‫‪SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS PRESENTS:‬‬

‫‪How to debate with the so-‬‬

‫‪called Salafiyyah‬‬
‫‪a handbook for people of sound mind and‬‬
‫‪seekers of truth‬‬

‫هو اليذ أأنزل عليك الكتاب منه ءايتا مكمتا هن{‬

‫أأم الكتاب و أأخر متشاباتا فأأما اليذن ف قلوبمه زيغ‬
‫فيتبعون ما تشابه منه ابتغآأء الفتنة و ابتغآأء تأأويل و ما‬
‫يعل تأأويل إال ا و الراسون ف العل يقولون ءامنا به‬
‫}ك من عند ربنا و ما يذكر إال أأولوا األلباب‬

‫‪Unofficial 3RD EDITION‬‬

CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE
WAHHAABIYY CREED 3
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE SO-CALLED
SALAFIYYS 3
THE CORRECT PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE OBLIGATION
OF FOLLOWING THEM 3
THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE NATION AT
LARGE 3
THE MATHHABS OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH 3
NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE WAHHAABIYYS 3
THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAAH 3
THE WAHHAABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAAH 3
THE WAHHAABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR INCORRECT
BELIEF 3
HOW THE WAHHAABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIYL 3
THE WAHHAABIYYS REJECT LOGIC 3
REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY CONFIRMED 3
THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHAABIYYS TRULY BELIEVE IN BODILY
ATTRIBUTES FOR ALLAAH (TAJSIYM) 3
THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE TEXTS 3
ISLAAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHAABIYY CREED 3
PROOF FROM THE QUR’AAN THAT REFUTES THE WAHHAABIYY CREED 3
THE PRIORITY OF THE MUHKAM VERSES OVER THE MUTASHAABIH 3
PROOF FROM THE HADIYTH THAT REFUTES THE WAHHAABIYY CREED 3
SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHAABIYY CREED 3
THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS 3
A DOCUMENTATION OF THE BELIEF OF THE SALAF 3
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE 3
EXPLAINING THE MEANING OF KUFR (BLASPHEMY) AND SOME OF ITS DETAILS
3
JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAAFIR (TAKFIYR) 3
HAVING THE CORRECT INTENTION 3
REFRAIN FROM PURPOSELY LEADING A PERSON TO SAY KUFR (BLASPHEMY) 3
THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE 3
THE IMPORTANCE OF FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF BELIEF 3
WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF? 3
CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THE WAHHAABIYY
MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HONORABLE
MUTASHAABIH TEXTS 3
INTRODUCTION 3
TRANSLATING THE QUR’AAN 3
THE WAHHAABIYYS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE IGNORANT 3
THE WAHHAABIYYS OUTWARDLY SHOW ADHERENCE TO THE SUNNAH 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADIYTH OF THE FEMALE SLAVE 3
THE STORY BEHIND THE HADIYTH 3

2
 THE WAHHAABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADIYTH 3
THE ARABIC TERMS HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEANING 3
DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADIYTH 3
IF THE WAHHAABIYY UNDERSTANDING WAS CORRECT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO
SAY “IN THE SKY” TO BE CONSIDERED A MUSLIM 3
THE FACT THAT THE HADIYTH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM
3
THE HADIYTH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN THE ISSUE OF BELIEF
3
A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION 3
THE WAHHAABIYYS TA’WIYL FOR THE HADIYTH 3
SIMILAR TEXTS 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH: { ‫الرحمن عـلى‬
‫ش استوى‬
‫<<}العـر ش‬AR-RAHMAANU 3ALA-L-3ARSHI-STAWAA>>
3
THE TAFSIYR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE WAHHAABIYYS WHO
MISINTERPRET IT 3
SIMILAR TEXTS USED BY WAHHAABIYYS AND HOW TO REFUTE THEIR CLAIMS 3
THE SAYING OF AL-IMAAM MAALIK 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADIYTH OF AN-NUZUWL 3
THE EXPLAINATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-3ASQALAANIYY 3
THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO IRRATIONAL MATTERS 3
A SIMILAR TEXT 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH: { ‫إليه يصعد الكلم‬
‫ }الطيب‬3
<<ILAYHI YAS3ADU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>> 3
THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE VERSE 3
THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING 3
A SIMILAR TEXT 3
ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN 3
ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE 3
VERSES MENTIONG THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH 3
ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND 3
DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD 3
THE SAYING OF ABUW HANIYFAH 3
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ALLAAH: {‫ << }بيديذ‬BIYADAYY>> 3
ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE 3
CONCLUSION 3
APPENDAGE 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAAH 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH: {‫<< }إانا أأمره إاذا أأراد شيئا أأن يقول ل كن فيكون‬Surely if He willed
for something He says to it: “Be”, and it shall be>> 3
THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AAN” 3
THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS 3
THE MEANING OF BID3AH LINGUISTICALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY 3
THE CORRECT MEANING OF: ‫“ و كل بدعة ضللاة‬WA KULLU BID3ATIN DALAALAH” 3
PROOF FROM THE HADIYTH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS 3
OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHAABIYYS IN THIS ISSUE, AND HOW TO REBUTTLE THEIR
CLAIMS 3
STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS 3
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF 3UMAR IBNU-L-KHATTAAB 3
EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS 3

3
 THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (3ALAYHI-
S-SALAAM) 3
WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHAABIYYS? 3
AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH 3
MUHAMMAD IBN 3ABDU-L-WAHHAAB 3
AL-ALBAANIYY 3
OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A SUBTITLE 3
EPILOGUE 3
TRANSLITERATION AND GLOSSARY 3

CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE

WAHHAABIYY CREED

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE SO-CALLED

SALAFIYYS

I
f Allaah willed, this booklet will shed light on some of the deviant beliefs of the so-
called Salafiyys, those whom the Muslims call the Wahhaabiyys. Hopefully, it will
be helpful in understanding what these misguided people believe, why they believe
it, and give some basic tips on how to refute them. Although the intention is to keep this
booklet as simple as possible, learning Islaamic knowledge on one’s own is not
encouraged by the religion. This booklet is equip with a glossary for unfamiliar terms, but
one should not attempt to teach Islaam to himself by simply reading books and making
his own understanding. Since this is so, every accountable person is obligated to go to a
knowledgeable teacher from Ahlu-s-Sunnah (the Sunni Muslims), and if there is no
teacher in his area, he must travel to find one, as said by the renowned shaafi3iyy scholar
Ahmad Ibn Rislaan in his famous millennial (1000 lined) poem entitled Az-Zubad:

‫من لم يجد معلما فليرحل‬ ‫سأِل‬

‫من لم يكن يعلم ذا فلي س‬ “Whoever does
not know, then let him ask, and whoever does not find a teacher, then let him travel.”
May Allaah guide us to knowledgeable teachers who can fill us with knowledge.

4
 THE CORRECT PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE
OBLIGATION OF FOLLOWING THEM
Know that in a very well known hadiyth with several narrations, the Messenger of
Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) warned about 72 sects that would deviate from the correct
path of the Muslims. That path is the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l-Jamaa3ah; Ahlu-s-
Sunnah for short. They are referred to in a hadiyth:

‫فليلزم الجماعة فمن أراد بحبوحة الجنة‬

“Whoever wishes for the prosperity of Paradise then let him stick to the Jamaa3ah,”
(At-Tirmithiyy). The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) taught his Companions that 72 out of 73
different sects would deserve Hellfire, and one would deserve Paradise. His Companions
asked him about that single group, and he (3alayhi-s-Salaam) told them, “The
Jamaa3ah.”
Ahlu-s-Sunnah, the People of the Prophet’s Method, is the group with the largest
following. In one narration, the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said,

‫فإذا رأيتم اختلفا فعليكم بالسواد العظم‬

"If you see (unacceptable) differences among you, then adhere to As-Sawaadu-l-
A3dham (the vast majority)” (Ibn Maajah). These different narrations of hadiyth
comply with each other. There is no contradiction between that single guided group being
the Jamaa3ah and being As-Sawaadu-l-A3dham. “Jamaa3ah” means “group”, and must
be explained to comply with the other hadiyth s, so in this context it means the majority.
In another narration, the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) named that group:

‫ما أنا عليه و أصحابي‬

“(The group which is upon) what my Companions and I are upon.” There is still no
conflict in the different descriptions of Ahlu-s-Sunnah. Historically, the majority of
Muslims have always had the same belief since the time of the Companions, who never
disagreed about the basics of belief among themselves. The majority of Muslims did not
disagree about the validity of the rulership of the pious khaliyfahs after the Prophet, or
deny the torture of the grave, or believe that major sins take a person out of Islaam, or
deny destiny, or deny that there will be believers who will be tortured in Hell, or deny
that people have free will; all of which were beliefs of different deviant groups

5
throughout history. Never has the majority disagreed about the correct belief, and we
challenge anyone to bring the evidence that such a thing ever occurred. Until today, 75%
to 80% of the nation has the same belief, and from that we can know that the so-called
Salafiyys are deviant people, since they consider most of the Muslims throughout the
world as mushrikuwn and bad innovators.

THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE NATION AT

LARGE
A Wahhaabiyy may put up a defense in this area. Proving that the nation as a
whole will always be guided necessitates that any small group who disagrees with the
majority of the nation is misguided. Therefore, for a Wahhaabiyy it is imperative to
discredit this notion, since he does not deny that they are a small out-numbered group. To
do that, he may mention the poor situation of Muslims today, their lack of knowledge and
being overwhelmed with sins. This is why we say that their belief will always be correct.
They would not agree upon a misguided creed. However, the Prophet foretold about his
nation becoming weak and sinful. There are several narrations about this, among them:

‫من أحييىَ سنتي عند فساد أمتي فله أجر شهيد‬

“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a
martyr.” This corruption in the nation does not mean that the majority will take a deviant
creed. Similar is the hadiyth narrated by Muslim:

‫و إإنِ أمتكم هذه جعلت عافيتها في أولها و سيصيب ءااخرها بلءا و أمور تنكرونها‬
“The protection of Allaah (the 3aafiyah) has been granted to the beginning of this
nation of yours, and its end will be inflicted with hardship and matters to which you
object”. A Wahhaabiyy may also produce the verse:
{ ‫} و قليل من عباديذ شكور‬
<<Only few of My slaves (the slaves of Allaah) are very thankful>>. We tell them that
this is in reference to piety- that few slaves of Allaah refrain from using their
endowments sinfully, which is ungratefulness to Allaah. There are other narrations about

6
this issue, so know that they may produce several references. The hadiyth s already
mentioned are enough to prove them wrong.
The Wahhaabiyys took the name of Ahlu-s-Sunnah for themselves, but if they are
a minority, only a couple million strong, how can they still claim the name? It is easy if
one merely distorts the meaning of “jamaa3ah”. To fool others, and to consider the
millions upon millions upon millions of Muslims as misguided, they say, “The Jamaa3ah
can be one person.” This statement may be true when a person is truly following Ahlu-s-
Sunnah, which is the majority, but he is secluded and surrounded by misguided people.
The case of the Wahhaabiyys does not apply. We seek the Protection of Allaah from such
sly deviance.
THE MATHHABS OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH
In reality, Ahlu-s-Sunnah is the vast, vast majority of Muslims. They stuck to the
same belief since the time of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) and never deviated from it.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah follows the four famous mathhabs in obedience to Allaah and His
Messenger, without disputing the validity of any of them. The largest of those schools is
the Hanafiyy School, the followers of the great Al-Imaam Abuw Haniyfah. Al-Imaam
Maalik was a contemporary of his and the greatest scholar in the city of Al-Madiynah at
his time. His school, the Maalikiyy school, is the most widely spread in Africa, with the
exception of the eastern African countries. Al-Imaam Ash-Shaafi3iyy was the greatest
student of Maalik, and his school, the Shaafi3iyy School, is the most common in the areas
of Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Jordon, as well as Indonesia and Malaysia. As for the
Hambaliyy school, the followers of Al-Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, it is the smallest of the
four, because many of the people who likened Allaah to the creations attributed
themselves to that school and have defamed it- repelling people from adhering to it. Ahlu-
s-Sunnah believes that if someone follows any one of those mathhabs, he would be
guided. By that, they respect the acceptable differences within the boundaries of the
Islaamic shariy3ah (law), as the Companions respected the different judgments given by
other mujtahid Companions. Ahlu-s-Sunnah follows the Companions in what they did,
and as a result, did not tamper with the rules of the Religion, like the Wahhaabiyys have
done.

7
 All of Ahlu-s-Sunnah has the same belief. They belong to one of two mathhabs
(schools) of 3aqiydah (creed; belief), even if some of them did not realize that. Knowing
about this is important. In brief, the two mathhabs of 3aqiydah do not have different
creeds. They carry the same belief. The difference between them is in such matters as the
definition of terminology. In other words, the base of these two schools is the same. The
outcome they reached in regards to the belief is the same. Their differences are in issues
like defining terms, ways of analyzing proofs, and the like. If someone follows one of the
schools of 3aqiydah (the Ash3ariyy or the Maaturiydiyy), he follows the belief of the
Prophet of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) and his Companions, just as the one who follows
the method of the schools of fiqh follows the method of the Prophet of Allaah (3alayhi-s-
Salaam) and his Companions.
In explaining the Muslim’s creed, most scholars are Ash3ariyys, also known as Al-
Ashaa3irah. The others are Maaturiydiyys, and it should not be understood that they are
few. The Wahhaabiyys hate both groups, claiming that Ash3ariyys and Maaturiydiyys are
deviant. They are cornered into this claim, because both fountains of knowledge refute
the Wahhaabiyy creed, and all other deviant creeds. Furthermore, since they claim that
the Ash3ariyys are deviant, and since most of the scholars are Ash3ariyys, they often
quote scholars whom they would consider deviant. The authority of heavy weight
scholars like An-Nawawiyy, Ibn Hajar Al-3Asqalaaniyy, and Al-Bayhaqiyy give their
books and lessons an authentic tone. The Wahhaabiyys pick and choose what they like
from the scholars’ comments and judgments, then if one were to show them what those
scholars believed, those Wahhaabiyys would say, “Oh, but he is an Ash3ariyy!”
Ahlu-s-Sunnah is moderate, safely between the different extremes that are and
have been practiced. Unlike the Wahhaabiyys, they do not liken the Attributes of Allaah
to the attributes of the creations, nor do they deny the Existence of Allaah or His
Attributes. They do not deem the intellect as something that has priority over the rules of
Allaah, nor do they stoop like the Wahhaabiyys and read the Qur’aan and the hadiyths
without using their minds. Some scholars said that the one who reads the Revelation
without using his mind is like the one who steps into the light with his eyes closed, and
the one who uses his mind without using the Revelation is like the one who steps into the
darkness with his eyes opened. We must step into the light with our eyes opened. We

8
must accept the Revelation of Allaah and use our minds (according to the guidance of the
great scholars of Islaam).
NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE
WAHHAABIYYS
Al-Mushabbihah, “the people who make similarities”, is among the ancient,
deviant factions about which the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) warned. They are
religiously defined as the people who liken; resemble Allaah to His creations. The so-
called Salafiyys; “the followers of the Salafiyy Da3wah”, as they call themselves, are a
modern branch of Al-Mushabbihah, as we will prove, if Allaah willed.
Rather than being Salafiyy (followers of the scholars of the first 300 years), they
are talafiyy (destructive). Do not call them Salafiyy, call them imposters. Call them “so-
called Salafiyys”, or “pseudo (fake) Salafiyys”. Put “Salafiyy” in quotation marks to show
that you do not consider them to actually be Salafiyy. If Allaah willed, we will also speak
about the true Salaf.
Call them The Wahhaabiyyah, the name given to them by the scholars when they
first deviated more than 200 years ago from the land of Najd in the Arabian Peninsula,
following their master, Muhammad Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab.
One would find many Wahhaabiyys who are offended by being called
Wahhaabiyys, and say that it is sinful to use the term, because it is derived from the name
of Allaah: “Al-Wahhaab” (the one who gives abundantly). They would say, “How can
you use the name of Allaah to refer to people you consider deviant, is this not belittling
His name?” This is yet another example of their ignorance. Had they known some of the
basics of the Arabic language, they would have not argued this point. In the books of
Arabic conjugation (sarf), which is the knowledge of the structures of the words, there is
a chapter called “an-nasab”, which means to attribute something to something else. For
example, if someone is attributed to the tribe of Quraysh, he would be “Qurashiyy”, and
if he was a follower of Al-Imaam Maalik he would be Maalikiyy. We are not actually
attributing those people to Al-Wahhaab, who is Allaah the exalted, but to Muhammad Ibn
3Abdu-l-Wahhaab- or more specifically to the last part of his name: 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab
(the slave of Al-Wahhaab). This name is composed of two words: 3abd and Al-Wahhaab,
and when someone is attributed to a person with this type of constructed name, one of the

9
two parts must be omitted. And so, the first part of the name in this case is omitted and
the second part is kept. Hence, anyone attributed to Muhammad Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab is
not called “3abdiyy”, but “wahhaabiyy”.
They also call themselves Ahlu-l-Haqq (the People of the Truth) and Ahlu-l-
Hadiyth (the People of [the science of] Hadiyth). When calling themselves Ahlu-l-
Hadiyth, they truly mean that they (unrightfully) make ijtihaad from the hadiyths-
bypassing what the mujtahids said. They have also been called Laa Mathhabiyyah (those
who do not claim any school of fiqh), and Ghayru-l-Muqallidiyn (those who do not
imitate). They explain this name to mean that they do not merely imitate the scholars,
rather they imitate the Prophet through the hadiyths, but it in fact means that they do not
follow qualified scholarship.
Truly, they are Ahlu-l-Kibr (the People of Arrogance), Ahlu-d-Dalaalah (the
people of misguidance), Al-Mushabbihah (the people who liken Allaah to His creations),
Al-Mujassimah (those who believe that Allaah has a body), Al-Hashwiyyah (people who
speak nonsense) and kuffaar (blasphemers), among other titles.
It is easy for an ignorant person to commit kufr (blasphemy) because of them.
Many people have fallen into their snare. Except for their kufr, they talk and dress like
Muslims. However, if lent a listening ear, they surely will throw an unfortunate person
into the black flames of Jahannam. This does not include people who are unaware of the
bad belief of the Wahhaabiyys, but may affiliate themselves with the so-called Salafiyys.
The Wahhaabiyys are as The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said:

‫س من جلدتنا يتكلمونِ إبأِلسنتنا تسمع منهم و تنكر دعاة علىَ أبواب جهنم يمن‬
‫أنا س‬
‫استمع إليهم قذفوه فيها‬
“There are people who look like us and talk with our talk. You would hear their
message and reject. They are preachers at the gates of Hell. Whoever listens to them,
they will throw him in it,” (Al-Bukhaariyy).

