Skip navigation

About This blog and Author

Prophet Muhammad (saw) said“Religion (Islam) began as a stranger. And (a time will come when) it will return to that condition as it had begun. So may the ghuraba( Strangers) be happy. They are those who will rectify the corruption & disorder that the people will create after me in my Sunnah”.   (Tirmidhi Shareef)









  1. Posted December 18, 2006 at 12:06 am | Permalink


    • nakkabi
      Posted January 30, 2011 at 12:13 am | Permalink

      Thanks good he send down the quran in Arabic. Some people read some ahadith with a lack of understanding and that because they think the have the knowledge.

      The one who used this hadith (Prophet Muhammad (saw) said“Religion (Islam) began as a stranger. And (a time will come when) it will return to that condition as it had begun. So may the ghuraba( Strangers) be happy. They are those who will rectify the corruption & disorder that the people will create after me in my Sunnah”. (Tirmidhi Shareef)

      has no idea what it means as Mohammed said you think it is on for them but it is for you

      Mohammed nasur adin Al albani is one of the people of knowledge.

    • Posted May 14, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

      As salaamu ‘alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuhu

      May Allahu ta ‘ala bless your efforts and continue to raise you to the task. Please be advised that the Al Adaab website in no longer hosted on the servers. {} Please update your links to point to Your comment on how we can make the site better are welcomed and needed.

      Ma’ salaam
      Ustadh Muhammad Sa’id Hunafa

  2. bankwahabi
    Posted February 11, 2008 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    dear brother in Islam,
    This is among the best blog to refute the deviation of wahabism. I also have one blog in Malay Language to refute wahabism. we may exchange information. you can email to me at
    my blog:

  3. Posted February 18, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    Walikum Salaam brother , I saw your blog it is a great work done and hope it will be of great benefit for all Muslims , thanks for your appreciation .

    May Allah help you on your work

  4. Posted March 22, 2008 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    As salam ‘aleykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh!

  5. Posted March 31, 2008 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Walikum Salaam brother Motamid

  6. sulliman23
    Posted October 31, 2008 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Proving Shaykh al-Albaani’s Proficiency in Ahadith to those who would malign him and are bereft of knowledge like the ones who adhere to ahlul shirk namely Num Ha MIm keller and the rabid soofee GF HADADI

    [1] Shaykh Al-Albani has Ijaza in hadith from the late Allamah Shaykh Muhammad Raghib at-Tabaagh with whom he studied hadith sciences, gaining authority to transmit from him. The Shaykh himself refers to this Ijaza in Mukhtasar al-Uluw (p.72) and in Tahdir as-Sajid (p.63). He has a further Ijaza from Shaykh Bahjatul Baitaa (through whom his isnad stretches back to Imam Ahmad). These are mentioned in the book Hayat Al-Albani (the Life of Al-Albani) by Muhammad ash-Shaibaani. This sort of Ijaza is given only to those who have excelled in hadith and can be trusted to accurately convey a hadith. A copy of the Ijaza is in the possession of his student, Ali Hassan al-Halabi. So it is not correct to say that the Shaykh is self-taught from books, without authority and without Ijaza.

    Whilst we are on the subject, i think it would not be out of place here to mention a few snippets from Shaykh Al-Albani’s life and career to further emphasise his great standing in the field of hadith science as well as the respect shown to him by other scholars. One cannot really do the subject justice in one or two brief emails, however, i hope the readers will find this information both encouraging and interesting:

    [1] Shaykh Al-Albani was born in 1914 in Ashkodera, the former capital of Albania.

    [2] His first shaykh was his father, Al-Haaj Nuh Najjatee, who himself had completed Shariah studies in Istanbul, returning to Albania as one of its Hanafi scholars. Under his father’s guidance, Shaykh Al-Albani studied Qur’an, tajwid, Arabic language as well as Hanafi fiqh.

    [3] He further studied Hanafi fiqh and Arabic language under Shaykh Sa’eed al-Burhan.

    [4] He would attend the lectures of Imam Abdul-Fattaah and Shaykh Tawfiq al-Barzah.

    [5] The Shaykh met the late hadith master, Ahmad Shakir, with whom he participated in knowledge based discussions on hadith and its research.

    [6] He met the late Indian hadith scholar, Shaykh Abdul-Samad Sharf ad-Deen, who himself had referenced the hadith to the first volume of An-Nasa’ee’s Sunan al-Kubra as well as Al-Mizzi’s monumental Tuhfatul-Ashraf, and they continued to exchange letters on matters of knowledge. In one such letter, Shaykh Abdul-Samad expressed his belief that Shaykh Al-Albani was the greatest hadith scholar of the time.

    [7] In recognition of his knowledge of hadith, he was commissioned as far back as 1955 by the Faculty of Shariah at Damascus University to carry out detailed analysis and research into hadith related to buying and selling and other business related transactions.

    [8] Shaykh Al-Albani began his formal work in the field of hadith by transcribing Al-Hafidh al-Iraqi’s monumental Al-Mughni ‘an Hamlil Asfar, being a study of the various hadith and narrations contained in Al-Ghazali’s famous Ihya Ulum ad-Din. This work alone contains some 5000 hadith.

