even if the majority of orthodox Sunni Muslims were strong today, indeed if they ruled an empire that stretched far to every corner of the globe, it would still be a failure to Salafis because to them the foundations of such a political system would have been based on reprehensible innovation (bid’a) and blasphemy (kufr). 

To the Salafi, the presence and power of Sunni orthodoxy, in all of its manifestations as illustrated throughout Islamic history, is just as impure as the rising European hegemony in all of its manifestations since the demise of the Muslim Ottoman Empire. To the Salafis, a minority in this world, the world is an abode of blasphemy, ruled and occupied by infidels that demands reformation through both non-violent and violent means to bring about a supposedly pure Islamic world system.

Wahhabi-Salafis come in various strains, some being more extreme than others. The variety in strains is due to differences in approach of bringing the Muslims back to a state of strengthened belief based on the example of the pious ancestors. It must be emphasized that although all Wahhabis are called Salafis, all Salafis are not purely Wahhabi.  “Salafi Muslims” include those like Syed Qutb who wish to eradicate the supposed current state of ignorance (jahiliyya) and bring Muslims back to a state of purity – a purity reminiscent of the purity of Muslims who lived in the time period of the Salaf.  However, all Salafi Muslims, whether they are Wahhabi or Qutbi, admire with exaggeration the role models Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab and Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, whose hard-line interpretations have inspired revolutionaries today. Therefore, although all Salafis are not Wahhabis, they admire many of the same role models  – role models who have been rejected and condemned by masses of orthodox Sunni scholars for their unauthentic representations of pristine Islam. It can also be said that all Wahhabis consider themselves to be Salafis and prefer to be called by this name (instead of Wahhabi), even though differences exist between Salafi groups.

Although there are differences in approach among Salafis, they have nonetheless allied themselves in an attempt to make the Salafi vision a reality by both non-violent and violent means. 
An example of this are the Salafi-oriented Deobandis and their alliance with the Wahhabis.   The alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood (and its various factions and offshoots) and the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia was strengthened during the 1950s and 1960s in the struggle of the Muslim Brotherhood against Egypt’s Nasserist regime. Saudis had provided refuge for some leaders of the Brotherhood, and also provided assistance to them in other Arab States. The Wahhabi-Salafi alliance was further strengthened as a response to the growing threat of Shi’ah power when the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran revolted and overthrew the U.S.-allied Shah in 1979.

Lastly, the alliance made itself manifest in the holy struggle (jihad) against the atheist/Communist Soviets in Afghanistan.  Salafis of all strains worked together as the “righteous Sunnis” to counter the Shi’ah-Communist threat, from proselytizing to killing to make their Salafism prevail. Indeed, Salafis have used both proselytizing and revolutionary means to express their message using both political and apolitical approaches. So-called “Sunni terrorism” today is perpetrated by radical Salafis who desire to replace “infidel” governments with myopic “scholars” who adhere to their fanatical interpretations and ideologies. Their tentacles are spread to all corners of the globe, including Bosnia, Albania, Indonesia, Philippines, Uzbekistan, England, Malaysia, South Africa, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.   Salafis have demonstrated the havoc they are capable of wreaking in recent decades.
 
Wahhabis as neo-Kharijites
 
The Wahhabis are especially notorious for reviving the ways of the Khawarij (or Kharijites). They originated in the time of the caliphates of Uthman and Ali, among the closest companions to Prophet Muhammad.  They were the earliest group of fanatics who separated themselves from the Muslim community. They arose in opposition to Ali – Prophet Muhammad’s son-in-law – because of his willingness to arbitrate with Mu’awiyah, governor of Damascus at that time, over the issue of the caliphate. The Khawarij, meaning “those who exited,” slung accusations of blasphemy against Ali and Mu’awiyah – and those who followed them – saying that the Qur’an, and not them, had the ultimate authority in the matter.  Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, in his book Talbis Iblis (The Devil’s Deception) under the chapter heading “A Mention of the Devil’s Delusion upon the Kharijites,” says that Dhu’l-Khuwaysira al-Tamimi was the first Kharijite in Islam and that “[h]is fault was to be satisfied with his own view; had he paused he would have realized that there is no view superior to that of Allah’s Messenger…”  Furthermore, the orthodox Sunni scholar Imam Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi discusses the Kharijite rebellions and their bloody massacres of tens of thousands of Muslims in one of his books. He explicitly mentions the Azariqa, one of the most atrocious Kharijite movements led by Nafi’ ibn al-Azraq from the tribe of Banu Hanifa – the same tribe where the heretic Musaylima the Prevaricator (or Liar) who claimed prophethood alongside Prophet Muhammad came from.  Just as the Khawarij threw accusations of blasphemy on Ali and Mu’awiya, Wahhabis throw accusations of blasphemy against Sunnis and Shi’ites.
 
 The Al-Sa`ud and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the founder of Wahhabism
 
Wahhabism is named after the its founder, Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1792), and has its roots in the land now known as Saudi Arabia. Without this man, the al-Sa`ud ‎, one of many clans spread over the Arabian peninsula, would not have had the inspiration, reason, and determination to consolidate the power that they did and wage "jihad" on people they perceived to be “polytheists” – those who attribute partners in worship to Almighty God. How intimately close was al-Sa`ud‎’s association with Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab? Robert Lacey eloquently illustrates this association:
 
Until [Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s] coming the Al Sa`ud ‎ had been a minor sheikhly clan like many others in Nejd, townsmen and farmers, making a comfortable living from trade, dates and perhaps a little horse-breeding, combining with the desert tribes to raid outwards when they felt strong, prudently retrenching in times of weakness.  Modestly independent, they were in no way empire builders, and it is not likely that the wider world would ever have heard of them without their alliance with the Teacher.[2]
 
The al-Sa`ud are originally from the village of ad-Diriyah, located in Najd, in eastern Arabia situated near modern day Riyadh, the capital of Sa`ud‎i Arabia.  Ancestors of Sau’ud Ibn Muhammad, whom little is known about, settled in the area as agriculturists and gradually grew in number over time into the clan of al-Sa`ud ‎.

Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab was raised in Uyainah, an oasis in southern Najd, and was from the Banu Tamim tribe. He came from a religious family and left Uyainah in pursuit of Islamic knowledge.  He traveled to Mecca, Medina, Iraq, and Iran to acquire knowledge from different teachers.  When he returned to his homeland of Uyainah, he preached what he believed to be Islam in its purity – which was, in fact, a vicious assault on traditional Sunni Islam.

The orthodox Sunni scholar Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi said that the teachers of Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, including two teachers he had studied with in Medina – Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi and Shaykh Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi – became aware of his anti-Sunni Wahhabi creed and warned Muslims from 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.”[3]

Moreover, Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab’s own father had warned Muslims from 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.
 
Ibn Taymiyah: the Wahhabi founder’s role model
 
It is worth giving an overview of a man named Ahmed Ibn Taymiyah (1263-1328) who lived a few hundred years before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab. The Wahhabi founder admired him as a role model and embraced many of his pseudo-Sunni positions. Who exactly was Ibn Taymiyah and what did orthodox Sunni scholars say about him? Muslim scholars had mixed opinions about him depending on his interpretation of various issues. His straying from mainstream Sunni Islam on particular issues of creed (`aqeedah) and  worship (`ibadat) made him an extremely controversial figure in the Muslim community. 
Ibn Taymiya has won the reputation of being the true bearer of the early pious Muslims, especially among reformist revolutionaries, while the majority of orthodox Sunnis have accused him of reprehensible bid’ah (reprehenisible innovation), some accusing him of kufr (unbelief).[4]

It behooves one to ask why Ibn Taymiyah had received so much opposition from reputable Sunni scholars who were known for their asceticism, trustworthiness, and piety. Some of Ibn Taymiyah’s anti-Sunni and controversial positions include:

(1) His claim that Allah’s Attributes are “literal”, thereby attributing God with created attributes and becoming an anthropomorphist;
(2) His claim that created things existed eternally with Allah;
(3) His opposition to the scholarly consensus on the divorce issue;
(4) His opposition to the orthodox Sunni practice of tawassul (asking Allah for things using a deceased pious individual as an intermediary);
(5) His saying that starting a trip to visit the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) invalidates the shortening of prayer;
(6) His saying that the torture of the people of Hell stops and doesn’t last forever;
(7) His saying that Allah has a limit (hadd) that only He Knows;
(8) His saying that Allah literally sits on the Throne (al-Kursi) and has left space for Prophet Muhammad (s) to sit next to Him;
(9) His claim that touching the grave of Prophet Muhammad (s) is polytheism (shirk);
(10) His claim that that making supplication at the Prophet Muhammad’s grave to seek a better status from Allah is a reprehensible innovation;
(11) His claim that Allah descends and comparing Allah’s “descent” with his, as he stepped down from a minbar while giving a sermon (khutba) to Muslims;
(12) His classifying of oneness in worship of Allah (tawheed) into two parts:  Tawhid al-rububiyya and Tawhid al-uluhiyya, which was never done by pious adherents of the salaf.
 
