What is Salafism? (the Wahabi myth)

[Zyxius]

Unrationed bashing for the sake of bashing would be very much against the purpose of this thread. Reasoned discussion is more than welcome.

The Wahhabi Myth - Salafism, Wahhabism, Qutbism


What is a Salafi and What is Salafism?

The reader will notice that the word "Wahhabi" is always indented with quotation marks here at TheWahhabiMyth.com. Those who are labelled with this word do not themselves use this term, as it is used as a means of belittlement. The reasons for the rejection of this term are clearly outlined throughout this book. The correct way of referring to them is by terming them Salafis, as they are those who adhere to the way of the Salaf - the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his companions.

Following the way of the Salaf is the way which has been legislated in the Quran and Sunnah, the very sources of Islam. The Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) said to his daughter Fatimah: "Indeed, I am for you a blessed Salaf."

When asked about which was the correct and acceptable way of understanding Islam, the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) replied by saying: "That which I and my companions are upon."

Similarly, Allah says in the Quran that He is pleased with the companions "and also those who follow them exactly (in faith)."

As such, He said regarding the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him security) and his companions:

"So if they believe as you (i.e. the Salaf) believe, they are indeed rightly guided."

All of the orthodox scholars of Islam followed the way of the Salaf in understanding religion. Early scholars such as Imam al-Awzaa'ee, who died 157 years after the Prophet's emigration to Medina, said: "Be patient upon the Sunnah, and stop where the people (i.e. the Salaf) stopped, and say what they said, and refrain from what they refrained from, and follow the path of your righteous Salaf; for verily, sufficient for you is what was sufficient for them."

Today, one of the famous Sunni schools of jurisprudence is named after a scholar named Abu Haneefah. Millions of Muslims all over the world ascribe themselves to his school of jurisprudence; those who the media would term "mainstream" Muslims. Regarding adherence to the Salafi methodology, he said, "Adhere to the narrations and way of the Salaf, and beware of newly invented matters (in religion), for all of it is innovation."

The orthodox scholars who came after these early generations also followed the understanding of the Salaf in religious matters. Imam ath-Thahabi said: "It is authentically related from ad-Daraqutni (a scholar from approximately 1,000 years ago) that he said: There is nothing more despised by me than 'ilmul-kalaam (innovated speech and rhetoric). I (adh-Thahabee) say: The man never entered into ’ilmul-kalaam, nor did he enter into argumentation (i.e. philosophy), he did not delve into that. Rather, he was Salafee (a follower of the Salaf)."

The present day scholars who stick to the mainstream understanding of Islam also ascribe themselves to the way of the Salaf. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable of scholars alive today. Regarding Salafism, he made the following remark: "It is not a party from amongst the various parties… Hence Salafism is a group of people who are upon the way of the Salaf, upon what the Messenger (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his Companions were upon; and it is not a party from amongst the contemporary groups present today."

The media claim that Salafis/"Wahhabis" believe that all those who do not follow their form of Islam are heathens" is a tall tale. Salafis believe that those Muslims who do not follow the understanding of the Salaf are not adhering to these and other clear texts. As such, they do not fall under the above-mentioned Quranic verse as being "rightly guided." Salafis distinguish between those who fall into religious innovation and those who fall into disbelief.

When considering the proofs which are contained within the Quran and Sunnah and the statements of all the orthodox scholars of Islam from the earliest generations to the present time, it becomes obvious that it is a great blunder for the media to refer to Salafism as being a new movement called "Wahhabism" which came about only two centuries ago during the time of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab in Saudi Arabia.

"So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?" [Quran 10:32]

- abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



al-Bukhaaree (no. 2652)

Saheeh Sunan at-Tirmidhee (3/54)

Quran 9:100

Quran 2:137

al-Hujjah (6/A-B) of Ismail Abu Fadhl

Sawnul-Mantaq wal-Kalaam (p. 32) of As-Suyuti

This statement does not come from the standpoint of being narrow-minded. On the contrary, any open minded individual will research the authenticity of any claim that something constitutes revelation from the Creator. If this claim is found to be true and its texts require the person to submit to its decrees, it would not be from wisdom to then proceed to search for contradicting knowledge that leads to uncertainty. Most philosophers would not try to claim that philosophy leads to certain knowledge. For that reason, you will find some philosophers looking at objects and discussing whether or not they are actually in existence.

Philosophizing and leaving the texts and understanding of the Salaf is what leads groups like al-Qaeda to establish new methodologies in religion. Consequently, conjecture is something which is censured in Islam.

"They follow nothing but conjecture; and verily, conjecture avails nothing against the truth." [53:28]

Siyar A'laamun-Nubalaa' (16/457) of Ath-Thahabi

Refer to the cassette, "at-Tahdheer min al-Bid'ah", second cassette, delivered as a lecture in Hawtah Sadeer (Saudi Arabia).