    [9] The Shaykh was famous for attending the Zahiriyyah library in Damascus, and was eventually given his own set of keys due to his frequent and lengthy study there. On one such occasion, an important folio was missing from a manuscript in use by the Shaykh and this led Shaykh Al-Albani to painstakingly catalogue all the hadith manuscripts in the library in an endeavour to locate the missing folio. Consequently, he gained in-depth knowledge of 1000s of hadith manuscripts, something that was attested to years later by Dr. Muhammad Mustafa Azami in the introduction to Studies in Early Hadith Literature where he said: ‘I wish to express my gratitude to… Shaikh Nasir al-Din al-Albani, who placed his extensive knowledge of rare manuscripts at my disposal.’

    [10] Shaykh Al-Albani would sometimes mention his extreme poverty during his early life. He said he would be reduced to picking up scraps of paper from the street, often discarded wedding cards, and use them to write his hadith notes on. Often, he would purchase scrap paper in bulk from the rubbish dump and take it home to use.

    [11] He would correspond with numerous scholars, particularly those from India and Pakistan, discussing matters related to hadith and the religion in general, including Shaykh Muhammad Zamzami from Morocco and Ubaydullah Rahman, the author of Mirqat al-Mafatih Sharh Mushkila al-Masabih.

    [12] His skill in hadith is attested to by a host of qualified scholars, past and present, including Dr. Amin al-Misri, head of Islamic Studies at Madinah University who considered himself to be one of the Shaykh’s students; also Dr. Subhi as-Salah, former head of Hadith Sciences at the University of Damascus; Dr. Ahmad al-Asaal, head of Islamic Studies at Riyadh University; the late Pakistani hadith scholar, Allamah Badiudeen Shah as-Sindee; Shaykh Muhammad Tayyib Awkeej, former head of Tafsir and Hadith at the University of Ankarah in Turkey; not to mention the likes of Shaykh Ibn Baz, Ibn al-Uthaymeen, Muqbil ibn Hadee and many others in later times.

    [13] After a number of his works appeared in print, the Shaykh was chosen to teach hadith at the new Islamic University of Madinah for three years from 1381 to 1383H where he was also a member of University board. After this he returned to his former studies and work in the Zahiriyyah library. His love for Madinah University is evidenced by the fact that he bequeathed his entire personal library to the University.

    [14] He would hold study circles twice a week whilst in Damascus which were attended by numerous students and university lecturers. In this way, the Shaykh completed instruction in the following classical and modern works:

    Fathul-Majid of Abdur-Rahman ibn Husain ibn Muhamamd ibn Abdul-Wahhab
    Rawdah an-Nadiyah of Siddiq Hasan Khan
    Minhaj al-Islamiyyah of Muhammad Asad
    Usul al-Fiqh of Al-Khallal
    Mustalah at-Tarikh of Asad Rustum
    Al-Halal wa al-Haram fil-Islam of Yusuf al-Qardawi
    Fiqh as-Sunnah of Sayyid Sabiq
    Ba’th al-Hathith of Ahmad Shakir
    At-Targhib wa at-Tarhib of Al-Hafidh al-Mundhiri
    Riyadh as-Saliheen on Imam an-Nawawi
    Al-Imam fi Ahadith al-Ahqam of Ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eid

    [15] After carrying out an analysis of the hadith in Ibn Khuzaymah’s Sahih, the Indian hadith scholar, Muhamamd Mustafa Azami (head of Hadith Science in Makkah), chose Shaykh Al-Albani to verify and re-check his analysis and the work is currently published in 4 volumes containing both their comments. This is an indication of the level of trust placed in Shaykh Al-Albani’s hadith ability by other scholars.

    [16] In their edition of the well known hadith compilation, Mishkat al-Masabih, the Maktaba al-Islamee publishing house requested Shaykh Al-Albani to edit the work before publication.The publisher wrote in the introduction: ‘We requested that the great hadith scholar, Shaykh Muhammad Nasir ad-Deen al-Albani, should help us in the checking of Mishkat and take responsibility for adding footnotes for any ahadith needing them, and researching and reproducing their sources and authenticity where needed, and correcting any deficiences…’

    [17] The Shaykhs printed works, mainly in the field of hadith and its sciences, number some 112 books. I personally have 17 of these books and these alone run into 45 volumes! He left behind him in manuscript form at least a further 70 works.

    [18] It is recorded on one occasion (and this incident is available on two tape cassettes – his students were in the habit of recording his teaching sessions), that a man visited Shaykh Al-Albani in his home in Jordan claiming to be a prophet! How would we have reacted when faced with such a situation? Shaykh Al-Albani sat the man down and discussed his claims at length (as I said, covering two tape cassettes) and in the end the visitor made tawba from his claim and all present, including the Shaykh, were overcome with tears. In fact, how often is Shaykh Al-Albani heard on tape bursting into tears when speaking about Allah, His Messenger and the affairs of the Muslims?

    [19] On another occasion (and I was told this by a Shaykh who was present in the gathering) he was visited by three men all claiming that Shaykh Al-Albani was a kafir. When it came time to pray they refused to pray behind him, saying it is not possible for a kafir to lead the prayer. The Shaykh accepted this, saying that in his eyes the three of them were Muslims so one of them should lead the prayer. Afterwards, they discussed their differences at length and when it came time for the following prayer, all three men insisted on praying behind Shaykh Al-Albani!

    [20] During the course of his life the Shaykh has researched and commented on over 30,000 individual chains of transmission (isnad) for countless hadith, having spent 60 years in the study of the books of the Sunnah and being in the company of, and in contact with, its scholars.