Although Ibn Taymiyah’s unorthodox, pseudo-Sunni positions were kept away from the public in Syria and Egypt due to the consensus of orthodox Sunni scholars of his deviance, his teachings were nevertheless circulating in hiding. An orthodox Sunni scholar says:
Indeed, when a wealthy trader from Jeddah brought to life the long-dead ‘aqida [creed] of Ibn Taymiya at the beginning of this century by financing the printing in Egypt of Ibn Taymiya’s Minhaj al-sunna al-nabawiyya [italics mine] and other works, the Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Bakhit al-Muti‘i, faced with new questions about the validity of anthropomorphism, wrote: "It was a fitna (strife) that was sleeping; may Allah curse him who awakened it."
 
            It is important to emphasize that although many of the positions of Ibn Taymiyah and Wahhabis are identical, they nonetheless contradict each other in some positions. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts Sufism (Tasawwuf) as a legitimate science of Islam (as all orthodox Sunni Muslims do), Wahhabis reject it wholesale as an ugly innovation in the religion. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts the legitimacy of commemorating Prophet Muhammad’s birthday (Mawlid) – accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims as legitimate – Wahhabis reject it as a reprehensible innovation that is to be repudiated.

Ibn Taymiyah is an inspiration to Islamist groups that call for revolution. Kepel says, “Ibn Taymiyya (1268-1323) – a primary reference for the Sunni Islamist movement – would be abundantly quoted to justify the assassination of Sadat in 1981…and even to condemn the Saudi leadership and call for its overthrow in the mid-1990s”.[5]

Sivan says that only six months before Sadat was assassinated, the weekly Mayo singled out Ibn Taymiyya as “the most pervasive and deleterious influence upon Egyptian youth.” Sivan further says that Mayo concluded that “the proliferating Muslim associations at the [Egyptian] universities, where Ibn Taymiyya’s views prevail, have been spawning various terrorist groups.” Indeed, a book entitled The Absent Precept, by `Abd al-Salam Faraj – the "spiritual" leader of Sadat’s assassins who was tried and executed by the Egyptian government – strongly refers to Ibn Taymiyya’s and some of his disciples’ writings. Three of four of Sadat’s assassins willingly read a lot of Ibn Taymiyya’s works on their own.[6]
 
Ibn Taymiyah is also noted to be a favorite of other Salafi extremists, including the Muslim Brotherhood’s Syed Qutb. Ibn Taymiyyah’s student, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, is also frequently cited by Salafis of all colors.
 
Ibn Taymiyah’s “fatwa” of jihad against Muslims

What is also well-known about Ibn Taymiyah is that he lived in turbulent times when the Mongols had sacked Baghdad and conquered the Abassid Empire in 1258.  In 1303, he was ordered by the Mamluk Sultan to give a fatwa (religious edict) legalizing jihad against the Mongols. Waging a holy war on the Mongols for the purpose of eliminating any threat to Mamluk power was no easy matter.  The Mongol Khan Mahmoud Ghazan had converted to Islam in 1295.   Although they were Muslims who did not adhere to Islamic Law in practice, and also supported the Yasa Mongol of code of law, they were deemed apostates by the edict of Ibn Taymiyah.  To Ibn Taymiyah, Islamic Law was not only rejected by Mongols because of their lack of wholesale adherence, but the “infidel” Yasa code of law made them legal targets of extermination. The so-called jihad ensued and the Mongol threat to Syria was exterminated.  Wahhabis and other Salafis to this day brand the Mongol Mahmoud Ghazan as a kafir (disbeliever).  Orthodox Sunni Muslims, however, have praised Mahmoud Ghazan as a Muslim. Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani writes:
 
In fact, Ghazan Khan was a firm believer in Islam.  Al-Dhahabi relates that he became a Muslim at the hands of the Sufi shaykh Sadr al-Din Abu al-Majami’ Ibrahim al-Juwayni (d.720), one of Dhahabi’s own shaykhs of hadith….During his rule he had a huge mosque built in Tabriz in addition to twelve Islamic schools (madrasa), numerous hostels (khaniqa), forts (ribat), a school for the secular sciences, and an observatory.  He supplied Mecca and Medina with many gifts.  He followed one of the schools (madhahib) of the Ahl al-Sunna [who are the orthodox Sunnis] and was respectful of religious scholars.  He had the descendants of the Prophet mentioned before the princes and princesses of his house in the state records, and he introduced the turban as the court headgear.[7]
 
Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab would later follow Ibn Taymiyah’s footsteps and slaughter thousands of Muslims in Arabia. 
 
Orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyah’s pseudo-Sunni positions
 
Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned by a fatwa (religious edict) signed by four orthodox Sunni judges in the year 726 A.H for his deviant and unorthodox positions.  Note that each of the four judges represents the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims belong to today. This illustrates that Ibn Taymiyah did not adhere to the authentic teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam as represented by the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. There is no evidence to indicate that there was a “conspiracy” against Ibn Taymiyyah to condemn him, as Wahhabis and other Salafis purport in his defense. The names of the four judges are: Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Jama’ah, ash-Shafi’i, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn al-Hariri, al-`Ansari, al-Hanafi, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr, al-Maliki, and Qadi [Judge] Ahmad Ibn `Umar, al-Maqdisi, al-Hanbali.

Some orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyya for his deviances and opposition to the positions of orthodox Sunni Islam include: Taqiyy-ud-Din as-Subkiyy, Faqih Muhammad Ibn `Umar Ibn Makkiyy, Hafiz Salah-ud-Din al-`Ala’i, Qadi, Mufassir Badr-ud-Din Ibn Jama’ah, Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Kilabi al-Halabi, Hafiz Ibn Daqiq al-`Id, Qadi Kamal-ud-Din az-Zamalkani, Qadi Safi-ud-Din al-Hindi, Faqih and Muhaddith `Ali Ibn Muhammad al-Baji ash-Shafi’i, the historian al-Fakhr Ibn al-Mu`allim al-Qurashi, Hafiz Dhahabi, Mufassir Abu Hayyan al-`Andalusi, and Faqih and voyager Ibn Batutah.
 
 Najd –  A place not so holy
 
Najd, in Saudi Arabia, is where the founder of Wahhabism came from. It was a mostly barren and dry land inhabited by Bedouins who used to graze animals.  With sparse water, it is not the most comfortable of places since its climate has extremes of heat and cold in the summer and winter seasons.  Najd has a notorious reputation in the orthodox Sunni community for originating seditions (fitan) long before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab came.  Indeed, it is known to have harbored many  trouble mongering individuals who challenged the Muslims both spiritually and physically. The orthodox Sunni Iraqi scholar Jamal Effendi al-Zahawi says:
 
Famous writers of the day made a point of noting the similarity between Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s beginnings and those of the false prophets prominent in Islam’s intial epoch like Musaylima the Prevaricator, Sajah al-Aswad al-Anasi, Tulaiha al-Asadi and others of his kind [14].
 
Fenari says that although Najd is closest to to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, it has only been dispraised by Prophet Muhammad (s) in authentic traditions.  He raises another interesting point that while many Arabian tribes were praised by Prophet Muhammad, the Banu Tamim – the most well known tribe of Central Arabia where Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab was from – is praised only once. Moreover, authentic traditions that “explicitly critique” the Banu Tamimites are far more numerous.  Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, documents the evolution of the Kharijite movements and illustrates how the tribe of Banu Tamim played a leading role in it.  Imam Abd al-Qahir also states that the Tamimites – and the Central Arabians in general – were intimately involved in the Kharijite rebellions against the Muslims, contrasting their immense contribution to the minimal contribution of members of the tribes of Medina and Yemen.  It is from Banu Tamim where a man name Abu Bilal Mirdas came from, who, although being a relentless worshipper, turned out to be one of the most barbaric Kharijite fanatics. “He is remembered as the first who said the Tahkim – the formula ‘The judgment is Allah’s alone’ – on the Day of Siffin, which became the slogan of the later Kharijite da’wa.”  It is reminiscent of what Wahhabis say today – that they strictly adhere to nothing but the Qur’an and Sunnah – although it is merely a jumble of words without coherent meaning. Najda ibn Amir of the tribe of Banu Hanifa was a Kharijite whose homeland was Najd, and the best known woman among the Kharijites was a Tamimite named Qutam bint `Alqama. It is fascinating to see that fanatics of all types came from a region where the fanatic Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab came from.
 
