Prepared by

Al-Ghadeer Center for Islamic Studies
Translated from Arabic by

Hamid S.Atiyyah, Ph.D.

© All rights of publication and printing reserved, 1416AH, 1995AD

Published by Al-Ghadeer for studies and publications Address: Harat Hurayk, Dak ash street, Fadhil-Allah and Ridha building, Blook B, First Floor, P.O.Box 50-24, Beirut Lebanon


1 AI-Wahabia and its founder

2 Origins of Wahabi thought

3 Sources of Wahabi thought

4 The Wahabi doctrine on the Prophet


5 The Wahabi doctrine regarding Divine attributes

6 The Wahabi and Muslims: the Wahabi bida (corruption)

7 The Wahabi and the Khawarij

8 The Wahabi and the Ghulat (extremists)

9 Whom does the Wahabi serve?

10. The true faith regarding visiting the

Prophet’s tomb and asking for his intercession

11 Anti-Wahabi books



AI-Wahabia and Its Founder

The Wahabi sect was founded by Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab ibn Suleiman al-Najdi (1111 – 1206 AH.). After obtaining fundamental religious training he developed a special interest in books on false Prophets such as Musailama al-Kathab, Sajah al-Aswad al-An’si and Tulaiha al-Assadi. In the early period of his scholarship his father and tutors became aware of his deviant thinking and this led them to warn people of him by saying: “This man will go astray and will mislead those whom Allah wish to keep distant [from Him] and torment.”

In 1143 AH. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab called upon the people of Najd to follow his new doctrine. However, his father and religious teachers rehmently opposed him and publicly refuted his ideas. Consequently, his mission remained unpopular until his father’s death ten years later. At that time he resumed his preaching and a small group of villagers followed him. Most of the villagers were, however, incensed by this and tried to kill him. He was thus, forced to flee to another town, Uyayna, where he won the favour of its ruler by marrying his sister. He remained there preaching his new doctrines until the indignant population drove him out. In al-Daria in eastern Najid he finally found permanent refuge. As a historical footnote it should be remembered that this was the land of the false prophet Musailama and the birthplace of the rada or apostatsy movement after the Prophet’s death. Ibn Abdul Wahab’s ideas fell on fertile ground in the town of al-Daria and its ruler, Muhammad ibn Saud, and most of its inhabitants converted to the new doctrine.

At that time Ibn Abdul Wahab behaved as if he had absolute monopoly over ijtihad, ie the ability to arrive at logical deductions on religious questions. In reality however, Ibn Abdul Wahab lacked the basic prerequisites that could qualify him to the rank of ijtihad. This was the opinion of his brother; Sulaiman, who knew him closely and authored a book refuting his brother’s invocation and demon­strating its falsehood. His book includes the following passage which concisely sums up the Wahabia and its founder: 1

At present people are plagued by someone who claims to follow the Holy Quran and al-Sunna (the Prophet Tradition) and dares to deduce from their teachings paying no heed to any opposition. Because anyone who opposses him [he calls] a heretic although he possesses none of the qualifications of the mujtahedeen – and, 1 swear by Allah, not even one tenth of one of these qualifications. In spite of this, his teachings have attracted many simpletons. To Allah we belong and shall return.


Origins of Wahabi thought

The Wahabi sect has two basic tenets, a declared tenet and a hidden one. The declared tenet is commitment to divine unity and opposition to idolatry and paganism. But as we shall see later, this commitment is not confirmed by the actual history of the Wahabi.

The hidden tenet is sowing the seeds of schism, discord, conflict and war among Muslims to serve the goals of foreign domination. This is the real purpose which the Wahabia has sought to achieve since its inception and until the present day. This means that the declared objective or tenet served only to impress followers and enlist their efforts in achieving the real objective.

Undoubtedly the slogan of reviving the concept of divine unity and opposing idolatry has its attraction, and followers can be expected to rally around it with enthusiasm but without being aware that it is only a camouflage for the real hidden purpose.

Experts on the history of the Wahabia confirm that the movement was originally established upon an order by the British colonial administration. The list of authori­tative sources supporting this conclusion is long and includes Saint John Philpy in The History of Najd, Khairi Hamad in The Pillars of Colonialism, Hamaion Himayati in Al-Wahabi Criticism and Analysis, and finally, Haiem Wiseman, the first prime minister of the Jewish entity in Palestine in his memoirs.


Sources of Wahabi thought

The Wahabi sect classified doctrines into two categories. The first category includes all those doctrines based on a text in the Quran or the Prophet Tradition. They claimed that such doctrines can be derived from these two sources directly and without resorting to the logical deductions of religious scholars regarding their meaning – even if these sources happen to be the Prophet’s Companions, early Muslims or other scholars.

The second category includes all doctrines which are not based on a Quranic or Prophetic text, and in such cases the Wahabis claim that they defer to the teachings and jurisprudence of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Ibn Taimia.

Regrettably, they failed in both categories by falling into contradictions and making gross errors of judgement as the following points show:

1. They relied entirely on interpretations based on the literal meaning of the texts, and thus they contradicted basic tenets and ijam, the consensus of religious scholars. This is why the Egyptian religious scholar of the last century, Muhammad Abdo, described them as worse than those who follow others blindly because they “believe that the literal meanings must be endorsed and adhered to without paying heed to the basic tenets on which religion is based. ,2

2. They contradicted Ahmed ibn Hanbal clearly and openly in pronouncing as blas­phemers and heretics Muslims who disagreed with them though none of Ibn Hanbal’s religious decrees support this. According to Ibn Hanbal, only a Muslim who intention­ally refuses to perform obligatory prayers can be called a blasphemer or heretic.

Similarly, no support for this Wahabi belief can be found in the works of Ibn Taimia. Indeed, Ibn Taimia opposed such thinking. He maintained that “whoever approved of those in agreement with him and condemned those who opposed him, created schisms in the ranks of Muslims, labelled those who disagreed with him regarding points of opinion and logical deduction as heretics, and approved waging was on them is a person who seeks to divide and create discord.” This description by Ibn Taimia fits the Wahabis completely.

3. If the Wahabi doctrine on visiting shrines is endorsed then Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal and all his followers are idolators who must be denounced and their lives and possessions legally forfeited. This is in view of a report by none other than Ibn Taimia that Imam Ibn Hanbal wrote a treatise on visiting the shrine of Imam al-Hussain ibn Ali (the grandson of the Prophet) at Kerbala with specific instructions for visitors. Ibn Taimia commented on this that <<people at the time of Imam Ahmed [ibn Hanbal] frequented [the shrine].>> 4

But the Wahabi creed considers making a journey to a shrine for the purpose of visiting it a form of idolatry which deserve the extreme punishment of loss of life and possessions. In effect, they condemned Imam Ahmed, his contemporaries and early Muslims who practiced this ritual and condoned it as idolators who must be put to death and their possessions confiscated. Furthermore, this Wahabi decree must also extend to the Prophet Companions who approved or performed this ritual. Their claim to be followers of Imam Ahmed is thus unfounded.

The same argument applies also to their belief regarding asking for the Prophet’s intercession. According to this, whoever asks for the Prophet intercession after the Prophet’s death is committing a cardinal idolatry. They argue that by performing such an act, a person treats the Prophet as an idol and worships him instead of Allah. According, they considered killing such a person and confiscating his possessions a religious duty.

This Wahabi doctrine runs contrary to the practice of asking for the Prophet’s intercession performed by a large number of his prominent Companions and early Muslims – whose requests, the subjects of these intercessions, were usually granted. Ibn Taimia has confirmed this in his book Al-Ziara on the bases of evidence by several authorities including al-Baihaqi, al-Tabarani, Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Ibn Abi al-Dunia. 6 Nevertheless, Ibn Taimia chose to go against these authorities by banning the call for intercession. Unlike the Wahabi, however, he refrained from calling it a cardinal act of idolatry.

To repeat, if the Wahabi doctrine regarding intercession is endorsed then all the Companions and early Muslims who practiced it must be considered idolaters who desrve to be put to death. Not only those are idolaters, according to the Wahabi, but also anyone who knew about this practice and refrained from opposing it and condemning those who performed it as heretics. These also must be executed and their possessions forfeited. In the final analysis, all early Muslims deserve such a sentence leaving none whom the Wahabi could regard as the model to emulate.


The Wahabi doctrine on the Prophet Companions

1. As indicated earlier, the Wahabi effectively charged most of the Prophet Companions with idolatry and heresy because they continued, after the Prophet’s death, to allow asking for his intercession and visiting his tomb. They also included in this category all those who condoned this practice or knew about it and did not brand it as an idolatry and heresy which is punishable by death and loss of possessions.

This is their true doctrine which con­tradicts their claim of holding the Prophet’s Companions in the highest position.

2. The Wahabi went further than this by directly attacking the Companions who followed the Prophet. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, the founder of the Wahabi sect, asserted that:

.. a group of Companions who fought with the Prophet, prayed, paid alms, fasted and made pilgrimage with him were, in fact, heretics and distant from Islam.7

3. It is unsurprising, therefore, for the Wahabi writers and scholars to go to an extreme in defending Yazid ibn Muawiya* whose deeds altest to his animosity to the Companions. It was Yazid’s army who sacked al-Medina at al-Hara battle in which countless Companions were murdered and their women raped. It is reported that in the aftermoth of this one thousand unwed girls became pregnant.

Before that, Yazid’s soldiers had committed the atrocious crime of murdering

He is the second Umayyid Caliph appointed by his father Muawiya as his successor.

eighteen members of the Prophet Household at Kerbala including his grandson, al-Hussain, a number of his brothers, and their sons including children and new born infants.

During the reign of Yazid also, Mecca was sacked and Al-Kaba set on fire. In spite of these, the Wahabi applaud Yazid in their writings which can only mean that they condone his deeds. They also blatantly ignore the documented accounts confirming that Yazid did not perform obligatory prayers and drank alcohol. For these transgressions alone, they should have declared him a heretic in accordance with Imam Ahmed’s teachings which they claim to follow. Instead of this they praise Yazid and condemn all those who ask for the Prophet’s intercession including the Companions as heretics.


The Wahabi doctrine regarding divine attributes

The Wahabi doctrine on Allah’s attributes is the same as that of al-Mujasima: * They claim that Allah possesses actual organs such as a hand, a leg, an eye and a face. They also describe him as literally siting, moving, changing position, descending and ascending. 8

This doctrine which they borrowed from Ibn Taimia originated with the Hoshawia who lacked profound knowledge of Islamic tenets and teachings. The Hashawia endorsed the literal meanings of religious texts and their

AI-Mujasima or anthropomorphise believed that Allah possessed physical attributes.

tajseem is similar to that of some Jewish denominations.

The Wahabis failed to support this belief with a single testimony by any of the Companions or early Muslims. But this did not deter them from claiming that this belief represents the consensus of early Muslims. In any case, their argument in defense of their belief regarding divine attributes lacks logical substance and hence it is unconvincing.

To justify their belief, however, the Wahabis relied entirely on a statement by Ibn Taimia who claimed that after reviewing all available commentaries by the Companions and the traditions reported by them and collected from several sources which amounted to more than 100 commentaries he could not find a single evidence from one Companion inter­preting the attributes’ verses in varinace with their literal meanings. 9

This allegation repeated by Ibn Taimia is false and was clearly refuted by the same sources whose authenticity and reliability were confirmed by Ibn Taimia himself. These sources include the commentaries of al-Tabari, Ibn Atia and al-Bagawi. 10

All of these sources reported that the Companions interpreted the Quranic verses on Allah’s attributes and did not endorse their literal meanings. To illustrate, Ayat al-Kursi or Chair verse was interpreted by AI-Tabari, Ibn Atia and al-Bagawi by referring to Ibn Abbas’ comment that the chair means Allah’s knowledge. Ibn Atia upheld this and regarded any other interpretation to be of Jewish or Hashawi origin which must be ignored. 11

In the same fashion, Allah’s ‘face’ is interpreted in all verses in which mention of it is found as purpose, recompense or other meanings depending on its context. Anyone can check al-Bagawi’s commentary which Ibn Taimia praised as utterly reliable to find out for himself that Ibn Taimia’s claim is unfounded. In specific, al-Bagawi’s commentaries on the following verses may be consulted: The Cow: 115, 255 and 272; Thunder: 22; The Narratives: 88; The Romans: 38, 39; The Man: 9; and the Night: 2. From this evidence it can be concluded that the companions did not support the Wahabi’s doctrine on divine attributes.


The Wahabi and Muslim:

The Wahabi ( bida )


The Wahabis believe that they are the only true Muslims because they uphold divine unity while other Muslims are idolaters who deserve to lose their lives and possessions. According to them, a person must not be considered a Muslim even if he pronounces al-Shahadatain, the two testimonies, that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his apostle if he also believes that he could be blessed by visiting the Prophet’s mosque and ask for his intercession.

They maintain that any Muslim who professes such beliefs is an idolater whose idolatry is a worse kind than that of Pre-Islamic people who worshipped idols and planets.

In his book Kashful al-Shubuhat, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab called all Muslims, with the exception of his followers, idolaters about 24 times. Other labels he used to describe them were : heretics, idols’ worshippers apostates, anti-divine unity, enemies of divine unity, Allah’s enemies and perfidious Muslims in 20 different parts of the same book. His followers copied him in this practice.

It is essential to ask here if this doctrine was truly based on a consensus of learned scholars or is it a Wahabi bida’ or corruption? Ibn Hazim, the well-known Sunni scholar, asserted that <<a Muslim can not be called a heretic or a sinner on the bases of his opinions whether made in the form of a doctrine or a religious decree. After mentioning numerous religious scholars who endorsed this viewpoint he concluded that it was the consensus of all Companions who commented on it.>> 1 3

According to Ibn Taimia only the Khawarij judged other Muslims to be heretics on the bases of their sins and learned opinions or deductions. 1 4 As such, the Wahabis have no precedent supporting this bida’ except the infamous Khawarij.


The Wahabi and the Khawarij

Surprising, there are many similarities between the Wahabi and the Khawarij which distinguish them from the rest of the Muslim.

Some of these common points follow:

1. The Khawarij disagreed with all

Muslims by maintaining that whoever commits a cardinal sin is a heretic. The Wahabis copied them by equating heresy with committing what they considered to be sins. 15

2. The Khawarij decreed that if committing cardinal sins become common in a Muslim land then it deserved to be considered dar harb, literally a land of war and those who live in it forfeit their lives and possessions.

This is also the Wahabi’s verdict on the nation of Islam if they believe that it is permissible to travel to the Prophet’s tomb and the shrines of pious men and ask for their intercession with Allah, though they worship anly Allah and perform good deeds.