  7. Posted October 31, 2008 at 8:54 pm | Permalink

    Question 6
    The Ijazas of Ibn Baz and al-Albani

    The Salafis allege that both Ibn Baz and al-Albani have ijazas (authorizations of mastery of a book, etc. in Islamic knowledge from the scholar it was studied with) from great sheikhs. They say that al-Albani has an ijaza from some sheikhs in Syria, do you have any information on this?

    Answer By Shayk Nuh Ha Mim Keller

    Our teacher in hadith, Sheikh Shu‘ayb al-Arna’ut, tells my wife and me that Sheikh Nasir al-Albani learned his hadith knowledge from books and manuscripts in the Dhahiriyya Library in Damascus, as well as his long years working on books of hadith. He did not get any significant share of his knowledge from living hadith scholars, according to Sheikh Shu‘ayb, for the very good reason that there wasn’t anyone in Damascus at the time who knew much about hadith, and he didn’t travel anywhere else to learn. I have heard Salafis say that he has an ijaza from one person in Syria, but it could only be (according to Sheikh Shu‘ayb) from someone with far less knowledge than himself I believe Sheikh Shu‘ayb about this, because his family, like Sheikh Nasir’s, were of the Albanians who emmigrated to Damascus at the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and they all know each other rather intimately. The impression one gets is that Sheikh Nasir’s father, Sheikh Nuh al-Albani, was so strict a Hanafi that he produced something of an over-reaction in Sheikh Nasir not only against Abu Hanifa and his madhhab, but against traditional Islamic sheikhs as well. According to Sheikh Shu‘ayb, Sheikh Nasir studied tajwid or ‘Qur’anic recitation’ and perhaps the Hanafi fiqh primer Maraqi al-falah [The ascents to success] with his father Sheikh Nuh al-Albani, and possibly other lessons in Hanafi fiqh from Sheikh Muhammad Sa‘id al-Burhani, who taught in Tawba Mosque, in the quarter of the Turks on the side of Mount Qasiyun, near Sheikh Nasir’s father’s shop. Sheikh Nasir subsequently found that his time could be more profitably spent with books and manuscripts at the Dhahiriyya Library and in reading works to students, and he did not attend anyone else’s lessons

    As for his ijaza or ‘warrant of learning,’ Sheikh Shu‘ayb tells us that it came when a hadith scholar from Aleppo, Sheikh Raghib al-Tabbakh, was visiting the Dhahiriyya Library in Damascus, and Sheikh Nasir was pointed out to him as a promising student of hadith. They met and spoke, the sheikh authorized him “in all the chains of transmission that I have been authorized to relate”—that is to say, a general ijaza, though Sheikh Nasir did not attend the lessons of the sheikh or read books of hadith with him. Sheikh Raghib al-Tabbakh had chains of sheikhs reaching back to the main hadith works, such as Sahih al-Bukhari, the Sunan of Abu Dawud, and hence had a contiguous chain back to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) for these books. But this was an authorization (ijaza) of tabarruk, or ‘for the blessing of it,’ not a ‘warrant of learning’—for Sheikh Nasir did not go to Aleppo to learn from him, and he did not come to Damascus to teach him

    This type of authorization (ijaza), that of tabarruk, is a practice of some traditional scholars: to give an authorization in order to encourage a student whom they have met and like, whom they find knowledgeable, or hope will become a scholar. The reason I know of such ijazas is because I have one, from the Meccan hadith scholar Sheikh Muhammad ‘Alawi al-Maliki, which authorizes me to relate “all the chains of transmission that I [Muhammad ‘Alawi al-Maliki] have been authorized to relate by my sheikhs,” including chains of transmission reaching back to the hadith Imams Malik, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Majah (Mecca: Muhammad ‘Alawi al-Maliki, 1412/1992). Though my name is on the authorization, and it is signed by the sheikh, it does not make me a hadith scholar like he is, because aside from some of his public lessons, my hadith knowledge is not from him but from Sheikh Shu‘ayb, whom I have actually studied with. Rather, Sheikh al-Maliki knows my sheikhs in Damascus, that I am the translator of ‘Umdat al-salik [Reliance of the traveller] in Shafi‘i fiqh, that we have known each other for some time, and he approves of my way. The scholarly value of such ijazas is merely to establish that we have met.

    As for Ibn Baz, I do not know who he studied with, though from his broadcasts on the radio, I would be most surprised if he had ever studied with someone uncommitted to what he and his colleagues simply call the da‘wa or ‘propagation,’ that is, of the revisions of Islam advocated by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab.

    As it is unlawful to say anything disliked about a Muslim except for an interest countenanced by Sacred Law, the following discussion will not exceed (a) whether these revisions constitute a sectarian emphasis differing from traditional Islam; and (b) if sectarian, how this influences issues that Sheikh Nasir and Ibn Baz might otherwise be believed about

    I mention this to you, because, as you may know, some people take offense at the word Wahhabi—and with good reason, if we mean to suggest that they do not love Islam, or are not trying to practice it to the best of their understanding and ability. I feel this is true of virtually all separatist groups, from the beginning of Islam. Provided they do not negate something necessarily known to be of the religion (necessarily known meaning that which any Muslim would know about if asked), all these groups may be said to have tried to understand and apply the Qur’an and the sunna, even though their understanding has brought them to a mistaken conclusion. This is why Shari‘a manuals say things like:

    They [those who rise in insurrection against the caliph] are subject to Islamic laws (because they have not committed an act that puts them outside of Islam that they should be considered non-Muslims. Nor are they considered morally corrupt (fasiq), for rebels is not a perjorative term, but rather they merely have a mistaken understanding), and the decisions of their Islamic judge are considered legally effective (provided he does not declare the lives of upright Muslims to be justly forfeitable) if they are such as would be effective if made by our own judge (Reliance of the Traveller, 594).