The Wahhabi assault on graves and the massacre of Muslim communities in Riyadh and Karbala
 
With the ferocious zeal of a “divine” mission, aimed at terminating what they perceived as the filthy polytheistic scum of Arabia, the Wahhabi army led by Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ first destroyed graves and objects in Najdi towns and villages that were used for what they condemned as “polytheistic practices.”  The Wahhabi movement mustered supporters who rallied behind their cause, increased the size of their army, and successfully united most of the people of Najd under the banner of Wahhabism by 1765. 
           
The assault and “jihad”of Wahhabism did not stop after the death of Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ in 1765, but continued with unrelenting and barbaric force under the leadership of his son, Abdul-Aziz, who captured the city of Riyadh in 1773. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab died a year earlier but left four sons who continued spreading Wahhabism and strengthened the Wahhabi family’s alliance with the Al-Sa`ud ‎.[8] Later, in 1801, the Wahhabi army marched to Karbala with a force of 10,000 men and 6,000 camels.[9] Upon reaching Karbala, they mercilessly and indiscriminately attacked its inhabitants for eight hours, massacring about 5,000 people. Moreover, they severely damaged Imam Hussein’s mosque, looted the city, and left the carnage-laden city with its treasures on 200 camels.[10] This holocaust won the Wahhabi criminals the unforgiving hatred and wrath of the Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims, who, until this day, curse them passionately.  The Shi’ite Muslims consider Imam Hussein, a grandson of Prophet Muhammad (s), one of the most sacred figures and his tomb one of the most sacred sites on earth. Every year, thousands of Shi’ites gather at the site to commemorate the death of Imam Hussein.  Visiting Karbala one is indeed filled me with awe and spiritual strength even as a devout Sunni. Shi’ite wrath, of course, didn’t mean much to the Wahhabis. The Shi’ites, along with the Sunnis, had already been labeled as “blasphemers” for practicing tawassul and tabarruk.  What are these practices? Are they part of Sunni Islam or not?
 
Tawassul and Tabarruk

Nuh Keller, an orthodox Sunni scholar, defines tawassul as “supplicating Allah by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, a good deed, or a name or attribute of Allah Most High”. I remember doing tawassul in 1989 at Imam Abu Hanifah’s tomb, the noble and renowned Islamic scholar whose ijtihad the majority of Sunni Muslims follow. Although I had not studied much about Islam and the practices of tawassul at that time, I had been told by trustworthy Muslims that using pious individuals as intermediaries when asking Allah for something was a blessed opportunity that I couldn’t afford to miss.  I had also visited the tomb of the great sufi and saint Abdul-Qadir Jilani and performed tawassul over there.  An example of tawassul is: “Oh Allah, I ask you to cure my illness by means of the noble status of Imam Abu Hanifah (s).”
 
When doing tawassul, the source of blessings (barakah) when asking Allah through an intermediary is Allah – not the intermediary.  The intermediary is simply a means to ask Allah for things. Although it is not necessary for a Muslim to use a pious intermediary when asking Allah, it is recommended because it was a practice of Prophet Muhammad (s), the Companions (ra), and of the great scholars of Islam (ra). It is not only prophets and saints (in their graves) that are used as means to asking Allah. A Muslim can also ask Allah through relics (tabarruk) that belonged to pious people, and may even use amulets with verses on the Qur’an on them as a means of asking God for protection from evil. It is not the means that provides protection, but Allah.
 
Wahhabis reject a type of tawassul accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims
 
Although Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Wahhabis believe that tawassul by one’s good deeds, a name or attribute of God, or intercession by someone who is alive and present is permissible, Wahhabis accuse Sunnis (and Shi’ites) of committing shirk (attributing partners in worship to God) when doing tawassul through an intermediary who is not alive or present (in the worldly life). That is, to a Wahhabi, tawassul through an intermediary who has died and is in his grave is ugly blasphemy. This is critical to know because this is the primary reason why Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab and the Al-Sa`ud ‎ criminals that collaborated with him massacred many Muslims in the Arabian peninsula.  Muslims had been doing this form of tawassul for over 1,000 years but the Wahhabis believed it was blasphemy that had to be exterminated by the sword.  What Wahhabis were doing in actuality was massacring orthodox Sunni Muslims, even though they foolishly believed they were fighting against evil blasphemors that didn’t deserve to live.  Wahhabis were not following the footsteps of the pious Salaf, but the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah who a couple of hundred years before them denounced that particular form of tawassul as sinful. Wahhabis today forbid Muslims from doing tawassul through Prophet Muhammad, and have enforced strict rules around his grave in Medina, Saudi Arabia. It is for this reason that Wahhabis forbid Muslims from visiting the graves of pious Muslims, and have destroyed markings on graves to prevent Muslims from knowing the specific spots where saints are buried. Yet, it is interesting to note the hypocritical nature of the Wahhabis when they had refused the demolishing of the grave of Ibn Taymiyah  in Damascus, Syria to make way for a road. Somehow, this is not “polytheism” to them, but it is “polytheism” for the majority of the Islamic community.
 
The flawed Wahhabi understanding of tawassul: confusing the means with the Giver
 
Wahhabis wrongly accuse orthodox Sunnis of committing shirk (polytheism) when asking God for something using an intermediary, whether the means is a pious human being in his grave,  objects (tabarruk), or seeking protection from God using amulets with verses of the Qur’an written on them (ruqya).   The Wahhabi believes that asking God for something through a means is the same as worshipping the means itself. That is, for people who do tawassul through a pious saint in his grave is asking the pious saint – and not God – for things. People who do tabarruk through a relic of Prophet Muhammad (s) are asking the relic – and not God – for blessings, and people who wear ruqya are asking the ruqya itself for protection – and not God. When a Muslim visits the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) grave and calls on the Prophet (s), “Oh Prophet,” (Ya Rasulullah), the Wahhabis accuse such a person of worshipping the Prophet (s) and refuse to accept the understanding that the Prophet himself is a means to asking God for things. Such an act to Wahhabis drives a Muslim out of the realms of the religion of Islam. In sum, the Wahhabis believe that such people are worshipping creation alongside God, and are therefore guilty of polytheism – attributing partners in worship to God.

The now deceased former Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Ibn Baz, defends Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s accusation of polytheism that he had heaped on the Muslim masses and his resorting to “jihad” by saying that Muslims had gone astray because they had “worshipped” things are than God:
 
The people of Najd had lived in a condition that could not be approved of by any believer. Polytheism had appeared there and spread widely. People worshipped domes, trees, rocks, caves or any persons who claimed to be Auliya (saints) though they might be insane and idiotic.
There were few to rise up for the sake of Allah and support His Religion. Same was the situation in Makkah and Madinah as well as Yemen where building domes on the graves, invoking the saints for their help and other forms of polytheism were predominant. But in Najd polytheistic beliefs and practices were all the more intense.
In Najd people had worshipped different objects ranging from the graves, caves and trees to the obsessed and mad men who were called saints.

When the Sheikh [Ibn Abdul-Wahhab] saw that polytheism was dominating the people and that no one showed any disapproval of it or no one was ready to call the people back to Allah, he decided to labour singly and patiently in the field. He knew that nothing could be achieved without jihad (holy fighting), patience and suffering [italics mine].[11]
 
Orthodox Sunnis, however, have never claimed to worship the means, but only God. Because Wahhabis didn’t tolerate this, they massacred thousands of Muslims who they saw as being “polytheists” in Arabia. In actuality, they were Sunni Muslims who were following Islam in its purity as taught by the pious ancestors that lived in the time period of the Salaf.  
 
 Wahhabis attribute a place and direction to Allah
 
While accusing the masses of Muslims of being polytheists, Wahhabis themselves have differentiated themselves from other Muslims in their understanding of creed. Due to the Wahhabis’ adherence to an unorthodox, grossly flawed literal understanding of God’s Attributes, they comfortably believe that Allah has created or human attributes, and then attempt to hide their anthropomorphism by saying that they don’t know ‘how’ Allah has such attributes. For example, Bilal Philips, a Wahhabi author says:
 
He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit.  He has a form befitting His majesty [italics mine], 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.
 
Discussing each part of his statement will shed light into his anthropomorphic mind.  Bilal Philips says that “Allah has a form befitting His majesty…”  What he confirms in his mind is that Allah definitely has a form. He even specifies the kind of form by saying: “He [Allah] has neither corporeal body…” meaning that Allah has a form that is not like the forms of creation, and then says, “nor is He a formless spirit.  Then he says, “He has a form befitting His majesty…”  The problem with such statements to a Muslim is that they express blatant anthropomorphism. What Bilal Philips is doing here is foolishly attributing a “form” to God that, in his mind, nobody has ever seen.  Therefore, Bilal Philips believes that God has some type of form, or non-corporeal body. No orthodox Sunni Muslim scholar has ever said such a perfidious thing.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, one of the greatest mujtahid Sunni imams ever to have lived, refuted such anthropomorphic statements over a thousand years before Bilal Philips was born.  The great Sunni Ash`ari scholar, Imam al-Bayhaqi, in his Manaqib Ahmad relates with an authentic chain that Imam Ahmed 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.
 