10
 THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAAH

To avoid confusion, the correct creed will be discussed before discussing their
incorrect creed.
Know that Allaah exists differently from anything else. He alone is without a
beginning, because no one created Him. He is the only Creator. He exists everlastingly
and does not change. He is perfect. Before creating the creations, He existed without
them. He existed before the skies or the 3Arsh existed, and He now exists as He eternally
existed, without those creations affecting or changing Him. He is alive without a body or
soul, and without needing sustenance. He is knowledgeable without a teacher and does
not learn or forget. He possesses the perfect knowledge of everything, and the creations
exist only as He knew they would. He has power to bring things from non-existence into
existence. He creates without tools and without getting weak or sleepy. He has the eternal
and everlasting Will, by which He specified His creations with particular places,
directions, shapes, colors, times, changes, movements, stability, hardships, ease, choice,
free will, and everything else He eternally willed for His creations. His management is
unhindered and uninterrupted. He cannot be distracted because He does not have limbs.
He has no partner, wife, parent, son, branch, origin, nor opposite. He does not need
anything, not a space to occupy, nor time to bind Him. He is not benefited nor harmed by
His creatures. He sees without eyes and hears without ears eternally, without looking into
a direction, without needing volume or sound waves, light, time, or space. Nothing is
hidden from Him. He speaks with His eternal Kalaam (speech), without it being of a
word, letter, sound, nor language. It is not the result of organs touching or air moving,
and it does not come from any direction. Allaah does not resemble anything in the
universe. He is not composed of particles, nor does He have the characteristics of
particles, such as color, shape, place, motion, stillness, texture, temperature, etc. He is
neither inside nor outside of something, since those are places for bodies. He is not in a
particular place, nor is He everywhere. He exists without being in any place. He does not
have the attributes of the creations. The creations are not parts or attributes of Allaah. All
of His attributes are eternal and everlasting. Since His Self is Eternal, His attributes

11
cannot be created. He is different from whatever is imagined. Let there be no doubt that
this is the correct belief in Him, the mighty Lord with the perfect names.

12
 THE WAHHAABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAAH

The focus of our discussion will be the Wahhaabiyys’ disbelief in the attributes of
Allaah. They claim Tawhiyd, but they really believe in tajsiym (attributing bodily
attributes to Allaah).
Their belief is that Allaah has attributes whose linguistic meanings refer to the
attributes of a body. This means that the meanings they choose to ascribe to Allaah are
meanings that imply a bodily reference, like organs, places and motion. Notice the word
“meanings”. They intend particular (bodily) definitions when they use certain words. Let
whoever talks to one of them pay attention not only to the words they use, but also to the
meanings they intend.
They believe that Allaah has a real face that should be understood literally. They
believe that He has two real eyes, and that He actually smiles (these are their own words)
and laughs. Their grandfather, Ibn Taymiyah, claimed that Allaah spoke after He was not
speaking. They believe that Allaah speaks Arabic, claiming that whenever Allaah creates,
He literally says “Kun (be; exist)”. They say that Allaah is attributed with a very real pair
of hands that must be understood as stated, and that Allaah really holds creations in them.
They believe that He has a real right hand and a real left hand, and some said He only has
two right hands, because a left would not befit Him. They believe that Allaah has real
fingers, but they may have different opinions about how many. At least, they would say
He has two, and some may say six. They have been known to say that Allaah sits on His
3Arsh, but it seems that was too easy to refute, so they reverted to saying that He is above
His 3Arsh. They focus on attributing places and directions to Him. They say He is
“above”, and they mean it in the physical sense. They claim that He is above the seven
skies, above the 3Arsh, the ceiling of Paradise. They believe that Allaah is separate from
His creations, disconnected from them, existing in a very high location. Some of them
say that Allaah is above the 3Arsh and there is no place there, which is absurd and against
what the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said about the book above it. They do not see this as
drawing similarities between Allaah and His creations. Some of them said that Allaah
exists in the sky, but perhaps those who say that He is above His 3Arsh have overtaken

13
them. Some may say that Allaah is above the 3Arsh by a four-finger spaced distance.
They believe that Allaah descends from above the 3Arsh down to the first sky, and then
ascends back up; that Allaah comes and goes- so that they believe that Allaah moves
from one place to another. Furthermore, they bind Allaah by time, believing that He
descends during the last third of the night, and that He is above the 3Arsh during the day.
They believe that Allaah has a shin and a real foot, which will be submersed in the fire of
Hell on the Day of Judgment. They even believe that Allaah will cast a shadow on that
day. They firmly believe that all of these so-called attributes must be taken by their real,
literal, apparent and obvious meanings.
As can be seen, when using the name “Allaah”, they refer to something
imaginary. Compare this to the correct belief mentioned in the previous section, and
easily see that they do not believe in God. Let whoever meets one of these deviant people
not be intimidated, nor should he underestimate every one of them. Some Wahhaabiyys
study and memorize, ready to bombard their opponent. The point of mentioning their
belief without mentioning their so-called proof is to expose the result of their analysis.
They misinterpreted many verses and hadiyths to establish their beliefs, and this is the
result.

14
 THE WAHHAABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR INCORRECT
BELIEF

What complicates the issue is that they usually deny that they believe in Allaah as
someone with a body. On the contrary, they say that they do not believe that He has a
body. Some of them say that they do not confirm whether He has a body or not, which is
still blasphemy. Some of them might say that He has a body, but then would say that they
do not know how His body is, which also does not escape blasphemy.
They would deny that Allaah has a body, because they know they would be
clearly admitting that He is like His creations. Taking this position may be the case of
most of them.
They may not confirm whether Allaah has a body or not, because they would not
want to explicitly liken Allaah to His creations, and at the same time they do not want to
reject their literal meanings. This is still blasphemy, since taking a middle ground and
saying, “I do not say if Allaah has a body or not,” is doubting about Allaah. It is the same
as saying, “I do not say if Allaah exists or not,” or “I do not say if Allaah has a partner or
not.” The one who doubts about any attribute of Allaah that is known by necessity (such
as His knowledge, power, the fact that He does not resemble the creations, etc) is not a
Muslim, as mentioned by the great Al-Imaam, Abuw Haniyfah, one of the heads of the
(real) Salaf, in his book Al-Wasiyyah. He said, “Whoever says that Allaah has a created
attribute, or doubts, or takes a middle ground between one way and the other without
confirming or denying either side is a blasphemer.” Whoever considers it possible for
Allaah to have a body, even if he did not believe that Allaah has a body, would blaspheme
for deeming it possible.
They might say that Allaah has a body, because it is obvious that they describe a
body, but they would say that His body is not like ours, or that they do not know how His
body is. According to the great Ahmad Ibn Hambal, the Salafiyy scholar whom they often
claim to follow, whoever says Allaah has a body unlike other bodies blasphemes. In his
book called “The creed of the distinguished Al-Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hambal”, Abuw
Fadal At-Tamiymiyy, the head of the Hambaliyy scholars in Baghdad said, “Ahmad

15
objected to those who call Allaah a body, and said: ‘The names of things are taken from
the language and the religious law; the linguists defined the jism (body) as that which has
length, width, depth, composition and image, and it (the term “jism”) did not come in the
religious law, and so it is invalid’ ”.
Furthermore, it is blasphemous to say that they do not know how His body is,
because the scholars of Islaam have made it very clear that "how" cannot be attributed to
Him. Throughout the books of the Sunniyy scholars, you would find that they said:
‫ بل كيفية‬, which means, "without a how (manner of being)". To say “they do not
know how He is” is to say that there is a how, but it is unknown to them. Saying that the
“how” is unknown does not negate the fact that they believe that He has a body, just as
saying, "the door is open, but I do not know how," does not negate the fact that the door
is open. So, if one of them says, "We do not know how," tell him that the scholars of the
(real) Salaf, like Umm Salamah, the Prophet’s (3alayhi-s-Salaam) wife, have agreed that
there is no how. She said, "the ‘How’ (being attributed to Him) is not rational (ghayru
ma3quwl)," (Al-Laalikaa'iyy, Ibn Hajar Al-3Asqalaaniyy). If Allaah willed, this point
will be revisited in the section, "The Truth about the saying of Allaah Ar-Rahmaanu
3ala- l-3Arshi-stawaa".
These people may have never learned the correct belief, so when they learned
their incorrect belief, they became attached to it and developed a warped logic. Their
thinking is based on an unsound premise: that Allaah is attributed with these (human)
attributes. They also have other horrendous and contradictory claims, which need not be
mentioned now. As a result, their thinking became twisted, like the Christians who say
that Allaah is one, and is three while He is one. The Wahhaabiyys believe that Allaah has
these (human) attributes, yet they claim that they believe that Allaah is not similar to His
creations. This is clearly unsound and incorrect.

HOW THE WAHHAABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS

Notice that their so-called proofs have not been referenced yet. Go through this
process gradually and systematically. First, have a general idea of how they believe in
Allaah, which is really disbelief. They will not deny the belief of which we have accused
them, but they may deny certain words used in this book, like “organ” and “motion”.

16
They openly use such words as “real”, “literal”, and “apparent” when they attribute these
(human) attributes to Allaah. In Arabic they use such words as “dhaahir” and
“haqiyqah”. Why do they believe these things? The following is the reasoning behind
their bad belief in Allaah, the exalted:
They believe that Allaah must be attributed with these (bodily) attributes because
of some literal meanings of Qur’aanic verses and hadiyths of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam). They say that these (bodily) attributes are found in Al-Qur’aan and As-Sunnah,
so we must believe in them, and whoever does not believe in them has negated them.
They mean that one must believe in those texts by their literal meanings, and whoever
does not believe by the literal meanings has completely negated the attribute, which of
course is not true. Hence, if they meet someone who does not believe that the Yad of
Allaah is a real and literal hand, they will accuse him of rejecting an attribute of Allaah.
If they find someone who does not believe that Allaah has a true and literal face, as they
would describe it without explicitly calling it an organ, they would accuse him of
completely rejecting an attribute of Allaah.
This twisted reasoning is a trick that lead many Muslims to blasphemy. They left
Al-Islaam to join the Wahhaabiyys, not realizing that this reasoning is perverted. They did
not possess the answers that would protect their faith. Seeing that too many Muslims did
not know how to defend themselves or Al-Islaam against the lies of the Wahhaabiyys is
what inspired the writing of this book. The Wahhaabiyys are among those whom Allaah
warned us about in the Qur’aan when He told us:
{ ‫} ف أأما اليذن ف قلوبمه زيغ فيتبعون ما تشابه منه ابتغ آأء الفتنة و ابتغ آأء ت أأويل‬
<<As for those with perversion in their hearts, they follow what may have more than
one meaning (mutashaabih verses), with the purpose of causing tribulation, and to
misinterpret it…>> (‘Aal 3Imraan, 7).
Know that these difficult people do not deem rational thinking valid. How could
they when it shows the invalidity of their creed? They say, “Logic is good, but it has its
place.” Although a true statement, what they truly mean is that one must believe what
they consider as proper belief, regardless of logic or reasoning.

17
 They believe that interpreting a verse or hadiyth differently from its literal
meaning, which is called making ta’wiyl, is sinful. This basic creed of theirs- that ta’wiyl
is sinful- is one of their greatest reasons for encountering contradictions, as will be shown
in the second chapter, if Allaah willed. It is true that some texts may literally suggest
some bodily attributes, but sound reasoning does not attribute bodily characteristics to the
Creator. The Wahhaabiyys do not believe that this is grounds to interpret these texts
differently from the literal meanings. As a result, they fell into Tajsiym (attributing bodily
attributes to Allaah), which is blasphemy, and they accuse the one who believes in a
different (befitting) interpretation of takthiyb (the blasphemy of contradicting the
religious judgments) and ta3tiyl (the blasphemy of denying the attributes of Allaah).
They say statements like, “If Allaah revealed this word, then it must be
understood by the literal meaning, or He would have revealed a different word.” This is a
very devious and weak-minded understanding, which may sound appealing to an ignorant
person. This reasoning has no support from the Qur’aan or the Sunnah. Scholars like
Abu-n-Nasr Al-Qushayriyy said that those who follow this method do so because of their
ignorance in Arabic.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIYL

On the contrary, Allaah taught us this lesson in the chapter of ‘Aal 3Imraan, verse
Seven:
{ ‫} منه ءاي تتا مكمتا هن أأم الكتاب و أأخر متشاباتا‬
<<Within the Qur’aan are muhkam verses (which according to the Arabic language
have only one meaning). They are the base of the book, and other verses are
mutashaabih (susceptible to more than one meaning). >> Also, The Prophet (3alayhi-
s-Salaam) made a supplication for Ibn 3Abbaas (may Allaah accept his and his father’s
deeds) to know the ta’wiyl of the Qur’aan, as authentically narrated by Al-Bukhaariyy.
The Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said:

‫اللهم علمه الحكمة و تأِويل الكتاب‬

“O Allaah, teach him the Wisdom (the Sunnah) and the ta’wiyl of the Book (Al-
Qur’aan)”. Ta’wiyl is to interpret a text differently from its literal meaning. It is known

18
that Ibn 3Abbaas interpreted many texts that the Wahhaabiyys use to liken Allaah to His
creations. The fact is that ta’wiyl is necessary for making all of the texts free of
contradiction.

***EXTRA DETAIL***
Know that the Wahhaabiyys may deny the validity of ta’wiyl by referring to the
verse:
{ ‫} و ما يعل ت أأويل إال ا‬
<<No one knows its ta’wiyl except Allaah>>. They say that it is not permissible to make
ta’wiyl because no one can know the ta’wiyl of the mutashaabih verses except Allaah. So,
they say that we must take them literally, because only Allaah knows the ta’wiyl. We
answer, “When reciting this verse (Suwratu Aal 3Imraan, 7) and stopping at the word
‘Allaah’ so that it means, ‘No one knows its ta’wiyl except Allaah’, this means, ‘No one
knows the time of happening (of certain matters like the Day of Judgment or the coming
of the One-eyed Imposter) except Allaah’.” According to this recitation of the verse,
Allaah dispraised the Jews who tried to determine the exact time of the occurrence of
Judgment Day by referring to some of the mutashaabih verses of the Qur’aan like:
‫ال‬
{ }

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

have been interpreted in different ways, and hence are mutashaabih. The word ta’wiyl
can mean “the time of happening”, as proven by the saying of Allaah in Suwratu-l-
A3raaf, 53:
{ ‫} يوم ي أأت ت أأويل‬
<<The Day when its ta’wiyl (time of happening) comes…>> In order to interpret the
word ta’wiyl as “meaning” or “interpretation”, recite past the word “Allaah”, and
continue until reaching the word “Al-3Ilm (the knowledge)”. Hence, the verse would say:
{ ‫} و ما يعل ت أأويل إال ا و ال راسون ف العل‬

19
<<No one knows the ta’wiyl (true interpretation) except Allaah and those who are
deeply rooted in the knowledge. >> In this way, both recitations comply without
contradiction. Furthermore, the Wahhaabiyys do make ta’wiyl for any verse whose literal
meaning contradicts their belief, as will be made obvious in the second chapter, in
shaa’a-llaah. In their so-called Noble Qur’aan (translation), they put a period after the
word “Allaah” because of their disregard and disbelief in the other recitation (qiraa’ah)
of the verse, known as the recitation of Mujaahid, the student of Ibn 3Abbaas. This extra
detail may not be needed for many, so do not bring it up without need, especially if you
do not completely understand this point. But, in case this booklet is used to refute a
Wahhaabiyy who raises this point, then here is the answer.

They say statements like, “We hear and we obey”, which to them means that they
take things by face value without looking into other possible meanings. Their belief is so
unsound, that they are forced to reject logic. They believe that the logical process of
refuting them is philosophy and innovation, which is also not true, as will now be
addressed, if Allaah willed.

20
 THE WAHHAABIYYS REJECT LOGIC
So let us address the intellectual and logical issues pertaining to this blasphemy.
They do not agree that the mind (al-3aql) should have consideration in deciphering what
Allaah revealed, so they say, “Sound thinking is good, but it has its place.” If they
completely reject sound thinking, no one will listen to them, so they give some weight to
it, but if they encourage people to think, they will expose themselves, so they deny that
rational thinking is a part of the creed (al-3aqiydah), which is a lie. They teach people to
just believe in the texts by their literal meanings and not to listen to anyone who says
otherwise. They might actually put their fingers in their ears, following the Sunnah of the
blasphemers from the time of Prophet Nuwh (Noah, 3alayhi-s-Salaam). They refer to a
saying of Al-Imaam 3Aliyy (may Allaah accept his deeds), but distort its true meaning.
They say that 3Aliyy (may Allaah accept his deeds) said, “If the religion was by logic, we
would wipe the bottom of the khuff (foot gear) instead of the top.” They would then tell
the person to forget about logic, and just accept the literal interpretations.

REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY CONFIRMED

It is important to have the correct understanding of this saying. 3Aliyy (may
Allaah accept his deeds) actually said, “Had the Religion been by opinion (ra’y), we
would wipe the bottom of the foot gear instead of the top (because the bottom is the side
that gets dirty), however I saw The Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) wiping the
top”. Al-Al-Imaam 3Aliyy did not negate the use of logic. Logic, reasoning, and use of the
intellect are praised throughout the Qur’aan. The two Sayings of Allaah are repeated

many times in the Qur’aan: { ‫<< } أأفل تعقلون‬Do you not use your minds?>>, and
{ ‫<< } أأفل يعقلون‬Do they not use their minds?>>.
Al-Al-Imaam 3Aliyy, the most knowledgeable of the Companions (may Allaah be
pleased with all of them), would not say anything against the Qur’aan, and if so, then his
saying would be rejected for the revelation of Allaah. In fact, consideration of the mental
judgments is an integral part of understanding the belief, and has its origin in Al-Qur’aan
and As-Sunnah. Hence, it is not philosophy or innovation.