    The fact that such people may consider other Muslims not of their sect to be non-Muslims—the hallmark of heterodox (batil) sects of all times and places—does not change the above rulings, and the caliph or his representative may use only enough force to end the strife. We find in the Hashiya radd al-muhtar ‘ala al-Durr al-mukhtar sharh Tanwir al-absar [(Ibn ‘Abidin’s) Commentary: the guide of the perplexed, upon (Haskafi’s) The choice pearls, an exegesis of (Tumurtashi’s) Illumination of eyes], whose every word is considered a decisive evidence (nass) in the Hanafi school:

    (al-Haskafi:) Those who revolt against obedience to the imam [meaning the caliph or his representative] are of three types:

    (1) highwaymen, and their ruling is known [n: i.e. the death penalty, if they do not give themselves up before they are caught];

    (2) rebels (bughat) against the caliphate, whose ruling will be discussed below [n: i.e. they are fought with as much force as needed to make them desist, as in the Reliance above];

    (3) and kharijites, meaning men with military force who revolt against the imam because of a mistaken scriptural interpretation (ta’wil), believing that he is upon a falsehood of unbelief (kufr) or disobedience to Allah (ma‘siya) that necessitates their fighting him, according to their mistaken scriptural interpretation, and who consider it lawful to take our lives, our property, and take our women as slaves, and who consider the Companions of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be disbelievers. Their ruling is the same as that of rebels (bughat) against the caliphate [n: (2) above] by unanimous consensus of fiqh scholars.

    (Ibn ‘Abidin:) His words and who consider the Companions of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be disbelievers are not a condition for someone to be a kharijite, but rather are a mere clarification of what those who revolted against ‘Ali (Allah Most High be well pleased with him) in fact did. Otherwise, it is enough to be convinced of the unbelief of those they fight against, as happened in our own times with the followers of [Muhammad ibn] ‘Abd al-Wahhab, who came out of the Najd in revolt, and took over the sanctuaries of Mecca and Medina. They followed the Hanbali madhhab, but believed that they were the Muslims, and that those who believed differently than they did were polytheists (mushrikin). On this basis, they held it lawful to kill Sunni Muslims (Ahl al-Sunna) and their religious scholars, until Allah Most High dispelled their forces, and the armies of the Muslims attacked their strongholds and subdued them in 1233 A.H. [1818] (Hashiya radd al-muhtar, 4.262).

    The Shafi‘i mufti of Mecca, Ahmad ibn Zayni Dahlan (d. 1304/1886), a historian as well as a scholar, recorded the story of the Wahhabis’ takeover of the holy places in a number of books, one of which, his two-volume history al-Futuhat al-Islamiyya [The Islamic conquests], gives the following description of what became perhaps their most famous, and certainly their most lethal ijtihad; namely, that the sunna of tawassul or ‘supplicating Allah through an intermediary’ was shirk:

    Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab claimed that his aim in this school of thought he innovated was to make sincere the belief in Allah’s unity (tawhid), and to abjure worshipping false gods (shirk), and that Muslims had been worshipping false gods for six hundred years, and that he had revived their religion for them. He interpreted Qur’anic verses revealed about worshippers of false gods (mushrikin) as referring to those who worship Allah alone, such as the word of Allah Most High,

    “And who is further astray than he who supplicates apart from Allah someone who will not answer him until Resurrection Day, while they are oblivious to their supplication” (Qur’an 46:5),

    and His word,

    “Do not supplicate besides Allah what will not benefit or harm you” (Qur’an 10:106).

    There are many such verses in the Qur’an , so Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab said that whoever seeks the help of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) or others, of the prophets, the friends of Allah (awliya’), or the righteous; or calls on him or asks him to intercede—was like such worshippers of false gods, and was referred to by the generality of such verses. He believed the same thing about visiting the tomb of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and all others of the prophets, friends of Allah, or the righteous. He said about the word of Allah Most High, who quotes the idolators about worshipping their idols:

    “We only worship them that they may bring us the nearer to Allah” (Qur’an 39:3)

    that people who pray to Allah by means of an intermediary (tawassul) are like these worshippers of false gods who said, “We only worship them that they may bring us the nearer to Allah.” He said that the worshippers of false gods didn’t believe their idols created anything, but rather that the Creator was Allah Most High, as shown by Allah’s word

    “And if you ask them who created them, they will say, ‘Allah’” (Qur’an 43:87),


    “And if you ask them who created the heavens and earth, they will say, ‘Allah’” (Qur’an 31:25),

    such that Allah did not judge them to have committed unbelief and worshipping false gods except for their saying, “that they may bring us all the nearer to Allah,” and in consequence, these people [Muslims who make tawassul] are like them.

    And this is simply wrong, for Muslim believers do not take the prophets (upon whom be peace) or the friends of Allah as gods or make them co-partners (shuraka’) with Allah, but rather, they believe that they are created slaves of Allah and do not deserve any worship

    As for the worshippers of false gods whom these Qur’anic verses were revealed about, they believed that their idols were gods, and reverenced them with the reverence of godhood, even if they acknowledged that they did not create anything—while believers do not hold that the prophets or awliya’ deserve worship or godhood, and do not reverence them with the reverence due solely to the Divine. Instead, they believe that they are the servants of Allah, and His beloved ones, whom He has elected and chosen, and through His blessings to them (baraka), He shows mercy towards His slaves. Their intention in seeking blessings through them is the mercy of Allah Most High, and much attests to the validity of this in the Qur’an and sunna.