Imam Ahmad continues:
 
The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components.  The expression has not been handed down in Shari’ah.  Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.
 
Imam Ahmed is a pious adherer of the time period of the Salaf that was praised by Prophet Muhammad (s).  How can Bilal Philips claim to represent the pious forefathers of the Salaf?  He not only contradicts them but is vehemently refuted by them. The great pious predecessors had refuted ignoramuses like Bilal Philips in their times long ago. 
 Blatant anthropomorphism is also illustrated by the Wahhabi Ibn Baz’s commentary on the great work of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi called “Aqeedah at-Tahawiyyah” (The Creed of Tahawi), a work that has been praised by the orthodox Sunni community as being representative of Sunni orthodoxy. The now deceased Ibn Baz was Saudi Arabia’s grand Mufti.

Article #38 of Imam Tahawi’s work states:
 
He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created entities are. 
 
Ibn Baz, in a footnote, comments:
 
Allah is beyond limits that we know but has limits He knows.
 
In another footnote, he says: 

By hudood (limits) the author [referring to Imam Tahawi] means [limits] such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.

Ibn Baz deceptively attempts to represent the noble Sunni Imam al-Tahawi as an anthropomorphist by putting his own anthropomorphic interpretation of Imam Tahawi’s words in his mouth.  It must be emphasized that not a single orthodox Sunni scholar understood Imam Tahawi’s statement as Ibn Baz did.
 
Ibn Baz’s also shows anthropomorphism in a commentary by the great Sunni scholar Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani.  Ibn Baz says:
 
As for Ahl ul-Sunna – and these are the Companions and those who followed them in excellence – they assert a direction for Allah, and that is the direction of elevation, believing that the Exalted is above the Throne without giving an example and without entering into modality.
 
Another now deceased Wahhabi scholar, Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, blatantly expresses his anthropomorphism.  He says:
 
Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.
 
The great Sunni Hanbali scholar, Ibn al-Jawzi, had refuted anthropomorphists who were saying that Allah’s establishment is ‘in person’ hundreds of years ago:
 
Whoever says:  He is established on the Throne ‘in person’ (bi dhatihi), has diverted the sense of the verse to that of sensory perception.  Such a person must not neglect that the principle is established by the mind, by which we have come to know Allah, and have attributed pre-eternity to Him decisively.  If you said:  We read the hadiths and keep quiet, no one would criticize you; it is only your taking them in the external sense which is hideous.  Therefore do not bring into the school of this pious man of the Salaf – Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] – what does not belong in it.  You have clothed this madhab [or school of jurisprudence]  with an ugly deed, so that it is no longer said ‘Hanbali’ except in the sense of ‘anthropomorphist’
 
Sulayman ibn `Abdul Allah ibn Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, the grandson of the Wahhabi movement’s founder, says:
 
Whoever believes or says:  Allah is in person (bi dhatihi) in every place, or in one place: he is a disbeliever (kafir).  It is obligatory to declare that Allah is distinct from His creation, established over His Throne without modality or likeness or exemplarity.  Allah was and there was no place, then He created place and He is exalted as He was before He created place
 
Just as Bilal Philips affirms a form to Allah in his mind, and Ibn Baz confirms limits to Allah in his mind, al-Uthaymeen confirms that Allah is literally sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne in his mind.  All of them have loyally followed the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the two arch-heretics who were instrumental in causing tribulation (fitna) and division among the Muslim masses because of their reprehensible, unorthodox interpretations of the Islamic sources.

Wahhabi anthropomorphists say: Allah is in a direction, Allah has limits, Allah is literally above the Throne, and that Allah is sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne.  To a Muslim, the fact is that the Throne is located in a particular direction and a certain place.  By understanding Allah to be above the Throne literally as the Wahhabis do, they are attributing Allah with created attributes and, as a result, are implying that a part of the creation was eternal with Allah.  This opposes what the the Qur’an and the following hadith authentically related by al-Bukhari says:
 
Allah existed eternally and there was nothing else [italics mine].
 
Sunni orthodoxy clears Allah of all directions and places.  To a Sunni, Allah has always existed without the need of a place, and He did not take a place for Himself after creating it.  Orthodox Sunni scholars have said exactly what was understood by Prophet Muhammad (s) and his Companions (ra).  Imam Abu Hanifah, the great mujtahid Imam who lived in the time period of the Salaf said:  “Allah has no limits…”, period.  And this is what Sunni orthodoxy represents.
 
Orthodox Sunni scholars oppose Wahhabism
 
I end this article with a selected list of orthodox Sunni scholars who have refuted Wahhabism and warned Muslims from its poison. The list of scholars, along with names of their books and related information, is quoted from the orthodox Sunni scholar Muhammad Hisham Kabbani[12]:
 
Al-Ahsa'i Al-Misri, Ahmad (1753-1826): Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect. His son Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Ahsa'i also wrote a book refuting them.
 
Al-Ahsa'i, Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Rahman: wrote a sixty-seven verse poem which begins with the verse:
 
Badat fitnatun kal layli qad ghattatil aafaaqa
wa sha``at fa kadat tublighul gharba wash sharaqa
 
[A confusion came about like nightfall covering the skies
and became widespread almost reaching the whole world]
 
Al-`Amrawi, `Abd al-Hayy, and `Abd al-Hakim Murad (Qarawiyyin University, Morocco): Al-tahdhir min al-ightirar bi ma ja'a fi kitab al-hiwar ["Warning Against Being Fooled By the Contents of the Book (by Ibn Mani`) A Debate With al-Maliki (an attack on Ibn `Alawi al-Maliki by a Wahhabi writer)"] (Fes: Qarawiyyin, 1984).
 
`Ata' Allah al-Makki: al-sarim al-hindi fil `unuq al-najdi ["The Indian Scimitar on the Najdi's Neck"].
 
Al-Azhari, `Abd Rabbih ibn Sulayman al-Shafi`i (The author of Sharh Jami' al-Usul li ahadith al-Rasul, a basic book of Usul al-Fiqh: Fayd al-Wahhab fi Bayan Ahl al-Haqq wa man dalla `an al-sawab, 4 vols. ["Allah's Outpouring in Differentiating the True Muslims From Those Who Deviated From the Truth"].
 
Al-`Azzami, `Allama al-shaykh Salama (d. 1379H): Al-Barahin al-sati`at ["The Radiant Proofs..."].
 
Al-Barakat al-Shafi`i al-Ahmadi al-Makki, `Abd al-Wahhab ibn Ahmad: unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.
 
al-Bulaqi, Mustafa al-Masri wrote a refutation to San`a'i's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's "Sa`adat al-Darayn" and consists in 126 verses beginning thus:
 
Bi hamdi wali al-hamdi la al-dhammi astabdi
Wa bil haqqi la bil khalqi lil haqqi astahdi
 
[By the glory of the Owner of glory, not baseness, do I overcome;
And by Allah, not by creatures, do I seek guidance to Allah]
 
Al-Buti, Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan (University of Damascus): Al-Salafiyyatu marhalatun zamaniyyatun mubarakatun la madhhabun islami ["The Salafiyya is a blessed historical period not an Islamic school of law"] (Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1988); Al-lamadhhabiyya akhtaru bid`atin tuhaddidu al-shari`a al-islamiyya ["Non-madhhabism is the most dangerous innovation presently menacing Islamic law"] (Damascus: Maktabat al-Farabi, n.d.).
 
Al-Dahesh ibn `Abd Allah, Dr. (Arab University of Morocco), ed. Munazara `ilmiyya bayna `Ali ibn Muhammad al-Sharif wa al-Imam Ahmad ibn Idris fi al-radd `ala Wahhabiyyat Najd, Tihama, wa `Asir ["Scholarly Debate Between the Sharif and Ahmad ibn Idris Against the Wahhabis of Najd, Tihama, and `Asir"].
 
Dahlan, al-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni (d. 1304/1886). Mufti of Mecca and Shaykh al-Islam (highest religious authority in the Ottoman jurisdiction) for the Hijaz region: al-Durar al-saniyyah fi al-radd ala al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Pure Pearls in Answering the Wahhabis"] pub. Egypt 1319 & 1347 H; Fitnat al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Wahhabi Fitna"]; Khulasat al-Kalam fi bayan Umara' al-Balad al-Haram ["The Summation Concerning the Leaders of the Sacrosanct Country"], a history of the Wahhabi fitna in Najd and the Hijaz.
 
al-Dajwi, Hamd Allah: al-Basa'ir li Munkiri al-tawassul ka amthal Muhd. Ibn `Abdul Wahhab ["The Evident Proofs Against Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession Like Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Wahhab"].
 