21
 The scholars of 3aqiydah (belief; creed), like Al-Ash3ariyy also pointed out the
fact that the Prophets, the greatest of Allaah’s creations (3alayhimu-s-Salaam), used
logical arguments to refute the blasphemers they encountered and to establish the correct
belief in Allaah, such as what was narrated in the stories of Prophet Ibraahiym
(Abraham, 3alayhi-s-Salaam). Among those stories was Ibraahiym’s debate with the
tyrant, Nimrod, mentioned in the chapter (suwrah) Al-Baqarah, who claimed to be God.
He told Nimrod, “Surely Allaah brings the sun from the east, bring it from the west if you
are truthful.” By this simple and clever logic, Ibraahiym silenced Nimrod.
Al-Imaam 3Aliyy’s aforementioned saying refers to the details of the practical
rules (al-fiqh), not the essentials of belief. One can realize the correct belief about the
Creator through reasoning; that worshipping a man or a stone or a picture is invalid. Why
else do the Christians readily say, “Just believe.”? It is because they realize the confusion
of their beliefs. However we do not use logic to deduce the practical rules. For example,
how would one logically conclude that there are five prayers? Mere logic does not
necessitate five prayers over six or four. How would one logically deduce that the bowing
position comes before prostration when praying? These judgments cannot be known by
logic, and are not based merely on opinion. These judgments are taken from The
Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s- Salaam). Prophets are sent as a mercy to humans and
jinn, who otherwise cannot know how to properly worship their Lord. However, those
humans and jinn can use their minds to know what is and what is not befitting to say
about their Lord. Hence, some scholars even said that whoever is sane and pubescent is
accountable to confirm the existence of the Creator and to correctly believe in His
oneness; that He alone is the creator of everything; the One Who does not resemble
anything, even if that person never heard the message of a Prophet. This is because every
child is born with the readiness for the correct belief (fitrah), and is mentally able to reach
it.
Allaah said:
{ ‫} و قالوا لو كنا نسمع أأو نعقل ما كنا ف أأصا بب السعي‬

22
<< They will say, “Had we listened, and had we used our minds, we would not have
been inhabitants of Hell.”>> This verse (Al-Mulk, 10) proves that the mental judgment
has weight and should be considered.

THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHAABIYYS TRULY

BELIEVE IN BODILY ATTRIBUTES FOR ALLAAH
(TAJSIYM)
Tell the Wahhaabiyy in a wise way that it is blasphemy to attribute a body to
Allaah, because the true goal is to help him and let him accept the truth, not to debate.
Unfortunately, it is known through experience that the one infected with the disease of
tashbiyh (likening Allaah to the creations) does not usually want to be cured. If the
Wahhaabiyy has not read this booklet yet, he would probably agree with you without
thinking about it; he would probably agree that it is blasphemy to attribute a body to
Allaah. On the other hand, he will still insist that Allaah is attributed with those (bodily)
attributes. He will say, “We must believe in them as they are without changing their
meanings.”
How could you still say that he truly believes that Allaah has a body? They want
you to believe that Allaah has bodily attributes, but to deny that He has a body. Whoever
accepts such contradictory reasoning is a person of a simple mind, someone who lacks
guidance, and does not value the high level of meanings that are revealed in the Qur’aan,
or the usefulness of the mind.
According to the mental judgment, whatever occupies a place is a body. The more
space it occupies, the bigger it is. They believe that the space Allaah occupies is above
the 3Arsh, although they will deny the terms “occupying space”. They have sayings about
whether Allaah is bigger or smaller than the 3Arsh. They believe that He leaves that
space to occupy another space, somewhere in the first sky.
Also, according to the mental judgment, whatever moves has a body. It must have
boundaries, limits and certain edges, so to fit in the places between which it moves.
Hence, whatever moves has a body, and whoever believes that Allaah moves
consequently believes in his heart that He has a body, even if he denies it with his tongue.

23
 They say that “Highness (al-3uluw)” is Allaah’s attribute, but they intend the
physical connotation instead of the majestic one. They say that He is “up”, while
repeatedly pointing to the sky. They do not say that "below" or "lowness" are attributes of
Allaah, but they say that He literally descends to the first sky, which implies that He
would be below whatever He passed on His way down. This sick belief stands in direct
contradiction with the authentic and explicit saying of The Messenger of Allaah, narrated
by Al-Bukhaariyy and Al-Bayhaqiyy:

‫أنت الظاهر فليس فوقك شيءا و أنت الباطن فليس دونك شيءا‬
"O Allaah, You are Adh-Dhaahir (the One whose existence is obvious) and there is
nothing above You, and You are Al-Baatin (the One Who cannot be reached by
delusions) and there is nothing below You."
Whatever has a direction is restricted to a place. Anything bound by a direction
has limits, because it is restricted to one place and not to another. Anything in a place is
something with a body, whether in a high place, like the book above the 3Arsh and the
angels in the sky, or a low place, like the bottom of Hellfire. These are descriptions of a
body.
So, tell the Wahhaabiyy that he is implying that Allaah has a body, and for him to
deny that Allaah has a body is ta’wiyl; negating the literal meanings. In other words, do
not let the Wahhaabiyys hold both points. In one hand, they hold literal meanings that
apply to bodies, and in the other, they deny that Allaah has a body. Both points add up to
a contradiction. It is the same as a Christian saying that he believes in monotheism while
saying that God is three. Is it a coincidence that the so-called Salafiyyah split the Tawhiyd
(oneness of Allaah) into three (bad innovation)!?

THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE

TEXTS
Then, a sound mind concludes that Allaah exists without being in any place or
direction, since places and directions are attributes of created things; bodies. This sound
reasoning complies with verse 11 from the chapter of Ash-Shuwraa:
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬

24
<<Nothing is similar to Allaah in any way. >> If Allaah was in a place, many things
would be similar to Him. His Existence without a place is not impossible, as
Wahhaabiyys think. On the contrary, the mental judgment confirms that Allaah exists
without a place, because He existed before He created places.
If someone says that clearing Allaah from all places is negating His existence,
then we pose a question similar to that of Abuw Haniyfah’s, “If Allaah needed a place,
where was He before He created them?” Such a person tries, but cannot imagine Allaah
existing without a place, so he thinks that would be denying His existence. The
Wahhaabiyy does not know what it means to say that nothing is whatsoever like Allaah.
He believes that Allaah needs something. Actually, negating a place for Allaah is denying
that Allaah has a body, since the place is the space that a body occupies.
It is confirmed that Allaah exists without a place, and therefore is not a body, so it
follows that He is not attributed with organs, motion, or time, and is totally unlike all of
His creations. That is the judgment of the sound mind in this issue.

25
 ISLAAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHAABIYY CREED

An ignorant person may ask, “So, what if they believe that Allaah has a body?
What is wrong with that?” The answer is: such a bad belief is against the explicit texts of
the Qur’aan, the hadiyths, the consensus of the scholars, and as just addressed, the
judgment of the mind.

PROOF FROM THE QUR’AAN THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHAABIYY CREED
Besides the mental proofs, we also refute them by referring to some very simple
and basic textual proofs. It is not necessary to refer to twenty different verses to confirm
the validity of the sound belief. One verse from The Qur’aan refutes their entire
foundation:
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>> (Ash-Shuwraa, 11). This verse means that nothing
is similar to Allaah in any way. It is a muhkam verse; a verse that only has one meaning
according to the Arabic language. It is explicit, not ambiguous nor figurative. The only
meaning it can possibly have is that nothing resembles Allaah. It means that there is
nothing common between Allaah and His creations; that Allaah is not like anything, and
nothing is like Him; that every creation is not similar to Allaah in any respect. This is the
meaning. This is enough to protect you from falling into the blasphemy of likening
Allaah to His creations, which is shirk.
Take a closer look at this explicit verse: Allaah said: { ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<laysa kamithlihi shay’>>. The word ‫ليس‬ “laysa” is the word of negation. The first
letter prefixed to the next word is the ‫“ ك‬Kaaf” with a fathah; a word made of one
letter, simply pronounced as “ka”. It originally means “like”. It is affixed to the word ‫مثل‬

“mithli”, meaning “like”. The last letter suffixed on the word “mithli” is the ‫“ ه‬haa’”

26
with a kasrah, so it is actually pronounced “he”. It is a third person masculine pronoun

meaning “him”, and it refers to Allaah. The last word in the verse is ‫شيءا‬ “shay’ ”,
which means “thing”. It is a general, indefinite term referring to all of the creations.
It is easily noticed that Allaah revealed the word “mithli” in this verse, with the
addition of revealing the “kaaf”. The negation of this combination emphatically denies

any likeness to Him. If the “kaaf” was removed (‫شيءا‬ ‫ليس مثله‬ ), it would still mean
that nothing is like Him. However, Allaah revealed the “kaaf” added to the “mithli”, and

this emphasizes the meaning that nothing is similar to Him. Furthermore, the term ‫شيءا‬

“shay’ ” is indefinite, and whenever an indefinite noun is presented in a negative

context, then the meaning is an all-inclusive negation. In other words, look at the
difference between saying, “He is not like a thing”, and “He is not like the thing”. The
first of these two is more inclusive, because the term “thing” is indefinite. From this, we
can know that Allaah is clear of having or being a body, and is clear of organs, motion,
places, directions, and change. According to the judgment of the mind, attributes such as
those would draw similarities between Allaah and His creatures.
Many other verses negate likeness between Allaah and His creations, like Al-
Ikhlaas 4:
{ ‫} و ل يذكن ل كفواا أأحد‬
<<There is no one equal to Him>>, or the 65th verse of Maryam:
{ ‫} هل تعل ل سييا‬
posing the rhetorical question, <<Do you know of anything similar to Him?>>.
However,
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>> is the most explicit verse in the Qur’aan that
clears Allaah from resembling His creations. Whoever is lost in the ocean of confusion
from the prevalent ignorance among today’s Muslims, let this verse be his plank of wood

27
for staying afloat. Never liken Allaah to His creations, no matter how many verses a
Wahhaabiyy may bring to you to convince you that Allaah is like a body.
We say that it is not permissible to interpret any text in a way that attributes
bodily characteristics to Allaah, because doing that will make the verses of The Qur’aan
contradictory, which is impossible. For the Wahhaabiyys, this contradiction is minute,
acceptable, and insignificant, because they do not believe that logic is associated with
belief.

THE PRIORITY OF THE MUHKAM VERSES OVER THE

MUTASHAABIH
As mentioned, { ‫<< } ليس كثل شء‬Nothing is whatsoever like Him>> is a muhkam
verse, and again, a muhkam verse is a verse that can only have one interpretation
according to the Arabic language. It is important to know the merit that Allaah gave to
the muhkam verses. In ‘Aal 3Imraan, verse 7, Allaah told us:
{ ‫} منه ءاي تتا مكمتا هن أأم الكتاب و أأخر متشاباتا‬
<<Within the Book are muhkam verses. They are the base of the book, and other
verses are susceptible to more than one meaning (mutashaabih). >> The mutashaabih
verses are not the base of the book, but the Wahhaabiyys act as if they are, which shows
that they do not understand the true meaning of this verse, or the true meaning of
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>. The true Sunniyy Muslims follow the rule of
Allaah that proves that the muhkam verses are the base of the book. They base their belief
on
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>, because it is a muhkam verse. Then, when
encountering attributes of Allaah like “Al-Yad”, “Al-3Ayn”, “Al-Wajh”, “Al-Istiwaa’”, etc,
they interpret them in a way that does not give Allaah a body or an attribute of a body,
because these words can have more than one meaning, as will be seen in the second

28
chapter, if Allaah willed. This is the straight and sound way, which stations the muhkam
verses as the base of the Book.

PROOF FROM THE HADIYTH THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHAABIYY CREED
As for the honorable sayings of the Prophet of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam), we
recite the hadiyth:

‫كانِ ا و لم يكن شيسءا غيره‬

“Allaah existed (eternally), and there was nothing other than Him.” This is a very
basic and easy-to-understand proof, narrated by Al-Bukhaariyy. It shows that Allaah was
eternally alone. There was no 3Arsh, sky, body, place, direction, light, darkness, nor
anything else.
If a Wahhaabiyy insists on his bad belief, mention this hadiyth and then ask, but
without the intention to make him say blasphemy, “Is a place something other than
Allaah?” He can give three possible responses:
(1) He may totally ignore your question, and instead of answering, he would ask
you a question, or he may change the subject. If he does either of those, do not answer his
question, nor follow him into another subject. Stick to the hadiyth and do not let him get
away with not answering the question. If he refuses to answer the question, it is because
he knows what you are trying to do, and he does not want to be cornered.
(2) If he says that the place is Allaah, which we do not expect him to say, then he
committed pure, explicit and blatant blasphemy.
(3) If he says that the place is something other than Allaah, then say, “Allaah
existed without anything, and you agree that the place is something other than Him, so by
this hadiyth, Allaah existed without a place.” If the Wahhaabiyy says, “Well, Allaah is
now in a place,” then he likened Allaah to the creations, attributing change to Him. Places
are not eternal, because Allaah is the only eternal One.
Also, the Wahhaabiyys believe that Allaah moves from one place to another, but
motion is not eternal. It comes into existence (has a beginning) after it was non-existent.
So, how can the Wahhaabiyys confirm that Allaah literally descends and ascends, when

29
the Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) told us that Allaah is eternal? According to the
Wahhaabiyys, Allaah acquired attributes, which negates being eternal. How is it known
that we are created, and not eternal? It is because we change and develop. Changing and
developing are signs of the existence of the mighty Creator; the Lord Who creates and
gives us the attributes that we did not have before. This is why Abuw Haniyfah said,
“Changes and variations occur on the creations (only).” Allaah is not a creation, so no
one gives Him attributes. Ahlu-s-Sunnah agreed that He does not give Himself attributes,
because whatever Allaah creates is a creation, and He does not have a created attribute.
Allaah is not like us. He is the One Who changes things, but He does not change. He is
eternal. This hadiyth is also an explicit one whose meaning cannot be played with. Use it
against them and stick to it. Do not let them lead you away from it, as the more devious
among them may intentionally try. If you use it properly, there would be no way around
it.

SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHAABIYY CREED

After creating the creations, Allaah did not acquire one of their attributes, like
being in a physical direction in comparison to them. Nor did he lose any of His attributes,
like eternally existing without changing. None of the creations became attributes of
Allaah. After creating places and directions, He did not take them as attributes for
Himself. He is not attributed with a created attribute; an attribute that did not exist, and
then came into existence. This is why At-Tahaawiyy, a true Salafiyy, in his book famous
as the 3Aqiydah of At-Tahaawiyy, said,
“With His attributes, He never ceased to be without beginning before His
creation. He did not acquire any attribute that did not exist before them, and just
as He with His attributes is without a beginning, likewise He with His attributes
will always be everlasting.”

30
 THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS
A good thing about At-Tahaawiyy’s book is that it conveys the consensus;
agreement (al-ijmaa3) of the Muslim scholars about the matters of Belief. Unfortunate for
Wahhaabiyys, they believe that all of the scholars can agree upon something and still be
wrong, so they care not that this book conveys the consensus. The authentic saying of the
Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) narrated by Al-Haakim and others:

‫ما كانِ ا ليجمع أمةي محمدد علىَ ضللة‬

“Allaah will not let (the scholars of) the nation of Muhammad agree on a
misguidance.” The Wahhaabiyys restrict this hadiyth to the Companions, may Allaah
accept their deeds and grant them high status. To that, tell them that they are making
ta’wiyl. This hadiyth guarantees protection for the ummah (nation) in general, which
follows its guided scholars. If the scholars would agree upon a mistake, this would
mislead the entire nation. Such was the fate of Banuw Israa’iyl (the Children of Israel),
whose scholars contravened the Islaamic laws revealed to Prophet Muwsaa (Moses), and
thus strayed the entire nation. The nation of Prophet 3Iysaa (Jesus) also deviated. The
nation of Muhammad will not deviate entirely; instead, most of them will always have the
proper belief.
Another issue of consensus conveyed by At-Tahaawiyy is, “Allaah is exalted
beyond limits, extremes, limbs, organs and instruments. The six directions (above, below,
right, left, in front of, behind) do not contain (i.e. pertain to) Him, as is the case of the
created things.”

A DOCUMENTATION OF THE BELIEF OF THE SALAF

Yet another benefit is that this book was written during the time of the Salaf.
When At-Tahaawiyy wrote this book, no one objected to it. The scholars of the Salaf
were generally the best in Islaam, and not one came to him telling him that his book
contained lies or mistakes against the correct Muslim belief. On the contrary, this book
became very, very famous, was memorized, and then narrated generation after
generation, without anyone discrediting it -until today, 1,100 years later. The
Wahhaabiyys do not agree with everything that he conveyed, as explicitly stated by the

31
now deceased Wahhaabiyy leader, Ibn Baaz, in his corrupted explanation of At-
Tahaawiyy’s book. Since they do not agree with him, then they admit that they do not
believe what Muslims believe, because the Muslims believed in what he documented
before he even wrote it. If they say that they do agree with him, then they agreed with us,
and the argument is closed.
He also conveyed, “Whoever ascribes to Allaah a meaning among the meanings
pertaining to mankind has blasphemed.” If the Wahhaabiyys are truly Salafiyy, then why
do they not agree with this belief that was documented by the Salaf, agreed on by the
Salaf, and passed on by them? It is because they take what they want and leave what they
want. If the Salaf believed that the one who ascribes a meaning to Allaah that pertains to
the humans is a kaafir (non-Muslim), then how do these so-called Salafiyyah consider
themselves Muslims, since they say, “The meaning is the same, but the degree is
different.”? They mean that the meaning of hand and face and eyes is the same when
attributed to Allaah, but it is a different kind of hand, face and eye. By this, they attribute
the meaning which relates to humans to Allaah, and as just mentioned, for that, the Salaf
made takfiyr (judged one as a non-Muslim). Be careful, they truly say this statement:
“The meaning is the same, but the degree is different”. This statement is blasphemous. If
they say that the meanings of “Al-Yad”, “Al-3Ayn” and “Al-Wajh” (the Arabic terms) are
not the same when attributed to Allaah, then they agreed with us. If they say that the
meanings of those terms are not the same when attributed to Allaah, then what happened
to taking them literally?” In other words, we are saying that the literal meaning is the
meaning that refers to the creations, so when they use the literal meanings of these terms,
they are using the creation meaning; the bodily meaning.