    The creed of the Muslims is that the Creator—He Who Afflicts, He Who Benefits, He who deserves worship—is Allah alone. They do not believe that anyone else has any effect whatsoever; and they believe that the prophets and awliya’ do not create anything, do not possess any ability to benefit or harm, but merely that through Allah’s grace to them (baraka), He shows mercy towards created servants.

    It was the belief of the worshippers of false gods that their idols deserved worship and godhood that made them guilty of associating co-partners with Allah (shirk), not merely their saying, “We only worship them that they may bring us the nearer to Allah.” For it was only when it was proved to them that their idols did not deserve to be worshipped—as they believed they did—that they said by way of excuse, “We only worship them that they may bring us nearer to Allah.”

    So how should Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and his followers consider believers who acknowledge the unity of tawhid to be comparable to those worshippers of false gods who believed in the godhood of their idols? For all the above-mentioned verses and those like them specifically refer to non-Muslims and worshippers of false gods, while not a single believer enters into them.

    Bukhari relates from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (Allah be well pleased with father and son) who related from the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) that in [foretelling the] description of the Kharijites, he said that they would “proceed to Qur’anic verses revealed about non-Muslims, and interpret them as if they referred to believers.”

    And in another hadith, also from Ibn ‘Umar, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, “The thing I fear most for my Umma is a man who interprets the Qur’an taking it out of its context”; both of these hadiths being applicable to this sect

    If believers’ praying to Allah through an intermediary (tawassul) and the like were worshipping false gods, it wouldn’t have been done first by the Prophet himself (Allah bless him and give him peace), his Companions, and the Muslim Umma, from first to last (Dahlan, al-Futuhat al-Islamiyya [Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tijariyya al-Kubra, 1354/1935], 2.258–59).

    This passage shows us why the Wahhabis’ were considered like Kharijites, men who, as al-Haskafi notes above, revolted against the imam “because of a mistaken scriptural interpretation (ta’wil),” believing that he was “upon a falsehood of unbelief (kufr) or disobedience to Allah (ma‘siya) that necessitates their fighting him.”

    The main difficulty with their theory that tawassul amounted to worshipping false gods was the fact that it was taught to the Umma by the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)—something you have asked about and will be discussed in question (9) below—which was perhaps why no one in the previous eleven centuries of Islamic scholarship before Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab had ever noticed that it was unbelief

    In this respect, it is fortunate that Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab didn’t get his hands on his own Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who enjoined his most outstanding student, Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Marrudhi (d. 275/888) to make tawassul through the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). Al-Marrudhi relates the tawassul of the hadith of the Companion (Sahabi) ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf containing the words, “O Allah, verily, I turn to You through Your prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy (Allah bless him and give him peace); O Muhammad, verily I turn through you to my Lord, that He may fulfill my need [emphasis the translator’s]“—which al-Marrudhi relates from Ahmad ibn Hanbal in the “Chapter on Supplications” of his Kitab al-mansak [Book of Hajj and ‘Umra]. This is mentioned by Ibn Taymiya (Qa‘ida jalila fi al-tawassul wa al-wasila [N.d. Reprint. Beirut: al-Maktaba al-‘Ilmiyya, n.d.], 98), whom I tend to believe on it, since it is something whose sunna character he tries to disprove his Imam about, though without conceiving it to be idolatry (shirk) or unbelief (kufr), as the Wahhabis did more than four centuries later.

    Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab is gone today, together with the fatwas he gave that resulted in the attacks on Mecca, Ta’if, and Medina beginning in 1205/1790 by “reformers” who believed that the lives, women, and money of ordinary Sunni Muslims who did not feel that tawassul was shirk could be lawfully taken by those who did. There are no more Wahhabis in this sense. As King Fahd (who, on the whole, has had a positive, moderating influence) said a few years ago in a speech, “We are not Wahhabis, we are Hanbalis.”

    Yet if the “revolt” (in al-Haskafi’s words) is gone, the “mistaken scriptural interpretation” remains; and its intellectual influence is still strong on all aspects of the religious establishment in Saudi Arabia. Many of the questions you have asked deal specifically with ideas aggressively packaged and exported to other Muslim countries under the aegis of Ibn Baz, and given currency by the support of Sheikh Nasir and his followers

    These are revisions to traditional Islam, and if many ordinary Muslims have forgotten this, it is due to the extent to which they have succeeded, abetted by heavy subsidizing and the present lack of traditional scholars (‘ulama) to teach Muslims the truth. Yet one cannot but feel they mark a transient phase, for Allah has promised to protect the din, and if the rebuttals of classical scholars were heard, these innovations would melt away. In the meantime, “reforms” have been slated for all three pillars of the din, Islam (Shari‘a), Iman (‘Aqida), and Ihsan (Tariqa), and can perhaps be best summarized under these headings:

    (1) Islam (Shari‘a): To their credit, the movement we are speaking of has revived interest in hadith among Islamic scholars across the board. But the emphasis on hadith and its ancillary disciplines to the exclusion of other Islamic sciences equally essential to understanding the revelation, such as fiqh methodology, or the conditioning of hadith by general principles expressed in the Qur’an , has created the false dichotomy in many Muslims’ minds of either fiqh or hadith. And this is an intellectual bid‘a of the most ominous sort for Islam, which has never accepted ijtihad from non-mujtahids, or anything short of the fiqh (literally “understanding subtle points”) of hadith.