Shaykh al-Islam Dawud ibn Sulayman al-Baghdadi al-Hanafi (1815-1881 CE): al-Minha al-Wahbiyya fi radd al-Wahhabiyya ["The Divine Dispensation Concerning the Wahhabi Deviation"]; Ashadd al-Jihad fi Ibtal Da`wa al-Ijtihad ["The Most Violent Jihad in Proving False Those Who Falsely Claim Ijtihad"].
 
Al-Falani al-Maghribi, al-Muhaddith Salih: authored a large volume collating the answers of scholars of the Four Schools to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.
 
al-Habibi, Muhammad `Ashiq al-Rahman: `Adhab Allah al-Mujdi li Junun al-Munkir al-Najdi ["Allah's Terrible Punishment for the Mad Rejector From Najd"].
 
Al-Haddad, al-Sayyid al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan ibn al-Qutb
Sayyidi `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad al-Shafi`i:

al-Sayf al-batir li `unq al-munkir `ala al-akabir ["The Sharp Sword for the Neck of the Assailant of Great Scholars"]. Unpublished manuscript of about 100 folios; Misbah al-anam wa jala' al-zalam fi radd shubah al-bid`i al-najdi al-lati adalla biha al-`awamm ["The Lamp of Mankind and the Illumination of Darkness Concerning the Refutation of the Errors of the Innovator From Najd by Which He Had Misled the Common People"]. Published 1325H.
 
Al-Hamami al-Misri, Shaykh Mustafa: Ghawth al-`ibad bi bayan al-rashad ["The Helper of Allah's Servants According to the Affirmation of Guidance"].
 
Al-Hilmi al-Qadiri al-Iskandari, Shaykh Ibrahim: Jalal al-haqq fi kashf ahwal ashrar al-khalq ["The Splendor of Truth in Exposing the Worst of People] (pub. 1355H).
 
Al-Husayni, `Amili, Muhsin (1865-1952). Kashf al-irtiyab fi atba` Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab ["The Dispelling of Doubt Concerning the Followers of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab"]. [Yemen?]: Maktabat al-Yaman al-Kubra, 198?.
 
Al-Kabbani, Muhammad Hisham, Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine, vol. 1-7, As-Sunnah Foundation of America, 1998.
_____, Islamic Beliefs and Doctrine According to Ahl as-Sunna - A Repudiation of "Salafi" Innovations,  ASFA, 1996.
_____, Innovation and True Belief: the Celebration of Mawlid According to the Qur'an and Sunna and the Scholars of Islam, ASFA, 1995.
_____, Salafi Movement Unveiled, ASFA, 1997.
 
Ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Shafi`i, `Abd Allah: Tajrid sayf al-jihad `ala mudda`i al-ijtihad ["The drawing of the sword of jihad against the false claimants to ijtihad"].
 
The family of Ibn `Abd al-Razzaq al-Hanbali in Zubara and Bahrayn possess both manuscript and printed refutations by scholars of the Four Schools from Mecca, Madina, al-Ahsa', al-Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, Yemen and other Islamic regions.
 
Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab al-Najdi, `Allama al-Shaykh Sulayman, elder brother of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab: al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["Divine Lightnings in Answering the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Ibrahim Muhammad al-Batawi. Cairo: Dar al-insan, 1987. Offset reprint by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul: Hakikat Kitabevi, 1994. Prefaces by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi`i and Shaykh Muhammad Hayyan al-Sindi (Muhammad Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab's shaykh) to the effect that Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is "dall mudill" ("misguided and misguiding").
 
Ibn `Abidin al-Hanafi, al-Sayyid Muhammad Amin: Radd al-muhtar `ala al-durr al-mukhtar, Vol. 3, Kitab al-Iman, Bab al-bughat ["Answer to the Perplexed: A Commentary on "The Chosen Pearl,"" Book of Belief, Chapter on Rebels]. Cairo: Dar al-Tiba`a al-Misriyya, 1272 H.
 
Ibn `Afaliq al-Hanbali, Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Rahman: Tahakkum al-muqallidin bi man idda`a tajdid al-din [Sarcasm of the muqallids against the false claimants to the Renewal of Religion]. A very comprehensive book refuting the Wahhabi heresy and posting questions which Ibn `Abdul Wahhab and his followers were unable to answer for the most part.
 
Ibn Dawud al-Hanbali, `Afif al-Din `Abd Allah: as-sawa`iq wa al-ru`ud ["Lightnings and thunder"], a very important book in 20 chapters. According to the Mufti of Yemen Shaykh al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad al-Haddad, the mufti of Yemen, "This book has received the approval of the `ulama of Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, and Ahsa' [Arabian peninsula]. It was summarized by Muhammad ibn Bashir the qadi of Ra's al-Khayma in Oman."
 
Ibn Ghalbun al-Libi also wrote a refutation in forty verses of al-San`ani's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-darayn and begins thus:
 
Salami `ala ahlil isabati wal-rushdi
Wa laysa `ala najdi wa man halla fi najdi
 
[My salutation is upon the people of truth and guidance
And not upon Najd nor the one who settled in Najd]
 
Ibn Khalifa `Ulyawi al-Azhari: Hadhihi `aqidatu al-salaf wa al-khalaf fi dhat Allahi ta`ala wa sifatihi wa af`alihi wa al-jawab al-sahih li ma waqa`a fihi al-khilaf min al-furu` bayna al-da`in li al-Salafiyya wa atba` al-madhahib al-arba`a al-islamiyya ["This is the doctrine of the Predecessors and the Descendants concerning the divergences in the branches between those who call to al-Salafiyya and the followers of the Four Islamic Schools of Law"] (Damascus: Matba`at Zayd ibn Thabit, 1398/1977.
 
Kawthari al-Hanafi, Muhammad Zahid. Maqalat al-Kawthari. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Azhariyah li al-Turath, 1994).
 
Al-Kawwash al-Tunisi, `Allama Al-Shaykh Salih: his refutation of the Wahhabi sect is contained in Samnudi's volume: "Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn."
 
Khazbek, Shaykh Hasan: Al-maqalat al-wafiyyat fi al-radd `ala al-wahhabiyyah ["Complete Treatise in Refuting the Wahhabis"].
 
Makhluf, Muhammad Hasanayn: Risalat fi hukm al-tawassul bil-anbiya wal-awliya ["Treatise on the Ruling Concerning the Use of Prophets and Saints as Intermediaries"].
 
Al-Maliki al-Husayni, Al-muhaddith Muhammad al-Hasan ibn `Alawi: Mafahimu yajibu an tusahhah ["Notions that should be corrected"] 4th ed. (Dubai: Hashr ibn Muhammad Dalmuk, 1986); Muhammad al-insanu al-kamil ["Muhammad, the Perfect Human Being"] 3rd ed. (Jeddah: Dar al-Shuruq, 1404/1984).
 
Al-Mashrifi al-Maliki al-Jaza'iri: Izhar al-`uquq mimman mana`a al-tawassul bil nabi wa al-wali al-saduq ["The Exposure of the Disobedience of Those Who Forbid Using the Intermediary of the Prophets and the Truthful Saints].
 
Al-Mirghani al-Ta'ifi, `Allama `Abd Allah ibn Ibrahim (d. 1793): Tahrid al-aghbiya' `ala al-Istighatha bil-anbiya' wal-awliya ["The Provocations of the Ignorant Against Seeking the Help of Prophets and Saints"] (Cairo: al-Halabi, 1939).
 
Mu'in al-Haqq al-Dehlawi (d. 1289): Sayf al-Jabbar al-maslul `ala a`da' al-Abrar ["The Sword of the Almighty Drawn Against the Enemies of the Pure Ones"].
 
Al-Muwaysi al-Yamani, `Abd Allah ibn `Isa: Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.
 
Al-Nabahani al-Shafi`i, al-qadi al-muhaddith Yusuf ibn Isma`il (1850-1932): Shawahid al-Haqq fi al-istighatha bi sayyid al-Khalq (s) ["The Proofs of Truth in the Seeking of the Intercession of the Prophet"].
 
Al-Qabbani al-Basri al-Shafi`i, Allama Ahmad ibn `Ali: A manuscript treatise in approximately 10 chapters.
 
Al-Qadumi al-Nabulusi al-Hanbali: `AbdAllah: Rihlat ["Journey"].
 
Al-Qazwini, Muhammad Hasan, (d. 1825). Al-Barahin al-jaliyyah fi raf` tashkikat al-Wahhabiyah ["The Plain Demonstrations That Dispel the Aspersions of the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Muhammad Munir al-Husayni al-Milani. 1st ed. Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Wafa', 1987.
 
Al-Qudsi: al-Suyuf al-Siqal fi A`naq man ankara `ala al-awliya ba`d al-intiqal ["The Burnished Swords on the Necks of Those Who Deny the Role of Saints After Their Leaving This World"].
 