Saudi Time Bomb? Analysis: Wahhabism, PBS Frontline (Nov. 15, 2001)

 

[Vinod2070]

Where does the Sufi Islam fit here?

It is credited by many Muslims to be the chief vehicle for Islam's expansion. Does it fit in with the Salafi thought?

 

[Zyxius]

Where does the Sufi Islam fit here?

It is credited by many Muslims to be the chief vehicle for Islam's expansion. Does it fit in with the Salafi thought?

Vinod, the subject at hand is what Salafism is and isn't from the mouth's of Salafi's themselves. I don't think that it is necessary to introduce the issue of Sufiism in this since it isn't really relevant to what's being said here.

 

[Vinod2070]

Vinod, the subject at hand is what Salafism is and isn't from the mouth's of Salafi's themselves. I don't think that it is necessary to introduce the issue of Sufiism in this since it isn't really relevant to what's being said here.

No problem. Thx.

 

[Awesome]

Salafis oppose change in the way Islam is practiced and keep calling for a return to the old days.

One of the most significant aspect of the old days was the concept of Ijtihad, which means to bring change according to the times, with renewed understanding of the world and science and social order.

See how that works?

The old days were all about the change. Ijtihad was abolished by our Maulvis claiming that, our faith is now at optimum levels and won't require any re-interpretation.

 

[Vinod2070]

Do the Salafis oppose the following of the Hadhiths and prophet's life too?

I understand they believe in only following the Quran and nothing else.

P.S. Asim mentioned about "Ijtihad". Do we have an example of that in the ultimate Wahabi society viz. SA or in Taliban which practices that brand of Islam?

 

[Zyxius]

Salafis oppose change in the way Islam is practiced and keep calling for a return to the old days.

One of the most significant aspect of the old days was the concept of Ijtihad, which means to bring change according to the times, with renewed understanding of the world and science and social order.

See how that works?

The old days were all about the change. Ijtihad was abolished by our Maulvis claiming that, our faith is now at optimum levels and won't require any re-interpretation.

Asim,

I identify myself with the Salafi school of thought more than anything else, so I guess I can tell you from the point of view of the follower of this school of thought that what you are saying is rather simplistic and does not represent what Salafi's believe. Salafi's, if you want to summarize the crux of what they are about, are against innovation in the way Islam is practiced. What that means is that we do not agree with things like praying to dead people, building mausoleums, creating Hadith or quotes out of thin air, and basically adding any new concepts to Islam, i.e. Bidat. It is by no means, "a return to the old days". Other people on this forum have talked about how "Wahabis" shouldn't drive cars because they believe in "going back to the old days" and they didn't have cars then. Needless to say that this type of argument is ignorant in the extreme.

Vinod, frankly I do not believe that you have any intention to have a genuine discussion and think you are more interested in mud slinging as you have done repeatedly in virtually every thread in which I have encountered you. So you can dispense with the game and start your bashing of Islam and Muslims now, because that is your already foregone conclusion.

 

[Vinod2070]

Asim,

I identify myself with the Salafi school of thought more than anything else, so I guess I can tell you from the point of view of the follower of this school of thought that what you are saying is rather simplistic and does not represent what Salafi's believe. Salafi's, if you want to summarize the crux of what they are about, are against innovation in the way Islam is practiced. What that means is that we do not agree with things like praying to dead people, building mausoleums, creating Hadith or quotes out of thin air, and basically adding any new concepts to Islam, i.e. Bidat. It is by no means, "a return to the old days". Other people on this forum have talked about how "Wahabis" shouldn't drive cars because they believe in "going back to the old days" and they didn't have cars then. Needless to say that this type of argument is ignorant in the extreme.

Vinod, frankly I do not believe that you have any intention to have a genuine discussion and think you are more interested in mud slinging as you have done repeatedly in virtually every thread in which I have encountered you. So you can dispense with the game and start your bashing of Islam and Muslims now, because that is your already foregone conclusion.

Zyxius, I do come with a different perspective from yours. Frankly I don't believe that I am indulging in mudslinging.

I feel it is just an attempt to avoid a different and may be difficult POV.

Asim linked Salafism to "Ijtihad". I at least don't see it being practiced by the people who follow Salafism (i.e. Saudis and the Taliban), so asked for a clarification. And you also don't agree with that definition of Salafism.

It is up to you to answer or not. At least I would expect you to not take it personally. This forum is so lively only because of representation of different POVs. Else both you and me have different forums where there would be no dissenting views and we can bash others to our heart's content.

So even if my or some other member's views irk you, pl. understand that is what makes this forum the place of choice for many. And frankly I do look forward to some interesting debates with you even without necessarily agreeing with you on most issues. We have many such interesting debates going on here.

 

[Zyxius]

Zyxius, I do come with a different perspective from yours. Frankly I don't believe that I am indulging in mudslinging.

I feel it is just an attempt to avoid a different and may be difficult POV.

Asim linked Salafism to "Ijtihad". I at least don't see it being practiced by the people who follow Salafism (i.e. Saudis and the Taliban), so asked for a clarification. And you also don't agree with that definition of Salafism.

