Thank you for your brief reply and I am sure you are sincere in your giving of information. However more questions do pop into my mind. Firstly, Al hamdu Lillah I congratulate you for classifying them as Muslims and that’s good opnion right there. A merit for you indeed.

The literal translation of Ahlus Sunnah means the people of Sunnah. As far as I know salafis are very strict on following the Sunnah of the Prophet saaws, the rightly guided khulufah and who they deem to be the first three generations. In many conversations with them they have simply stated the Hadith where the Prophet saaws says in so many words that the best generation his, then the one after that and then the one after that, after the third the Prophet saaws warned us to watch out for scholars that would commit perjury. So from what I know the Salafis lay claim to stick to these three generations. And I haven’t seen anything yet from them that disproves that, except for the Saudis destruction of sacred places, like building toilets on where the house of one of the Prophets family used to live etc. however, I feel that it would be wrong to make a sweeping generalization and hold each salafi to account for their actions. Back to the main point, I have only seen Sunnah coming from these brothers and they emphasize it strongly, as their slogo goes “Qur’aan and Sunnah.” I need to know what makes them not from the Ahlus Sunnah. How do they contradict the Sunnah? They grow beards, take from the vast volumes of the Ahaadith, and practice that which the scholars agree upon and leave that where there is dispute like music, loud dhickr, tawwusal through the dead, etc.

Aqeedah, I have seen many false arguments in regards to what the salafis believe, I was once told that salafis believe that Allah sits on a chair, has literal hands, two eyes and ears and so forth. However when looking through salafi publications I supprisingly found that they believe in the transcendence of Allah just as shaykh Nuh Ha Meem outlines in umdat us salik. Allah is beyond time and space, and so forth. I tend to find that the group that accuses them of such reads from Aqeedah ut Tahaawiyah as a foundational text and then I find the salafis using Aqeedah ut Tahaawiyah as a foundational text. So are we speaking past each other when we use the same text? That question comes into mind.

With the issue of Fiqh, I tend to notice that they follow the stronger position by looking to the masaa’il of the four Imams and taking from them. They claim not to be bound to one Imam. I ask whats the problem with this? Is not the diversity a Rahmah from Allah so we can choose?
Its not nafs if we pick and choose the stronger position right? I must say that not just anybody can do this, go to the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and derive rulings for themselves. The Imaams did us a great favour with their research and blood sweat and tears. Knowledge of ussol ul fiqh and other knowledge’s are required to look at the masaa’il and choose which position. I have also found that the salafis do not forbid following a madhaab its self but they condemn the extremism within, talking about denying Ahaadith and saying to people they are not allowed to follow certain sunnahs as their Imaam did not do it. I can understand their arguments because I try to be diplomatic in my stance to this whole issue of sectarian debate. I do understand that madhaabs are not the following of the Imaam but the methodology they used to derive from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah which was then passed down from student to student. That takes us to the issue of following scholars. We cant forbid the the following of scholars and who do the salafis follow when somebody tells them a status of a haith, whether its Sahih, Hasan or daeef, they have no choice but to follow a scholar blindly. Unless we all become scholars, so in reality this whole la taqleed issue to me is a no brainer. Also we all have to take into consideration that even in the time of the Prophet saaws there were people praying differently, some would raise the hands and some would not. They knew the masaa’il direct from the prophet saaws but we find no arguments of mixing and matching. In fact we find no argument of even following a madhaab. Personally I recommend somebody to follow a madhaab if they don’t know nor have the time to study the masaa’il of fiqh in depth. However I feel strongly that Allah will not punish a person due to the fact he was not a Hanafi, Maliki, Shafee, Hanbali etc. As long as he strived to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet saaws and was sincere in his worship towards Allah. Wallahu Ghufurun Raheemun and indeed Allah is forgiving and Merciful.

Tasawuf – heres another argument I find that people are bashing heads with each other refusing to listen. Even though the term tasawuf was not mentioned by the Prophet saaws Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah Rahimahullah admits that tasawuf is a state of ihsaan which is known in the Qur’aan as tazkiyah an nafs. (fatawaa al kubraa volume 10 & 11). It is also interesting to note that Karen Armstrong in her biography of Muhammad saaws states that this religion was known as tazkiyah before Allah revealed the word Islaam in S.5.3. so in essence tasawuf and tazkiyah are the same thing. The Sufis practice tasawuf – purification of the heart and then we have the salafis practicing the same thing but yet they call it tazkiyah! Or tarbiyah.
We have to point out here that the word tasawuf, even though it was not used by the Prophet saaws, it was used by orthodox scholars such as Imaam Malik, Imaam Nawawi and Imaam Ghazali and many others and these scholars accepted the term tasawuf for the science known as tazkiyah so I find the argument here is only the word. It is again a strong example of how Muslims of our age strive to differ and cause friction amongst themselves. And I mean no offense by that.

Ash'ari and Maturidi Aqeedah, - we have discussed aqeedah, I don’t even know what ashari and maturdi, neither am I deviant if I don’t follow one of these two. I stick closely with Aqeedah ut tahaawiyah by Imaam Tahaawi, Fiqh ul Akbar by Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imam Ghazalis discourse in his Ihyaa. I have not known a salafi yet to go against these texts I bite onto with my molar teeth.

The issue of tawasul – as far as I have been educated they do believe in tawasul, but they dislike the going to graves and asking the dead for things. As I don’t find that an article of faith to ask the dead for favours, etc. I don’t follow it either, that does not mean I follow Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab. If I cant find the Prophet saaws doing so, or teaching so then I cant practice this. And shirk is something that Allah judges not humans unless its blatantly manifest, we are not to judge people inwardsly as we haven’t the ability to see the heart. As for going to graves and asking for favours, it could be a bidah and if it was, no Muslim has the right to enforce them on other Muslims or class thm as part of the out group because they refuse to do so.

For example, I may claim to love the Prophet saaws, but I don’t celebrate his birthday, but I am happy that he was born and strive to follow his Sunnah but yet I get some brother takfeering me because I fail to practice their bidah hasanah. You would have to admit, when this happens a bidah hasanah becomes sour for that person takfeering and to be honest how many times have you heard your brothers and sisters moand and groan about wahaabies on milaad un Nabi, when they are supposedly celebrating. For those who believe the Prophet saaws is present do you really feel the Prophet saaws is going to be pleasured by the talk of how wahaabies are kuffar and munaafaqen for not celebrating the prophets birthday?

Seriously we do have issues and I love to talk about them, not for the wrong reasons, I try to build bridges and not burn them. Allah commanded us not to divide ourselves into sects and He also commanded us to make peace when two groups are fighting. So please let us at least read through. Understand that this is not a debate or an argument. Let it be known that the Prophet saaws was about to tell the Muslims when laylatul Qadr was until Muslims started arguing in front of him. It was at that point when Allah took the knowledge away. So its not about hwo knows the most, whos right are wrong. Its about peace, justice, truth and all the praise worthy qualities that Muslims should embodie in order to unite upon the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. And this ummah will never unite upon error so isn’t it best that we reject the things that are being disputed and causing division between Muslims of today and follow only that our scholars agree upon? And when I say our scholars I mean scholars that the deobandiyah, the brelviyah, the salafiyah agree upon. For example you like Ibn Abbas, I like Ibn Abbas, o.k common ground! You like Imaam Ghazali , so do I , now we getting somewhere. You don’t like Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab, o.k fair enough, lets not go there. I don’t like Rida Khan Brelvi , o.k for the sake of Allah lets leave both of these scholars alone. Let us go back. Back to the important scholars we really love. The roots of the tree that the Prophet saaws advised us to bite unto when so much dispute appears. Its not hard, it is only our stubbornness that makes it hard! So shall we burn bridges and ourselves in the process or should we build bridges of understanding that help people cross safely? Its down to how we conduct ourselves in dialogues as such. So who wants to understand each other?

Sorry i dont recall shouting, not for a second. If you would like to paint a picture of a big red bull with steam coming out of his nose and hang it around my neck, thats up to you. However i would rather you put away your stereo type writer and discuss in a fruitful manner, gently as i have been doing. wasalams

Salams

Those who refuse to be taught never learn, and those who refuse to learn can never teach. Now its obvious i have hit a nerve with you.

Let us analyze what your problem maybe. I would like you to run through my post back there and point it out, instead of attacking me personally.

Attacking me personally will never stand up to reason with what i have said. I ask you kindly not to get over emotional and start making sharp comments with intent to insult.

I can assure you i dont mean to patronise anybody here, if you feel belittled then please tell me why and how i have belittled you.

Can you please notice how emotions can side track a discussion, please dont let that happen. We are Muslims, i am sure we can reason without getting all angry on each other.

I think you may be correct. The guy from Ahad Ahad forums may be able to say a thing or two here,i have noticed he passes through.

Thanks for the linx.

I look alot at the articles on Sunni path. Theres alot of material from umdat us salik on there, especially sheikh nuhs discourses.

Without intent of disrespct or raising myself above the four great Imams, they were subject to mistakes being human. Imam Shafee wrote a book and redited it over forty times and finally published it proclaiming "Only the book of Allah is without error." As Mutahideen, we have to follow the Imaams, how is the question though. Its a bit of a fallacy to say that we are not allowed to follow blindly, If so who do we believe and how do we judge correctly when we dont have the knowldge of grammar and ahaadith analisis. Proclaiming a hadith to be Sahih because Albani or Ibn Baz says so is exactly the same blind following. So how do we know that hadeeth is sahih, hasan or da'eef without the knowldege to determine so and moreover i should imagine the four Imams are more worthy to take from, firstly because they are from the first three generations, whilst salah al farzan, Ibn Baz, Uthmanee, Albani, etc are not. Secondly, all for Imaams knew most of the ahaadith in the six collections of by heart, whilst top ranking salafi scholars such as Ibn Baz has admitted to only read the six collections. The Imaams did make mistakes, however when a Mujtahid makes a mistake they still get rewarded for it as one hadith of the Prophet saaws indicates. It is not for us to tear them apart and insult them if they contradicted the Qur'aan and the Sunnah is some way of the other, we simply recognize that mistake and see how accepted scholars have outruled that mistake. When i say accepted scholar, i am talking about somebody whom we all respect and not disputed figures such as Raza Khan or Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab , nor Ashraf Ali Thaanwi for that matter. We are talking about scholars that everybody agrees upon.
If we do find the Imaams contradicting the Qur'aan or the Sunnah out of mistake then it is good to follow the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, but ask a scholar first. If you dont you might get confused with masaa'il and make your own judgements. for example a shafee may start doing a ghusl everytime he has used the toilet, instead of simply doing wudhu when he comes into contact with a woman. When confusions like this arrise we have to go to the scholars, or look at the relevant texts to see how they derived a certain ruling and with what understanding. Madhaabs are there to make things easier for common lay men like us, and its not blind following but rather reasoned following, especially if you look up the masaa'il for yourself. This can be done by studying usool ul fiqh. If the Imaams made mistakes we will find that the mujtahideen after them corrected their mistakes. Somebody who has the ability to derive from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah is a mujtahid. there are a few types of Mujtahiduwn but we wont find any nowadays with the rank and knoweldge as the four Imaams possessed, nor will there be any again, except for the Mahdi and Prophet Isaa (a.a) as they will be inspired by Allah overnight and when they come, the sectarian debate we see , will cease.

Aqeedat ut tahaawiayh, i got nothing but praisworthy things to say about that book, its a must that we all get it. I will take my questions to other forums. wasalams

Salams

Anything that was praticed by the Salaf in un-Achronistic terms is perfectly acceptable, if the modern day Salafis are right in a mas'alah i will stand by them in that mas'alah. If they are wrong, however, i want stand with them. Not to say they are wrong or right. Bottom line they are not my enemies. Nor do i wahaabie bash. It is my lack of knowledge that forces me not to condemn people.

Quote:

They have no real love for God's Holy Prophet Muhammad.

I suggest we have a nice little word about that. Please explain to me why they dont love the Prophet saaws. Thats issue one.

Quote:

They commit idolatry [ Shirk ] of the worst kind.

Again you are going to have to explain yourself, issue two.

Quote:

They have no value for any human being who is not in own group.

Again you are going to have to explain yourself, issue three.

Quote:

They gave Islam and Muslims a very bad name by committing atrocities
like September 11 attacks in New York, and the July 7 bombings in London.

Issue four.

Since you have made four claims, you are now going to have to explain to us why. We have the right to know.

I am not the one making some serious allegations, its so easy to demonize others and make them look bad . I am simply asking for the person to expound on their claims. Say what you want but it doesnt stand to reason. Moreover i dont know lots, i am a researcher who also reports their findings. I dont fall for cheapshot propaganda and the only way to come in the know is to ask questions. I didnt give any lecture, if you cant reason with me then dont bother posting. You know nothing about me so suggesting i am deceptive and so forth is just an attack against me simply because you cant reason with what i have put forth. All personal comments to the side. If you dont like what i have to post then dont read, and dont participate. If you dont have any consrtuctive to say then please keep out of here. Just dont get all mardy because i dont submit to your personal opinions based on relentless hatred, infact i would rather ask questions and reason with people, its called friendly dialouge not fracas, ruccas or what so ever. By the way i am not a follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab, i am still reasearching. With this i find that people are quick to criticize without doing there research. Why do people believe things without doing their research? are we not told to enquire into things? 49 verse 6 certainly says so! its not about argumentation, sincere reasoning rather, if you love truth then you will no what i mean, however if you hate the truth you will fail to address my line of reasoning and continue to attack my character.

Also i ask kindly that if you see anything wrong with what i have said then please point it out instead of making personal comments about me, the discussion is not about me, its about what people consider to be wrong with Salafis. At present i am preparing a document which asks a lot of questions and i seek to find those answers. So i will shift to other forums in attempt to find what i am looking for. But for now i am checking on the posts here and will keep up with the discussion here

Your correct in what you say, I agree with you. That’s why I studied under scholars and without boast received ijaaza to teach basic Arabic grammar. I have studied seerah under the likes of Sheikh Muhammad Imdad Husaain al Ahzari, Fiqh under his son, Tafseer under Masood Alam Khan, a course in hermeneutics under Sheikh Abu Jafar ,Aqeedah under Abdur-Rahman ibn Yusuf and Tajweed ul Qur’aan under Qari Ameer Hussain al Ahzari. however despite this I do find a lot of knowledge through the internet and I confirm that we do not become an Imam, scholar in two minutes just by a quick visit to fatawaa online.
Or opening up the Sahih and saying whoop there it is! Still there is the science of verifying Hadith and I find that the Salafis do that. I find them studying under people that do have ijaaza. One of the greatest follies against Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab that he didn’t have ijaaza, when infact he studied under orthodox scholars, including his father.

Quote:

- salafis DO go against Imam abu Hanifa's fiqh al-akbar, Malik's muwatta and other such books,

if so them I openly will reject them but I need to know how and then look at the evidences you will present insha’Allah and interrogate salafi scholars and then draw my own conclusion

I am happy you understand that following a madhab is not following an imam but the methodology and principals they used when deriving from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. I believe strongly that our discussions will be something I can learn and benefit from.

on many points I agree with you and you will be supprised to find that there are acronistic salafiyah that will agree too.

And thank you for the parable, you words do not fall on deaf ears, I will go to Sunni forum. However like I said, I am currently preparing a step by step discussion on tawassul because I need to find out the truth. I never claim to be a 100% right, not even 1 %, you have dialouged well and I am pleased with that. With that attitude towards dialogues such as this, we will see through the smoke. wasalams

Omorow the floors open . Firstly why dont the Salafiyah love the Holy Prophet saaws? because they dont celebrate his birthday? what is it?

Omorrow

Salams, you didnt answer the question. I asked you why do you argue that they dont love the Prophet saaws?

You replied in so many words, because they dont love the Prophets!

Its logical to state your premises as to why they dont love the Prophet before coming to such conclusions, i simply ask you again what are you premises? what makes you think they dont love the Prophet saaws?

If i was to say to you, you do not love your mother, you would indeed question why i claimed such a thing. If you have no certain knowledge about these issues and you are just hating to be part of the group bash, then please be sincere in your posistion and dont hate a people without any evidence.