    One sad outcome of dichotomizing fiqh and hadith is the revival of Dhahiri thought we have talked about above, with its “fallacy of misplaced literalism” in interpreting primary scriptural texts. Such literalism necessarily forces itself upon someone trained in hadith alone (like Sheikh Nasir) if he tries to deduce Shari‘a rulings without mastery of the interpretive tools needed to meet the challenges that face the mujtahid, for example, in joining between a number of hadiths on a particular question that seem to conflict, or the many other intellectual problems involved in doing ijtihad. This strident Dhahirism—especially among Sheikh Nasir’s followers—has made some contemporary Muslims seriously believe that it is a matter of either following “the Qur’an and sunna,” or one of the schools of the mujtahid Imams

    Now, the big lie has only gained credibility today because so few Muslims understand what ijtihad is or how it is done. I believe this can be cured by familiarizing Muslims with concrete examples of how mujtahid Imams derive particular Shari‘a rulings from the Qur’an and hadith, examples which first, demonstrate the breadth of their hadith knowledge (Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayd Allah ibn al-Munadi (d. 272/886) relates that Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that having memorized three hundred thousand hadiths was not enough to be a mujtahid), and second, demonstrate their mastery of the deductive principles that enable one to join between all the primary texts. Until this is done, the advocates of this movement will probably continue to follow the ijtihad of non-mujtahids (the sheikhs who inspire their confidence), under the catch phrase “Qur’an and sunna” just as if the real mujtahids were unfamiliar with the obligation of following these. The followers perhaps cannot be blamed, since “for someone who has never travelled, his mother is the only cook.” But I do blame the sheikhs who, whatever their motivations, write and speak as if they were the only cooks

    (2) Iman (‘Aqida): The uncritical acceptance and subsidizing of Ibn Taymiya’s and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya’s opinions in ‘aqida has had a number of results

    One is that Ibn Taymiya’s denial of all figurative expression (majaz) in the Qur’an , what we have called above “misplaced literalism,” has caused the anthropomorphism it brings to most minds to spread to the horizons, under the slogan of a “return to the ‘aqida of early Muslims,” which, as explained above, it most certainly is not

    In this connection, I was recently speaking with Mawlana ‘Abdullah Kakakhail, a scholar of Islamic belief (usul al-din) from Islamabad, who told me that he graduated from the Islamic University in Medina in 1966, and shortly afterwards, on the verge of returning home, had been summoned to the office of the vice-rector of the university, who expressed his disappointment that the student had not benefited more from his studies in Islamic faith (‘aqida). The vice-rector said he knew ‘Abdullah was returning to Pakistan with the same tenets of faith he had had when he came. They got to talking about the mutashabihat or ‘unapparent in meaning’ Qur’anic verses and hadiths, and the discussion turned to Allah’s ‘hand’ (Qur’an 48:10). “You say,” the young man told the vice-rector, “That ‘the hand is known, but the how of it is unknown.’ What does the unknownness of this how mean?” The vice-rector said, “It means we do not know whether the hand is black or white, or whether it is long or short.” The vice-rector’s name was Ibn Baz, and this was what was being offered at the time as the da‘wa or ‘invitation’—apparently to the faith (‘aqida) that inspired the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

    Secondly, the yawning gulf between this kind of anthropomorphism and the entire previous Qur’an tafsir literature has necessitated the explanation that someone (namely, the Ash‘ari school) has crept in upon the Umma and altered the “‘aqida of the early Muslims” that is alleged to have been there before (but now cannot be found). This has in turn divided the field of ‘aqida into two camps, pro- and anti-Ash‘ari, whereas for the previous thousand years, Sunni Muslims agreed upon the orthodoxy of the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools. Why was something fixed that was not broken?

    Indeed, when a wealthy trader from Jedda brought to life the long-dead ‘aqida of Ibn Taymiya at the beginning of this century by financing the printing in Egypt of Ibn Taymiya’s Minhaj al-sunna al-nabawiyya and other works, the Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Bakhit al-Muti‘i, faced with new questions about the validity of anthropomorphism, wrote: “It was a fitna (strife) that was sleeping; may Allah curse him who awakened it.”

    But perhaps the most ill-starred ‘aqida legacy of the historical Wahhabi movement is something now practiced from the Najd to the Indian Subcontinent, to the East and the West; namely, the ease with which Muslims call each other “unbelievers.” Whether it is over a fiqh question like tawassul, or an ‘aqida question like the above, this is precisely the sectarianism which Allah forbids in the Qur’an with the words,

    “And do not be like those who separated into factions and differed between themselves” (Qur’an 3:105),

    Sectarianism of this sort is something that did not exist in traditional Sunni Islam for the previous thousand years, but rather represents a break with that tradition. Whether we justify it in the name of an ‘Islamic reform,’ or a ‘return to early Islam,’ sectarianism is and remains the kind of bid‘a of misguidance of which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said in the hadith of Muslim,

    “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours that is not from it shall have it rejected” (Muslim 3.1343).