It is clear from the previous two points that the Wahabis are more disruptive and evil than the Khawarij While the Khawarij based their verdict of heresy on deeds that all Muslims agreed on being cardinal sins, the Wahabis chose acts which are not actually sins but favourable deeds performed by devout early Muslims including the Prophet’s Companions.

3. The Wahabis and the Khawarij are similar in their strict application of religion and their ossified interpretations of its doctrines. Thus when the Khawarij read the Quranic verse: <<Judgment belongs to Allah>> they said that whoever allowed resort to settlement is an idolator. ‘There is no judgment but Allah’s’ became their slogan. And though it is indisputable it was misapplied to justify their deviant ways. This attitude illustrates their ignorance of Islam and rigid thinking since the principle of settlement of dispute through adjudicator or third-party intervention was established by the Holy Quran, the Prophet’s Tradition and the deeds of the Companions and early Muslims. It is also supported by common logic.

Similarily, the Wahabis interpreted the following verses:

<<You alone we worship and You alone we pray for help,>. 16

,(<Who is he that can intercede with Him but by His own permission>>. 17 <<No intercession shall avail with Him but that which He Himself allow>>. 18

To mean that anyone who justifies visiting the Prophet’s Mosque or the shrines of pious Muslim and ask for their intercession is an idolator. They considered such acts as tantamount to worshipping the Prophet or those pious Muslims instead of Allah. Accordingly,

they declared that there is no intercession except His.

While these heated declarations are indisputable, the intentions behind them are open to suspicions. The Wahabis chose to ignore the tradition established by the Companions and early Muslims regarding the legality of visiting the Prophet’s Mosque and other shrines and asking for intercession.

4. Ibn Taimia observed that the deviant group the Khawarij was the first bida’ or corruption in Islam because its followers judged other Muslims as heretics and legalized killing them. 19 it can be added that the Wahabia, and for the same reason, is the last bida’ in Islam.

5. Some of the Prophet’s comments on the rise of the Khawarij and their deviation from Islam also apply to the Wahabis. Consider, for example, the Prophet’s saying that: <<a group of people shall emerge from the east who reads the Quran without understanding it. They shall deviate from it like an arrow missing its tai,(yet. Shaving the head shall he their distinguishing characteristics 20 In commenting on this saying, al-Qastalani said that <<‘due east’ means east of al-Medina such as Naj’id and further.>>

Naj’id is the birthplace of Wahabia from which it spread to other places. Also, shaving their heads was one of the Wahabis’ established tradition which was mandatory for all their followers including women. None of the deviant groups who predated t hem was known to impose it. Some of the religious scholars who witnessed the rise of this movement maintained that there is no need to write books to refute the Wahabia because it is sufficient to repeat the Prophet’s saying that ‘Shaving the head is their distinguishing characteristic,’ since none has done it before them.

6. The Prophet described the Khawarij’ as <<those who will slaughter Muslims and leave the pagans unharmed.>> This also applies to the Wahabis who fought only Muslims. Their scholars and books also call for waging war on other Muslims only.

7. Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn Omar described the Khawarij as << having applied verses revealed regarding pagans to the believers.>> 24 Ibn Abbas is reported to have said on the same subject:

Don’t be like the Khawarij who inter­preted some [verses] of the Quran to apply to the faithful. Those verses were revealed regarding followers of other divine messages and pagans. The Khawarij were ignorant of their meanings and as a result they killed [Muslims] and looted their possessions.

The Wahabis followed suit by applying verses revealed in the case of idolaters to the believers.

8. We can now imagine the following dialogue between a Sunni and a Wahabi:

-The Wahabi: The Hanabila [ie followers of Imam Ibn Hanball books are also ours. Which of these books do you disapprove of? If you indeed have something against them then you must cite their books and not their critics!

-The Sunni: What do you think of the Karamita? [ a dissident group formed during the Abbasid rule].

-The Wahabi: They are pagans and idolaters.

-The Sunni: But they claim adherence to the Prophet Household’s doctrines and that their books are also theirs. But the books of the Prophet Household contain nothing but words of enlightment and truth.

-The Wahabi: The Qaramita were liars and historians have demonstrated their heresy and falsification.

-The Sunni: Then you accept evidence presented by historians?

– The Wahabi: Yes! Imam al-Shafi said that the historian’s methodology in relying on multiple sources is better, in his opinion, than the acceptance of a single source by the narrators of the Prophet’s Tradition.

– The Sunni: Then you must accept what the historians considered as evidence of the Wahabi heresy.. A person’s deed may be held as evidence against him or her even if he denies doing it. And when the Qaramita legalized murdering Muslims and stealing their possessions no doubt regarding their heresy remained. This also applies to your Wahabi masters.

-The Wahabi: (was angry and speechless).

-The Sunni then added: What is your opinion of the description of the Khawarij as heretics who shall be punished with Hell’s fire?

– The Wahabi replied: The consensus is that the Khawarij deviated from the true path and thus incurred Allah’s wrath. But the Khawarij were put to rout at the Nahrawan battle and the Wahabis do not belong to them!

– The Sunni said: Why do you think the Khawarij deserved Allah’s wrath? was it because of the inadequacy of their prayers and fasting”

– The Wahabi: No!

– The Sunni: Was it then because of their devotion, or recital of the Quran or paying lipservice to the truth?

– The Wahabi: No!

– The Sunni persisted: Why then? Tell me!

The Wahabi stammered and could not manage a reply.

– The Sunni: There is one and only one reason for incurring Allah’s wrath and that is legalizing the slaughter of innocent Muslims and the theft of their possessions after calling them heretics and also whoever makes the claim that he is the only true Muslim. Anyone who commits such deeds and makes such claims deserves the same fate.


The Wahabi and the

Ghulat (Extremists)

The Ghulat or extremist are those who went to extremes in exalting a person or persons to the extent of raising him or them above the ranks of ordinary human beings.

At the same time of the rise of Wahabia in Naj’id, another person was preaching a new doctrine which renewed much of what has disappeared of the beliefs of the first Ghulats who deified Imam Ali and other members of the Prophet Household. His teachings were similar to those of Ibn Abdul Wahab in labelling his opponents as heretics. He actually went further than the Wahabia founder by attacking most of the Prophet’s Companions and calling them heretics.

The name of that man was Shaikh Ahmed al-Ihsaie (died 1241 AH.) His followers were thus known as al-Shaikhia. He was succeeded by Khathim al-Rashti who established his headquarters at Kerbala in southern Iraq.

The Wahabi’s attitudes toward this movement is interesting. As history report, the Wahabis attacked Karbala where al-Rashti and his followers resided. As their custom in all their military campaigns, the Wahabis sacked the city, slaughtering thousands of innocent men, women and children and looting and destroying houses and shops. But they guaranteed al-Rashti’s personal safety and declared that anyone entering his house shall be safe. This special treatment of this group and their leader unveils the true nature of the Wahabi and exposes the falsehood of their claim of opposing idolatry and defending divine unity.

At this point, it may be useful to compare this position with a similar one by Ibn Taimia, whom the Wahabis claim to follow, toward another extremist group, namely the Yazidis. The Yazidis exalted Yazid ibn Muawiya whose un-Islamic deeds were enumerated earlier. A branch of this sect was named al-Adawia after Udai ibn Musafir whom they exalted along with Yazid.

Ibn Taimia who was a contemporary of this sect maintained an inexplicably untypical attitude toward this group. Famed for his extreme opinions and fierce attacks on Islamic sects swiftly judging them to be deviant and heretic, he wrote a letter to this group addressing them as faithful Muslims. In this civil and well-wishing letter we find none of his offending style and usual labels which he used in communicating with or writing on other Islamic groups such as the Asharia, the Imamiya Shia, the Zaidis, Mutazila, Murajia and others.

His letter to this group begins as follows: 26

From Ahmed ibn Taimia to whoever receives this letter of the Muslims who belong to the Sunna and follow the exemplary, blessed, and learned shaikh Udai ibn Musafir al-Umawi. Allah has mercy on him and all those who follow his path.. May Allah lead them to His path and obey Him and His Prophet.

This shows that Ibn Taimia considered this deviant group as Sunni Muslim in variance with the consensus identifying them as extremists, heretics and idolaters who did not worship only Allah.


Whom does the Wahabi serve?

Muslims are abliged to give first priority to upholding Muslims’ interest. But do the Wahabis actually adhere to this principle Did they ever oppose colonial and imperialist plots against Muslim countries? What contributions did they make to counter the imperialist and Zionist interests in Muslim countries? And finally is it true that they are loyal to Western powers and have helped them to gain access to Muslims’ resources, and thus compromising their sovereignity and dignity?

It is clear to every Muslim that the Wahabis have faithfully served Western interests in Islamic countries. Furthermore, history of this group since the early days of its founder reveal not the slightest concern for developing Muslim communities through fighting poverty and illeteracy and upholding the rule of sharia and justice. Instead the Wahabis concentrated on labeling Muslims as heretics and idolaters who deserve to be put to death and their possessions looted. Nothing catches their interest and fires their enthusiasm except finding a grave which they believe must be destroyed or attacking anyone who asks the Prophet for intercession with Allah.

Under this banner they launched a vicious campaign against Muslims, murdering, looting and spreading discord and schism. But the safety of Muslim countries and communities against foreign attack was never one of their concerns. Thus, the Wahabi princes and religious leaders turned a blind eye to the occupation of Jerusalem, the fate of Bosnian and Lebanese Muslim and the American hegemony over Islamic countries and ex­ploitation of their oil resources.

At the same time they are outraged by the tomb of Hamza ibn Abd al-Mutalib which the Companions visited and prayed at and by the shrine of the Prophet’s grandson, al-Hussain ibn All which the Companions and early Muslims travelled long distances to visit it – and even during the lifetime of Ahmed ibn Hanbal as mentioned earlier. It is also pertinent to wonder why those Wahabis are not moved by the embargo imposed on the Libyan people as they were by the gifts they found at the Prophet’s tomb.

It is regrettable that so much of their time, effort and financial resources have been squandered on trivial issues which attract and deceive only the simple-minded. Why the Wahabis choose to focus on such issues can be answered in the following points:

First, their minds are closed and their thinking is rigid and superficial. As their writings and arguments indicate, they appear to be incapable of any profound thoughts.

Second, they fall to take into consideration basic facts about human nature and current developments in human societies. This is clearly seen in their disregard of religious. social sciences and scientific research and their total devotion to secondary and trivial issues which have no significance for the present times.

Third, their blunt language, strong criticism and obtuse viewpoints indicate that they hold no good intentions for the Islamic nation and its welfare.

Fourth, their open loyalty to Islam’s enemies is a fact requiring no further proof. It is now clear to all that the Wahabis are subservient to the West more than any other faction. As a result of this blind loyalty, the invading Zionist and imperialist forces have found it easy to penetrate Islamic countries and to destroy or plunder their resources and subjugate their populations. The Wahabis have given these foreign powers all the support they needed to realize their selfish objectives. This support has also made possible the establishment of the Zionist entity in the heart of the Muslim nation, and they continue to give it direct and indirect support. The Wahabis have also consistently helped pro-West regimes to put down liberation movements and to suppress the Islamic reawakening movement which has given them and other unpopular regimes a strong cause for worry.


The true faith regarding visiting the Prophet’s tomb and asking for his intercession

First, on visiting the Prophet’s tomb, the following evidence is presented:

1. Prophet Muhammad said: <<Whoever visits me after my death is as if he had visited me in my lifetime.>> 27

2. Prophet Muhammad said: <<Whoever visits me at al-Medina I shall be his witness and intercede on his behalf on Judgment Day.>> 28

3. Prophet Muhammad said: <<Whoever visits me at al-Medina shall be at my side on Judgment Day.>> 29

4. The Prophet also said: <<Whoever visits my tomb will entitled to my intercession.>> 30

5. Imam Malik said: If a man wants to visit the Prophet’s tomb let him turn his back to the Qibla ( ie the Kaba in Mecca), face the Prophet and call a blessing on him and supplicate. 31

6. Followers of Imam al-Shafi advised visitors of the Prophet’s tomb to stand facing the tomb with their backs to the Qibla. This was also Ahmed ibn Hanbal’s instruction. 32

7. In his book entitled Al-Ilal wa al-Su’alat, Abdullah ibn Ahmed ibn Hanbal (son of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal) wrote: <<1 asked my father if it is permissible for a person to touch the Prophet’s minber, ie pulpit, and to seek blessings by touching and kissing it and do the same at the Prophet’s tomb, and he answered me: It is allowed.>> 33

8. Al-tabari said: <<It is permissible to kiss and touch the [Prophet’s] tomb and that was the tradition of religious and pious persons. >> 34

9. Imam Jafar al-Sadiq reported that Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter, used to visit her uncle’s, Hamza, tomb every Friday. 35

Second, on asking for the Prophet’s intercession, we present the following testi­monies:

1. The Prophet said in his supplication: <<O Allah, by the right of supplicants … >> 36

2. Al-Sawi al-Hanbali wrote in his book Al-Mustawib on the subject of visiting the Prophet’s tomb: ‘The visitor should approach the tomb’s wall, facing it with his back to the Qibla and the pulpit to his left.’ He also described the procedure for supplication at the tomb as follows: <,(O Allah, you have addressed the Prophet in Your Book: ‘And if when they do themselves injustice by committing sins they can come to you to beg Allah’s forgiveness and the Prophet beseeches Allah to forgive them.’ So I have come to your Prophet to ask for forgiveness and I beseech You to grant me forgiveness as You have granted it to those who visited him in his lifetime. O Allah I ask You in the name of Your Prophet..’

