Daniel Haqiqatjou Official

Why did Rabbi Faris decide to publicly attack Uthman ibn Farooq now, after spending years collecting a long list of Uthman's "deviant violations"?

The essence of Wahhabi thought is creating arguments to takfir all non-Wahhabis, and then applying these arguments to justify attacks on Muslims who resist Wahhabi political control.

Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab claimed that all the scholars and laymen of his era were kafirs because they made theological mistakes.

He further claimed that the meaning of the shahada required identifying all kafir groups, declaring them to be kafirs, disassociating from them, and waging jihad against them.

In particular, Ibn Abd al-Wahhab waged jihad against all Muslims who did not submit to the rule of the early Saudi state that he helped establish.

Inspired by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's ideas, his followers carefully study the doctrines of every other Muslim group.

They look for any doctrine of "kufr" (i.e., any doctrine which causes a person to become a kafir).

Using this method, Wahhabis have developed arguments that the Asharis and Maturidis are kafirs. They have also developed arguments that all four legal schools are kufr.

Wahhabis claim that Asharis and Maturidis endorse kufr because they deny that Allah is physically located above the throne. It is claimed that this is kufr because it is known with certainty (ma'lum min al-din bi-darura) that Allah is physically located above the throne).

Wahhabis further claim that the four legal schools (Hanafis, Malikis, Shafiis, Hanbalis) endorse kufr, because they deny that istighatha is shirk akbar. It is claimed that this is kufr because it is known with certainty (ma'lum min al-din bi-l-darura) that istigatha is shirk akbar.

Needless to say, Wahhabis also claim that the Shia also endorse kufr (e.g., based on the argument that they believe in tahrif of the Quran, that they deny that Abu Bakr was a legitimate Caliph, etc.).

This is based on the thinking of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, who declared all the Asharis, Maturidis, followers of the four legal schools, and Shia - of this time - to be kafirs.

But here there is an important qualification.

In Islam, simply endorsing kufr does not automatically make one a kafir. If one only endorses kufr due to lack of knowledge (i.e., ignorance), one can be temporarily excused. The excuse disappears once a Muslim has received the knowledge through adequate instruction. This is known as excusing for ignorance (al-udhr bi-l-jahl).

A key characteristic of the principle of excusing for ignorance is that it can be subjective. Hence, whenever there is a Muslim who endorses kufr, one can always claim that he has already received sufficient instruction and hence should be considered a kafir and fought through jihad. Alternatively, one can always claim that he has not received sufficient instruction, and hence should not be declared a kafir and fought (yet).

This is extremely important for understanding Wahhabis. They have already collected evidence, which to their minds, proves that all non-Wahhabis endorse kufr. The only question is whether to declare them kafirs now and fight them now, or give them some more time.

It's like having a blackmail file prepared on all Muslims.

What guides Wahhabis in these decisions is political interests, rather than principles. Thus, whenever a non-Wahhabi opposes Wahhabi rule and political interests, he is declared a kafir who has received sufficient instruction. But whenever a non-Wahhabi does not oppose Wahhabis, they give him more time before declaring him a kafir.

It is on these grounds that Wahhabis declared other Arab tribes and the entire Ottoman empire kafirs for politically opposing them.

Similarly, whenever a political leader allies with a Wahhabi state (e.g., Saudi Arabia), he is not declared a kafir (e.g., MBZ, Asad). But a political leader which opposes the Wahhabi state (e.g., Saddam Husayn) is declared a kafir.

Wahhabi Dawah groups work in the same way.

www.tgoop.com/haqiqatjou/10914

4.2K viewsFeb 17 at 17:18

Why did Rabbi Faris decide to publicly attack Uthman ibn Farooq now, after spending years collecting a long list of Uthman's "deviant violations"?

The essence of Wahhabi thought is creating arguments to takfir all non-Wahhabis, and then applying these arguments to justify attacks on Muslims who resist Wahhabi political control.

Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab claimed that all the scholars and laymen of his era were kafirs because they made theological mistakes.

He further claimed that the meaning of the shahada required identifying all kafir groups, declaring them to be kafirs, disassociating from them, and waging jihad against them.

In particular, Ibn Abd al-Wahhab waged jihad against all Muslims who did not submit to the rule of the early Saudi state that he helped establish.

Inspired by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's ideas, his followers carefully study the doctrines of every other Muslim group.

They look for any doctrine of "kufr" (i.e., any doctrine which causes a person to become a kafir).

Using this method, Wahhabis have developed arguments that the Asharis and Maturidis are kafirs. They have also developed arguments that all four legal schools are kufr.

Wahhabis claim that Asharis and Maturidis endorse kufr because they deny that Allah is physically located above the throne. It is claimed that this is kufr because it is known with certainty (ma'lum min al-din bi-darura) that Allah is physically located above the throne).

Wahhabis further claim that the four legal schools (Hanafis, Malikis, Shafiis, Hanbalis) endorse kufr, because they deny that istighatha is shirk akbar. It is claimed that this is kufr because it is known with certainty (ma'lum min al-din bi-l-darura) that istigatha is shirk akbar.

Needless to say, Wahhabis also claim that the Shia also endorse kufr (e.g., based on the argument that they believe in tahrif of the Quran, that they deny that Abu Bakr was a legitimate Caliph, etc.).

This is based on the thinking of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, who declared all the Asharis, Maturidis, followers of the four legal schools, and Shia - of this time - to be kafirs.

But here there is an important qualification.

In Islam, simply endorsing kufr does not automatically make one a kafir. If one only endorses kufr due to lack of knowledge (i.e., ignorance), one can be temporarily excused. The excuse disappears once a Muslim has received the knowledge through adequate instruction. This is known as excusing for ignorance (al-udhr bi-l-jahl).

A key characteristic of the principle of excusing for ignorance is that it can be subjective. Hence, whenever there is a Muslim who endorses kufr, one can always claim that he has already received sufficient instruction and hence should be considered a kafir and fought through jihad. Alternatively, one can always claim that he has not received sufficient instruction, and hence should not be declared a kafir and fought (yet).

This is extremely important for understanding Wahhabis. They have already collected evidence, which to their minds, proves that all non-Wahhabis endorse kufr. The only question is whether to declare them kafirs now and fight them now, or give them some more time.

It's like having a blackmail file prepared on all Muslims.

What guides Wahhabis in these decisions is political interests, rather than principles. Thus, whenever a non-Wahhabi opposes Wahhabi rule and political interests, he is declared a kafir who has received sufficient instruction. But whenever a non-Wahhabi does not oppose Wahhabis, they give him more time before declaring him a kafir.

It is on these grounds that Wahhabis declared other Arab tribes and the entire Ottoman empire kafirs for politically opposing them.

Similarly, whenever a political leader allies with a Wahhabi state (e.g., Saudi Arabia), he is not declared a kafir (e.g., MBZ, Asad). But a political leader which opposes the Wahhabi state (e.g., Saddam Husayn) is declared a kafir.

Wahhabi Dawah groups work in the same way.

BY Daniel Haqiqatjou Official