It is up to you to answer or not. At least I would expect you to not take it personally. This forum is so lively only because of representation of different POVs. Else both you and me have different forums where there would be no dissenting views and we can bash others to our heart's content.

So even if my or some other member's views irk you, pl. understand that is what makes this forum the place of choice for many. And frankly I do look forward to some interesting debates with you even without necessarily agreeing with you on most issues. We have many such interesting debates going on here.

LOL.....its a little late to play the nice, tolerant Hindewww now.....you've already shown your colors on the other threads....so please cut the bull.

 

[Vinod2070]

LOL.....its a little late to play the nice, tolerant Hindewww now.....you've already shown your colors on the other threads....so please cut the bull.

I don't have anything to prove to you. If you have made up your mind, good for you.

I am not going to respond to your posts from now on. Guess that will make you happy.

P.S.

its a little late to play the nice, tolerant Hindewww now

This told me exactly the kind of person we are dealing with! Shows your color.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Alright guys,

Leave picking out the trolls and flamers to the mods please.

While I understand that sometimes it is hard to get around preconceptions, especially after rancorous exchanges elsewhere, lets please try and address each post on its own merits.

If flames or denigration of religion/ethnicity/race/nationality occurs, please let the mods know with the report post feature.

Thank you, and let the debates continue.

 

[Vinod2070]

The question I asked earlier is open for other members here:

Asim mentioned about "Ijtihad". Do we have an example of that in the ultimate Wahabi society viz. SA or in Taliban which practices that brand of Islam?

Whatever is good about Salafism, can you give some examples of that being practiced in the Salafi societies that makes them better compared to Non-Islamic democracies and Islamic democracies like Turkey and even Pakistan to an extent?

Are people there happier, more tolerant of each other and outsiders, women and minorities have better rights, people are not flogged on the streets for supposed infractions by the enforcers of "virtue" and preventers of "vice" et al. ? In a nutshell what makes them better societies that the rest of the Islamic world should emulate and even the non-Islamic world can look up to?

This post is strictly for others to reply. Not for the ones who think it is indulging in any bashing.

 

[Zyxius]

The question I asked earlier is open for other members here:

Whatever is good about Hinduism, can you give some examples of that being practiced in the hindu societies that makes them better compared to Non-Hindu societies?

Are people there happier, more tolerant of each other and outsiders, women and (lower) "castes" have better rights, people are not told they are unequal or "untouchable, and they don't go to temples to kiss rats and share their food, or pour milk on a rock they think is a God? In a nutshell what makes them better societies that hindu societies should emulate and even look up to?

This post is strictly for others to reply. Not for the ones who think it is indulging in any bashing.

I simply replaced the word Islam with Hindu and some basic words to demonstrate to you what your post looks like. You are basically saying that a whole segment of the Muslim population is just wrong and you are coming on this thread to make your point despite the fact that the purpose of this thread is to speak about the misconceptions of it. Your posts reveal that you are in fact simply anti-Muslim and are couching your hatred in pseudo conversation and debate. Please continue...you are proving that Hindus have a paper thin veil that hides their hatred of Muslims and Islam.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think there needs to be an acknowledgment that Zyxius is perhaps trying to advance an opinion about what Salafism means that is not in consonance with what certain societies are practicing, or scholars are advocating.

Societies and nations are not perfect in implementing their values, beliefs (in the West or East) or laws - I do not think that using an example of the poor state of the Muslim world currently is necessarily a reflection upon Islam, it is a reflection upon the distortion of faith, of ineffective systems of government and failures of government.

Therefore I think Zyxius's criticism in this respect is correct - can we say for certain that there is any society that has implemented perfectly, Salafism, before we use it to justify the failure of Salafism?

We need to know what Salafism advocates, how it would approach governance, etc. before we can analyze whether it will work or not.

 

[Flintlock]

he question I asked earlier is open for other members here:

Whatever is good about Hinduism, can you give some examples of that being practiced in the hindu societies that makes them better compared to Non-Hindu societies?

Several, but lets skip that for the moment.

Are people there happier, more tolerant of each other and outsiders, women and (lower) "castes" have better rights, people are not told they are unequal or "untouchable, and they don't go to temples to kiss rats and share their food, or pour milk on a rock they think is a God? In a nutshell what makes them better societies that hindu societies should emulate and even look up to?

Er...just a quick update....the caste system has been banned in India, and consequently within Hinduism. No religious leader in India is seen openly endorsing the caste system.
If it is still practiced today, its a hangover from earlier times.

As far as worshipping rats or pouring milk over a rock is concerned, there is nothing illegal/harmful about that. Atleast there is nothing more harmful in that than repeatedly walking around a black building and flogging yourself with whips.

You know nothing about hinduism. There are over 1000 different sects in Hinduism, and I daresay that the beliefs of some of these sects are far more "logical",than any Islamic ones, even philosophical.