3. In the supplication of Imam Ali ibn al-Hussain he said: <<O Lord, deliver me from sadness by the right of Muhammad and his Household.>> 37

4. The Hanbali shaikh Abu Ali al-Khala said: <<Whenever something worries me I would visit the tomb of [Imam] Musa ibn Jafar and ask for his intercession, and Allah always granted me what I asked for. >>38

5. Imam al-Shafi said: <<I seek blessings through Abi Hanifa by visiting his tomb daily. If I need anything I would perform a short prayer, visit his tomb and implore Allah to grant me my wish. My supplications were always answered.>> 39

6. Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Mo’amal said: <<We accompanied Imam Abi Bakr ibn Khuzaima, Abi Ali al-Thaqafi and a group of religious scholars on a visit to the tomb of [Imam] All ibn Musa al-Rida in Toos (Persia). I was astonished by the high respect shown by Ibn Khuzaima towards the tomb and his supplications at it.>> 40

7. Ibn Taimai said: Ahmed ibn Hanbal, as reported in Minsak al-Mirwithi, allowed asking for the Prophet’s intercession and supplicating at his tomb. Other sources such as Ibn Abi al-Dunia, al-Baihaqi, al-Tabarani have also confirmed this, according to Ibn Taimia. 41


Anti Wahabia books

A significant number of Muslim scholars have countered the Wahabi movement with books and disertations refuting their beliefs and exposing the falsehood of their arguments and their deviation from the Holy Book, The Traditions and the faith of early Muslims. A list of some of these books follows:

1. Al-Khawaja al-Sirhindi, Al-Usool al-Arbafi Tardeedal-Wahabia.

2. Al-Shaikh al-Mushrifi al-Maliki, Idhar al-Ukook mimin Mana’ al-Tawasil bi al-Nabi wa al-Wali al-Sadooq.

3. Muhammad ata-Allah, Al-Aqwa’l al-Mardia fi al-Rad ala al- Wahabia.

4. Al-Shaikh Tahir Sunbil al-Hanafi, Al-Intisar lilAwlia’al-Abrar.

5. Al-Shaikh Ibraheem al-Rawi, Al-Awraq al-Baghdadiafi al-Hawadith al-Najdia.

6. Al-Shaikh Salman al-Azami, Al-Baraheen al-Satia’.

7. Al-Shaikh Hamadallah al-Dajawi, Al-Basair li Munkiri al-Tawasil.

8. Nassir al-Saeed, Tarikh al-Saud.

9. Al-Shaikh Abdullah ibn Abdu Latif al-Shafi, Tajreed Saif al-Jihad li Muda’i al-Ijtihad.

10. Al-Shaikh Abdullah ibn Ibraheem Merghani, Tahreth al-Aqbia ala al-Istiqatha bi al-Anbia wa al-Awlia.

11. Al-Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Rahman al-Hanbali, Tahakum al-Muqalideen bi min Ida’Tajdeed al-Deen.

12. Abu Hamid ibn Marzook, Al-Tawasil bi

al-Nabi wa bi al-Saliheen.

13. Al-Shaikh Ibraheem Hilmi, Jalal al-Haqfi KashfAhwal Shirar al-Khalq.

14. Malik Dawood, Al-Haqaiq al-Islamia fi al-Ra’d ala al-Mazaim al-Wahabia bi

Ail’lat al-Kitab wa al-Sunna al-Nabawia.

15. Ahmed ibn Zaini Dahlan, Khulasat al-Kalam fi Umara al-Balad al-Haram.

16 – ———– Al-Durur al-Sania, fi al-Ra’d ala al- Wahabia.

l7———— Fitnat al-Wahabia.

18. Al-Shaikh Ismail AI-Tamimi al-Maliki al-Tunisi, Ra’d ala Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab.

19. Al-Sakih al-Hanbali Abdul Muhsin al-Ushaikiri, A 1-Ra’d ala al- Wahabia.

20. Al-Shaikh Ibraheem ibn Abdul Kadir al-Riahi al-Tunisi al-Maliki, Ra’d ala al-Wahabia.

21. Al-Shaikh Ibraheem ibn Uthman al-Samnoodi al-Masri, Sa’dat al-Darain fi al-Ra’d ala al-Furkatain al-Wahabia wa Muqalidat al-Dahria.

22. Abu Hamid Marzook, Al-Saif al-Batir li Unq al-Munkir ala al-Akabir.

23. Shah Fadhil Rasool AI-Qadiri, Saif al-Jabar al-Maslool ala A’dai al-Abrar.

24. AI-Shaikh Dawood ibn Sulaiman al-Baghdadi, Sulh al-Ikhwan fl al-Ra’d ala min Qal bi al-Shurk wa al-Kufran.

25.Al-Shaikh Sulaiman ibn Abdul Wahab, Al-Sawaiq al-Ilahia fi al-Ra’d ala

at– Wahabia.

26———– Fasil al-Khitab fi al-Rad ala Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab.

27. Al-Shaikh Jameel Sidqi al-Zahawi, Al-Fajr al-Sadiq.

28. Muhsin al-Ameen, Kashf al-Irtiabfi Atba’ Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab.

29. Muhammad Jawad Mugania, Hathi Hia al-Wahabia.



1. Sulaiman ibn Abdul Wahab, Al-Ra’d ala al-Wahabia, p. 7; Ibid., Fittiat al-Wahabia, p. 5; Mahmoud Shukri al-Aloosi, Al-Sawa’ik al-Ilahia fi al-Ra’d ala al- Wahabia.

2. Muhammad Abda, Al-Islam wa al-Nasrania, 8th edition, p. 97.

3. Ibn Taimia, Majmi’at Fatawa ibn Taimia, vol. 3, p.


4. Ibn Taimia, Ra’s al-Hussain, p. 209.

5. Al- San’ani, Tat’hear al-I’tiqad, p. 7.

6. Ibn Taimia, Al-Ziara, vol. 7, pp. 10 I- 106.

7. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, Al-Ra’sal al-A’mlia al-Tisa‘, p. 120.

8. Abdul Latif ibn Abdul Wahab [grandson of the founder], Al-Hadia al-Sania, Part Four.

9. Ibn Taimia, Tafseer Sura al-Noor, pp. 178-179.

10. Ibn Taimia, Muqadima fi Usool al-Tafseer, p. 5 1.

11. Cited by al-Shawkani in Fatih al-Qadeer, vol. 1, p. 272.

12. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, Al-Ra’sal al-A’mlia al-Tisa’, p. 79; Ibid., Fatih al-Majeed, pp. 40-41 Ibid., Arba’al-Quaid; Ibid., Kashful al-Shubuhat; al-San’ani, Tat’hearal -I’tiqad, pp. 7, 12, 25.

13. Ibn- Hazim, Al-Fasil, vol. 2, p. 247; Al-Sharani, Al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir, ch. 58.

14. Ibn Taimia, Majmut Fatawa, vol. 13, p. 20.

15. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab, Kashful al-Shubuhat; AI-San’ani, Tat’hearal-Itiqad.

16. The Quran 1:5.

17. The Quran 21:28.

18. The Quran 34:23.

19. Ibn Taimia, Majmut al-Fatawa, vol. 13, p. 20.

20. Saheeh al-Bukhari, Kitab al-Tawheed, part 57,No. 7123.

21. AI-Qastalani, Irshad al-Sari, Dar al-Fikr, vol. 15, p. 626.

22. Zaini Dahlan, Fitnat al- Wahabia, p. 19.

23. Ibn Taimia, Majmut al-Fatawa, vol. 13. p. 32.

24. Saheeh al-Bukhari, Kitab Istitabat al-Murtadean, part 5.

25. Hamaion Hima’yati, Al-Wahabia: Nakd wa Tahleel, p. 24.

26. Ibn Taimia, Al-Was’ia al-Kubra, P. 5.

27. Sunnun al-Darqutni, vol. 2, p. 278.

28. Sunnun Abi Dawood, vol. 2, p. 12; Ibn Abi al-Dunia, Wa,fa al-Wafa, p. 1395.

29. AI-Baihaqi, Al-Suntiun al-Kubra, vol. 5, p. 245.

30. Sunnun al-Darqutni, vol. 2, pp. 378, 194.

31. AI-Nawawi, Roos al-Masa’il; Wafa al-Wafa, op. cit., p. 1377.

32. Wafa al-Wafa, op. cit., p. 1378.

33. Ibid., p. 1404.

34. Ibid., p. 1406.

35. Tafseer al-Qurtubi, vol. 10, p. 248.

36. Ibn al-Sunni, Amal al- Yaom wa al-Laila.

37. Al-Sahifa al-Sajadia, Supplication no. 30.

38. Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 1, p. 120.

39. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 123; AI-Khawarizmi, Manaqib Abi Hanifa, vol. 2, p. 199.

40. Tahtheeb al-Tah’theeb, vol. 7, p. 339.

41. Ibn Taimia, Al-Tawasil wa la-Wasila, pp. 105-106.

Published in: on June 22, 2008 at 4:44 am  Leave a Comment  

Protokol-protokol Zionis antarabangsa ( sebagai peringatan )

//” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

Dalam bukunya The International Jew (1976), Henry Ford menyatakan, “Jika saya ditanya tentang asli tidaknya Protokolat Zionis, maka saya tidak akan mau masuk ke dalam perdebatan panjang itu. Satu-satunya hal yang ingin saya katakan berkenaan dengannya adalah, bahwa semua kejadian yang ada di dunia ini sejalan dengannya…”

Ada benarnya yang dikatakan Henry Ford.

Misalnya, Protokol No 15. Krisis ekonomi yang dibuat akan memberikan hak baru kepada konspirasi, yaitu hak pemilik modal dalam penentuan arah kekuasaan. Ini akan menjadi kekuasaan turunan. Protokol No.21. Penguasaan kekayaan alam negeri-negeri non-Yahudi mutlak dilakukan.

oleh : Us. Mohd Darus Senawi Ali ( Majlis Agama Pulau Pinang )

artikel asal :


Protokol Yahudi adalah satu perancangan terperinci dan teliti, ianya adalah hasil satu kongeres Yahudi antara bangsa yang telah berlangsong di bandar Bal di Swizland pada tahun 1897, yang dipengurusi oleh Teodur Hardzal.

Apa yang dapat kita simpulkan dari kesemua protokol yang sebanyak dua puluh empat (24) protokol, ialah satu luahan kebencian, hasad, dengki kesumat kaum Yahudi terhadap alam seluruhnya, Islam mau pun bukan Islam, selain dari bangsa Yahudi. Ianya mencerminkan segala sifat buruk dan jahat, pendendam, tamak, haluba, gelojoh, penindas, membunuh dan sebagainya. Falsafah yang menyebut “ Matlamat menghalalkan sarana” merupakan pegangan terpenting dalam ajaran Yahudi dan darinya terlakar perancangan jahat mereka yang di sebut: The protocols of Learned Elders of Zion”.

Di hari ini kita boleh pegang buku ini kemudian kita cuba padankan dengan sinario yang berlalu di hadapan mata kepala kita, pasti kita mendapati ianya berlaku satu persatu, persis sebagai mana yang dirancana oleh pihak Yahudi itu.

Ajaran-ajaran agama dengan segala nilai murni yang dibawa oleh para nabi dan rasul telah dapat membentuk budi pekerti manusia di merata pelosok dunia, membenteras hawa nafsu, kecenderungan jahat, pekerti liar, namun dengan kemunculan Yahudi dan pengaruh protokolnya telah melenyap hampir semua nilai-nilai murni yang dibina oleh ajaran-ajaran Ilahi itu, kini dunia dan tidak terlepas Malaysia seakan-akan berada di zaman Jahiliah dengan segala amalan-amalan yang liar dan tidak berperi kemanusian.

Saripati Perancangan Konspirasi Yahudi:

  • sejak berabad-abad Yahudi merancana satu pelan rahsia bertujuan menawan dan menguasai dunia, semata-mata untuk kemeselahatan bangsa Yahudi.
  • pelan rahsia ini memperlihatkan hasad dengki Yahudi tehadap dunia termasuk agama Kristian itu sendiri, di Amerika pergerakan Yahudi telah meresap masuk hingga kedalam gereja, di antara usahanya ialah menganjur kepada libralisma dan kebebasan dari sebarang nilai agama.
  • gerakan Yahudi berusaha menjatuhkan pemerintahan yang sedang berkuasa untuk digantikan dengan sejenis pemerintahan kuku besi, dalam proses ini gerakan Yahudi memperdaya raja-raja dan pemerintah supaya melakukan penginanyan dan kezaliman terhadap rakyat jelata dan dari sudut yang lain Yahudi menggalakan rakyat jelata supaya bangkit menentang raja-raja dan pemerintah yang zalim, kununnya menuntut keadilan, kebebasan dan persamaan dan sebagainya.
  • meninmbulkan percanggahan dan huru hara di dalam semua negara melalui pertubuhan rahsia mereka yang berlebal politik, agama, kesenian, sukan, Fremeson, Gereen peace dan pertubuhan berdaftar lain.
  • mereka mengetahui bahawa sistem pemerintah di negara-negara dunia pada hari ini sudah rosak dan korap, justeru itu maka mereka berkewajipan melipatgandakan kerosakan tadi, akhirnya pemerintahan ini akan tumbang dan jatuh dengan mudah, setelah itu mudah pula untuk didirikan pemerintahan Yahudi sebagai penggantinya, kerja memanipolasikan pemerintahan yang korap ini atau yang baik adalah kerja dan profision bangsa Yahudi. Berdasarkan pengalaman mereka di sepanjang sejarah jahat mereka.
  • Yahudi menganggap bahawa semua manusia selain Yahudi adalah setaraf dengan binatang dikenali sebagai Goyem semua mereka diperintah dan dikirabicara sebagai mana diperintah binatang ternakan.
  • semua midia massa, industeri berita, percetakan, institusi pengajian, panggong-panggong hiburan, syarikat-syarikat perfilamen , perundangan, dan penggubalannya mestilah di bawah kekuasaan Yahudi, ini kerana Yahudi memiliki dan monopoli emas (kekayaan) dunia.
  • meletakkan asas ekonomi dunia di atas dasar emas yang dimonopoli oleh kaum Yahudi, bukan di atas dasar kerja dan penghasilan atau kekayaan lain, di samping selalu menimbulkan krisis-krisis ekonomi dunia, sahingga dengan itu maka tidak ada masa di mana dunia ini damai dan tenang. [Henry Ford telah menyebut: The Jewish philosophy of money is not to make money “but to get money” . the distinction between these two is fundamental. It is difference between “getting” and “making”.] The International Jew ms. 7

Nota Kaki:

Muhammad Khalifah al-Tunisi, al-Khatar al-Yahudi, ms. 26.

Henry Ford, The International Jew, ms. 10.

Pihak Yahudi memang bangsat menjadi batu api di antara dua kelompok, kita masih ingat lagi bagai mana Yahudi berjaya melagakan di antara dua suku Arab iaitu kaum Khazraj dan Aws di Yathrib sebelum kedatangan Islam, merekalah yang membiaya kedua-dua kabilah ini, mereka terpaksa pula berhutang dari kaum Yahudi pengisap darah, menyebabkan mereka terpaksa menyerah tanah milik mereka kepada Yahudi malah lebih teruk lagi, kaum yahudi ini memksa mereka menyerah anak-anak perempuan mereka bagi melangsaikan hutang piutang mereka.

Lihat saja kerja Yahudi yang menggerak Quraisy, Ghatafan dan kabilah-kabilah Arab lain untuk memerangi Rasulullah , dalam peperangan al-Ahzab ataual-Khandaq.