Al-Rifa`i, Yusuf al-Sayyid Hashim, President of the World Union of Islamic Propagation and Information: Adillat Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`at aw al-radd al-muhkam al-mani` `ala munkarat wa shubuhat Ibn Mani` fi tahajjumihi `ala al-sayyid Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki ["The Proofs of the People of the Way of the Prophet and the Muslim Community: or, the Strong and Decisive Refutation of Ibn Mani`'s Aberrations and Aspersions in his Assault on Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki"] (Kuwait: Dar al-siyasa, 1984).
 
Al-Samnudi al-Mansuri, al-`Allama al-Shaykh Ibrahim: Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn al-wahhabiyya wa muqallidat al-zahiriyyah ["Bliss in the Two Abodes: Refutation of the Two Sects, Wahhabis and Zahiri Followers"].
 
Al-Saqqaf al-Shafi`i, Hasan ibn `Ali, Islamic Research Intitute, Amman, Jordan: al-Ighatha bi adillat al-istighatha wa al-radd al-mubin `ala munkiri al-tawassul ["The Mercy of Allah in the Proofs of Seeking Intercession and the Clear Answer to Those who Reject it"]; Ilqam al hajar li al-mutatawil `ala al-Asha`ira min al-Bashar ["The Stoning of All Those Who Attack Ash'aris"]; Qamus shata'im al-Albani wa al-alfaz al-munkara al-lati yatluquha fi haqq ulama al-ummah wa fudalai'ha wa ghayrihim... ["Encyclopedia of al-Albani's Abhorrent Expressions Which He Uses Against the Scholars of the Community, its Eminent Men, and Others..."] Amman : Dar al-Imam al-Nawawi, 1993.
 
Al-Sawi al-Misri: Hashiyat `ala al-jalalayn ["Commentary on the Tafsir of the Two Jalal al-Din"].
 
Sayf al-Din Ahmed ibn Muhammad: Al-Albani Unveiled: An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues, 2nd ed. (London: s.n., 1994).
 
Al-Shatti al-Athari al-Hanbali, al-Sayyid Mustafa ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan, Mufti of Syria: al-Nuqul al-shar'iyyah fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["The Legal Proofs in Answering the Wahhabis"].
 
Al-Subki, al-hafiz Taqi al-Din (d. 756/1355): Al-durra al-mudiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya, ed. Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari ["The Luminous Pearl: A Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya"]; Al-rasa'il al-subkiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya wa tilmidhihi Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ed. Kamal al-Hut ["Subki's treatises in Answer to Ibn Taymiyya and his pupil Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya"] (Beirut: `Alam al-Kutub, 1983); Al-sayf al-saqil fi al-radd `ala Ibn Zafil ["The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya)" Cairo: Matba`at al-Sa`ada, 1937; Shifa' al-siqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam ["The healing of the sick in visiting the Best of Creation"].
 
Sunbul al-Hanafi al-Ta'ifi, Allama Tahir: Sima al-Intisar lil awliya' al-abrar ["The Mark of Victory Belongs to Allah's Pure Friends"].
 
Al-Tabataba'i al-Basri, al-Sayyid: also wrote a reply to San`a'i's poem which was excerpted in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-Darayn. After reading it, San`a'i reversed his position and said: "I have repented from what I said concerning the Najdi."
 
Al-Tamimi al-Maliki, `Allama Isma`il (d. 1248), Shaykh al-Islam in Tunis: wrote a refutation of a treatise of Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.
 
Al-Wazzani, al-Shaykh al-Mahdi, Mufti of Fes, Morocco: Wrote a refutation of Muhammad `Abduh's prohibition of tawassul.
 
al-Zahawi al-Baghdadi, Jamil Effendi Sidqi (d. 1355/1936): al-Fajr al-Sadiq fi al-radd 'ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq ["The True Dawn in Refuting Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession and the Miracles of Saints"] Pub. 1323/1905 in Egypt.
 
Al-Zamzami al-Shafi`i, Muhammad Salih, Imam of the Maqam Ibrahim in Mecca, wrote a book in 20 chapters against them according to al-Sayyid al-Haddad.
See also:
 
Ahmad, Qeyamuddin. The Wahhabi movement in India. 2nd rev. ed. New Delhi : Manohar, 1994.
 

[1] Throughout the article, (s) means “peace be upon him,” and (ra) means “may Allah (swt) be pleased them.”
[2] Lacy, Robert. The Kingdom: Arabia & the House of Sa`ud ‎.  p. 59.
[3] Zahawi, Jamal E (1996) The Doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna Versus the ‘Salafi’ Movement. Translated by Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani. As-Sunna Foundation of America.
[4] For example, orthodox Sunni scholar Abu Ala Bukhari accused people of unbelief (kufr) if they called Ibn Taymiyah “Shaykh”. Imam Zahid al-Kawthari accused Ibn Taymiyah’s positions on the creed to be tantamount to apostasy.
[5] Gilles, Kepel. Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, p. 72.
[6] Sivan, Emmanuel. Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. pg. 102-103.
[7] Kabbani, Hisham M (1996). Islamic Beliefs & Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna A Repudiation of “Salafi” Innovations. Volume I. As-Sunna Foundation of America.
 
[8] Safran, Nadav.  (1988).  Saudi Arabia:  The Ceaseless Quest for Security.  Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY.  Pg. 11.
[9] Safran, Nadav.  (1988).  Saudi Arabia:  The Ceaseless Quest for Security.  Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY.  Pg. 12.
[10] Bagot, Blubb, Sir J. (1961). War in the Desert .New York:  Norton. Pg. 44.
[11] Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baz. “Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.” Available: www.alinaam.org.za/library/hist_bio/ibnwahhaab.htm.
[12] Ibid., Zahawi. pp. 7-15.

Understanding Quranic Verses Related To Allah’s (SWT) Attributes

 

يقولون ان الله سبحانه وتعالى جسم وأطرافه
 
___________________________________________________________
 
Salafis and their like minded groups have misunderstood the Quranic verses that depict Allah (SWT) attributes. In their insistence to take textual/literal meanings of these verses, they conceded exclusive ‘hands, eyes, face, direction, limitations, dwelling, etc., for Allah (SWT).

We have discussed this issue in detail in the following. Our explanation, Insha-Allah will remove misunderstanding of many Muslim groups.
 
To accept a body and limbs for Allah (SWT), whatever may be the kind – exclusive / divine or creature like – is  Shirk Fis Sifaat-e-Elahi, (polytheism in Allah’s –SWT Attributes), an unpardonable sin.
It is in Quran - Say O’Prophet Allah (SWT) is one.  Allah (SWT) is independent. He does not have children. Nobody has given birth to him. Nobody can match Him or equal Him”. (Al-Ikhlas - 1- 4).

It is in Quran - ‘There is nothing like Him, He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing (Ash-Shura – 11).

His attributes of  ‘seeing, hearing, speech and omnipotence, etc., have no resemblance to creatures.

The basic principle in understanding the verses of Quran and Ahadiths is that these should be understood in their most absolute, literal and apparent meanings; unless there is a proof why they should not be understood in their textual meanings.  Such proofs include; other Quranic verses, Ahadith and Consensus (Ijmaa).  Mere preference of taking certain verses on their textual meanings  is not acceptable.

This is known as Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh). The rational purpose of this rule of requiring a proof is to avoid people interpreting Quran and Hadith any way they like.

One of the major principles of Fiqh is the recognition that, not everything in Quran can be understood literally or in its textual meaning, because that will result in one verse contradicting the other in its extracted meanings. This is the reason, Allah (SWT) sent messengers to explain the actual meanings of His scriptures. In the absence of messengers, the scriptures would have been subjected to merciless interpretations by different sects/groups to achieve political power.

When there are more than one Quranic verse or Hadith on the same subject and these seem to give different ‘apparent/literal meanings’, then we should not try to understand the meanings of these verses in a way that ‘we accept some at the expense of others’. This will be a great sin. If you reject a Quranic verse, or try to misinterpret some verses to prove your wrong beliefs, you will be out of Islam.

There is one more important issue.  If you believe and give emphasis on the textual meaning of a Quranic verse, because Ibn Taymiyyah or Abdul Wahhab translated it that way, and try to interpret other Quranic verses to defend their beliefs, then you will be treated as ‘ blind follower of Ibn Taymiyyah and Abdul Wahhab at the expense of 4 established Imams of Islamic Jurisprudence viz., Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Maalik and Iman Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

We are providing below translations of 23 Quranic verses and Ahadith which give information about Allah’s (SWT) Unity (Zaat) and His attributes.