32
 IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE

Thus far, we have covered the blasphemous, twisted and devious beliefs of the
Wahhaabiyys, their reasoning, or (twisted) logic behind it, and some basic reasons why
they are in error. To recap and summarize: they believe that Allaah has a body because
they take some verses and hadiyths literally. They will usually deny that they believe that
Allaah has a body, but you may find some who are ill enough to admit it.
Their belief is invalid, incorrect, and unsound for many reasons. It does not make
sense (but they do not care), it makes the verses of The Qur’aan contradict each other (as
will be elaborated on, if Allaah willed), it is against the explicit muhkam sayings of The
Prophet (hadiyth can be muhkam and mutashaabih also), and it is against the agreement
of the scholars. Before looking at some of the texts that these very misguided people use
to fool the Muslims, let us go over some important information and advice:

EXPLAINING THE MEANING OF KUFR (BLASPHEMY) AND

SOME OF ITS DETAILS
Such a bad belief is undoubtedly blasphemous, but what is blasphemy?
Blasphemy is kufr, the opposite of iymaan (faith or belief), that which cancels and
nullifies the validity of one’s Islaam. A blasphemer is a kaafir, and a kaafir is not a
Muslim. Kufr is the worst sin that the slaves of Allaah commit, and it can be committed
without knowing. Being ignorant about the rules of blasphemy does not protect anyone
from becoming a blasphemer, or else Jews, Christians, Hindus, and others would not be
blasphemers. An intention is not needed to commit blasphemy. That is why The Prophet
(3alayhi-s- Salaam) said:
‫إنِ العبد ليتكللم بالكلمة ل يرى بها بأِساا يهوي بها في النار سبعين خريفا ا‬
“Surely the slave of Allaah will utter the word. He does not see anything wrong with
it. Because of it, he will fall for 70 autumns (70 years) into (the bottom of) Hellfire.”
The depth of 70 years into Hellfire is a place that no Muslim will reach. Therefore, the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) was talking about how someone committed blasphemy
because of something he said, but without realizing that he even did anything wrong.

33
Even a new Muslim who acquired a bad belief in Allaah would not be excused from kufr.
This is so because the correct belief and saying the shahaadah are the minimum
requirements for becoming a Muslim. In other words, just saying the shahaadah by itself
is not enough to make a person a Muslim, if that utterance is not associated with the
proper belief. Also, believing without uttering the shahaadah does not validate ones
Islaam.
There is absolutely no excuse for having a bad belief in Allaah, His Messenger
(3alayhi-s- Salaam), or His Religion. People with bad beliefs in Allaah, like five per-
centers, the so-called Nation of Islaam, and the Wahhaabiyys fell into kufr. Some groups
have bad beliefs in The Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s- Salaam), like the Ahmadiyyah
who deny that Muhammad is the last to receive the status of prophethood. Some people
claim Islaam, but disbelieve in its exclusiveness; that Islaam is the only valid religion,
like those who misunderstood some Qur’aanic verses and believe that the Jews’ and
Christians’ religions will be accepted by Allaah on the Day of Judgment. When it comes
to these essentials of the belief, there is no excuse for not having them. One must have
those most basic issues in tact to be a Muslim. As for other issues, like believing in the
Angels, the Day of Judgment, Paradise, Hellfire, the obligation of the five prayers, etc, if
someone becomes a Muslim and has not yet believed in these things because he hasn’t
heard about them, his Islaam is still valid.
A Muslim who commits kufr leaves Islaam and becomes a kaafir. This terrible
action is Ar-Riddah (apostasy), and because of it, all good deeds are erased, as we are told
in the Chapter of Al-Maa’idah, verse 5:
{ ‫} ومن يذكفر ب إليإان فقد حبط عل‬
<<Whoever commits blasphemy and rejects belief has wasted his deeds>>. As for the
bad deeds, they are not erased by apostasy. Anyone with a bad belief in Allaah because of
a Wahhaabiyy influence, or with any belief like it, like some people who believe that
Allaah is light, must say the Shahaadah again with the intention to leave that blasphemy
and never return to it. Anyone who repeated their blasphemous sayings must do the same
to clear himself of their poison. Uttering the Shahaadah is to say: “No one is God except
Allaah and Muhammad is The Messenger of Allaah.” This can be said in any language,

34
and no witness or shower is needed. One should be keen to say it properly, by clearly
pronouncing the “h” in the name of Allaah, and also pronouncing the name of Prophet
Muhammad (3alayhi-s- Salaam) correctly. Whoever cannot pronounce the name of
Allaah can translate it, and whoever cannot pronounce the name of Muhammad can call
him by his other title: Abu-l-Qaasim [abul\cau`\sim], like to say: “No deity is worthy of
worship except God, and Muhammad (or Abu-l-Qaasim1) is the messenger of God.
If someone says the Shahaadah while believing something that contradicts its
basic meaning, then what he uttered did not make him a Muslim.

JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAAFIR (TAKFIYR)

Do not let your kinship or friendship bond you to these people, just as those who
are deep into the so-called Salafiyy cult will shun others very swiftly. Do not compromise
the validity of your belief because of your relationship with a Wahhaabiyy. Some people
refuse to call a person a kaafir, claiming that judging others is forbidden, which is not
true. We do judge- by the rules of Allaah. Ask the one who claims that judging is
forbidden, “How do you judge a person who utters the shahaadah?” He would obviously
judge such a person as a Muslim. How would he judge the one who cheats, lies, or steals?
He would judge that person as a cheater, liar, or thief. Then why would this person refuse
to judge the one who blasphemes as a blasphemer? We follow the saying of ^Umar Ibnu-
l-Khattaab, that we judge the people according to what is apparent from them. If they
show goodness then we treat them as such, and if they show wickedness then we treat
them as such. Do not be reluctant to confirm that he is a kaafir if you witness him
uttering blasphemous things. Some people are reluctant because of the hadiyth narrated
by Muslim:

‫من قال لخيه يا كافرفقد باءا بها أحدهما إنِ كانِ كما قال و إل رجعت عليه‬
“Whoever says to his brother, ‘O, kaafir’, then one of those two would truly be
inflicted with being a kaafir. Either it is as he said, or else it comes back to him.”
This means that if a person calls someone else a kaafir, then he had better be correct, or
else he will become a kaafir for labeling a Muslim with kufr without evidence2. It means
1
Even saying Abu-l-Gaasim [gas`\im] is valid if Abu-l-Qaasim is difficult
2
Sometimes a person labels a Muslim as a kaafir unrightfully, but would not be judged as a kaafir himself,
which is the case of a person who is confused and thinks that something is kufr when it is not. For example,

35
that if the person is correct in calling another person a kaafir, then it is as he said- that
person is a kaafir, but if he is incorrect, then that judgment of kufr comes back to him,
and he falls into kufr. The Prophet did not say that it cannot be known if a person
committed kufr or not. He did not say that it is not permissible to judge a person as a
kaafir unless that person testifies for himself that he is a kaafir. Nor is it mentioned by the
scholars of Ahlu-s-Sunnah that a non-scholarly Muslim cannot know how to identify
blasphemy. The person who says these things speaks from his own opinions about the
rules of Allaah. In fact, in the chapter of At-Tawbah (Baraa’ah), verse 74, Allaah told us
about people who swear with their tongues that they did not commit any blasphemy, but
they actually did say words of blasphemy and left Islaam after they had been Muslims:
{ ‫} و يلفون بلا ما قالوا و لقد قالوا كمة الكفر و كفروا بعد إاسلمامه‬
If a person commits kufr, he is a kaafir, with no doubt about it. So, if someone
knows a person who committed kufr, but still treats him as a Muslim; makes him believe
that he is still a Muslim, then that someone fell into kufr himself. Kufr is a great reality
that many people fall into everyday without knowing. Learning about it is an obligation.
Kufr is the sin that will put a person in Hellfire forever if he dies without clearing himself
from it.

HAVING THE CORRECT INTENTION

Among the most important things to be mindful of is having the correct intention.
Let the one who debates with deviant people keep the pure intention. Do not debate with
the mere intention of arguing, nor just to show that you are right and the other person is
wrong, or to show off your knowledge. Instead, debate with the intention to show the
truth. Our Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) did not debate unless it was to show the truth, nor
did he ever lose a debate. Al-Imaam Ash-Shaafi3iyy said that he never debated with
someone unless it was to show the truth. If you believe that the deviant person will not
accept what you are saying, and will only continue committing blasphemy, then it is not

if someone believes that drinking alcohol is blasphemy, so he judges the Muslim who drinks alcohol as a
blasphemer, he does not blaspheme for that because of his confusion, but he is sinful for calling that
Muslim a blasphemer and for not learning the obligatory knowledge of the religion. The judgment
mentioned in the hadiyth pertains to the one who judges a person as a kaafir without any reason or
evidence, and not even out of confusion.

36
permissible to keep debating with him. However, it is permissible to continue if you need
to protect the people who are around, and to show the truth to those who are listening.
Also, do not forget to maintain good manners and very importantly, to stay calm. Do not
let your frustration show, and do not let it lead you to shouting, etc.

REFRAIN FROM PURPOSELY LEADING A PERSON TO SAY

KUFR (BLASPHEMY)
Also, refrain from asking questions that lead the deviant person to commit kufr.
For instance, do not ask a Wahhaabiyy, “Do you believe that Allaah has a real face?” or
“Do you believe that Allaah is in a place above His 3Arsh?” The Wahhaabiyy will
predictably answer, “Yes” to those questions, and then commit blasphemy as a result of
that answer; because he is admitting that he believes in blasphemy. If you provoke, lead,
cause or make someone commit blasphemy, you will fall into it yourself. This is a grave
mistake made by many debaters. Intending to make their opponents commit to bad
sayings, they purposely make their opponents utter blasphemous words. It is done to
expose the contradictions and inconsistencies, but sadly, these people fall into blasphemy
while wanting to do something good. As such, if you talk to a Christian, do not ask, “Do
you believe that Jesus is the son of God?” Do not ask the atheist, “Do you deny the
existence of God?” When these people answer “yes” to these questions, which would be
the expected answer, they will fall into blasphemy. Whoever tempts, prompts or
encourages a blasphemer to confess to his blasphemy also falls into blasphemy. The one
who engages in a debate must learn the proofs and strategies explained by the scholars,
learn the Islaamic rules pertaining to debate, and avoid sinful matters, such as missing the
prayers and asking blasphemous questions.

THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE

Also, whoever wants to present the proofs needs to think and to recognize his
limitations. Efforts to show the truth can be wasted because of not thinking ahead and not
knowing when to speak and when to be silent. Do not bring up a detail without having
further evidence or references for support. The Wahhaabiyy will ask for proof, and you
will have backed yourself into a corner. On the other hand, do not be afraid to ask a

37
Wahhaabiyy for his proof. Do not forget that the burden of presenting evidence is on the
one who makes the claim, as the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said. With this simple rule,
you can easily corner a person who tries to avoid an issue. If a misguided person is asked
to prove his claim, and so he replies, “Prove me wrong,” do not fulfill his request. This is
an attempt to avoid the question. Tell him, “The burden of proof is with whoever made
the claim, so do not ask me for proof; I have not made a claim yet. I have only asked for
your proof.” This is extremely effective in refuting Wahhaabiyys, because it makes them
run around in circles like headless chickens. The most frequent response we get from
Wahhaabiyys when we ask, "What is your proof?", or "Who said that?" is everything
except the answer. Nevertheless, be careful. Do not think that every Wahhaabiyy will
always be stunned by this.

THE IMPORTANCE OF FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF BELIEF

Many ignorant people say, “Why are you arguing over the belief? That is so basic!
There are Muslims who are dying because of the blasphemers! The Muslims are not
unified, we need unity! Stop wasting your time on these small issues!” To that, refer to
the Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) when he said:

‫أفضل العمال إيمانِ ل شك فيه‬

“The best of deeds is (the correct) belief (in Allaah and His messenger) without a
doubt in it.” Belief is higher than prayer, fasting, charity, and even unity, which will not
exist when the beliefs of the people clash.
This belief is the worst of their transgressions and deviance, because it pertains to
the belief in Allaah. If a person does not have the correct belief, then he is not a Muslim.
The first thing to straighten with these people is their belief. We single them out because
they imitate Muslims very closely, and then teach kufr. There are other deviant ideas that
they propagate. Among them is the false notion that everything innovated in Islaam is
bad, despite that they give religious speeches with microphones, teach religious classes in
schools and universities (instead of in the mosques and houses), and have calculated the
prayer times for years in advance instead observing them every day or every few days.
This topic will be revisited in the appendage of the book, God willing. They are known
for their extremist ways of making optional (Sunnah) deeds into obligations, such as

38
obligating women to cover their faces. They also deem lawful things unlawful by
unrightfully restricting them to certain times, such as making the duff (tambourine)
forbidden on a day that is not a holiday or wedding. They are also among the terrorists
who are giving the Muslims a bad reputation in these days. They prohibit traveling to visit
The Prophet’s (3alayhi-s-Salaam) grave, and other matters. Whoever thinks that these
mistakes are simple then let him think again. These examples are only a handful of their
mistakes. By this sick misinterpretation of the religion, they accuse Muslims of kufr,
deviance, and sins, which causes tribulation and results in teaching people incorrect rules.

39
 WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF?

The Salaf (predecessors, forerunners, pioneers) is the first three generations of

Muslims, as narrated by At-Tirmithiyy:

‫خير الناس قرني ثم الذين يلونهم ثم الذين يلونهم‬

“The best of the people are from my century, then those who come after them, then
those who come after them.” They are the Muslims of the first three hundred years,
starting at the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet from Makkah to Al-Madiynah. In general,
the Muslims of the Salaf are better than those who came after them. We say “in general”,
because it is possible to find someone from the khalaf (era after the Salaf) who is better
than an individual from the Salaf. It was the time of the four pious, rightly guided caliphs:
Abuw Bakr, 3Umar, 3Uthmaan, and 3Aliyy. Add to that list Al-Hasan and 3Umar Ibn
3Abdu-l-3Aziyz (may Allaah accept their deeds). The schools of fiqh were established,
and four remain since then- the followers of the great Salafiyy mujtahids, Abuw Haniyfah,
Maalik, Ash-Shaafi3iyy, and Ahmad Ibn Hambal. The books of hadiyth were compiled
during this time. It was the time of the greatest scholars of hadiyth, namely Al-
Bukhaariyy, Muslim, At-Tirmithiyy, Abuw Daawuwd, An-Nasaa’iyy and Ibn Maajah, and
others. Also during this time, the great scholars of 3aqiydah emerged, Abu-l-Hasan Al-
Ash3ariyy and Abuw Mansuwr Al-Maaturiydiyy. The Muslims were regarded as the
people of knowledge and piety. Because of the work that the great scholars of the Salaf
did, the Muslims after them had a facilitated ease in terms of learning Islaam.

40
 CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THE
WAHHAABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE
HONORABLE MUTASHAABIH TEXTS

INTRODUCTION

It is vital to speak about some texts that the Wahhaabiyys use, because many
people see the invalidity of their belief, but feel compelled to follow them because they
do not want to reject the Islaamic texts. Many people know that likening Allaah to His
creatures is not sound or correct, but when shown verses and hadiyths, they feel that they
must accept what the Wahhaabiyys say. Then they make themselves believe that the
Wahhaabiyys’ belief in Allaah does not liken Him the creations, thus rejecting sound
reasoning. Some people feel like they are rejecting the Islaamic texts if they reject what
the Wahhaabiyys say, but this is not the case. Rejecting their claims is not rejecting the
Islaamic texts, it is simply rejecting the Wahhaabiyy misunderstanding of those texts.

TRANSLATING THE QUR’AAN

Beware of their so-called Qur’aanic translation, The Noble Qur’aan. It should be
called, “the Wahhaabiyy mistranslation of The Qur’aan”. In it, they attribute organs to
Allaah by translating the verses literally, and supporting their mistranslations with
mistranslated hadiyths and terrible footnotes. They even explicitly attribute more than
one shape to Allaah. Of course, they believe it is the best translation available.
We point out the fact that translating the text of the Qur’aan and presenting that
translated text as a representation of the Qur’aan is an innovation. The scholars did not
encourage it. Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l-Jamaa3ah did not translate the Qur’aan, they
explained it, and what a difference between explaining and translating there is. They
wrote books of tafsiyr (interpretation) in which they explained each word or group of
words in the verses. These books of tafsiyr sometimes became as vast as four volumes or
more. Some people are so deprived of the true teachings of Ahlu-s-Sunnah that they
actually believe in their translation as infallible, never thinking that there could be

41
mistakes in it. If they were asked, “What are you reading?” they would say, “The
Qur’aan.” It is truly and merely a translation of the Qur’aan. Instead of giving word for
word translations, the scholars gave detailed tafsiyr (interpretation; explanation), leaving
the text of the Qur’aan in Arabic. Allaah told us in many places in the Qur’aan that the
Qur’aan is in Arabic, such as the third verse in Az-Zukhruf:
{ ‫} إا ين جعلناه قرءان ع ربييا‬
<<Surely We (Allaah) have made it an Arabic Qur’aan>>. Instead of translating the
Qur’aan into different languages, the Muslims learned Arabic.
Like the rest of the religious knowledge, tafsiyr must be acquired from a teacher.
Even an Arab is forbidden from making tafsiyr without first learning its rules from the
mufassiruwn (interpreters). There are many good books of tafsiyr, like the books of Abuw
Hayyaan, Al-Qurtubiyy and An-Nasafiyy. On the contrary, beware of the tafsiyr of Ibn
Kathiyr, who was a Mushabbih (someone who likens Allaah to the creations) affected by
the teachings of Ibn Taymiyah. There are rules and ways of making tafsiyr, so the
Qur’aan is not left to be interpreted by any unqualified person. So know that when we
use the term “interpretation”, it is not intended by that to merely read the Qur’aan,
especially not a translation, and come with a meaning from one’s own whim or
conjecture, like the Christians who actually have no science for interpreting their book.
The interpretations of their preachers are random and not based on any specific rules.
Mistranslating the Qur’aan and the Hadiyths is an evil innovation. Learn from
knowledgeable, trustworthy teachers, not translations. And with that, it is important to
understand that it is not a condition to know Arabic to learn the meanings of the Qur’aan.
The condition is to learn the meanings from a teacher who learned those meanings from a
teacher.
Remember, we understand the texts in accordance with the verse:
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing resembles Allaah in anyway>>. By following this method, we avoid both
mental and textual contradictions. They understand the texts according to the verse:
{ ‫} الرحن عـل العـربش ا سستوى‬

42
<<Ar-Rahmaanu 3ala-l-3Arshi-stawaa>>, which they believe is the proof that Allaah is
secluded in a place above the 3Arsh. By that, they fell into many contradictions, both
mental and textual.