Lihat satu persatu protokol mereka…..

Disalin dari : Hanzalah Blog ( klik sini )

Protokol 1 :Cara memerintah yang sebaik-baiknya ialah dengan menggunakan kekerasan dan keganasan bukan dengan perbincangan ilmiah. Hak itu terletak kepada kekuatan. Sesungguhnya politik tidak sesuai dengan akhlak. Pemerintah yang berpandukan moral bukanlah ahli politik yang bijak. Mereka yang ingin memerintah mestilah pandai menggunakan tipu helah dan matlamat yang menghalalkan cara. Minuman keras harus digunakan untuk mencapai tujuan itu.

Protokol 2
: Bantuan-bantuan yang diberikan oleh bangsa Yahudi melalui agen-agen Yahudi akan memperkuatkan kedudukan Yahudi. Yahudi akan memerintah bangsa lain seperti bangsa itu sendiri memerintah negaranya tanpa disedari bahawa mereka telah berada di bawah genggaman Yahudi. Ketua pentadbir yang dilantik untuk mengatur pentadbiran negeri terdiri daripada oramg-orang yang berjiwa budak, yang mudah diarah untuk kepentingan Yahudi. Melalui akhbar, Yahudi mengerakkan fikiran orang ramai serta mengambil kesempatan mendapatkan emas, meskipun dari lautan darah dan air mata. Pengorbanan adalah perlu, kerana setiap yang bernyawa di kalangan Yahudi berharga 1,000 orang bukan Yahudi.

Protokol 3 : Yahudi akan menjadikan negara bukan Yahudi , sebagai gelanggang pertelagahan manusia yang boleh membawa huru-hara dan seterusnya kemerosotan ekonomi. Yahudi akan berlagak sebagai penyelamat dengan mempelawa memasuki PASUKAN KITA iaitu sosialis, komunis dan lain-lain yang dapat memberi ruang kepada Yahudi untuk menguasai bangsa bukan Yahudi. Dalam alam fikiran Yahudi wajib ditanam perasaan bahawa semua haiwan (bangsa bukan Yahudi) tidur nyenyak apabila kenyang dengan darah. Ketika itu senanglah bagi yahudi memperhambakan mereka.

Protokol 4 : Bangsa Yahudi mestilah menghapuskan segala bentuk kepercayaan agama serta mengikis dari hati orang bukan Yahudi prinsip ketuhanan dan menggantikannya dengan perkiraan ilmu hisab serta lain-lain keperluan kebendaan. Fikiran orang bukan Yahudi mestilah dialih ke arah memikirkan soal perdagangan dan perusahaan supaya mereka tidak ada masa untuk memikirkan musuh-musuh mereka. Akhirnya seluruh kepentingan akan jatuh ke tangan Yahudi.

Protokol 5 : Kalau muncul orang-orang yang bijaksana dari kalangan bukan Yahudi, mereka tidak akan dapat mengatasi bangsa Yahudi. Ilmu sains, politik dan ekonomi rekaan orang Yahudi yang bijak memberi taraf yang tinggi kepada modal. Untuk menjamin public oponion kepada Yahudi, bangsa Yahudi mestilah membingungkan mereka dengan memberikan pelbagai pendapat yang saling bertentangan. Akhirnya mereka mengambil keputusan tidak mencampuri urusan politik kerana politik hanya difahami oleh orang-orang yang memimpin rakyat sahaja. Inilah rahsia yang pertama.
Protokol-protokol Zionis antarabangsa: Untuk memusnahkan perusahaan bangsa bukan Yahudi, ialah dengan cara merosakkan sumber pengeluaran dengan memupuk tabiat berbuat kejahatan dan meminum minuman keras di kalangan pekerja, serta mengambil langkah menghapuskan orang-orang terpelajar di kalangan bangsa bukan Yahudi. Semua bangsa yang bukan Yahudi mesti dipatuhkan menduduki martabat kaum buruh yang melarat.

Protokol 7 : Orang-orang Yahudi wajib menaburkan fitnah supaya timbul kekacauan, pertelagahan dan permusuhan di kalangan manusia. Bila timbul penentangan terhadap bangsa Yahudi, maka wajiblah orang-orang Yahudi menyambutnya dengan peperangan secara total di seluruh dunia .

Protokol 8 : Pemerintah Yahudi akan dikelilingi oleh segolongan ahli-ahli bank, jutawan dan usahawan.

Protokol 9 : Yahudi akan mendirikan KERAJAAN DIKTATOR dengan membuat dan melaksanakan undang-undang yang tegas , iaitu undang-undang yang akan membunuh tanpa pengampunan. Yahudi akan merosakkan moral pemuda-pemuda bukan Yahudi dengan menanamkan teori-teori palsu dan ilmu-ilmu yang batil.

Protokol 10 : Yahudi akan membawa masuk racun liberisme ke dalam negara-negara bukan Yahudi supaya menggugat kestabilan politik. Pilihanraya diatur supaya boleh memberi kemenangan kepada pemimpin-pemimpin yang dapat bertugas sebagai agen Yahudi dalam melaksanakan rancangan-rancangan Yahudi.

Protokol 11 : Bangsa Yahudi menyifatkan diri mereka sebagai SERIGALA dan bangsa lain sebagai KAMBING. Bagi mereka, Yahudi merupakan bangsa yang terpilih dan mereka bercerai-berai di atas muka bumi ini sebagai satu rahmat. Cerai-berai yang nampak sebagai satu kelemahan, tetapi mencerminkan kekuatan yang dapat membawa bangsa itu ke pintu kekuasaan di seluruh dunia.

Protokol 12 : Yahudi akan mengubah pengertian tentang KEBEBASAN atau KEMERDEKAAN dengan mentafsirkan istilah itu sebagai mengamalkan apa-apa yang diperkenalkan atau diberikan oleh undang-undang. Kalau bangsa bukan Yahudi diberi permit menerbitkan 10 akhbar atau majalah, maka bangsa Yahudi mesti menerbitkan 30 akhbar atau majalah. Ia penting supaya menjadi alat untuk mengubah fikiran rakyat.

Protokol 13
: Untuk melengkapi usaha-usaha memonopoli dan mempercepatkan proses keruntuhan kaum industrialis dari kalangan bukan Yahudi, di samping terus mendorong adanya spekulasi itu, maka bangsa Yahudi menyebarkan projek-projek kemewahan, badan pertunjukan di kalangan bukan Yahudi kerana semuanya ini akan menelan kekayaan mereka. Untuk mengalihkan perhatian orang-orang bukan Yahudi dari memikirkan persoalan politik, maka agen-agen Yahudi hendaklah membawa mereka kepada kegiatan-kegiatan hiburan, olahraga (sukan), pesta-pesta, pertandingan-pertandingan kesenian, kebudayaan dan lain-lain lagi.

Protokol 14 : Para filosuf mestilah membincangkan kekurangan-kekurangan serta mendedahkan keburukan agama-agama lain. Para penulis Yahudi harus menonjolkan tulisan-tulisan pornografi (lucah) iaitu mengadakan sastera yang tidak bermakna, kotor dan keji.

Protokol 15 : Bila mendapat kekuasaan, bangsa Yahudi akan membunuh tanpa belas-kasihan terhadap setiap orang yang menentangnya. Setiap pertubuhan yang merancang untuk menentangnya mestilah dibubarkan dan ahli-ahlinya dibuang negeri. Oleh itu mesti didirikan sebanyak-banyaknya FREMASONIC LODGE iaitu tempat-tempat pertemuan rahsia orang-orang Yahudi.

Protokol 16 : Yahudi akan membangunkan universiti mengikut rancangan yang tersusun. Pensyarah-pensyarah akan mendidik dan membina para pemuda supaya menjadi manusia yang patuh kepada pihak berkuasa (Yahudi) .Bagaimanapun, ajaran mengenai undang-undang negeri dan politik tidak diajar kecuali beberapa orang sahaja yang dipilih kerana kebolehan mereka.

Protokol 17 : Yahudi meletakkan kehakiman dalam bidang yang sempit dan terhad. Perguaman akan melahirkan orang-orang yang kejam dan tidak berperikemanusiaan . Ia mempunyai tabiat untuk mencapai kemenangan bagi orang yang dibelanya, walaupun terpaksa menghancurkan semangat keadilan dan mengorbankan kebajikan masyarakat.

Protokol 18 : The King of Jew akan dikawal oleh pengawal-pengawal rahsia, kerana orang-orang Yahudi tidak akan membuka pintu kepada kemungkinan adanya kegiatan-kegiatan untuk menentang Yahudi.

Protokol 19 : Bangsa Yahudi akan membicarakan orang-orang yang melakukan kesalahan politik sama seperti orang yang membunuh dan lain-lain kesalahan yang hina. Orang ramai akan memandang kesalahan-kesalahan politik itu sebagai kesalahan yang hina dan berasa benci kepada mereka yang melakukannya.

Protokol 20 : Bank Yahudi International akan memberi pinjaman kepada bangsa yang bukan Yahudi dengan kadar bunga yang tinggi. Pinjaman yang sedemikian merupakan lintah yang melekat pada badan. Bank Yahudi akan membiarkan lebih banyak lintah yang melekat hingga akhirnya mereka mati kerana kehilangan darah yang terlalu banyak. Ekonomi akan lumpuh bila hutang melekat.

Protokol 21 : Yahudi menggantikan pasaran wang institusi hutang kerajaan di mana tujuannya untuk meletakkan nilai perusahaan mengikut pendapatan kerajaan. Institusi ini akan dapat menawarkan kepada pasaran 500 sijil pinjaman perusahaan dalam sehari atau memberi sebanyak itu juga. Dengan cara inilah perusahaan akan bergantung kepada Yahudi.

Protokol 22 : Untuk mencapai tujuan yang baik, kadang-kadang kekerasan terpaksa digunakan. Kekuasaan bagi Yahudi kerana BERKUASA PENUH dalam rangka meletakkan dunia di bawah pemerintahannya. Di tangan Yahudilah terletak pusat kekuasaan yang paling besar.

Protokol 23 : Orang Yahudi wajib melatih seluruh umat manusia dalam meninggikan rasa segan dan malu agar mereka terbiasa dengan sifat patuh dan setia iaitu setia pada Yahudi.

Protokol 24
: Kerajaan tidak boleh diserahkan kepada mereka yang tidak tahu selok-belok pemerintahan. Hanya mereka yang boleh menunjukkan sifat keras, kejam dan boleh memerintah dengan tegas akan menerima teraju kerajaan daripada pemimpin-pemimpin kita (Yahudi ).

Published in: on June 19, 2008 at 9:08 am  Leave a Comment  

50 kesalahan Al-Albani ; Ulama Hadis idola Dr Asri @ Ustaz Wahabi !!!


Al-Albani has said in “Sharh al-Aqeedah at-Tahaweeah, pg. 27-28″ (8th edition, Maktab al-Islami) by Shaykh Ibn Abi al-Izz al-Hanafi (Rahimahullah), that any Hadith coming from the Sahih collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim is Sahih, not because they were narrated by Bukhari and Muslim, but because the Ahadith are in fact correct. But he clearly contradicts himself, since he has weakened Ahadith from Bukhari and Muslim himself! Now let us consider this information in the light of elaboration :-


No 1: (*Pg. 10 no. 1 )

Hadith: The Prophet (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) said: “Allah says I will be an opponent to 3 persons on the day of resurrection: (a) One who makes a covenant in my Name but he proves treacherous, (b) One who sells a free person (as a slave) and eats the price (c) And one who employs a laborer and gets the full work done by him, but doesn’t pay him his wages.” [Bukhari no 2114-Arabic version, or see the English version 3/430 pg 236].

Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 4/111 no. 4054″. Little does he know that this Hadith has been narrated by Ahmad and Bukhari from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 2: (*Pg. 10 no. 2 )

Hadith: “Sacrifice only a grown up cow unless it is difficult for you, in which case sacrifice a ram.” [Muslim no. 1963-Arabic edition, or see the English version 3/4836 pg. 1086].

Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 6/64 no. 6222.” Although this Hadith has been narrated by Imam’s Ahmad, Muslim, Abu Dawood, Nisai and Ibn Majah from Jaabir (Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 3: (*Pg. 10 no. 3 )

Hadith: “Amongst the worst people in Allah’s sight on the Day of Judgement will be the man who makes love to his wife and she to him, and he divulges her secret.” [Muslim no. 1437- Arabic edition].

Al-Albani claims that this Hadith is DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/197 no. 2005.” Although it has been narrated by Muslim from Abi Sayyed (Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 4: (*Pg. 10 no. 4 )

Hadith: “If someone woke up at night (for prayers) let him begin his prayers with 2 light rak’ats.” [Muslim no. 768]. Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 1/213 no. 718.” Although it is narrated by Muslim and Ahmad from Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 5: (*Pg. 11 no. 5 )

Hadith: “You will rise with shining foreheads and shining hands and feet on the Day of Judgement by completing Wudhu properly. . . . . . . .” [Muslim no. 246].

Al-Albani claims it is DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/14 no. 1425.” Although it has been narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 6: (*Pg. 11 no. 6 )

Hadith: “The greatest trust in the sight of Allah on the Day of Judgement is the man who doesn’t divulge the secrets between him and his wife.” [Muslim no’s 124 and 1437]

Al-Albani claims it is DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/192 no. 1986.” Although it has been narrated by Muslim, Ahmad and Abu Dawood from Abi Sayyed (Allah be pleased with him)!!

No 7: (*Pg. 11 no. 7 )

Hadith: “If anyone READS the last ten verses of Surah al-Kahf he will be saved from the mischief of the Dajjal.” [Muslim no. 809].

Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/233 no. 5772.” NB- The word used by Muslim is MEMORIZED and not READ as al-Albani claimed; what an awful mistake! This Hadith has been narrated by Muslim, Ahmad and Nisai from Abi Darda (Allah be pleased with him)!! (Also recorded by Imam Nawawi in “Riyadh us-Saliheen, 2/1021″ of the English ed’n).

No 8: (*Pg. 11 no. 8 )

Hadith: “The Prophet (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) had a horse called al-Laheef.” [Bukhari, see Fath al-Bari of Hafiz Ibn Hajar 6/58 no. 2855]. But Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 4/208 no. 4489.” Although it has been narrated by Bukhari from Sahl ibn Sa’ad (Allah be pleased with him)!!!

Shaykh Saqqaf said: “This is only anger from anguish, little from a lot and if it wasn’t for the fear of lengthening and boring the reader, I would have mentioned many other examples from al-Albani’s books whilst reading them. Imagine what I would have found if I had traced everything he wrote?”