(i) ‘There is nothing like unto Him, He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing. (Ash-Shura – 11).
(ii) ‘People’s eyes cannot perceive (see) Him, He perceives their eyes (Al-An-aam – 104).
(iii) ‘Wherever you are, He is with you’. (Al-Hadid – 4).
(iv) ‘Allah is the light (existence) of the Heavens and Earth’. (An-Noor -35).
(v) ‘We (Allah-SWT) are closer to you than your jugular vein’. (Qaf – 16).
(vi) ‘He is in your own self, will you not then see’. (Az-Zariyat – 21).
(vii) Whichever side you turn, you will find Allah (SWT); Verily ( in truth ) Allah – (SWT) is Omnipresent (existing everywhere every moment) and Omniscient (infinitely wise). ( Al-Baqra – 115 ).
(viii) Transcendent (magnificent) is your Lord, the Lord of All-Greatness, far above what they ascribe to Him’. (As-Saaffaat – 180).
(ix) When My servants ask you (O’Prophet – SAWS) concerning Me, ( tell them ) I am ever present ( with them ) and I listen to the call of him that calls Me. (Al-Baqara – 186).
(x) Nothing, even the weight of a mote lying either in the heavens or in the earth escapes His notice’. (As-Saba – 3).
(xi) Say O’Prophet Allah (SWT) is one. Allah (SWT) is independent. He does not have children. Nobody has given birth to him. Nobody can match Him or equal Him”. (Al-Ikhlas - 1- 4).
(xii) He is the First, and the Last, He is the Manifest (apparent) and the Immanent (actually present through out the material world) and is the knower of all things’. (Al-Hadeed – 3).
(xiii) (Allah - SWT) the Compassionate, is sitting on the Empyrean (Arsh) (Taha -5).
(xiv) His Chair (throne) spreads over the Heavens and the Earth, the preservation of them does not burden Him; He is High, the Great. (Al-Baqra – 255).
(xv) (O’Prophet –SAWS) ‘You did not throw, when you threw, but Allah (SWT) has thrown. (Infe’al – 17).
(xvi) ‘Certainly, those who are doing ‘the promise of allegiance’ ( b’ayah ) to you, O’ Prophet (SAWS), they are actually doing the promise of allegiance to Allah (SWT). Allah’s (SWT) hand is upon their hand. (Al-Fath – 10).
(xvii) ‘And who is more truthful in His word than Allah (SWT) (An-Nisa – 87).
(xviii) ‘All that there is in Cosmos shall vanish. The countenance of your Lord alone shall endure, the Lord of Resplendent Majesty and Glory). (Ar-Rahman – 26-27).
(xix) ‘But construct an Ark under Our eyes, as we reveal and address Me no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin; for they are about to be overwhelmed (in the flood). (Houd – 37).
(xx) ‘Verily in the creation of the Skies and the Earth, and the differences of night and day there are signs for those who have perceptive minds. (Aal `Imraan, 190).
(xxi) It is in Hadith of Ihsan, Prophet Mohammad (SAWS) said, ‘You worship Allah (SWT) seeing Him, and in case you fail to see Him do your prayers knowing fully well that He is seeing you’ (Bukhari and Muslim).
(xxii) It is in Bukhari and Muslim …. that Allah (SWT) descends to the first sky before the last third of every night and says ‘Who prays to Me and I will answer his prayers? Who asks Me and I will give him? And Who asks My forgiveness I will forgive him.
(xxiii) It is in Hadith (Muslim and Baihaqi) The Prophet (SAWS) said, ‘O Allah, You are the First (Awwal), so there is nothing before You, and You are the Last (Aakher) so there is nothing after You. You are the apparent (Al-Thaahir) so there is nothing above You. And You are the hidden (Al-Baatin), so there is nothing below you.’

We have mentioned 20 Quranic verses and three authentic Ahadith above that are generally the subject of discussion among different sects.

Let us read the above Quranic verses and Ahadith one more time. We will realize that, if we take literal (textual) meanings of all these verses, we will get confused. Like, one of the above Quranic verse declares that ‘no eyes can see Allah (SWT)’. But we have another Quranic verse and Prophet’s (SAWS) Hadith (Bukhari) commanding us to see Allah (SWT).

Similarly, Quran says ‘Nothing is like Him (Allah -SWT)’. This verse negates all types of forms, shapes, body and face for Allah (SWT); whether divine or creature like. If He had a divine body, He would have described for Himself ‘ No creatures body or form is like His”. Thus, we conclude that Allah (SWT) is free from the limitations of face, form, body, place or dwelling of all kinds. We cannot allow further discussion in this issue because this is the basic faith of Islam.

It is in Quran - ‘And who is more truthful in His word than Allah (SWT) (An-Nisa – 87).

Let us see this verse of Quran. “Fa ainama tuwallu fathamma Wajhullahi  (Al-Baqra 115).

Salafis insist that in the above verse, they will take the literal/textual meaning of Arabic word ‘Wajha’ as face.

Salafis chose to understand Quranic verses and Ahadith as per the whims and imagination. They insist upon the literal (textual) meanings of the whole Quran and Ahadith. But for some verses they ignore this practice.

Look at the following Quranic verse.

It is in Quran - “Qala innama ana rasulu rabbiki li ahaba laki ghulaman zakiyya” (Maryam – 19).

The textual meaning of this verse is ‘ Hazrat Jibreel (AS) said to Hazrata Maryam (AS) ‘ I am the Apostle /messenger of Allah (SWT) and ‘ the reason I have come to you is to give you a son’.

As per their standard practice, by extracting its textual meanings, Salafis should declare that Hazrat Jibreel (AS) is a messenger of Allah (SWT) like many other messengers. And He gave Hazarata Maryam the celebrated son.

But they do not make that mistake here. Since, Hazrat Jibreel (AS) brings the message of Allah (SWT) to His Prophets/Apostles, Salafis understand this verse like any other Muslim does. Meaning, Hazrat Jibreel (AS) informed Hazrata Maryam (AS) that ‘He has come from Allah (SWT) to give her the good tidings of a son’. Giving a son is the work of Allah (SWT) and conveying this good news is the work of Hazrat Jibreel (AS).

If they had kept the same spirit in understanding Quranic verses related to Allah’s (SWT) attributes, they would have found the right path of Islam. But they do not want to follow the established principles in this context. As a matter of fact, they rebelled against all established rules of Islam. This attitude on their part has resulted in their acceptance of Hands, eyes, face, chair, dwelling for Allah (SWT).

Since they accept that ‘there is no one like Him’, therefore they claim that Allah (SWT) has hands, eyes, face, place, direction, dwelling, etc. but His body and limbs are not like that of human beings. Then how are these? They say that Allah (SWT) knows about it.

What a mess and what a misunderstanding! This confusion has led them to concede a body form for Allah (SWT) which has eyes, hands, face. They also claim that He uses a big chair to sit. They have even fixed a dwelling on Arsh for Him and claim that he descends from His place of residence to the first sky before dawn every night to listen to people’s prayers. Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar.

Ibn Batuta, the famous historian has mentioned that he  visited Ibn Taymiyya when he was in Damascus prison.   He has written that he once attended Taymiyyah's lecture in a mosque, and when  a person questioned Ibn Taymiyyah how Allah (SWT) descends to the first sky every night to listen to the prayers of the people; Ibn Taymiyyah walked down one step from the pulpit of the mosque to display to the people that    "this is the way Allah (SWT) descends every night to the first sky". 

This depiction of Ibn Taymiyyah clearly shows that he had made a shape / body of Allah (SWT) in his mind though he never said so publicly.   

All Quranic verses whose textual meanings indicate creature like attributes for Allah (SWT) have to be understood in proper perspective so that our basic Islamic faith remains intact. Since Allah (SWT) is like no one, and He is free from creature like attributes, then the meanings of these verses will be ‘ the expression of His omnipotence, magnanimity, and His presence throughout the skies and the material world’. With this understanding if you read all the above verses, you will get the right path of Islam.

Allah’s (SWT) Unity envelops everything in this cosmos from within and outside. If you read the following Quranic verses with this understanding, you will get their correct meanings.

It is in Quran - ‘He is the First, and the Last, He is the Manifest (apparent) and the Immanent (actually present through out the material world) and is the knower of all things’. (Al-Hadeed – 3). At another place in Quran ‘Allah is the light (existence) of the Heavens and Earth’. (An-Noor -35). And at another place in Quran ‘‘He is in your own self, will you not then see’. (Az-Zariyat – 21).

To accept a body and limbs for Allah (SWT), whatever may be the kind – divine or creature like – is plain Shirk Fis Sifaat, (polytheism in Allah’s –SWT attributes) which is an unpardonable sin. This belief has taken Salafis and their like minded groups far, far away from Islam.

Hindus also got confused in understanding Allah’s (SWT) attributes. Hindus accept every attribute of Allah (SWT) as a different God with a divine body and face.

The Christian accept 3 different Gods with divine bodies and faces, whose roles are different from each other.

The Salafis and like minded groups accept one God, with divine body, face and Limbs.

All the above believes are outside the sphere of Islamic teachings. All these theories are philosophical, concocted/fabricated by human mind and are totally against the basic faith of Islam.