    (3) Ihsan (Tariqa): The third of the re-forms, and among the most aggressively pursued today is an attempt to finish tasawwuf or ‘Sufism’ as one of the Islamic sciences, though there is no doubt that it has been considered as such by virtually all classical scholars since the religious sciences were first recorded. Our times have seen the printing and reprinting of works like ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi’s Talbis Iblis [The Devil’s deception] passages of which criticize “the Sufis” (meaning groups of them in his time) without mentioning that a great many of the biographies of his five-volume Sifa al-safwa [Description of the elect] are the very Sufis quoted in extenso in Qushayri’s classic work on Sufism al-Risala al-Qushayriyya.

    Though Sufism exists for the good reason that the sunna we have been commanded to follow is not just the words and outward actions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), but also his states, such as reliance on Allah (tawakkul), sincerity (ikhlas), forbearance (hilm), patience (sabr), humility (tawadu‘), perpetual remembrance of Allah, and so on. Many, many hadiths and Qur’anic verses indicate the obligatory character of attaining these and hundreds of other states of the heart, such as the hadith related by Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

    “No one will enter paradise who has a particle of arrogance in his heart” (Muslim, 1.93).

    or the sahih hadith in the Sunan of Abu Dawud about the obligatoriness of having presence of heart in the prayer (salat), that ‘Ammar ibn Yasir heard the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) say,

    “Verily, a man leaves, and none of his prayer has been recorded for him except a tenth of it, a ninth of it, an eighth of it, a seventh of it, a sixth of it, a fifth of it, a fourth of it, a third of it, or a half of it” (Sunan Abi Dawud [N.d. Reprint. Istanbul: al-Maktaba al-Islamiyya, n.d.] 1.211).

    Half a minute’s reflection should show each of us where we stand on these aspects of our din, and why in classical times, helping Muslims to attain these states was not left to amateurs, but rather delegated to ‘Ulama’ of the heart, the scholars of Islamic Sufism

    As in other Islamic sciences, mistakes historically did occur in Sufism, most of them stemming from not recognizing the Shari‘a and tenets of faith (‘aqida) of Ahl al-Sunna as being above every human being. But these mistakes were not different in principle from, for example, the Isra’iliyyat (baseless tales of Bani Isra’il) that crept into Qur’anic exegesis (tafsir) literature, or the mawdu‘at (hadith forgeries) that crept into the body of prophetic hadith. These were not taken as proof that tafsir was bad, or hadith was deviance, but rather, in each discipline, the errors were identified and warned against by the Imams of the field, because the Umma needed the rest. And such corrections are precisely what we find in books like Qushayri’s Risala, Ghazali’s Ihya’ and other works of Sufism.

    In contrast, the re-formers of our times have hit upon the expedient of creating doubts of there being any genuine Islamic science to attain spiritual sincerity in a systematic and knowledge-based way. But perhaps today they are beginning to realize that if one ends all spiritual aspiration, one will only produce numbers of aggressive Muslims with no other means of feeling more religious than by arguing to prove their fellow Muslims are less so—an unenviable condition described in the hadith of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace),

    “No people went astray after guidance, except that they were afflicted with arguing.”

    To summarize, the movement to re-form our din attacks the scholarly authority that has traditionally been the support of its three pillars: in Islam, by turning Muslim’s hearts against the madhhabs that are our Shari‘a; in Iman, by presenting Ibn Taymiya’s anthropomorphism as the ‘way of the early Muslims’; and in Ihsan, by trying to close the door of traditional Islamic spirituality once and for all.

    Sheikh Nasir and Ibn Baz are among the main luminaries of the movement, and the latter’s whole career shows an emphasis on these reforms, from the publications printed under his auspices and distributed across the globe, to the funding of Wahhabi U. graduates to return from Medina to their homelands to disseminate the teachings of sect, tirelessly retelling of how few Muslims scholars over the last fourteen hundred years have truly understood Islam as it was understood by the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and themselves.

    So perhaps the best answer to your question about the ijazas of these two men is to ask in turn: What relevance to such re-formers should the traditional ijaza system have, when its function was to preserve intact the understanding of Islam by traditional scholars down through the centuries, an understanding they wish to change?




    Shayk Ibn Baz Shayk Albani

    Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz (Arabic: عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن باز ‘Abd al-‘Azīz ibn ‘Abd Allāh ibn Bāz) was the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia from 1993 until his death in 1999
    Ibn Baz did his best to aid and abet the main
    innovators of our time such as al-Albani, on whom he
    bestowed the King Faysal Prize “for services rendered
    to Islam”

    Shaikh Al-Albaani was in charge of the teaching of the subject of Mustalalhahul Hadeeth (the science of Hadeeth) for three years at the Islamic University of Madinah in Saudi Arabia.

    And these are some of misadventures of He published “corrected” editions of the two Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, which he deceitfully called “Abridgments” (mukhtasar) in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks. He published newly-styled editions of the Four Sunan, al-Bukhari’s al-Adab al-Mufrad, al-Mundhiri’s al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib, and al-Suyuti’s al-Jami` al-Saghir, each of which he split into two works, respectively prefixed Sahih and Da`if in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks. He said: “Many of those who interpret figuratively [the Divine Attributes] are not heretics (zanâdiqa), but they say what heretics say,” and “figurative interpretation is the very same as nullification (al-ta’wîl `ayn al-ta`tîl).”