Shaykh Saqqaf said: “The strange and amazing thing is that Shaykh al-Albani misquoted many great Hadith scholars and disregards them by his lack of knowledge, either directly or indirectly! He crowns himself as an unbeatable source and even tries to imitate the great scholars by using such terms like “Lam aqif ala sanadih“, which means “I could not find the chain of narration”, or using similar phrases! He also accuses some of the best memorizers of Hadith for lack of attention, even though he is the one best described by that!” Now for some examples to prove our point:

No 9 : (* Pg. 20 no. 1 )

Al-Albani said in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 6/251 no. 1847″ (in connection to a narration from Ali): “I could not find the sanad.”

Shaykh Saqqaf said: “Ridiculous! If this al-Albani was any scholar of Islam, then he would have known that this Hadith can be found in “Sunan al-Bayhaqi, 7/121″ :- Narrated by Abu Sayyed ibn Abi Amarah, who said that Abu al-Abbas Muhammad ibn Yaqoob who said to us that Ahmad ibn Abdal Hamid said that Abu Usama from Sufyan from Salma ibn Kahil from Mu’awiya ibn Soayd who said, ‘I found this in my fathers book from Ali (Allah be pleased with him).'”

No 10 : (* Pg. 21 no. 2 )

Al-Albani said in ‘Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/283′: Hadith of Ibn Umar ‘Kisses are usury,’ I could not find the sanad


Shaykh Saqqaf said: “This is outrageously wrong for surely this is mentioned in ‘Fatawa al-Shaykh ibn Taymiyya al-Misriyah (3/295)’: ‘Harb said Obaidullah ibn Mu’az said to us, my father said to me that Soayd from Jiballa who heard Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) as saying: Kisses are usury.’ And these narrators are all authentic according to Ibn Taymiyya!”

No 11 : (* Pg. 21 no. 3 )

Hadith of Ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him): “The Qur’an was sent down in 7 dialects. Everyone of its verses has an explicit and implicit meaning and every interdiction is clearly defined.” Al-Albani stated in his checking of “Mishkat ul-Masabih, 1/80 no. 238″ that the author of Mishkat concluded many Ahadith with the words “Narrated in Sharh us-Sunnah,” but when he examined the chapter on Ilm and in Fadail al-Qur’an he could not find it!

Shaykh Saqqaf said: “The great scholar has spoken! Wrongly as usual. I wish to say to this fraud that if he is seriously interested in finding this Hadith we suggest he looks in the chapter entitled ‘Al-Khusama fi al-Qur’an’ from Sharh-us-Sunnah (1/262), and narrated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (no. 74), Abu Ya’ala in his Musnad (no.5403), Tahawi in Sharh al-Mushkil al-Athar (4/172), Bazzar (3/90 Kashf al-Asrar) and Haythami has mentioned it in Majmoo’a al-Zawaid (7/152) and he has ascribed it to Bazzar, Abu Ya’ala and Tabarani in al-Awsat who said that the narrators are trustworthy.”

No 12 : (* Pg. 22 no. 4 )

Al-Albani stated in his “Sahihah, 1/230″ while he was commenting on Hadith no. 149: “The believer is the one who does not fill his stomach. . . . The Hadith from Aisha as mentioned by Al-Mundhiri (3/237) and by Al-Hakim from Ibn Abbas, I (Albani) could not find it in Mustadrak al-Hakim after checking it in his ‘Thoughts’ section.”

Shaykh Saqqaf said: “Please don’t encourage the public to fall into the void of ignorance which you have tumbled into! If you check Mustadrak al-Hakim (2/12) you will find it! This proves that you are unskilled at using book indexes and the memorization of Hadith!”

No 13 : (* Pg. 23 )

Another ridiculous assumption is made by al-Albani in his “Sahihah, 2/476″ where he claims that the Hadith: “Abu Bakr is from me, holding the position of (my) hearing” is not in the book ‘Hilya’


We suggest you look in the book “Hilya , 4/73!”

No 14 : (*Pg. 23 no. 5 )

Al-Albani said in his “Sahihah, 1/638 no. 365, 4th edition”: “Yahya ibn Malik has been ignored by the 6 main scholars of Hadith, for he was not mentioned in the books of Tahdhib, Taqreeb or Tadhhib.”

Shaykh Saqqaf: “That is what you say! It is not like that, for surely he is mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib of Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (12/19 Dar al-Fikr edition) by the nickname Abu Ayoob al-Maraagi!!

So beware!


No 15 : (* Pg. 7 )

Al-Albani has criticized the Imam al-Muhaddith Abu’l Fadl Abdullah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghimari (Rahimahullah) for mentioning in his book “al-Kanz al-Thameen” a Hadith from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him) with reference to the narrator Abu Maymoona: “Spread salaam, feed the poor. . . .”

Al-Albani said in “Silsilah al-Daeefa, 3/492″, after referring this Hadith to Imam Ahmad (2/295) and others: “I say this is a weak sanad, Daraqutni has said ‘Qatada from Abu Maymoona from Abu Hurayra: Unknown, and it is to be discarded.'” Al-Albani then said on the same page: “Notice, a slapdash has happened with Suyuti and Munawi when they came across this Hadith, and I have also shown in a previous reference, no. 571, that al-Ghimari was also wrong for mentioning it in al-Kanz.”

But in reality it is al-Albani who has become slapdashed, because he has made a big contradiction by using this same sanad in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/238″ where he says, “Classified by Ahmad (2/295), al-Hakim . . . from Qatada from Abu Maymoona, and he is trusted as in the book ‘al-Taqreeb’, and Hakim said: ‘A Sahih sanad‘, and al-Dhahabi agreed with Hakim!

So, by Allah glance at this mistake! Who do you think is wrong, the Muhaddith al-Ghimari (also Suyuti and Munawi) or al-Albani?

No 16 : (* Pg. 27 no. 3 )

Al-Albani wanted to weaken a Hadith which allowed women to wear golden jewellery, and in the sanad for that Hadith there is Muhammad ibn Imara. Al-Albani claimed that Abu Haatim said that this narrator was: “Not that strong,” see the book “Hayat al-Albani wa-Atharu. . . part 1, pg. 207.”

The truth is that Abu Haatim al-Razi said in the book ‘al-Jarh wa-Taadeel, 8/45′: “A good narrator but not that strong. . .” So note that al-Albani has removed the phrase “A good narrator !”

NB-(al-Albani has made many of the Hadith which forbid Gold to women to be Sahih, in fact other scholars have declared these Hadith to be daeef and abrogated by other Sahih Hadith which allow the wearing of gold by women. One of the well known Shaykh’s of the “Salafiyya” – Yusuf al-Qardawi said in his book: ‘Islamic awakening between rejection and extremism, pg. 85: “In our own times, Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani has come out with an opinion, different from the consensus on permitting women to adorn themselves with gold, which has been accepted by all madhahib for the last fourteen centuries. He not only believes that the isnad of these Ahadith is authentic, but that they have not been revoked. So, he believes, the Ahadith prohibit gold rings and earrings.”

So who is the one who violates the ijma of the Ummah with his extreme opinions?!)

No 17 : (* Pg. 37 no. 1 )

Hadith: Mahmood ibn Lubayd said, “Allah’s Messenger (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) was informed about a man who had divorced his wife 3 times (in one sitting), so he stood up angrily and said: ‘Is he playing with Allah’s book whilst I am still amongst you?’ Which made a man stand up and say, ‘O Allah’s Messenger, shall I not kill him?'” (al-Nisai


Al-Albani declared this Hadith to be Daeef in his checking of “Mishkat al-Masabih, 2/981, 3rd edition, Beirut, 1405 A.H; Maktab al-Islami”, where he says: “This man (the narrator) is reliable, but the isnad is broken or incomplete for he did not hear it directly from his father.”

Al-Albani then contradicts himself in the book “Ghayatul Maram Takhreej Ahadith al-Halal wal Haram, no. 261, pg. 164, 3rd Edn, Maktab al-Islami, 1405 A.H”; by saying it is SAHIH!!!

No 18 : (* Pg. 37 no. 2)

Hadith: “If one of you was sleeping under the sun, and the shadow covering him shrank, and part of him was in the shadow and the other part of him was in the sun, he should rise up.” Al-Albani declared this Hadith to be SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami al-Sagheer wa Ziyadatuh (1/266/761)”, but then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in his checking of “Mishkat ul-Masabih, 3/1337 no. 4725, 3rd Ed” and he has referred it to the Sunan of Abu Dawood!”

No 19 : (* Pg. 38 no. 3 )

Hadith: “The Friday prayer is obligatory on every Muslim.” Al-Albani rated this Hadith to be DAEEF in his checking of “Mishkat al-Masabih, 1/434″, and said: “Its narrators are reliable but it is discontinuous as is indicated by Abu Dawood”. He then contradicts himself in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/54 no. 592″, and says it is SAHIH!!!

So beware o wise men!

No 20 : (* Pg. 38 no. 4 )

Al-Albani has made another contradiction. He has trusted Al-Muharrar ibn Abu Hurayra in one place and then weakened him in another. Al-Albani certifies in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 4/301″ that Muharrar is a trustee with Allah’s help, and Hafiz (Ibn Hajar) saying about him “accepted”, is not accepted, and therefore the sanad is Sahih


He then contradicts himself in “Sahihah 4/156″ where he makes the sanad DAEEF by saying: “The narrators in the sanad are all Bukhari’s (i.e.; used by Imam al-Bukhari) men, except for al-Muharrar who is one of the men of Nisai and Ibn Majah only. He was not trusted accept by Ibn Hibban, and that’s why al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar did not trust him, Instead he only said ‘accepted!'”

So beware of this fraud!

No 21 : (* Pg. 39 no. 5 )

Hadith: Abdallah ibn Amr (Allah be pleased with him): “The Friday prayer is incumbent on whoever heard the call” (Abu Dawood). Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was HASAN in “Irwa al-Ghalil 3/58″, he then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in “Mishkatul Masabih 1/434 no 1375″!!!

No 22 : (* Pg. 39 no. 6 )

Hadith: Anas ibn Malik (Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) used to say : “Do not be hard on yourself, otherwise Allah will be hard on you. When a people were hard on themselves, then Allah was hard on them.” (Abu Dawood


Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was DAEEF in his checking of “Mishkat, 1/64″, but he then contradicts himself by saying that this Hadith is HASAN in “Ghayatul Maram, pg. 141″!!

No 23: (* Pg. 40 no. 7 )

Hadith of Sayyida Aisha (Allah be pleased with her): “Whoever tells you that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) used to urinate while standing, do not believe him. He never urinated unless he was sitting.” (Ahmad, Nisai and Tirmidhi )

Al-Albani said that this sanad was DAEEF in “Mishkat 1/117.” He then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in “Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Sahihah 1/345 no. 201″!!!

So take a glance dear reader!

No 24 : (* Pg. 40 no. 8 )

Hadith “There are three which the angels will never approach: The corpse of a disbeliever, a man who wears ladies perfume, and one who has had sex until he performs ablution” (Abu Dawood


Al-Albani corrected this Hadith in “Sahih al-Jami al-Sagheer wa Ziyadatuh, 3/71 no. 3056″ by saying it was HASAN in the checking of “Al-Targhib 1/91″ [Also said to be hasan in the English translation of ‘The Etiquettes of Marriage and Wedding, pg. 11]. He then makes an obvious contradiction by saying that the same Hadith was DAEEF in his checking of “Mishkatul-Masabih, 1/144 no. 464″ and says that the narrators are trustworthy but the chain is broken between al-hasan al-Basri and Ammar (Allah be pleased with him) as al-Mundhiri had said in al-Targhib (1/91)!!

No 25 : (* Pg. 42 no. 10 )

It reached Malik (Rahimahullah) that Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) used to shorten his prayer, in distances such as between Makkah and Ta’if or between Makkah and Usfan or between Makkah and Jeddah. . . .

Al-Albani has weakened it in “Mishkat, 1/426 no. 1351″, and then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/14″!!

No 26 : (* Pg. 43 no. 12 )

Hadith: “Leave the Ethiopians as long as they leave you, because no one takes out the treasure of the Ka’ba except the one with the two weak legs from Ethiopia.” Al-Albani has weakened this Hadith in his checking of “Mishkat 3/1495 no. 5429″ by saying: “The sanad is DAEEF.” But then he contradicts himself as is his habit, by correcting it in “Sahihah, 2/415 no. 772.”

An example of al-Albani praising someone in one place and then disparaging him in another place in his books

No 27 : (* Pg. 32 )

He praises Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami in the book ‘Sahih al Targhib wa Tarhib, page 63′, where he says: “I want you to know one of the things that encouraged me to. . . . which has been commented by the famous and respected scholar Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami” . . . . And he also said on the same page, “And what made me more anxious for it, is that its checker, the respected Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami has announced. . . .”

Al-Albani thus praises Shaykh al-Azami in the above mentioned book; but then makes a contradiction in the introduction to ‘Adaab uz Zufaaf (The Etiquettes of Marriage and Wedding), new edition page 8′, where he said: “Al-Ansari has used in the end of his letter, one of the enemies of the Sunnah, Hadith and Tawhid, who is famous for that, is Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami. . . . . For his cowardliness and lack of scholarly deduction. . . . .”

NB – (The above quotation from Adaab uz Zufaaf is not found in the English translation by his supporters, which shows that they deliberately avoided translating certain parts of the whole work).

So have a glance at this!


No 28 : (* Pg. 143 no. 1 )

Hadith of Abi Barza (Allah be pleased with him): “By Allah, you will not find a man more just than me” (Sunan al-Nisai, 7/120 no. 4103).

Al-Albani said that this Hadith was SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 6/105 no. 6978″, and then he astonishingly contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in “Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, pg. 164 no. 287.”

So beware of this mess!

No 29 : (* Pg. 144 no. 2 )

Hadith of Harmala ibn Amru al-Aslami from his Uncle: “Throw pebbles at the Jimar by putting the extremity of the thumb on the fore-finger.” (Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, 4/276-277 no. 2874)

Al-Albani acknowledged its weakness in “Sahih Ibn Khuzaima” by saying that the sanad was DAEEF, but then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 1/312 no. 923!”

No 30 : (* Pg. 144 no. 3 )

Hadith of Sayyidina Jabir ibn Abdullah (Allah be pleased with him): “The Prophet (Peace be upon him) was asked about the sexually defiled [junubi]. . . can he eat, or sleep. . . He said :’Yes, when this person makes wudhu.'” (Ibn Khuzaima no. 217 and Ibn Majah no. 592).

Al-Albani has admitted its weakness in his comments on “Ibn Khuzaima, 1/108 no. 217″, but then contradicts himself by correcting the above Hadith in “Sahih Ibn Majah, 1/96 no. 482 “!!

No 31 : (* Pg. 145 no. 4 )

Hadith of Aisha (Allah be pleased with her): “A vessel as a vessel and food as food” (Nisai, 7/71 no. 3957).

Al-Albani said that it was SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/13 no. 1462″, but then contradicts himself in “Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, no. 263 pg. 157″, by saying it is DAEEF!!!

No 32 : (* Pg. 145 no. 5 )

Hadith of Anas (Allah be pleased with him): “Let each one of you ask Allah for all his needs, even for his sandal thong if it gets cut.”

Al-Albani said that the above Hadith was HASAN in his checking of “Mishkat, 2/696 no. 2251 and 2252″, but then contradicts himself in “Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/69 no. 4947 and 4948″!!!

No 33 : (* Pg. 146 no. 6 )

Hadith of Abu Dharr (Allah be pleased with him): “If you want to fast, then fast in the white shining nights of the 13th, 14th and 15th.”

Al-Albani declared it to be DAEEF in “Daeef al-Nisai, pg. 84″ and in his comments on “Ibn Khuzaima, 3/302 no. 2127″, but then contradicts himself by calling it SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/10 no. 1448″ and also corrected it in “Sahih al-Nisai, 3/902 no. 4021″!!

So what a big contradiction!

NB- (Al-Albani mentioned this Hadith in ‘Sahih al-Nisai’ and in ‘Daeef al-Nisai’, which proves that he is unaware of what he has and is classifying, how inept!)

No 34 : (* Pg. 147 no. 7 )

Hadith of Sayyida Maymoonah (Allah be pleased with her): “There is nobody who has taken a loan and it is in the knowledge of Allah. . . .” (Nisai, 7/315 and others).

Al-Albani said in “Daeef al-Nisai, pg 190″: “Sahih, except for the part al-Dunya.” Then he contradicts himself in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/156″, by saying that the whole Hadith is SAHIH, including the al-Dunya part. So what an amazing contradiction!

No 35 : (* Pg. 147 no. 8 )

Hadith of Burayda (Allah be pleased with him): “Why do I see you wearing the jewellery of the people of hell” (Meaning the Iron ring), [Nisai, 8/172 and others. . .]. Al-Albani has said that it was SAHIH in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/153 no. 5540″, but then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in “Daeef al-Nisai, pg. 230″!!!

No 36 : (* Pg. 148 no. 9 )

Hadith of Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him): “Whoever buys a carpet to sit on, he has 3 days to keep it or return it with a cup of dates that are not brownish in colour” (Nisai 7/254 and others).

Al-Albani has weakened it with reference to the ‘3 days’ part in “Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, pg. 186″, by saying: “Correct, except for 3 days.” But the ‘genius’ contradicts himself by correcting the Hadith and approving the ‘3 days’ part in “Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/220 no. 5804″.

So wake up (al-Albani)!!

No 37 : (* Pg. 148 no. 10 )

Hadith of Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him): “Whoever catches a single rak’ah of the Friday prayer has caught (the whole prayer).” (Nisai 3/112, Ibn Majah 1/356 and others). Al-Albani has weakened it in “Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, no. 78 pg. 49″, where he said: “Abnormal (shadh), where Friday is mentioned.” He then contradicts himself by saying SAHIH, including the Friday part in “Irwa, 3/84 no. 622 .”

May Allah heal you!


No 38 : (* Pg 157 no 1 )

KANAAN IBN ABDULLAH AN-NAHMY :- Al-Albani said in his “Sahihah, 3/481″ : “Kanaan is considered hasan, for he is attested by Ibn Ma’een.” Al-Albani then contradicts himself by saying, “There is weakness in Kanaan” (see “Daeefah

, 4/282″)!!

No 39 : (* Pg. 158 no. 2 )

MAJA’A IBN AL-ZUBAIR :- Al-Albani has weakened Maja’a in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/242″, by saying, “This is a weak sanad because Ahmad has said: ‘There is nothing wrong with Maja’a’, and Daraqutni has weakened him. . .”

Al-Albani then made a contradiction in his “Sahihah, 1/613″ by saying: “His men (the narrators) are trusted except for Maja’a who is a good narrator of Hadith.”

An amazing contradiction!

No 40 : (* Pg. 158 no. 3 )

UTBA IBN HAMID AL-DHABI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 5/237″ by saying: “And this is a weak (Daeef) sanad which has three defects. . . . the second defect is the weakness of al-Dhabi, the Hafiz said: ‘A truthful narrator with hallucinations'”.

Al-Albani then makes an obvious contradiction in “Sahihah, 2/432″, where he said about a sanad which mentions Utba: “And this is a good (hasan) sanad, Utba ibn Hamid al-Dhabi is trustworthy but has hallucinations, and the rest of the narrators in the sanad are trusted.” !!

No 41 : (* Pg. 159 no. 4 )

HISHAM IBN SA’AD :- Al-Albani said in his “Sahihah, 1/325″: “Hisham ibn Sa’ad is a good narrator of Hadith.” He then contradicts himself in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 1/283″ by saying: “But this Hisham has a weakness in memorizing”

So what an amazement!!

No 42 : (* Pg. 160 no. 5 )

UMAR IBN ALI AL-MUQADDAMI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in “Sahihah, 1/371″, where he said: “He in himself is trusted but he used to be a very bad forger, which makes him undependable. . . .” Al-Albani then contradicts himself again in “Sahihah, 2/259″ by accepting him and describing him as being trustworthy from a sanad which mentions Umar ibn Ali. Al-Albani says: “Classified by Hakim, who said: ‘A Sahih Isnad (chain of transmission)’, and al-Dhahabi went along with it, and it is as they have said.”

So what an amazement !!!

No 43 : (* Pg. 160 no. 6 )

ALI IBN SA’EED AL-RAZI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in “Irwa, 7/13″, by saying: “They have said nothing good about al-Razi.” He then contradicts himself in another ‘fantastic’ book of his, “Sahihah, 4/25″, by saying: “This is a good (hasan) sanad and the narrators are all trustworthy.”

So beware !!!

No 44 : (* Pg. 165 no. 13 )

RISHDIN IBN SA’AD :- Al-Albani said in his “Sahihah, 3/79″ : “In it (the sanad) is Rishdin ibn Sa’ad, and he has been declared trustworthy.” But then he contradicts himself by declaring him to be DAEEF in “Daeefah, 4/53″; where he said: “And Rishdin ibn Sa’ad is also daeef.” So beware!!

No 45 : (* Pg. 161 no. 8 )

ASHAATH IBN ISHAQ IBN SA’AD :- What an amazing fellow this Shaykh!! Al-Albani!! Proves to be. He said in “Irwa al-Ghalil, 2/228″: “His status is unknown, and only Ibn Hibban trusted him.” But then he contradicts himself by his usual habit! Because he only transfers from books and nothing else, and he copies without knowledge; this is proven in “Sahihah, 1/450″, where he said about Ashaath: “Trustworthy”. So what an amazement!!!

No 46 : (* Pg. 162 no. 9 )

IBRAHIM IBN HAANI :- The honourable!! The genius!! The copier!! Has made Ibrahim ibn Haani trustworthy in one place and has then made him unknown in another. Al-Albani said in ‘Sahihah, 3/426′: “Ibrahim ibn Haani is trustworthy”, but then he contradicts himself in “Daeefah, 2/225″, by saying that he is unknown and his Ahadith are refused!!

No 47 : (* Pg. 163 no. 10 )

AL-IJLAA IBN ABDULLAH AL-KUFI :- Al-Albani has corrected a sanad by saying it is good in “Irwa, 8/7″, with the words: “And its sanad is good, the narrators are trustworthy, except for Ibn Abdullah al-Kufi who is truthful.” He then contradicts himself by weakening the sanad of a Hadith where al-Ijlaa is found and has made him the reason for declaring it DAEEF (see ‘Daeefah, 4/71′); where he said: “Ijlaa ibn Abdullah has a weakness.” Al-Albani then quoted Ibn al-Jawzi’s (Rahimahullah) words by saying: “Al-Ijlaa did not know what he was saying .”!!!

No 48 : (* Pg. 67-69 )

ABDULLAH IBN SALIH : KAATIB AL-LAYTH :- Al-Albani has criticised Al-Hafiz al-Haythami, Al-Hafiz al-Suyuti, Imam Munawi and the Muhaddith Abu’l-Fadl al-Ghimari (Allah’s mercy be upon them) in his book “Silsilah al-Daeefah, 4/302″, when checking a Hadith containing the narrator Abdullah ibn Salih. He says on page 300: “How could Ibn Salih be all right and his Hadith be good, even though he has got many mistakes and is of little awareness, which also made some fraudulent Hadiths enter his books, and he narrates them without knowing about them!” He has not mentioned that Abdullah ibn Salih is one of Imam al-Bukhari’s men (i.e. used by al-Bukhari), because it does not suit his mode, and he does not state that Ibn Ma’een and some of the leading critics of Hadith have trusted him. Al-Albani has contradicted himself in other places in his books by making Hadiths containing Abdullah ibn Salih to be good, and here they are :-

Al-Albani said in “Silsilah al-Sahihah, 3/229″ : “And so the sanad is good, because Rashid ibn Sa’ad is trustworthy by agreement, and who is less than him in the men of Sahih, and there is also Abdullah ibn Salih who has said things that are unharmful with Allah’s help!!” Al-Albani also said in “Sahihah, 2/406″ about a sanad which contained Ibn Salih: “a good sanad in continuity.” And again in “Sahihah, 4/647″: “He’s a proof with continuity.”

NB- (Shaykh Saqqaf then continued with some important advice, this has been left untranslated for brevity but one may refer to the Arabic for further elaboration).

By the grace of Allah, this is enough from the books of Shaykh Saqqaf to convince any seeker of the truth, let alone the common folk who have little knowledge of the science of Hadith. If anyone is interested for hundreds of other similar quotes from Shaykh Saqqaf, then I suggest you write to the following address to obtain his book Tanaqadat al-Albani al-Wadihat (The Clear Contradictions of al-Albani).

PO BOX 925393

[The cost for volume 1 is $4.00 US plus shipping and the cost for volume 2 is $7.00 plus shipping].

Allah knows best.


This has been just 48 selected contradictions from the works of al-Albani, as derived by Shaykh Saqqaf. During the course of my own research into al-Albani’s works which have been translated into English by his followers in England, I myself came across some startling errors. I was given some publications coming from his supporters in England [Jami’at Ihyaa Minhaaj al-Sunnah]; one by the title: “Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud’s Sunan (according to Shaikh al-Albaanee, No’s according to the English Translation of Professor Ahmad Hasan, published in 1411/1991 C.E.)”, and the other by the title: “Daeef Ahadith of an-Nawawi’s Riyaad-us-Saaliheen (according to the checking of Naasir ud-Deen Al-Albani, No’s according to the English Translation of S. M. Madni Abbasi)”.

I found some serious contradictions when I cross-referenced the above named publications; but I content myself by quoting just two of the contradictions, so that a round figure of fifty errors is achieved! Besides these errors there are others which will be displayed in the following pages, from the one who claims to be giving us the most ‘authentic’ Sunnah through his ‘classifications of Ahadith’! The main aim in carrying out the latter exercise is for the benefit of those believers who do not and can not read the Arabic works of al-Albani for one, and secondly to give the opportunity to any doubting “Thomas”; who may or may not be one of al-Albani’s supporters at the time of reading this short exposition, to actually go along and check the references I have quoted from (mainly in English). By doing this, Insha’Allah, all doubts about the authenticity of this exposition will be alleviated and the hearts of those who doubt may become content! Allah knows best.

No 49 :-

Hadith: Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported the Apostle of Allah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) as saying: “Allah and His Angels bless those who are on the right flanks of the rows (in prayer).” [See Sunan Abu Dawood, 1/676 pg. 175, English ed’n and Riyadh-us-Saliheen, 2/1094 pg. 548].

When I checked the authenticity of the above Hadith by using the list “Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud’s Sunan“, it was not counted amongst the daeef ones, which means to the user of this list that the above Hadith is SAHIH (or at least HASAN) according to the checking of al-Albani!

But, when I found the same Hadith in Riyadh-us-Saliheen, it was declared to be DAEEF by al-Albani. The actual words used by the author of “Daeef Ahaadith of an-Nawawi’s Riyadh-us-Saliheen“, was:- “Al-Albaanee brings a long note. . . . . . The wording (‘upon those on the right rows’) is Shaadh or Munkar – the correct narration being : (‘upon those who join the rows’) – see Mishkaat, no. 1096, ‘Daeef Abi Daud’, no.153. . .”!!!

NB- al-Imam Nawawi (Allah’s mercy be upon him) said that the above Hadith has been cited on the terms of Imam Muslim by Imam Abu Dawood (see the above reference in ‘Riyadh’).

No 50 :-

Hadith: Abu Umamah (Allah be pleased with him) says that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: “A person who did not take part in jihad or failed to equip a fighter, or did not look well after the family of a fighter, would be severely punished by Allah before the day of judgement.” ( Abu Dawood, 2/2497, pg. 693 and Riyadh-us- Saliheen, 2/1348, pg. 643)

When I checked the authenticity of the above Hadith by using the list ‘Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud’s Sunan’, it was not listed as being DAEEF, hence it has been declared to be SAHIH (or at least HASAN) in al-Albani’s checking of Abu Dawood! But when I found the above Hadith in Riyadh-us-Saliheen, al-Albani declared it to be DAEEF. The actual words used by the author of ‘Da’eef Ahaadith of An-Nawawi’s Riyaad-us-Saaliheen’ was: “Its isnad contains al-Waleed ibn Muslim-a-mudallis – and he has used ‘an’anah here (‘from. . .’). See ‘at-Ta’leeq-ur-Ragheeb’, 2/200.”

NB- Imam an-Nawawi said that the above Hadith has been related with a Sahih isnad, besides that, according to Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnaoot’s checking of the above Hadith in his edition of Riyadh-us-Saliheen, the above Hadith is not daeef (this information has been derived from another publication of ‘Jami’at Ihyaa Minhaaj al- Sunnah, by the title “List of daeef ahadiths in Riyaad-as-Saliheenaccording to Shuaib Arnaoutt,” but as for the lists authenticity, I say: it needs to be checked). I leave you to decide whose checking you will adopt.

Now that I have quoted you 50 mistakes of al-Albani in Hadith, I wish to delve into some rather important issues of fiqh, especially by comparing al-Albani’s declarations with the views of other authors! For the record let me say at the outset, that most of the opinions that I will be quoting from al-Albani are sound and acceptable to one school of fiqh or another. But if the reader may sometimes get the feeling that I have inclined too much towards one particular school, then I have only done so to defend other sound and acceptable views which have been and are still being practised by large sections of the Ummah, indifference to the views of al-Albani and others. To all of us, more than one view should be acceptable if a Mujtahid has used his personal reasoning to extract a ruling from the sources of the Shari’ah; since this was the attitude of the glorious Salaf as-Salihin (pious predecessors of the first three generations of Islam), may Allah be pleased with them all. But as for al-Albani and the generality of his supporters they have adopted the tactless way of ejecting/criticising all other ways ‘unacceptable’ to their deductions from the Qur’an and Sunnah as you shall see below.

Allah knows best.

Published in: on June 17, 2008 at 3:06 am  Comments (4)  

Apabila Dr Asri memuji memuja Syeikhnya yang ditolak ratusan ulama kita !

Beberapa hari lepas seluruh ulama dihina seperti anjing. Kerana mengampu pemerintah dan menyembunyikan kebenaran. Ulama digambar seperti orang yang dangkal fikiran dan suka dengan kemewahan dan pangkat yang tinggi. Ulama disifatkan seperti anjing yang menyalak padahal semua sahaja boleh dimaksudkan seperti anjing jika benar tafsiran ayat tersebut ditujukan kepada ulama yang menyembunyikan kebenaran, apakah kebenaran Ibnu Taimiyyah yang ingin ditegakkan ?

Asri Mufti Wahabi pertama di alam melayu kita. Yang jelas mengingkari perkara perkara ijmak ulama dengan ‘mengusung’ Ibnu Taimiyyah di dalam tulisannya.

Saya tidak bermaksud ingin menjawab satu persatu tulisan beliau cuma ingin paparkan Siapakah Ibnu Taimiyyah dan apakah yang telah berlaku semasa zaman hidupnya dahulu setelah Mufti Darus Sunnah bernama Asri ini beria ia ingin mengangkat Syeikh tunggalnya ini sebagai idola umat Islam di Malaysia.

Barangkali para mufti kita tidak sedar tulisan Asri ini tetapi mereka bukan bisu dan kelu lidah kerana ramai lagi sarjana Islam yang akan terus menerus mempertahankan kesucian ajaran Islam dari dicemari oleh ‘ajaran baru lagi bidaah seperti wahabi ini’ yang dipopularkan oleh Dr Asri Al Wahhabi Wal Bid’ie…

Bacalah :


Berikut adalah nama-nama para ulama yangmsemasa dengan Ibnu Taimiyah (W 728 H) dan

berdebat dengannya atau yang hidup setelahnya dan membantah serta menyerang pendapat-pendapatnya. Mereka adalah para ulama dari

empat madzhab; Syafi’i, Hanafi, Maliki dan Hanbali:

1. Al Qadhi al Mufassir Badr ad-din Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Jama’ah asy-Syafi’i (W 733 H).

2. Al Qadhi Muhammad ibn al Hariri al Anshari al Hanafi.

3. Al Qadhi Muhammad ibn Abu Bakar al Maliki

4. Al Qadhi Ahmad ibn ‘Umar al Maqdisi al-Hanbali. Dengan fatwa empat Qadhi (hakim) dari empat madzhab ini, Ibnu Taimiyah dipenjara pada tahun 762 H. Peristiwa ini diuraikan dalam ‘Uyun at-Tawarikh karya Ibnu Syakir al-Kutubi, Najm al Muhtadi wa Rajm al Mu’tadi karya Ibn al Mu’allim al Qurasyi.

5. Syekh Shalih ibn Abdillah al Batha-ihi, pimpinan para ulama di Munaybi’ ar-Rifa’i, kemudian menetap di Damaskus dan wafat tahun 707 H. Beliau adalah salah seorang yang menolak pendapat Ibnu Taimiyah dan membantahnya seperti dijelaskan oleh Ahmad al-Witri dalam karyanya Raudlah an-Nazhirin wa Khulashah Manaqib ash-Shalihin. Al-Hafizh Ibnu Hajar al ‘Asqalani juga menuturkan biografi Syekh Shalih ini dalam ad-Durar al Kaminah.

6. Syekh Kamal ad-Din Muhammad ibn Abu al-Hasan Ali as-Siraj ar-Rifa’i al Qurasyi dalam Tuffah al Arwah wa Fattah al Arbah. Beliau ini semasa dengan Ibnu Taimiyah .

7. Qadhi al Qudhah (Hakim Agung) di Mesir; Ahmad ibn Ibrahim as-Surrruji al Hanafi (W710 H) dalam I’tiraadlat ‘Ala Ibn Taimiyah fi ‘Ilm al Kalam.

8. Qadhi al Qudhah (Hakim Agung) madzhab Maliki di Mesir; Ali ibn Makhluf (W 718 H). Beliau berkata: “Ibnu Taimiyah berkeyakinan Tajsim. Dalam madzhab kami, orang yang meyakini ini telah kafir dan wajib dibunuh”.

9. Asy-Syekh al Faqih Ali ibn Ya’qub al Bakri (W 724 H). Ketika Ibnu Taimiyah datang ke Mesir beliau mendatanginya dan mengingkari pendapat-pendapatnya .

10. Al Faqih Syams ad-Din Muhammad ibn ‘Adlan asy-Syafi’i (W 749 H). Beliau mengatakan: “Ibnu Taimiyah berkata; Allah di atas ‘Arsy dengan keberadaan di atas yang sebenarnya, Allah berbicara (berfirman) dengan huruf dan suara”.

11. Al Hafizh al Mujtahid Taqiyy ad-Din as-Subki (W 756 H) dalam beberapa karyanya:

– Al I’tibar Bi Baqa al Jannah Wa an-Nar

– Ad-Durrah al Mudliyyah Fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Ibn Taimiyah

– Syifa as-Saqam fi Ziyarah Khairi al Anam

– An-Nazhar al Muhaqqaq fi al Halif Bi ath-Thalaq al Mu’allaq

– Naqd al Ijtima’ Wa al Iftiraq fi Masa-il al-Ayman wa ath-Thalaq

– at-Tahqiq fi Mas-alah at Ta’liq

– Raf’ asy-Syiqaq ‘An Mas-alah ath-Thalaq.

12. Al Muhaddits al Mufassir al Ushuli al Faqih Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn Makki, yang lebih dikenal dengan Ibn al Murahhil asy-Syafi’i (W 716 H) beliau membantah dan menyerang Ibnu Taimiyah.

13. Al Hafizh Abu Sa’id Shalah ad-Din al ‘Ala-I (W. 761 H). Beliau mencela Ibnu Taimiyah seperti dijelaskan dalam:

– Dzakha-ir al Qashr fi Tarajim Nubala al ‘Ashr, hlm .32-33, buah karya Ibnu Thulun.

– Ahadits Ziyarah Qabr an-Nabi Shallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam.

14. Qadhi al Qudhah (Hakim Agung) di al Madinah al Munawwarah; Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Musallam ibn Malik ash-Shalihi al-Hanbali (W 762 H).

15. Syekh Ahmad ibn Yahya al Kullabi al Halabi yang lebih dikenal dengan Ibn Jahbal (W 733H). Beliau semasa dengan Ibnu Taimiyah dan menulis sebuah risalah untuk membantahnya, berjudul Risalah fi Nafyi al Jihah, yakni menafikan Jihah (arah) bagi Allah.

16. Al Qadhi Kamal ad-Din ibn az-Zumallakani (W 727 H). Beliau mendebat Ibnu Taimiyahdan menyerangnya dengan menulis dua risalah bantahan tentang masalah talak dan ziarah ke makam Rasulullah.

17. Al Qadhi Kamal Shafiyy ad-Din al Hindi (W715 H), beliau mendebat Ibnu Taimiyah.

18. Al Faqih al Muhaddits ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-Bajiyy asy-Syafi’i (W 714 H). Beliau berdebat Ibnu Taimiyah dalam empat belas majlis dan berhasil membungkamnya.

19. Al Mu-arrikh al Faqih al Mutakallim al Fakhr Ibn al Mu’allim al Qurasyi (W 725 H) dalam karyanya Najm al Muhtadi wa Rajm al Mu’tadi.

20. Al Faqih Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Ali al-Mazini ad-Dahhan ad-Dimasyqi (W 721 H) dalam dua risalahnya:

– Risalah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Ibn Taimiyah fi Masalah ath-Thalaq.

– Risalah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Ibn Taimiyah fi Masalah az-Ziyarah.

21. Al Faqih Abu al Qasim Ahmad ibn Muhammad asy-Syirazi (W 733 H) dalam karyanya Risalah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala ibn Taimiyah.

22. Al Faqih al Muhaddits Jalal ad-Din Muhammad al Qazwini asy-Syafi’i (W 739 H)

23. Surat keputusan resmi yang dikeluarkan oleh Sultan Ibnu Qalawun (W 741 H) untuk memenjarakannya.

24. Al Hafizh adz-Dzahabi (W 748 H). Ia semasa dengan Ibnu Taimiyah dan membantahnya dalam dua risalahnya :

– Bayan Zaghal al ‘Ilm wa ath-Thalab.

– An-Nashihah adz-Dzahabiyyah

25. Al Mufassir Abu Hayyan al Andalusi (W 745H) dalam Tafsirnya: An-Nahr al Maadd Min al-Bahr al Muhith.

26. Syeikh ‘Afif ad-Din Abdullah ibn As’ad al-Yafi’i al Yamani al Makki (W 768 H).

27. Al Faqih ar-Rahhalah Ibnu Baththuthah (W 779 H) dalam karyanya Rihlah Ibn Baththuthah.

28. Al Faqih Taj ad-Din as-Subki (W 771 H) dalam karyanya Thabaqat asy-Syafi’iyyah al-Kubra.

29. Al Muarrikh Ibnu Syakir al Kutubi (W 764 H); murid Ibnu Taimiyah dalam karyanya: ‘Uyun at-Tawarikh.

30. Syekh ‘Umar ibn Abu al Yaman al Lakhami al-Fakihi al Maliki (W 734 H) dalam at-Tuhfah al-Mukhtarah Fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Munkir az-Ziyarah.

31. Al Qadhi Muhammad as-Sa’di al Mishri al-Akhna-i (W 750 H) dalam al Maqalah al-Mardhiyyah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Man Yunkir az-Ziyarah al-Muhammadiyyah. Buku ini dicetak dalam satu rangkaian dengan Al-Barahin as-Sathi’ah karya Al ’Azami.

32. Syekh Isa az-Zawawi al Maliki (W 743 H) dalam Risalah fi Mas-alah ath- Thala.

33. Syekh Ahmad ibn Utsman at-Turkamani al-Juzajani al Hanafi (W 744 H) dalam al Abhatsal Jaliyyah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala Ibn Taimiyah.

34. Al Hafizh Abd ar-Rahman ibn Ahmad, yang terkenal dengan Ibnu Rajab al Hanbali (W 795 H) dalam: Bayan Musykil al Ahadits al-Waridah fi Anna ath-Thalaq ats-Tsalats Wahidah.

35. Al Hafizh Ibnu Hajar al ‘Asqalani (W 852 H) dalam beberapa karyanya:

– Ad-Durar al Kaminah fi A’yan al Mi-ah ats-Tsaminah

– Lisan al Mizan

– Fath al Bari Syarh Shahih al Bukhari

– Al Isyarah Bi Thuruq Hadits az-Ziyarah

36. Al Hafizh Waliyy ad-Din al ‘Iraqi (W 826 H) dalam al Ajwibah al Mardliyyah fi ar-Radd ‘Ala al As-ilah al Makkiyyah.

37. Al Faqih al Mu-arrikh Ibn Qadhi Syuhbah asy-Syafi’i (W 851 H) dalam Tarikh Ibn Qadhi Syuhbah.

38. Al Faqih Abu Bakr al Hushni (W 829 H) dalam Karyanya Daf’u Syubah Man Syabbaha Wa Tamarrada Wa Nasaba Dzalika Ila al Imam Ahmad.

39. Pimpinan para ulama seluruh Afrika, Abu Abdillah ibn ‘Arafah at-Tunisi al Maliki (W 803 H).

40. Al ‘Allamah ‘Ala ad-Din al Bukhari al Hanafi (W 841 H). Beliau mengkafirkan Ibnu Taimiyah dan orang yang menyebutnya Syekh al Islam1. Artinya orang yang menyebutnya dengan julukan Syekh al Islam, sementara ia tahu perkataan dan pendapat-pendapat kufurnya. Hal ini dituturkan oleh Al Hafizh as-Sakhawi dalam Adl-Dlau Al Lami’.

41. Syekh Muhammad ibn Ahmad Hamid ad-Din al Farghani ad-Dimasyqi al Hanafi (W 867 H) dalam risalahnya Ar-Radd ‘Ala Ibnu Taimiyah fi al I’tiqad.

42. Syekh Ahmad Zurruq al Fasi al Maliki (W 899 H) dalam Syarh Hizb al Bahr.

43. Al Hafizh as-Sakhawi (W 902 H) dalam Al-I’lan Bi at-Taubikh liman Dzamma at-Tarikh.

44. Ahmad ibn Muhammad Yang dikenal dengan Ibnu Abd as-Salam al Mishri (W 931 H) dalam al Qaul an-Nashir fi Raddi Khabath ‘Ali ibn Nashir.

45. Al ‘Alim Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Khawarizmi ad-Dimasyqi yang dikenal dengan Ibnu Qira (W968H), beliau mencela Ibnu Taimiyah.

46. al Bayyadli al Hanafi (W 1098 H) dalam Isyarat al Maram Min ‘Ibarat al Imam.

47. Syekh Ahmad ibn Muhammad al Witri (W980 H) dalam Raudlah an- Nazhirin Wa Khulashah Manaqib ash- Shalihin.

48. Syekh Ibnu Hajar al Haytami (W 974 H) dalam karya-karyanya;

– Al Fatawi al Haditsiyyah

– Al Jawhar al Munazhzham fi Ziyarah al Qabr alMu’azhzham

– Hasyiyah al Idhah fi Manasik al Hajj

49. Syekh Jalal ad-Din ad-Dawwani (W 928 H) dalam Syarh al ‘Adludiyyah.

50. Syekh ‘Abd an-Nafi’ ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Arraq ad-Dimasyqi (W 962 H) seperti dijelaskan dalam Dzakha-ir al Qashr fi Tarajim Nubala al ‘Ashr, hlm. 32-33, buah karya Ibnu Thulun.

51. Al Qadhi Abu Abdullah al Muqri dalam Nazm al-La-ali fi Suluk al Amali.

52. Mulla ‘Ali al Qari al Hanafi (W 1014 H) dalam Syarh asy-Syifa li al Qadli ‘Iyadl.

53. Syekh Abd ar-Ra-uf al Munawi asy -Syafi’I (W 1031 H) dalam Syarh asy-Syama-il li at-Tirmidzi.

54. Al Muhaddits Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Illan ash-Shiddiqi al Makki (W 1057 H) dalam risalahnya al Mubrid al Mubki fi ar-Radd ‘ala ash-Sharim al Munki.

55. Syekh Ahmad al Khafaji al Mishri al Hanafi(W 1069 H) dalam Syarh asy-Syifa li al Qadli ‘Iyadl.

56. Al Muarrikh Ahmad Abu al ‘Abbas al Muqri (W 1041 H) dalam Azhar ar-Riyadl.

57. Syekh Ahmad az-Zurqani al Maliki (W 1122H) dalam Syarh al Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah

58. Syekh Abd al Ghani an-Nabulsi (W 1143 H) dalam banyak karya-karyanya.

59. Al Faqih ash-Shufi Muhammad Mahdi ibn ‘Ali ash Shayyadi yang terkenal dengan ar-Rawwas (W1287H)

60. As-Sayyid Muhammad Abu al Huda ash- Shayyadi (W 1328 H) dalam Qiladah al-Jawahir.

61. Al Mufti Musthafa ibn Ahmad asy-Syaththi al-Hanbali ad-Dimasyqi (W 1349 H) dalam karyanya an-Nuqul asy-Syar’iyyah.

62. Mahmud Khaththab as-Subki (W 1352 H) dalam ad-Din al Khalish atau Irsyad al Khalq Ila ad-Din al-Haqq.

63. Mufti Madinah asy-Syekh Al Muhaddits Muhammad al Khadlir asy-Syinqithi (W1353H) dalam karyanya Luzum ath-Thalaq ats-Tsalas Daf’uhu Bi Ma La Yastathi’ al ‘Alim Daf’ahu.

64. Syekh Salamah al ‘Azami asy-Syafi’i (W 1376H) dalam al Barahin as-Sathi’ah fi Radd Ba’dl al-Bida’ asy-Sya-i’ah dan beberapa makalah dalam surat kabar Mesir Al Muslim

65. Mufti Mesir Syekh Muhammad Bakhit al-Muthi’i (W 1354 H) dalam karyanya Tathhir al-Fuad Min Danas aI I’tiqad

66. Wakil Syekh al Islam pada Daulah Utsmaniyyah (Dinasti Bani Utsman) Syekh Muhammad Zahid al Kawtsari (W 1371 H) dalam beberapa karyanya:

– Maqalat al Kawtsari

– At-Ta’aqqub al Hatsits lima Yanfihi Ibnu Taimiyah mi al Hadits

– Al Buhuts al Wafiyyah fi Mufradat Ibnu Taimiyah

– Al Isyfaq ‘Ala Ahkam ath- Thalaq

67. Ibrahim ibn Utsman as-Samnudi al Mishri dalam karyanya Nushrah al Imam as-Subki Bi Radd ash-Sharim al Munki.

68. ‘Alim Makkah Muhammad al ‘Arabi at-Tabban (W 1390 H) dalam Bara-ah al-Asy’ariyyin Min ‘Aqa-id al Mukhalifin.

69. Syekh Muhammad Yusuf al Banuri al Bakistani dalam Ma’arif as-Sunan Syarh Sunan at-Tirmidzi.

70. Syekh Manshur Muhammad ‘Uwais dalam Ibnu Taimiyah Laisa Salafiyyan.

71. Al-Hafizh Syekh Ahmad ibn ash-Shiddiq al-Ghummari al Maghribi (W 1380 H) dalam beberapa karyanya, di antaranya:

– Hidayah ash-Shaghra

– Al Qaul al Jaliyy

72. asy-Syeikh al Muhaddits Abdullah al Ghammarial Maghribi (W 1413 H) dalam banyak karyanya, di antaranya:

– Itqan ash-Shan-‘ah Fi Tahqiq Ma’na al Bid’ah

– Ash-Shubh as-Safir fi Tahqiq Shalah al Musafir

– Ar-Rasa-il al Ghammariyyah

73. Al Musnid Abu al Asybal Salim ibn Jindan (W1969 H) dari Jakarta Indonesia dalam karyanya Al Khulashah al Kafiyah fi al Asanid al-‘Aliyah.

74. Hamdullah al Barajuri, ‘Alim Saharnapur dalam al Bashair Li Munkiri at-Tawassul Bi Ahlal Qubur

75. Syekh Musthafa Abu Sayf al Hamami. Beliau mengkafirkan Ibnu Taimiyah dalam karyanya: Ghawts al ‘Ibad Bi Bayan ar-Rasyad. Buku ini mendapat persetujuan dan rekomendasi dari beberapa ulama besar, di antaranya; Syekh Muhammad Sa’id al ‘Arfi, Syekh Yusuf ad-Dajwi, Syekh Mahmud Abu Daqiqah, Syekh Muhammad al Buhairi, Syekh Muhammad Abd al Fattah ‘Inati, Syekh Habibullah al-Jakni asy-Syinqithi, Syekh Dasuqi Abdullah al ‘Arabi dan Syekh Muhammad Hifni Bilal.

76. Muhammad ibn Isa ibn Badran as-Sa’di al-Mishri

77. As-Sayyid Syekh al Faqih Alawi ibn Thahir al-Haddad al Hadlrami.

78. Mukhtar ibn Ahmad al Muayyad al ‘Adzami (W 1340 H) dalam Jala’ al Awham ‘An Madzahib al A-immah al ‘Izham Wa at-Tawassul Bi Jahi Khair al Anam ‘Alaihi ash-Shalatu Wa as-Salam yang beliau tulis sebagai bantahan terhadap buku Ibnu Taimiyah; Raf’ al Malam.

79. Syekh Ismail al Azhari dalam Mir-at an-Najdiyyah.

80. KH. Muhammad Ihsan dari Jampes Kediri Jawa timur dalam Kitabnya Siraj ath-Thalibin

81. KH. Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari (W 1366 H/1947 R), Rais Akbar Nahdlatul Ulama dari Jombang Jawa Timur, dalam kitabnya Risalah Ahlussunnah Wal Jama’ah.

82. KH. Ali Maksum (W 1989 R), Rais ‘am Nahdhatul Ulama IV dari Yogyakarta Jawa Tengah dalam bukunya Hujjah Ahlussunnah Wal Jama’ah.

83. KH Abu al Fadll bin Abd asy-Syakur, dari Senori Tuban Jawa Timur dalam kitab-kitabnya, di antaranya:

– Al Kawakib al-Lamma’ah fi Tahqiq alMusamma Bi Ahlussunnah Wal Jama’ah

– Syarh al Kawakib al-Lamma’ah

84. KH. Ahmad Abdul Hamid dari Kendal Jawa Tengah dalam Bukunya ’Aqa-id Ahlussunnah Wal Jama’ah

85. KH Siradjuddin ‘Abbas (W 1401 H/1980 R) dalam banyak karyanya:

-I’tiqad Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah

– 40 Masalah Agama, jilid IV

86. Tuan Guru KH. Muhammad Zainuddin Abdul Majid ash-Shaulati (W 1997 R) Ampenan Pancor Lombok NTB dalam bukunya Hizb Nahdhatul Wathan Wa Hizb Nahdhatul Banat.

87. K.H. Muhammad Muhajirin Amsar ad-Dari (W 2003 R) dari Bekasi Jawa Barat dalam salah satu surat yang beliau tulis.

88. Al Habib Syekh al Musawa ibn Ahmad al-Musawa as-Saqqaf; Penasehat Umum Perguruan Tinggi dan Perguruan Islam Az Ziyadah Klender Jakarta Timur.

89. KH. Muhammad Syafi’i Hadzami Mantan Ketua Umum MUI Propinsi DKI Jakarta 1990-2000 dalam bukunya Taudlih al Adillah.

90. KH. Ahmad Makki Abdullah Mahfudz Sukabumi Jawa Barat dalam Bukunya Hishnu as-Sunnah Wal Jama’ah fi Ma’rifat Firaq Ahl al-Bid’ah.

91. Syekh Abdullah Tha’ah. Beliau membantah Ibnu Taimiyah dalam bukunya al Fatawa al ‘Aliyyah yang beliau tulis pada tahun 1932. Buku ini memuat fatwa para ulama, para Imam, pengajar dan para mufti serta para Qadhi di Makkah, yang sebahagiannya berasal dari Indonesia, Thailand dan lain-lain. Mereka menyatakan bahwa Ibnu Taimiyah sesat dan menyesatkan. Berikut nama para ulama yang turut menghadiri majlis pernyataan fatwa tersebut serta menandatanganinya : Sayyid Abdullah –Mufti Madzhab Syafi’i di Makkah-,

Syekh Abdullah Siraj –pimpinan para Qadhi dan Kepala para ulama Hijaz-, Syekh Abdullah ibn Ahmad –Qadli Makkah-, Syekh Darwisy –Amin Fatwa Makkah-, Muhammad ‘Abid ibn Husain –Mufti Madzhab Maliki di Makkah-, Syekh Umar ibn Abu Bakr Bajuneid –Wakil Mufti Madzhab Hanbali di Makkah-, Syekh Abdullah ibn Abbas –Wakil Qadli Makkah-, Syekh Muhammad Ali ibn Husein al Maliki –Seorang Imam dan pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Ahmad al Qari –Qadhi Jeddah-, Syekh Muhammad Husein –Seorang Imam dan pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Mahmud Zuhdi ibn Abdur Rahman –Seorang pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Muhammad Habibullah ibn Maayaabi – Seorang pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Abdul Qadir ibn Shabir al Mandayli (Mandailing-Sumut) –Seorang pengajar di Makkah-,Syekh Mukhtar ibn ‘Atharid al Jawi (asal Jawa) –Seorang pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Sa’id ibn Muhammad al Yamani –Seorang Imam dan pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Muhammad Jamal ibn Muhammad al Amir al-Maliki –Seorang Imam dan pengajar di Makkah-, Sayyid ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz al-Maliki –Seorang pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Abdullah Zaydan asy-Syinqithi –Seorang pengajar di Makkah-, Syekh Mahmud Fathani (asal Thailand) –Seorang pengajar di Makkah, Syekh Hasanuddin ibn Syekh Muhammad Ma’shum asal Medan Deli-Sumut.

92. Syekh Ahmad Khathib al Minangkabawi, Seorang Imam Madzhab Syafi’i di Makkah asal Minangkabau Sumatera dalam bukunya al-Khiththah al Mardliyyah.

93. Syekh Muhammad Ali Khathib Minangkabau, Murid Syekh Ahmad Khathib al-Minangkabawi, dalam kitabnya Burhan al-Haqq. Beliau juga telah mengumpulkan para ulama di Sumatera untuk membantah Rasyid Ridla penulis al Manar dan para pengikutnya di Indonesia.

94. Syekh Abdul Halim ibn Ahmad Khathib al-Purbawi al Mandayli, Murid Syekh Mushthafa Husein, pendiri Pon-Pes. Al-Mushthafawiyyah, Purba Baru, Sumut dalam risalahnya Kasyf al Ghummah yang beliau tulis tahun 1389 H -12/8/1969.

95. Syekh Abdul Majid Ali (W. 2003) Kepala Kantor Urusan Agama daerah Kubu-Riau, Sumatera, salah seorang ulama kharismatik dan terkenal di daerah tersebut. Beliau mengkafirkan Ibnu Taimiyah dan menyatakan bahwa gurunya Syekh Abdul Wahhab Panay-Medan mengkafirkan Ibnu Taimiyah.

96. K.H. Abdul Qadir Lubis, pimpinan Pon.Pes. Dar at-Tauhid, Mandailing-Sumut(W. 2003). Beliau mengkafirkan Ibnu Taimiyah di sebagian majlisnya.

97. K.H. Muhammad Sya’rani Ahmadi Kudus Jawa Tengah dalam bukunya al Fara-id as-Saniyyah wa ad-Durar al Bahiyyah yang beliau tulis pada tahun 1401 H. Dalam buku ini beliau menyatakan bahwa Ibnu Taimiyah adalah seorang Musyabbih Mujassim (orang yang menyerupakan Allah dengan makhluk-Nya dan meyakini bahwa Allah adalah jisim -benda-).

98. K.H. Muhammad Mashduqi Mahfuzh, Ketua Umum MUI Jawa Timur dalam bukunya al-Qawa’id al Asasiyyah li Ahlissunnah WalJama’ah.

99. Syekh al Muhaddits al Faqih Abdullah al Harari al-Habasyi dalam kitabnya al Maqalaat as-Sunniyyah Fi Kasyf Dlalalaat Ahmad ibn Taimiyah, Shorihul Bayan,Sharhul Qawiim, Bughyah al-Tholib.

Terakhir, Wahai seorang pencari kebenaran, lihat dan amatilah! bagaimana mungkin kita berpegangan dengan orang yang dicela oleh sekian banyak para ulama yang menjelaskan hakikatnya serta kesesatan-kesesatannya agar diwaspadai, dijauhi dan tidak diikuti oleh umat. Apakah anda masih lagi buta dengan dalil-dalil yang telah Ulama’ ASWJ kemukakan? Atau anda masih menunggu Api Neraka membakar anda di akhirat kelak!!! Adakah anda masih meragui kesesatan Ibn Taimiyyah dan pengikutnya yang hanya beberapa kerat; atau anda mahu KAFIR kan seluruh ulama’ Islam ASWJ yang mengikut manhaj Asya’itah dan Maturidiyyah!!!

Oleh itu, apa yang disampaikan oleh golongan ANTI-WAHABI adalah bukan dari HAWA NAFSU yang JELEK atau Kepentingan duniawi. Sesungguhnya penjelasan ini adalah daripada Ulama’ Mu’tabar dan Pandangan Jumhur Ulama’ ASWJ dan Bukan ORANG-ORANG BODOH Yang Hanya ada PHD atau mengaji tak habis lagi tapi rasa sudah menjadi mujtahid mutlaq atau ahli tarjih.

Marilah kita beramai-ramai berdoa pada ALLAH SWT agar kita sentiasa dalam Aqidah Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah (Asya’irah dan Maturidiyyah). Allahumma Amiin…

Disusun oleh:

Published in: on June 17, 2008 at 2:00 am  Comments (2)