Islam says, Allah (SWT) is one and, nothing is like Him. He is free from the considerations of ‘ form, shape, face and body of all kinds, exclusive or creature like.

Why Salafis got confused and made a divine idol of Allah (SWT) in their minds?

The answer is simple. Ibn Taymiyyah did not study Quran and Hadith under the able guidance of a prominent Shaikh of Ihsan / Wali Allah who would have explained him the true meanings of Quranic verses. He studied Quran and Hadith and other Islamic subjects on his own, understood the meanings as per his limited understanding and at the age of 19, declared himself bigger than all Imams of Islamic Jurisprudence.
Not only that, he also accused all Sufi Shaikhs of Ihsan, all Ulema of 600 years before him as polytheists / innovators / infidels and what not.

Shaykhul Islam al Hafiz Taqiyud-Din Ali Ibn Abdil-Kafi as-Subki - writes in the Preface of his book Ad-Durratu ‘l-Mudiyyah,  as follows:

QUOTE - “By his claims Ibn Taymiyyah innovated foul things in the usul of belief, and infringed the foundations of Islam, and in the same time covered himself under the pretext of following the Book and Sunnah, outwardly showing that he was a caller to Truth and a guide to heaven, while on the contrary he deviated from following the Book and Sunnah to innovation, and deviated from the consensus of the Muslims by infringing the ijma`.

He said what leads to the attribution of a body and of composition to the Divine Essence, and that it is not impossible that Allah is composed by parts. He said that the Essence of Allah Ta`ala contains contingent elements (hawadith) that the Qur’an is also contingent, and that Allah spoke it after it was not, that He speaks and keeps silent, and that phenomena take place in Him in the same way they take place in created beings.

He crossed the limit to the point of claiming that the world is eternal, and was coherent with this assumption to the point of claiming that there is no beginning for the contingencies, Hence, he confirmed that – according to his opinion – the eternal attributes [of Allah ] are contingent and the contingent created entities are eternal. None has ever joined those two opinions together in any religion. He was not among the seventy-three groups into which the Ummah is divided [i.e. he is neither a Sunni, nor a member of one of the seventy two heretic sects, but rather the founder of a new sect of his own]. In spite of all of this being horrible kufr, it is little compared to what he innovated in the furu (other issues of Islam)’.” UNQUOTE

Five centuries later, Ibn Abdul Wahhab followed Ibn Taymiyyah's foot steps and created a large group of people who started believing in Allah’s (SWT) exclusive/ special hands, eyes, face, direction, etc.

It is in Quran - “Truly, the Devil is an enemy to you, so take him as an enemy: he only calls his party to become of the inhabitants of the blaze" (Al-Fatir - 6).  

In explaining the above verse, the great scholar Ahmad Sawi writes in his Hashiya commentary in Tafseer-e-Jalaaleen, as follows.

QUOTE  “ It is said this verse was revealed about the Kharijites [foretelling their appearance], who altered the interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunna, on the strength of which they declared it lawful to kill and take the property of Muslims — as may now be seen in their modern counterparts; namely, a sect in the Hijaz called "Wahhabis," who "think they are on something, truly they are the liars.  Satan has gained mastery over them and made them forget Allah’s remembrance. Those are Satan’s party, truly Satan’s party, they are the losers" (Qur’an 58 : 18–19).  We ask Allah Most Generous to extirpate them completely" UNQUOTE

Unless Salafis and their like minded groups change their basic faith about Allah (SWT) and Prophet Mohammad (SAWS), their chances of salvation on the Day of Judgment may be remote.

In Allah’s (SWT) court that day, either you are a Muslim or Non-Muslim. If your basic faith is not correct, then you may be declared as Non-Muslim or hypocrite (Munafiq).

Salafis argue that they are accepting Allah (SWT) is not like His creatures. Also accepting that creature attributes cannot be associated with him. But, in the same breath they claim hands, limbs, eyes, face, and limits (Hadd) for Him and say that all these are divine, not creature like. This is polytheism in Allah's (SWT) Attributes (Shirk fis- Siffat-e-Elahi).

Hindus and Christians also say the same thing. What is the meaning of divine face and body? This means that you have created a shape and body for Allah (SWT) in your mind. You have deliberately misinterpreted Quranic verses in this context. But you do not want to accept it openly. This is hypocrisy; a greater sin than polytheism. 

Allah (SWT) knows what is in our heart. Let us  not debate and argue as politicians do. Allah (SWT) will judge us as per our beliefs.  Let us not be under any illusions about it.   

All Quranic verses are truthful. When we read a verse that needs to be understood by interpreting its meanings, we should first say, "I believe in whatever Allah (SWT) means" then we should strive to find out their purported meanings.

It is in Quran - "The people who strive in our way, We show and put them on the right path' (Al-An-Kaboot - 69). Let us try to understand the meanings of the following Quranic verses.

(Allah - SWT) the Compassionate, is sitting on the Empyrean (Taha -5).

Sitting, standing, walking, etc., are the attributes of human beings and creatures. We cannot associate these attributes with Allah (SWT). He is pure from all such considerations. If we take literal meaning of the word ‘sitting’ in this verse, then, we will have to deny many Quranic verses where Allah (SWT) has said ‘His Existence in unconfined, unlimited’. Therefore, the meaning of the this verse will be ‘ Allah (SWT) – the Compassionate, occupies the seat of power. As a matter of fact Allah (SWT) occupies everything in this Cosmos. Therefore, the real (purported) meanings of this verse will be ‘Allah –SWT is wielding supreme authority’.

It is in Quran - His Chair spreads over the Heavens and the Earth. (Al-Baqra – 255).

Chairs, tables etc., are used by human beings. We cannot associate these attributes with Allah (SWT). He is pure from all such considerations. If we take literal meaning of the word ‘Chair’ in this verse, then, we will have to deny many Quranic verses that emphatically negate ascribing human attributes to Allah (SWT). Therefore, the meaning of this verse will be ‘His authority spreads over the heavens and Earth’.

(O’Prophet –SAWS) ‘You did not throw, when you threw, but Allah (SWT) has thrown. (Infe’al – 17).

Throwing, catching, etc., are human attributes. We cannot impose these attributes on Allah (SWT). The purport of the verse is to emphasize that ‘ (O’Prophet) when you threw handful of sand towards enemy’s armed forces, you did it on My (Allah’s -SWT) behest’. The purport of this verse is to emphasize that ‘this is exactly what Allah (SWT) wanted you to do.

Certainly, those who are doing ‘the promise of allegiance’ ( ba’ya ) to you, O’ Prophet (SAWS), they are actually doing the promise of allegiance to Allah (SWT). Allah’s (SWT) hand is upon their hand. (Al-Fath – 10).

Hands, eyes, ears, etc., are the attributes of human beings and creatures. We cannot associate these attributes with Allah (SWT). He is pure from all such considerations. If we take literal meaning of the word ‘hand’ in this verse, then, we will have to deny many Quranic verses. The purport of the verse is to emphasize that when you (O’Prophet –SAWS) were taking ‘ ba’ya ’ from people, you did that ‘on My (Allah’s -SWT) behest. ‘This is exactly what Allah (SWT) wanted you to do on that occasion’.

It is in Quran - "But construct an Ark under Our eyes, as we reveal and address Me no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin; for they are about to be overwhelmed (in the flood). (Houd – 37).

Hands, eyes, ears, etc., are the attributes of human beings and creatures. We cannot associate these attributes with Allah (SWT). He is pure from all such considerations. If we take literal meaning of the word ‘hand’ in this verse, then, we will have to deny many other Quranic verses which negate any form, face and limb for Allah (SWT). The purport of the verse is to emphasize to Prophet Noah (AS) to continue constructing the Ark and Allah (SWT) is watching you doing that. Allah (SWT) is commanding Prophet Noah (AS) to concentrate in his work rather than praying for those who do not deserve to be saved.

 
Let us see this verse of Quran. “Fa ainama tuwallu fathamma Wajhullahi (Al-Baqra 115).

The literal meaning of this verse is ‘wherever you turn, you will find the face of Allah (SWT). We know Allah (SWT) is free from the limitations of face, form, body, place and direction. Therefore, we understand the meaning of this verse as ‘Wherever you turn, you will find Allah (SWT).

It is in Quran - ‘When you read Quran, seek protection of Allah (SWT) from the evil Satan’ (An-Nahl – 98).

How do we seek this protection? We say “Auzubillahi Minish Shaitanir Rajeem” ( I take refuge of Allah –SWT from the reprobated and reproached Satan). Then we start reading Quran by saying “ Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim” ( In the name of Allah –SWT who is most compassionate and most merciful). Why do we do that? We do it to keep ourselves protected from the evil considerations of Satan which mislead us in our understanding of Quran and Hadith.