    He suggests that al-Bukhari( ALLAH FORBID NAUZ BILLAH) is a disbeliever for interpreting the Divine Face as dominion or sovereignty (mulk) in the verse { Everything will perish save His countenance } (28:88) in the book of Tafsir in his Sahih: “Except His wajh means except His mulk, and it is also said: Except whatever was for the sake of His countenance.” Albani blurts out: “No true believer would say such a thing” and “We should consider al-Bukhari innocent of that statement

    Shayk Albani and Shayk Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz NEVER had permission or training from any Sunni Hadith Scholar to decide which is WEAK and which is true Hadith , and yet Shayk Albani was made in charge of the teaching of the subject of Mustalalhahul Hadeeth (the science of Hadeeth) for three years at the Islamic University of Madinah in Saudi Arabia by the Saudi Wahhbi Governament why ?

    Shayk Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz and was made Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia from 1993 until his death in 1999 why ?

    and why was Shayk Albani allowed to Publish books on True and false Hadith in Sahi Bukhari when he was not an Qualified HADITH Scholar in the first place to decide right and wrong hadith ?

    These questions just baffle the Innocent unsuspecting Muslims for answers from the Wahhabi Salafi Saudi Governament , who’s faith this evil scholar has robbed by preaching them THEIR fancy lies and error filled views about SAHI HADITH .


    Today Millions of Unsuspecting Muslims some innocent and some not so innocent look at SAUDI ARABIA as a source of true AUTHENTIC Islamic knowledge , but unfortunate they are not aware the very same PSEUDO Islamic Saudi Scholars and the Saudi government are robbing them of their TRUE Imaan , Islam and Hereafter
    One may question the sorry sate of their Imaan , when they dont even bother to find out the REALITY of who they are learning their Islam from ? , today a Muslim may spend a HUNDRED DAYS reading and learning where and which trustworthy company to invest his precious money but he would not give an HOUR to learn and read about these Saudi Pseudo Islamic Scholars whom they are blindly ready to hand over their Imaan , Islam and Hereafter .
    May be if they still open their eyes and hearts and read this hadith there is still hope they might be saved from this great corruption and fitnah of Devil

    Imam Bukhari (Radiallhu Anhu) quotes this Hadith

    from Abdullah ibn Umar (Radiallhu Anhu) that the

    Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) once

    prayed for Syria (Shaam) and Yemen. It is narrated

    that there were some people of Najd also present in

    the gathering and they requested the Prophet (Sallal

    Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) to make du’a for Najd also.

    The Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)

    continued saying: “O! Allah, Shower Blessings on

    Shaam and Yemen,” The people of Najd again

    requested the Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)

    to offer prayers for Najd.

    The Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)

    said: “It ( Najd) is a place of tremor and

    Fitna (Mischief) and the horn of Shaitaan will

    rise from there.” (Bukhari Shareef, Vol. ii, PP. 1050)

    It can be deduced from the above Hadith that Najd is neither blessed nor a good place but one of Fitna and Evil. Najd has been deprived of the prayers of the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and therefore Najd has the seal of misery and misfortune and hoping for any good from there is going against the Will of Allah.







    With courtesy of

    Dr Syed

    ( Sufi786)
    Author of Answering Wahhabism and Salafism blog
    To all the so called Pseudo Wahhabis and Pesudo Salafis


    This entry was written by sufi786 and posted on March 2, 2008 at 9:49 pm and filed under Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Shaik Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz, Shaikh Al-Albaani, The Ijazas of Ibn Baz and al-Albani – Do they have an, hadith on Najad hypocrites with tags Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz, Ibn Baz and al-Albani have any Ijazas at all to teach H, Ijazas of Ibn Baz and al-Albani, Shaikh Al-Albaani Nuh Ha Mim Keller. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. Edit this entry.
    « As far as Wahhabi tamperings with classical texts goes, how widespread is this heinous crime? Can you give some serious examples of this?

  8. mujahadaone
    Posted March 8, 2009 at 11:51 pm | Permalink


    I did not and will not call anyone kafir, having made that clear, this sufi will never believe in your garbage. It is just amazing; I run into your diatribes on-line by accident and was blown away by your vitriolic analysis. This sufi has a high regard and follow Naqshbandi and Tijjaniyya sheikhs,such as Usman bin Fodio, not your so-called sheikh dunya,Hamza Yusuf and others. I truly embraced the verse that enjoins Muslims to hold onto the rope of Allah and not to divide but I draw the line with anyone, be they my own blood, who aid and abate the killing of muslims like chickens. And to anyone, who comes to aid of the oppressed, who raised their hands in prayer to the heavens, you and the kuffars, call them wahabbis, salafis, alqaeda, hamas, terrorists,fundamentalist and every negative ism that there is in the book, oh I like the “Islamo-fascist” term, indeed. There are terrorist, of course, the biggest terrorists of them all are called the pentagon and IDF. Never ever heard one peep, let alone an outrage when these criminal gangs commit atrocities against muslims. Sheikh al-Ghazali warns that we should be wary of ulema at the citadel of power, all your sheikhs are at the citadel of kufr itself.

    Let me borrow some words, “I will not pray behind you guys, Hamza Yusuf etc, even if you lead prayers between Hajral aswad and maqam Ibrahim, period”. sufi786, your analysis,is pure intellectual onanism,big deal you are an MD.

  9. Posted September 11, 2017 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    For Wahhabi/ Salafi related texts see

  10. Posted September 11, 2017 at 7:59 am | Permalink

    For texts on the so-callaed Salafiyya (Wahhabiyya) movement see:

One Trackback/Pingback

  1. […] Answering Wahhabism And Salafism […]

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.
%d bloggers like this: