how to debate with the so called salafiyyah

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS PRESENTS:

يةف ي ك

المسم نيمناظرة بالسلفية

HOW TO DEBATE WITH

THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYAH a handbook for thoroughly refuting Wahhabiyys in the topics

of the attributes, madhhabs, innovations and tawassul

ا ي أنزل عليك الكتاب منه أ يت محكات هنذ أم الكتاب وأخر متشابات فأمذ هو الذ

م زيغ فيتذبعون ما تشابه ين ف قلوب لذ الذمنه ابتغاء الفتنة وابتغاء تأويل وما يعل تأويل ا

لذ أولو ال كذر ا منذا به ك من عند رب نا وما يذذ اسون ف العل يقولون أ والرذ لباب اللذ

Al-KAYFIYYAH

HOW TO DEBATE WITH THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYAH

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 2

5th edition

Al-KAYFIYYAH



CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED .. 7

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYS

.................................................................................................................................... 8

THE PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE OBLIGATION OF FOLLOWING THEM ............... 9

THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE NATION AT LARGE.................................11

THE MAHHABS OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH ...........................................................................................13

NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE WAHHABIYYS ............................................17

THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAH ........................................................................ 21

THE WAHHABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAH ...................................... 23

THE WAHHABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR INCORRECT BELIEF .......... 25

HOW THE WAHHABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS .......................................................................27

THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJAZ (FIGURATIVE SPEECH) .................................................................30

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIL ..................................................................32

THE WAHHABIYYS REJECT LOGIC ..................................................................................................36

REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY CONFIRMED ..............................................37

THE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THE SCHOLARS MEANT WHEN THEY DISPRAISED

(RATIONAL) ARGUMENTATION (KALAM) ..................................................................................40

THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHABIYYS TRULY BELIEVE IN BODILY ATTRIBUTES

FOR ALLAH (TAJSIM) ........................................................................................................................44

THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE TEXTS ................................47

ISLAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHABIYY CREED ............................... 49

PROOF FROM THE QUR’AN THAT REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED ..................................50

THE PRIORITY OF THE DECISIVE VERSES OVER THE AMBIGUOUS .....................................53

PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED .................................57

SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHABIYY CREED .......................................................61

THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS ............................................................................................61

A DOCUMENTATION OF THE SALAF’S BELIEF ..........................................................................63

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE ......................................................... 66

EXPLAINING THE MEANING OF KUFR (BLASPHEMY) AND SOME OF ITS DETAILS .........66

JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAFIR (TAKFIR) .................................................................................69

HAVING THE CORRECT INTENTION .............................................................................................71

REFRAIN FROM PURPOSELY LEADING A PERSON TO SAY KUFR (BLASPHEMY) .............71

THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE....................................................................................73

THE IMPORTANCE OF FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF BELIEF..................................................74

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF? ............................................................................. 77

CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR MISUNDERSTANDING

OF THE HONORABLE TEXTS ................................................................. 78

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 79

TRANSLATING THE QUR’AN ...........................................................................................................79

THE WAHHABIYYS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE IGNORANT ....................................................81

THE WAHHABIYYS SHOW OUTWARD ADHERENCE TO THE SUNNAH ..................................82

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF THE FEMALE SLAVE ........................... 85

THE STORY BEHIND THE HADITH ................................................................................................85

THE WAHHABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADITH .......................................................86

THE ARABIC TERMS HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEANING ........................................................86

DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADITH ......................................................................................88

HAD THE WAHHABIYY UNDERSTANDING BEEN CORRECT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO

SAY “IN THE SKY” TO BE CONSIDERED A MUSLIM .................................................................89

THE FACT THAT THE HADITH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM ..90

THE HADITH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN THE ISSUE OF BELIEF ..........92

A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION ....................................................................................................93

THE WAHHABIYYS TA’WIL FOR THE HADITH ..............................................................................95

SIMILAR TEXTS .................................................................................................................................95

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {( اس توى العـرش عـىل الرمحن )} <<AR-

RAHMANU ÂLA-L-ÂRSHI-STAWA>> ........................................................... 98

THE TAFSIR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE WAHHABIYYS WHO

MISINTERPRET IT ..............................................................................................................................98

SIMILAR TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS AND HOW TO REFUTE THEIR CLAIMS .............105

THE SAYING OF IMAM MALIK ......................................................................................................110

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF AN-NUZUL .......................................... 112

THE EXPLANATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-ÂSQALANIYY ..........................................................112

THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO IRRATIONAL MATTERS ...................116

SIMILAR TEXTS ...............................................................................................................................116

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {( ليه الطيب اللكم يصعد ا )} ........................ 118

<<ILAYHI YASÂDU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>> .............................................. 118

THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE VERSE ..................................................................................118

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING ....................................................................119

Al-KAYFIYYAH



A SIMILAR TEXT ..............................................................................................................................120

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN ..................................................... 121

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE .................................................... 122

VERSES MENTIONING THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH ..................................................................122

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND .................................................. 124

DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD ............................................................................................124

THE SAYING OF ABU HANIFAH ....................................................................................................124

THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(بيدي)} << BIYADAYY>> ................................125

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE .................................................... 128

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 129

CORNERING THE WAHHABIYY WITH THE ISSUE OF “CLOSENESS (QURB)” ................ Error!

Bookmark not defined.

ALLAH DOES NOT CAST A SHADOW ...........................................................................................131

ALLAH DOES NOT HAVE A FOOT .................................................................................................132

THREE EASY WAYS TO SMASH A WAHHABIYY ........................................................................133

APPENDIX ............................................................................................... 137

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAH ................................................. 138

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {( منا ذا أ مره ا فيكون كن هل يقول أ ن شيئا أ راد ا )} <<Surely if He willed

for something, He says to it, “Be”, and it shall be>> ..........................................................................139

THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AN”.............................................................................141

THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS ................................................................. 143

THE MEANING OF BIDÂH LINGUISTICALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY ......................................143

THE CORRECT MEANING OF: ضاللة بدعة كل و “WA KULLU BIDÂTIN DALALAH” .............143

PROOF FROM THE HADITH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS ...................................................144

OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS IN THIS ISSUE, AND HOW TO REBUTTLE THEIR

CLAIMS ..............................................................................................................................................146

STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS ................................................147

THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ÛMAR IBNU-L-KHATTAB ............................................149

EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS .........................................................................................150

THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD 152.... ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHABIYYS? ............................................ 156

AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH .............................................................................................................156

MUHAMMAD IBN ÂBDU-L-WAHHAB ........................................................................................162

AL-ALBANIYY..................................................................................................................................163

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 6

OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A SUBTITLE ........................................164

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORSHIP AND TAWASSUL ........ 165

THE CORRECT MEANING OF WORSHIP .....................................................................................165

TAWASSUL .......................................................................................................................................170

CALLING AND SEEKING HELP (ISTIGHATHAH) IS NOT WORSHIP ......................................177

THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE ABSENT OR DEAD ....................................................183

HANGING WRITTEN WORDS AROUND ONE’S NECK FOR PROTECTION (AL-HIRZ) ........186

RECITING AT THE GRAVES ..........................................................................................................189

EPILOGUE .............................................................................................................. 193

GLOSSARY ............................................................................................... 195

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 7

CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE

WAHHABIYY CREED

8

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE

SO-CALLED SALAFIYYS

f Allah willed, this handbook will shed light on some of the deviant beliefs of the

so-called Salafiyys, those whom the Muslims call the Wahhabiyys. Hopefully, it will

be helpful in understanding what these misguided people believe, why they believe

it, and give some basic tips on how to refute them. Although the intention is to keep

this booklet as simple as possible, learning Islamic knowledge on one’s own is not

encouraged by the Religion. This handbook is equipped with a glossary and footnotes for

unfamiliar terms, but one should not attempt to teach Islam to himself by simply reading

books and depending on his own understanding. The Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

علم وإنما العلم بالت

“The knowledge is only by learning.1” This means that taking the knowledge is from

the inheritors of the Prophets: the scholars; from their mouths, chest to chest, not reading

books. Since this is so, every accountable person is obligated to go to a knowledgeable

teacher from Ahlu-s-Sunnah2, and if there is no teacher in his area, he must travel to find

one, as said by the renowned Shafiˆiyy scholar Ahmad Ibn Rislan, in his famous

millennial3 poem, Az-Zubad:

أل من لم يجد معلما فليرحل من لم يكن يعلم ذا فليس

“Whoever does not know, then let him ask, and whoever does not find a teacher, then let

him travel.”

May Allah guide us to knowledgeable teachers who can fill us with knowledge.

1 Al-Bukhariyy

2 the Sunniyy Muslims

3 1000 lined

I

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

9

THE PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE

OBLIGATION OF FOLLOWING THEM

Know that in a very well-known hadith, the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص warned about 72

sects that would deviate from the correct path of the Muslims. He said:

كلها في النار إال واحدة ثنت ين وسبعين فرقة،وإن هذه األمة ست فترق على

“Surely, this nation will divide into 73 factions. All of them will be in Hell except

one.1” That path is the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l- Jamaâh; “the People of the Sunnah

and the Majority”. They are called Ahlu-s-Sunnah for short, or even, “the Sunniyy

Muslims”. They are referred to in a hadith:

ليلزم الجماعةف حة الجنةوراد بحبأفمن

“Whoever wishes for the prosperity of Paradise, let him adhere to the Jamaâh,”2.

The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص taught his Companions that 72 out of 73 different sects would be in

Hellfire. Some will dwell in Hell forever because of a blasphemous conviction. Some

will dwell therein for a limited time known to Allah, due to a deviant creed that did not

reach blasphemy, for every creed that does not comply with the creed of the Prophet and

his Companions is a major sin if it does not reach the level of blasphemy3. Only one

group out of the 73 groups would deserve Paradise without first being tortured in Hell.

His Companions asked him about that single group, and he ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص told them:

الجماعة

1 Narrated by Abu Dawud and others

2 Narrated by At-Tirmidhiyy

3 An example of a deviant creed that does not reach the level of blasphemy is the creed of those who say

that after the death of the Prophet, Abu Bakr, Ûmar and Ûthman all took the rulership before Âliyy

unjustly. This is deviant because it contradicts the agreement of the Companions.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

10

“The Jamaâh.” 1

Ahlu-s-Sunnah, the People of the Prophet’s Method, is the group with the largest

following. In one narration, the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

واد األعظم إن أمتي ال تجتمع على ضللة، فإذا رأي تم اختلفا ف عليكم بالس

"Surely, my nation does not unanimously agree upon any misguidance, so if you see

(unacceptable) differences among you, then adhere to the vast majority”2. These

different narrations of hadith comply with each other. There is no contradiction between

that single, guided group being the “Jamaâh” and being “As-Sawadu-l-Aˆdham”.

“Jamaâh” means “group”, and must be explained to comply with the other hadiths, so in

this context it means the majority.

In another narration, the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص named that group:

ما أنا عليه وأصحابي

“(The group which is upon) what my Companions and I are upon.”3 There is still no

conflict in the different descriptions of Ahlu-s-Sunnah, for historically, the majority of

Muslims have always had the same belief since the time of the Companions, who never

disagreed about the basics of belief among themselves; the Companions were altogether

on the same path, and they did not divide into factions. As for thr next generation, most

of those who were attributed to Islam were upon the path of the Companions, and a

mintority deviated, and this is the case for every generation that came after.

The majority of Muslims did not disagree about the validity of the rulership of the four

pious khalifahs after the Prophet, nor did they deny the torture of the grave, or believe

that major sins take a person out of Islam. They did not deny that Allah can be seen,

although He is seen without having a shape, form or color- and thias point will be

1 Narrated by Abu Dawud

2 Narrated by Ibn Majah

3 Narrated by At-Tabaraniyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

11

revisited. They did not deny destiny, or deny that there will be believers who will be

tortured in Hell, or that people have a will, voluntary acts, and choice; all of which were

beliefs held by different deviant groups throughout history. Never has the majority

disagreed about the basics of the correct belief, and we challenge anyone to bring

evidence of such a disagreement. Until today, 75% to 80% of the nation has the same

belief, and from that, we know that the so-called Salafiyys are deviant people, since they

consider most of the Muslims throughout the world as mushriks and heritics, because the

Muslims believe in good innovations, and tawassul- which the Wahhabiyyah deem shirk.

The clarification of tawassul and innovations will come later, God willing.

THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE

NATION AT LARGE

A Wahhabiyy may put up a defense in this area. Proving that the nation as a whole will

always be guided necessitates that any small group who disagrees with the majority of the

nation is misguided. Therefore, for a Wahhabiyy, it is imperative to discredit this notion;

since he does not and cannot deny that they are a small out-numbered group. To do that,

he may mention the poor situation of Muslims today, their lack of knowledge and being

overwhelmed with sins.

This is why we, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, say that the belief; the creed (ˆaqidah) of the majority

of the nation will always be correct. They would not agree upon a misguided creed.

However, the Prophet foretold that his nation will become weak and sinful. There are

several narrations about this, among them:

جر شهيدأعند فساد أمتي فله تيسن يىحأمن

“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a

martyr.”1 This corruption in the nation does not mean that the majority will believe in a

deviant creed. Similar is the hadith:

1 Narrated by At-Tabaraniyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

12

هذه جعلت عافيتها في أولها و سيصيب ءاخرها بالء و أمور تنكرونهاكم ن أمتوإ

“Allah’s protection (the âfiyah) has been granted to the beginning of this nation of

yours, and its end will be inflicted with hardship and matters to which you object”1.

A Wahhabiyy may also produce the verse:

كور )} {(وقليل من عبادي الشذ

<<Only few of My slaves (the slaves of Allah) are very thankful>>2.

We tell them that this is in reference to piety, and in fact, to the Awliya’ (Muslims

saints); the waliyy is the shakur, the one who is exceedingly thankful. Few slaves of

Allah are shakir (thankful; those who refrain from using their endowments sinfully,

which is ungratefulness to Allah), and even fewer are shakur (awliya’). There are other

narrations about this issue, so know that they may produce several references. The

hadiths already mentioned are enough to prove them wrong, along with the fact that they

believe differently than the trustworthy, powerful Angel Jibril, who said to the Prophet:

ولو أخذت الخمر لغوت أمتك

“Had you taken the wine, O Muhammad, your nation would have gone astray.” Since the

Prophet did not choose the wine on the night when he went up into the skies, then his

nation will not go astray.

The Wahhabiyys took the name of Ahlu-s-Sunnah for themselves, but if they are a

minority, only a few million strong, how can they still claim the name? It is easy if one

merely distorts the meaning of “jamaâh”. To fool others, and to consider the millions

upon millions upon millions of Muslims as misguided, they say, “The Jamaâh can be

one person.” They may produce what the Prophet said about Zayd Ibn Âmr Ibn Nufayl:

1 Narrated by Muslim

2 As-Saba’, 13

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

13

يأتي أمة وحده

“He will come on Judgment Day as a nation of his own.” However, this man died

before the Prophet received revelation, and the Prophet said this about him because he

reached the correct creed in Allah without the message of a Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. This does not

prove that the general nation will go astray. We seek the protection of Allah from such

dishonesty and unsound inference.

THE MADHHABS (SCHOOLS) OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH

In reality, Ahlu-s-Sunnah is the vast, vast majority of Muslims. They stuck to the same

belief since the time of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص and never deviated from it. Ahlu-s-Sunnah

follows the four famous madhhabs in obedience to Allah and His Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

without disputing the validity of any of them, despite the differences among them. It is

important to know that in the past, there were other valid schools, like the schools of Al-

Awzaîyy, Al-Layth, the two Sufyans as well as others, but these four are the remaining

schools. The followers of these schools took great care to document their schools and

pass them down to the following generations.

The largest of those four schools is the Hanafiyy School, the followers of the great

Persian, Imam Abu Hanifah. Imam Malik was a contemporary of his, and the greatest

scholar in the city of Al-Madinah at his time. His school, the Malikiyy school, is the most

widely spread in Africa, with the exception of the eastern African countries. Imam Ash-

Shafiîyy, the scholar of Quraysh, was the greatest student of Malik, and his school, the

Shafiîyy School, is the most common in the areas of Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and

Jordan, as well as Indonesia and Malaysia, but many Syrians are Hanafiyy. As for the

Hambaliyy school, the followers of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, it is the smallest of the

four, because many of the people who likened Allah to the creations attributed themselves

to that school and have defamed it- repelling people from adhering to it. In fact, in some

of the works of the scholars, they referred to the Mushabbihah (the Likeners; the people

who liken Allah to the creation) as “the Hanabilah (the Hambaliyys).” This is only due to

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

14

those people defaming the Hambaliyy school, and it is exactly like the people referring to

the Wahhabiyys as “the Salafiyys”.

Here, we will take an opportunity to substantiate the validity of the schools, because this

is one of the deviances of the Wahhabiyys. They say that following the schools is an

innovation. Some of them, out of their ignorance, say, “Did the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص follow a

school?” The answer to that silly question is, “No, he did not follow a school. The

schools are based on following him.” This means that the schools use the hadiths of the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص as evidence. Therefore, Ahlu-s-Sunnah believes that if someone follows

any one of those madhhabs, he would be guided. By that, they respect the acceptable

differences within the boundaries of the Islamic shariâh (law), as validated by the

Prophet himself ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, and just as the Companions and their students respected the

different judgments given by different mujtahid Companions.

Clear evidence from the incidents that took place between the Companions at the time of

the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص is what was narrated by Al-Bukhariyy from the route of Ibn Ûmar:

ل ف بين ل يصلني أ حد ) قال النيب صىل هللا عليه و سل لنا ملا رجع من ال حزاب : عن ابن معر قال العرص ا

فأ درك بعضهم العرص ف الطريق فقال بعضهم ل نصيل حىت نأ تهيا وقال بعضهم بل نصيل مل يرد منا ذكل (قريظة

فذكر للنيب صىل هللا عليه و سل فل يعنف واحدا مهنم

“Ibn Ûmar said, “When he returned from the battle against the United Parties1 the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said to us, “No one prays Al-Âsr until reaching Bani Quraydhah2.”

Some of them were in route when the Asr prayer came in. Some said, “We do not pray

until we get there.” Some of them said, “No, we shall pray, that is not what he wanted

from us.” That was (later) mentioned to the Prophet and he did not scold anyone of

them.” The evidence contained in this hadith is that some mujtahid Companions

understood the apparent expression of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, and thus took it to be permission

to pray Âsr outside of its time if it meant praying it only at their destination. Others

1 Al-Ahzab

2 They were a tribe of Jews who had breached their treaty with the Prophet.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

15

understood that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص was telling them to rush to their destination so to pray

the prayer in its time there, but not to pray the Prayer outside of its time.

Had their difference been unacceptable, the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص would have scolded those who

disobeyed him, because the belief of the Muslims is that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص does not

remain silent in the face of sins. This is exactly the difference between the schools. Some

understood a hadith this way, while others that way, some referred to a hadith while

others did not confirm its authenticity, etc., but most importantly, all of those mujtahids

were qualified. Thus, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, unlike the Wahhabiyys, follow the Companions in

what they did in reference to imitation (taqlid) of scholars and following schools. As a

result, they did not tamper with the rules of the Religion. More will be mentioned about

the validity of following the schools in the section about the Wahhabiyy grandfather,

Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah.

All of Ahlu-s-Sunnah have the same basic belief. They belong to one of two madhhabs

(schools) of âqidah (creed; belief), even if some do so without realization. Knowing

about this is important. In brief, the two madhhabs of âqidah do not have different

creeds. They carry the same basic belief. The difference between them is in such matters

as definitions and terminology. In other words, the base of these two schools is the same.

The outcome they reached in regards to the belief is the same. Their differences are in

issues like defining terms. If someone follows one of the schools of âqidah, the

Ashâriyy school or the Maturidiyy school, he follows the belief of the Prophet of Allah

and his Companions, just as the one who follows the method of the previously ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

mentioned schools of fiqh follows the method of the Prophet of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص and his

Companions.

If someone says, “If their belief is the same, why have two different schools, and if they

have two different schools, how could they both be the guided faction?” The answers for

these two questions are as follows:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

16

The first is that they are different schools because they were established by two different

men in two different areas, but both with the same basic belief. Naturally, being different

individuals, they would differ in their terminology and expressions, even if their belief

were the same. Then, the scholars who came after them applied the method of those two

scholars, and taught according to their ways, out of confession that those two scholars

were the masters of their time in the science of the creed, just as Al-Bukhariyy and

Muslim were the masters in hadith narration1, and the Four Imams were the masters of

Fiqh. Thus, anyone who took by the way of Al-Ashâriyy in expressing the matters of the

creed was attributed to his school. Likewise is said about whoever taught and authored

according to the way of Al-Maturidiyy. Furthermore, it is valid to say that whoever is an

Ashâriyy is a Maturidiyy, and whoever is a Maturidiyy is an Ashâriyy.

The answer to the second question is that the fact that they share the same basic creed

confirms that both groups are the guided faction, just as the Companions, who had the

same basic creed, differed about whether the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص saw Allah. Some, like Ibn

Âbbas, said that he saw Allah with his heart2. Others, like Â’ishah, said that he did not

see Allah. Some of Ahlu-s-Sunnah said that he saw Allah with his eyes. Yes, what is

correct is that he saw Allah with his heart and not with his eyes, that it is possible that

what Â’ishah meant was that he did not see Allah with his eyes, and that no one will see

Allah with their eyes in this lifetime, the proof for which does not befit this summarized

booklet, but the point is that this difference does not mean that the Companions have

divided into factions. They all still have the same basic belief, which is that Allah can be

seen. Likewise, the differing expressions between the Ashâriyys and the Maturidiyys do

not make them two different factions, because their basic creed is the same. Hence, what

is precise is to say that they are two schools within the same guided faction.

In explaining the Muslim’s creed, most scholars, like the Shafiîyy and the Malikiyy

scholars, are Ashâriyys, also known as Al-Ashaîrah. Others, usually Hanafiyy scholars,

are Maturidiyys, and it should be known that they are not few. The Wahhabiyys hate both

1 If someone asks, “Do Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim have a school in hadith? The answer is yes. Among the

scholars who followed the way of those two imams is Al-Hakim, the author of Al-Mustadrak.” 2 Not in his heart- with his heart instead of his eyes.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

17

groups, claiming that Ashâriyys and Maturidiyys are deviants. They are cornered into

this claim, because both fountains of knowledge refute the Wahhabiyy creed, and all

other deviant creeds. Furthermore, since they claim that the Ashâriyys are deviant, and

since most of the scholars are Ashâriyys, they often quote scholars whom they would

consider deviant. The authority of heavy weight scholars like An-Nawawiyy, Ibn Hajar

Al-Âsqalaniyy, and Al-Bayhaqiyy give their books and lessons an authentic tone,

although in reality such scholars refuted and disagreed with the Wahhabiyy beliefs. The

Wahhabiyys pick and choose what they like from the scholars’ comments and judgments,

then if one were to show them what those scholars believed, those Wahhabiyys would

say, “Oh, but he is an Ashâriyy!”

Ahlu-s-Sunnah is moderate, safe between the different extremes that are and have been

practiced. Unlike the Wahhabiyys, they do not liken the attributes of Allah to the

attributes of the creations. Nor do they deny the attributes or existence of Allah, as the

Wahhabiyys would accuse them. They do not deem the intellect as something that has

priority over the rules of Allah, nor do they stoop like the Wahhabiyys and read the

Qur’an and the hadiths without using their minds. Some scholars said that the one who

reads the Revelation without using his mind is like the one who steps into the light with

his eyes closed, and the one who uses his mind without using the Revelation is like the

one who steps into the darkness with his eyes opened. We must step into the light with

our eyes opened. We must accept the Revelation of Allah and use our minds (according

to the guidance of the great scholars of Islam). What other than ignoring the mind allows

a person to believe that the Cr eator has one side with two right hands, one foot and one

shin? The one who is intelligent would be sure that the references that they took literally

that lead them to establish this deformed description must have a different meaning.

NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE

WAHHABIYYS

Al-Mushabbihah, “the Likeners”, are among the ancient, deviant factions about which the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص warned. They are religiously defined as the people who liken the self of

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

18

Allah to the selves of His creations, or they liken His attributes to their attributes. The so-

called Salafiyys; “the followers of the Salafiyy Daˆwah”, as they call themselves, are a

modern branch of Al-Mushabbihah, as we will prove, if Allah willed.

Rather than being Salafiyy (followers of the scholars of the first 300 years), they are

talafiyy (destructive). Do not call them Salafiyy, call them imposters. Call them “so-

called Salafiyys”, or “pseudo (fake) Salafiyys”. If Allah willed, we will also speak about

the true Salaf.

Call them The Wahhabiyyah, the name given to them by the scholars when they first

deviated more than 200 years ago, emerging from the land of Najd in the Arabian

Peninsula, following their master, Muhammad Ibn Âbdi-l-Wahhab. Some claim that

there is no such faction called the Wahhabiyyah. Refer them to the book of Muhammad

Ibn Âbdi-l-Wahhab’s own brother, the good scholar, Shaykh Sulayman Ibn Âbdi-l-

Wahhab, who wrote a book refuting his brother and his followers: As-Sawaîq Al-

Ilahiyyah Fi-r-Raddi Âla-l- Wahhabiyyah (The Devine Bolts in Refuting the

Wahhabiyys).

EXTRA DETAIL:

the validity of using the term “wahhabiyy”

One would find many Wahhabiyys who are offended by being called Wahhabiyys, and say

that it is sinful to use the term, claiming that it is derived from the name of Allah: “Al-

Wahhab” (the one who gives abundantly). They would say, “How can you use Allah’s

name to refer to people you consider deviant? Is this not belittling His name?” This is yet

another example of their ignorance. Had they known some of the basics of the Arabic

language, they would not argue this point. In the books of Arabic conjugation1 (sarf),

which is the knowledge of the structures of the words, there is a chapter called “nasab

(the attribution of something to something else)”. For example, if someone is attributed

to the tribe of Quraysh, he would be “Qurashiyy”- and not Qurayshiyy-, as per the

1 Also called morphology

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

19

proper rules. The one who does not learn would assume that he would be called

“qurayshiyy”. If he were a follower of Imam Malik he would be “Malikiyy”.

We are not actually attributing those people to Al-Wahhab, who is Allah the Exalted, but

to Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab- or more specifically to the last part of his name:

Âbdu-l-Wahhab (the slave of Al-Wahhab). This name is composed of two words: “Âbd

(slave)” and “Al-Wahhab”, which is Allah’s name. When someone is attributed to a

person with this type of constructed name (ism murakkab), one of the two parts must be

omitted. If keeping the first part leads to confusion, the first part of the name is omitted

and the second part is kept. Hence, anyone attributed to Muhammad Ibn Âbdi-l-Wahhab

is not called “Âbdiyy”, but “Wahhabiyy”, like if someone is attributed to Âbdu-l-

Ashhal or Âbdu-l-Qays; he would not be called Âbdiyy, rather Ashhaliyy or Qaysiyy

Likwise, the follower of Âbdu-l-Qadir is called “Qadiriyy”, etc.

***

They also call themselves Ahlu-l-Haqq (the People of the Truth) and Ahlu-l- Hadith (the

People of [the science of] Hadith). When calling themselves Ahlu-l- Hadith, they truly

mean that they (unrightfully) make ijtihad from the hadiths- bypassing what the

mujtahids said. They have also been called La Madhhabiyyah (those who do not claim

any school of fiqh), and Ghayru-l-Muqallidin (those who do not imitate). They explain

this name to mean that they do not merely imitate the scholars, rather they imitate the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص through the hadiths, but in fact, it means that they do not follow qualified

scholarship.

Truly, they are Ahlu-l-Kibr (the People of Arrogance), Ahlu-d-Dalalah (the people of

misguidance), Al-Mushabbihah (the people who liken Allah to His creations), Al-

Mujassimah (anthropomorphists; the people who believe that Allah has a body), Al-

Jihawiyyah (Those who attribute a direction to Allah), Al-Hashwiyyah (people who speak

nonsense) and kuffar (blasphemers), among other titles.

It is easy for an ignorant person to commit kufr (blasphemy) because of them. Many

people have fallen into their snare. Except for their kufr, they talk and dress like Muslims.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

20

However, if lent a listening ear, they surely will throw an unfortunate person into the

black flames of Jahannam. This does not include people who do not believe the bad

belief of the Wahhabiyys, but may affiliate themselves with the so-called Salafiyys. The

Wahhabiyys are as The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

بواب جهنم من أناس من جلدتنا يتكلمون ب ألسنتنا تسمع منهم و تنكر دعاة على أ

قذفوه فيها استمع إليهم

“There are people who look like us and talk with our talk. You would hear their

message and reject. They are preachers at the gates of Hell. They will throw

whomever listens to them in it,”1.

1 Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

21

THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAH

o avoid confusion, the correct creed will be discussed before discussing their

incorrect creed. Know that Allah exists differently from anything else. His self

is His reality, and not a body. He alone is without a beginning, because no one

created Him. He is the only Creator. He exists everlastingly and does not change. He is

perfect. Before creating the creations, He existed without them. He existed before the

skies or the ˆArsh existed, and He now exists as He eternally existed, without those

creations affecting or changing Him. He is alive without a body or soul, and without

needing sustenance. He is knowledgeable without a teacher and does not learn or forget.

He possesses the perfect knowledge of everything, and the creations exist only as He

knew they would. He has power to bring anything possible from non-existence into

existence. He creates without tools and without getting weak or sleepy. He has the eternal

and everlasting Will, by which He specified His creations with particular places,

directions, shapes, colors, times, changes, movements, stability, hardships, ease, choice

and will, and everything else He eternally willed for His creations. His management is

unhindered and uninterrupted. He cannot be distracted because He does not have limbs.

He has no partner, wife, parent, son, branch, origin, nor opposite. He does not need

anything, not a space to occupy, nor time to bind Him. He is not benefited nor harmed by

His creatures. He eternally sees and hears everything without eyes or ears, without

looking into a direction, without needing volume or sound waves, light, time, or space.

Nothing is hidden from Him. He speaks with His eternal Kalam (speech), without it being

of a word, letter, sound, nor language. It is not the result of organs touching or air

moving, and it does not come from any direction. Allah does not resemble anything in the

universe. He is not composed of particles, nor does He have the characteristics of

particles, such as color, shape, place, motion, stillness, texture, temperature, etc. He is

neither inside nor outside of something, since those are places for bodies. He is not in a

particular place, nor is He everywhere. He exists without being in any place. He does not

have the attributes of the creations. The creations are not parts or attributes of Allah. All

of His attributes are eternal and everlasting. They are not organs or emotions. Since His

Self is Eternal, His attributes cannot be created. He is different from whatever is

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

22

imagined. Let there be no doubt that this is the correct belief in Him, the mighty Lord

with the perfect names.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

23

THE WAHHABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAH

he focus of our discussion will be the Wahhabiyys’ disbelief in the attributes of

Allah. They claim Tawhid, but they really believe in tajsim (attributing bodily

attributes to Allah).

Their belief is that Allah has attributes whose linguistic meanings refer to the attributes of

a body. This means that the meanings they choose to ascribe to Allah are meanings that

imply a bodily reference, like organs, places and motion. Notice the word “meanings”.

They intend particular (bodily) definitions when they use certain words. Let whoever

talks to one of them pay attention not only to the words they use, but also to the

meanings they intend.

They believe that Allah has a real face that should be understood literally. They believe

that He has two real eyes, and that He actually smiles (these are their own words) and

laughs. Their grandfather, Ibn Taymiyah, claimed that Allah spoke after He was not

speaking. They believe that Allah speaks Arabic, claiming that whenever Allah creates,

He literally says “Kun (be; exist)”. They say that Allah is attributed with a very real pair

of hands that must be understood as stated, and that Allah really holds creations in them.

They believe that He has a real right hand and a real left hand, and some said He only has

two right hands, because a left would not befit Him. They believe that Allah has real

fingers, but they may have different opinions about how many. At least, they would say

He has two, and some may say six. They have been known to say that Allah sits on His

Ârsh, but it seems that was too easy to refute, so they reverted to saying that He is above

His Ârsh. They focus on attributing places and directions to Him. They say He is

“above”, and they mean it in the physical sense. They hate for someone to claim that his

highness is majestic, and not physical. They claim that He is above the seven skies, above

the Ârsh, the ceiling of Paradise. They believe that Allah is separate from His creations,

disconnected from them, existing in a very high location. Some of them say that Allah is

above the Ârsh and there is no place there, which is absurd and against what the Prophet

said about the book above it. They do not see this as drawing similarities between ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

Allah and His creations. Some of them said that Allah exists in the sky, but perhaps those

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

24

who say that He is above His Ârsh have overtaken them. Some may say that Allah is

above the Ârsh by a four-finger spaced distance. They believe that Allah descends from

above the Ârsh down to the first sky, and then ascends back up; that Allah comes and

goes- so that they believe that Allah moves from one place to another. Furthermore, they

bind Allah by time, believing that He descends during the last third of the night, and that

He is above the Ârsh during the day. They believe that Allah has a shin and a real foot,

which will be submersed in the fire of Hell on the Day of Judgment. They even believe

that Allah will cast a shadow on that day. They firmly believe that all of these so-called

attributes must be taken by their real, literal, apparent and obvious meanings.

As can be seen, when using the name “Allah”, they refer to something imaginary.

Compare this to the correct belief mentioned in the previous section, and easily see that

they do not believe in God. Let whoever meets one of these deviant people not be

intimidated, nor should he underestimate every one of them- until he masters this book.

Some Wahhabiyys study and memorize, ready to bombard their opponent, but this book

should give you the answer for every trick they have up their sleeves. The point of

mentioning their belief without mentioning their so-called proof is to expose the result of

their analysis. They misinterpreted many verses and hadiths to establish their beliefs, and

this is the result.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

25

THE WAHHABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR

INCORRECT BELIEF

hat complicates the issue is that they usually deny that they believe that

Allah has a body. On the contrary, they usually say that they do not believe

that He has a body. However, some of them say that they do not confirm

whether He has a body or not, which is still blasphemy. Some of them might say that He

has a body, but then would say that they do not know how His body is, which also does

not escape blasphemy.

They would deny that Allah has a body, because they know that they would be clearly

admitting that He is like His creations. Taking this position may be the case of most of

them. Despite this denial, it is known that they secretly believe that Allah has a body

because they hate for someone to say that He has no place or direction, and they think

that denial of place and direction is denial of His existence. Had that been true, then

where was Allah before he created places and directions?

They may not confirm whether Allah has a body or not, because they would not want to

explicitly liken Allah to His creations, and at the same time they do not want to reject

their literal meanings. This is still blasphemy, since being neutral and saying, “I do not

say if Allah has a body or not,” is like doubting about Allah; it is a lack of certainty

(yaqin), and lack of certainty is blasphemy. It is the same as saying, “I do not say if Allah

exists or not,” or “I do not say if Allah has a partner or not.” The one who doubts or is

neutral about any attribute of Allah that is known by necessity1 (such as His knowledge,

power, the fact that He does not resemble the creations, etc) is not a Muslim, as

mentioned by the great Imam Abu Hanifah, one of the heads of the (real) Salaf, in his

book Al-Wasiyyah. He said, “Whoever says that Allah has a created attribute, or doubts2,

or is neutral3 is a blasphemer.” Whoever considers it possible for Allah to have a body,

even if he did not believe that Allah actually has a body, would blaspheme for deeming it

possible.

1 Known by both scholars and laymen

2 Doubt means having the slightest uncertainty.

3 Neutral means not to take one side or another side; neither to confirm nor deny either side.

W

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

26

The less intelligent among them might say that Allah has a body, because it is obvious

that they describe a body, but they would say that His body is not like ours, or that they

do not know how His body is. According to the great Ahmad Ibn Hambal, the Salafiyy

scholar whom they often claim to follow, whoever says Allah has a body unlike other

bodies blasphemes. In his book, “The Creed of the Distinguished Imam Ahmad Ibn

Hambal”, Abu Fadl At-Tamimiyy, the head of the Hambaliyy scholars in Baghdad said,

“Ahmad objected to those who call Allah a body, and said, ‘The names of things are taken

from the language and the Religious Law. The linguists defined the jism (body) as that

which has length, width, depth, composition and image, and it (the term “jism”) did not

come in the Religious Law, and so it is invalid’. ”

Furthermore, it is blasphemous to say that they do not know how His body is, because the

scholars of Islam have made it very clear that "how" cannot be attributed to Him.

Throughout the books of the Sunniyy scholars, you would find that they said Allah and

His attributes:

بال كيف

"without a how (i.e., manner of being)". Thus, to say “they do not know how He is” is to

say that there is a how, but it is unknown to them. Saying that the “how” is unknown does

not negate the fact that they believe that He has a body, just as saying, "The door is open,

but I do not know how," does not negate the fact that the door is open. Likewise, they

say, “We don’t know how He sits or how He descends, or How his hands or eyes are,”

etc. What this truly means is that they do not know if He is sitting ‘Indian style’, or like

one sits in the Prayer, and they do not know if He descends head first or feet first, or if he

has a human hand or monkey hand, or an eye on the chin or on the forehead, etc. So, if

one of them says, "We do not know how," tell him that the scholars of the (real) Salaf

have agreed that there is no how, which is a categoric negation of any mode or fashion or

manner of being, as narrated from the likes of Umm Salamah, the Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص wife

and Imam Malik. She said, "the ‘How’ (being attributed to Him) is not rational (ghayru

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

27

maˆqul),"1. If Allah willed, this point will be revisited in the section, "The Truth about

Istiwa’".

These people may have never learned the correct belief, so when they learned their

incorrect belief and they became attached to it, they developed a warped logic. Their

thinking is based on an unsound premise: that Allah is attributed with these (human)

attributes. They also have other horrendous and contradictory claims, which need not be

mentioned now. As a result, their thinking became twisted, like the Christians who say

that Allah is one, and is three while He is one. The Wahhabiyys believe that Allah has

these (human) attributes, yet they claim that they believe that Allah is not similar to His

creations. This is clearly unsound and incorrect.

HOW THE WAHHABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS

Notice that their so-called proofs have not been referenced yet. Go through this process

gradually and systematically. First, have a general idea of how they believe in Allah,

which is really disbelief. They will not deny the belief of which we have accused them,

but they may deny certain words used in this book, like “organ” and “motion”. They

openly use such words as “real”, “literal”, and “apparent” when they attribute these

(human) attributes to Allah. In Arabic, they use such words as “dhahir” and “haqiqah”.

But why do they believe these things? The following is the reasoning behind their bad

belief in Allah, the exalted:

They believe that Allah must be attributed with these (bodily) attributes because of some

literal meanings of Qur’anic verses and hadiths of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. They say that these

(bodily) attributes are found in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, so we must believe in them,

and whoever does not believe in them has negated them. They mean that one must

believe in those texts by their literal meanings, and whoever does not believe in the literal

meanings has completely negated the attribute, which of course is not true. Hence, if they

meet someone who does not believe that the Yad of Allah is a real and literal hand, they

1 Ibn Hajar Al-ˆAsqalaniyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

28

will accuse him of rejecting an attribute of Allah. If they find someone who does not

believe that Allah has a true and literal face, as they would describe it without explicitly

calling it an organ, they would accuse him of completely rejecting an attribute of Allah.

This twisted reasoning is a trick that lead many Muslims to blasphemy. They left Islam to

join the Wahhabiyys, not realizing that this reasoning is perverted. They did not possess

the answers that would protect their faith. Seeing that too many Muslims did not know

how to defend themselves or Islam against the lies of the Wahhabiyys is what inspired the

writing of this book. The Wahhabiyys are exactly among those whom Allah clearly

warned us about in the Qur’an when He told us:

م زيغ فيتذبعون ما تشابه منه ابتغاء الفتنة وابتغاء تأويل )} ين ف قلوب ا الذ {(فأمذ

<<As for those with perversion in their hearts, they follow what is ambiguous

(mutashabih) in it (the Qur’an), seeking tribulation, and seeking its

misinterpretation>>1.

The perversion in their hearts is their inclination away from truth and towards falsehood.

Their following the ambiguous verses is their tracking them, putting them altogether, and

listing them one after the other. Their tribulation is their argumentation and debating with

the Muslim to take him out of his Religion into their false creed. The meaning they seek

is the wrong meaning, and hence is a misinterpretation of the verses. They want to give

the texts meanings that comply with their creeds instead of making their creeds comply

with the texts.

Know that these difficult people do not deem rational thinking valid. How could they

when it shows the invalidity of their creed? For example, how could they absurdly say,

“Allah is above the Throne, and there is no place there,” while the word ‘there’ refers to a

place? It is as if they are saying, “There is no place in that place.” They say that Allah

descends during the last third of the night, but it is always the last third of the night

somewhere on earth, so He would have to be going up and down, up and down, up and

1 ‘Al ˆImran, 7

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

29

down, non-stop. When, then, would He be over the Throne according to them? Whoever

used his mind would be sure that the texts that they refer to have meanings different from

what they claim, even if he did not know what those meanings were, simply for the

stupidity of these claims. They say, “Logic is good, but it has its place,” and what they

truly mean is that one must believe what they consider as proper belief, regardless of

logic or reasoning. They mean that logic’s place is outside of the Religion.

They believe that assigning a meaning to a verse or hadith that is different from its literal

meaning, which is called “making ta’wil”, is sinful. This basic creed of theirs- that ta’wil

is sinful- is one of their greatest reasons for encountering contradictions, as will be shown

in the second chapter, if Allah willed. It is true that some texts may apparently suggest

some bodily attributes, but they can have other meanings. Explicit verses of the Qur’an

negate that those verses should be taken by their literal, physical meanings, and sound

reasoning does not attribute bodily characteristics to the Creator. It is invalid for the

verses or recitations of the Qur’an to contradict each other, and that is the result of their

claims, that there is conflict in the texts. The Wahhabiyys do not believe that this is

grounds to interpret these texts differently from the literal meanings. As a result, they fell

into Tajsim (attributing bodily attributes to Allah), which is blasphemy, and they accuse

the one who believes in a different (befitting) interpretation of takdhib (the blasphemy of

contradicting the religious judgments) and taˆtil (the blasphemy of denying the attributes

of Allah).

They say statements like, “If Allah revealed this word, then it must be understood by the

literal meaning, or He would have revealed a different word,” then they contradict

themselves when they encounter verses like:

ء محيط )> ذه بك ش ن .<(أل ا

If taken literally, it would mean that Allah surrounds everything or engulfs everything.

Since they do not believe that, they do not explain it like that; they say it refers to His

knowledge of everything. This reasoning, that since Allah revealed the expression, it

must be taken literally, has no support from the Qur’an or the Sunnah. Scholars like Abu-

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

30

n-Nasr Al-Qushayriyy said that those who follow this method do so because of their puny

understanding of Arabic. It is a very devious and weak-minded understanding, which

may sound appealing to an ignorant person. As just seen, in reality, they do not apply this

reasoning to every ambiguous text. There are plenty of ambiguous texts that they give

alternative explanations for, such as what Al-Bukhariyy narrated:

لة نه وب ين القب إن ربه ب ي

[which apparently means] “Surely his Lord is between him and his Qiblah.” How

would Allah be between the praying person and his Qiblah, which would imply that Allah

is on earth, when He is high above the Throne according to them? How do you explain

this hadith, O Wahhabiyy, and if you do not take it by its apparent meaning, you cannot

accuse us if anything for making ta’wil.

THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJAZ (FIGURATIVE SPEECH)

The Wahhabiyys have denied that there is any figurative speech in the Qur’an or the

Sunnah, and some of them have denied it from the speech of the Arabs completely.

Ibn Taymiyah said:1

بل وتقسيم اللغة إلى حقيقة ومجاز تقسيم مبتدع محدث لم ينطق به السلف ,فال مجاز في القرآن

“There is no figurative speech in the Qur’an. In fact, dividing the language into “literal

speech” and “figurative speech” is an innovated categorization. It was never uttered by

the Salaf.” This denial, in reality, is a fabrication and a fib, but to them, it is necessary for

their creed, and they only deny figurative speech because of the perversion in their hearts:

their incredible attachment to likening Allah to the creations. If they confirm that there is

figurative speech in the Religious Texts, the entire foundation of their claim will be

destroyed and all of their argumentation would be petty and useless. Thus, to justify

interpreting the mutashabih verses by their apparent meanings, Ibn Taymiyah made this

claim.

1 In Majmu^ Al-Fatawa

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

31

The ease of demolishing this absurdity frees us from having to give a detailed refutation.

Let us settle with a few clear examples and references. Allah describes His Prophet in the

Qur’an as:

اجا منريا)} {(س1

<<A luminous lantern>>

If there is no figurative speech in the Qur’an, then the Prophet must be a literal lamp,

which is not true because he is a human being. The actual meaning is that the Prophet

eradicates the darkness of blasphemy and is a reason for misguided people to become

guided. In the Qur’an, Allah described a wall as:

{(جدارا يريد أن ينقضذ )}2

<<A wall that wants to fall>>.

If there is no figurative speech in the Qur’an, then that wall would have to literally been

ascribed with a will, which is an attribute of the living. This verse gives the wall the

image of something living and willing, so to portray its leaning over as if it is ready to

fall. Taking this verse literally would necessitate confirming that the wall was alive.

Lastly, Allah informed us in His book:

3{(نساؤك حرث لك )}

<<Your women are plots of land for your cultivation>>.

Therefore, according those who deny figurative speech in the Book of Allah or the

sayings of His Prophet, the women are actual plots of land, and not humans made of flesh

1 Al-Ahzab, 46

2 Al-Kahf, 77

3 Al-Baqarah, 223

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

32

and blood. The verse actually contains a metaphor that refers to the impregnation of

women.

So, just as it is known to us that these texts should not be taken literally, it is known that

nothing in the Qur’an or the hadiths that would seemingly ascribe organs, places,

directions or motion to Allah should be taken literally. As for Ibn Taymiyah’s claim that

the Salaf did not confirm figurative speech in the Arabic language, that is refuted by the

fact that the Imams like Ibn Âbbas, Al-Bukhariyy, Ahmad Ibn Hambal and others from

the Salaf interpreted texts according to meanings different from the apparent meanings,

as will come in the second chapter. Ibn Âbbas said in confirmation of figurative speech

in the Qur’an:

إذا خفي عليكم شيء من القرآن فابتغوه من الشعر فإنه ديوان العرب

“If anything in the Qur’an is unclear to you, then seek its meaning from the poetry, for

the poetry is the portfolio of the Arabs.” Also among the Salaf who confirmed figurative

speech is Abu Ûbaydah Maˆmar Ibn Al-Muthanna. He has a famous book entitled,

Majaz Al-Qur’an (the figurative speech within the Qur’an).

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIL

On the contrary, Allah taught us this lesson in His book:

{(منه أ يت محكات هنذ أم الكتاب وأخر متشابات )}1

<<Within the Qur’an are decisive verses (which according to the Arabic language have

only one meaning). They are the base of the book, and other verses are ambiguous

(mutashabih; susceptible to more than one meaning).>>

Also, The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص made a supplication for Ibn Âbbas (may Allah accept his and his

father’s deeds) to know the ta’wil of the Qur’an, when he said:

1 Al Îmran, 7

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

33

اللهم علمه الحكمة و تأويل الكتاب

“O Allah, teach him the Wisdom (the Sunnah) and the ta’wil of the Book (Al-

Qur’an)”1. Ta’wil is a non-literal inference; to interpret a text differently from its

apparent meaning. It is known that Ibn ˆAbbas interpreted many texts that the

Wahhabiyys use to liken Allah to His creations. The fact is that ta’wil is necessary for

making all of the texts free of contradiction, as already clearly demonstrated.

EXTRA DETAIL:

how the Wahhabiyys deny ta’wil

Know that the Wahhabiyys may deny the validity of ta’wil by referring to the verse:

{( لذ اللذ{(وما يعل تأويل ا

2

<<No one knows its ta’wil except Allah>>.

They say that it is not permissible to make a non-literal inference because no one can

know the ta’wil of the mutashabih verses except Allah; we must take them literally,

because only Allah knows their ta’wil. We answer, “Ta’wil has numerous meanings, and

when reciting this verse and stopping at the word ‘Allah’ so that it means, ‘No one knows

its ta’wil except Allah’, this actually means, ‘No one knows the manifestation; time of

happening (of certain matters like the Day of Judgment or the coming of the One-eyed

Imposter) except Allah’.”

According to this recitation of the verse, Allah dispraised the Jews who tried to

determine the exact time of the occurrence of Judgment Day by referring to some of the

mutashabih verses of the Qur’an like:

1{(امل)}

1 Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy, At-Tabaraniyy, At-Tabariyy and Ibn Majah

2 Al ˆImran, 7

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

34

which are three letters among the Arabic letters. This verse, and similar verses, such as

{(ن)} 2

have been interpreted in different ways because of their ambiguity, and hence are

mutashabih. The word “ta’wil” can mean “the manifestation; the time of happening”, as

proven by the saying of Allah:

{(هل ي نظرون إال تأويله ي وم يأتي تأويله )}3

<<Are they awaiting anything other than its (Judgment Day’s) ta’wil (occurrence;

manifestation)? The Day when its ta’wil (manifestation; time of happening)

comes…>>

In order to interpret the word “ta’wil” as “meaning” or “interpretation”, recite past the

word “Allah”, and continue until reaching the word “al-ˆilm (the knowledge)”. Hence,

the verse would say:

اسون ف العل )} والرذ لذ اللذ{(وما يعل تأويل ا

4

<<No one knows the ta’wil (true interpretation) except Allah and those who are deeply

rooted in the knowledge. >>

In this way, both recitations are in compliance, for just as there is no contradiction

between the meanings of the verses of the Qur’an, there must be no contradiction

between the meanings in its recitations, as already mentioned; since one recitation means

that no one knows its ta’wil except Allah, and the other means that no one knows its

ta’wil except Allah and those who are deeply rooted in the knowledge, the word ta’wil

must have a different meaning in each recitation.

1 Al-Baqarah, 1

2 Al-Qalam, 1

3 Al-A^raf, 53

4 Al ˆImran, 7

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

35

Furthermore, the Wahhabiyys absolutely do make ta’wil for any verse or hadith whose

literal meaning contradicts their beliefs, as will be made obvious in the second chapter,

in sha’a-llah, but take this verse as another example:

<( سة لذ هو رابعهم ول خوى ثلثة ا لذ هو سادسهم ما يكون من ن

ا )>

Which would apparently be translated as, “There is no secret amongst three except that

He is the fourth of them, nor amongst five except that He is the sixth of them.” They

explain this verse to be in reference to His knowledge, and not that he is with those

people in person.

In their so-called Noble Qur’an translation, they intentionally put a period after the word

“Allah” because of their disregard and disbelief in the other recitation (qira’ah)1 of the

verse, known as the recitation of Mujahid, the student of Ibn ˆAbbas.

Lastly, the claim that there are verses in the Qur’an whose meanings cannot be possibly

known by any creature is actually wrong, because it implies that there are verses that

have no benefit for the people, since in this claim, the people could never understand

their meanings. Had this been true, the old Arabs would have discredited the Prophet

by saying, “This book is not a miracle as you claim, for our language is understood ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

and intelligible, and you have come with something that has no meaning to us, and

cannot be known by anyone.” This claim is mentioned in some of the footnotes of their

so-called Noble Qur’an translation in reference to some of the verses, and is a

widespread misconception. Do not be impressed by it because it is a trap. It contradicts

the verse of the Qur’an that proves that the language of the Qur’an is intelligible:

2{(بلسان عرب مبني )}

<<(The Qur’an is revealed) in a clear Arabic tongue>>.

1 Qira’ah “recitation” could refer to any of the proper ways of reciting the Qur’an.

2 Ash-Shuˆara’, 195

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

36

This extra detail may not be needed for many, so do not bring it up without need,

especially if you do not completely understand this point. But, in case this handbook is

used to refute a Wahhabiyy who raises this point, then here is the answer.

***

They quote the verse from the Qur’an:

عنا وأطعنا)} {(وقالوا س

<<They said, “We hear and we obey”>>1,

which to them means that they take things by face value without looking into other

possible meanings. Their belief is so unsound, that they are forced to reject logic. They

believe that the logical process of refuting them is philosophy and innovation, which is

also not true, as will now be addressed, if Allah willed.

If the Wahhabiyy were to ask, “How could we be misguided by merely believing what is

in the Qur’an? We are just taking what is in the Book and going no further.” Tell him,

“But your method of interpretation is sinful, and Allah told us about His book:

لذ الفاسقني )}2{(يضل به كثريا ويدي به كثريا وما يضل به ا

<<He misguides many by the Qur’an and guides many by it, and He only misguides the

major sinners by it>>.”

THE WAHHABIYYS REJECT LOGIC

So let us address the intellectual and logical issues pertaining to this blasphemy. They do

not agree that the mind (al-ˆaql) should have consideration in deciphering what Allah

revealed, so they say, “Sound thinking is good, but it has its place.” If they completely

reject sound thinking, no one will listen to them, so by their mere tongues and not their

1 Al-Baqarah, 285

2 Al-Baqarah, 26

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

37

hearts, they give some weight to it, but if they encourage people to think, they will

expose themselves, so they deny that rational thinking is a part of the creed (al-âqidah),

which is a lie. They teach people to just believe in the texts by their literal and apparent

meanings, and not to listen to anyone who says otherwise. They might actually put their

fingers in their ears, following the sunnah of the blasphemers from the time of Prophet

Nuh (Noah, ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص). Allah told us in the Qur’an about their rejection of the truth:

م )} ن كذما دعوتم لتغفر لهم جعلوا أصابعهم ف أ ذان{(وا

1

<<(Noah said), “And surely, whenever I call them so that You would forgive them (by

guiding them to Islam), they put their fingers in their ears”>>.

They refer to a saying of Imam Âliyy (may Allah accept his deeds), but they pervert its

text and distort its true meaning. They say that Âliyy (may Allah accept his deeds) said,

“If the Religion were by logic, we would wipe the bottom of the khuff (foot gear)2 instead

of the top.” They would then tell the person to forget about logic, and just accept the

literal interpretations.

REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY

CONFIRMED

It is important to have the correct understanding of this saying. Âliyy (may Allah accept

his deeds) actually said:

ين بالرأي لكان أسفل الخف أولى بالمسح من أعله، وقد رأيت رسول الله عليه صلى الل لو كان الد

يه وسلم يمسح على ظاهر خف

“Had the Religion been by opinion (ra’y), wiping on the bottom of the foot gear instead

of the top would have been better (because the bottom is the side that gets dirty), however

1Nuh, 7

2 The khuff refers to foot gear with specific qualities that one is allowed to wipe instead of washing the feet

in wudu’.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

38

I saw The Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص wiping the top”. Do not be surprised at this misquote.

They are dishonest and they do it all the time. Imam Âliyy did not negate the use of logic.

Logic, reasoning, and use of the intellect are praised throughout the Qur’an. The two

Sayings of Allah are repeated many times in the Qur’an:

{(أ فل تعقلون)}

<<Do you not use your minds?>>, and

{(أ فل يعقلون)}

<<Do they not use their minds?>>.

He also said:

<( لباب ار ل يت لول ال ماوات والرض واختلف اللذيل والهنذ نذ ف خلق السذ *ا ين يذكرون اللذ الذ

ماوات والرض م ويتفكذرون ف خلق السذ <(قياما وقعودا وعىل جنوب

<<Certainly, in the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the day

and night, there are surely signs for those who have sound minds* those who mention

Allah while standing, sitting, or on their sides, and they think about the creation of the

heavens and earth… >>1

Imam Âliyy, the most knowledgeable of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with all

of them), would not say anything against the Qur’an, and if so, then his saying would be

rejected for the Revelation of Allah. In fact, consideration of the mental judgments is an

integral part of understanding the belief, and has its origin in Al-Qur’an and As-Sunnah.

Hence, it is neither philosophy nor innovation.

The scholars of âqidah (belief; creed), like Al-Ashâriyy also pointed out the fact that the

Prophets, the greatest of Allah’s creations (âlayhimu-s-Salatu wa-s-Salam), used logical

arguments to refute the blasphemers they encountered and to establish the correct belief

1 Al Îmran, 191

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

39

in Allah, such as what was narrated in the stories of Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham, ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص).

Among those stories was Ibrahim’s debate with the tyrant, Nimrod, mentioned in the

chapter (surah) Al-Baqarah, 258:

ي ويميت قال أن أحي وأميت قال ){ ي ي الذ براهمي رب ذ قال ا

ق فأت با من ا مس من المش يأت بلشذ نذ اللذ

براهمي فا

ا

ي كفر )}المغرب فبت الذ

<<When Ibrahim said, “My Lord creates life and makes the living die.” Nimrod said,

“I create life and make the living die.” Ibrahim said, “Surely, Allah brings the sun

from the east, so bring it from the west.” Upon that, the one who blasphemed was

dumbfounded>>.

By this simple and clever logic, Ibrahim silenced Nimrod, who claimed to be God. This

verse is evidence for the permissibility of debating deviant people to establish the truth.

So, if a Wahhabiyy claims that debating is forbidden, which he will not do until until he

finds that you have knowledge and that he cannot debate with you, or if he claims that

mental evidence is not from the Religion, use this verse as your evidence. In fact, it is

obligatory on some Muslims (communal obligation) in every town to know the mental

and textual evidence, and to refute the deviant people.

Thus, Imam ˆAliyy’s aforementioned saying refers to the details of the practical rules (al-

fiqh), not the essentials of belief. One can realize the correct belief about the Creator

through reasoning; that worshipping a man or a stone or a picture is invalid. Why else do

the Christians readily say, “Just believe”? It is because they realize the confusion of their

beliefs. However, we do not use logic to deduce the practical rules. For example, how

would one logically conclude that there are five prayers? Mere logic does not necessitate

five prayers over six or four. How would one logically deduce that the bowing position

comes before prostration when praying? These judgments cannot be known by logic, and

are not based merely on opinion. These judgments are taken from The Messenger of

Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. Prophets are sent as a mercy to humans and jinn, who otherwise cannot know

how to worship their Lord properly. However, those humans and jinn can use their minds

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

40

to know what is and what is not befitting to say about their Lord. For that reason, some

scholars even said that whoever is sane and pubescent is accountable1 to confirm the

existence of the Creator and to believe in His oneness correctly; that He alone is the

creator of everything; the one who does not resemble anything, even if that person never

heard the message of a Prophet. This is because every child is born with the readiness for

the correct belief (fitrah), and is mentally able to reach it.

Allah said:

{( عري وقالوا لو كنذا نسمع أو نعقل ما كنذا ف اب السذ أص )}2

<< They will say, “Had we listened and had we used our minds, we would not have

been inhabitants of Hell.”>>

This verse proves that the mental judgment has weight and should be considered.

THE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THE SCHOLARS MEANT

WHEN THEY DISPRAISED (RATIONAL) ARGUMENTATION

(KALAM)

Many Wahhabiyys will attempt to thwart your rational argumentation by telling you that

what you are doing is called “kalam”, and the scholars dispraised kalam; they referred to

the Book and the Sunnah and went no further, and the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص and the Companions

never used it. Therefore, accept what came in the Book and the Sunnah and do not try to

rationalize what they did not.

The answer to that, in summary, is that those early scholars who did not use the kalam to

argue did not do so because of how few the misguided people were. It was enough to

refer to the Book and the Sunnah. However, later the misguidance spread, and the people

1 According to most scholars, accountability refers to being sane, pubescent, and having heard the basic

message of Islam, which is the meaning of the shahadah. Whoever dies as an accountable non-Muslim will

be tortured everlastingly in Hell on the Day of Resurrection. 2 Al-Mulk, 10

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

41

of deviance claimed that the People of Truth were using weak narrations and ambiguous

verses with explanations that do not agree with the intellect. So the scholars refuted them

with their own standard: intellectual argumentation, however, the Sunniyy’s

argumentation was derived from the Book and the Sunnah, as will be demonstrated.

Someone once said to Abu Hanifah, “Why do you talk with the Knowledge of Kalam and

the Companions did not talk with it?” He said, “Their example is like people who do not

have in their presence those who fight them, so they did not need to wield their weapons,

and our example is like those who have among them those who fight them, so they had to

wield their weapons.” This means that they had the tools and the means; they had the

same belief system, but they did not have to use such argumentation often. They did use

it occasionally, and the references for that are not appropriate for this summarized

refutation.

If they produce for you a quote from Ash-Shafiîyy that he dispraised rational

argumentation, such as:

ن يلقاه بالكالمأن يلقى هللا العبد بكل ذنب ما خال الشرك خير من ا

أ ل

“For the slave to meet Allah 1 with every sin except shirk is better than to meet Him with

kalam,” we tell them that this is clarified by other more specific texts, such as that he

said:

هواءأن يلقاه بشيء من هذه ال

أن يلقى هللا العبد بكل ذنب ما عدا الشرك خير من ا

أ ل

“For the slave to meet Allah with every sin except shirk is better than to meet Him with

any hint of these deviant beliefs.” This is why Al-Bayhaqiyy said said in Manaqib Ash-

Shafiîyy:

By this talk, Ash- Shafiîyy, may Allah have mercy upon him, only meant Hafs and

his likes among the people of heresy. This is what he meant in all that was

conveyed about him about dispraising the Kalam and its people, except that some

1 “Meeting Allah (liqa’u-llah)” can refer to death, or being judged on Judgement Day. It is said in English,

“He met his Maker”, meaning that he died.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

42

narrators generalized, and some specified. In the specification of those who

specified, there is evidence of his intent.

Actually, Ash-Shafiîyy debated on more than one occasion. Ishaq said, “My father said

to me, ‘One day Ash-Shafiîyy was talking to one of the scholars, and he was very tight

on him, precise, he sought evidence from him, and put him in a corner. I said to him, ‘O

Abu Âbdillah, this is for the people of Kalam, not for the people of halal and haram.’

Ash-Shafiîyy said, ‘We have mastered this before we mastered that’.”

Al-Muzaniyy said,

A debate took place between a man and me. He asked me about something, as if it

were about to make me doubt about my Religion. I went to Ash- Shafiîyy, and I

said to him, ‘This is what happened...’ Ash- Shafiîyy said to me, ‘Where are

you?’ I said, ‘I am in the Masjid.” He said to me, ‘You are in the likes of the sea

of Taran while its waves are smacking you around. This is a question of the

atheists, and the answer for it is this and that. For the slave to be inflicted with

every harm that Allah created is better for him than to be inflicted with arguing

for deviant beliefs.’

This proves that he was skilled at intellectual argumentation. And as usual, the

Wahhabiyys say one thing and do another, because they use the kalam that Ash-Shafiîyy

dispraised: the argumentation of the deviant people. Here are some of their so-called

rational arguments, and the refutations for them:

1. They say that denying that Allah is in a place is denying His existence, just as

saying that a person is neither in the Mosque somewhere nor outside of the

Mosque somewhere is denying his existence. We say, this is true when the one

you are talking about is a body with dimentions, something that must fill a space,

and look at how you have compared Allah to a person in the Mosque or outside of

it, after claiming that you believe that Allah does not resemble anything. As for

the one who is not a body, then it is not impossible that He would exist without a

place, and Allah existed before places existed, As the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

43

ره كان الله ولم يكن شيء غي

“Allah existed (eternally), and there was nothing other than Him.1”.

2. They say that Allah is either inside of the creation or outside of it, and He is not

inside of it, so He must be outside of it, and if He is outside of it, He is either

connected to it or disconnected from it. They say that He is not connected to it, so

He must be disconnected from it, and in fact is high above the creation, above the

seven skies. We answer by saying that what they have described is something

with edges and limits; a bodily object. Allah is not a body and does not resemble

the creation.

3. They say that everything witnessed in existence is either a body, like the people,

trees, buildings, water, etc., or a feature of a body, like the motion, stillness, color,

smell, etc. It is not valid that Allah would be the feature of a body, because then

He would be in need of a body to exist, so He must be a body Himself. We tell

them that Allah is not similar to what is witnessed in existence. All of what they

have described is a creation. They have blatantly likened Allah to the creations.

4. They say that Allah must be higher in a place because He is higher in status. We

tell them that highness of place does not dictate highness in status. The Angels in

the sky have a lower rank than the Prophets on the earth, and the guards on the

roof have a lower rank than the king or president in the basement or bunker.

They have other so-called logical arguments, but this should be enough to give you an

understanding of their twisted reasoning. These people fit the description of those who

are dispraised in the Book of Allah:

بغري عل )> <(ومن النذاس من يادل ف اللذ2

<<Among the people are those who debate about Allah without knowledge.>>


2 Al-Hajj, 8

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

44

THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHABIYYS TRULY

BELIEVE IN BODILY ATTRIBUTES FOR ALLAH (TAJSIM)

Because the true goal is to help the misguided person and to let him accept the truth, not

to debate, tell the Wahhabiyy in a wise way that it is blasphemy to attribute a body to

Allah. Unfortunately, it is known through experience that the one infected with the

disease of tashbih (likening Allah to the creations) does not usually want to be cured. If

the Wahhabiyy has not read this booklet yet, he would probably agree with you without

thinking about it; he would probably agree that it is blasphemy to attribute a body to

Allah. On the other hand, he will still insist that Allah is attributed with those (bodily)

attributes. He will say, “We must believe in them as they are without changing their

meanings.”

If this is his position, how could you still say that he truly believes that Allah has a body?

They want you to believe that Allah has bodily attributes, but to deny that He has a body.

Whoever accepts such contradictory reasoning is a person of a simple mind, someone

who lacks guidance, and does not value the high level of meanings that are revealed in

the Qur’an, or the usefulness of the mind.

According to the mental judgment, whatever occupies a place is a body. The more space

it occupies, the bigger it is. They believe that the space Allah occupies is above the ˆArsh,

although they will deny the terms “occupying space”. They have sayings about whether

Allah is bigger than, smaller than, or the same size as the ˆArsh. They believe that He

leaves that space to occupy another space, somewhere in the first sky.

Also, according to the mental judgment, whatever moves is a body. It must have

boundaries, limits and certain edges, so to fit in the places between which it moves.

Hence, whatever moves has a body, and whoever believes that Allah moves consequently

believes in his heart that He has a body, even if he denies it with his tongue.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

45

They say that “Highness (al-ûluw)” is Allah’s attribute1, but they intend the physical

connotation instead of the majestic one. They say that He is “up”, while repeatedly

pointing to the sky. They do not say that "below" or "lowness" are attributes of Allah,

although they say that He literally descends to the first sky, which implies that He would

be below whatever He passed on His way down. This sick belief stands in direct

contradiction with the authentic and explicit saying of The Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص that

even Al-Albaniyy says is authentic (although he is not qualified and thus has no right to

grade any hadith, as will come):

ن فليس دونك شيء وأنت الظاه ر فليس فوقك شيء، وأنت الباط 2

"O Allah, You are Adh-Dhahir (the One whose existence is obvious) and there is

nothing above You, and You are Al-Batin (the One Who cannot be reached by

delusions) and there is nothing below You." Because of this devastating refutation, Ibn

Taymiyah contradicted himself when he said:

ن يا وال يخلو من ماء الد ه العرش أنه ف وق العرش وأنه ي نزل إلى الس

“He is above the Ârsh, and He descends down to the sky, but the Ârsh is never devoid

of Him.3” It is unacceptable to the sound mind that Allah would be on the Ârsh above the

sky, then descend down to the sky, and still upon the Ârsh.

Whatever has a direction is restricted to a place. Anything bound by a direction has

limits, because it is restricted to one place and not to another. Anything in a place is

something with a body, whether in a high place, like the book above the Ârsh and the

Angels in the sky, or a low place, like the bottom of Hellfire. These are descriptions of a

body.

1 It is true that Allah has the attribute of ûluww (highness), but its correct meaning refers to His majesty

and perfection, not a direction 2 Al-Bukhariyy, Muslim, Al-Hakim, At-Tirmidhiyy, Al-Bayhaqiyy and others

3 Majmuˆ Al-Fatawa

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

46

So, tell the Wahhabiyy that he is obviously implying that Allah has a body, and for him

to deny that Allah has a body is ta’wil; negating the literal meanings. It is helpful for you

to know and understand a rule of the scholars:

الزم المذهب مذهب إذا كان بينا

“The implication of one’s opinion is his opinion, if that implication were obvious.”

Muhammad Îllaysh1 said:

ناوألن الزم المذهب ليس مذهبا إذا لم يكن ب ي

“The implication of one’s opinion is not (necessarily) his opinion if it is not obvious.”

This means that if one holds an opinion or a belief, such as if one were to say that Allah

sits upon a grand throne, then the obvious implication of his belief is that Allah is a body.

Therefore, since this implication is obvious, it is confirmed as his belief, even if he does

not state it explicitly. Do not be fooled by some weak or sly people who tell you that the

scholars said that the implication of one’s opinion is not his opinion. Ad-Dasuqiyy said2:

زم الخفي .وأما ق ولهم الزم المذهب ليس بمذهب فمحمول على الل

“What some said, that the implication of one’s opinion is not one’s opinion, is in

reference to the implication that is not obvious.” Also, As-Sawiyy said3:

زم الخفي نا ق ولهم الزم المذهب ليس بمذهب ألنه في الل وال يرد علي

“What some said, that the implication of one’s opinion is not his opinion, does not

discredit what we have said, because that is in reference to the vague implication.”

However, saying Allah is above the throne, and ascends and descends, and has two real

hands, a face, eyes, etc., is all very obviously the description of a body.

1 Al-Minah Al-Jalil

2 Al-Hashiyah Âla Ash-Sharh Al-Kabir

3 Al-Hashiyah Âla Ash-Sharh As-Saghir

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

47

So, do not let the Wahhabiyys hold both points. In one hand, they hold literal meanings

that apply to bodies, and in the other, they deny that Allah has a body. Both points add up

to a contradiction. It is the same as a Christian saying that he believes in monotheism

while saying that God is three. Is it a coincidence that the so-called Salafiyyah split the

Tawhid (oneness of Allah) into three categories (which is a bad innovation)!?

THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY

THE TEXTS

Then, a sound mind concludes that Allah exists without being in any place or direction,

since places and directions are attributes of created things; bodies. This sound reasoning

complies with the verse:

ء )} 1{(ليس كثل ش

<<Nothing is similar to Allah in any way. >>

If Allah were in a place, many things would be similar to Him. His Existence without a

place is not impossible, as Wahhabiyys think. On the contrary, the mental judgment

confirms that Allah exists without a place, because He existed before He created places,

as already clarified.

If someone says that clearing Allah from all places is negating His existence, then where

was He before He created them? Such a person tries, but cannot imagine Allah existing

without a place, so he thinks that would be denying His existence. The Wahhabiyy does

not know what it means to say that nothing is whatsoever like Allah. In fact, some of

them blatantly ignore this aforementioned verse. He believes that Allah needs something.

Actually, negating a place for Allah is denying that Allah has a body, since the place is

the space that a body occupies.

1 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

48

It is confirmed that Allah exists without a place, and therefore is not a body, so it follows

that He is not attributed with organs, motion, or time, and is totally unlike all of His

creations. That is the judgment of the sound mind in this issue, as supported by the

explicit texts of the Religion.

EXTRA DETAIL:

seeing Allah

Another indication that these people truly liken Allah to the creation and believe that He

is a body, and that they imagine something although they claim that they do not, is that

when it is said to them that Allah exists without a place, and is not a body, shape or

color, they say,“Don’t you believe that Allah can be seen?” As already mentioned, we do

believe that Allah will be seen, but the reason for this question of theirs after our

negation of created attributes for Allah, is that what we say wipes away whatever they

have been unconsciously imagining; once they truly understand what we mean by saying

that Allah is not a body, and He exists without a place, they find themselves unable to

imagine that, and thus ask, “But don’t you believe that Allah can be seen?”

Yes, we believe that Allah can be seen, but He is seen unlike the creation is seen. Their

belief is that Allah is seen in a direction and a place- like a creation. Our belief is that

Allah is seen UNLIKE the creation is seen, so He is seen without being in a place or a

direction. This is a topic that can be explained for pages, so we will summarize by

producing some of the Sunniyy quotes that clarify the correct belief. Abu Hanifah said:

تشبيه وال كيفية وال يكون والل ت عالى يرى في الخرة وي راه المؤمنون وهم في الجنة بأعين رؤوسهم بل بينه وبين خلقه مسافة

“Allah the Exalted is seen in the Afterlife. The Believers will see Him with the eyes of

their heads, without any resemblance, without a manner of being, and without their being

between Him and the creation any distance.” This means that Allah will not be close or

far, high or low, big or small, etc. Imam An-Nasafiyy said:

معي بإيجاب رؤية المؤمنين لل تعالى في دار الخرة، فيرى ال في مكان، وال وقد ورد الدليل السو اتصال شعاع أو ثبوت مسافة بين الرائي وبين الل تعالىعلى جهة من مقابلة أ

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

49

“The certainty of the Believers seeing Allah the Exalted in the Afterlife was narrated in

the transmitted evidence. He will be seen without a place, or being in an opposing

direction, and without the connection of light rays, or the establishment of a direction

between the seer and Allah the Exalted.” Allah exists without a place, and despite that,

He is seen. This is why the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

ال تضامون في رؤيته

“You will not crowd together to see Him.”In Paradise, they will not have to gather or

face any special direction to see Allah. Whereever they may be in Paradise, as wide and

vast as it is, and whatever direction they may be facing, Allah empowers them to see Him.

As for the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص saying:

لة البدر كما ت رون القمر لي

“Like you see the full moon on a clear night,” this does not mean that Allah is a circle

that is seen like the moon is seen, and some mindless Wahhabiyys really believe it does,

rather, it means that you will have no doubt that you saw Allah, like you have no doubt

about seeing the full moon on a clear night. In other words, the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not

compare Allah to the moon, he compared the certainty of seeing Allah to the certainty of

seeing the moon; he compared the sighting to the sighting, not the Creator to the

creation. This is the proper belief in seeing Allah, and it does not mean that He is a body.

***

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

50

ISLAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHABIYY

CREED

n ignorant person may ask, “What does it matter if they believe that Allah has

a body? What is wrong with that?” The answer is that such a bad creed is

against the explicit texts of the Qur’an, the hadiths, the Consensus of the

scholars, and as just addressed, the judgment of the mind.

PROOF FROM THE QUR’AN THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHABIYY CREED

Besides the mental proof, we also refute them by referring to some very simple and basic

textual proof. It is not necessary to refer to twenty different verses to confirm the validity

of the sound creed about the self of Allah 1

. One verse from The Qur’an refutes their

entire foundation:


<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>.

This verse means that nothing is similar to Allah in any way. It is a decisive (muhkam)

verse; a verse whose intended meaning is plainly clear. It is explicit, not ambiguous nor

figurative. It means that there is nothing common between Allah and His creations; that

Allah is not like anything, and nothing is like Him; that every creation is not similar to

Allah in any respect. This is the meaning. This is enough to protect you from falling into

the blasphemy of likening Allah to His creations, which is shirk.

Take a closer look at this explicit verse: Allah said:

ء )} {(ليس كثل ش

1 Since they believe that Allah is made of parts, they had to refer to many verses to establish their creed

about the bodily self that they worship. However, since Allah is not a body or made of parts, it is enough to

refer to one verse to establish the correct understanding about the reality of His self. 2 Ash-Shura, 11

A

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

51

<<laysa kamithlihi shay’>>. The word ليس “laysa” is the word of negation. The first

letter prefixed to the next word is the ك “Kaf” with a fathah; a word made of one letter,

simply pronounced as “ka”. It originally means “like”. It is affixed to the word مثل

“mithli”, meaning “like”. The last letter suffixed on the word “mithli” is the ه “ha’” with

a kasrah, so it is actually pronounced “he”. It is a third person masculine pronoun

meaning “him”, and it refers to Allah. The last word in the verse is شيء “shay’ ”, which

means “thing”. It is a general, indefinite term referring to all of the creations.

It is easily noticed that Allah revealed the word “mithli” in this verse, with the addition of

revealing the “kaf”. The negation of this combination emphatically denies any likeness to

Him. If the “kaf” were removed (ليس مثله شيء ), it would still mean that nothing is

like Him. However, Allah revealed the “kaf” added to the “mithli”, and this emphasizes

the meaning that nothing is similar to Him. Furthermore, the term شيء “shay’ ” is

indefinite, and whenever an indefinite noun is presented in a negative context, then the

meaning is an all-inclusive negation. In other words, look at the difference between

saying, “He is not like a thing”, and “He is not like the thing”. The first of these two is

more inclusive, because the term “thing” is indefinite. From this, we can know that Allah

is clear of having or being a body, and is clear of organs, motion, places, directions, and

change. According to the judgment of the mind, attributes such as those would draw

similarities between Allah and His creatures.

Many other verses negate likeness between Allah and His creations, like Al-Ikhlas 4:

{(ولم يكن هل كفوا أحد )}1

<<Never has there been one equal to Him>>,

or the 65th

verse of Surat Maryam:

1 Al-Ikhlas, 4

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

52

يا)} {(هل تعل هل س1

posing the rhetorical question, <<Do you know of anything similar to Him?>>. There is

also:

المثال )> <(فل تضبوا للذ2

<<Do not make examples (i.e. similars) for Allah>>, and:

أندادا)> علوا للذ <(فل ت3

<<Do not make contenders for Allah (i.e. similars who oppose Him) >>

However,


<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>

is the most explicit verse in the Qur’an that clears Allah from resembling His creations,

because of the aforementioned emphasis. Whoever is lost in the ocean of confusion from

the prevalent ignorance among today’s Muslims, let this verse be his plank of wood for

staying afloat. Never liken Allah to His creations, no matter how many verses a

Wahhabiyy may bring to you to convince you that Allah is like a body.

We say that it is not permissible to interpret any text in a way that attributes bodily

characteristics to Allah, because doing that will make the verses of The Qur’an

contradictory, which is impossible. For the Wahhabiyys, this contradiction is minute,

1 Maryam, 65

2 An-Nahl, 74

3 Al-Baqarah, 22

4 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

53

acceptable, and insignificant, because they do not believe that logic is associated with

belief.

THE PRIORITY OF THE DECISIVE VERSES OVER THE

AMBIGUOUS

As mentioned,



is a decisive verse, and again, a decisive verse is a verse that can only have one

interpretation according to the Arabic language. It is important to know the merit Allah

gave to the decisive verses. In ‘Al ˆImran, verse 7, Allah told us:

{( الكتاب وأخر متشابات منه أ يت محكات هنذ أم )}2

<<Within the Book are decisive verses. They are the base of the book, and other verses

are ambiguous (susceptible to more than one meaning; mutashabih). >>

The mutashabih verses are not the base of the book, but the Wahhabiyys act as if they are,

which shows that they do not understand the true meaning of this verse, or the true

meaning of:


<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>.

The true Sunniyy Muslims follow the rule of Allah that proves that the decisive verses are

the base of the book. They base their belief on:

1 Ash-Shuru, 11

2 Al ˆImran, 7

3 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

54


<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>,

because it is a decisive verse. Then, when encountering attributes of Allah like “Al-Yad”,

“Al-ˆAyn”, “Al-Wajh”, “Al-Istiwa’”, etc, whose literal meanings would liken Allah to the

creations, they interpret them in a way that does not give Allah a body or an attribute of a

body, because these words can have more than one meaning, as will be seen in the second

chapter, if Allah willed. This is the straight and sound way, which stations the decisive

verses as the base of the Book.

EXTRA DETAIL

the Wahhabiyy misinterpretation:

The Wahhabiyyah have tricks to avoid being cornered by this verse. Among them is that

they say, “When reciting this verse, you should not stop there, rather, you must continue

and read the rest of the verse:

{( ميع البصري وهو السذ )}2

<<And He is the one who hears and sees>>.”

From there they will accuse you of distorting the meaning of the verse by saying, “Just as

it is valid that He hears and sees while nothing is like Him, it is valid that He has a face

and hands while nothing is like Him.” The answer for this is in two steps. The first is to

prove the validity of reciting:



1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 Ash-Shura, 11

3 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

55

and stopping there. That is achieved in two ways: The first is the fact that the Wahhabiyy

has no proof that it is invalid to stop the recitation where we have stopped. The scholars

have always mentioned this amount of the verse, even Ibn Taymiyah in some places, and

in if one looked into the book of the Qur’an, he would find a sign over top of the verse

proving that the reciter is allowed to stop there. There would be nothing left but for the

Wahhabiyy to say, “That is for the recitation, not the meaning.”Respond by saying,

“Would it be valid for the recitation to give an invalid meaning?” The second way to foil

the Wahhabiyy’s attempt to dodge this verse’s ruling is to say to him, “Even if we recited

the saying:

{( ء ميع البصري ليس كثل ش وهو السذ )}1

<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him, and He hears and sees>>,

that is not the beginning of the verse, so what made it permissible for you to start at



when it is in itself the continuation of previous statements? Why have you not recited the

entire verse from its beginning to its end?” If he says,“Because this is the part of the

verse related to our topic,” We answer, “For the same reason we have recited the

amount that we have recited.”

The second step is to clarify that the hearing and sight of Allah are not by eyes and ears,

have no beginning or end, and are not restricted to time, direction, volume, or light, and

thus do not resemble the hearing and sight of the creatures. The scholars said that this

was the benefit of being mentioned after the confirmation that He does not resemble

anything. In other words, Allah told us in His book:


1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

56


then, after knowing that He does not resemble anything, we are informed that:

ميع البصري )} {(وهو السذ

<<He is the one Who hears and Sees>>,

so that we would know that His hearing and sight are different from that of the creations.

This is the key for answering their question to us, “Why is it valid for you to say that

Allah has hearing, sight, knowledge and power, but you prevent us from saying that He

has hands, fingers, face and eyes?” You can respond by saying that hearing, sight,

knowledge and power do not necessitate a body. They are meanings that do not dictate

composition and physical structure. As for their claim of a face and hands, etc.:

1) If they say that they are real, literal face and hands, then they have likened Allah

to the creation, because real, literal face and hands require composition and

physical structure. If they say that they are not literal, then they have made ta’wil.

2) If they say that they do not know the meanings of face and hands in reference to

Allah, then we ask them how they could translate something without knowing its

meaning.

3) If they say that they translated the Arabic terms into their English counterparts,

we tell them that the Arabic terms have many possible meanings, so the intended

meanings must be translated according to the context, and not the mere word by

its face value.

4) If they choose to use only the Arabic words, such as al-wajh and al-yad, without

confirming any specific meanings for them except that they are attributes of Allah

and that Allah knows about them, then they have complied with us.

The origin of their twisted understanding of the verse:

1 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

57

{( ء ميع البصري ليس كثل ش وهو السذ )}1

<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him, and He hears and sees>>

is taken from their grandfather, Ibn Taymiyah, who confessed that he likens Allah to the

creation when he said in his book Bughyah Al-Murtad:

قال تعالى ليس كمثله شيء فنزه وهو السميع البصير فشبه وهي أعظم آية أنزلت في التنزيه ومع ذلك

لم تخل عن التشبيه

The Exalted said: {( ء 2{(ليس كثل ش <<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>, and

thereby He was exalted from resemblance; {( ميع البصري and He hears and>> {(وهو السذ

sees>>, and thus He was likened. This is the greatest verse revealed in clearing Allah

from resembling the creation, and despite that, it was not devoid of resembling Him

to others.

The reality of Ibn Taymiyah’s claim is that the Qur’an contradicts itself.

***

PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHABIYY CREED

As for the honorable sayings of the Prophet of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, we recite the hadith:

ره كان الله ولم يكن شيء غي

1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

58

“Allah existed (eternally), and there was nothing other than Him.1” Not only is this a

very basic and easy-to-understand proof, but it is exceedingly strong evidence against

them. It shows that Allah was eternally alone. There was no ˆArsh, sky, body, place,

direction, light, darkness, nor anything else.

If a Wahhabiyy insists on his bad belief, mention this hadith and then ask, but without the

intention to make him say blasphemy, “Is a place something other than Allah?” He can

give three possible responses:

1) He may totally ignore your question, and instead of answering, he would ask you

a different question, or he may change the subject. If he does either of those, do

not answer his question, nor follow him into another subject. Stick to the hadith

and do not let him get away with not answering the question: “Is a place

something other than Allah?” If he refuses to answer the question, it is because he

knows what you are trying to do, and he does not want to be cornered, because the

dishonest person cares about winning a debate, not about conforming to the truth.

2) If he says that the place is Allah, which we do not expect him to say, then he

committed pure, explicit and blatant blasphemy. Most likely, he will never say

that.

3) If he says that the place is something other than Allah, then say, “Allah existed

without anything, and you agree that the place is something other than Him, so by

this hadith, Allah existed without a place.” If the Wahhabiyy says, “Well, Allah is

now in a place,” then he likened Allah to the creations, attributing change to Him.

Places are not eternal, because Allah is the only eternal One.

This is why the scholars said that if someone says that Allah is in a place, he is either

saying that Allah is created or that the place is eternal.


Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

59

EXTRA DETAIL:

the shirk of Ibn Taymiyah

Because of the clarity of this refutation, Ibn Taymiyah went to claim the existence of the

types of things eternally with Allah. This means that he dose not confirm that a thing

itself is beginningless, but that its kind or type is beginningless. Fo example, he would say

that every book is created, but the book as a kind of thing is not creted, and every man is

created, but mankind is not created. He said in his book Minhaj As-Sunnah An-

Nabawiyyah:

وإن جاز أن يكون نوع الحوادث دائما لم يزل فإن األزل ليس هو عبارة عن شيء محدد بل ما من

ر وقت يقدر إال وقبله وقت آخ

“… Even though it is valid that the creations in their kind would be everlasting,

beginningless, for eternity is not an expression of something specific. Instead, there is no

moment of time, except that before it there was another moment… ” Does not Ibn

Taymiyah know that time is a creation of Allah, and hence was preceded by non-

existence? If that expression is not clear enough, then here is his statement from his book

called: Muwafaqatu Sahih Al-Manqul liSarih Al-Maˆqul:

فإن األزلي هو نوع الحادث ال عين الحادث

“Because the eternal one is the type of the creation, not the created thing itself.”

What lead Ibn Taymiyah to say these things is the fact that he wants to confirm a place

and direction for Allah no matter the cost. Thus, if it were said that attributing a place to

Allah means that Allah changed, he would respond by saying, “No, actually the place as

a type of thing is beginningless, and so Allah was always in a place; before that place

there was another place, and before that place there was another place, etc.” Or he

would say, “Allah was always over the ^Arsh, because before this ^Arsh there was one

before it, and before that one there was one before it, etc.”This creed of Ibn Taymiyah is

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

60

a shameful exposure and a confirmation of his belief that something existed with Allah

eternally, which is shirk. Types do not exist without their individual elements. If it were

said, for example, that there is no shoe in the room, that means that the entire type does

not exist in the the room, because none of its individual elements are existing in the room.

If, for example, there were no humans, then mankind does not exist. So claiming that the

kind is eternal is a claim that the elements are eternal, and thus He has contradicted the

verse of the Qur’an:

ل )> <(هو الوذ

<<He is the First (i.e. the only one without a beginning)>>

***

Also, the Wahhabiyys believe that Allah moves from one place to another, but motion is

not eternal. It comes into existence (has a beginning) after it was non-existent. So, how

can the Wahhabiyys confirm that Allah literally descends and ascends, when the Prophet

told us that Allah is eternal? According to the Wahhabiyys, Allah acquired ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

attributes, which negates being eternal. How is it known that we are created, and not

eternal? It is because we change and develop. Changing and developing are signs of the

existence of the mighty Creator; the Lord Who creates and gives us the attributes that we

did not have before. This is why Abu Hanifah said in Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar,

واالختلف يحدث عند المخلوقين التغير

“Changes and variations occur on the creations (only).” Allah is not a creation, so no one

gives Him attributes. Ahlu-s-Sunnah agreed that He does not give Himself attributes,

because whatever Allah creates is a creation, and He does not have a created attribute.

Allah is not like us. He is the One Who changes things, but He does not change. He is

eternal. This hadith is also an explicit one whose meaning cannot be played with. Use it

against them and stick to it. Do not let them lead you away from it, as the more devious

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

61

among them may intentionally try. If you use it properly, there would be no way around

it.

SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHABIYY CREED

After creating the creations, Allah did not acquire one of their attributes, like being in a

physical direction in comparison to them. Nor did He lose any of His attributes, like

eternally existing without changing. None of the creations became attributes of Allah.

After creating places and directions, He did not take them as attributes for Himself. He is

not attributed with a created attribute; an attribute that did not exist, and then came into

existence. This is why At-Tahawiyy, a true Salafiyy, in his book famous as The ˆAqidah

of At-Tahawiyy, said:

لهم من صفته، وكما كان بصفاته ما زال بصفاته قديما ق بل خلقه، لم ي زدد بكونهم شيئا لم يكن ق ب

ها أبديا .أزليا كذلك ال ي زال علي “With His attributes, He never ceased to be without beginning before His creation. He did

not acquire any attribute that did not exist before them, and just as He, with His

attributes, is without a beginning, likewise He, with His attributes, will always be

everlasting.”

THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS

A good thing about At-Tahawiyy’s book is that it conveys the Consensus; agreement (al-

ijmaˆ) of the Muslims about the matters of Belief. He says at the beginning of this book:

هذا ذكر بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة

“This is a clarification of the creed of Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l-Jama^ah…” He copied what

Ahlus-Sunnah believes about the Consensus:

ة نة وإ جماع الم ي شيئا يخال ف الك تاب والس وال من يدع

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

62

“And (we do not believe) anyone who opposes the Book, the Sunnah or the Consensus of

the Nation.” Unfortunate for Wahhabiyys, they believe that all of the scholars can agree

upon something and still be wrong, so they care not that this book conveys the

Consensus. The authentic saying of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص disproves them:

محمد على ضاللة مة أما كان هللا ليجمع

“Allah would never let (the scholars of) the Nation of Muhammad agree on a

misguidance.1” The Wahhabiyys restrict this hadith to the Companions, may Allah

accept their deeds and grant them high status. To that, tell them that they are making

ta’wil. This hadith guarantees protection for the ummah (nation) in general, which

follows its guided scholars, not just the Companions. Imamu-l-Haramayn said2:

ة دون غيرها لقوله رع ورد بعصمة هذه ملسو هيلع هللا ىلصوإجماع هذه األمة حج ال تجتمع أمتي على ضللة والشة على العصر الثاني وفي أي عصر كان جماع حج األمة وال

“The Consensus of this nation, and not that of another one, is evidence, because of his

(the Prophet’s) saying, ي على ضاللة ال تجتمع أمت ) :ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص ) <My nation will not gather on a

misguidance>. The Religious Law came with the infallibility of the nation. The

Consensus is evidence for the following era, and for any era to come…” If the scholars

would agree upon a mistake, this would mislead the entire nation. Such was the fate of

Banu Isra’il (the Children of Israel), whose scholars contravened the Islamic laws

revealed to Prophet Musa (Moses), and thus strayed the entire nation. The nation of

Prophet ˆIsa (Jesus) also deviated. The nation of Muhammad will not deviate entirely;

instead, most of them will always have the proper belief.

Another issue of consensus conveyed by At-Tahawiyy is:

ء والدوات ال تحويه الجهات الست كسائر وتعالى عن الحدود والغايات والركان والعضا

المبتدعات

1 narrated by Al-Hakim and others

242/ 1)الورقات ): Al-Waraqat

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

63

“Allah is exalted beyond limits, extremes, limbs, organs and instruments. The six

directions (above, below, right, left, in front of, behind) do not contain Him, as is the case

of the created things.”

A DOCUMENTATION OF THE SALAF’S BELIEF

Yet another benefit is that this book was written during the time of the Salaf. When At-

Tahawiyy wrote this book, no one objected to it. The scholars of the Salaf were generally

the best in Islam, and not one came to him telling him that his book contained lies or

mistakes against the correct Muslim belief. On the contrary, this book became very, very

famous, was memorized, and then narrated generation after generation, without anyone

discrediting it -until today, 1,100 years later. The Wahhabiyys do not agree with

everything that he conveyed, as explicitly stated by the now deceased Wahhabiyy leader,

Ibn Baz, in his corrupted explanation of At-Tahawiyy’s book. Since they do not agree

with him, then they admit that they do not believe what Muslims believe, because the

Muslims believed in what he documented before he even wrote it. If they say that they do

agree with him, then they agreed with us, and the argument is closed.

He also conveyed:

ن معان ي البشر فقد كفر ب معنى م ومن وصف هللا

“Whoever ascribes to Allah an attribute with a meaning among the meanings pertaining

to mankind has blasphemed.” If the Wahhabiyys are truly Salafiyy, then why do they not

agree with this belief that was documented by the Salaf, agreed on by them, and thus

passed on? It is because they take what they want and leave what they want. If the Salaf

believed that the one who ascribes a humanistic meaning to Allah is a kafir (non-Muslim),

then how do these so-called Salafiyyah consider themselves Muslims, since they say,

“The meaning is the same, but the degree is different”? They mean that the meaning of

hand, face and eyes is the same when attributed to Allah (the organ meaning), but it is a

different kind of hand, face and eye; i.e, they do not know if it is a long face, or a round

face, or a human hand or a squirell hand, or a human eye, or a cat eye, or a goat eye, etc.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

64

By this, they attribute the meaning that relates to humans to Allah, and as just mentioned,

for that, the Salaf made takfir (judged one as a non-Muslim). Be careful, they truly say

this statement: “The meaning is the same, but the degree is different”. This statement is

blasphemous. If they say that the meanings of “al-yad”, “al-ˆayn” and “al-wajh” (the

Arabic terms) are not the same when attributed to Allah, then they agreed with us. If they

say that the meanings of those terms are not the same when attributed to Allah, then what

happened to taking them literally?” In other words, we are saying that the literal meaning

is the meaning that refers to the creations, so when they use the literal meanings of these

terms, they are using the creation’s meaning; the bodily meaning.

EXTRA DETAIL:

“agreement in expression”

It is important to know the difference between “agreement in expression” and

“agreement in meaning” Similarity between two things does not always take place by

merely using the same expression. For example, we say that Allah exists and the

creatures exist, but this agreement in expression does not necessitate that He resembles

the creations, since His existence is without a body, soul, time or place. Thus, if they ask

us, “What made it acceptable for you to say that His hearing, sight and speech are

different from the creations?” We respond by saying, as previously mentioned, “It is true

that the expression is the same, but the meaning is different, for His sight is without

pupils, His hearing is without ears, and His speech is without letters or sounds.” We

oppose the Wahhabiyys, not because they confirm “yad”, “ˆayn” and “wajh” to Allah,

but because they do not accept for someone to deny that Allah has hands or a face

according to the apparent meanings. They say, “We must take those attributes as they

are, without looking for other linguistic meanings.” We, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, say, “We must

believe in the attributes that are mentioned in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, but any

attribute that would apparently imply a physical meaning is not taken by its apparent

meaning.” Therefore, if one of them were to say that Allah has hands, face and eyes that

are not organs nor pieces, and are not dimensional or physical, then if this is truly his

understanding, he then agreed with us, except in the expression. Upon that, we only

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

65

object to his usage of English words that delude people to think that Allah has organs.

We then advise him to stick to the Arabic words, and to explain to the people that those

Arabic words, as attributes of Allah, are not to be taken by their apparent meanings.

***

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

66

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE

hus far, we have covered the blasphemous, twisted and devious beliefs of the

Wahhabiyys, their reasoning, or (twisted) logic behind it, and some basic

reasons why they are in error. To recap and summarize, they believe that Allah

has a body because they take some verses and hadiths literally. They will usually deny

that they believe that Allah has a body, but you may find some who are ill enough to

admit it.

Their belief is invalid, incorrect, and unsound for many reasons. It does not make sense

(but they do not care), it makes the verses of The Qur’an contradict each other (as will be

elaborated on, if Allah willed), it is against the explicit, decisive sayings of The Prophet

(hadith can be decisive and ambiguous also), and it is against the agreement of the

scholars. Before looking at some of the texts that these very misguided people use to fool

the Muslims, let us go over some important information and advice:

EXPLAINING THE MEANING OF KUFR (BLASPHEMY) AND

SOME OF ITS DETAILS

Such a bad belief is undoubtedly blasphemous, but what is blasphemy? Blasphemy is

kufr, the opposite of iman (faith; belief), that which cancels and nullifies the validity of

one’s Islam had he been a Muslim. A blasphemer is a kafir, and a kafir is not a Muslim. A

Muslim who becomes a blasphemer is called an apostate (murtadd), and there are special

rules for him. Kufr is the worst sin that the slaves of Allah commit, and one of the most

important things that you can know is that it can be committed without knowing. The

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said about the Khawarij:

يقولون الحق ويقرءون القرآن ويمرقون من اإلسالم وال يتعلقون منه بشيء

“They say the truth, they recite the Qur’an, and they go out of Islam, and nothing of

it remains on them.1” It is true that this is about the Khawarij, but they did not go out of

Islam without knowing because they were Khawarij; they went out of Islam without

1 Fathu-l-Bari

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

67

knowing because leaving Islam without knowing is a reality that can happen to people.

Being ignorant that something makes a person a blasphemer and takes him out of Islam

does not protect him from becoming a blasphemer, or else Jews, Christians, Hindus, and

others would not be blasphemers, because they do not think that they are blasphemers.

Had ignorance been an excuse, it would be better than knowledge, because then people

would choose ignorance so that they would be excused.

So as clarified, an intention is not needed to commit blasphemy. That is why The Prophet

:said ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

إن العبد ليتكلم بالكلمة ال يرى بها بأسا يهوي بها في النار سبعين خريفا

“Surely the slave of Allah will utter the word. He does not see anything wrong with

it. Because of it, he will fall for 70 autumns1 into Hellfire.

2” The depth of 70 years into

Hellfire is the bottom of Hell, a place that no Muslim will reach. Therefore, the Prophet

was talking about how someone committed blasphemy because of something he ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

said, but without realizing that he even did anything wrong. Even a new Muslim who

acquired a bad belief in Allah would not be excused from kufr. This is so because the

correct belief and saying the shahadah are the minimum requirements for becoming a

Muslim. In other words, just saying the shahadah by itself is not enough to make a person

a Muslim, if that utterance is not associated with the proper belief. This is why the

Prophet said:

إيمان ال إله إال الل وفي قلبه وزن ذرة منيخرج من النار من قال

“Whoever says, “No one is God but Allah”3 will exit Hellfire, as long as there is a

particle’s weight of faith in his heart.”4 Also, believing without uttering the shahadah

does not validate ones Islam, or else the Prophet’s uncle Abu Talib would have been a

1 i.e. 70 years

2 At-Tirmidhiyy, Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim

3 This means, “Whoever says no one is God but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.”

4 Al-Bukhariyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

68

Muslim, because he knew that his nephew, Muhammad, was truthful, but he refused to

utter the shahadah.

There is absolutely no excuse for having a bad belief in Allah, His Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, or

His Religion. People with bad beliefs in Allah, like five per-centers, the so-called Nation

of Islam, and the Wahhabiyys fell into kufr. Some groups have bad beliefs in The

Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, like the Ahmadiyyah, who deny that Muhammad is the last to

receive the status of prophethood. Some people claim Islam, but disbelieve in its

exclusiveness; that Islam is the only valid Religion, like those who misunderstood some

Qur’anic verses and believe that the Jews’ and Christians’ Religions will be accepted by

Allah on the Day of Judgment. When it comes to these essentials of the belief, there is no

excuse for not having them. One must have those most basic issues intact to be a Muslim.

As for other issues, like believing in the Angels, the Day of Judgment, Paradise, Hellfire,

the obligation of the five prayers, etc, if someone becomes a Muslim and has not yet

believed in these things because he has not heard about them, his Islam is still valid.

A Muslim who commits kufr leaves Islam and becomes a kafir. This terrible action is Ar-

Riddah (apostasy), and because of it, all good deeds are erased, as we are told:

ميان فقد حبط معل )}1{(يكفر بل

<<Whoever commits blasphemy and rejects belief has wasted his deeds>>.

As for the bad deeds, they are not erased by apostasy. Anyone with a bad belief in Allah

because of a Wahhabiyy influence, or any belief like it, like some people who believe that

Allah is light, must say the Shahadah again with the intention to leave that blasphemy

and never return to it. Anyone who repeated their blasphemous sayings must do the same

to clear himself of their poison. Uttering the Shahadah is to say: “No one is God except

Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” This can be said in any language, and

no witness or shower is needed. One should be keen to say it properly, by clearly

pronouncing the “h” in the name of Allah, and also pronouncing the name of Prophet

1 Al-Ma’idah, 5

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

69

Muhammad ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص correctly. Whoever cannot pronounce the name of Allah can translate

it, and whoever cannot pronounce the name of Muhammad can call him by his other title:

Abu-l-Qasim [abul\cau`\sim], like to say: “No deity is worthy of worship except God, and

Muhammad (or Abu-l-Qasim1) is the Messenger of God.

If someone says the Shahadah while believing something that contradicts its basic

meaning, then what he uttered did not make him a Muslim.

JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAFIR (TAKFIR)

Do not let your kinship or friendship bond you to these people, just as those who are deep

into the so-called Salafiyy cult will shun others very swiftly. Do not compromise the

validity of your belief because of your relationship with a Wahhabiyy. Some people

refuse to call a person a kafir, claiming that judging others is forbidden, which is not true.

We do judge- by the rules of Allah. Ask the one who claims that judging is forbidden,

“How do you judge a person who utters the shahadah?” He would obviously judge such

a person as a Muslim. How would he judge the one who cheats, lies, or steals? He would

judge that person as a cheater, liar, or thief. Then why would this person refuse to judge

the one who blasphemes as a blasphemer? At-Tahawiyy said:

ن ذل ك نهم شيء م وال نشهد عليهم بكفر وال بشرك وال ب ن فاق ما لم يظهر م

“We do not testify about any of them (who were believed to be a Muslim) that he

committed blasphemy, shirk, or hypocracy as long as nothing of that sort appears from

them.” If they show goodness then we treat them as such, and if they show wickedness

then we treat them as such. Do not be reluctant to confirm that he is a kafir if you witness

him uttering blasphemous things. This is the creed of the Muslims.

Some people are reluctant because of the hadith:

هإن كان كما قال وإال رجعت عليا أحدهم خيه يا كافرفقد باء بهامن قال ل

1 Even saying Abu-l-Gasim [gas`\im] is valid if Abu-l-Qasim is difficult

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

70

“Whoever says to his brother, ‘O, kafir’, then one of those two would truly be

inflicted with being a kafir. Either it is as he said, or else it comes back to him.1” This

means that if a person calls someone else a kafir, then he had better be correct, or else he

will become a kafir for labeling a Muslim with kufr without evidence2. It means that if the

person is correct in calling another person a kafir, then it is as he said- that person is a

kafir, but if he is incorrect, then that judgment of kufr comes back to him, and he falls

into kufr. The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not say that it cannot be known if a person committed

kufr or not. He did not say that it is not permissible to judge a person as a kafir unless that

person testifies for himself that he is a kafir. Nor is it mentioned by the scholars of Ahlu-

s-Sunnah that a lay-Muslim cannot know how to identify blasphemy. The person who

says these things speaks from his own opinions about the rules of Allah. In fact, Allah

told us:

سلمهم )}مة الكفر وكفروا بعد ا ما قالوا ولقد قالوا ك لفون بللذ {(ي

3

<< They swear by God (that) they did not say it, and by God, they (actually) did say the

word of blasphemy and blasphemed after their state of Islam>>.

If a person commits kufr, he is a kafir, with no doubt about it. So, if someone knows a

person who committed kufr, but still treats him as a Muslim; makes him believe that he is

still a Muslim, then that someone fell into kufr himself. Kufr is a great reality that many

people unknowingly fall into everyday. Learning about it is an obligation. Kufr is the sin

that will put a person in Hellfire forever if he dies without clearing himself from it.

If someone says, “This verse you just quoted was revealed about the hypocrites who used

to pretend to be Muslims, so it does not pertain to the Muslims,” respond by saying,

1 narrated by Muslim

2 Sometimes a person labels a Muslim as a kafir unrightfully, but would not be judged as a kafir himself,

which is the case of a person who is confused and thinks that something is kufr when it is not. For example,

if someone believes that drinking alcohol is blasphemy, so he judges the Muslim who drinks alcohol as a

blasphemer, he does not blaspheme for that because of his confusion, but he is sinful for calling that

Muslim a blasphemer and for not learning the obligatory knowledge of the religion. The judgment

mentioned in the hadith pertains to the one who judges a person as a kafir without any reason or evidence,

and not even out of confusion. 3 At-Tawbah (Bara’ah), 74

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

71

“Before it became clear that those people were hypocrites, how were they treated, as

Muslims or not?” Indeed they were treated according to what they showed outwardly, as

we have already stated. Therefore, any person who outwardly shows Islam, and then

shows blasphemy is judged as a blasphemer, hypocrite or not.

HAVING THE CORRECT INTENTION

Among the most important things to be mindful of is having the correct intention. Let the

one who debates with deviant people keep the pure intention. Do not debate with the

mere intention of arguing, nor just to show that you are right and the other person is

wrong, or to show off your knowledge. Instead, debate with the intention to show the

truth. Our Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not debate unless it was to show the truth, nor did he ever

lose a debate. Imam Ash-Shafiˆiyy never debated with someone unless it was to show the

truth. If you believe that the deviant person will not accept what you are saying, and will

only continue committing blasphemy, then it is not permissible to keep debating with

him. If you believe he will not listen, but you need to protect the people who are around,

and to show the truth to those who are listening, you can direct you speech to them and

clarify for them what needs to be clarified. Do not leave him to talk to the people and

spread his blasphemy among them if you are able to protect them from him.

REFRAIN FROM PURPOSELY LEADING A PERSON TO SAY

KUFR (BLASPHEMY)

Also, refrain from asking questions that lead the deviant person to commit kufr. For

instance, do not ask a Wahhabiyy, “Do you believe that Allah has a real face?” or “Do

you believe that Allah is in a place above His ˆArsh?” The Wahhabiyy will predictably

answer, “Yes” to those questions, and then commit blasphemy as a result of that answer;

because he is admitting that he believes in blasphemy. If you provoke, lead, cause or

make someone commit blasphemy, you will fall into it yourself. The evidence that this is

forbidden is the verse:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

72

ث والعدوان )}1{(ول تعاونوا عىل ال

<<Do not assist each other in sins and transgression>>.

If Allah forbade us from assisting in sins, then more so it is forbidden to assist in the

worst of sins, which is blasphemy.

This is a grave mistake made by many debaters. Intending to make their opponents

commit to bad sayings, they purposely make their opponents utter blasphemous words.

Yes, it is done to expose the contradictions and inconsistencies, but sadly, these people

fall into blasphemy while wanting to do something good. As such, if you talk to a

Christian, do not ask, “Do you believe that Jesus is the son of God?” Do not ask the

atheist, “Do you deny the existence of God?” When these people answer “yes” to these

questions, which would be the expected answer, then the one who posed the question also

blasphemes. Whoever tempts, prompts or encourages a blasphemer to confess to his

blasphemy also falls into blasphemy. Avoiding this sin requires you to be clever, quick

and thoughtful. The one who is able to refute a deviant person without asking him such

questions is much more effective and skilled than someone who cannot do that, and

moreover is safe by protecting himself from blasphemy.

The evidence that the one who encourages another to blaspheme shares their sin of

blasphemy is the hadith2 that in reference to wine, the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص damned:

whoever squeezes the grapes, whoever drinks the wine, whoever delivers it, the one to

whom it is delivered, whoever pours it, whoever sells it, whoever consumes its price,

whoever buys it, and he for whom it is purchased. They all share in the sin, because they

all had a hand in it. There are similar narrations about the people who participate in

usurious gain (riba); the one who writes it, the one who witnesses it, the one who gives it,

the one who takes it, etc. Furthermore, the scholars of the four schools, as well as other

schools, have confirmed and agreed that it is blasphemous to knowingly aid any person

commit blasphemy. So fear Allah, and do not think that this matter is light or less than

1 Al-Ma’idah, 2

2 Narrated by At-Tirmidhiyy, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, Al-Hakim and others.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

73

blasphemy. The one who engages in a debate must learn the proofs and strategies

explained by the scholars, learn the Islamic rules pertaining to debate, and avoid sinful

matters, such as missing the prayers and asking blasphemous questions.

THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE

Also, do not forget to maintain good manners and very importantly, to stay calm. Do not

let your frustration show, and do not let it lead you to shouting, etc. Allah advised us:

ذت ه أحسن )} نة وجادلهم بل ل سبيل رب ك بلحكة والموعظة الحس 1{(ادع ا

<<Call to the path (i.e., the Religion) of your Lord with wisdom and good

admonishment, and debate them with what is better>>.

This verse is yet more evidence that it is permissible to debate in the Religion if there is a

benefit.

Furthermore, whoever wants to present the proof needs to think and to recognize his

limitations. Efforts to show the truth can be wasted because of not thinking ahead and not

knowing when to speak and when to be silent. Do not bring up a detail without having

further evidence or references for support. The Wahhabiyy will ask for proof, and you

will have backed yourself into a corner. On the other hand, do not be afraid to ask a

Wahhabiyy for his proof. Do not forget that the burden of presenting evidence is on the

one who makes the claim, as the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

عيالب نة على المد ي

“The evidence is upon the claimer.2” With this simple rule, you can easily corner a

person who tries to avoid an issue. If a misguided person is asked to prove his claim, he

may reply, “Prove me wrong.” Do not fulfill his request. This is an attempt to avoid the

question. Tell him, “The burden of proof is upon whoever made the claim, so do not ask 1 An-Nahl, 125

2 Narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy and others.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

74

me to prove that you are wrong. Prove that you are correct. I have not made a claim yet. I

have only asked for your proof.” This is one of the most important rules of debate and it

is extremely effective in refuting Wahhabiyys, because it makes them run around in

circles like headless chickens. The most frequent response we get from Wahhabiyys when

we ask, "What is your proof?", or "Who said that?" is everything except the answer.

Nevertheless, be careful. Do not think that every Wahhabiyy will always be stunned by

this. So remember, when debating, as long as you do not make a claim, you do not have

to produe evidence. Once you make your claim, you are the one who has to prove it.

Also, so not forget, that the Wahhabiyys are masters at dodging questions, so do not ask a

second question until your first question is answered, even if it means repeating it ten

times. Tell your opponent to either answer the question, or to say, “I do not know.”

THE IMPORTANCE OF FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF

BELIEF

Many ignorant people say, “Why are you arguing over the belief? That is so basic! There

are Muslims who are dying because of the blasphemers! The Muslims are not unified, we

need unity! Stop wasting your time on these small issues!” To that, refer to the

Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص when he said:

ال شك فيهعمال إيمان فضل الأ

“The best of deeds is (the correct) belief (in Allah and His messenger) without a

doubt in it.” Belief is higher in status than prayer, fasting, charity, and even unity, which

will not exist when the beliefs of the people clash.

This belief is the worst of their transgressions and deviance, because it pertains to the

belief in Allah. If a person does not have the correct belief, then he is not a Muslim. The

first thing to address with these people is their belief. We single them out because they

imitate Muslims very closely, and then teach kufr. There are other deviant ideas that they

propagate. Among them is the false notion that everything innovated in Islam is bad,

despite that they give religious speeches with microphones, teach religious classes in

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

75

schools and universities (instead of in the mosques and houses), and have calculated the

prayer times for years in advance instead observing them every day or every few days.

This topic will be revisited in the appendage of the book, God willing. They are known

for their extremist ways of making optional (Sunnah) deeds into obligations, such as

obligating women to cover their faces. They also deem lawful things unlawful by

unrightfully restricting them to certain times, such as making the duff (tambourine)

forbidden on a day that is not a holiday or wedding. They are also among the terrorists

who are giving the Muslims a bad reputation these days. They prohibit traveling to visit

The Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص grave, and other matters. Whoever thinks that these mistakes are

simple then let him think again. These examples are only a handful of their mistakes. By

this sick misinterpretation of the Religion, they accuse Muslims of kufr, deviance, and

sins, which causes tribulation and results in teaching people incorrect rules.

It would be appropriate to clarify a fallacy presented by some who claim our Religion. It

is not valid for someone to claim the need for striving for absolute unity with all factions

ascribed to Islam, for that does not comply with the Religious Texts. The Messenger of

Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

ع فب قل ع فب ل سان ه ، فإ ن لم يستط ه ، فإ ن لم يستط نكم منكرا فليغيره ب يد ب ه من رأى م

“Any one of you who saw something forbidden, then let him change it by his hand.

If unable, then by his tongue. If unable, then with his heart (he must hate it)…1” The

point of evidence is that if we were to unite with all factions, we would either be silent

about their deviance, or warn from it and forbid it. If we are silent about their deviance

and invalid creeds, then we have abandoned this hadith of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, and the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص warned us from being silent in the face of evil and deviance when he said:

قاب ه إ ن الناس إ ذا رأوا هم ب ع أن يعم المنكر ال يغيرونه أوشك هللا


Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

76

“Surely, if the people saw the forbidden and they do not change it, they are on the

verge of a general punishment from Allah.1” If we are forbidding them and warning

against them, then we are not uniting with them, instead, we would be calling them to

join us, agree with us, and to leave out everything that opposes what we are upon. Thus,

it is clear that claiming that all factions should unite and put their differences aside is

invalid, unless it means for them to unite under the Sunniyy creed and leave all other

deviant creeds. The only correct way is to call to the truth and oppose whatever opposes

the truth, and Allah knows best.

1 Narrated by Ahmad and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WAHHABIYY CREED

77

WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF?

he Salaf (predecessors, forerunners, pioneers) is the first three generations of

Muslims, as narrated by At-Tirmithiyy:

ين يلونهم ين يلونهم، ثم الذ خير الناس قرن ي، ثم الذ

“The best of the people are from my century, then those who come after them, then

those who come after them.” They are the Muslims of the first three hundred years,

starting from the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet from Makkah to Al-Madinah. In

general, the Muslims of the Salaf are better than those who came after them. We say “in

general”, because it is possible to find someone from the khalaf (era after the Salaf) who

is better than an individual from the Salaf. It was the time of the four pious, rightly

guided caliphs: Abu Bakr, Ûmar, Ûthman, and Âliyy. Add to that list Al-Hasan and

Ûmar Ibn Âbdu-l-Âziz (may Allah accept their deeds). The schools of fiqh were

established, and four remain since then- the followers of the great Salafiyy mujtahids,

Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafiîyy, and Ahmad Ibn Hambal. The books of hadith were

compiled during this time. It was the time of the greatest scholars of hadith. Among them

were Al-Bukhariyy, Muslim, At-Tirmidhiyy, Abu Dawud, An-Nasa’iyy and Ibn Majah, and

others. Also during this time, the great scholars of âqidah emerged, Abu-l-Hasan Al-

Ashâriyy and Abu Mansur Al-Maturidiyy. The Muslims were regarded as the people of

knowledge and piety. Because of the work that the great scholars of the Salaf did, the

Muslims after them had facilitated ease in terms of learning Islam.

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR

MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HONORABLE TEXTS

78

CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE

HONORABLE TEXTS

Al-KAYFIYYAH




79

INTRODUCTION

t is vital to speak about some texts that the Wahhabiyys use, because many

people see the invalidity of their creed, but feel compelled to follow them

because they do not want to reject the Islamic texts. Many people know that

likening Allah to His creatures is not sound or correct, but when shown verses and

hadiths, they feel that they must accept what the Wahhabiyys say. Then they make

themselves believe that the Wahhabiyys’ belief in Allah does not liken Him to the

creations, thus rejecting sound reasoning. Some people feel like they are rejecting the

Islamic texts if they reject what the Wahhabiyys say, but this is not the case. Rejecting

their claims is not rejecting the Islamic texts, it is simply rejecting the Wahhabiyy

misunderstanding of those texts.

TRANSLATING THE QUR’AN

Beware of their so-called Qur’anic translation, The Noble Qur’an. It should be called,

“the Wahhabiyy mistranslation of The Qur’an”. In it, they attribute organs to Allah by

translating the verses literally, and supporting their mistranslations with mistranslated

hadiths and terrible footnotes. They even explicitly attribute more than one shape to

Allah. Of course, they believe it is the best translation available.

We point out the fact that translating the text of the Qur’an and presenting that translated

text as a representation of the Qur’an is an innovation. The scholars did not encourage it.

Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l- Jamaˆah did not translate the Qur’an; they explained it, and what a

difference between explaining and translating there is. They wrote books of tafsir

(interpretation) in which they explained each word or group of words in the verses. These

books of tafsir sometimes became as vast as four volumes or more. Some people are so

deprived of the true teachings of Ahlu-s-Sunnah that they actually believe that their

translation is infallible, never thinking that there could be mistakes in it. If they were

asked, “What are you reading?” they would say, “The Qur’an.” It is truly and merely a

translation of the Qur’an. Instead of giving word for word translations, the scholars gave

I

Al-KAYFIYYAH




80

detailed tafsir (interpretation; explanation), leaving the text of the Qur’an in Arabic.

Allah told us in many places in the Qur’an that the Qur’an is in Arabic, such as:

نذ جعلناه قرأ ن عربيا)}1{(ا

<<Surely, We (Allah) have made it an Arabic Qur’an >>.

Instead of translating the Qur’an into different languages, the Muslims learned Arabic.

Like the rest of the religious knowledge, tafsir must be acquired from a teacher. Even an

Arab is forbidden from making tafsir without first learning its rules from the mufassirun

(interpreters). There are many good books of tafsir, like the books of Abu Hayyan and Al-

Qurtubiyy. There are also books of tafsir that need the scrutiny of a strong scholar, like

that of An-Nasafiyy, which has good explanation and numerous weak hadiths. To the

contrary, there are also bad books of tafsir, such as the tafsir of Ibn Kathir, who was a

Mushabbih (someone who likens Allah to the creations) affected by the teachings of Ibn

Taymiyah. The Wahhabiyys have translated his tafsir and propagated it to be the finest

tafsir in Islamic history.

There are rules and ways of making tafsir, so the Qur’an is not left to be interpreted by

any unqualified person. Hence, know that when we use the term “interpretation”, it is not

meant to refer to merely reading the Qur’an, especially not a translation, and to produce a

meaning from one’s own whim or conjecture, like the Christians who actually have no

science for interpreting their book. The interpretations of their preachers are random and

not based on any specific rules. Mistranslating the Qur’an and the hadiths is an evil

innovation. Learn from knowledgeable, trustworthy teachers, not translations. And with

that, it is important to understand that it is not a condition to know Arabic to learn the

meanings of the Qur’an. The condition is to learn the meanings from a teacher who

learned those meanings from a teacher.

Remember, we understand the texts in accordance with the verse:

1 Az-Zukhruf, 3

Al-KAYFIYYAH




81


<<Nothing resembles Allah in anyway>>.

By following this method, we avoid both mental and textual contradictions. They

understand the texts according to the verse:

توى)} محن عىل العرش اس 2{(الرذ

<<Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>>,

which they believe is the proof that Allah is secluded in a place above the Ârsh. Its

meaning will be addressed in detail in what follows, God willing. By that, they fell into

many contradictions, both mental and textual.

THE WAHHABIYYS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE

IGNORANT

A person not very knowledgeable about the matters of the creed, like a new Muslim, is

easy prey for them. They fill him with their bad beliefs by showing their so-called proof.

He may become consumed before he knows it, confident that he has learned Islam. Also,

they take advantage of whoever is ignorant of Arabic by showing their so-called proof. In

addition, whoever lacks intelligence would be easy to convince. They feed on the

ignorant and dimwitted. They may start with truth, such as to say, “No one deserves to be

worshipped except Allah alone! Muhammad ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص is His slave and Messenger! Jesus is

the slave of Allah and His Messenger...” Then, they disclose their dark side by adding,

“We must believe that Allah rose above His Ârsh, and that Allah settled Himself on the

Ârsh, and that Allah has two real hands…” In this way, they overtook many. It is

imperative to critically analyze what they say in order to understand their contradictions.

1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 Taha, 5

Al-KAYFIYYAH




82

Conversely, in the Muslim countries, they are known and cautioned against- in the

lessons, books, and Jumuˆah speeches. There, they are minorities, so it is not as easy for

them to spread their beliefs. As such, they believe that most of The Muslims are

misguided people.

As if they confirm that the belief does not make sense. They all but stop short of saying,

“Yes, it is a contradiction to say that nothing is like Allah while describing Him with the

attributes of bodies, however it is confirmed in the Qur’an and by The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, so

no matter what reasoning dictates, we do verify these bodily attributes to Allah.” In their

minds, the Qur’an confirms bodily attributes to Allah, so they believe that they should

confirm bodily attributes to Allah, thereby disregarding the mental judgment. One may

consider this stance as something like patriotism. They are proud to say that no matter

what is rational or logical, they believe in The Qur’an, but they missed a point- the

correct belief does not defy logic, so there is no need to abandon it.

THE WAHHABIYYS SHOW OUTWARD ADHERENCE TO

THE SUNNAH

They also snag people by their manners and appearance. They outwardly show the

religious rituals and signs. They grow nice beards, trim their mustaches, wear nice

fragrances, and usually dress with Muslim clothing. Ibn Majah reports that the Prophet

said:

نت نايكون دعاة على أبواب جهنم، من أجا لدت نا يتكلمون ب ألس ن ج بهم إ ليها قذفوه ف يها هم قوم م

“There will be preachers at the gates of Hell. They will throw whomever responds to

them into it. They are people who resemble us and speak with our tongues. Adhere

to the Jamaˆah of the Muslims…”

They believe that wearing the pants below the ankles is a major sin, while the truth is that

it is not sinful if someone wears his pants below his ankles without arrogance or vanity.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




83

Some of the mean and ignorant ones will not return the greetings of the Muslim whose

pants are below his ankles.

They falsely believe that it is obligatory for women to wear black or navy blue, and to

wear over-garments. The truth is that when the Prophet was asked if the woman could

pray with a scarf and a shirt without a garment from the waist down (izar), he said:

إذا كان الدرع سابغا يغطي ظهور قدميها

“If the shirt was flowing and covered the top of her feet.” Abu Dawud narrated this, and

it proves that she does not have to wear an over-garment, which is the garment worn over

the shirt and the rest of her clothes. The Wahhabiyys also believe that the women must

cover their faces. However, there is more than one hadith that confirms that women were

in the presence of the Prophet with their faces uncovered, and he did not object to them or

forbid them from that.

They make the lines of their congregational prayers very straight. Their display of the

Sunnah may contribute to their stubbornness. In their minds, can they see themselves

misguided while bearing a big prostration mark, a long beard, and having two wives?

However, a person with the correct belief will not accept their claims, because he knows

that Allah is not similar to His creations, even if the Wahhabiyy has a huge beard and may

have memorized many chapters of the Qur’an. The Muslim would say to himself, “I don’t

know Arabic, but I know the rule. The verse or the hadith would not contradict the rule.”

The Muslim is confident about the rule, because the rule makes sense: Nothing is like

Allah. Nothing resembles Him. No one has His Attributes. He does not have the attributes

of anyone else. Allah is different from whatever you can imagine. This is how a person

protects himself from likening Allah to the creations. The many verses and hadiths they

produce might seem overwhelming to a weak or doubtful person, nevertheless if you

learn the correct tafsir (interpretation) of each and every one of those texts, you’ll see that

those people are very, very, very misguided.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




84

After mentioning this, keep two important facts in mind: 1) A good outside appearance

does not necessitate a good heart with the correct belief. Do not let looks fool you, and 2)

do not judge every person with a big beard and cut pants walking with a veiled woman in

black as a Wahhabiyy. Those are recommended acts for the Muslim. Use your mind and

seek the truth with the sincere intention of seeking the blessings and acceptance of Allah

(liwajhi-llah).

Al-KAYFIYYAH




85

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF THE FEMALE

SLAVE

here is good reason for starting with Imam Muslim’s narration of Hadithu-l-

Jariyah1; the Hadith of the Female Slave. They use it very much to convince

people that Allah is bound to a place. Understanding why it is not a proof for

their claims is a matter of critical importance. Whoever misunderstands and thinks that

the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص likened Allah to His creations falls into kufr (blasphemy).

THE STORY BEHIND THE HADITH

According to the narration of Imam Muslim, a man had a female slave taking care of his

flock, when a wolf attacked and ate a sheep. When he found out, he felt that she was

negligent, so he hit her in the face. Then he regretted that and went to the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

and asked him, “O, Messenger of Allah, should I set her free?” The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said,

“Bring her to me,” so he brought her to him, and according to Imam Muslim, the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked her:

عتقها فإنها مؤمنةأنت رسول هللا قال أنا قالت أين هللا قالت في السماء قال من أقال

“Ayna-llah?” She said, “Fi-s-sama’.” He said, “Who am I?” She said, “You are the

Messenger of Allah.” He said, “Free her, for she is a believer.”

The explanation of the untranslated terms will come, if Allah willed.

If a person does not understand the correct creed or the rules of interpreting the Islamic

texts, he would take this hadith literally and confirm the created attribute of being in the

sky to Allah. Centuries ago, Ahlu-s-Sunnah established the correct explanation of this

narration, and there are several reasons why it is not proof for their claims. If Allah

willed, we will only mention a few.

1 The “jariyah” can refer to a free, enslaved, child or pubescent female.

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH




86

THE WAHHABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADITH

May Allah protect us as we scrutinize their understanding of this hadith. They claim it to

be proof that Allah exists in a place, saying that The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked the girl, “Where

is Allah?” -inquiring about a location. Thus they deduce that Allah must be in a place, and

that it must be permissible to inquire about His location. Then they interpret her reply to

mean, “In the sky”. So, they furthermore say that since he said, “Free her, for she is a

believer,” then Allah must be in the sky. This understanding likens Allah to the creations,

and whoever takes the literal understanding has fallen into kufr.

THE ARABIC TERMS HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEANING

A smart and honest person should do at least one of two things if presented with this

hadith: Reject the meaning that confines Allah to a space and limits Him like a body,

without rejecting the hadith itself (in its Arabic text), and if a little shaken by it, then go

to a knowledgeable person and ask about it. A blind follower, an idle person who does

not want to investigate, and a weak-minded person will not ask , he will simply accept

what they say, breaching the correct belief. May Allah strengthen our (correct) beliefs

and our intellects.

The truth is that in this hadith, The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص was asking the girl about her belief in

Allah, and not about a place for Him, and she expressed that Allah has the highest status.

This hadith does not prove their claim because its words can have more than one

meaning (mutashabih). The word “ayna” does not only ask about the makan (place), but

also the makanah (rank; status). This is proven by various sources, including sayings of

Companions, and Muslim scholars. The line of poetry:

أين الثرى من الثريا و أين معاوية من علي

apparently says, "Where is Pleiades compared to the soil, and where is Muâwiyah

compared to Âliyy?” The locations of Muâwiyah and Âliyy are not actually sought,

although “ayna” is used. It compares the high status of Âliyy, the rightly guided caliph,

Al-KAYFIYYAH




87

(which is high like the stars) to the status of Muâwiyah, who was unjust and committed

major sins by rebelling against the rightly guided caliph.

The terms “fi-s-sama’” can also have more than one meaning. Besides “in the sky”, it

may signify having a high status. For example, in front of The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, An-

Nabighah, the Companion, said:

بلغنا السمــــــاء

“We reached the sky,” as narrated by Ibn Âbdu-l-Barr. He meant that by the blessing of

Islam, Allah raised their ranks.

EXTRA DETAIL:

“the meaning of ‘makan’”

We do not object to saying that “ayna” asks about the “makan”, but know that

“makan” does not only mean, “place”, it also means “makanah (status)”. So if a

Wahhabiyy brings a small, reliable Arabic dictionary, in which all of the definitions are

not mentioned, do not feel cornered if he says that “ayna” asks about the “makan” (and

he will say, “which means the place”). We agree, but makan can also mean “makanah

(status)”. Hence, the Wahhabiyy has no proof. If he asks for proof that “makan” can

mean “the status (makanah)”, then refer to the narration in which Al-Âbbas said “O

Allah, the people are directing their supplication to you by me because of my MAKAN to

your prophet.” This is narrated by Al-Bazzar, and they narrate this hadith when

attempting to discredit tawassul by the Prophet after his death. Truly, Al-Âbbas was

referring his status of being The Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص companion and uncle, and not to the

place he was in, because even blasphemers stood there. As such, the word “ayna” does

ask about the “makan”, which can mean “place” or “status”.

***

And so, this hadith neither proves that Allah is in a place, nor that it is permissible to ask

about a place for Him. It is permissible to ask “ayna-llah?” in Arabic, if the person

Al-KAYFIYYAH




88

means, “What do you believe about the status of Allah?” but one cannot ask, “Where is

Allah?” or “What place is Allah in?” because this is implying that Allah is in a place,

which is blasphemy. Everyone must be certain with no doubt that Allah exists without a

place, and that it is blasphemy even to imply that He is in a place.

Our point is to show that there are two possible meanings for the terms of this hadith.

One is the rejected literal meaning, which contradicts

1{(ليس كثل شء)}

<<Nothing resembles Allah >>.

The other interpretation is that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked her about her belief in Allah, and

her reply meant that Allah has the greatest status and highest majesty. This is the

acceptable interpretation, because it corresponds with the Arabic language and the

religious rules. Furthermore, it complies with other texts, including other narrations of

this very hadith.

DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADITH

Know that in many cases, a hadith would have several narrations. This is because the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not obligate his companions to memorize everything he said, so they

would often convey the meanings of what he said, and as a result, the expressions of one

hadith would vary from one narrator to another. Take an example from the previously

mentioned hadith:

كان هللا و لم يكن شيء غيره

“Allah existed, and there was nothing other than Him.2” Al-Bayhaqiyy narrated the

same hadith, but with different wording:

1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 narrated by Al-Bukhariyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH




89

كان هللا قبل كل شيء

“Allah existed before everything.” These are examples of one hadith having different

narrations. This hadith of the female slave does not prove their claims because it has

more than one narration, each with different wording:

Let us look at the narration of the great Salafiyy mujtahid, Imam Malik, which is stronger

than Imam Muslim’s narration. In his book called Al-Muatta’, Malik narrated that the

Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked the girl:

ني رسول هللا قالت نعمأتشهدين أال هللا قالت نعم قال إله إن ال أقال أتشهدين

“Do you testify that no one is God except Allah (Atashhadina an la ilaha illa-llah)?”

she said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah?”

She said, “Yes.”

As we can see, this narration does not ask about a place for Allah. In it, The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

asked the girl about her belief in Allah. Since this narration asks about her belief, then the

narration of Muslim should also be interpreted to mean that she was asked about her

belief, and not about a place for Allah, because they are merely different narrations of the

same hadith. It would only be ludicrous to interpret the narration of Imam Muslim by the

literal meaning, for then it would not comply with a stronger narration, the narration of

Malik. We do not interpret two different narrations of the same hadith so that they would

conflict with each other; we interpret them to comply with each other.

HAD THE WAHHABIYY UNDERSTANDING BEEN

CORRECT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SAY “IN THE

SKY” TO BE CONSIDERED A MUSLIM

A third reason this hadith does not prove their claim is the fact that the Wahhabiyy

understanding of it contradicts a basic, fundamental rule that all Muslims know: A

person’s Islam is confirmed upon uttering the Shahadah. According to the Wahhabiyys,

Al-KAYFIYYAH




90

The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص taught us this rule, but neglected it himself, since according to them he

judged her as a Muslim just because she said, “in the sky.” Furthermore, if it is enough to

say “in the sky” to be judged as a believer, then the Wahhabiyys should consider the Jews

and Christians believers, but they do not. Therefore, the narration of Malik clarifies what

The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص was asking, and the narration of Muslim is understood according to

Malik’s narration, in which she actually was asked about the Shahadah, and that complies

with the basics of the Religion. For this reason, An-Nawawiyy said when explaining the

narration of Muslim,

In the hadith is evidence that the blasphemer does not become a believer except

by confessing about (the oneness of) Allah, and the message of the Messenger of

Allah, ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, and in it is evidence that whoever confesses about the two shahadahs

and believes in that with certainty, that this is sufficient for him for the validity of

his belief and (the validity of him) being among the People of the Qiblah and (the

people of ) Paradise...

THE FACT THAT THE HADITH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM

DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM

If they say that this hadith is narrated by Muslim, whose book is the second most

authentic book of hadith, we agree (according to most scholars), but this fact does not

benefit the Wahhabiyy. Firstly, not every hadith narrated by Muslim is strong. To think

that there is not a single weak hadith in the book of Muslim whatsoever is an evidence of

one’s ignorance in the science of hadith. It is confirmed in even the smallest books of

hadith terminology that there are hadiths for which Imam Muslim has been criticized,

which is one of the reasons that his book is the second strongest book of hadith narration.

Furthermore, Muslim did not explain this hadith of the slave woman; he only narrated it.

Narrating and explaining are two different issues not to be confused. As a blow below the

belt, the Wahhabiyys may claim that because of their prestige, the narrations of Al-

Bukhariyy and Muslim are enough without taking other books of hadith into

consideration. This is utter stupidity and foolishness. It is not the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah

Al-KAYFIYYAH




91

to reject any authentic text from the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, and the fact is that the authentic

hadiths are spread throughout hundreds of books.

Thus, when a hafidh judges a hadith as authentic, that is according to his own research.

Some scholars said that Muslim’s narration is weak; a specific type of weakness called

“shuthuth” (oddness). This is when a hadith seems to be authentic, but it opposes other

authentic narrations from those who are stronger in memorization or more numerous. In

this case, the preserved narration would be the narration of Malik:

ي رسول هللا قالت نعمنأتشهدين أال هللا قالت نعم قال إله إن ال أقال أتشهدين

He said, “Do you testify that no one is God except Allah?” she said, “Yes.” He said,

“Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah?” She said, “Yes.”

Other scholars refrained from applying any version of the hadith because of a different

type of weakness called "idtirab (disorder; inconsistency)". This is when the differences

in the versions of one hadith do not comply with each other and there is no way to give

priority to one over the other. They said that the different narrations of this hadith have

too great of a discrepancy in their texts and chains; One narration says “ayna-llah”, one

narration says “Do you testify that no one is God but Allah?”, one says that the female

slave was mute and could not speak at all, and one narration says, “Who is your Lord?”

Abu Hanifah even narrates a version of the hadith in which the story is completely

different: A man’s mother died and left in her will for a slave to be freed on her behalf, so

the man told the Prophet that he only had that particular slave woman, and asked the

Prophet if freeing her was sufficient to fulfill his mother’s will. There are also

inconsistencies in the chains of this hadith. Hence, this hadith is unreliable in the issues

of belief, and among a small number of hadiths for which Imam Muslim was criticized.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




92

THE HADITH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN

THE ISSUE OF BELIEF

Additionally, unless narrated through many, many different routes (mutawatir by the

statement) the scholars do not claim that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said those exact words to the

very letter. The Qur’an is an example. Its wording can be traced back to the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

through so many chains that we can confirm that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص recited those exact

words to the very letter (while believing that the Qur’an he conveyed was not his own

Qur’an wording, but was the wording revealed unto him). In such a case, they would say

that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص used those very words. If not narrated like that, they do not give a

100% guarantee that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص used those exact words. This hadith of the slave

woman is not mutawatir, and is not even mashhur (narrated from at least three people).

Some of the very stern scholars of ˆaqidah said that a strong narration from the route of

only one trustworthy person is unreliable in belief issues; three trustworthy narrators are

needed. The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص could not have used all of the terms in all of the narrations,

being only one incident. So, according to the scholars who did accept the hadith, the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked her something, and the sum of all the different narrations shows that

he was not asking her about a place, rather he was asking her about her belief in Allah.

They put all of the different narrations together and came up with a common meaning,

like Imam Al-Bayhaqiyy. Parenthetically, the narration in which she was mute and raised

her finger is weak, but can be interpreted to mean that Allah is one, or that He has the

high majesty. Some of the Wahhabiyys claim that Muslim narrated that the female slave

pointed up and said, "In the sky." Saying "fi-s-sama’ " is one narration, and raising the

finger (and not saying anything at all) is another.

The fact that they do not teach people about the narration of Malik, and do not interpret

the narration of Muslim to comply with the narration of Malik is an indication that they

are misguided, since they pick and choose which narrations they want, and hide the

others.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




93

A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION

Among the trustworthy, reliable scholars who explained this hadith, is An-Nawawiyy, in

his very famous explanation of Sahih Muslim. Among what he said about this hadith is:

This hadith is among the hadiths of attributes, and there are two methods in

explaining it,”... “One is to believe in it without delving into its meaning,

confirming

1{(ليس كثل شء)}

<<Nothing is like Him in any way>>,

and that He is clear of the attributes of the creations. The second (method) is to

make ta’wil in a way that befits Him. So whoever takes by that (second method)

says that what is meant is to subject her to a test: Is she a monotheist who

confesses that the Creator, Manager, and doer2 (of whatever He willed) is indeed

Allah alone, the one whom if the invoker supplicates to Him he directs himself to

the sky, just as the one who prays directs himself towards the Kaˆbah- and that is

not because He is limited to the sky, just as He is not limited to the direction of the

Kaˆbah, rather because the sky is the qiblah of those who supplicate, just as the

Kaˆbah is the qiblah of those who pray- or is she an idol worshipper, among the

pagans who worship the idols that are in their presence3? So when she said في

He knew that she was (”fi-s-sama’, which apparently means “in the sky) السماء

a monotheist, and not an idol worshipper. Al-Qadi ˆIyad said, ‘There is no

difference between the Muslims altogether; the scholar of fiqh, the scholar of

hadith, the scholar of belief, the skillful debater, and the common Muslim, that the

1 Ash-Shura, 11

2 The Creator (Al-Khaliq) and the Manager (Al-Muddabbir) are capitalized as they are names of Allah. The

scholars said that Allah is a “doer”, not as a name but as a description. Thus it was not capitalized. 3 Meaning that they do not direct themselves to the sky because their idols are in front of them.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




94

outward meanings of what is narrated in mentioning Allah the exalted being in

the sky, like His saying:

{( ال رضأ أ منمت من ف السامء أ ن خيسف بك )}1

and texts like it, are not by their literal meanings, rather they are all given

ta’wil according to all of the Muslims.’

An-Nawawiyy mentioned something very beneficial, “…not because He is limited to the

sky, just as He is not limited to the direction of the Kaˆbah …” The Wahhabiyys say that

we hold our hands to the sky when supplicating, because Allah is above us. Truly, it is

not proof. If lifting the hands to the sky proves that Allah is above us, then facing the

Kaˆbah would prove that Allah is in Makkah, which they do not believe. Nor do not say

that the saying of Allah in the Qur’an:

{(بيت)}

<< My house >>,

referring to the Kaˆbah, means the place where Allah resides. We lift our hands to the sky

because the sky is the qiblah (the thing that is faced; the reference point for facing a

direction) for the supplication, just as we face the Kaˆbah in prayer because the Kaˆbah is

the qiblah for the prayer. Besides that, Muslim narrated that on occasions, the Prophet

.made supplication with his palms facing the ground ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

As we can see, An-Nawawiyy conveyed that the Muslims do not accept the literal

meaning of texts like this hadith. So do the Wahhabiyys know better than An-Nawawiyy?

Do they claim to know better about the hadith than the scholars of hadith? Can they

produce the name of a reliable scholar who said that An-Nawawiyy was wrong- other than

Al-Albaniyy, who truly is not a scholar? If they say that it is possible that An-Nawawiyy

1 Al-Mulk, 16 (which apparently translates as, “Do you feel secure from who is in the sky that he would not

make the ground split from beneath you?”)

Al-KAYFIYYAH




95

could be wrong, their famous move when shown what the scholars said, tell them that it

is also possible that they can be wrong, which in fact they are.

THE WAHHABIYYS TA’WIL FOR THE HADITH

They moreover claim to take the literal meaning of Imam Muslim’s narration, yet they

claim that Allah is high above His ˆArsh, above the sky. How then, can they go by the

apparent meaning of this hadith which apparently says that Allah is in the sky? In their

English translations of this hadith, they say that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص asked her, “Where is

Allah?” and she replied, “He is above the heavens,” which is ta’wil on their part. The

word في “fi” apparently means “in”, although it could mean على “ˆala (on, over,

upon)”. The word السماء “as- sama’” apparently means “the sky”. The term mentioned

in Muslim’s narration is singular السماء (sky; heaven), not plural السموات (skies;

heavens). If they take the literal meaning, they have to say that Allah is in the sky, but

they believe that Allah is above the skies. If they want to say that it means that Allah is

above the skies, then they are not taking the literal meaning (ta’wil), and cannot accuse us

of anything when we do not take the literal meaning.

SIMILAR TEXTS

In the Wahhabiyy mistranslation of the Qur’an, they do the same for the aforementioned

verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, 16:

{(أ أ منمت من ف السامء)}

They say that the aforementioned verse means, “Do you feel secure from the One who is

above the heavens?” They then show a new Muslim or a Muslim who does not know

Arabic, and try to convince him to believe that Allah is above the seven skies, limited to a

place. However, the literal translation of the verse says, “Do you feel secure from who is

in the sky?” The word من “man” (who; whoever) can be singular or plural. If used in the

singular context to refer to Allah, it means the One with the highest status. If used in the

Al-KAYFIYYAH




96

plural context, then it refers to the angels who live in the sky, and on occasions have

come down by the order of Allah to inflict the punishment on the transgressors.

This hadith of the female slave, this verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, and other texts like

them are reasons why some of the Wahhabiyys said that Allah exists in the sky. Among

those hadiths is:

رض يرحمكم من في السماءرحموا من في الا

“Be merciful to whoever is on earth, and whoever is in the sky will be merciful to

you.” This actually refers to the angels, as proven by another narration of the same

hadith, with the terms هل السماءأ , “the people of the sky”. They would say that Allah

is in the sky, He ascends up, and sits on the Ârsh, mounts it, or establishes Himself on it.

They would say that He is above the Ârsh and He descends down to the sky at nighttime.

They do not usually say that He sits on the Ârsh in America (although Ibn Taymiyah said

that Allah sits), but our brothers from overseas report that they do. Here, they say, “He is

above the Ârsh” (in a physical direction), as if He is hovering above it. They then tell

people not to try to imagine how He is above the Ârsh. Allah is glorified from what they

attribute to Him.

Remember that it is not a condition to mention the aforementioned points of refutation

against them in the order presented in the book. You may find yourself in a position

where it is better to mention Imam Malik’s narration before mentioning that the terms of

the hadith can have more than one meaning. Nor is it a condition to mention every single

point you know. Sometimes it is enough to mention one detail.

In closing this section, it would be worthwhile to mention some verses of the Qur’an. In

the chapter of Az-Zumar, verse 68, Allah said:

ل من شاء هللا)} {(و نفخ ف الصور فصعق من ف السموات و من ف ال رض ا

Al-KAYFIYYAH




97

<<The Horn will be blown, and whoever is in the skies or on Earth will faint, except

those whom Allah willed.>>

Fainting does not befit Allah. If the Wahhabiyy says, “It means that those whom Allah did

not will to faint will not faint, so Allah will not faint while He is in the sky when the horn

blows,” we say, “Allah does not will for Himself to be protected; He is not a subject of

His own will, the creations are subjects of His will.”

In the chapter of Al-Ambiya’, verse 104, Allah said:

{(يوم نطوي السامء كطي السجل للكتب)}

<<The Day when We (Allah) will fold the sky like books…>>

According to their belief, Allah will be smashed by the folding of the sky, because the

skies are solid entities, not merely air, gas and clouds. They are very smooth, wide, and

dense, with angels at their entrances.

Once, a new Muslim was shaken by this hadith. He had never heard about it before, but

he knew that Allah is not like His creations in any way. Knowing this rule and hearing

this hadith explained by a Wahhabiyy raised questions in his mind, because of the

contradiction. He asked about it and learned many reasons why it does not mean what

those liars say.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




98

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(الرمحن عـىل العـرش اس توى)}

<<AR-RAHMANU ÂLA-L-ÂRSHI-STAWA>>

f not for Hadithu-l-Jariyah, this verse:

1{(الرمحن عـىل العـرش اس توى)}

<<Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>>

would be our first reference. It is their favorite verse. They claim it to be proof that Allah

is above His Ârsh, or that He sits upon it. Let us take a closer look at this honorable

verse that is clear of their incorrect interpretation:

THE TAFSIR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE

WAHHABIYYS WHO MISINTERPRET IT

The word {الرمحن}"Ar-Rahman" is a name of Allah. Al-Bayhaqiyy explained it as “the

One with abundant mercy for believers and blasphemers in this life, but His mercy is

reserved for believers in the Hereafter”2.

The word {عـىل}"âla" is what in English would be a preposition. It may mean "on",

"over (by status or by place)”, “according to”, and more.

The word { العـرش}"The Ârsh" apparently means "the throne", but is not really a chair; it

is the ceiling of Paradise and the largest of creations- held up by four enormous and

praiseworthy angels. On The Day of Judgment, eight angels will carry it.

The word {اس توى} "Istawa" has many, many meanings. It is a verb that refers to the

eternal attribute of Allah called Al-Istiwa’. It has a befitting meaning, and Allah knows its

1 Taha, 5

2 Al-Asma’ wa-s-Sifat

I

Al-KAYFIYYAH




99

reality. One of its meanings is "sat", which does not befit Allah, and this is why some

Wahhabiyys said “Allah sits on His throne.” Al-Qamus, the famous dictionary by Al-

Fayruz’abadiyy, lists 15 meanings for it. Because of this dictionary, every Arabic

dictionary was called “qamus”. More meanings will be mentioned as we go along, if

Allah willed.

There are two methods of interpreting texts like this, as An-Nawawiyy mentioned about

the hadith of the female slave: One is to believe in it without assigning any particular

meaning to it. Do not seek its specific meaning. Following this method, we simply take

the position that it has a befitting meaning that complies with the rules of the Religion,

without the need of contravening the Arabic language, and Allah and His Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

know about it. We confirm that its meaning is becoming without stipulating what that

meaning is, and we merely say, “Allah is attributed with istawa.” This is actually the

general way of the Salaf, and the meaning of Ash-Shafiîyy’s saying, “I believe in what

came from Allah according to the meaning that Allah willed and I believe in what came

from the Messenger of Allah according to the meaning that the Messenger of Allah

meant.” So let the Wahhabiyys follow it.

Do not be fooled by the misquoted translations produced by Wahhabiyys. They bring

mistranslated quotes from the Imams about this issue, claiming that they said, "We

believe that Allah rose above His Ârsh," while truly they only said, "We believe in

Istiwa’ ". They DID NOT say, "We believe that istawa means that Allah rose above His

Ârsh." Nor did they say, "We believe that istawa means that Allah sat…" They said,

"Istawa without a how", not “He sat without a how.” They said, “The meaning of istawa

is not like what is imagined,” and not, “It is impossible to say how Allah mounted the

Ârsh”. For that reason, if a Wahhabiyy brings a mistranslation similar to what is

mentioned, and attributes it to a reliable scholar, tell him, “Do not bring your translation

of what a scholar said when he used a word that can have 15 meanings.” Tell him to

bring the explicit evidence that those scholars said istawa when attributed to Allah means

"rose above" or "sat". In other words, tell him to bring the proof that those scholars

assigned a particular definition to “istawa” over another, and do not accept a simple

Al-KAYFIYYAH




100

translation that of course, is by a Wahhabiyy. If the Wahhabiyy brings some statements

from some of the old, reliable scholars, like Mujahid the student of Ibn ˆAbbas and Al-

Farra’, claiming that those scholars said it means “rose above” by using such words as

then know that even those words still can have the ,”(alaˆ) عال“ or ”(irtafaˆa) ارتفع“

meaning of highness in status and majesty, not only highness in place. That is assuming

that the narrations are authentic. Do not be shaken by this, because it is known that there

are two types of highness: physical, which is impossible to be an attribute of Allah, and

majestic, which is permissible. Thus, had they used words that attribute “highness” to

Allah, that is not evidence that Allah is in a place. Furthermore, had they intended by

those expressions that Allah exists in a physical location, they would be rejected by virtue

of the definitive evidence that Allah does not resemble His creation.

The other method is to look into the Arabic language and select what is befitting to Allah.

For example, do not use “he sat (jalasa)”, because that implies that Allah has a body. Do

not use “to become upright (iˆtadala)”, for that would liken Allah to the plants that stand

tall on their stalks, as Allah told us about the crops:

{( توى عىل سوقه فاس )}1

<<It stood upright on its stalk>>.

Do not use the meaning “to ripen (nadija)”, for that would liken Allah to the fruits, nor

“to become complete (tamma)”, for that would liken Him to the men who reach the prime

of their strength, as Allah told us about Prophet Musa:

{( ه ا بلغ أشدذ توىولمذ أ تيناه حكا وعلما واس )}2

<<When he reached the prime of his strength and was complete, We granted him

prophethood and knowledge>>.

1 Al-Fath, 29

2 Al-Qasas, 14

Al-KAYFIYYAH




101

Do not use “to dwell in a place or to be firmly established upon something (istaqarra)”,

or else He would be similar to the Ark. Allah told us in His book about that Ark:

{( توت عىل الجودي واس )}1

<<It settled upon (the peak of ) Mt. Judiyy>>.

None of these meanings befit Allah, even though they are linguistically applicable to

“istawa”, and there are many more meanings.

One of the meanings of “istawa” is قهر “qahara (to subdue)”. If a Wahhabiyy says that

this does not befit Allah, because it implies that Allah did not have control over the Ârsh,

and then conquered it, we say, “Then do not say it means He rose above the Ârsh,

because it implies that He was not above it and then He became above it.” Then we add,

“What shows that the word “qahara” is attributable to Allah, are His two names, القاهر

‘Al-Qahir’ and القهار ‘Al-Qahhar’, which are mentioned in the Qur’an and hadiths, and

derive from qahara. The correct explanation is that when the Ârsh was created, it was

subjugated by Allah’s power. There is no implication of struggle.” In this verse, Allah

informed us that He subdues the Ârsh, the largest of creations, and subsequently controls

everything else, and this is what many of the Salaf said. Al-Bukhariyy narrated about

Mujahid:

{على العرش }« عل »: { است وى}: وقال مجاهد

“Mujahid said, istawa means âla (subjugated) the Ârsh.” Az-Zajjaj said in Maâni-l-

Qur’an:

استولى( استوى)وقالوا معنى

“They said that the meaning of istawa is ‘subjudgated’.” Al-Akhfash said:

1 Hud, 44

Al-KAYFIYYAH




102

قدر": عل "ومعنى " عل "يقول { على العرش است وى}

“Istawa over the Ârsh means subjugated (âla), and the meaning of subjugated (âla) is

the ascription of power.” And there are many more references.

However, you may need to know that they have another deception they practice: They

say that whenever the verb عل (âla) is made transitive by the particle على (âla), such as

Mujahid’s statement: “âla âla-l-Ârsh” means emphatically “rose over the Ârsh”, and

cannot refer to domination or supremecy. This is another lie that is refuted by the 91st

verse of Al-Mu’minun:

هل بما خلق ولعل بعضهم عىل بعض )>هب ك ا ذا ل

هل ا

<(وما كن معه من ا

<<There was never a god with Him. Had there been, then every god would have

taken what it created and some of them would have dominated (the verb عال [âla])

over (the particle على [âla]) others.>>

EXTRA DETAIL:

“their denial that istiwa’ means subjugation”

Their claim that the meaning “subjugation” for “istawa” is unfounded in the Arabic

language is easily countered by the statements of many linguists, some already

mentioned, and others such as Ar-Raghib Al-Asbahaniyy, in his famous book Mufradat

Al-Qur’an, where he said:

{الرحمن على العرش استوى } قوله ومتى عدي بعلى اقتضى معنى االستيلء ك

“Whenever it (istawa) is made transitive by (the preposition) “âla”, it has the meaning

of subjugation.” Yes, even scholars from the Salaf have documented that, such as the

mujtahid and hafidh, At-Tabariyy in his book of tafsir, where he said, “In the speech of

Al-KAYFIYYAH




103

the Arabs, al-istiwa’ is used to have different meanings…,” then he said after listing

several:

ها االحتياز واالستيلءومن

“Among those meanings is “taking possession” and “subjugation”.” This is enough to

counter a Wahhabiyy who says that Ibn Al-Aˆrabiyy was asked if he knows about

“istawa” having the meaning of “istawla” (subjugation), and he said, “I do not know

it”. The scholars have a rule:

من حفظ حجة على من لم يحفظ

“The one who knows or memorizes something is given priority over he who does not.”

If they produce another narration in which he said, “The Arabs do not say that a person

conquered something (استولى على الشيء) unless he had an opponent…,” respond by

saying, “this narration contradicts the first, because he is confirming that he knows the

meaning.”

If they say, “At first he did not know it, but then he learned it,” respond by saying, “Then

it is also possible that he did not know that they use subjugation without a reference to

any previous struggle or the existence of an opponent.” What proves that they did use the

meaning of subjugation without the existence of a struggle or an opponent is the famous

verse of Arabic poetry:

قد استوى بشر على العراق من غير سيف ودم مهراق

“Bishr conquered ˆIraq without a sword and without blood spill.”

If they say that the poet who said this line is unknown, we respond by saying that several

scholars, such as Az-Zabidiyy1 and Ibn Kathir

1 (whom they consider an authority) have

1 In Taj Al-ˆaruws

Al-KAYFIYYAH




104

confirmed him to be Al-Akhtal, the Christian Arab poet. Additionally, anyone who has

studied Arabic properly knows that there are many lines of poetry used as references in

the Arabic language, despite that their authors are unknown. The condition is that they

are confirmed to be from the period of those whose speech is used as references and

evidence in the Arabic language.

If they say,“But he was a Christian, so how can you use his speech as evidence?” The

simple answer is that it is not a condition for the poet to be a Muslim. The condition is

that he came from the period of those whose speech is used as reference for the rules of

the language. Many lines of poetry that were said by the idol worshippers were quoted by

Ibn Âbbas when he would interpret verses of the Qur’an.”

***

The Wahhabiyy might ask, “Why is the Istiwa’ over the Ârsh specifically mentioned if

Allah did not rise over it? What is the benefit of specifying that He subdues and controls

the Ârsh in particular- since He has power over all things?”, The response is, “To point

out the status of the Ârsh, just as He said in the Qur’an:

2{(وهو رب العرش العظمي )}

<<He is the Lord of the great Ârsh>>,

and this does not negate the fact that He is the Lord of all things.”

What further validates this meaning of istawa are the verses that come before and after

the verse in question. Allah said in the Qur’an:

ماوات العىل } ن خلق الرض والسذ توى ( 4)تنيل ممذ محن عىل العرش اس ماوات وما ف الرض وما بيهنما ( 5)الرذ هل ما ف السذ

ى ت الثذ {((6)وما ت

1 In his history book called Al-Bidayah wa-n-Nihayah

2 At-Tawbah, 129

Al-KAYFIYYAH




105

The first verse, which is the fourth in the chapter of Taha, contains the meaning that

Allah created the Earth and the heavens, and the third of the three verses, which is the

sixth verse in the chapter, contains the meaning that Allah owns the heavens and the earth

and all that is in between them. Since the Qur’an is the most eloquent speech, then by

virtue of the context, it is more likely that the meaning of the fifth verse is that Allah

controls and subdues the Ârsh. This is so because Allah confirms in the fourth verse that

He is the Creator, and in the sixth that He is the Owner, so which meaning for the fifth

verse is more harmonious, that He sits or rises, or that He subdues and controls?

One of the meanings of “istawa” is حف ظ “hafidha (to preserve; to protect)”. From which

the name of Allah الحفيظ “Al-Hafidh” is derived. If interpreted by this, it means that

Allah preserves the Ârsh and keeps it high above Paradise. If not for Allah’s preservation

of the Ârsh, it would fall and destroy what is beneath it.

Assigning a particular meaning is the way of the Khalaf, the scholars after the Salaf. Lots

of deviation emerged in the later generations, as well as weakness in the pure Arabic

language, so there was a necessity to specify meanings for those verses. The scholars of

the Salaf occasionally assigned particular meanings to the ambiguous verses, but it was

not their routine. We must rely on the scholars for the correct understanding, and not on

our imaginations.

CORNERING THE WAHHABIYYS WITH THE ISSUE OF

QURB (CLOSENESS)

The Wahhabiyys do not stop there. They believe that since Allah attributed Al-Istiwa’ to

Himself more than once in the Qur’an, this emphasizes that Allah is above in a place. For

example, they say that Allah said:

توى عىل العرش )} {(ثذ اس 1

1 Ar-Ra^d, 2

Al-KAYFIYYAH




106

And they say it means, “Then He rose over the throne.” We can say that according to

them, Allah is above the Throne, and if He is above the Throne, then He is very far away,

because as confirmed in the hadith, the distance between the earth and the first heaven

above the earth is 500 years. There are seven heavens, and between one heaven and the

other, there are 500 years. That is 3,500 years away. Furthermore, the thickness of each

of the seven heavens, like the distance between them, is also 500 years. That is an

additional 3,500 years. Now, add to that 7,000 year distance, that above the seventh sky

there is Paradise, which is disconnected from the seventh sky and larger than it, and

above Paradise there is the ceiling Paradise, the ^Arsh; the Throne, and it is larger than

the heavens and earth combined. Therefore, He must be very far away according to their

creed. They also very often say that Allah is disconnected from His creation, very high

above them. Some of them even say that He is so high above, that He exists without a

place. However, how could He be so far away when there are many texts that apparently

say Allah is close? For example, when the Companions were raising their voices while

mentioning Allah, the Prophet said in the hadith of Al-Bukhariyy and others:

إن الذي تدعون . ارب عوا على أن فسكم؛ فإنكم ما تدعون أصم وال غائبا، إنما تدعون سميعا بصيرا

أق رب إلى أحدكم من عنق راحلته

“Take it easy on yourselves. You are not calling upon one who is deaf or absent, you

are calling upon one who hears and He is ‘qarib (apparently: close)’, and the One you

are calling upon is ‘aqrab (apparently: closer)’ to one of you than the neck of his

animal upon which he rides.” Forget not also the 16th

verse of Qaf:

<( ليه من حبل الوريد ن أقرب ا ون )>

<We (Allah) are ‘closer’ to the human than the jugular vein>.

Additionally, how can they claim that Allah is far away, above the Throne, when He said

in the 19th

verse of Al-ˆAlaq:

Al-KAYFIYYAH




107

{(واسد واقتب )}

<<Wa-sjud wa-qtarib>>.

It apparently means, “Prostrate and draw nearer (to Allah)”. This will be like a smack to

the face that will lead them to make another ta’wil, because this verse apparently implies

that Allah is below us, since prostration requires going down to the floor. In their

conviction, one’s head is closer to Allah when standing than when prostrating, because

when standing his head is closer to the sky and when prostrating, his head is closer to the

floor. So if prostrating brings one closer to Allah, and if they do not believe in ta’wil, then

they would have to say that there is something close to Allah, and they would have to say

that Allah is below so that the prostrating person can draw near to Him. There is also a

hadith from Imam Muslim:

أقرب ما يكون العبد إلى ربه و هو ساجد فأكثروا من الدعاء فيه

“The slave would be closest to Allah while prostrating, so make lots of supplication

while prostrating...” So stand back and watch the Wahhabiyy eat his own words about

denying ta’wil.

To escape this obvious contradiction, they make ta’wil and say that their closenesss to

Him is by their obedience, not distance, and His closeness to them is His knowledge of

them. Say, “If the closeness is by obedience or knowledge, and not distance, then His

highness is by majesty, not place.”

Several Wahhabiyys have made ta’wil for the hadith that we have repeated frequently,

because of its devastating refuation of their corrupted creed:

فليس دونك شيء1

“…there is nothing below You.” Since they believe that He is above everything, they

hate the hadith that says that nothing is below Him, and thus they explained it as,

“…there is nothing close to You”, and sometimes they say it means, “… there is nothing 1 narrated by Al-Bukhariyy , Al-Bayhaqiyy and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH




108

beside You.” Here, if they say that it means that nothing is close to Him, we attack them

with the aforementioned references, and if they say it means nothing is beside (or next to)

Him, then Ibn Taymiyah commited kufr and shirk when he likened the Prophet to Allah

when he said in supporting his sick creed:

معه على العرشالعرش لم يمتلئ به وأنه يقعد نبيه عليه السلم

“The Throne does not get filled up by Allah, and He sits His Prophet with Him on the

Throne.” What ugly blasphemy, and O, what a vicious exposure. This is in his book

called Bayan Talbis Al-Jahmiyyah, and he says the same in Majmu^ Al-Fatawa. This the

man they call the Shaykh of Islam, and this is their creed, although they claim that they

do not believe that Allah is a body. So according to him, there is not only something close

to Allah, but also beside Him.

By this senseless explanation of the hadith, they claim the Prophet was not eloquent.

According to them, instead of saying, “O Allah, You are the First and there is nothing

before You, You are the Last, and there is nothing after You, You are the (One

whose existence is) Obvious and there is nothing above You, and You are (from

delusions and imaginations) the Hidden and there is nothing below You,” he said,

“there is nothing near You,” or “nothing is next to You.” Which is more harmonious?

If they say, “Had Allah willed for a meaning other than being above the throne, He would

have used such an expression to clarify that, so do not say it means that Allah subjugated

the throne,” We respond by saying, “You have fallen into what you are trying to escape,

because according to your method, you cannot say that it means that Allah is above the

throne, because that is not the expression mentioned; rather, the mentioned expression is

merely “istawa”.”

Al-KAYFIYYAH




109

EXTRA DETAIL:

“their attribution of time to Allah”

The Wahhabiyyah have attributed time to Allah, which is one of the greatest indications

that they believe that He has created attributes. Among what they use to ascribe time to

Him is the verse:

{( توى عىل م ثذ اس تذة أيذ ماوات والرض ف س ي خلق السذ الذ ذك اللذ نذ ربالعرش ا )}

1

which they say means, “Surely, your Lord created the skies and the Earth in six days,

then He rose above the throne.” They explain by saying, “The word (thumma ( ث))

means, “then”, which expresses “delay”; the occurrence of something after the

occurrence of something else by considerable time (tarakhi)”. We answer by saying,

“Thumma ( ث) originally means, “then”, but it can also mean “and” and thus does not

give the meaning of delay and time. Allah told us in the Qur’an:

{( ن ذفس واحدة ثذ جعل مهنا زوجاخلقك م ن )}2”

<<He created you from one soul and He created from that soul its spouse>>.

This verse is in reference to the creation of Adam, his wife and their progeny. If taken

apparently it would mean, “He created you from one soul, then He created from that soul

its spouse”, which would imply that his children were created before their mother. This

meaning is impossible, since it is known that His spouse was created before his progeny.

Likewise, it is known that Allah did not physically rise above the Ârsh at a time after the

creation of the skies and Earth, and had they had a proper creed about the eternal

Creator, they would not have said such a thing. The true meaning is, <<Surely your Lord

created the skies and the Earth in six days, and He istawa âla-l-ârsh>>;” according

to the aforementioned possibilities previously mentioned.

1 Ar-Ra^d, 2

2 Az-Zumar, 6

Al-KAYFIYYAH




110

***

THE SAYING OF IMAM MALIK

To close this section, know that these people refer to an unconfirmed narration from

Imam Malik. They say that he said, "Istawa is known but the 'how' is not." This narration

is discredited by two narrations from Al-Bayhaqiyy, one in Al-Asma’u wa-s-Sifat, and the

other in Al-Iˆtiqad.

In the former, he narrates from the route of Âbdu-llah Ibn Wahb that he said, “We were

with Malik Ibn Anas when a man came in and said, ‘O Abu Âbdu-llah,

1{(الرمحن عـىل العـرش اس توى)}, how is His Istiwa’? ’, Then Malik lowered his head and

was overtaken by sweat, then he raised his head and said, ‘{(الرمحن عـىل العـرش اس توى)}2,

just as He attributed to Himself; how is not said, and how is inapplicable (ânhu marfuˆ).

You are a person of wickedness and a perpetrator of innovation. Get him out of here!’, so

the man was put out.”

In the latter, Al-Bayhaqiyy narrates from the route of Yahya Ibn Yahya that he said, “We

were with Malik Ibn Anas when a man came and said, ‘O Abu Âbdu-l-lah, 3الرمحن عـىل )}

,How did He istawa?’ So Malik lowered his head, then started sweating ,{(العـرش اس توى

and then said, ‘Istawa is not unknown, ‘how’ is not rational (ghayru maˆqul), believing in

it is obligatory, asking about it is an innovation, and I only see you as an innovator.’ Then

he ordered for the man to be put out.”

Remember, there is a great difference between saying, "We do not know how Allah is",

and saying "Allah has no 'how' ". It is important to know that some people use this type of

expression to mean, “the reality”. Thus they would say, “I do not know how Allah is.”

1 He recited the verse: {الرمحن عـىل العـرش اس توى} <<Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>> (Taha, 5)

2 Taha, 5

3 Like the previous footnote.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




111

What they mean is that they do not know His reality. According to this meaning, it is not

blasphemy. As for those Wahhabiyys, they say that they do not know how His two hands

are, and how He puts His foot in Hell, and how He goes up and down in the sky, and this

is blasphemy.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




112

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF AN-NUZUL

n appropriate third reference would be the hadith of An-Nuzul:

ينزل ربنا إلى السماء الدنيا1

“Yanzilu Rabbuna ila-s-sama’i-d-dunya”, which literally says, “Our Lord descends to

the lowest sky.”

According to the Arabic language, “nuzul” would literally be movement from one place

to a lower one. If a Wahhabiyy says, “Allah descends, but not with a descent of motion,”

tell him, “But you said you take the literal meaning.” Also, mention that such a saying is

fabricated. Yes the scholars said that the nuzul of Allah is not motion, and that His nuzul

is not like the descent of the creatures, but what is meant is that they were not specifying

a meaning for nuzul, as mentioned numerous times already. So the difference between

what the scholars said, and saying, “Allah descends, but not with a descent of motion,” is

that the scholars did not translate the term into another language, which necessitates

specifying a meaning. Also, the Wahhabiyy actually does believe that Allah moves, as we

will show, but he only denies it with his tongue when challenged.

THE EXPLANATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-ˆASQALANIYY

If they say, “But Al-Bukhariyy narrated this hadith, and his book of hadith is known to be

the most authentic,” we say, “There is a difference between narrating a hadith to illustrate

its authenticity, and explaining the correct meaning of the hadith.” If they want to refer to

the scholars who explained it, then let us refer to the great scholar, Ibn Hajar Al-

ˆAsqalaniyy, Amiru-l-Mu’minina fi-l- Hadith (The prince of the Muslims in the science

of hadith), also known as “The Seal of the Hafidhs”. His is the most famous of the

explanations of Al-Bukhariyy’s book. Here are some statements given when speaking

about this hadith in his sharh (explanation) called Fathu-l-Bari:


A

Al-KAYFIYYAH




113

This hadith is used as a proof by those who confirm a direction to Allah, claiming

it is the direction of above, and the majority has rejected that, because such a

saying leads to (attributing) containment to Allah, and Allah is exalted from that.

There are different sayings about the meaning of “An-Nuzul”. Among them are

those who carry it on its apparent and literal meaning, and those are the

Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to the creations), and Allah is exalted from

their sayings,”...“and among them are those who kept it as is was narrated,

believing in it without specifying a meaning, while clearing Allah from manner of

being and resemblance, and those are the majority of the Salaf,”... “And among

them are those who interpreted it in a befitting way that complies with the speech

of the Arabs,...

Ibnu-l-ˆArabiyy said, ‘...as for his ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص saying “yanzilu” (which literally means

"he descends"), it refers to His doings 1 and not His self; it refers to Allah’s Angel

that descends with His order and prohibition. Nuzul, just as it exists in bodies,

also has an allegorical meaning, so if you carry the hadith by the physical

meaning, then it is the attribute of the dispatched Angel, and if you carry it by the

allegorical meaning, then it would be called a nuzul from one rank to another

rank, and that is correct Arabic.’, The summary is that he (Ibnu-l-ˆArabiyy)

explained it in two ways: either that the meaning of “yanzilu” is that He descends

His order, or His angel with His order, or else that it is figurative, with the

meaning of kindness2 towards those who supplicate, and the answering of their

supplication, and the like.

Abu Bakr Ibn Furak said that some shaykhs have narrated it with a dammah3 on

the beginning4, while omitting the direct object, i.e. descends an Angel, and what

strengthens that is what was narrated by An-Nasa’iyy,

1 His act of creating

2 i.e. mercy

3 the “oo” sound

4 so that it reads: ينزل ربنا “yunzilu Rabbuna”

Al-KAYFIYYAH




114

الليل ثم يأمر مناديا يقول هل من داع رإن هللا يمهل حتى يمضى شط

فيستجاب له

“After the middle of the night passes, certainly Allah orders a caller to

(descend and) call out 'Is there anyone making supplication, so that it

would be answered for him?” Al-Qurtubiyy said, ‘This lifts any

ambiguity’.”... “Al-Baydawiyy said, “Since it is confirmed by the definite

evidence that He, the glorified, is cleared of bodily characteristics and

containment, then the transfer from one location to a lower location is

impossible to be attributed to Him...

Here, towards the end of the quote, Ibn Hajar mentioned narrations of this hadith that

prove that the one who descends from above to below is the Angel, not Allah. This

aforementioned narration of An-Nasa’iyy explains the narration of Al-Bukhariyy that the

Wahhabiyy would use to object to our explanation:

قى ث لث الليل الخر ي ق ن يا حين ي ب ماء الد لة إلى الس من يدعوني، : ول ي نزل رب نا ت بارك وت عالى كل لي ي فأغفر له فأستجيب له من يسألني فأعطيه، من يست غفرن

The Wahhabiyy would say, “This means: Our Lord, tabaraka wa taˆala, descends every

night to the lowest sky while the last third of the night remains, and He says, ‘Who calls

upon Me so that I might answer him? Who asks Me so that I may grant him? Who seeks

My forgiveness so that I may forgive him?’ It must be Allah who descends in person,

because the Prophet said, ‘Our Lord descends and He says such and such.’ Had it been

the Angel who descended, it would not be valid for the Angel to say, “Who is asking Me

so that I may grant him, who is repenting to Me so that I may forgive him.” The answer is

that the Angel, just as he was ordered to descend, he was ordered to call out and convey

from Allah. It is as if the Angel says, “O people, your Lord says, ‘Who is calling me, who

is asking me, who is repenting to me’, etc.” This is why in the other narration it says:

اب له هل من مست غفر يغفر له هل من سائل يعطىمر مناديا ي نادي ي قول هل من داع يستج أثم ي

Al-KAYFIYYAH




115

“…Then He commands a caller to call out, ‘Is there a supplicator so that he would

be answered, is there a repenter so that he would be forgiven, is there and asker sioo

that he would be given?’”

Always remember what Al-ˆIraqiyy said:

و خير ما فسرته بالوارد

“The best of what you used to interpret it (the hadith) was by that which was narrated

(i.e., another hadith).”

The synopsis is that the word “malak (angel)” is omitted, and omission (hathf) is

something extremely prevalent in the Arabic language. Thus, the meaning would

be, “(By His order) Our Lord descends (an angel) to the lowest sky.” The

omission of the word malak (angel) is like the verse from the Qur’an:

{(واسأل القرية )}

<<Ask the village>>. The word “people (of)” is deliberately omitted, because that is

valid in Arabic. Another example is the saying of Allah:

لذ أنفسهم وما يشعرون )>دعون ا ين أ منوا وما خي والذ ادعون اللذ <(خي

<<The hypocrites deceive (the Messenger of) Allah and those who believe, and they

fool no one but themselves.>>

This means that they show outwardly what is different from what they have inwardly,

and if translated word for word, it woud say that they deceive Allah, which is impossible.

The decent was only attributed to Allah because He commanded it. It is also like saying,

“The general bombed until nightfall,” or, “The judge imprisoned the criminal.” This does

not necessitate that the general or the judge did it himself, nor is that which was bombed

mentioned.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




116

THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO

IRRATIONAL MATTERS

Furthermore, if they say that Allah descends during the last third of the night, and ascends

during the day, then we easily refute them by saying that it is always nighttime

somewhere, and it is always daytime somewhere. If Allah descends to the lowest sky

during the last third of the night, He would have to be above in the other part of the

world. Then, when the night falls on that part of the world, He would have to be above in

that first part of the world. Not just that, but after the last third of the night lapses in one

area, it will shortly become the last third of the night in another, which means that

according to them, Allah would be going up and down relentlessly. Such a contradiction

is the result of this bad belief. To that they say with disgust, “May Allah protect us, you

are using your mind.”

Forget not that they are contradiction the authenic hadith:

ف ليس ف وقك شيء، وأنت الباطن ف ليس دونك شيء وأنت الظاهر

“You, Allah, Are Adh-Dhahir, and there is nothing above you, and you are Al-Batin,

and there is nothing below you.” If Allah rose above something then something is

below him, and if He descends down, then He would be below something, and hence

something would be above Him.

SIMILAR TEXTS

For extra benefit, let us mention verse 157 of Al-Anˆam:

<( لذ أن ك هل ينظرون ا تأتهيم الملئكة أو يأت رب )>

Literally translated it would say, “Are they awaiting other than the Angels to come, or for

Allah to come?”, and this is what the Wahhabiyys believe; that Allah will come to the

Al-KAYFIYYAH




117

people on Judgement Day. It truly means that the signs of Allah’s power will come, as

clarified by the 33rd

verse of An-Nahl:

لذ أن تأتهيم الملئكة أو يأت أمر رب ك )> <(هل ينظرون ا

<< Are they awaiting other than for the Angels to come, or for the Command (i.e.,

the traces of His power) of Allah to come?>>

If this is clear, then the true meaning of verse 22 of the chapter of Al-Fajr should be

clear:

ك والمل صفا صفا)} {(وجاء رب

<<(The signs of the power of) your Lord will come and the angels will be standing

row after row>>.

Apparently, it says “And your Lord will come…” It does not mean that Allah is a body

who will move from one place to another, as the Wahhabiyys think. Imam Ahmad Ibn

Hambal gave this ta’wil, as authenticated by Imam Al-Bayhaqiyy in his book Manaqibu

Ahmad. Let us end this section with the proper explanation of An-Nahl, 26:

<( قف من فوقهم بنيانم من القواعد فخرذ علهيم السذ وأته العذاب من حيث ل يشعرون فأت اللذ )>

<<Allah (created tremors and clefts that) came to their construction, the roof fell upon them,

and the torture came to them from whence they did not expect>>.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




118

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH:

ب )} ي م الطذ ليه يصعد اللك {(ا

<<ILAYHI YASÂDU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>>

great sign of their ignorance is their reference to Suratu Fatir, 10:

ب )} ي م الطذ ليه يصعد اللك {(ا

<<Ilayhi yasâdu-l-kalimu-t-tayyib>>.

They say that this verse proves that Allah exists above, because the verse apparently says,

“The good words ascend to Him.” They say that {ليه ilayhi” means “to (the place of)“ {ا

Allah”, and the word {يصعد} “yasâdu” means “they ascend”, so that the verse means “To

Him ascend the good words”. Refuting this claim is easier than it looks:

THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE VERSE

The correct meaning of the verse is, <<The good words are taken up to the sky, an

honorable place, by the angels who recorded them, as a sign of their acceptability to

Allah >>. The Wahhabiyys may deny this interpretation because of their ignorance, but

we verify it by referring to another verse: As-Saffat, 99:

هيدين )} ل رب س ن ذاهب ا

{(وقال ا

<<Wa qala inni thahibun ila rabbi sayahdin>>.

Apparently, this verse means that Prophet Ibrahim ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said, “I am going to my Lord, He

will guide me.” He did not mean that He was going to the place of Allah, because he was

going to the land of Ash-Sham, the land of the Prophets (Âlayhimu-s-Salatu wa-s-

Salam), and an honorable place on Earth. If Allah exists in a place above us, then that

great Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص would not say that he was going to Allah if he was not going up. What

A

Al-KAYFIYYAH




119

he meant, is that he was going to the place honored by his Lord. Hence, just as in this

verse

ل رب)} {(ا

“ila rabbi (to my Lord)” means “to (the place honored by) my Lord”, the word

ليه)} {(ا

“ilayhi (to Him)” means “to (the place honored by) Him (Allah)”. So, we say that this

verse means that the good words that are uttered are copied by the angels and taken up to

the sky by them, which is a place honored by Allah.

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING

Furthermore, the Wahhabiyys do not really take the literal meaning of the verse. They

also say that it means the angels copy the good words down and then take them to the

sky. However, the apparent meaning of the verse does not say that the angels copy the

good words. So, by its literal meaning, they have to say that the words go up (by

themselves), but words cannot go up by themselves, since words are not entities with

dimensions. If they say that a hadith says the angels write down the good words (which is

true), and they understand the verse in conjunction with the hadith, then we say, “There is

also another hadith:

نت الباطن فليس دونك شيءأنت الظاهر فليس فوقك شيء و أ

‘O Allah, you are the One whose existence is obvious, and there is nothing above

you, and you are the One who cannot be reached by delusions, and there is nothing

below you,’ (Muslim and Al-Bayhaqiyy) so understand the verse according to this hadith

also.”

Al-KAYFIYYAH




120

A SIMILAR TEXT

Similar to the aforementioned texts, is the famous hadith of the Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص ascent to

the seven heavens, and what is above them (and since Allah is not similar to the Prophet,

He did not ascend above the seven heavens). In it, Prophet Musa ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said to our Prophet

:ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

رجع إلى ربكا

“Irjiˆ ila rabbik” which apparently means, “go back to your Lord”. The proper meaning

is, “Go back to the honorable place where you heard the Eternal Kalam (The

Speech) of your Lord”.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




121

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN

he Wahhabiyys refer to the verse:

{(يوم يكشف عن ساق )}

<<Yawma yukshafu ân saq>>

to claim that Allah has a shin. They say that this verse means “The Day when Allah will

expose His shin” or “The Day when the shin will be laid bare.” They say that because of

the word {ساق} “saq”, which apparently refers to the organ between the knee and the

foot and is composed of skin and bone. We say that the “saq” mentioned in this verse is

not even an attribute of Allah. The verse does not say "the saq of Allah ". It refers to the

hardship of The Day of Judgment, as mentioned by many scholars, like Abu Hayyan Al-

Andalusiyy in his famous tafsir of the Qur’an called Al-Bahru-l-Muhit. Ibn Hajar also

confirms this meaning from Ibn Âbbas; that he interpreted the verse to refer to the

severity (shiddah) of the situation of that day.

If a battle reached a very fierce point, it is said in Arabic,

كشفت الحرب عن ساق

"The battle exposed a saq". We say as Ibn Âbbas said, that the verse refers to the Day

when the justice and wrath of Allah will be obvious, and many people will suffer from

His punishment. In English, the word "shin" does not have the figurative usages as the

word "saq".

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH




122

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE

he Wahhabiyys also believe that Allah is attributed with a real and literal face

because of the word “wajh” that He attributed to Himself. We agree that Al-

Wajh is an attribute of Allah, but we do not agree that Allah has a face. We say

that the Wajh of Allah is His eternal and everlasting attribute that is not similar to the

attributes of the creations. We do not say that the Wajh of Allah is a face, because the

literal meaning of “face” refers to the front part of the head, extending from the normal

hairline to the chinbone and from the base of the ear to the base of the other ear. Actually,

in light of certain verses, we laugh at the Wahhabiyys.

VERSES MENTIONING THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH

For example, look at the saying of Allah in the chapter of Al-Qasas, verse 88:

لذ وجه )}ء هاكل ا {(ك ش

<<Kullu shay’in halikun illa wajhah>>.

The literal meaning of this verse says, “Everything will be destroyed except His face”. It

is very easy to see that we should no

\t take the literal meaning of this verse. If the Wahhabiyys insist on this, then they must

say that His (according to them) eyes, hands, fingers, shin, and foot will be destyed. If

they do not say that, then they are negating the literal meaning, and thus contradicting

themselves.

Furthermore, we point out the fact that this verse has the word كل “kull” in it, which

apparently means “every” or “all”. They like this word, and think it can only mean

“every”. In view of that, according to their own method, they are forced to say that

everything other than the face of Allah will be destroyed.

One interpretation of this verse is the ta’wil of Al-Bukhariyy. In his chapter of tafsir, in

the section pertaining to this chapter of Al-Qur’an, he said “<<Illa Wajhah>> means

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH




123

<<Illa Mulkah>>”; what would apparently be interpreted as “Except for His face” means

<<Except for His Dominion (supreme ownership)>>. One interpretation of this verse,

also mentioned by Al-Bukhariyy is that everything done without seeking the blessings of

Allah alone is not accepted (rewarded). This is a valid interpretation that conforms to the

Arabic language, like the verse:

لذ ابتغاء وجه رب ه العىل )} 1{(ا

<<Except to be done for the Wajh (acceptance) of his Lord>>.

There are also other interpretations for the verse.

We also look at the verse:

{( وا فثذ وجه اللذ 2{(فأينما تول

<<Fa’aynama tuwallu fathamma wajhu-llah>>.

It apparently says, “Wherever you turn yourselves, there is the face of Allah,” which

contradicts their established belief because it implies that Allah has a face that is

everywhere, which they do not believe. For example, they do not believe that if you turn

yourself towards the bathroom, Allah’s face is in that direction. They believe that Allah

has a real face that is with Him, and that He is physically above the ˆArsh. One of the

meanings of Wajh is “Qiblah (that which is faced).” This verse is actually a proof that it

is permissible to pray an optional prayer without facing the Kaˆbah, while traveling and

riding on an animal, and with other conditions that need to be satisfied, as mentioned by

Mujahid the student of Ibn ˆAbbas.

Allah is not attributed with a face, He is attributed with Wajh, and He knows its reality.

The word can have more than one meaning, so it is safe not to specify a meaning, or else

to interpret it according to the context of the statement.

1 Al-Layl, 20

2 Al-Baqarah, 15

Al-KAYFIYYAH




124

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND

DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD

o briefly clear Allah from the organs known as hands, check the definitions

listed for the term “yad”, like hand (an organ), power, authority, assistance,

possession, favor, etc. These are not even half of the definitions. Some befit

Allah, like power, and some do not, like hand (as an organ). Ibn Hajar lists over 20

meanings in his explanation of Al-Bukhariyy, and references many of them with verses of

the Qur’an and Arabic expressions or lines of poetry. We will skip the references only for

the sake of brevity. He cited: the organ, power, ownership, covenant, submission,

endowment, dominion, lowness; humiliation, authority, obedience, protection, the handle

of a sword, the bird’s wing, duration (of time), beginning, cash, ability, a group, a path,

dispersion, and more. In Al-Ma’idah, 6, Allah revealed it to mean “thira’ (arm)”:

ل المرافق )} {(فاغسلوا وجوهك وأيديك ا

<<Wash your faces and hands (i.e. arms) up to the elbow>>.

THE SAYING OF ABU HANIFAH

The saying of Abu Hanifah, the most explicit of the Four Imams in clearing Allah from

tashbih (likeness to the creation): “It is not said that the Yad of Allah is His power, nor

His endowment, because in saying that, there is negation of His attribute, and that is the

saying of the Muˆtazilah. Rather, His yad is His attribute and it has no how.” is used by

the Wahhabiyys. They say that he said that Allah’s hand is not power, is not favor, etc.”;

meaning that he is saying that it is an actual hand. The true meaning of the statement, is

that Allah’s attribute of yad is not always interpreted as power in every context, nor is it

always interpreted as endowment in every context, etc.

In one verse, Allah said:

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH




125

فوق أيديم )} {(يد اللذ

<<Yadu-llahi fawqa aydihim>>,

which apparently says “the hand of Allah is above their hands. ” It truly means that their

allegiance to the Prophet is a commitment to Allah, not that Allah put His hand on top of

the Muslim’s hands, which is physical contact, which they believe is valid for Allah.

In one hadith:

يد هللا مع الجماعة

“Yadu-llahi maâl-Jamaâh”, which apparently says, “The hand of Allah is with the

Jamaâh.” The Jamaâh is on Earth, but they believe that Allah is above the sky. The

correct meaning is that the support of Allah is with the Jamaâh.

From these, it is clear that the literal meaning of Yad is not intended. In many languages,

including English, this figurative usage is common.

THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ALLAH:

{(بيدي)}

<< BIYADAYY>>

In the chapter of Sad, verse 75, Allah said:

{( بليس ما منعك أن تسجد لما خلقت بيديذ ي ا )}

<<O Iblis, what prevented you from prostrating to what I created biyadayy?>>

The word {بيدي} “biyadayy” apparently means “with my two hands”, however, it may

also have other meanings. Some scholars said that it was mentioned that ‘Adam was

created “biyadayh” (with His yadayn) as an expression drawing attention to his special

Al-KAYFIYYAH




126

honor. Because to the contrary, Iblis was created by Allah, but it is not mentioned that he

was created “biyadayy”. We are not allowed to say it means “two hands”, because that

would be explicitly comparing Allah to the humans.

Ibn Hajar narrates from some of the scholars: “This (verse) was put forth to facilitate an

understanding1, for it is known that whoever takes care of something and has interest in it

attends to it with both hands. It is thus understood from that, that the heed given to the

creation of Adam was more perfect2 than that of other creations.”

The fact is that the dual form of the word does not always denote a pair. An example is

the saying of Al-Hajj:

لبيك اللهم لبيك

“Labbayka-llahumma labbayk”, meaning, “O Allah, I am quick in responding to your

order in Al-Hajj”, or “I obey you one time after another, O Allah”. Sometimes the dual

form of the Arabic word may refer to importance of something, swiftness to act, or the

reoccurrence of something (more than twice), like the verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk:

{ تني (ثذ ارجع البرص كرذ )}3

Which apparently means, “look twice”, (using the dual form) but actually means <<Look

time and time again (at the creation of Allah)>>

Because the Wahhabiyys believe that this verse is very clear evidence that Allah has two

real hands, and what has been presented surely is not convincing for them, we smack

them with a clear refutation by citing the 71st verse of Yasin:

1 This means to make something closer to a person’s understanding

2 Perfection as an attribute of the creatures has levels. Thus, it is possible for one creature to be more

perfect than another. For example, beauty is an attribute of perfection for creatures, and it varies between

them. Likewise is said about bodily strength and intelligence. However, when speaking about Allah’s act of

creating, it is not said to be more perfect in reference to one thing or another. Allah created all things

perfectly, meaning that they all existed in accordance with His will, whether they were big or small, strong

or weak, ugly or beautiful. This is the meaning of the verse: {( ء خلقه ي أحسن كذ ش The one> [As-Sajdah, 7]{(الذ

who perfected everything He created>. 3 Al-Mulk, 4

Al-KAYFIYYAH




127

ا معلت أيدينا أنعاما )} {(أولم يروا أنذ خلقنا لهم ممذ

<<Did they not think about how We created for them livestock…>>.

Apparently: “That We created for them from what We have done with Our (more than

two) hands….” The plural form (ayd) is used, not the singular form (yad), nor the dual

form (yadan). In Arabic, the plural form of the word is for counting items from three to

ten.

One hadith or verse would apparently say that He has one hand. Another would say two,

and another would apparently say three or more, so why did they not say that He has six

or more hands? Is it that they have the belief of the Hindus and do not want to confess?

The correct belief is that Allah is attributed with Al-Yad, and it does not resemble

anything, it is not an organ and Allah knows its reality.

May Allah bless Abu-l-Hasan Al-Ashˆariyy, whom the scholars followed in defending the

belief of the Muslims. Let us end this section with Sad, 45:

ساق ويعقوب أول اليدي والبصار )}براهمي وا

{(واذكر عبادن ا

It apparently says, "Remember Our (Allah’s) slaves, Abraham, Issac and Jacob, who had

hands and vision." In the Wahhabiyy mistranslation, they make ta’wil and say that it

means they had strength and religious understanding. So, they make ta’wil for creations

that really have hands, but for Allah, supremely exalted beyond the descriptions of men,

they insist on the literal meanings.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




128

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE

he word “âyn” can connote “eye”, “evil eye”, “spring of water”, “self”,

“individuality”… and much more. For example, take the term “fard âyn

(personal obligation)”. Learning the matters of belief is a personal obligation. In

Suratu-l-Ghashiyah, âyn refers to a spring of water, one in Paradise and one in Hell:

{(تسقى من عني أ نية )} and {(فهيا عني جارية )}

Prophet Nuh’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص Ark was sailing by the guidance of Allah:

ري بأعيننا)} {(ت

Apparently, it means, “running by Our eyes”. There is no proof that Allah has eyes in the

hadith:

وإ ن ربكم ليس ب أعور

“Your Lord is not one-eyed,”. The Wahhabiyys use this to say that Allah has two eyes.

This hadith is in reference to the one eyed imposter who will claim to be God. The

Prophet informed us that this ugly ascription is not an attribute of the true God.

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH




129

CONCLUSION

y now, the reader can clearly see the deviance of the so-called Salafiyys. In

another verse, Allah tells us:

ماوات والرض )} نور السذ 1{(اللذ

<< Allah is the guide of the people of the skies (the angels) and the people of the

earth to the light of belief>>.

It apparently says, “Allah is the light of the Heavens and Earth.” The Wahhabiyys do not

usually say that Allah is a light, which is an illumination. If they can use the figurative

meanings, how do they make it forbidden for us? What are their criteria for taking one

ambiguous text literally and another figuratively? All of it is from Allah and His

Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. Nay, instead of being honest and submitting to the truth, after all of this

explanation, the Wahhabiyys will stubbornly say that we have done nothing except

“explain the meanings away”. Upon hearing the proper meanings of the texts, they say,

“you have emptied out the meanings.” They justify their own ta’wil by saying that they

only give the proper tafsir (interpretation). We say to them, “Then we have also given the

tafsir”. This double standard is due to arrogance and lack of intelligence.

Take heed, O seeker of truth, and benefit from what the great scholar, ˆAbdu-r-Rahman

Ibnu-l-Jawziyy said about some of the people who likened Allah to the creations centuries

before the Wahhabiyyah, in his book called Akhbaru-s-Sifat:

When a group of the ignorant knew about this book of mine, they were not

pleased, because they were used to the speech of their leaders who attribute a

body to Allah, and they said, “This is not the madhhab!” I said, “This is not

YOUR madhhab nor the madhhab of your shaykhs whom you have imitated, for I

have cleared the madhhab of Imam Ahmad and denied the lies that have been

transmitted”... “And I saw some of our colleagues talking about the matters of the

creed inappropriately. Three people were authorized to author: Abu ˆAbdu-llah

1 An-Nur, 35

B

Al-KAYFIYYAH




130

Ibn Hamid, his companion the Judge, and Ibnu-z-Zaghuniyy. They wrote books by

which the madhhab was defamed, and took the attributes by a physical meaning.

They heard that Allah created Adam with his image1, and so they confirmed a

picture, a face, two eyes, a mouth, an uvula, molars, a direction- which is the

clouds- two hands, fingers, a pinky, a thumb, a chest, a thigh, two shins and two

feet, and then said that they never heard about Allah having a head2. They said

that He touches and is touched, comes close to the slave in person, and some of

them said that He breathes. Then they appease the common people with their

saying: “it is not like what we can conceive”. They took by the apparent

meanings of the names and attributes of Allah, and then innovatively called those

(apparent meanings) “the attributes of Allah”- with no mental or textual

evidence. They paid no attention to the texts that detour away from the apparent

meanings to the meanings that are necessary for Allah, nor to the knowledge of

what the apparent meanings imply, which is the attributes of the creations. They

were not convinced about saying “His act of creating”3; rather they said it is the

attribute of His self. Then upon confirming these attributes, they said, ‘We do not

carry these attributes according to other meanings that are dictated by the

language, like to say that yad means power or punishment, or that the maji’ and

the ityan4 mean grace and mercy, or that the saq means hardship, rather we take

them by their apparent meanings.’ And the apparent meanings are what are

known to be the attributes of the humans. An issue is taken literally if that (literal

meaning) were possible, so if there is an indication to do otherwise, then it is

taken figuratively. They are stubbornly adherent to likening Allah to the

creations, and some of the laymen have followed them. I have exposed the

follower and the followed. I said to them, “You are the people who convey, and

you have a following, and your imam is the great Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, and

he used to say while being under the whip, “How would I say that which was not

1 This either means that Allah created Adam with an honorable image, or that Allah created Adam with

Adam’s image, which is the image given to all the humans after him. 2 Meaning that they know of no narration from the Prophet about that, so they do not confirm it.

3 Like what was said about the hadith of An-Nuzul.

4 which both apparently mean ‘coming’

Al-KAYFIYYAH




131

said?” And so beware of innovating into my madhhab that which is not a part of

it...

ALLAH DOES NOT CAST A SHADOW

Clear evidence that they believe that Allah is a bodily structure is they say that Allah will

cast a shadow. This hadith truly refers to the shade of the ˆArsh:

له ل إ ال ظ له ، يوم ال ظ ف ي ظ لهم هللا سبعة يظ

“There are seven types that Allah will shade in His shade, the Day when there is no

shade except His shade.” The word “dhilluhu (His shadow)”, as mentioned in the

hadith1, is the honorable shadow that is owned by Allah, and the only shade available on

the Day of Judgment, when the sun will descend as close as a mile from the heads of the

people. What helps to clarify this meaning is the likes of the saying of Allah:

2{(بيت )}

<<bayti (My house)>>,

referring to the honorable Kaˆbah that is owned by Allah, not a place where Allah lives;

and

{(روح )}3

<<ruhi (My soul)>>,

referring to the honorable soul of Adam owned by Allah. The Kaˆbah and the soul of

Adam should not be associated with the Self of Allah; they are not attributes of God. It is

as Allah reported in the Qur’an, that Salih, the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, said:

1 Narrated by Muslim and Al-Bukhariyy

2 Al-Baqarah, 125

3 Al-Hijr, 29

Al-KAYFIYYAH




132

{( {(نقة اللذ1

<<(Be aware of) the Camel of Allah >>,

which expresses the status of that camel, and does not mean that the camel is an attribute

of Allah. If the shadow is an attribute of Allah, then the camel, the Kaˆbah, and the soul

would all have to be attributes of His, something they do not say. All of these are

examples of “relation; attribution by ownership and honor”, called in Arabic: “idafatu

milk wa tashrif”. Not to mention that there is another version of the hadith from the route

of Salman that explicitly mentions the ˆArsh:

ه ل عرش ف ي ظ لهم هللا سبعة يظ

“There are seven types of people whom Allah will shade in the shadow of His

ˆArsh2”.

ALLAH DOES NOT HAVE A FOOT

From another ambiguous hadith, they say that Allah will put His foot in Hellfire:

ة قدمه ز حتى يضع رب الع

There is a lot to be said about this hadith, but it is solid enough to produce the verse:

{(لو كن هؤلء أ لهة ما وردوها)}

<<Had those (idols) been worthy of worship, they would not enter Hell>>.

Allah the exalted will order for the idols to be thrown in Hell with those who worshipped

them. This verse proves that Allah, the only one who deserves worship, does not enter the

Hellfire, because the one who deserves worship does not enter Hell. The true meaning of

the hadith was explained by An-Nawawiyy as Allah putting a group of people in Hell. He

said,

1 Ash-Shams, 13

2Narrated by Ahmad, At-Tabaraniyy and others.

Al-KAYFIYYAH




133

This hadith is among the famous hadiths of attributes, and the difference between

the scholars in reference to the two ways of explaining it has already been

mentioned repeatedly: The first is the way of most of the Salaf, and some of the

scholars of belief, that its meaning should not be spoken about, rather that we

believe that it is true according to what Allah willed, that it has a befitting

meaning, and that the apparent meaning is not intended. The second, which is the

saying of most of the scholars of belief, is that it is interpreted according to what

is befitting, and according to that, they have differed about the meaning of this

hadith. It was said that what is meant by the term قدم (qadam; which apparently

means foot), in this case is متقدم (mutaqaddam; that which is advanced;

brought to the forefront), which is commonly used in the language. And so the

meaning would be: ‘until Allah the exalted puts in it (i.e. Hell) those whom He

has put forward for it among the people of torture...

THREE EASY WAYS TO SMASH A WAHHABIYY

May Allah have mercy upon you. Throughout the book, several strategies and arguments

were presented for defense and offense; however, here are three cases- although already

mentioned in the book in one way or another- that if used properly, one should be able to

use any one of them to silence a Wahhabiyy swiftly and easily:

The first is that we ask the Wahhabiyy what he says about the verse:

{(وهو معك أين ما كنمت )}1

which apparently means, “He is with you wherever you are”. He will either take it

literally or not. If he takes it literally, He has fallen into explicit contradiction of their

creed, for they confirm the direction of highness for Allah, believing without evidence

that highness of place confirms highness of status. If he says that it means that Allah

knows about everything everywhere, then say, “Just as you saw it fit to interpret the verse

1 Al-Hadid, 4

Al-KAYFIYYAH




134

in a way that is different from the apparent meaning so to save yourself from

contradiction, we also make ta’wil for every verse and hadith that apparently implies that

Allah is in the direction of the sky, because that is necessary for escaping contradiction.”

However, the difference between us and them is that we escape all contradictions, while

they are stuck with contradicting the verse:


<Nothing resembles Him in any way>.

It may be said to him, “What made it permissible for you to make ta’wil and made it

forbidden for us?” It may also be said to him, “Based on what rule did you make ta’wil

for one verse and leave it for the other verse?” This deed of the Wahhabiyyah is called in

Arabic “tahakkum”; being arbitrary, or in other words, saying something without

evidence. Do not let him move to another subject until he answers the question or submits

to Ahlu-s-Sunnah.

The second case is to refer immediately to the aforementioned hadith known as “the

hadith of ˆImran Ibn Al-Husayn”:

كان الل ولم يكن شيء غيره

< Allah existed and there was nothing other than Him>. From the great strength of the

evidence in this hadith, you may even refer to it before you mention any verse from the

Qur’an. This hadith is a very mighty weapon against them. The way to use this hadith

has already been explained in the section “PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT

REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED”, so review it there. If the Wahhabiyy says

that he does not know the hadith, tell him that his ignorance does not change the fact that

the hadith exists, and do not let him move to another point. If he claims that it is weak,

tell him that it is actually sahih, narrated in Al-Bukhariyy, in the chapter of Tawhid, and

1 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH




135

add that he should not talk without knowledge. Out of desperation, he may claim that this

hadith does not prove that Allah exists without a place or direction. If so, tell him that it is

not permissible to shut off your mind on purpose. The hadith is as clear as daybreak in

negating the existence of anything with Allah eternally, and that includes places and

directions.

The third way is to ask the Wahhabiyy, “Must the Muslim creed be built upon something

definitive1 or speculative

2?” If he says speculative, and he most likely will not say that,

then his ignorance and stupidity will be obvious to anyone with mental discrimination. If

he says that the creed of the Muslims must be built upon something definitive and not

speculative, then we agree, but then say to him, “How many meanings can istawa have?”

If he says that it can have only one meaning, then he is either a ruthless liar or a pathetic

ignoramus. If he confesses that it can have many possible meanings, then for him to

choose “rising above” is a speculation on his part. The secret of using this point is in

clarifying that speculation comes into play when there is more than one possibility for

something. The rule the scholars used was:

إذا ثبت االحتمال سقط القطع في االستدالل

“If more than one possibility is confirmed, then the certainty of the evidence is dropped”.

For this reason, the real Salaf used to say “Istawa, as He ascribed to Himself,” because

that is definitive. They did not choose one meaning over another, because that would be

speculative, and they definitely did not say, “Rose above as He ascribed to Himself.” As

for the verse:


<Nothing resembles Him in any way>.

It can only have one meaning, so it is definitive and thus the creed is built upon it.

1 Meaning: something definite and absolute

2 Meaning: something that could possibly be true or not be true

3 Ash-Shura, 11

Al-KAYFIYYAH




136

***

Allah knows best and He grants the success

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | APPENDIX 137

APPENDIX

Al-KAYFIYYAH



THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAH

he Speech of Allah is an eternal and everlasting attribute of Allah, as previously

mentioned. It is not of a sound, letter, or language. With this attribute, Allah

orders, forbids, promises, threatens, informs, and questions, but without His

speech being made of parts. It is one eternal and everlasting speech that does not change.

It does not travel through the air or take up time, nor can it be imagined. It is wrong to

believe that His speech is of parts; that at one time He orders, then His speech changes so

that He forbids at another time, etc. Rather, the change occurs in the creations; He would

create in His slave the understanding of an order, and in another slave the understanding

of a question, etc. The evidence from the Book of Allah that He is not attributed with

parts is the verse:

{(وجعلوا هل من عباده جزءا)}1

<<They made Him from the parts of His slaves>>

This attribute of Allah is confirmed in the Qur’an and the hadith. It was established from

the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص that he said:

ن أحد إ ال سيكلمه ربه يوم الق يامة ليس بينه وبينه ترجمان نكم م ما م

“There is not one of you except that his Lord will speak to him on the Day of

Judgment; there will be no interpreter between them.2” Whoever denies the Speech

of Allah has attributed imperfection to Allah and has blasphemed. Likewise is the

judgment of the one who likens this attribute to the speech of the creatures. Most of the

debates in the early days were about the issue of the Speech of Allah.

The belief of those who liken Allah to the creations is that Allah has speech, but that His

speech is similar to the speech of the creation, although they will not say it like that3.

1 Az-Zukhruf, 15

2 Narrated by Ahmad and others

3 They will not blatantly say that his speech is like the speech of creations. But they say that He speaks

Arabic, and they say other things that imply that His speech is created.

T

Al-KAYFIYYAH



They believe that Allah speaks Arabic, but that His speech is eternal, which as usual, is a

contradictory matter.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH:

ذا أراد شيئا أن يقول هل كن فيكون )} ذما أمره ا ن

1{(ا

<<Surely if He willed for something, He says to it, “Be”, and

it shall be>>

What lead those who liken Allah to the creations to believe that Allah speaks Arabic is

this verse, and other verses like it. They would say that Allah said:

{(أن يقول هل كن فيكون )}

claiming that it means that He utters the word (كن; kun), which is a command meaning

“be; exist”. They would add to that, that the since Allah is eternal then His utterance must

be eternal; so they considered an expression that has a beginning and an end-since it

starts with a particular letter and sound and ends with a letter and sound- as eternal and

everlasting. The scholars have given very convincing refutations against this

blasphemous creed:

They said that the term (كن) (kun) is Arabic, and Allah existed before the Arabic

language and all other types of things existed, so the result of their claim is that Allah was

silent and then started speaking, which is impossible since that is the attribute of the

creatures, as well as an imperfection.

Their claim that Allah always utters these two letters before the creation of every

individual thing also leads to saying that Allah addresses things that do not exist. In other

words, according to them, when He gives the command to exist, who was being

addressed? The thing did not yet exist so to receive the address. If they claim that He

addresses it after it existed, then respond by saying, “it is meaningless to say He created

1 Yasin, 82

Al-KAYFIYYAH



something that already exists”; meaning that they claim that Allah says (كن) (kun)

whenever He willed to create something, so if He is addressing something that already

exists, then there is no benefit in ordering it to exist.

Furthermore, their claim implies that Allah does not say anything other than (كن) (kun),

because He would be addressing every distinct thing that comes into existence, but at

every single moment, countless things simultaneously come into existence, whether

bodies, sounds, motions, thoughts or otherwise.

Additionally, their belief leads to say that Allah creates the creations by a creation, which

is the utterance of (كن) (kun). Based on this creed, that a creation, which is the utterance

of (كن) (kun) was the reason for the creation of other things, that creation must have

been preceded by the utterance of (كن) (kun), and since it is created, it would also have

to be preceded by the utterance of (كن) (kun). The belief of Ahlu-s-Sunnah is that Allah

creates with His eternal will and power, in accordance with His eternal knowledge.

Ahlu-s-Sunnah said that if it were valid that Allah would speak with words and sounds,

then it would be valid that He would have any attribute of the creations, because

whatever resembles something is subject to whatever it’s similar is subject. For that

reason, people believe that any particular book could burn, since books burn, and that any

house could be demolished, because houses can be demolished. Anything that speaks

with letters, words, and sounds could have organs, and anything with organs can be

destroyed.

What, then, is the correct meaning of the verse? Ahlu-s-Sunnah had two interpretations of

this verse, both of which comply with the judgment of the sound mind and the texts of the

Religion. The first interpretation is that

ذا أراد شيئا أن يقول هل كن فيكون )}ذما أمره ا ن

{(ا

<<Surely, if He willed for something, He says to it, “Be,” and it shall be>>

Al-KAYFIYYAH



means that Allah creates without effort, difficulty, or prevention. This means that the

things He willed to create come into existence swiftly and easily without being delayed

from their destined times of existence. The second interpretation is that things come into

existence in accordance with Allah’s eternal judgment. His judgment is His command,

and His command is His eternal speech, not an Arabic expression. The word in the

Qur’an: { نك } (kun) facilitates an understanding, and refers to the eternal Speech of Allah,

just as the word (اهلل) (Allah) itself facilitates an understanding and refers to the eternal

self whom we worship. The first interpretation was given by Al-Maturidiyy himself, and

the second was mentioned by the Ashˆariyys like Al-Bayhaqiyy.

THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AN”

It is very important to know that the term “Al-Qur’an” has two usages. The first is the

eternal and everlasting speech, which is an attribute of Allah. It has no beginning and no

end, as mentioned previously. According to this meaning, the first thing that may come to

mind when hearing the word “Al-Qur’an” , which is the Book of Allah, is not intended.

The second meaning for “Al-Qur’an” is the expressions revealed to Muhammad, may

peace be upon him, which are created. The pages on which those expressions are written

are created, the ink used to write them is created, the tongues that recite them are created,

the hearts that memorize those expressions are created, etc. The term: “Al-Qur’an” is

synonymous to the term: “the Speech of Allah”, because “the Speech of Allah” also has

these two meanings: the eternal and everlasting attribute of Allah, and the revealed

expressions.

Because of this interchangeable word usage and meaning, the people who liken Allah to

the creations got confused and misunderstood the statement of the scholars, “Al-Qur’an is

the Speech of Allah and it is not created.” They thought that the scholars meant that the

revealed expressions are the eternal Speech of Allah and that those revealed expressions

are not created, which is a blasphemous, illogical understanding, because it attributes

eternity to the created thing. Had they adhered to the saying of Al-Junayd Al-Baghdadiyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



they would have been safe: “At-Tawhid (monotheism) is distinguishing the eternal from

the event.”

The scholars of the Salaf said that it is forbidden to say, “The Qur’an is created”, for fear

of someone misunderstanding and believing that the attribute of Allah is created. They

also forbade people from saying, “The Qur’an is not created”, for fear of someone

believing that the revealed expressions are eternal. They said, “The Qur’an is the Speech

of Allah and it is not created”, a statement that is clearer than the previous two. They said

that when clarifying this issue to people to mention these details. So when we quote

verses of the Qur’an and say, “Allah said”, it is not with the meaning that Allah speaks

Arabic, but meaning that those expressions are not the work of a creature; no human,

angel, or jinn authored the Qur’an, rather it is a revelation that refers to the eternal

Speech of Allah, clarifying for the creatures Allah’s orders, prohibitions, promise, and

threat.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS

THE MEANING OF BIDÂH LINGUISTICALLY AND

RELIGIOUSLY

ne of the greatest tribulations these people have brought upon the Muslims is

their misunderstanding of innovations. Linguistically, “bidâh (innovation)”

means, “that which was done without a previous example”. There is no

dispraise in the word itself. Religiously, a bidâh is something not revealed explicitly in

the Qur’an or the Sunnah. In this issue, the Wahhabiyy’s mistake lies in believing that

anything not done by the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص is sinful, because it is an innovation. The truth is

that any new issue must be checked to see if it complies with or contradicts the rules of

the Religion.

THE CORRECT MEANING OF WHAT APPARENTLY MEANS,

“EVERY INNOVATION IS MISGUIDANCE1”

Because of a hadith, they claim to shun any innovated matter- but we know better:

وكل ب دعة ضاللة

Apparently, the hadith says, “Every innovation is misguidance.” This is the basis of their

deviance in this issue, so may the hadith be cleared of their falsehood. This hadith is

sahih, but their interpretation is invalid. The true meaning of the hadith is, “Every

innovation (which does not comply with the rules of the Religion) is misguidance.”

The Wahhabiyys would deny this interpretation with disgust, relying on the word “kull

;”We say that the terms of this hadith are “âmm makhsus .”(every; each; all) (كل)

general wording with specific meaning. The support for our claim is abundant and clear:

One hadith:

وكل عين زان ية 1 Narrated by Abu Dawud and others

O

Al-KAYFIYYAH



apparently means, “Every eye is a fornicator”. Despite the general wording, the Prophets,

pious people, blind men, and children are not included, so it has a specific meaning. It

truly means, “Most eyes glance with the forbidden look; the look that leads to

fornication1”. The verse from the Qur’an should convince the doubtful:

ء )} ر كذ ش 2{(تدم

Apparently, it means, “It destroyed everything”, but truly it means <<The wind

destroyed most of the things in that area>>. The violent wind that destroyed the tribe

of ˆAd blew on them for seven nights and eight days consecutively. Certainly, this verse

does not mean that the wind destroyed everything, for that would include the Heavens

and Earth entirely. Therefore, despite the general wording of the verse, the intended

meaning is specific.

PROOF FROM THE HADITH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS

A Wahhabiyy may acknowledge these general expressions with specific meanings, but

deny that the hadith of innovations is one of them, because his heart is firmly opposed to

the idea of good innovations. We further substantiate our interpretation of the hadith with

another hadith about innovations:

سلم سنة حسنة، ف له أجرها، وأجر م ن عمل بهامن سن في ال

“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islam has its reward, and the reward of whoever

works according to it…3” This hadith is an explicit proof for good innovations. Imam

Muslim narrated this hadith and because of it, we understand the hadith which apparently

says that every innovation is misguidance to be of general wording with a specific

meaning. This is because it is impossible for two authentic sayings of the Prophet to

contradict each other.

1 Narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy and Ibn Khuzaymah

2 Al-Ahqaf, 25


Al-KAYFIYYAH



Of course, the Wahhabiyys have their routines for evading the ruling contained in this

hadith. Some of them say that it is specifically for the Companions. Others say that it

refers to the one who revives a Sunnah of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. Both claims are easily

countered. Definitely, this hadith is not restricted to the Companions, because the Prophet

”…gave a general statement that is not restricted: “Whoever starts a good Sunnah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

In addition, it does not refer to the person who revives a Sunnah of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص,

because then he would truly be restarting; following something the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص already

started. Easily seen by the honest person, this hadith praises whoever innovates

something that complies with the rules of the Religion.

Some of the more ignorant Wahhabiyys will argue that the word “bidˆah” is not in this

hadith. A true but petty argument, for the reference to innovations is still contained

therein. Because of their blindness, they will not see our point, and still insist that this

hadith means, “Whoever revives a good Sunnah of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص...” If you meet one

of those, then recite the second half of the hadith:

عليه وزرها و وزر من عمل بهاسالم سنة سيئة كان و من سن في اإل

“And whoever starts an evil Sunnah in Islam, then upon him is its sin and the sin of

whoever works according to it…1” There is no Sunnah of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص classified as

an “evil Sunnah”. According to their method, the second half of this hadith would mean,

“And whoever revives an evil Sunnah of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص …” Hence, the word “Sunnah”

in this hadith means “a way”; “a practice”- and not exclusively the Sunnah of the Prophet

.This clarifies the meaning of the word “Sunnah” in the first half of the hadith .ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS IN THIS ISSUE,

AND HOW TO REBUTTLE THEIR CLAIMS

Being very staunch in this issue, they will produce more texts to substantiate their claim.

Do not be shaken if they recite the hadith of Al-Bukhariyy:


Al-KAYFIYYAH



حدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو ردأمن

5ty6Then, they will say it means, “Whoever innovates into this affair of ours that which

is not from it is rejected”. Actually, this hadith supports what we have already stated,

because the meaning is, “Whoever invents something that does not comply with ( the

rules of) this Religion of ours is rejected.” The hadith does not say

Whoever innovates into our Religion is“ حدث في أمرنا هذا فهو ردأمن

rejected”, rather, the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص gave a qualifying statement:

ما ليس منه

“that which does not comply with it”. So, if the new action complies with the rules of

the Religion, it is not rejected.

They may deliver the verse:

{اليوم أ كلت لك دينك}1

claiming that it means, “Today I have perfected your Religion for you”. From there, they

say that anything coming afterwards would be an unacceptable innovation. This verse

does not support their claim at all. By this interpretation, they imply that the Religion was

imperfect until this verse came, and this is nasty blasphemy. Whoever has a sound mind

and seeks the truth would then inquire about our explanation. We say that the verse

means, <<On the day of this verse’s revelation, the rules of the Religion have been

completed>>. Out of His Wisdom, Allah did not reveal all of the rules of the Religion at

once, but in stages, and all Muslims know this. For example, the obligation of the five

prayers was not revealed to the Prophet until the event of the night journey and ascension

up to the skies. The obligation of Praying the Friday prayer and of fasting the month of

Ramadan came after the migration from Makkah to Al-Madinah. Even the prohibition of

drinking wine was not revealed immediately. This verse came, confirming that the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص received the last of the rules, and he conveyed all of them- even the general

1 Al-Ma’idah, 3

Al-KAYFIYYAH



rules which the future top scholars (mujtahids) would need for deducing the answers for

cases not mentioned by the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. Additionally, this verse was not the last verse

to be revealed. If they claim that anything that comes after this verse is an unwanted

innovation, then they say all the verses and hadiths that came later are abominable, which

itself is an abominable claim.

STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS

What has been mentioned is good ammunition and enough to protect a Muslim from

becoming doubtful about good innovations, but know that they recite other texts,

including reports from the Companions and other scholars. What helps to understand

many of the texts they would present is to know that when the scholars used the word

“bidâh” without restriction, they meant the bad innovation; in particular they meant the

bad beliefs of the deviant factions. The context was understood, so they did not always

have to say, “bad bidâh”- they just said, “bidâh”. However, the sayings of the scholars

explicitly mentioning good innovations are abundant, like the saying of Ash-Shafiîyy:

The innovated matters are of two types: The first of them is that which was

innovated and conflicts with something from the Book, the Sunnah, the

Consensus, or what was confirmed from the companions (athar). This is the

innovation of misguidance. The second is that good thing which was innovated

and does not conflict with anything from the Book, the Sunnah, or the Consensus.

That is the innovated thing which is not dispraised.

This is narrated in The Merits of Ash-Shafiîyy by Al-Bayhaqiyy.

An-Nawawiyy documented in his book Tahthibu-l-Asma’i wa-l-Lughat:

“The Imam and Shaykh whom his greatness, proficiency, mastery in the different

types of knowledge, and status of being an imam are agreed upon, Abu

Muhammad Âbdu-l-Âziz Ibn Âbdu-s-Salam1, may Allah except his deeds, said

towards the end of the book Al-Qawaîd, ‘The innovation is divided into:

1 He is also famous as: Îzzu-d-Din Ibn Âbdu-s-Salam

Al-KAYFIYYAH



obligatory, prohibited, recommended, disliked, and permissible. The way to reach

that is by applying the innovation to the rules of the Religious Law. So if it

applied to the rules of what necessitates an obligation, it is obligatory, or the

rules of prohibition, then it is prohibited, or the recommendation, then it would be

recommended, or the disliked, then it would be disliked, or the permissible, then it

would permissible.’ ”

The statement of Ibn Âbidin, the famous Hanafiyy scholar clarifies this quote of Ibn

Âbdu-s-Salam:

“The innovation could be obligatory, like the preparation of the evidences for

refuting the misguided sects, and learning grammar (an-nahw) which enables the

understanding of the Book and the Sunnah1; or recommended, like the innovation

of inns (for students of knowledge and the poor), schools, and every charitable

matter that did not exist in the first days (of Islam); or disliked, such as

decorating the Mosque; or permissible, such as exaggerating in delicious foods,

drinks, and (luxurious) clothing.”

This is in his book called Raddu-l-Muhtar. Among the most devastating references

against these people is what Ibn Taymiyah said in his book Qawaîd Jalilah fi-t-Tawassul

wa-l-Wasilah:

نا بدعة حس نة سيئة ليست واجبة ول مس تحبة فهيي بدعة وك بدعة وه ضلةل بتفاق املسلمني ومن قال ف بعض البدع ا

ذا قام دليل رشعي أ نا مس تحبة منا ذكل ا فا

“Every innovation that is not obligatory or recommended is an evil innovation and a

misguidance by the agreement of the Muslims, and whoever said about some innovations

that they are good innovations, would be correct only if a religious evidence stands as

proof that it is recommended.” Here, He explicitly confirms the existence of good

innovations, although he was not as precise as An-Nawawiyy, Îzzu-d-Din and Ibn

Âbidin in his categorization. What is correct is that if it is not obligatory, recommended

1 This is in reference to the one who wants to convey the hadith and interpret the Qur’an.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



or permissible, then it is a bad innovation, and that includes the disliked innovations that

did not reach the level of being forbidden, like writing “S.A.W.” after the Prophet’s

name. Amid the explicit scholarly sayings is that of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, “What a good

bidâh this is,” narrated by Malik, Al-Bukhariyy, and others.

THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ÛMAR IBNU-L-

KHATTAB

Ûmar, may Allah increase his status, gave this statement after ordering the people to

pray the tarawih prayers behind one imam, and then returning on a different night to find

that the people kept praying as he ordered- something the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص never ordered,

nor did Abu Bakr. This narration makes the Wahhabiyys’ blood boil. They ridiculously

say that Ûmar did not mean that what he did was an innovation. They say that the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص already prayed the tarawih prayers in congregation, so Ûmar truly meant,

“What a good revival of the Sunnah this is”. Clarify for them that the tarawih prayer is

not the innovation, not even praying it in congregation, but the order for all the people to

pray behind one imam establishes the innovation. When the Prophet was alive, he did not

order it, although some people did it. He started praying at home because he did not want

the people to think that it was an obligation. Since then, the people used to pray the

tarawih prayers in scattered groups- a person here, a congregation there, another person

there… and Abu Bakr, after the Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص death, left it as such. After Abu Bakr,

Ûmar ordered a change- for all the people to gather behind one imam. Since then, the

Muslims worldwide have prayed tarawih behind one imam. This perfectly discredits the

Wahhabiyy belief, for if their understanding of this issue was correct, then Ûmar would

have said, “I will not order the people to pray behind one imam, I will leave it as the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص left it.” Add to that, that if Ûmar meant that he revived the Sunnah, he

would not have used the words البدعة تنعم “good innovation”, especially after the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص already said, according to the Wahhabiyys, that every bidâh is

misguidance. So, they claim that Ûmar meant the linguistic meaning of bidâh, and they

say it means, “to revive”. We tell them that “ahya (to revive)” refers to what was already

done, like what is mentioned in the hadith:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



جر شهيدأمتي فله أسنتي عند فساد يىحأمن

“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a

martyr.1” There is no way to replace the word “ihya’ (revival)” with the word “bidâh

(innovation)”. This trick of theirs is a cheap attempt to hide the truth. Do not fall for it.

Rather, look at what Ibn Hajar said in explanation of Ûmar’s statement:

The innovation is originally that which is done without a previous example, and in

the Religious Law it is applied to that which is contrary to the Sunnah, and so it

would be dispraised. The accuracy of the issue is that if it is from something that

is categorized under what is religiously considered good, then it is good, and if it

was from something that is categorized under what is religiously considered bad,

then it is bad, or else it would be permissible (mubah; not rewardable nor

punishable), and it could be divided into the five judgments.2

EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS

The examples of good innovations and things that the Prophet did not do are also

abundant. One of the things that the Prophet did not do is Abu Bakr’s order to compile the

Qur’an into one mus-haf, upon the suggestion of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, despite that Abu

Bakr explicitly told Ûmar, “How can you do something that the Messenger of Allah did

not do?” Ûmar said to him, “By Allah, it is good.3” A second example is basing the

Islamic calendar on the migration of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, which was done by Ûmar, and

not the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. The people differed about what to use as a reference point for the

calendar. Some said by the birth of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, some said by his death, some

mentioned the first reception of the revelation. Ûmar chose the Hijrah (migration)

because of its great importance. He also was the first to have registered soldiers; an army

reserve. Ûthman Ibn Âffan ordered for an additional athan to be called for the Friday

prayer.

1 Al-Hakim and others

2 Obligatory, recommended, forbidden, disliked, and permissible.

3 If a Wahhabiyy says that this is not an innovation because there was a need for its compilation, respond by

saying that the need for the issue does not deny the fact that the Prophet did not do it or order for it to be

done.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



Here the Wahhabiyys have a trick: They say that the Prophet said to adhere to my Sunnah

and the Sunnah of the righteous caliphs after me, so these aforementioned Imams did not

innovate anything, rather, all of what they have contributed is called sunnah, not bidâh.

One can ask the Wahhabiyy upon that, “Then tell me, in the Religion, is it permissible for

someone to do what the Prophet did not do or it is not permissible for someone to do

what the Prophet did not do?” He will never say that it is permissible to do what the

Prophet did not do, and if he does, he will validate good innovations.

Furthermore, the Wahhabiyy does not truly understand the hadith about the sunnah of the

Caliphs, because he does not realize that by his understanding, he has made the Caliphs

as impeccable and infallible as the Prophet himself. If he says that he does not elevate

them to the level of the Prophet, we ask if they might make a mistake in what they say

and do. If the Wahhabiyy says yes, then we tell them that adhereing to their sunnah does

not mean “everything they do is called a sunnah and that they do not make good

innovations”; it means that we must adhere to them as long as they comply with the

Religion.

The Companion, Khubayb, prayed two rakâhs before being executed. When the

Companions found out about what he did, they said, “He made a Sunnah for us.” The

dots in the Qur’an were innovated by the students of the Companions. Even Ibn

Taymiyah acknowledges that the dots are an innovation, and he accepts them. He said in

his book Majmuˆ Al-Fatawa:

ذه بدعة : قيل ليه : وقيل : يكره ذكل لن ك لبيان . ل يكره للحاجة ا عر وقيل يكره النقط دون الشذذه ل بأس . اب ال حيح أن والصذ

به

“It was said that it is disliked because it is an innovation, it was said that it was not

disliked because of the need, it was said that the dots are disliked and not the harakat

because they clarify the syntactical case, and what is correct is that there is nothing wrong

with it.” The titles of the surahs (chapters) and the other symbols in the Qur’an, like the

signs that show where to stop reciting, are all innovated. The terminologies of the science

of hadith, like “sahih”, “hasan”, and “daîf” are all innovated. Protect yourself and

Al-KAYFIYYAH



defend Islam with these facts. The commonly known arrangement of the Arabic letters

was initiated by someone from thre nation of Muhammad. Before that, they were

arranged according to the “Abjad” sequence.

THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF

PROPHET MUHAMMAD ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

Not mentioning the commemoration of the Mawlid (birth) of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص would

leave this section incomplete. The Wahhabiyys find this good Sunnah to be an abhorrent

major sin, and some claim it to be shirk and kufr. Among their attacks against it is to say,

“The Companions of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص loved the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص more than others, so had

the Mawlid been good, they would have been the first to do it.” Our response is that there

is no rule that says whatever the Companions were not the first to think of is rejected. It is

true that the Companions were the best, but this does not mean that any goodness that

would ever cross the minds of men would cross the minds of the Companions

beforehand. If the Wahhabiyys are truthful, let them extend this idea to other matters; let

them say, “If putting the dots in the Qur’an was good, then the Companions would have

done it first.” Furthermore, in the Companions’ intense love for the Prophret, that love

which we lack, there is support for the Mawlid, because the Mawlid reminds the person

of the Prophet and makes him love the Prophet. If the Companions did not need the

Mawlid because of the complete and perfect love for the Prophet, then we do need it

because of our dry hearts and lack of the Companions’ love for him.

A proof for the validity of the Mawlid is the previously mentioned hadith of the Prophet

:ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

محمد على ضاللة مة أما كان هللا ليجمع

“Allah will not let (the scholars of) Muhammad’s nation agree on a misguidance.1”

When the Mawlid was first done some 800 years ago, not a scholar objected, nor the

scholars of the centuries after that, thereby establishing the Consensus of its validity. The

1 Narrated by Ibn Majah

Al-KAYFIYYAH



fact is that the Wahhabiyys deem it a trifling sin, and some even say it is blasphemous,

thereby breeching the Consensus, and whoever disagrees with the Consensus has

disagreed with the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص . If they resort to a lie and say that all of those

scholars were misguided, and so Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab called the people back

to the true belief, then we stun them with the hadith of Al-Bukhariyy:

مـــتي ظـــاهرين على الحــــقأال تــــزال طــائـفة مـــن

“There will always be a group from my nation which is very evidently adhering to

the truth.” If the Wahhabiyys were correct, then this hadith would be wrong, because

they claim that centuries passed without a scholar speaking out against an atrocious

corruption that spread throughout all Muslim countries.

Another proof, coming from Ibn Hajar as narrated by As Sakhawiyy, is found in the

hadith of Âshura’, which is the tenth day of the Islamic month of Muharram. The

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص recommended for the Muslims to fast on that day every year because that

was the day when Musa was saved from the Pharaoh, and the day when the Ark of

Prophet Nuh settled on the mountain (Âlayhima-s-Salatu wa-s-Salam). Ibn Hajar said

that this hadith proves that it is permissible to thank Allah at specific times for an

endowment that He gave or for a calamity that He relieved, and the best of all is the

coming of Prophet Muhammad ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, more specifically, his birth. When the Prophet was

asked why he fasts every Monday, he said, “I was born on Monday.”

There is no worship of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص involved in the Mawlid, as the Wahhabiyys

accuse the Muslims. They may recite the hadith:

طرت النصارى عيسى ابن مريمأال تطروني كما

“Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians have done to Jesus the son of

Mary,1” which does not mean that the Mawlid is forbidden, but that worshipping the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص is forbidden.

1 narrated by Ahmad and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH



When left to stand on his last leg, the Wahhabiyy may ask, “Why would you want to do

something that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not do?” The answer is simply, “To get the

blessings.” The concept that is so hard to get through their skulls is that it is not forbidden

to do something just because the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص did not do it, hence the saying of the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص:

جر من عمل بهاأسالم سنة حسنة فله أجرها و من سن في اإل

“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islam has its reward, and the reward of whoever

works according to it…1”

Then how is the Mawlid practiced? It is practiced by reciting the Qur’an, reciting the

biography of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, singing words of praise, feeding the Muslims, and other

recommended and rewardable worships. The Wahhabiyys would say that it is not

permissible to gather all of these matters together on one day in the name of

commemorating the birth of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. We emerge triumphant by telling them

that they have then discredited their claim of three aspects of Tawhid; the Tawhid of

godhood, the Tawhid of lordship and the Tawhid of the names and attributes, which is

truly a wicked innovation because it is related to belief. Not a soul from the Salaf stated

it. Refusing to acknowledge that their division of Tawhid is an innovation, when asked

for an explicit text from the Qur’an or the hadith, they say, “We have only gathered the

various verses about these issues and put them together.” They are masters of the double

standard.

Actually, Ahlu-s-Sunnah’s practice of the Mawlid is like the innovation of the Muslims

who followed ˆIsa (Jesus, ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص). Allah praised them in the Qur’an:

1ل)} ابتغاء رضوان و جعلنا ف قلوب الين ات بعوه رأ فة و رمحة و رهباني ة ابتدعوها ما كتبناها علهيم ا

{(هللا مفا رعوها حق رعايهتا


Al-KAYFIYYAH



<< And in the hearts of those who followed him, We (Allah) created compassion,

mercy, and rahbaniyyah which they innovated. We did not obligate it on them; they

only did it seeking the reward of Allah. Those who came later did not observe it as it

should have been observed>>

In this verse, we are told that these compassionate and merciful Muslims innovated

rahbaniyyah; a practice of leaving the people and the luxuries of this world, even

marriage, to dedicate all of their spare time to worship. They were not obligated to do

this, but it was rewardable and praiseworthy. What further shows that it was a good

innovation is the fact that the people who came afterwards did not practice the

rahbaniyyah properly, and those are the Christian monks we know of today. This verse

benefits the nation of Muhammad and is a proof for good innovations in Islam. If the

Wahhabiyy says that there is no rahbaniyyah in the nation of Muhammad, tell him that

this is not our point; the point is that they did a good innovation. What is strange is that

the Wahhabiyy government have an entire week dedicated to celebrating the birth of

Muhammad Ibn ˆAbdu-l-Wahhab.

1 , Al-Hadid, 27

Al-KAYFIYYAH



WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHABIYYS?

earn a bit of the biographies of some of their heads, and further see their

misguidance. While they claim not to follow a madhhab, they follow the

explanations of selected individuals. In essence, they do follow a madhhab;

unfortunately it is not a valid one.

AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH

Their grandfather is Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah Al-Harraniyy, from some 700 years ago. He is

their master’s master, and reference for âqidah (creed). It is important to know that Ibn

Taymiyah was not a Wahhabiyy. He had many beliefs contrary to theirs.

He believed that saying, “O, Muhammad,” after the Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص death is good-

something that the Wahhabiyys consider blasphemous. In his book called The Good

Words1, he narrated that Âbdullah Ibn Ûmar, the great Companion, said, “O,

Muhammad,” after the death of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. Thus, according to the Wahhabiyy

creed, Ibn Taymiyah is a mushrik. Because of this fact, the Wahhabiyyah have published

this book of his with this hadith omitted. In this issue, do not be sidetracked by the

Wahhabiyy saying, “That hadith is weak”. Respond simply by saying, “Whether the

hadith is weak or strong is not the issue; the issue is that he put it in a book that he called

The Good Words, which means that he considered it good.” Anyway, the scholars

considered it acceptable to narrate weak hadiths if they were in reference to doing good,

optional deeds, but not for confirming rules or matters of the creed. Al-Îraqiyy in his

millennial2 poem said:

ا أو ر ف ، و ع ض ين ل ي ب ر ت ي ن غ ا م و و ع ر و ض و ر م ي وا في غ ل ه س و

ن يابن )ع د ه د ( م اح ر و ي غ و م و ك ه في الح ان ي د ب ائ ق الع

1 Al-Kalim At-Tayyib

2 1,000 lined poem

L

Al-KAYFIYYAH



“They (the scholars of hadith) were lenient in more than one area when they narrated,

without clarifying the weakness in the hadith, but they considered that the level of the

hadith must be clarified in reference to rulings and convictions. This was said by Ibn

Mahdiyy and others.”

Therefore, whether or not the hadith is weak does not change the fact that he considered

it good, and thus narrated it in a book that he called “the good words”. This is one of the

strongest issues for breaking Wahhabiyys. Either they admit that calling upon someone

who died does not necessitate that the caller is worshipping the one who died, or they

consider Ibn Taymiyah as a blasphemer for considering it something good.

Nor did Ibn Taymiyah discredit the madhhabs. He claimed to follow the madhhab of

Ahmad Ibn Hambal, but to the contrary, he was far from Imam Ahmad’s path. Whenever

a Wahhabiyy discredits following a madhhab, mention this fact. Only their most ignorant

followers will deny it. Also, make it clear for the Wahhabiyy that this is a single

madhhab, since some Wahhabiyys say you cannot follow one particular madhhab.

How could anyone who understands the Religion deny the validity- in fact the necessity-

of following the schools? It is enough to clarify for whoever denies the schools, that he

does not have enough knowledge to the deduce rulings that were not explicitly mentioned

in the Qur’an or the hadith, and thus must follow someone who does, like any one of the

Four Imams, just like the one who does not have knowledge of medicine or mechanics

must refer to a doctor or a mechanic. He does not know enough about what is general in

the Book of Allah, or what is specific, what is abrogating, what is abrogated, what is

absolute, what is restricted, what has more than one meaning, what has only one

meaning, the reasons for the revelation of the different verses, etc. How can he then be

sure that he can successfully deduce the rulings that he needs by just reading the Qur’an?

The same is said about the hadith of the Prophet, or is that Wahhabiyy the type of foolish

person who thinks it is enough to have (translations of) Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim on his

shelf? In order to deduce rulings, one must have vast knowledge of the hadiths, their

varying narrations, their chains, and the books that are not arranged according to the

Al-KAYFIYYAH



chapters of fiqh, like Musnad Ahmad1, as well as many other issues. The proof that there

are cases not explicitly mentioned and thus are in need of the deduction of qualified,

mujtahid scholars is the hadith in which the Prophet asked Muâth Ibn Jabal upon

sending to him Al-Yaman:

فبس نة رسول : ن مل يكن ف كتاب هللا ؟ قال ا ف: بكتاب هللا قال أ قيض : ن عرض كل قضاء ؟ قال ا كيف تقيض

جهتد رأ يي ول أ : ن مل يكن ف س نة رسول هللا صىل هللا عليه و سل ؟ قال ا ف: هللا صىل هللا عليه و سل قال

هللا هللا صىل رسول امحلد هلل الي وفق رسول: فضب رسول هللا صىل هللا عليه و سل صدره وقال : أ لو قال

عليه و سل ملا يريض رسول هللا

“How will you rule if a case is presented to you?” He said, “I will rule according to the

Book of Allah.” The Prophet said, “And if it is not in the Book of Allah?” He said,

“Then by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah.” The Prophet said, “And if it is not in

the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah?” He said, “I will deduce the ruling (make

ijtihad) to the best of my ability.” Then the Messenger of Allah hit him on the chest and

said, “Praise and thanks be to Allah, the one who gave success to the messenger of the

Messenger of Allah to do what pleases the Messenger of Allah.”

Ibn Taymiyah also did not discredit good innovations, as presented. He is misguided

because he breeched the Consensus in more than 60 cases. He was not a Wahhabiyy, but

he was a Mushabbih (a likener). He has books filled with blasphemy; some of which he

took from others before him and some of which he imagined on his own. In The Book of

the Ârsh,2 one of his statements is, “Allah could be carried on a mosquito if He willed, so

how about a great Ârsh?” It is true that he was a scholar, in fact a hafidh of hadith.

Because of his knowledge and outward character, he gained the title, “Shaykhu-l- Islam

(the shaykh of Islam)”. However, the scholars who knew of his situation said that his

knowledge exceeded his intelligence; he memorized more than he could comprehend.

1 Some books of hadith are not arranged according to the chapters of fiqh, so researching whatever is

narrated about the prayer or Zakah would not as simple as looking into the table of contents and turning to

the chapter of prayer or Zakah. 2 Kitab Al-Ârsh

Al-KAYFIYYAH



The Wahhabiyys are very impressed by his misleading title, which he was not the only

one to receive. His title has been given to others, like Imam Al-Ashˆariyy and Ibn Hajar

Al-ˆAsqalaniyy. Moreover, other scholars have other titles. Al-Ghazaliyy is “Hujjatu-l-

Islam (the proof of Islam)”, and Abu Mansur Al-Baghdadiyy was called “Al-Ustath (the

highly ranked teacher)”. Al-Juayniyy was called “Imamu-l-Haramayn (the Imam of the

two holy cities)”. Strangely, the Wahhabiyys are not impressed by these big scholars. The

Wahhabiyys believe that Ibn Taymiyah was the mujaddid (renewer) of his time, but he is

not worthy of standing in the shadow of the true mujaddid of his time, Taqiyyu-d-Din As-

Subkiyy, who wrote several books refuting Ibn Taymiyah.

Ibn Taymiyah claimed that Hellfire will end- something an ignorant Wahhabiyy denies,

and an evasive Wahhabiyy makes excuses for. He has a book with a misleading title: The

Refutation Against Whoever Claims that Paradise and Hell are Finite. What he actually

wants to say is that only Hell is Finite, not that both Paradise and Hell are finite. He said

therein:

مع أن القائلين ببقائها ليس معهم كتاب و ال سنة و ال أقوال الصحابة

“Those who claim that Hell will remain have no evidence from the Book, the Sunnah or

the statements of the Companions.” Then how about this verse from the Book:

ين فهيا أبدا)} {(خال1

<<They will be in it forever and ever>>,

or this statement from the Prophet:

وألهل النار يا أهل النار خلود ال موت

“(and it will be said) to the people of Hell, “O, People of Hell, everlastingness without

death”.1”? Even his faithful student, Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah, whom the scholars

1 Al-Ahzab, 65

Al-KAYFIYYAH



nicknamed: “The Shadow of Ibn Taymiyah who walks upon the face of the Earth”,

agreed with Ibn Taymiyah, and said out of conveying the conviction of Ibn Taymiyah:

أبدية ال انتهاء لها و ال تفنى كالجنة فأين من القران و السنة دليل واحد و أما كونها

يدل على ذلك

“As for Hell being everlasting with no end, and not vanishing like Paradise (is

everlasting), where is there not a single piece of evidence of that from the Qur’an and the

Sunnah?2”

For those who deny, we tell them not to deny what they do not know. Those who know

that he said it make excuses. Some may say that Allah will reward him for his mistake.

Some may say he retracted his statement. Both excuses are wrong. Claiming that Hellfire

will end is blasphemy, because its everlastingness is explicitly repeated throughout the

Qur’an. How would this man, who memorized the Qur’an and knew Arabic very well, be

rewarded for contradicting the explicit verses of Allah’s book? Allah rewards the

mujtahids when they make ijtihad in the fiqh judgments that not that are not explicitly

mentioned..” even if they deduce a wrong answer, as proven by the hadith:

فل أ جر واحدمن اجهتد فأ صاب فل أ جران و من اجهتد و أ خطأ

“Whoever3 deduces a ruling and was correct has two rewards, and whoever deduces a

ruling and is mistaken will have one reward.4” However, an unqualified person who

breeches the basics of belief that are explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an is not rewarded,

in fact he loses all of his reward. As for claiming that he retracted the statement, let the

Wahhabiyy produce the retraction, or else refrain from lying to protect a deviant man.

This claim breeches one of the most fundamental Muslim beliefs, and is merely one case

where Ibn Taymiyah strayed.


2 In his book Hadi-l-Arwah

3 It is not meant by saying “whoever” that anyone who deduces rulings is rewarded. This is restricted to the

qualified person, as proven by other hadiths is which the Prophet dispraised those who gave rulings without

being qualified. 4Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH



His fate was that he died imprisoned according to the Consensus of the head judges of the

four schools in his era. To that, the Wahhabiyys compare his situation to that of Imams

Malik and Ahmad, who are clear and very far from the straying of Ibn Taymiyah. They

were not beaten nor imprisoned by prestigious and just judges of Ahlu-s-Sunnah as was

Ibn Taymiyah, nor were they blamed for bad statements by other scholars of their era.

They were tortured by the deviant faction of their time, the Muˆtazilah. There is no

comparison in this issue. The Wahhabiyys have the nerve to imply that Ibn Taymiyah and

his students were the only guided people of their time, and all of the other scholars were

influenced by the bad innovators and the Sufiyyah (they believe that the practice of

tasawwuf is categorically invalid, which is also not true). They dare claim that he was

imprisoned out of jealousy of his knowledge. Upon overwhelming exposure such as what

is mentioned here, the Wahhabiyy would say, “It is not permissible to defame the

scholars, this is backbiting and gossip.” The answer to this attempt to overlook the truth

is to say that the Prophet warned against many people when there was a need to do so,

such as the hadith:

ما أظن فلنا وفلنا ي عرفان من ديننا شيئا

“I do not think that so and so and that so and so know anything about our Religion,1”

and the hadith of Fatimah Bint Qays when she sought the Prophet’s advice about two

men who wanted to marry her:

فل يضع العصا عن عاتقه: فصعلوك وأما أبو جهم : أما معاوية

“As for Muˆawiyah, he is poor, and as for Abu Jahm, he never takes the stick from his

shoulder (meaning that he beats women).2” There is also the hadith of Hind the wife of

Abu Sufyan, who said to the Prophet, “Abu Sufyan is certainly a miserly man. Would it be

sinful if I took some of his money secretly?” the Prophet did not say to her, “How could

you expose him like that? This is backbiting and gossip,” rather, he said:

1Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy

2Narrated by Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH



خذي أنت وبنوك ما يكفيك بالمعروف

“You and your children (may) take what is normally needed.1” Therefore, our exposure

of Ibn Taymiyah’s deviance is not mere gossip, but a religious duty.

His books were burned, except what the scholars kept for records, he was warned against

from the tops of the minarets, and people were forbidden to teach from his route. He

became outdated until Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab revived and added to his

teachings.

MUHAMMAD IBN ÂBDU-L-WAHHAB

Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab is their father, after whom they were named. He was a

deviant man from just over 200 years ago, of the land of Najd, the land that the Prophet

,said ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

ـطلـع قـرن الشـيطانيبها

“The horn of the devil will emerge from Najd.2” His father, Âbdu-l-Wahhab, and his

brother, Shaykh Sulayman, and the other scholars of his time shunned him. Unlike his

master, he was not a scholar. His father was disappointed in him because he did not study

as his ancestors had. One of the easiest angles to expose his deviance may lie in the fact

that he was not authenticated by any scholar of his time. He was not a scholar of âqidah

(creed), nor fiqh (detailed rules), nor lughah (Arabic language), nor tafsir (Qur’anic

interpretation), nor hadith, nor history, etc. He was so ostracized, that he deemed

everyone who did not follow him a blasphemer. He claimed to be the mujaddid of his

time, calling Muslims back to their Religion. He claimed that the Muslims all over the

Earth worshipped graves, Prophets and awliya’ (Muslims of the highest levels of piety),

and this belief is still held by his followers until today. It was reported that he was a

funded British agent. He was the first person to misinterpret the hadith claiming that all

1Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy

2 Narrated by Ahmad

Al-KAYFIYYAH



innovations are bad, which has lead to intense tribulations in our times. He instigated his

followers to rebel against the khalifah, which is a major sin even if the khalifah is an

unjust Muslim. As a result, he shed the blood of many Muslims. His followers have

confirmed his belief of likening Allah to the creation in many of their books, of course

without calling it “likening”. He died after more than 100 years and left the legacy of the

worst faction alive today.

AL-ALBANIYY

Their uncle is Nasiru-d-Din Al-Albaniyy, a deviant contemporary who died. The

Wahhabiyys elevated him to the status of a muhaddith (hadith scholar). He worked in a

library, and indulged in reading the books of hadith. He misunderstood a lot, and

imagined himself to be a scholar. We discredit him by telling the Wahhabiyys that he had

no shaykh to teach him the science of hadith, and we challenge any Wahhabiyy to bring

us his chain of teachers if they think this is a lie. Not to mention that the true scholars had

many, many, many shaykhs, so even upon the presentation of one chain of teachers

(which they have yet to produce) we would not be impressed. Despite this, they take him

as the brightest hadith scholar of our day, and some go as far as to label him as the

mujaddid of our time. He has endeavored diligently in perverting the hadith and its

science, but the true scholars have not been hesitant in refuting and warning against him.

The only people who do not know him as a fraud are his followers and whoever has been

poisoned by them.

It was narrated about him that in one of his sessions, a Jordanian lawyer requested from

Al-Albaniyy to recite 10 hadiths with their chains of narration from memory. Al-Albaniyy

responded by saying, “I am not a muhaddith of memorization, I am a muhaddith of the

book.” The lawyer responded by saying, “Then I am able to do what you do” Upon that,

Al-Albaniyy felt embarrassed.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A

SUBTITLE

The Wahhabiyys have other heads, such as the recently deceased ˆAbdu-llah Ibn Baz. He

has been falsely called “the Grand Mufti of Makkah”. He has also worked hard in

solidifying the call of the Wahhabiyys. Now that he and Al-Albaniyy are dead, we find the

Wahhabiyys breaking into small groups, bickering among themselves. Hopefully, their

end will come soon. Among their heads is a Caribbean man named Bilal Philips. He

believes that Allah must be above the creations since it is not befitting to say He is below

them. Ibn Baz and Philips are among the Wahhabiyys who documented the so-called

three aspects of Tawhid. In America there is a man named Dawud Adeeb, who has been

refuted by our brothers on more than one occasion. In one lecture called, “The Existence

of Allah”, he said that he did not know whether dividing Tawhid into three categories was

an innovation or not, yet he proceeded to teach the people about it anyway. Be warned

about these men, and others, like Ibn ˆUthaymin, who said that we do not know exactly

how Allah sits, and that Allah has a glorious face and two real eyes. He did not try to

camouflage his blasphemy. He also said that denying total dissimilarity from every aspect

between Allah and the creations is a mistake; it is a must that there be some sort of

resemblance between the attributes of Allah and the attributes of the creation so that we

can understand them. Not only did he not camoflauge his blasphemy, but it overcame him

to the extent that could not hide it. They have many stooges and plenty of money to back

them. It is important that the information in this book is learned properly, understood, and

taught to as many people as possible, so to help in defending the Religion of Muhammad

.There are only a few standing between the Wahhabiyys and the people .ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

Al-KAYFIYYAH



THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORSHIP

AND TAWASSUL

mong their strongest fallacies and wickedest of heresies is their corrupted talk

about tawassul. Perhaps they misguide more people with this fallacy than with

their talk about likening Allah to the creations. They say to the unsuspecting

person, “Do you worship the graves? Do you worship the Prophets? Do you call upon the

dead?” And of course, that unsuspecting Muslim would say, “Never!” They would say to

him, “Beware of those who do shirk throughout the Muslim lands, calling upon the

Prophets and Muslim Saints (Waliyys), rubbing themselves on their graves and asking for

their intersession.” They say more than this, and this is a very dangerous poison. It is like

the bite of the so-called vampire, quickly turning its victims into practically incurable

deviants. The one who learns before encountering this talk of theirs can protect himself,

but the one who has leant them a listening ear in this issue may never return to the truth,

even if he heard all of the evidence. In fact, he would just ignore all of the evidence and

believe that it is all weak, even if their own authorities authenticate the references. Some

prefer to avoid tawassul after hearing the talk of the Wahhabiyys in this issue, even if

they do not take the Wahhabiyy creed. Let us not make this introduction longer than it

needs to be, and bring the remedy for their sick poison. However, one must know that the

key to refuting Wahhabiyys in this issue is textual evidence; Qur’anic verses, hadiths and

traditions from the Companions (athar). You must understand and memorize the proof.

An essential mistake of the Wahhabiyy in this topic is his rejection of religious proof for

his opinion. To successfully refute them, it is imperitive that you know the references that

disprove them, and enforce those references on them.

THE CORRECT MEANING OF WORSHIP

The first thing one must do to protect himself and others, and to refute the Wahhabiyys in

this menacing deviance, is understand the meaning of “ˆibadah (worship)”, because they

accuse the Muslims of worshipping other than Allah when they never did so. To

understand the meaning of worship, one must understand that worship (ˆibadah) is a

concept; a description of one’s actions. Therefore, one may walk, and depending on his

A

Al-KAYFIYYAH



intention, his walking may be worship or may not be. In the hadith that we will revisit,

the Prophet taught us to say when walking to the Masjid:

وال سمعة، وخرجت ات قاء، وأسألك بحق ممشاي هذا، فإني لم أخرج أشرا، وال بطرا، وال رياء،

سخطك، وابتغاء مرضاتك

“…O Allah, I ask You by the right of this walking of mine, for I have not gone out

boasting, or to impress, nor insincerely, nor seeking a reputation. I have gone out fearing

Your punishment and seeking Your acceptance…”

His eating might be worship or might not be. The Prophet taught the one who forgot to

eat in the name of Allah to say:

بسم الله أوله وآخره

“In the name of Allah at its beginning and at its end.”

His fighting might be worship or it might not be. A man said the Prophet, “One may fight

out of anger, or to protect himself, so what is Fighting for the sake of Allah?” The

Prophet said:

بيل الله عز وجل من قاتل لتكون كلمة الله هي العليا، ف هو في س

“Whoever fights so that the Word of Allah will be dominant has fought for the sake of

Allah”

Even one’s prostrating might be worship to someone or it might not be. For this reason,

when we prostrate to Allah we are worshipping Him, and when the Angels prostrated to

Adam, they were not worshipping him, and when Muˆadh Ibn Jabal prostrated to the

Prophet, he was not worshipping the Prophet. The references for these prostrations are as

follows:

It was confirmed that when Muˆadh Ibn Jabal came from the lands of Ash-Sham, he

prostrated to the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص . The Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



ما هذا

“What is this?” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, I saw the people of Ash-Sham

prostrating to their generals and priests, and you are more deserving of that. The Prophet

said:

لو كنت آمر أحدا أن يسجد ألحد ألمرت المرأة أن تسجد لزوجها, ال تفعل

“Do not do that. Had I ordered anyone to prostrate to anyone, I would have ordered

the woman to prostrate to her husband.” This is narrated by Ibn Hibban, Ibn Majah

and others. Yes, it may be forbidden in the Laws of Muhammad to prostrate to a human,

but that is beside the point. Always beware of a Wahhabiyy reaching for something

beside the point. The point is that the great Companion prostrated to the Prophet, and the

Prophet did not accuse him of shirk. Propstration is a greater indication of humility and

servitude than calling, so how is calling the Prophet worshipping him while prostrating to

him is not? Also, Allah commanded the Angels to prostrate to Adam:

<( ذ قلنا للملئكة اسدوا ل دم فسجدواوا )>

1

<And when We said to the Angels, “Prostrate to Adam,” so they prostrated…>

So what makes one prostration worship and the other not? Even the brothers of Prophet

Yusuf prostrated to him:

وا هل سذدا)> <(وخر

<They fell in prostration to him.>

Why is seeking refuge with Allah worshipping Allah, and seeking refuge with the

Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص not worshipping him? Imam Ahmad narrated in his Musnad,

with a hasan chain of narration, as said by Hafidh Ibn Hajar2, that Al-Harith Ibn Hassan

Al-Bakriyy said in the presence of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص:

1 Al-Baqarah, 34

2 Fathu-l-Bari

Al-KAYFIYYAH



ه ورسوله ان اكون كوافد عاد اعوذ بالل

“I seek refuge with Allah and his Messenger from being like the delegate of the tribe of

Âd.” The Prophet did not object to him. Had what he done been shirk, the Prophet would

have clarified that. How we know that the Wahhabiyys are misguided in this issue, is that

they would consider the one who seeks refuge with Allah and His Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص a

mushrik, even after knowing of the strong hadith in this issue. If you were to tell him the

hadith before he ever knew about it, he would assume that it is weak or fabricated, and

find such a doing very ugly and despicable. In fact, to him, this is obvious and clear shirk,

although Imam Ahmad narrated it and did not comment on it; had it been such obvious

shirk, he would have realized that when documenting it.

Worship is the ultimate submission, the extent of humility, and the maximum humbleness

and fear for another, not calling and asking. Take some of the quotes of the Sunniyy

linguists for the true definition of îbadah (worship):

The hafidh, faqih and linguist, Taqiyyu-d-Din Âliyy Ibn Âbdi-l-Kafi As-Subkiyy defined

it as:

غاية الخضوع الخشوع

“the extremity in humbleness and fear”, as mentioned by the imam, hafidh and linguist,

Muhammad Murtada Az-Zabidiyy. Others have mentioned the likes of this, such as Abu

Mansur Al-Azhariyy in Tahdhib Al-Lughah. He said in conveying the words of Az-Zajjaj,

who is among the most famous linguists1:

الطاعة مع الخضوع: ومعنى العبادة في اللغة

“Worship in the Arabic language is the (special) obedience with the (ultimate) humility.”

This does not mean that any obedience is worship, or any humility, or else anyone who

obeyed another, even his parent or employer, would be worshipping that one, and anyone

رجوقد ةأخ انيةعاد قص مد الث ناد أح ان البكري قال خرجت اعنحسن بإس أنا والعلء بن الحضرمي إلى رسول الله صلى الله لحارث بن حس عليه وسلم الحديث وفيه ف قلت أعوذ بالله وبرسوله أن أكون كوافد عاد

1 Tahdhib Al-Lughah

Al-KAYFIYYAH



who humbled himself to another, even his parent or commanding officer, would be

worshipping that other. Ibn Mandhur said similar to that in Lisanu-l-Ârab1, as well as Al-

Farra’ and Ar-Raghib Al-Asbhaniyy in his book Mufradatu-l- Qur’an 2

. Ibn Athir said,

“Îbadah in the language is the obedience with the submission.” Also, Al-Fayyumiyy, one

of the famous linguists said in Al-Misbah3:

وهي النقياد والخضوع

“...it is the submission and the humility.”

Hence, to refute the Wahhabiyy, you must understand firmly that worship is not merely

calling upon someone- whether alive or dead- nor merely seeking help from someone

other than Allah, nor fearing someone, nor being hopeful of something from someone,

nor merely glorifying someone, nor merely going to the grave of a waliyy to seek

blessings, just as it is not merely prostrating or merely seeking refuge. Nor is it worship

to request something from someone in an unusual way, because when the Children of

Israel were searching for the body of Prophet Yusuf, a woman requested from Prophet

Musa that she would be his companion in Paradise, and she did not request that from

Allah. Had she done an act of shirk, Musa, the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, would have

clarified that.

None of these matters in themselves are applicable to the meaning of îbadah according

to the linguists, as you have just seen. The Wahhabiyys use all of these matters to

wrongfully define worship, and then accuse the Muslims of worshipping someone other

than Allah. What we have presented as the definition of îbadah is what is linguistically

confirmed, what is normal (ûrf), and in compliance with what came in the Religion.

Take, for example, a person who goes to the grave of his dead parent, falls to his knees

crying, and says, “O Father!” It is not normally thought that this person has worshipped

his dead parent, except by a Wahhabiyy, because to him, calling a dead person is

1 :(172/ 3) العرب لسان

والتذلل الخضوع العبودية وأصل والعبدية؛ والعبودية العبودة بين عبد فالن : ويقال 2 (:241/ 2) القرآن غريب في المفردات

إال تعبدوا أال : قال ولهذا تعالى، هللا وهو اإلفضال، غاية له من إال يستحقها وال التذلل، غاية ألنها منها، أبلغ والعبادة التذلل، إظهار: العبودية

إياه 3 (383 ص/ 1 ج) - الكبير الشرح غريب في المنير المصباح

Al-KAYFIYYAH



forbidden and is worship of the dead. According to him, whoever says, “O, Prophet

Muhammad,” has blasphemed for calling upon someone who has died, although it came

in the Tashahhud for the Prayer:

لم عليك أي ها النبي الس“Peace be upon you, O Prophet.”

Then according to the Wahhabiyyah, the Four Imams, Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafi^iyy

and Ahmad are all mushriks for confirming this as part of the Prayer after the Prophet’s

death, as well as the Companions who passed them on to the people after them, like Ibn

Abbas and Ibn Mas^ud. Not only is this calling on the Prophet after his death, but it is

part of the Prayer. Despite that, the Companions and the imams did not say it is

forbidden, let alone shirk.

TAWASSUL

Tawassul linguistically means: “to seek a means”. Allah said in His Book:

يل )> ليه الوس <(وابتغوا ا

<Seek the means to Him>.

This means seek everything that grants you a higher status to Allah, and by that, Allah

will make the results of those means manifest for you, and Allah has the power to make

them manifest without those means. This verse is not restricted, and therefore it is not

valid for a Wahhabiyy to restrict it to particular conditions that he believes in, as will be

made clear. It means to take advantage of the means, and Allah will manifest for you the

results you seek. Technically, tawassul is to seek from Allah the occurrence of a benefit

or the repulsion of harm by mentioning the name of a Prophet or a waliyy, out of honor

of the one by whom the tawassul is made. An example is what Al-Bayhaqiyy narrates in

Dala’il An-Nubuwwah:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



ا اق ت رف آدم الخطيئة د لما غفرت لي: ، قال لم يا رب أسألك بحق محم

“When Adam committed the sin, he said, ‘O my Lord, I ask you by the status of

Muhammad to forgive me’…” As is clear, this is part of the Religion, and far from

deviance, blasphemy or shirk.

Our answer to the Wahhabiyy who asks, “Why make tawassul? Cannot Allah grant you

what you seek without that?” is, “Yes, but He made tawassul an optional resort. There is

nothing wrong with it, and in fact it is beneficial and helpful.” Allah made the matters of

life based on reasons and consequences, although He has the power to grant us reward

without us doing any deeds.

An-Nasafiyy said in his Tafsir:

قرب إلى اإلجابةأ تقديم الوسيلة قبل طلب الحاجة ا

“Advancing the good deeds and offerings before seeking the need makes it more likely

for one to be answered.” Allah made the tawassul by the Prophets and waliyys during

their lives and after their deaths a means for the manifestation of what we seek. We ask

Allah by them, hoping that we would get what we asked for. We say, “O Allah, we

certainly ask You by the status or honor of the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص to fulfill our

need or to relieve us of our calamity.” We also say, “O Allah, we ask you by the status of

ˆAbdi-l-Qadir Al-Jaylaniyy…” and the like. It is not a condition to say, “by the status of”.

One can say, “I ask you by Muhammad,” as will be seen. This is permissible and has only

been made forbidden by the Wahhabiyyah, thus they have deviated from Ahlu-s-Sunnah.

There is no real evidence that tawassul by the Prophets and the Waliyys is forbidden,

whether that was done in their absence or after their deaths. The Wahhabiyyah have

claimed that this is shirk, unless some conditions are fulfilled: that it is done in their

presence during their lives, but the Prophet said:

كل شرط ليس في كتاب الله ف هو باطل، وإن كان مائة شرط

Al-KAYFIYYAH



“Every condition that is not in the Book of Allah is invalid, even if it were 100

conditions.” The condition of being alive and present is a fabrication, as we will prove by

first referring to “The Hadith of the Blind Man (Hadithu-l-Aˆma)”. This hadith perfectly

discredits the claims of the Wahhabiyyah on every level; that making tawassul or calling

upon someone is only permissible if that one were alive and present, or else it is skirk:

1. Within it is evidence that calling on someone is not worship, because the blind

man was personally ordered by the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص to call upon the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص,

who would never order someone to worship him. The Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said to him:

ائت الميضأة فتوضأ وصل ركعتين ثم قل اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبينا

محمد

نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي في حاجتي لتقضي لي

“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray two rakˆahs, then say, ‘O Allah, I

surely ask you, and direct myself to You by our Prophet, Muhammad, the

Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself by you to my Lord in my time

of need so that my need would be fulfilled’.”

2. There is also proof that calling upon someone in his absence is permissible,

because the blindman, obeying the Prophet, went away from the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

when he called upon him, as proven by the saying of Ibn Hunayf, the Companion

who narrated the hadith:

نه لم يكن به ضر قطقال أفوهللا ما تفرقنا ول طال بنا المجلس حتى دخل علينا الرجل كا

“I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the session been long, when the

man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.” This means that he went

away from the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, as the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص ordered him, said the

supplication that contains calling on the Prophet, and then came back.

3. There is also proof that calling upon someone after his death is not worship,

because the Companions continued to teach this supplication after the Prophet’s

death ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, as ˆUthman Ibn Hunayf did. Also, the hadith scholars continued to

Al-KAYFIYYAH



narrate this supplication without forbidding the people from applying it after the

death of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص.

Here is the hadith in its entirety as narrated by At-Tabaraniyy in his two books Al-

Muˆjam Al-Kabir and Al-Muˆjam As-Saghir:

ن رجال كان يختلف إلى عثمان بن عفان رضي هللا عنه في حاجة له فكان عثمان ل يلتفت إليه : عن عثمان بن حنيف أا

ثم صل أة فتوضا

أركعتين ثم قل اللهم إني ول ينظر في حاجته فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فشكا إليه ذلك فقال ائت الميضا

روح أتوجه بك إلى ربي في حاجتي لتقضي لي ثم رح حتى ا

أتوجه إليك بنبينا محمد نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني ا

ألك وا

أساأا

جلسه على أدخله على عثمان بن عفان فا

أخذ بيده فا

أتى باب عثمان فجاء البواب فا

أمعك فانطلق الرجل ففعل ما قال ثم ا

له حاجته فقضا له حاجته و قال ما ذكرت حاجتك حتى كانت هذه الساعة ثم خرج طنفسته فقال ما حاجتك؟ فذكرمن عنده فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فقال جزاك هللا خيرا ما كان ينظر في حاجتي ول يلتفت إلي حتى كلمته في فقال

تاه ضرير فشأكا عليه ذهاب بصره عثمان بن حنيف وهللا ما كلمته ولكن شهدت رسول هللا صلى هللا عليه و سلم وقد ا

:فقال

إن شئت صبرت و إن شئت دعوت لك :فقال يا رسول هللا إنه شق علي ذهاب بصري و إنه ليس لي قائد فقال

ائت الميضأة فتوضأ وصل ركعتين ثم قل هؤالء الكلمات نه لم يكن ب

أه ضر قطففعل الرجل ما قال فوهللا ما تفرقنا ول طال بنا المجلس حتى دخل علينا الرجل كا

A man used to go back and forth to Ûthman Ibn Âffan, may Allah accept his

deeds, because of an issue that he needed fulfilled. Ûthman did not look into his

issue. This man met Ûthman Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about that. So

Ûthman Ibn Hunayf said to him, “Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray

two rakâhs, and then say, ‘O Allah, I surely ask You, and direct myself to You by

our Prophet, Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself to

my Lord by you in my time of need so that my need would be fulfilled,’ then come

to me so that I would go with you.” The man left and did as he said, but then went

directly to the door of Ûthman. The doorman came, took him by the hand and

took him in to see Ûthman Ibn Âffan. He sat him on his carpet and said, “What

is it that you need?” So he told him about his need, and Ûthman fulfilled his need

for him and said, “I did not remember your need until this moment.” Then the

man left Ûthman, met with Ûthman Ibn Hunayf and said, “May Allah

compensate you. He would not look into my need until you spoke to him about

me.” Ûthman said, “I swear by Allah, I did not speak to him, however, I

Al-KAYFIYYAH



witnessed the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص when a blind man came to him and

complained about the loss of his sight. He said to the blind man:

“If you want, you will be patient, and if you want, I will make supplication for

you.”

The man said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, The loss of my sight has surely been a

hardship on me, and I certainly have no one to guide me.’ So he said to the blind

man:

“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, then say these words…”

The man did as he said, and I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the

session been long, when the man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.

Ibn Taymiyah was the first to prohibit making tawassul by the Prophet, as mentioned by

Taqiyyu-d-Din As-Subkiyy, in his book Shifa’u-s-Saqam. He said:

Know that it is permissible and good to make tawassul, to seek help (istiˆanah),

and to seek intercession (tashaffuˆ) by the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص to one’s Lord, the

glorified and exalted. The permissibility and goodness of that is known by every

religious person. It is known by the doings of the Prophets and Messengers, and

the biographies of the righteous Salaf, and no one has denied that from any

religion, and the denial of it was never heard of at any time in history until Ibn

Taymiyah came and spoke about it with speech by which he fooled those who are

weak and inexperienced. He innovated what was not preceded before him at any

time in history.”

It is permissible to make tawassul by what is attributed with life and what is not attributed

with life. Allah said:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



لة)} ب والصذ تعينوا بلصذ 1{(واس

<Seek help through patience and prayer>.

A Wahhabiyy’s blindness will make him unable to see the evidence in this verse that

Commands us to seek help from other than Allah. The validity of tawassul by the

Prophets and the pious, and by what is alive and what is not alive, is the well-known,

aforementioned hadith narrated from the route of Abu Saˆid Al-Khudriyy:

ائلين عليك وبحق ممشاي ه لة فقال اللهم إني أسألك بحق الس ذا إذا خرج الرجل من بيته إلى الص

“If someone left his house to go to the prayer and he said, “O Allah, surely I ask You

by the right of those who ask You, and by the right of this walking of mine…”.”

The Prophets and the pious are among those who ask Allah, so it is lawful to make

tawassul by them; this hadith promotes the meaning: “I ask You by the right of the

Prophets”, or “by the right of the waliyys”. “By the right of” means, “I ask you by the

status that those have with You”.

Furthermore, those people have a higher status to Allah than the status of the walking, so

if it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the walking to the prayer- which is

not something living-, it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the Prophets and

the pious people, whether living or not living. We have already presented the tawassul of

Adam by the Prophet as an example:

ا اق ت رف آدم الخطيئة، د لما غفرت لي: قال لم يا رب أسألك بحق محم

“When Adam committed the sin, he said, ‘O my Lord, I ask you by the status of

Muhammad to forgive me’…” If making tawassul by someone who is not alive is shirk,

then according to the Wahhabiyys, Adam, the father of men, along with the Four Imams,

is a mushrik, because he made tawassul by the Prophet before the Prophet was created.

Let us see what other names will join this list of people that the Wahhabiyyah consider

mushriks.

1 Al-Baqarah, 45

Al-KAYFIYYAH



EXTRA DETAIL:

“The Tawassul of Ûmar by Al-Âbbas”

If they say, “Ûmar Ibn Al-Khattab made tawassul by Al-Âbbas after the Prophet’s

death; does that not prove that it is forbidden to made tawassul by him after his death,

since Ûmar would not leave out doing what is best had it been permissible?” The

answer is that Ûmar did not leave out tawassul by the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص because he died.

Rather, had the Wahhabiyy understood the text at all, he would have never asked the

question, because the answer for his question is contained in the story; Al-Âbbas gave

the reason for why they made tawassul by him when he said:

اللهم إن القوم توجهوا بي إليك لمكاني من نبيك

“O Allah, certainly the people have directed themselves by me to You because of my

status to your Prophet.1” He did not say, “They directed themselves by me to You

because Your Prophet has died.” Thus, Ûmar did so out of observing the status of the

relatives (Al) of the Prophet. This incident is narrated by Az-Zubayr Ibn Bakkar.

Furthermore, leaving out something is not evidence that it is forbidden, as confirmed in

the books of the Foundations of Fiqh. The Prophet left out many permissible things, and

that is not evidence that they are forbidden. Ûmar wanted to clarify the permissibility of

making tawassul by other than the Prophet, and that is why Ibn Hajar said after

narrating this story, “Among the benefits taken from the story of Al-Âbbas is the

recommendation of seeking intercession by the people of goodness, piety, and the family

of the Prophet (Ahlu-l-Bayt).” No one said that this story proves that tawassul by the

Prophet after his death is forbidden.

***

1414 ص/ 21 ج) - البخاري صحيح شرح القاري عمدة 437 ص/ 1 ج) - حجر ابن - الباري فتح ,( ص/ 12 ج) - دمشق تاريخ ,(

328)

Al-KAYFIYYAH



CALLING AND SEEKING HELP (ISTIGHATHAH) IS

NOT WORSHIP

To refute a Wahhabiyy in this issue, you must memorize the proof and not be intimidated

by his spooky talk of grave worshippers. One proof that calling is not worship, whether

the called one were alive or dead, present or absent, is the aforementioned hadith of the

blind man. Take a few more references:

Among what proves that calling the dead is not blasphemy is the story of Prophet

Ibrahim and the revival of the dead birds1:

ي >> براهمي رب أرن كيف تذ قال ا

الموت قال أولم تؤمن قال بىل ولكن ليطمئذ قليب قال فخذ وا

ليك ثذ اجعل عىل ك جبل مهننذ جزءا ثذ ادعهنذ يأتينك هنذ ا ري فرص أربعة من الطذ سعيا واعل أنذ اللذ

<<ز حكمي عزي

<When Abraham said, “O my Lord, show me how You revive the dead.” God said, “You

already believe.” He said, “Indeed, but so that my heart will be more firm.” God commanded

him: “Take four birds, dismember them and distribute their pieces on different mountains,

then call them, and they will come to you (reconstructed and revived).”>

To this the Wahhabiyy will laugh and say that we are being silly, but for us, he is being

silly, because calling on the dead is calling on the dead- human or not. And why would

calling on someone who originally has a mind and speech be worse than calling on a dead

thing that when living has no mind or speech? He is the one who made an inconsistent

rule, not us.

Among what proves the validity of calling upon other than Allah without worshipping

that one, even if he were absent, is what was narrated by Al-Bazzar from the route of Ibn

ˆAbbas:

1 Al-Baqarah, 260

Al-KAYFIYYAH



حدكم أصاب ا

أرض سوى الحفظة يك تبون ما يسقط من ورق الشجر فإذا ا

أإن هلل مالئكة فى ال

رض أعينوا عباد هللاعرجة با

أفالة فليناد ا

“Surely, Allah has angels who roam the earth, other than the angels who record the

deeds. They document the leaves that fall to the ground. So if one of you were in an open

land and was inflicted with a difficulty, let him call out, “Help, O slaves of Allah.” So

along with Prophet Adam and the Four Imams, Ibn Abbas is a mushrik according to them,

for encouraging seeking help from those who are not present (how would one know those

angels are present?). Hafidh Al-Haythamiyy said that At-Tabaraniyy narrated this hadith

and its narrators are trustworthy. Ibn Hajar also narrated this hadith in his sessions of

dictation (amali) as a hadith of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص (marfuˆ), and he judged it as hasan. The

different narrations of this hadith support each other, and strengthen whatever weakness

exists in some of the narrations.

It is also documented by the scholars of hadith, like Al-Bayhaqiyy in Al-Madkhal, that

weak narrations can be used for doing good acts, supplications, and interpretation of the

Qur’an, and this was already addressed in this book previously, when we produced Ibn

Taymiyah’s approval of what he and his followers consider shirk (because Ibn Taymiyah

contradicting himself is nothing strange). In his book Al-Kalimu-t-Tayyib, his quote is:

كنا عند عبد هللا بن عمر رضي هللا عنهما، فخدرت رجله فقال له : عن الهيثم بن حنش قالحب الناس إليك، فقال: رجل

أنما نشط من عقال: اذكر ا

أيا محمد، فكا

“From Al-Haytham Ibn Hanash that he said, ‘We were with ˆAbdullah Ibn ˆUmar, may

Allah accept his and his father’s deeds, when his leg was inflicted with the ‘khadar’. A

man said to him, ‘Mention the most beloved of people to you’, and so he said, ‘Ya

Muhammad’, and it was as if he was untied from a knot’.”

So is Ibn Taymiyah a mushrik or not, O Wahhabiyy? Rather, the Wahhabiyy will make

every excuse for Ibn Taymiyah for what he has done here, and accuse anyone else who

does the exact same thing of shirk.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



1. If the Wahhabiyy says that the hadith is weak, we tell him that is beside the point;

Ibn Taymiyah considered it a good practice, weak or not, and even if it were

weak, weak narrations can still be used for doing good deeds.

2. If he says that what is meant in the hadith is that Ibn Ûmar wanted to conjure up

the remembrance of the Prophet in his heart, not to call on the Prophet, we tell

him that it says “Ya Muhammad,” which is calling. What grammarian said that

saying “Ya So and So” is not calling if one wanted to conjure up the

remembrance of another in one’s heart? Are you actually a sane person who

accepts this excuse? And how come it was only Ibn Ûmar who meant to conjure

up the Prophet in his heart, and anyone else who says the exact same words after

the Prophet’s death is a mushrik according to you (except Ibn Taymiyah)?

3. If he says, “He was told to MENTION the most beloved person to him, so when

he said, ‘Ya Muhammad’, he was only MENTIONING the Prophet, not calling on

him.” The answer is that he said, “Ya Muhammad (O Muhammad). The fact that a

person told him to MENTION the most beloved to him is beside the point. He

called the Prophet after his death.” They play all of these word games because

they believe in Ibn Taymiyah more than they believe in the Prophet. They did not

play these word games for the sake of Ibn Ûmar, it was for the sake if Ibn

Taymiyah.

EXTRA DETAIL:

“the munada (the vocative case in Arabic)”

It is helpful to digress into the Arabic language in this issue. The ‘munada’, literally:

‘the called one’, and grammatically: ‘the vocative case’, is in essence a direct object

(mafûl bih). This is because had one said, “يا عبد هللا (O Âbdallah)”, it is as if he said

(’O‘ يا) is omitted, and the particle (’I call‘ أدعو) The verb ”.(I call Âbdallah) أدعو عبد هللا“

took its place.

There are a number of particles used for it: Its most famous is (يا ‘Ya’), like ‘Ya Zayd (O,

Zayd)’. With it, you can call the close and the far, the one who is present and the one who

Al-KAYFIYYAH



is not present. Among them is (أ ‘A’), like: ‘AZayd!’; ‘O Zayd!’, if he is close, and there

are others. Al-Haririyy said1:

ي وإن شئت هي أا او همزة او ا يا

أ وناد من تدعو بيا او با

“Call whomever you want to call by (using) ‘ya (ا ا) aya‘ ,’(ي ي ay‘ ,(ا ) by using a Hamzah ,’(اأ

ي ) ”.(هيا) ’and if you want, then by using ‘haya ,’(اأ

It has many cases and branches. One of those branches is the special munada named “al-

mustaghathu bih (one whose help is sought).” In his grammar book, the explanation of

Qatru-n-Nada, Ibn Hisham, may Allah have mercy upon him, defined this specific

munada as:

ة او يعين على دفع مشقةوهو كل اسم نودي ليخلص من شد

‘Every name that is called (out) for being relieved of something harsh, or for assistance

in repelling difficulty.” The only particle used for this type is (يا “ya”), which means, ‘O’,

and it has details that are not directly related to this discussion. Therefore, for the

Wahhabiyys to say that Ibn Taymiyah did not approve of “calling on the dead” as they

would call it, or “seeking help (isthighathah) from the dead” is a lie.

***

Among the evidence of tawassul by the Prophet and others, using them as a means for the

supplication to be answered, whether during their lives or after their deaths, is what was

narrated by Hafidh Abu Bakr Al-Bayhaqiyy with his chain of narration mentioned in the

Arabic text:

بيهقي حافظ ابو بكر ال

: قال ال

فارسي قال

، : اخبرنا ابو نصر بن قتادة وابو بكر ال بو عمرو بن مطر

أحدثنا ا

ع ثنا ابو معاوية، عن ال ى، حد ى بن يحي ثنا يحي ، حد هلي ثنا إبراهيم بن علي الذ

ح مش، عن ابي صال حد

ه عليه : قال الدار عن مالك ى الل صل بي ى قبر الن

اب فجاء رجل إل خط

صاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر بن ال

أا

م فقال هم قد هلكوا: وسل تك فإن م ه ل ه استسق الل يا رسول الل

1 Mulhatu-l-Iˆrab

Al-KAYFIYYAH



م في المنام فقال ه عليه وسل ى الل ه صل نهم مسقون، ائ: فاتاه رسول اللأقره مني السالم واخبره ا

أت عمر فا

كيس .وقل له عليك بالكيس ال

جل فاخبر عمر فقال ما عجزت عنه : فاتى الرلوا إل

يا رب ما ا

From the route of Malik Ad-Dar, that the people were inflicted with a drought1 at

the time of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, and so a man came to the grave of the Prophet

and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, seek the rain for your nation, for certainly they

are perishing!’ Then, the Messenger of Allah came to him in the dream and said,

‘Go to Ûmar and pass the salam to him from me and inform him that they will be

irrigated, and say to him, ‘Endeavor, endeavor’. And so the man and informed

Ûmar, and so Ûmar said, ‘O my Lord, I do not fall short except in what I am

unable to do.’

Hafidh Ibn Kathir, who is trustworthy to them, narrated this and said immediately

afterwards:

وهذا إسناد صحيح

“This is an authentic chain of narration.” The confirmation of that person who went to the

grave being the Companion, Bilal Ibn Al-Harith is found in another version of the story,

also narrated by Ibn Kathir:

مزني حارث وهو بالل ب -فاخبرهم بقول ال

م يفطن -ن ال

ففطنوا ول

واما استبطاك في الستسقاء فاستسق بنا: فقال إن

“…And so Ûmar informed them about what Al-Muzaniyy said-and he is Bilal Ibn Al-

Harith-and they understood and he did not understand. They said, ‘He is only considering

that you have been slow in performing the prayer for seeking rain (al-istisqa’), so lead us

in the prayer of seeking the rain.’…”

1 The drought lasted six months.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



So how do the Wahhabiyys play with this narration?

1. If the Wahhabiyy lies and claims that the hadith is weak, we have produced Ibn

Kathir’s authentication of the hadith, and he is reliable to them.

2. If they say that there is no evidence in dreams, we tell them that that is beside the

point. The evidence is not in the dream, it is in the doing of the Companion while

no one objected to him.

3. If they say their silence to his deed was the proof that they objected to it, we tell

them, “You claim to follow the Salaf, so stop talking; do like them and be silent.”

We also tell them that objecting to the deed is by speaking up, not being silent.

The Messenger of Allah said:

من رأى منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده فإن لم يستطع فبلسانه فإن لم يستطع فبقلبه

“Any one of you who saw something forbidden, then let him change it by his

hand. If unable, then by his tongue. If unable, then with his heart (he must hate

it)…1”


Al-KAYFIYYAH



THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE ABSENT OR

DEAD

The Wahhabiyys said that it is not permissible to call someone who is not alive or is

absent, because they do not hear, so this is why the person commits shirk in their claim;

he must have believed in the godhood of the dead or absent one to think that he (the dead

or absent) can hear him (the living) and then help him. We say that this is a claim that

has no evidence, and in fact is against the evidence. Ibn ˆAbbas narrated:

جال وأرحام قام إب راهيم على الحجر ف قال يا أي ها الناس كتب عليكم الحج فأسمع من في أصلب الر

يك النساء فأجابه من آمن ومن كان سبق في علم الله أنه يحج إلى يك اللهم لب ي وم القيامة لب

“Ibrahim stood upon the stone and said, ‘O people, Hajj has been made obligatory upon

you!’ He made those who were in the spines of the men (as seminal fluid) and the wombs

of the women hear, and whoever was to believe and whoever was eternally known by

Allah that he would perform the Hajj until Judgment Day responded, ‘labbayka-

llahumma, labbayk!’.” In some narrations, it is mentioned that he made everyone in the

heavens and earth hear him. So according to the Wahhabiyyah, along with Adam and Ibn

^Abbas and the Four Imams, Prophet Ibrahim is a mushrik. If the Wahhabiyy says, “He

was a Prophet,” we say, “Then you are going back on your invalid rule, that those who

are not alive or who are far cannot hear. You did not say, ‘Unless the one who calls them

is a Prophet’, nor do you believe that, because you misinterpret the verse that we will

clarify:

ذك ل تسمع الموت )> ن1<(ا

<O Muhammad, you cannot make the dead hear>.”

So we pose the question wanting only a “yes-or-no” answer: is it a condition that the one

who hears be alive and present? He must say no. If he says, “Not if the caller is a 1 An-Naml, 80

Al-KAYFIYYAH



Prophet,” we object because statements without evidence are not accepted in our

Religion: It is confirmed that Ûmar, who is not a Prophet, was in Al-Madinah giving a

speech, then interrupted himself to call out to Sariyah, the commander of the army in

Persia, “Sariyah, take the mountain, take the mountain!” Later, the messenger of the army

told of how the enemy had prepared an ambush, and then they heard Ûmar’s voice

saying to take the mountain, so they took the mountain as cover and avoided the ambush.

This is narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy in Al-Iˆtiqad, and by others, and is very famous. The

Imams use it as evidence for the karamahs of the Waliyys. Most likely, the Wahhabiyy

will deny this story- without evidence, of course- because he would rather adhere to his

empty, false beliefs than submit to religious evidence. So if calling someone depends on

him being alive and present, or else it is shirk, then to the Wahhabiyys, along with Adam,

Ibn Abbas, the Four Imams and Ibrahim the Messenger of Allah, Ûmar is a mushrik.

As for the dead hearing, we confirm this because we believe in the life of the Barzakh;

the life in the grave. When the person is buried, his soul returns to him, and he returns to

consciousness, but in a different state than the people who did not lose their souls yet. He

remains like that until his body decays, if his body is among those that decay. For

example, there is the hadith of Ibn Âbbas from the Prophet:

نيا في ي عرفه كان المؤمن أخيه بقبر يمر أحد من ما ورد إالعرفه عليه ف يسلم الدلم عليه الس

“There is not one of you that passes by the grave of his fellow believer that he knew

in the dunya and gives him the salam, except that he [i.e., the dead one] would know

him and return his salam.” This hadith was narrated by Ibn Âbdul-Barr and Âbdul-

Haqq Al-Ishbiliyy, and he deemed it as authentic. Also, Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim

narrated from the route of Anas from the Prophet that he said:

إذا نعالهم ق رع ليسمع وإنه أصحابه عنه وت ولى ق بره في وضع إذا العبد إن انصرفوا

Al-KAYFIYYAH



“Certainly, the slave, if he is put in his grave, and his companions turn away from

him, he will surely hear the steps of their sandals as they leave…”

As for the saying of Allah that the Wahhabiyys always use:

ذك ل تسمع الموت )> ن1<(ا

<O Muhammad, you cannot make the dead hear>,

it likens the blasphemers to the dead, as proven by the fact that the Prophet was calling

living people to Islam, not dead people. It does not mean that the dead cannot hear,

because there are several pieces of evidence proving that the dead do hear, like what was

just mentioned, as well as the belief in the questioning of the Angels Munkar and Nakir.

They ask the dead people, and the dead people answer them. There is also the the incident

when the Prophet said to the casualties of the Battle of Badr:

وجدتم ما وعد ربكم حقا؟

“Have you found what your Lord promised you to be true?” It was then said to the

Prophet, “O Messenger of Allah, do you call the dead?” He responded:

هم ، ولكن ال يجيبون ما أن تم بأسمع من

“You do not hear better than they do, however, they do not answer.”2

You should know that the Prophets are alive in their graves and their bodies do not decay.

It was narrated in the hadith of Anas from the Prophet,

يصلون قبورهم في أحياء األنبياء “The Prophets are alive in their graves praying.” Al-Bayhaqiyy deemed it authentic and

the Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaniyy agreed with him. You should also know that the

Wahhabiyy conviction about the Prophet is that he loses his status after death, and for that

1 An-Naml, 80

2 Al-Bukhariyy

Al-KAYFIYYAH



reason many of them bad-mouth the Prophet and call him a corpse, or say that a stick is

more useful than he is because he has died. They would never dare to say something like

that about Ibn Taymiyah.

HANGING WRITTEN WORDS AROUND ONE’S NECK

FOR PROTECTION (AL-HIRZ)

Wearing the ‘hirz’, also called the ‘hijab’ and the ‘ta^widh’, which is a paper or the like

on which Qur’an and supplications are written for protection against harm, is religiously

substantiated. It is not kufr (blasphemy) or shirk (worship of other than Allah). The

Religious evidence has priority over all opinions. At-Tirmidhiyy narrates the hadith:

إذا فرغ أن رسول هللا صلى هللا عليه و سلم قال : عن عمرو بن شعيب عن أبيه عن جده

أحدكم في النوم فليقل أعوذ بكلمات هللا التامات من غضبه وعقابه وشر عباده ومن

قال وكان عبد هللا بن عمرو يعلمها من بلغ همزات الشيطان وأن يحضرون فإنها لن تضره

كتبها في صك ثم علقها في عنقه من ولده ومن لم يبلغ منهم قال أبو عيسى هذا حديث حسن غريب

From the route of Âmr Ibn Shuâyb, from his father, from his grandfather: The

Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said, “If one of you wakes up frightened, then let him

say, ‘I seek refuge with the perfect Words of Allah, from His wrath and His

punishment, the evil of His slaves, from the whispers of the devil, and that the

devil will approach me on my death-bed’,” and Âbdullah Ibn Âmr used to teach

it to his pubescent children, and whoever did not reach puberty among his

children, he wrote it and hung it on their necks.

At-Tirmidhiyy said, “This hadith is “hasan gharib,” which means the hadith is reliable.

“Gharib” means that it was narrated through one route. An ignorant Wahhabiyy might

think he is saying that the hadith is strange. May Allah protect you from a deviant who

tries to fool you by telling you, “This means the hadith is strange.”

Al-Albaniyy’s weakening this hadith is weightless, because he is not qualified to grade

any hadith, as we already touched upon. He is not a hafidh of hadith, or even a

Al-KAYFIYYAH



muhaddith. In fact, he is not a hadith scholar, and not even a ‘musnid’, contrary to what

those who follow him and need his opinions for their beliefs would say. Here are some

references from the old scholars and imams; from the Salaf and beyond. In Al-Majmuˆ,

the explanation of al-Muhadhdhab, An-Nawawiyy said:

الح )وقال ...التعاويذ يعنون الحروز قال القاضي حسين وغيره يكره للمحدث حمل في ( أبو عمرو بن الص

جال ويجعل ع بيان والر ليها شمع ونحوه فتوى أخرى يجوز تعليق الحروز التي فيها قرآن على النساء والص

شمع ونحوه نساء وشبههن بالتحذير من دخول الخالء بها والمختار أنه ال يكره إذا جعل عليه ويستوثق من ال

الك ال بأس بما يعلق على النساء ألنه لم يرد فيه نهي ونقل ابن جرير الطبري عن مالك نحو هذا فقال قال م

بيان من القرآن إذا جعل في كن كقصبة حديد أو جلد يخرز عليه وقد يستدل لالباحة بحديث الحيض والص

عل صلى هللا ه أن رسول هللا كان يعلمهم من الفزع كلمات أعوذ )يه وسلم عمروبن شعيب عن أبيه عن جد

ياطين أن يحضرون ة من غضبه وشر عباده ومن همزات الش التام بن عمرو ( بكلمات هللا قال وكان عبد هللا

:رواه أبو داود والترمذي وقال حديث حسن ( نيه ومن لم يعقل كتبه فأعلقه عليه يعلمهن من عقل من ب

Judge Husayn and others said that it is disliked for the one who needs to make

wudu’ (muhdith) to carry the taâwidh, and they mean the hirz1…”Abu Âmr

Ibnus-Salah said in another fatwa (religious answer) that it is permissible to

hang the hirz, which has in it Qur’an, on the women, children and men. Some wax

or the like would be used to seal it. The women and their likes are discouraged

from entering the bathroom with it. What is preferred is that it is not disliked if it

were sealed with wax or the like, because there was no prohibition narrated about

it. Ibn Jarir At-Tabariyy transmitted from Malik what is similar to this. He said:

Malik said that there is no problem about the Qur’an being hung on the

menstruating women and the children… Evidence that this is permissible is the

hadith of Âmr Ibn Shuâyb, from his father, from his grandfather:

ن ) باد ه كان يعل مهم م ن غضب ه وشر ع الفزع كل مات أعوذ ب كل مات هللا التامة م ين أن يحضرون ن همزات الشياط مهن من ( وم قال وكان عبد هللا بن عمرو يعل

ن بن يه ومن لم يعق ل كتبه فأع (لقه عليه عقل م

“The Messenger of Allah used to teach them words for waking up from a

nightmare: "I seek refuge with the perfect Words of Allah, from His wrath, the

evil of His slaves, from the whispers of the devils, and that the devil will approach

1 I.e., it is not forbidden, let alone an act of worshipping other than Allah or any other

type of blasphemy.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



me on my deathbed", and Âbdullah Ibn Âmr used to teach them to whoever had

mental discrimination among his children, and whoever did not reach mental

discrimination, he wrote it down and hung it on their necks." This is narrated by

Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhiyy, who said the hadith is hasan (strong, reliable).

Here, An-Nawawiyy, At-Tirmidhiyy, Judge Husayn (a high ranking Shafiîyy scholar,

nicknamed ‘Habrul-Ummah [the scholar of the nation]’), Ibnus-Salah (the fore-runner of

the science of hadith terminology, a strong scholar, and a high ranking waliyy from the

Salaf), At-Tabariyy (who is a mujtahid, hafidh of hadith and Qur’an interpreter from the

Salaf), Malik (who needs no introduction), the Companion Âbdullah Ibn Âmr, and

others, all validated this practice of wearing the hirz. These are among the biggest

scholars; much, much bigger than Al-Albaniyy, who is not truly a scholar, and over a

thousand years earlier. They definitely know better about what is shirk and what is not

shirk than Al-Albaniyy. However, we have alreadyestablished in the beginning of the

book that they believe that the majority of the nation believes in kufr.

And what do those people who believe that this issue is blasphemy and shirk say about

Malik? Is he a blaspheming non-Muslim to them? He is one of the most fundamental

imams of the nation. They would never dare to say that he is a blasphemer, although they

might believe it, and although they would say it about others for the same reason.

As for the Tama’im (talismans) that the Prophet said are shirk, these are things from the

Jahiliyyah (Era of Ignorance). They are not the same as the hirz; they do not have the

same ruling in our Religion. This is what was established by Ahlus-Sunnah and

understood from the hadith centuries before people misunderstood the case and mixed the

two issues. Those people from the Era of Ignorance believed that those talismans created

benefit, and this is blasphemy. The hirz does not create anything. It is hoped that Allah

will create the benefit by it.

If someone asks, “Why rely on these written words? Rely on Allah. Can Allah protect

you without these words?” The answer is that wearing the hirz is another example of

seeking a reason (sabab) to get what you want (which is the protection), like drinking

water for quenching the thirst, or taking medicine seeking cure. A person should not

Al-KAYFIYYAH



believe that these reasons create anything, or that they benefit without the power and

creating of Allah. To believe these words create benefit is shirk, because Allah is the only

Creator. The benefit of wearing them is that one hopes that Allah will create the benefits

by them, and not that they create anything. Allah is the only Creator.

Therefore, it is valid for us to also ask them, “Why do you drink water and not merely

rely on Allah? Do you believe that the water creates? Can Allah relieve that thirst without

water? And why do you have a lock on your door? And why do you take medicine? And

why do you recite words for protection? Do you believe that these creations benefit

without the power of Allah? Cannot Allah create the cure without the medicine, and the

protection without the lock, etc?” Even reciting the words of protection with the tongue is

done with the same reasoning- that one HOPES that Allah will protect him by those

uttered words. Those uttered words do not create. Likewise, the Muslims are innocent of

shirk or believing in a creator other than Allah when wearing a hirz. If drinking water,

taking medicine, using a lock and uttering words do not make a person fall into shirk,

then also wearing written words would not make a person fall into shirk.

So again, the tama’im mentioned in the hadith are not the same as the hirz. They are the

practice of the Jahiliyyah. The people from the jahiliyyah used to believe that they create-

not that Allah creates- just like they used to worship the idols and believe that sicknesses

were contagious by themselves, not by the creating of Allah. Those who used the hadiths

that mentioned the tama’im to forbid the hirz did not learn or believe about this issue

properly.

RECITING AT THE GRAVES

Those mean people also forbid the Muslims from reciting the Qur’an over the graves of

their dead. They have nothing to substantiate this but their meanness and dry character,

may Allah deform their faces. Let us give a brief, yet ample clarification of its being a

religious recommendation.

Ahlus-Sunnah have a consensus that the dead benefit from the supplication of the living

and their charities given on the behalf of the dead. An-Nasafiyy, may Allah have mercy

upon him, said in his famous document about the Muslim Creed:

Al-KAYFIYYAH



.وفي دعاء األحياء لألموات وصدقتهم عنهم نفع لهم

“The supplication of the living for the dead and the charities on their behalf is beneficial

to them (for the dead).” Muhaddith Murtada Az-Zabidiyy said in the Explanation of Al-

Ihya’ that As-Suyutiyy said in the explanation of As-Sudur,

As for reciting the Qur’an at the grave, our scholars and colleagues (meaning the

Shafiîyys) and others are definitive of its religious legitimacy. Az-Zaˆfaraniyy

said, ‘I asked Ash-Shafiîyy about reciting at the grave, and he said there is no

problem with it.’ An-Nawawiyy said in the Explanation of Al-Muhadhdhab, ‘It is

recommended for the one who visits the graves to recite what is easy for him of

the Qur’an and to make duâ’ for them after it. Ash-Shafiîyy explicitly mentioned

this and the mujtahids within the Shafiîyy school have agreed upon it.’ An-

Nawawiyy added in another place, ‘If he completes the recitation of the entire

Qur’an that would be even better.’ It is mutawatir that Ash-Shafiîyy visited the

grave of Al-Layth Ibn Saˆd and praised him a lot and recited the Qur’an from the

beginning to the end there, and he said, “I hope that this will continue to

happen,” and then the issue persisted.

Al-Qurtubiyy said, “Some of our scholars have used as evidence for the recitation of the

Qur’an over the grave the hadith of the moist stick, the one that the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص broke into

two, then he planted a half into one grave and another half into the other grave and then

he said:

لعله يخفف عنهما ما لم ييبسا“It is so that the torture will be lightened for them as long as the sticks do not dry.”

That is narrated by the Two Shaykhs. He said, “This promotes the legitimacy of planting

the trees on the graves and reciting the Qur’an, and if it is lightened for them by the

plants then how about by the recitation of the Qur’an by the believing person?” An-

Nawawiyy said, “The scholars have recommended the recitation of the Qur’an at the

grave and they considered it good by the hadith of the two sticks. They said that if the

benefit reached the dead by the tasbih (saying subhanallah) of the sticks while they were

moist, then for the dead to benefit from the recitation of the Qur’an at the grave is even

Al-KAYFIYYAH



more so valid, because the recitation of the Qur’an from a person is greater and more

beneficial than the tasbih (saying subhanallah) of a stick.

Among what testifies to the dead person benefiting from the recitation of another is the

hadith of Maˆqil Ibn Yassar that the Messenger of Allah ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص said:

اقرءوا على موتاكم

“Recite on your dead.” Abu Dawud narrated it. There is also the hadith:

اقرءوا يس على موتاكم

“Recite Yasin on your dead.” That is narrated by An-Nasa’iyy, Ibn Majah, and Ibn

Hibban. There is also the hadith:

يس ثلث القرءان ال يقرؤها رجل يريد الل والدار الخرة إال غفر له، فاقرؤها على موتاكم

“Yasin is a third of the Qur’an. No man who wants the reward from Allah and he

wants the pleasureful life of the hereafter recites it except that he would be forgiven,

and so recite it over your dead.”

Ahmad narrated it. Some of the Followers of the Companions have interpreted the

recitation over the dead to be in reference to the one who is on his deathbed, but this

explanation (ta’wil) is against the apparent meaning of the hadith, and there is no need to

make such an inference. Furthermore, it would be said that if the one on the deathbed

benefits from the recitation of Yasin although this recitation is not from his own deeds,

then the dead person would likewise benefit, because the dead person is like the present,

living person; he hears like the present living person, as confirmed in the hadith.

It was narrated from Âliyy Ibn Musa al-Haddad that he said, “I was with the Ahmad Ibn

Hambal in a funeral, and Muhmmad Ibn Qudamah al-Jawhariyy was with us. When the

dead person was buried, a blind man came reciting at the grave, and Ahmad said, “Hey

you! Certainly, reciting at the grave is an innovation. When we left from the graves,

Muhammad Ibn Qudamah said, “O Abu Âbdillah, what do you say about Mubashshir

Ibn Ismaîl al-Halabiyy?’ He (Ahmad) said, “Trustworthy. Have you copied anything

from his route?” He (Muhammad Ibn Qudamah) said, “Yes. Mubashshir Ibn Ismaîl

informed me from Âbdurahman Ibn Âla’ the son of Al-Lajlaj, from his father, that he

Al-KAYFIYYAH



made a will that when he is buried, the beginning and end of Al-Baqarah would be

recited at his grave, and I heard Ibn ˆUmar making the same will.” Then Ahmad said, Go

back to the man and tell him to recite.” This is how al-Qurtubiyy narrated it in his book

at-Tadhkirah, and Allah knows best.

Al-KAYFIYYAH



EPILOGUE

et us end with some statements given about the Wahhabiyys by the scholars in

a book called Fitnatu-l-Wahhabiyyah (the tribulation of the Wahhabiyys), by

the real Muftiy of Makkah, Shaykh Ahmad Zayniyy Dahlan. He said, “What Ibn

Âbdu-l-Wahhab’s father, brother, and shaykhs speculated about him came true by the

will of Allah, the exalted. Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab innovated deviant and misleading ways

and beliefs and managed to allure some ignorant people to follow him.” He also said, “In

an effort to give credibility to his innovations, Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab embellished his

sayings with quotes he selected from Islamic sources, that is, quotes used for proofs in

many issues, but not the issues which Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab was attempting to support.”

He also said:

Initially, the Wahhabiyys sent a group to Makkah and Al-Madinah, thinking that

through lies and fabrications, they would be able to spoil the belief of the scholars

of those two holy cities. When they arrived and declared their beliefs, the scholars

of Makkah and Al-Madinah refuted them and established the Islamic evidences

against them- which they could not refute. The scholars were certain about the

Wahhabiyys ignorance and misguidance, and found them absurd and thoughtless.

They took note of their beliefs and found them full of many types of blasphemy,

and thus the Wahhabiyys fled like frightened zebras fleeing from a lion. Hence,

after establishing the proofs, the scholars wrote an attestation against the

Wahhabiyys to the head judge of Makkah, confirming them as blasphemers

because of their beliefs.

Perhaps this is more than sufficient. If we can refute the Wahhabiyy understanding of the

aforementioned texts, then the others that they use can also be explained. This booklet

complies with the verse:

{( ة أخرجت للنذاس تأمرون بلمعروف وتهنون عن المنكر وتؤمنون بللذ كنمت خري أمذ )}1

1 Al Îmran, 110

L

Al-KAYFIYYAH



<<You are the best nation ever sent out to the people. You bid the good, forbid the evil,

and believe in Allah>>.

We thank Allah for the blessings that He gave without being obligated to give anything.

We thank Him for enabling us to know who these wicked people are and granting us the

ability to refute them. We ask Him to enable us to see the truth as truth so that we may

abide by it, and to see the evil as evil so that we may avoid it. We ask Him to grant us the

correct belief and a good understanding of it. We ask Him to let us die with belief, and

escape His torture. We ask Allah to grant us the lawful sustenance. May Allah make this

booklet beneficial in life and after death, forgive those who worked on it, spread it, make

it a shield and a weapon for the Muslims, and make it weigh heavy in the scale on the

Day of Judgment. O, Allah, we ask you by the merit and honor of Your beloved Prophet

,to answer this humble supplication ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

And Allah knows best.

Al-KAYFIYYAH


SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | GLOSSARY 195

GLOSSARY

Allah is the proper name of the Creator.

Ahlu-s-Sunnah is the group which follows

the method of the Companions of the Prophet

.ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

Al- Whether capitalized or not, represents the

definite article alif lam (ال), “the”. Because of the

idgham (merging) of the lam with 14 specific

letters (the shamsiyy letters), the definite article

will also be written throughout the text with the

following letters “At-”, “Ath-”, “Ad-”, “Adh-”,

“Ar-”, “Az-”, “As-”, “Ash-”,

“As-”, “Ad-”, “At-”, “Adh-”, and “An-”.

âqidah “creed; belief; conviction” It is the

science of belief.

âql “mind; intellect” It is the faculty given to

some creatures which enables them to

distinguish between what is valid and what is

invalid.

ârsh “throne” It is the ceiling of Paradise.

Blasphemy is the opposite of belief (kufr).

Companion refers to those who met the

Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص, believed in him, and died as

Muslims.

Fiqh is the science of the detailed practical

rules of the Religion.

Hadith refers to the narrated sayings, doings,

and approvals of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص. It is often

referred to as the Sunnah.

Hafidh refers to the top scholars of hadith

who are qualified to grade the levels of the

narrations. These scholars are higher than

muhaddiths. Someone who memorized the

Qur’an is also called a hafidh, but this does not

make him a scholar.

Ijmaˆ “consensus” It is the unanimous

agreement among the mujtahids in any era about

the judgment of a particular case. Once

established, no one has the right to later disagree.

Ijtihad is the effort put by the mujtahid to

deduce judgments not explicitly mentioned in the

Qur’an or hadith.

Jahannam is a name of Hell

Madhhab “school of practical rules” refers to

the work of scholars following a particular

mujtahid. Sometimes the word is used for other

meanings.

Muhkam (decisive) is a verse or hadith

that has only one meaning in the Arabic

language.

Mujaddid “renewer” refers to a great scholar

who would appear every century to renew the

Religion for the Muslims.

Mujtahid refers to the top scholars who

deduce judgments in case the ruling is not

explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an or Hadith.

Mushabbihah is the plural of Mushabbih,

someone who likens Allah to the creations.

Mutashabih (ambiguous) is a verse or

hadith that can have more than one meaning.

Even an Arab may not reach its true meaning.

Mushrik is someone who associates partners

with Allah.

Sahih “valid; authentic” It often refers to a

narration which fulfills the highest conditions of

authenticity.

Salaf “predecessors” It refers to the first three

centuries of Muslims. Some scholars said it only

refers to the Companions, their students, and

their students- and not the first three centuries

entirely. The first saying is the strong one.

“Salafiyy” is an adjective.

Al-KAYFIYYAH


196

Shirk is associating partners with Allah.

Sufiyy is a person who practices tasawwuf.

The true application of tasawwuf is in leaving

the mundane and worldly desires. It is not by

neglecting the obligatory prayers for optional

deeds, spinning in circles, dancing, touching

women, or belittling the status and pleasures of

Paradise.

Sunnah has many meanings. Linguistically, it

means, “a way”. Religiously, it could refer to the

hadith of the Prophet ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص; to the optional,

recommended, and rewardable matters; and to

the Prophet’s ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص practice of the Religion in

general, including the obligations.

Tafsir is the science of interpreting the

Qur’an. It may refer to the actual interpretation.

Tajsim is believing that Allah has a body.

Tawhid is the Oneness of Allah; monotheism.

This word may also be synonymous with

ˆaqidah; the science of the correct belief in Allah

and His Messenger ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص.

Ta’wil is interpreting a text to have a meaning

different from its apparent meaning.

We when referring to Allah denotes majesty,

not plurality.

how to debate with the so called salafiyyah

Spiritual