THE WAHHAABIYYS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE IGNORANT

A person not very knowledgeable about the matters of the creed, like a new
Muslim, is easy prey for them. They fill him with their bad beliefs by showing their so-
called proofs. He may become consumed before he knows it, confident that he has
learned Islaam. Also, they take advantage of whoever is ignorant of Arabic by showing
their so-called proofs. In addition, whoever lacks intelligence would be easy to convince.
They feed on the ignorant. They may start with truth, such as to say, “No one deserves to
be worshiped except Allaah alone! Muhammad (3alayhi-s- Salaam) is His slave and
Messenger! Jesus is the slave of Allaah and His Messenger...” Then, they disclose their
dark side by adding, “We must believe that Allaah rose above His 3Arsh, and that Allaah
settled Himself on the 3Arsh, and that Allaah has two real hands…” In this way, they
overtook many. It is imperative to critically analyze what they say, so to understand their
contradictions.
Conversely, in the Muslim countries, they are known and cautioned against- in the
lessons, books, and Jumu3ah speeches. There, they are minorities, so it is not as easy for
them to spread their beliefs. As such, they believe that most of The Muslims are
misguided people.
As if they confirm that the belief does not make sense. They all but stop short of
saying, “Yes, it is a contradiction to say that nothing is like Allaah while describing Him
with the attributes of bodies, however it is confirmed in the Qur’aan and by The Prophet
(3alayhi-s- Salaam), so no matter what reasoning dictates, we do verify these bodily
attributes to Allaah.” In their minds, the Qur’aan confirms bodily attributes to Allaah, so
they believe that they should confirm bodily attributes to Allaah, thereby disregarding the
mental judgment. One may consider this stance as something like patriotism. They are
proud to say that no matter what is rational or logical, they believe in The Qur’aan, but
they missed a point- the correct belief does not defy logic, so there is no need to abandon
it.

43
THE WAHHAABIYYS OUTWARDLY SHOW ADHERENCE TO THE
SUNNAH
They also snag people by their manners and appearance. They outwardly show the
religious rituals and signs. They grow nice beards, trim their mustaches, wear nice
fragrances, and usually dress with Muslim clothing. They say that cutting the beard is
sinful, and although some mujtahids did say that, they deny the validity of the saying of
the mujtahids who said it is only disliked and not sinful to cut the beard. They believe
that not wearing the pants above the ankles is a major sin. Some of the mean and ignorant
ones will not return the greetings of the Muslim whose pants are below his ankles. They
believe that it is obligatory for women to cover their faces and to wear black or navy
blue. They make the lines of their congregational prayers very straight. Their display of
the Sunnah may contribute to their stubbornness. In their minds, can they see themselves
misguided while bearing a big prostration mark, a long beard, and having two wives?
However, a person with the correct belief will not accept their claims, because he
knows that Allaah is not similar to His creations, even if the Wahhaabiyy has a huge
beard and may have memorized many chapters of the Qur’aan. The Muslim would say to
himself, “I don’t know Arabic, but I know the rule. The verse or the hadiyth would not
contradict the rule.” The Muslim is confident about the rule, because the rule makes
sense: Nothing is like Allaah. Nothing resembles Him. No one has His Attributes. He
does not have the attributes of anyone else. Whatever you imagine in your mind, Allaah
is different from that. This is how a person protects himself from likening Allaah to the
creations. The many verses and hadiyths they produce might seem overwhelming to a
weak or doubtful person, nevertheless if you learn the correct tafsiyr (interpretation) of
each and every one of those texts, you’ll see that those people are very, very, very
misguided.
After mentioning this, keep two important facts in mind: 1) A good outside
appearance does not necessitate a good heart with the correct belief. Do not let looks fool
you, and 2) do not judge every person with a big beard and cut pants walking with a
veiled woman in black as a Wahhaabiyy. Use your mind and seek the truth with the
sincere intention of seeking the blessings and acceptance of Allaah (liwajhi-llaah).

44
 THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADIYTH OF THE FEMALE SLAVE

There is good reason for starting with Al-Imaam Muslim’s narration of Hadiythu-
l-Jaariyah; the Hadiyth of the Female Slave. They use it very much to convince people
that Allaah is bound to a place. Understanding why it is not a proof for their claims is a
matter of critical importance. Whoever misunderstands and thinks that the Prophet
(3alayhi-s-Salaam) likened Allaah to His creations falls into kufr (blasphemy).

THE STORY BEHIND THE HADIYTH

According to the narration of Al-Al-Imaam Muslim, a man had a female slave
taking care of his flock, when a wolf attacked and ate a sheep. When he found out, he felt
that she was negligent, so he hit her in the face. Then he regretted that and went to the
Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) and asked him, “O, Messenger of Allaah, should I set her
free?” The Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) said, “Bring her to me,” so he brought her to
him, and according to Al-Imaam Muslim, the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) asked her:

‫قال أين ا قالت في السماءا قال من أنا قالت أنت رسول ا قال أعتقها فإنها مؤمنة‬
“Ayna-llaah?” She said, “Fi-s-samaa’.” He said, “Who am I?” She said, “You are the
Messenger of Allaah.” He said, “Free her, for she is a believer.”
The explanation of the untranslated terms will come, if Allaah willed.
If a person does not understand Islaam, the correct belief, or the rules of
interpreting the Islaamic texts, he would take this hadiyth literally and attribute a created
attribute to Allaah. Centuries ago, Ahlu-s-Sunnah established the correct explanation of
this narration, and there are several reasons why it is not proof for their claims. If Allaah
willed, we will only mention a few.

THE WAHHAABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADIYTH

May Allaah protect us as we scrutinize their understanding of this hadiyth. They
claim it to be proof that Allaah exists in a place, saying that The Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam) asked the girl, “Where is Allaah?” -inquiring about a location. Thus they deduce

45
that Allaah must be in a place, and that it must be permissible to inquire about His
location. Then they interpret her reply to mean, “In the sky”. So, they furthermore say
that since he said, “Free her, for she is a believer,” then Allaah must be in the sky. This
understanding likens Allaah to the creations, and whoever takes the literal understanding
has fallen into kufr.

THE ARABIC TERMS HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEANING

A smart and honest person should do at least one of two things if presented with
this hadiyth: Reject the meaning that confines Allaah to a space and limits Him like a
body, without rejecting the hadiyth itself (in its Arabic text), and if a little shaken by it,
then go to a knowledgeable person and ask about it. A blind follower, an idle person who
does not want to investigate, and a weak-minded person will not ask , he will simply
accept what they say, breeching the correct belief. May Allaah strengthen our (correct)
beliefs and our intellects.
The truth is that in this hadiyth, The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) was asking the
girl about her belief in Allaah, and not about a place for Him, and she expressed that
Allaah has the highest status.
This hadiyth does not prove their claim because its words can have more than one
meaning (mutashaabih). The word “ayna” does not only ask about the makaan (place),
but also the makaanah (rank; status). This is proven by various sources, including sayings
of Companions, and Muslim scholars. The line of poetry:

‫أين الثريا من الثرى و أين معاوية من علي‬

literally says, "Where is Pleiades compared to the soil, and where is Mu3aawiyah
compared to 3Aliyy?” The locations of Mu3aawiyah and 3Aliyy are not actually sought,
although “ayna” is used. It compares the high status of 3Aliyy, the rightly guided caliph,
(which is high like the stars) to the status of Mu3aawiyah, who was unjust and committed
major sins by rebelling against the rightly guided caliph.
The terms “fi-s-samaa’” can also have more than one meaning. Besides “in the
sky”, it may signify having a high status. For example, in front of The Prophet (3alayhi-
s-Salaam), An-Naabighah, the Companion, said:

46
 ‫بلغنا السمــــــاءا‬
“We reached the sky,” as narrated by Ibn 3Abdu-l-Barr. He meant that by the blessing of
Islaam, Allaah raised their ranks.

*** EXTRA DETAIL***

We do not object to saying that “ayna” asks about the “makaan”, but know that
“makaan” does not only mean, “place”, it also means “makaanah (status)”. So if a
Wahhaabiyy brings a small, reliable Arabic dictionary, in which all of the definitions are
not mentioned, do not feel cornered if he says that “ayna” asks about the “makaan”
(and he will say, “which means the place”). We agree, but makaan can also mean
“makaanah (status)”. Hence, the Wahhaabiyy has no proof. If he asks for proof that
“makaan” can mean “the status (makaanah)”, then refer to the narration in which Al-
3Abbaas said “O Allaah, the people are directing their supplication to you by me
because of my MAKAAN to your prophet.” This is narrated by Al-Bazzaar, and they
narrate this hadiyth when attempting to discredit tawassul by the Prophet after his death.
Truly, Al-3Abbaas was referring his status of being The Prophet’s (3alayhi-s- Salaam)
companion and uncle, and not to the place he was in, because even blasphemers stood
there. As such, the word “ayna” does ask about the “makaan”, which can mean “place”
or “status”.

And so, this hadiyth neither proves that Allaah is in a place, nor that it is
permissible to ask about a place for Him. It is permissible to ask “ayna-llaah?” in Arabic,
if the person means, “What do you believe about the status of Allaah?” but one cannot
ask, “Where is Allaah?” or “What place is Allaah in?” because this is implying that
Allaah is in a place, which is blasphemy. Everyone must be certain with no doubt that
Allaah exists without a place, and that it is blasphemy even to imply that He is in a place.
Our point is to show that there are two possible meanings for the terms of this
hadiyth. One is the rejected literal meaning, which contradicts
{ ‫} ليس كثل شء‬

47
<<Nothing resembles Allaah >>. The other interpretation is that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam) asked her about her belief in Allaah, and her reply meant that Allaah has the
greatest status and highest majesty. This is the acceptable interpretation, because it
corresponds with the Arabic language and the religious rules. Furthermore, it complies
with other texts, including other narrations of this very hadiyth.

DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADIYTH

Know that in many cases, a hadiyth would have several narrations. This is
because the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) did not obligate his companions to memorize
everything he said, so they would often convey the meanings of what he said, and as a
result, the expressions of one hadiyth would vary from one narrator to another. Take an
example from the previously mentioned hadiyth:

‫كانِ ا و لم يكن شيسءا غيره‬

“Allaah existed, and there was nothing other than Him.” Al-Bayhaqiyy narrated the
same hadiyth, but with different wording:

‫كل شيءا كانِ ا قبل‬

“Allaah existed before everything.” These are examples of one hadiyth having different
narrations. This hadiyth of the female slave does not prove their claims because it has
more than one narration, each with different wording:
Let us look at the narration of the great Salafiyy mujtahid, Al-Imaam Maalik,
which is stronger than Al-Imaam Muslim’s narration. In his book called Al-Muwatta’,
Maalik narrated that the Messenger of Allaah (3alayhi-s-Salaam) asked the girl:

‫شهدين أنِ ل إله إل ا قالت نعم قال أتشهدين أني رسول ا قالت نعم‬
‫قال أت ش‬
“Do you testify that no one is God except Allaah (Atashhadiyna an laa ilaaha illa-
llaah)?” she said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of
Allaah?” She said, “Yes.”
As we can see, this narration does not ask about a place for Allaah. In it, The
Prophet (3alayhi-s- Salaam) asked the girl about her belief in Allaah. Since this narration
asks about her belief, then the narration of Muslim should also be interpreted to mean that
she was asked about her belief, because they are different narrations of the same hadiyth.

48
It would only be ludicrous to interpret the narration of Al-Imaam Muslim by the literal
meaning, because it would not agree with a stronger narration. We do not interpret two
different narrations of the same hadiyth so that they would conflict with each other; we
interpret them to comply with each other.

IF THE WAHHAABIYY UNDERSTANDING WAS CORRECT, IT

WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SAY “IN THE SKY” TO BE
CONSIDERED A MUSLIM
A third reason this hadiyth does not prove their claim is the fact that the
Wahhaabiyy understanding of it contradicts a basic, fundamental rule that all Muslims
know: A person’s Islaam is confirmed upon uttering the Shahaadah. According to the
Wahhaabiyys, The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) taught us this rule, but neglected it
himself, since according to them he judged her as a Muslim just because she said, “in the
sky.” Furthermore, if it is enough to say “in the sky” to be judged as a believer, then the
Wahhaabiyys should consider the Jews and Christians believers, but they do not.
Therefore, the narration of Maalik clarifies what The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) was
asking, and the narration of Muslim is understood according to Maalik’s narration, in
which she actually was asked about the Shahaadah, and that complies with the basics of
the religion. For this reason, An-Nawawiyy said when explaining the narration of Muslim,
“In the hadiyth is evidence that the blasphemer does not become a believer except
by confessing about (the oneness of) Allaah, and the message of the Messenger of
Allaah, may Allaah raise his rank and protect him from what he feared for his
nation, and in it is evidence that whoever confesses about the two shahaadahs and
believes in that with certainty, that this is sufficient for him for the validity of his
belief and (the validity of him) being among the People of the Qiblah and (the
people of ) Paradise...”

49
 THE FACT THAT THE HADIYTH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM
DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM
If they say that this hadiyth is narrated by Muslim, whose book is the second most
authentic book of hadiyth, we agree (according to most scholars), but Muslim did not
explain this hadiyth, he only narrated it. Narrating and explaining are two different issues
not to be confused. As a blow below the belt, the Wahhaabiyys may claim that because of
their prestige, the narrations of Al-Bukhaariyy and Muslim are enough without taking
other books of hadiyth into consideration. This is utter stupidity and foolishness. It is not
the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah to reject any authentic text from the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam), and the fact is that the authentic hadiyths are spread throughout hundreds of
books.
Furthermore, when a haafidh judges a hadiyth as authentic, that is according to
his own research. Some scholars said that Muslim’s narration is weak; a specific type of
weakness called "idtiraab (disorder; inconsistency)". They said that the different
narrations of this hadiyth have too great of a discrepancy in its texts and chains; One
narration says “ayna-llaah”, one narration says “Do you testify that no one is God but
Allaah?”, one says that the female slave was mute and could not speak at all, and one
narration says, “Who is your Lord?” Abuw Haniyfah even narrates a version of the
hadiyth in which the story is completely different: A man’s mother died and left in her
will for a slave to be freed on her behalf, so the man told the Prophet that he only had that
particular slave woman, and asked the Prophet if freeing her was sufficient to fulfill his
mother’s will. Hence, some scholars said the hadiyth is weak, and unreliable in the issues
of belief.

THE HADIYTH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN

THE ISSUE OF BELIEF
Additionally, unless narrated through many, many different routes (mutawaatir by
the statement) the scholars do not claim that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said those
exact words to the very letter. The Qur’aan is an example. Its wording can be traced back
to the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) through so many chains that we can confirm the

50
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) recited those exact words to the very letter (while believing
the Qur’aan he conveyed was not his own wording, but was the wording revealed unto
him). In such a case, they would say that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) used those very
words. If not narrated like that, they do not give a 100% guarantee that the Prophet
(3alayhi-s-Salaam) used those exact words. This hadiyth is not mutawaatir, and is not
even mashhuwr (narrated from at least three people). Some of the very stern scholars of
3aqiydah said that a strong narration from the route of only one trustworthy person is
unreliable in belief issues; three trustworthy narrators are needed. The Prophet (3alayhi-
s-Salaam) could not have used all of the terms in all of the narrations, being only one
incident. So, according to the scholars who did accept the hadiyth, the Prophet (3alayhi-
s-Salaam) asked her something, and the sum of all the different narrations shows that he
was not asking her about a place, rather he was asking her about her belief in Allaah.
They put all of the different narrations together and came up with a common meaning,
like Al-Imaam Al-Bayhaqiyy. Parenthetically, the narration in which she was mute and
raised her finger is weak, but can be interpreted to mean that Allaah is one, or that He has
the high majesty. Some of the Wahhaabiyys claim that Muslim narrated that the female
slave pointed up and said, "In the sky." Saying "fi-s-samaa’ " is one narration, and raising
the finger (and not saying anything at all) is another.
The fact that they do not teach people about the narration of Maalik, and do not
interpret the narration of Muslim to comply with the narration of Maalik is an indication
that they are misguided, since they pick and choose which narrations they want, and hide
the others.

A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION
Among the trustworthy, reliable scholars who explained this hadiyth, is An-
Nawawiyy, in his very famous explanation of Sahiyh Muslim. Among what he said about
this hadiyth is:

“This hadiyth is among the hadiyths of attributes, and there are two methods in
explaining it,”... “One is to believe in it without delving into its meaning,
confirming

51
 { ‫} ليس كثل شء‬
<<Nothing is like Him in any way>>, and that He is clear of the attributes of the
creations. The second (method) is to make ta’wiyl in a way that befits Him. So
whoever takes by that (second method) says that what is meant is to subject her to
a test: Is she a monotheist who confesses that the Creator, Manager, and doer (of
whatever He willed) is indeed Allaah alone, the one whom if the invoker
supplicates to Him he directs himself to the sky, just as the one who prays directs
himself towards the Ka3bah- and that is not because He is limited to the sky, just
as He is not limited to the direction of the Ka3bah, rather because the sky is the
qiblah of those who supplicate, just as the Ka3bah is the qiblah of those who
pray- or is she an idol worshipper, among the pagans who worship the idols that

are in their presence3? So when she said ‫( في السماءا‬fi-s-samaa’, which literally

means “in the sky”) He knew that she was a monotheist, and not an idol
worshipper. Al-Qaadiy 3Iyaad said, ‘There is no difference between the Muslims
altogether; the scholar of fiqh, the scholar of hadiyth, the scholar of belief, the
skillful debater, and the common Muslim, that the outward meanings of what is
narrated in mentioning Allaah the exalted being in the sky, like His saying:
{ ‫} أأ أأمنت من ف السمء أأن يسف بك ا ألرض‬
(which literally translates as, “Do you feel secure from who is in the
sky…”), and texts like it, are not by their literal meanings, rather they are
all given ta’wiyl according to all of the Muslims.’ ”

An-Nawawiyy mentioned something very beneficial, “…not because He is limited

to the sky, just as He is not limited to the direction of the Ka3bah …” The Wahhaabiyys
say that we hold our hands to the sky when supplicating, because Allaah is above us.
Truly, it is not proof. If lifting the hands to the sky proves that Allaah is above us, then
facing the Ka3bah would prove that Allaah is in Makkah, but they do not say that. Nor do
not say that the saying of Allaah in the Qur’aan:
3
Meaning that they do not direct themselves to the sky because their idols are in front of
them.

52
 { ‫} بيت‬
<< My house >> (the Ka3bah), means the place where Allaah resides. We lift our hands
to the sky because the sky is the qiblah (the thing that is faced; the reference point for
facing a direction) for the supplication, just as we face the Ka3bah in prayer because the
Ka3bah is the qiblah for the prayer. Besides that, Muslim narrated that on occasions, the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) made supplication with his palms facing the ground.
As we can see, An-Nawawiyy conveyed that the Muslims do not accept the literal
meaning of texts like this hadiyth. So do the Wahhaabiyys know better than An-
Nawawiyy? Do they claim to know better about the hadiyth than the scholars of hadiyth?
Can they produce the name of a reliable scholar who said that An-Nawawiyy was wrong-
other than Al-Albaaniyy, who truly is not a scholar? If they say that it is possible that An-
Nawawiyy could be wrong, their famous move when shown what the scholars said, tell
them that it is also possible that they can be wrong, which in fact they are.

THE WAHHAABIYYS TA’WIYL FOR THE HADIYTH

They moreover claim to take the literal meaning of Al-Imaam Muslim’s narration,
yet they claim that Allaah is high above His 3Arsh, above the sky. How then, can they go
by the apparent meaning of this hadiyth which literally says that Allaah is in the sky? In
their English translations of this hadiyth, they say that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam)
asked her, “Where is Allaah?” and she replied, “He is above the heavens,” which is

ta’wiyl on their part. The word ‫في‬ “fiy” literally means “in”, although it could mean
3 “ َ‫على‬alaa (on, over, upon)”. The word ‫“ السماءا‬as- samaa’” literally means “the
sky”. The term mentioned in Muslim’s narration is singular ‫( السماءا‬sky; heaven), not

plural ‫( السموات‬skies; heavens). If they take the literal meaning, they have to say that
Allaah is in the sky, but they believe that Allaah is above the sky. If they want to say that
it means that Allaah is above the sky, then they are not taking the literal meaning
(ta’wiyl), and cannot accuse us of anything when we do not take the literal meaning.

53
 SIMILAR TEXTS
In the Wahhaabiyy mistranslation of the Qur’aan, they do the same for the
aforementioned verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, 16:
{ ‫} أأ أأمنت من ف السمء‬
They say that the aforementioned verse means, “Do you feel secure from the One who is
above the heavens?” They then show a new Muslim or a Muslim who does not know
Arabic, and try to convince him to believe that Allaah is above the seven skies, limited to
a place. However, the literal translation of the verse says, “Do you feel secure from who

is in the sky?” The word ‫من‬ “man” (who; whoever) can be singular or plural. If used in
the singular context to refer to Allaah, it means the One with the highest status. If used in
the plural context, then it refers to the angels who live in the sky, and on occasions have
come down by the order of Allaah to inflict the punishment on the transgressors.
This hadiyth of the female slave, this verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, and other
texts like them are reasons why some of the Wahhaabiyys said that Allaah exists in the
sky. Among those hadiyths is:

‫ارحموا من في الرض يرحمكم من في السماءا‬

“Be merciful to whoever is on earth, and whoever is in the sky will be merciful to
you.” This actually refers to the angels, as proven by another narration of the same

hadiyth, with the terms ‫أهل السماءا‬, “the people of the sky”. They would say that
Allaah is in the sky, He ascends up, and sits on the 3Arsh, mounts it, or establishes
Himself on it. They would say that He is above the 3Arsh and He descends down to the
sky at nighttime. They do not usually say that He sits on the 3Arsh in America (although
Ibn Taymiyah did), but our brothers from overseas report that they do. Here, they say, “He
is above the 3Arsh” (in a physical direction), as if He is hovering above it. They then tell
people not to try to imagine how He is above the 3Arsh. Allaah is glorified from what
they attribute to Him.
Remember that it is not a condition to mention the aforementioned points of
refutation against them in the order presented in the book. You may find yourself in a
position where it is better to mention Al-Imaam Maalik’s narration before mentioning that

54
the terms of the hadiyth can have more than one meaning. Nor is it a condition to mention
every single point you know. Sometimes it is enough to mention one detail.
In closing this section, it would be worthwhile to mention some verses of the
Qur’aan. In the chapter of Az-Zumar, verse 68, Allaah said:
{ ‫} و نفخ ف الصور فصعق من ف السمواتا و من ف ا ألرض إال من شاء ا‬
<<The Horn will be blown, and whoever is in the skies or on Earth will faint, except
those whom Allaah willed.>> Fainting does not befit Allaah. If the Wahhaabiyy says, “It
means that those whom Allaah did not will to faint will not faint, so Allaah will not faint
while He is in the sky when the horn blows,” we say, “Allaah does not will for Himself to
be protected; He is not a subject of His own will, the creations are subjects of His will.”
In the chapter of Al-Ambiyaa’, verse 104, Allaah said:
{ ‫} يوم نطويذ السمء كط يي السجل للكتب‬
<<The Day when We (Allaah) will fold the sky like books…>> According to their
belief, Allaah will be smashed by the folding of the sky, because the skies are solid
entities, not merely air, gas and clouds. They are very smooth, wide, and dense, and they
have angels at their entrances.
Once, a new Muslim was shaken by this hadiyth. He had never heard about it
before, but he knew that Allaah is not like His creations in any way. Knowing this rule
and hearing this hadiyth explained by a Wahhaabiyy raised questions in his mind, because
of the contradiction. He asked about it and learned many reasons why it does not mean
what those liars say.

55
 THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH:
{ ‫ش استوى‬
‫<<}الرحمن عـلى العـر ش‬AR-RAHMAANU 3ALA-L-3ARSHI-
STAWAA>>

If not for Hadiythu-l-Jaariyah, this verse, Suwratu Taa Haa, 5:

{ ‫} الرحن عـل العـربش ا سستوى‬
<<Ar-Rahmaanu 3ala-l-3Arshi-stawaa>> would be our first reference. It is their
favorite verse. They claim it proof that Allaah is above His 3Arsh, or that He sits upon it.
Let us take a closer look at this honorable verse that is clear of their incorrect
interpretation:

THE TAFSIYR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE

WAHHAABIYYS WHO MISINTERPRET IT
The word { ‫"} الرحن‬Ar-Rahmaan" is a name of Allaah. Al-Bayhaqiyy explained it as “the
One with abundant mercy for believers and blasphemers in this life, but His mercy is

reserved for believers in the Hereafter”. The word { ‫"} عـل‬3alaa" may mean "on", "over
(by status or by place)”, “according to”, and more. The word { ‫"} العـربش‬The 3Arsh"
literally means "the throne", but is not really a chair; it is the ceiling of Paradise and the
largest of creations- held up by four enormous and praiseworthy angels. On The Day of

Judgment, eight angels will carry it. The word { ‫" } ا سستوى‬Istawaa" has many, many
meanings. It is a verb that refers to the eternal attribute of Allaah called Al-Istiwaa’. It has
a befitting meaning, and Allaah knows its reality. One of its meanings is "sat", which
does not befit Allaah, and this is why the Wahhaabiyys said that Allaah sits on His 3Arsh.
Al-Qaamuws, the famous dictionary by Al-Fayruwz’aabaadiyy, lists 15 meanings for it.
Because of this dictionary, every Arabic dictionary was called “qaamuws”. More
meanings will be mentioned as we go along, if Allaah willed.
There are two methods of interpreting texts like this, as An-Nawawiyy mentioned
about the hadiyth of the female slave: One is to believe in it without assigning any

56
particular meaning to it. Do not seek its specific meaning. Following this method, we
simply take the position that it has a befitting meaning that complies with the rules of the
religion, without the need of contravening the Arabic language, and Allaah and His
Messenger (3alayhi-s-Salaam) know about it. We confirm that its meaning is becoming
without stipulating what that meaning is. This is actually the general way of the Salaf,
and the meaning of the saying of Ash-Shaafi3iyy, “I believe in what came from Allaah
according to the meaning that Allaah willed and I believe in what came from the
Messenger of Allaah according to the meaning that the Messenger of Allaah meant.” So
let the Wahhaabiyys follow it.
Do not be fooled by the misquoted translations produced by Wahhaabiyys. They
bring mistranslated quotes from the Imaams about this issue, claiming that they said, "We
believe that Allaah rose above His 3Arsh," while truly they only said, "We believe in
Istiwaa’ ". They DID NOT say, "We believe that istawaa means that Allaah rose above
His 3Arsh." Nor did they say, "We believe that istawaa means that Allaah sat…" They
said, "Istawaa without a how", not “He sat without a how.” They said, “The meaning of
istawaa is not like what is imagined,” and not, “It is impossible to say how Allaah
mounted the 3Arsh”. For that reason, if a Wahhaabiyy brings a mistranslation similar to
what is mentioned, and attributes it to a reliable scholar, tell him, “Do not bring your
translation of what a scholar said when he used a word that can have 15 meanings.” Tell
him to bring the explicit evidence that those scholars said istawaa when attributed to
Allaah means "rose above" or "sat". In other words, tell him to bring the proof that those
scholars assigned a particular definition to “istawaa” over another, and do not accept a
simple translation that of course, is by a Wahhaabiyy.
The other method is to look into the Arabic language and select what is befitting
to Allaah. For example, do not use “he sat”, because that implies that Allaah has a body.
Do not use “to increase in power”, which implies that Allaah was previously weaker; nor
“to become upright”, or “to ripen”, etc. None of these meanings befits Allaah, even
though they are linguistically applicable to “istawaa”.

One of the meanings of “istawaa” is ‫قهر‬ “qahara (to subdue)”. If a Wahhaabiyy

says that this does not befit Allaah, because it implies that Allaah did not have control
over the 3Arsh, and then conquered it, we say, “Then do not say it means He rose above

57
the 3Arsh, because it implies that He was not above it and then He became above it.”
Then we add, “What shows that the word “qahara” is attributable to Allaah, are His two

‘
names, ‫ القاهر‬Al-Qaahir’ and ‫هار‬ ‘
‫ الق ل‬Al-Qahhaar’, which are mentioned in the
Qur’aan and hadiyths, and derive from qahara. The correct explanation is that when the
3Arsh was created, it was subjugated by Allaah’s power. There is no implication of
struggle.” In this verse, Allaah informed us that He subdues the 3Arsh, the largest of
creations, and subsequently controls everything else. If the Wahhaabiyy asks, “Why is the
Istiwaa’ over the 3Arsh specifically mentioned if Allaah did not rise over it; what is the
benefit of specifying that He subdues and controls the 3Arsh in particular- since He has
power over all things?”, then the response is, “To point out the status of the 3Arsh, just as
He said in the Qur’aan:
{ ‫} و هو رب العرش العظي‬
<<He is the Lord of the great 3Arsh>>, and this does not negate the fact that He is the
Lord of all things.”
What further validates this meaning of istawaa are the verses that come before
and after the verse in question. Allaah said in the Qur’aan:
{ ‫ ( ل ما ف‬5 ) *‫ ( الرحن عل العربش ا سستوى‬4 )* ‫تنيل من خلق ا ألرض و السمواتا العل‬
( 6 ) ‫} السمواتا و ما ف ا ألرض و ما بينم و ما تتح الثى‬
The first verse, which is the fourth in the chapter of Taa Haa, contains the meaning that
Allaah created the Earth and the heavens, and the third verse, which is the sixth in the
chapter, contains the meaning that Allaah owns the heavens and the earth and all that is in
between them. Since the Qur’aan is the most eloquent speech, then by virtue of the
context, it is more likely that the meaning of the fifth verse is that Allaah controls and
subdues the 3Arsh. This is so because Allaah confirms in the fourth verse that He is the
Creator, and in the sixth that He is the Owner, so which meaning for the fifth verse is
more harmonious, that He sits or rises, or that He subdues and controls?

58
 One of the meanings of “istawaa” is ِ‫حإفظ‬ “hafidha (to preserve; to protect)”.
From which the name of Allaah ِ‫الحفيظ‬ “Al-Hafiydh” is derived. If interpreted by this, it
means that Allaah preserves the 3Arsh and keeps it high above Paradise. If not for
Allaah’s preservation of the 3Arsh, it would fall and destroy what is beneath it.
Assigning a particular meaning is the way of the Khalaf, the scholars after the
Salaf. Lots of deviation emerged in the later generations, and there was a necessity to
specify meanings for those verses. The scholars of the Salaf occasionally assigned
particular meanings to the mutashaabih verses, but it was not their routine. We must rely
on the scholars for the correct understanding, and not on our imaginations.

SIMILAR TEXTS USED BY WAHHAABIYYS AND HOW TO

REFUTE THEIR CLAIMS
The Wahhaabiyys do not stop there. They believe that since Allaah attributed Al-
Istiwaa’ to Himself more than once in the Qur’aan, this emphasizes the meaning that
Allaah is above in a place, We simply tell them that they are wrong. If they say that
Allaah said:
{ ‫} ثث ا سستوى عل العرش‬
<<Thumma-stawaa 3ala-l-3arsh>>, we say it does not mean that He is in a place. We
combat their misinterpretation with the verse:
{ ‫} و هو معك أأين كنت‬
<<Wa huwa ma3akum aynamaa kuntum>> (Al-Hadiyd, 4). Literally, it means “He is
with you wherever you are”. They do not take this literally because it contradicts their
belief that Allaah is above us. If they say the verse:
{ ‫} و ا سستوى عل العرش‬
<<Wa-stawaa 3ala-l-3arsh>>, then we counter with the verse:
{ ‫ك ش ءء ميط‬
‫} أأ لآ إانه ب ي‬

59
<<Alaa innahuw bikulli shay’in muhiyt>> (Fussilat, 54), which literally means: “Does
not Allaah surround everything?” They also do not take this verse literally.
If they believe that Allaah revealed istawaa many times to highlight that He is in
a place above us, then they should believe that He is everywhere, since there is more than
one verse with this literal meaning. Ironically, they make ta’wiyl, denying that Allaah is
everywhere. They say it means that He knows everything, which is true. We prevail by
saying, “If it is permissible to say that He is not everywhere by His Self, rather by His
knowledge, then it is permissible to say that He is not positioned above in a place by His
Self, but by His Majesty.

THE SAYING OF AL-IMAAM MAALIK

To close this section, know that these people refer to an unconfirmed narration
from Al-Imaam Maalik. They say that he said, "Istawaa is known but the 'how' is not."
This narration is discredited by two narrations from Al-Bayhaqiyy, one in Al-Asmaa’u
wa-s-Sifaat, and the other in Al-I3tiqaad.
In the former, he narrates from the route of 3Abdu-l-laah Ibn Wahb that he said,
“We were with Maalik Ibn Anas when a man came in and said, ‘O Abuw 3Abdu-l-laah,

{ ‫ } الرحن عـل العـربش ا سستوى‬, how is His Istiwaa’? ’, Then Maalik lowered his head
4

and was overtaken by sweat, then he raised his head and said, ‘{ ‫الرحن عـل العـربش‬
‫} ا سستوى‬
5
, just as he attributed to Himself; how is not said, and how is inapplicable (3anhu
marfuw3). You are a person of wickedness and a perpetrator of innovation. Get him out of
here!’, so the man was put out.”
In the latter, Al-Bayhaqiyy narrates from the route of Yahyaa Ibn Yahyaa that he
said, “We were with Maalik Ibn Anas when a man came and said, ‘O Abuw 3Abdu-l-laah,

4
He recited the verse: {‫<< } الرحن عـل العـربش ا سستوى‬Ar-Rahmaanu 3ala-l-3arshi-stawaa>>
5
He recited the verse, like the previous footnote.

60
6
{ ‫} الرحن عـل العـربش ا سستوى‬, How did He istawaa?’ So Maalik lowered his head, then
started sweating, and then said, ‘Istawaa is not unknown, ‘how’ is not rational (ghayru
ma3quwl), believing in it is obligatory, asking about it is an innovation, and I only see
you as an innovator.’ Then he ordered for the man to be put out.”
Remember, there is a great difference between saying, "We do not know how
Allaah is", and saying "Allaah has no 'how' ".

6
Like the previous footnote.

61
 THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADIYTH OF AN-NUZUWL

An appropriate third reference would be the hadiyth of An-Nuzuwl , one narration

of which is:

‫ينزل ربنا إلىَ السماءا الدنيا‬

“Yanzilu Rabbunaa ila-s-samaa’i-d-dunyaa”, which literally says, “Our Lord descends
to the lowest sky.”
According to the Arabic language, “nuzuwl” would literally be movement from
one place to a lower one. If a Wahhaabiyy says, “Allaah descends, but not with a descent
of motion,” tell him, “But you said you take the literal meaning.” Also, mention that such
a saying is fabricated. Yes the scholars said that the nuzuwl of Allaah is not motion, and
that His nuzuwl is not like the descent of the creatures, but what is meant is that they were
not specifying a meaning for nuzuwl, as mentioned numerous times already. So the
difference between what the scholars said, and saying, “Allaah descends, but not with a
descent of motion,” is that the scholars did not translate the term into another language,
which necessitates specifying a meaning.

THE EXPLAINATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-3ASQALAANIYY

If they say, “But Al-Bukhaariyy narrated this hadiyth, and his book of hadiyth is
known to be the most authentic,” we say, “Yes, but he did not explain it.” Again, there is
a difference between narrating a hadiyth to illustrate its authenticity, and explaining the
correct meaning of the hadiyth. If they want to refer to the scholars who explained it, then
let us refer to the great scholar, Ibn Hajar Al-3Asqalaaniyy, Amiyru-l-Mu’miniyna fi-l-
Hadiyth (The prince of the Muslims in the science of hadiyth), also known as “The Seal
of the Haafidhs”. His is the most famous of the explanations of Al-Bukhaariyy’s book.
Here are some statements given when speaking about this hadiyth in his sharh
(explanation) called Fathu-l-Baariy:

“This hadiyth is used as a proof by those who confirm a direction to Allaah,

claiming it is the direction of above, and the majority has rejected that, because
such a saying leads to (attributing) containment to Allaah, and Allaah is exalted

62
 from that. There are different sayings about the meaning of “An-Nuzuwl”. Among
them are those who carry it on its apparent and literal meaning, and those are the
Mushabbihah (those who liken Allaah to the creations), and Allaah is exalted
from their sayings,”...“and among them are those who kept it as is was narrated,
believing in it without specifying a meaning, while clearing Allaah from manner
of being and resemblance, and those are the majority of the Salaf,”... “And among
them are those who interpreted it in a befitting way that complies with the speech
of the Arabs,”... “Ibnu-l-3Arabiyy said, ‘...as for his (3alayhi-s-Salaam) saying
“yanzilu” (which literally means "he descends"), it refers to His doings 7 and not
His self; it refers to Allaah’s angel that descends with His order and prohibition.
Nuzuwl, just as it exists in bodies, also has an allegorical meaning, so if you carry
the hadiyth by the physical meaning, then it is the attribute of the dispatched
angel, and if you carry it by the allegorical meaning, then it would be called a
nuzuwl from one rank to another rank, and that is correct Arabic.’, The summary
is that he (Ibnu-l-3Arabiyy) explained it in two ways: either that the meaning of
“yanzilu” is that He descends His order, or His angel with His order, or else that it
is figurative, with the meaning of kindness towards those who supplicate, and the
answering of their supplication, and the like. Abuw Bakr Ibn Fuwrak said that
some shaykhs have narrated it with aُ dammah8 on the beginning9, while omitting
the direct object, i.e. descends an angel, and what strengthens that is what was
narrated by An-Nasaa’iyy,

‫ا يمهل حتىَ يمضىَ شطر الليل ثم يأِمر مناديا يقول هل من داع فيستجاب له‬
‫إننِ ي‬
“After the middle of the night passes, certainly Allaah orders someone
to (descend and) call out 'Is there anyone making supplication, so that
it would be answered for him?” Al-Qurtubiyy said, ‘This raises any
ambiguity’.”... “Al-Baydaawiyy said, “Since it is confirmed by the definite
evidences that He, the glorified, is cleared of bodily characteristics and
containment, then the transfer from one location to a lower location is
impossible to be attributed to Him...”
7
His act of creating
8
the “oo” sound
9
so that it reads: ‫“ ُينزل ربنا‬yunzilu Rabbunaa”

63
 According to this, the word “malak (angel)” is omitted, and omission
(hadhf) is something extremely prevalent in the Arabic language. Thus, the
meaning would be, “(By His order) Our Lord descends (an angel) to the lowest
sky.” The omission of the word malak (angel) is like the verse from the Qur’aan:
{ ‫} و اس أأل الق رية‬
<<Ask the village>>. The word “people (of)” is deliberately omitted, because that is
valid in Arabic. It is also like saying, “The general bombed until nightfall.” This does not
necessitate that the general did it himself, nor is that which was bombed mentioned. Ibn
Hajar also mentioned another narration of this hadiyth, and the scholars like Al-
3Iraaqiyy mentioned that the best way to interpret a hadiyth is by another hadiyth, he
said:

‫و خير ما فسرته بالوارد‬

Which means: the best of what you used to interpret it (the hadiyth) was by that which
was narrated (i.e., another hadiyth)
And what would those people say about the hadiyth narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy:

‫ينزل عيسىَ ابن مريم من السماءا‬

"Jesus the Son of Mary descends from the sky." Since the descent of Prophet 3Iysaa
(Jesus) is literal- coming from a higher place to a lower one, then the Nuzuwl of Allaah
cannot be the movement from a higher place to a lower one.

THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO

IRRATIONAL MATTERS
Furthermore, if they say that Allaah descends during the last third of the night,
and ascends during the day, then we easily refute them by saying that it is always
nighttime somewhere, and it is always daytime somewhere. If Allaah descends to the
lowest sky during the last third of the night, He would have to be above in the other part
of the world. Then, when the night falls on that part of the world, He would have to be
above in that first part of the world. Not just that, but after the last third of the night

64
lapses in one area, it will shortly become the last third of the night in another, which
means that according to them, Allaah would be going up and down relentlessly. Such a
contradiction is the result of this bad belief. To that they say with disgust, “May Allaah
protect us, you are using your mind.”

A SIMILAR TEXT
For extra benefit, let us mention verse 22 of the chapter of Al-Fajr:
{ ‫} و ج آأء ربك و اللم صف اا صفا‬
<<(The signs of the power of) your Lord will come and the angels will be standing
row after row>>. Literally, it says “And your Lord will come…”. It does not mean that
Allaah is a body who will move from one place to another, as the Wahhaabiyys think. Al-
Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hambal gave this ta’wiyl, as authenticated by Al-Imaam Al-Bayhaqiyy
in his book Manaaqibu Ahmad.

65
 THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH:
{ ‫}إليه يصعد الكلم الطيب‬

<<ILAYHI YAS3ADU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>>

A great sign of their ignorance is their reference to Suwratu Faatir, 10:

{ ‫} إاليه يصعد الكمه الطيب‬
<<Ilayhi yas3adu-l-kalimu-t-tayyib>>. They say that this verse proves that Allaah exists
above, because the verse literally says, “The good words ascend to Him.” They say that {

‫“ } إاليه‬ilayhi” means “to (the place of) Allaah”, and the word {‫“ } يصعد‬yas3adu” means
“they ascend”, so that the verse means “To Him ascend the good words”. Refuting this
claim is easier than it looks:

THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE VERSE

The correct meaning of the verse is, <<The good words are taken up to the sky,
an honorable place, by the angels who recorded them, as a sign of their acceptability
to Allaah>>. The Wahhaabiyys may deny this interpretation because of their ignorance,
but we verify it by referring to another verse: As-Saaffaat, 99:
{ ‫} و قال إان ذاه تب إال رب سسيديذن‬
<<Wa qaala inniy thaahibun ilaa rabbiy sayahdiyn>>. Literally, this verse means that
Prophet Ibraahiym (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said, “I am going to my Lord, He will guide me.”
He did not mean that He was going to the place of Allaah, because he was going to the
land of Ash-Shaam, the land of the Prophets (3alayhimu-s-Salaam), and an honorable
place on Earth. If Allaah exists in a place above us, then that great Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam) would not say that he was going to Allaah if he was not going up. What he
meant, is that he was going to the place honored by his Lord. Hence, just as in this verse

{ ‫“ } إال رب‬ilaa rabbiy (to my Lord)” means “to (the place honored by) my Lord”, the
word { ‫“ } إاليه‬ilayhi (to Him)” means “to (the place honored by) Him (Allaah)”. So, we

66
say that this verse means that the good words that are uttered are copied by the angels and
taken up to the sky by them, which is a place honored by Allaah.

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING

Furthermore, the Wahhaabiyys do not really take the literal meaning of the verse.
They also say that it means the angels copy the good words down and then take them to
the sky. However, the apparent meaning of the verse does not say that the angels copy the
good words. So, by its literal meaning, they have to say that the words go up (by
themselves), but words cannot go up by themselves, since words are not entities with
dimensions. If they say that a hadiyth says the angels write down the good words (which
is true), and they understand the verse in conjunction with the hadiyth, then we say,
“There is also another hadiyth:

‫أنت الظاهر فليس فوقك شيءا و أنت الباطن فليس دونك شيءا‬
‘O Allaah, you are the One whose existence is obvious, and there is nothing above
you, and you are the One who cannot be reached by delusions, and there is nothing
below you,’ (Al-Bukhaariyy and Al-Bayhaqiyy) so understand the verse according to this
hadiyth also.”

A SIMILAR TEXT
Similar to the aforementioned texts, is the famous hadiyth of the Prophet’s
(3alayhi-s-Salaam) ascent to the seven heavens, and what is above them (and since
Allaah is not similar to the Prophet, He did not ascend above the seven heavens). In it,
Prophet Muwsaa (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said to our Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam):

‫ارجع إلىَ ربك‬

“Irji3 ilaa rabbik” which literally means, “go back to your Lord”. The proper meaning is,
“Go back to the honorable place where you heard the Eternal Kalaam (The Speech)
of your Lord”.

67
 ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN

The Wahhaabiyys refer to the verse:

{ ‫} يوم يذكشف عن ساق‬
<<Yawma yukshafu 3an saaq>> to claim that Allaah has a shin. They say that this verse
means “The Day when Allaah will expose His shin” or “The Day when the shin will be

laid bare.” They say that because of the word { ‫“ } ساق‬saaq”, which literally refers to the
organ between the knee and the foot and is composed of skin and bone. We say that the
“saaq” mentioned in this verse is not even an attribute of Allaah. The verse does not say
"the saaq of Allaah ". It refers to the hardship of The Day of Judgment, as mentioned by
many scholars, like Abuw Hayyaan Al-Andalusiyy in his famous tafsiyr of the Qur'aan
called Al-Bahru-l-Muhiyt. Ibn Hajar also confirms this meaning from Ibn 3Abbaas; that
he interpreted the verse to refer to the severity (shiddah) of the situation of that day.
It is said in Arabic, ‫" كشفت الحرب عن ساق‬The battle exposed a saaq", if the
battle was at a very fierce point. We say that the verse refers to the Day when the justice
and wrath of Allaah will be obvious, and many people will suffer from His punishment.
In English, the word "shin" does not have the figurative usages as the word "saaq".

68
 ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE

The Wahhaabiyys also believe that Allaah is attributed with a real and literal face
because of the word “wajh” that He attributed to Himself. We agree that Al-Wajh is an
attribute of Allaah, but we do not agree that Allaah has a face. We say that the Wajh of
Allaah is His eternal and everlasting attribute that is not similar to the attributes of the
creations. We do not say that the Wajh of Allaah is a face, because the literal meaning of
“face” refers to the front part of the head, extending from the normal hairline to the
chinbone and from the base of the ear to the base of the other ear. Actually, in light of
certain verses, we laugh at the Wahhaabiyys.

VERSES MENTIONG THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH

For example, look at the saying of Allaah in the chapter of Al-Qasas, verse 88:
{ ‫} ك شء هال إال وجه‬
<<Kullu shay’in haalikun illaa wajhah>>. The literal meaning of this verse says,
“Everything will be destroyed except His face”. It is very easy to see that we should not
take the literal meaning of this verse. If the Wahhaabiyys insist on this, then they must
say that His (according to them) eyes, hands, fingers, shin, and foot will be destroyed. If
they do not say that, then they are negating the literal meaning.

Furthermore, we point out the fact that this verse has the word ‫كل‬ “kull” in it,
which literally means “every” or “all”. They like this word, and think it can only mean
“every”. In view of that, according to their own method, they are forced to say that
everything other than the face of Allaah will be destroyed.
One interpretation of this verse is the ta’wiyl of Al-Bukhaariyy. In his chapter of
tafsiyr, in the section pertaining to this chapter of Al-Qur’aan, he said “<<Illaa
Wajhah>> means <<Illaa Mulkah>>”; what would literally be interpreted as “Except for
His face” means <<Except for His Dominion (supreme ownership)>>. One
interpretation of this verse is that everything done without seeking the blessings of
Allaah alone is not accepted (rewarded). This is a valid interpretation that conforms to the
Arabic language, like the verse in the chapter of Al-Layl:

69
 { ‫} إال ابتغاء وجه ربه ا ألعل‬
<<Illa-btighaa’a Wajhi Rabbihi-l-a3laa>>, which means, <<Except to be done for the
Wajh (blessings; favor; acceptance) of his Lord>>. There are also other interpretations
for the verse.
We also look at the verse:
{ ‫} ف أأين ت ولوا فث وجه ا‬
<<Fa’aynamaa tuwalluw fathamma wajhu-llaah>>. It literally says, “Wherever you
turn yourselves, there is the face of Allaah,” which contradicts their established belief
because it implies that Allaah has a face that is everywhere, which they do not believe.
For example, they do not believe that if you turn yourself towards the bathroom, Allaah’s
face is in that direction. They believe that Allaah has a real face that is with Him, and that
He is physically above the 3Arsh. One of the meanings of Wajh is “Qiblah (that which is
faced).” This verse is actually a proof that it is permissible to pray an optional prayer
without facing the Ka3bah, while traveling and riding on an animal, and with other
conditions that need to be satisfied, as mentioned by Mujaahid the student of Ibn
3Abbaas.
Allaah is not attributed with a face, He is attributed with Wajh, and He knows its
reality. The word can have more than one meaning, so it is safe not to specify a meaning,
or else to interpret it according to the context of the statement.

70
 ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND

DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD

To briefly clear Allaah from the organs known as hands, check the definitions
listed for the term “yad”, like hand (an organ), power, authority, assistance, possession,
favor, etc. These are not even half of the definitions. Some befit Allaah, like power, and
some do not, like hand (as an organ). Ibn Hajar lists over 20 meanings in his explanation
of Al-Bukhaariyy, and references many of them with verses of the Qur’aan and Arabic
expressions or lines of poetry. We will skip the references only for the sake of brevity. He
cited: the organ, power, ownership, covenant, submission, endowment, dominion,
lowness; humiliation, authority, obedience, protection, the handle of a sword, the bird’s
wing, duration (of time), beginning, cash, ability, a group, a path, dispersion, and more.
In Al-Maa’idah, 6, Allaah revealed it to mean “thiraa’ (arm)”:
{ ‫} فاغسلوا وجوهك و أأ يديذك إال ال رافق‬
<<Wash your faces and hands (i.e. arms) up to the elbow>>.

THE SAYING OF ABUW HANIYFAH

The saying of Abuw Haniyfah, the most explicit of the Four Imaams in clearing
Allaah from tashbiyh (likeness to the creation): “It is not said that the Yad of Allaah is His
power, nor His endowment, because in saying that, there is negation of His attribute, and
that is the saying of the Mu3tazilah. Rather, His yad is His attribute and it has no how.” is
used by the Wahhaabiyys. They say that he said that Allaah’s hand is not power, is not
favor, etc.”; meaning that he is saying that it is an actual hand. The true meaning of the
statement, is that Allaah’s attribute of yad is not always interpreted as power in every
context, nor is it always interpreted as endowment in every context, etc.
In one verse, Allaah said:

71
 { ‫} يد ا فوق أأيديمه‬
<<Yadu-llaahi fawqa aydiyhim>>, which literally says “the hand of Allaah is above their
hands. ” It truly means that their allegiance to the Prophet is accepted by Him, not that
Allaah put His hand on top of the Muslim’s hands, which is physical contact.
In one hadiyth:

‫يد ا مع الجماعة‬
“Yadu-llaahi ma3al-Jamaa3ah”, which literally says, “The hand of Allaah is with the
Jamaa3ah.” The Jamaa3ah is on Earth, but they believe that Allaah is above the sky. The
correct meaning is that the support of Allaah is with the Jamaa3ah.
From these, it is clear that the literal meaning of Yad is not intended. In many
languages, including English, this figurative usage is common.

THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ALLAAH: {‫}بيديذ‬

<< BIYADAYY>>
In the chapter of Saad, verse 75, Allaah said:
{ ‫} ي إابليس ما منعك أأن تسجد لا خلقتح بيديذ‬
<<O Ibliys, what prevented you from prostrating to what I created biyadayy?>> The

word { ‫“ } بيديذ‬biyadayy” literally means “with my two hands”, and it could mean
otherwise. Some scholars said that it was mentioned that ‘Aadam was created “biyadayh”
(with His yadayn) as an expression drawing attention to his special honor. Because to the
contrary, Ibliys was created by Allaah, but it is not mentioned that he was created
“biyadayy”. We are not allowed to say it means “two hands”, because that would be
explicitly comparing Allaah to the humans.
Ibn Hajar narrates from some of the scholars: “This (verse) was put forth to
facilitate an understanding, because it is known that whoever takes care of something and
has interest in it attends to it with both hands, so it is understood from that, that the heed
given to the creation of Aadam was more perfect than that of other creations.”

72
 The fact is that the dual form of the word does not always denote a pair. An
example is the saying in Al-Hajj,
‫لبيك اللهم لبيك‬
“Labbayka-llaahumma labbayk”, meaning, “O Allaah, I am quick in responding to your
order in Al-Hajj”, or “I obey you one time after another, O Allaah”. Sometimes the dual
form of the Arabic word may refer to importance of something, swiftness to act, or the
reoccurrence of something (more than twice), like the verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk:
{ ‫} ث ارجع البص ك رتي‬
Which literally means, “look twice”, but actually means <<Look time and time again
(at the creation of Allaah)>>
Because the Wahhaabiyys believe that this verse is very clear evidence that Allaah
has two real hands, and what has been presented surely is not convincing for them, we
smack them with a clear refutation by citing the 47th verse of Ath-Thaariyaat:
{ ‫} و السمء بنيناها ب أأييد‬
<<Allaah created the sky with great power>>, literally: “Allaah built the sky with
(more than two) hands.” The plural form (ayd) is used, not the singular, nor the dual
forms. In Arabic, the plural form of the word is for counting items from three to ten.
One hadiyth or verse would literally say that He has one hand. Another would say
two, and another would literally say three or more, so why did they not say that He has
six or more hands? Is it that they have the belief of the Hindus and do not want to
confess? The correct belief is that Allaah is attributed with Al-Yad, and it does not
resemble anything, it is not an organ and Allaah knows its reality.
May Allaah bless Abu-l-Hasan Al-Ash3ariyy, whom the scholars followed in
defending the belief of the Muslims. Let us end this section with Saad, 45:
{ ‫} و اذكر عبادن إاب راهي و إاساق و يعقوب أأ وولْ ا أليديذ و ا ألبصار‬
It literally says, "Remember Our (Allaah’s) slaves, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who had
hands and vision." In the Wahhaabiyy mistranslation, they make ta’wiyl and say that it
means they had strength and religious understanding. So, they make ta’wiyl for creations

73
that really have hands, but for Allaah, supremely exalted beyond the descriptions of men,
they insist on the literal meanings.

74
 ALLAAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE

The word “3ayn” can connote “eye”, “evil eye”, “spring of water”, “self”,
“individuality”… and much more. For example, take the term “fard 3ayn (personal
obligation)”. Learning the matters of belief is a personal obligation. In Suwratu-l-
Ghaashiyah, 3ayn refers to a spring of water, one in Paradise and one in Hell:
{ ‫ } فيا عي جا رية‬and {‫} تسقى من عي ءانية‬
Prophet Nuwh’s (3alayhi-s-Salaam) Ark was sailing by the guidance of Allaah:
{ ‫} تريذ ب أأعيننا‬
Literally, it means, “running by Our eyes”. There is no proof that Allaah has eyes in the
hadiyth:

‫وإنِ ربكم ليس بأِعـور‬

“Your Lord is not one-eyed,”. The Wahhaabiyys use this to say that Allaah has two
eyes.

75
 CONCLUSION

By now, the reader can clearly see the deviance of the so-called Salafiyys. Let us
close with several additional examples. Several Wahhaabiyys have made ta’wiyl for the
hadiyth:

‫فليس دونك شيءا‬

“…there is nothing below You,” and explained it, “…there is nothing close to You”.
Upon such a silly ta’wiyl, produce the 19th verse of Al-3Alaq:
{ ‫} و اسد و اقتب‬
<<Wa-sjud wa-qtarib>>. It literally means, “Prostrate and draw nearer (to Allaah)”. They
also make ta’wiyl for this verse, which literally implies that Allaah is below us, because
prostration requires going down to the floor. They explain by saying that the closeness to
Allaah is by obedience, which is true. They made this ta’wiyl to avoid an obvious
contradiction, although there is also a hadiyth from Al-Imaam Muslim:

‫أقرب ما يكونِ العبد إلىَ ربه و هو ساجد فأِكثروا من الدعاءا فيه‬

“The slave would be closest to Allaah while prostrating, so make lots of supplication
while prostrating...” So stand back and watch the Wahhaabiyy eat his own words about
denying ta’wiyl. If it is permissible to say that closeness to Him is by obedience, then it is
permissible to say that His highness is by Majesty.
In Another verse, Allaah tells us:
{ ‫} ا نور السمواتا و ا ألرض‬
<<Allaah is the guide of the people of the skies (the angels) and the people of the
earth to the light of belief>>. It literally says, “Allaah is the light of the Heavens and
Earth.” The Wahhaabiyys do not usually say that Allaah is a light, which is an
illumination. If they can use the figurative meanings, how do they make it forbidden for
us? What are their criteria for taking one mutashaabih text literally and another
figuratively? All of it is from Allaah and His Messenger (3alayhi-s-Salaam).
They say that Allaah will cast a shadow, but the hadiyth truly refers to the shade

of the 3Arsh. “Dhilluhu ‫( ظلــه‬His shadow)”, as mentioned in the hadiyth, in this

context is the honorable shadow that is owned by Allaah, and the only shade available on

76
the Day of Judgment, when the sun will descend as close as a mile from the heads of the

people. What helps to clarify this meaning is the likes of the saying of Allaah: { ‫} بيت‬
<<baytiy (My house)>>, referring to the honorable Ka3bah that is owned by Allaah, and

{ ‫<< } روح‬ruwhiy (My soul)>>, referring to the honorable soul of Aadam owned by
Allaah. The Ka3bah and the soul of Aadam should not be associated with the self of
Allaah. It is as Allaah reported in the Qur’aan, that Saalih, the Messenger of Allaah
(3alayhi-s-Salaam), said:
{ ‫} نقة ا‬
<<(Be aware of) the Camel of Allaah>>, which expresses the status of that camel, and
does not mean that the camel is an attribute of Allaah. All of these are examples of
relation by ownership and honor, called in Arabic: “idaafatu milk wa tashriyf”. Not to
mention that there is another version of the hadiyth from the route of Salmaan that
explicitly mentions the 3Arsh:

‫سبعة يظلهم ا في ظل عرشه‬

“There are seven types of people whom Allaah will shade in the shadow of His
3Arsh”.
From another mutashaabih hadiyth, they say that Allaah will put His foot in
Hellfire:

‫حتىَ يضع رب العزة قدمه‬

There is a lot to be said about this hadiyth, but it is solid enough to produce the verse:
{ ‫} لو كن هؤلء ءاله اة ما وردوها‬
<<Had those (idols) been worthy of worship, they would not enter Hell>>. Allaah the
exalted will order for the idols to be thrown in Hell with those who worshipped them.
This verse proves that Allaah, the only one who deserves worship, does not enter the
Hellfire. The true meaning of the hadiyth was explained by An-Nawawiyy as Allaah
putting a group of people in Hell. He said,
“This hadiyth is among the famous hadiyths of attributes, and the difference
between the scholars in reference to the two ways of explaining it has already
been mentioned repeatedly: The first is the way of most of the Salaf, and some of

77
 the scholars of belief, that its meaning should not be spoken about, rather that we
believe that it is true according to what Allaah willed, that it has a befitting
meaning, and that the apparent meaning is not intended. The second, which is the
saying of most of the scholars of belief, is that it is interpreted according to what
is befitting, and according that, they have differed about the meaning of this

hadiyth. It was said that what is meant by the term ‫( قدم‬qadam; which literally

means foot), in this case is ‫( متقدم‬mutaqaddam; that which is advanced;

brought to the forefront), which is commonly used in the language. And so the
meaning would be: ‘until Allaah the exalted puts in it (i.e. Hell) those whom He
has put forward for it among the people of torture’...”

After all of this explanation, the Wahhaabiyys will say that we have done nothing
except “explain the meanings away”. Upon hearing the proper meanings of the texts, they
say, “you have emptied out the meanings.” They justify their own ta’wiyl by saying that
they only give the proper tafsiyr (interpretation). This double standard is due to arrogance
and lack of intelligence. Take heed, O seeker of truth, and benefit from what the great
scholar, 3Abdu-r-Rahmaan Ibnu-l-Jawziyy said about some of the people who likened
Allaah to the creations centuries before the Wahhaabiyyah, in his book called Akhbaaru-
s-Sifaat:
“When a group of the ignorant knew about this book of mine, they were not
pleased, because they were used to the speech of their leaders who attribute a
body to Allaah, and they said, “This is not the mathhab!” I said, “This is not
YOUR mathhab nor the mathhab of your shaykhs whom you have imitated, for I
have cleared the mathhab of Al-Imaam Ahmad and denied the lies that have been
transmitted”... “And I saw some of our colleagues talking about the matters of the
belief inappropriately. Three people were authorized to author: Abuw 3Abdu-llaah
Ibn Haamid, his companion Al-Qaadiy, and Ibnu-z-Zaaghuwniyy. They wrote
books by which the mathhab was defamed, and took the attributes by a physical
meaning. They heard that Allaah created Aadam with his image10, and so they

10
This either means that Allaah created Aadam with an honorable image, or that Allaah created Aadam with
Aadam’s image, which is the image given to all the humans after him.

78
 confirmed an image, a face, two eyes, a mouth, a uvula, molars, a direction-
which is the clouds- two hands, fingers, a pinky, a thumb, a chest, a thigh, two
shins and two feet, and then said that they never heard about Allaah having a
head11. They said that He touches and is touched, comes close to the slave in
person, and some of them said that He breathes. Then they appease the common
people with their saying: “it is not like what we can conceive”. They took by the
apparent meanings of the names and attributes of Allaah, and then innovatively
called those (apparent meanings) the attributes of Allaah with no mental or textual
evidence. They paid no attention to the texts that detour away from the apparent
meanings to the meanings that are necessary for Allaah, nor to the knowledge of
what the apparent meanings imply, which is the attributes of the creations. They
were not convinced about saying “His act of creating”12; rather they said it is the
attribute of His self. Then upon confirming these attributes, they said, ‘We do not
carry these attributes according to other meanings that are dictated by the
language, like to say that yad means power or punishment, or that the majiy’ and
the ityaan (which both literally mean ‘the coming’) mean grace and mercy, or the
saaq means hardship, rather we take them by their apparent meanings.’ And the
apparent meanings are what are known to be the attributes of the humans. An
issue is taken literally if that (literal meaning) was possible, so if there is an
indication to do otherwise, then it is taken figuratively. They are stubbornly
adherent to likening Allaah to the creations, and some of the laymen have
followed them. I have exposed the follower and the followed. I said to them, “You
are the people who convey, and you have a following, and your imaam is the great
imaam, Ahmad Ibn Hambal, and he used to say while being under the whip,
“How would I say that which was not said?” And so beware of innovating into my
mathhab that which is not a part of it...”

11
Meaning that they know of no narration from the Prophet about that, so they don’t confirm it.
12
Like what was said about the hadiyth of An-Nuzuwl.

79
 APPENDAGE

This third edition of How to Debate with the So-Called Salafiyyah is

supplemented with a brief clarification of the meanings of the terms “Al-Qur’aan” and
“the Speech of Allaah”, and a clarification of innovations in Al-Islaam.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAAH

The Speech of Allaah is an eternal and everlasting attribute of Allaah, as

previously mentioned. It is not of a sound, letter, or language. With this attribute, Allaah
orders, forbids, promises, threatens, informs, and questions, but without His speech being
made of parts. It is one eternal and everlasting speech that does not change. It does not
travel through the air or take up time, nor can it be imagined. It is wrong to believe that
His speech is of parts; that at one time He orders, then His speech changes and so He
forbids at another time, etc. Rather, the change occurs in the creations; He would create in
His slave the understanding of an order, and in another slave the understanding of a
question, etc. This attribute of Allaah is confirmed in the Qur’aan and the hadiyth. It was
established from the Messenger of Allaah that he said:

ِ‫ما منكم من أحد إل سيكلمه ربه يوم القيامة ليس بينه و بينه ترجمان‬
“There is not one of you except that his lord will speak to him on the Day of
Judgment; there will be no interpreter between them.” Whoever denies the Speech of
Allaah has attributed imperfection to Allaah and has blasphemed. Likewise is the
judgment of the one who likens this attribute to the speech of the creatures. Most of the
debates in the early days were about the issue of the Speech of Allaah.
The belief of those who liken Allaah to the creations is that Allaah has speech, but
that His speech is similar to the speech of the creation. They believe that Allaah speaks
Arabic, but that His speech is eternal, which as usual, is a contradictory matter.

80
 THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAAH:

{ ‫} إانا أأمره إاذا أأ راد شيئا أأن يقول ل كن فيكون‬

<<Surely if He willed for something He says to it: “Be”, and it
shall be>>

What lead those who liken Allaah to the creations to believe that Allaah speaks
Arabic is this verse, and other verses like it. They would say that Allaah said:
{ ‫} يقول ل كن فيكون‬
claiming that it means that He utters the word (‫( ) كن‬kun), which is a command meaning
“be; exist”. They would add to that that the since Allaah is eternal then His utterance
must be eternal; so they considered an expression that has a beginning and an end-since it
starts with a particular letter and sound and ends with a letter and sound- as eternal and
everlasting. The scholars have given very convincing refutations against this
blasphemous creed:
They said that the term (‫( ) كن‬kun) is Arabic, and Allaah existed before the
Arabic language and all other types of things existed, so the result of their claim is that
Allaah was silent and then started speaking, which is impossible since that is the attribute
of the creatures.
Their claim that Allaah always utters these two letters before the creation of every
individual thing also leads to saying that Allaah addresses things that do not exist. If they
claim that He addresses it after it existed, then respond by saying, “it is meaningless to
say He created something that already exists”; meaning that they claim that Allaah says (

‫( ) كن‬kun) whenever He willed to create something, so if He is addressing something

that already exists, then there is no benefit in ordering it to exist.
Furthermore, their claim implies that Allaah does not say anything other than (

‫( ) كن‬kun), because He would be addressing every distinct thing that comes into
existence, but at every single moment, countless things come into existence, whether
bodies, sounds, motions, thoughts or otherwise.

81
 Additionally, their belief leads to say that Allaah creates the creations by a

creation, which is the utterance of (‫( ) كن‬kun). The belief of Ahlu-s-Sunnah is that
Allaah creates with His eternal will and power, in accordance with His eternal
knowledge.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah said that if it were valid that Allaah would speak with words and
sounds, then it would be valid that He would have any attribute of the creations, because
whatever resembles something is subject to whatever it’s similar is subject. For that
reason, people believe that any particular book could burn, since books burn, and that any
house could be demolished, because houses can be demolished. Anything that speaks
with letters and words and sounds could have organs, and anything with organs can be
destroyed.
What, then, is the correct meaning of the verse? Ahlu-s-Sunnah had two
interpretations of this verse, both of which comply with the judgment of the sound mind
and the texts of the religion. The first interpretation is that
{ ‫} إانا أأمره إاذا أأ راد شيئا أأن يقول ل كن فيكون‬
<<Surely if He willed for something He says to it: “Be,” and it shall be>> means that
Allaah creates without effort, difficulty, or prevention. This means that the things He
willed to create come into existence swiftly and easily without being delayed from their
destined times of existence. The second interpretation is that things come into existence
in accordance with Allaah’s eternal judgment. His judgment is His command, and His

command is His eternal speech, not an Arabic expression. The word in the Qur’aan: { ‫} كن‬
(kun) facilitates an understanding, and refers to the eternal Speech of Allaah, just as the
word
(‫( ) ال‬Allaah) itself facilitates an understanding and refers to the eternal self whom we
worship. The first interpretation was given by Al-Maaturiydiyy himself, and the second
was mentioned by the Ash3ariyys like Al-Bayhaqiyy.

82
 THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AAN”
It is important to know that the term “Al-Qur’aan” has two usages. The first is the
eternal and everlasting attribute of Allaah. It has no beginning and no end, as mentioned
previously. The second is the expressions revealed to Muhammad, may peace be upon
him, which are created. The pages on which those expressions are written are created, the
ink used to write them is created, the tongues that recite them are created, the hearts that
memorize those expressions are created, etc. The term: “Al-Qur’aan” is synonymous to
the term: “the Speech of Allaah”, because “the Speech of Allaah” also has these two
meanings: the eternal and everlasting attribute of Allaah, and the revealed expressions.
Because of this interchangeable word usage and meaning, the people who liken
Allaah to the creations got confused and misunderstood the statement of the scholars,
“Al-Qur’aan is the Speech of Allaah and it is not created.” They thought that the scholars
meant that the revealed expressions are the eternal Speech of Allaah and that those
revealed expressions are not created, which is a blasphemous understanding, because it
attributes eternity to the created thing. Had they adhered to the saying of Al-Junayd Al-
Baghdaadiyy they would have been safe: “At-Tawhiyd (monotheism) is distinguishing the
eternal from the event.”
The scholars of the Salaf said it is forbidden to say, “The Qur’aan is created”, for
fear of someone misunderstanding and believing that the attribute of Allaah is created.
They also forbade people from saying, “The Qur’aan is not created”, for fear of someone
believing that the revealed expressions are eternal. They said, “The Qur’aan is the
Speech of Allaah and it is not created”, a statement that is clearer than the previous two.
They said that when clarifying this issue to people to mention these details. So when we
quote verses of the Qur’aan and say, “Allaah said”, it is not with the meaning that Allaah
speaks Arabic, but meaning that those expressions are not the work of a creature; no
human, angel, or jinn authored the Qur’aan, rather it is a revelation that refers to the
eternal Speech of Allaah, clarifying for the creatures Allaah’s orders, prohibitions,
promise, and threat.

83
 THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS

THE MEANING OF BID3AH LINGUISTICALLY AND

RELIGIOUSLY
One of the greatest tribulations these people have brought upon the Muslims is
their misunderstanding of innovations. Linguistically, “bid3ah (innovation)” means, “that
which was done without a previous example”. There is no dispraise in the word itself.
Religiously, a bid3ah is something not revealed explicitly in the Qur’aan or the Sunnah.
In this issue, the Wahhaabiyy’s mistake lies in believing that anything not done by the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) is sinful, because it is an innovation. The truth is that any
new issue must be checked to see if it complies with or contradicts the rules of the
Religion.

THE CORRECT MEANING OF: ‫“ و كل بدعة ضللة‬WA KULLU

BID3ATIN DALAALAH”
Because of a hadiyth, they claim to shun any innovated matter- but we know
better:

‫و كل بدعة ضللة‬
Literally, the hadiyth says, “Every innovation is misguidance.” This is the basis of their
deviance in this issue, so may the hadiyth be cleared of their falsehood. This hadiyth is
sahiyh, but their interpretation is invalid. The true meaning of the hadiyth is, “Every
innovation (which does not comply with the rules of the Religion) is misguidance.”
The Wahhaabiyys would deny this interpretation with disgust, relying on the word “kull (

‫( )كل‬every; each; all)”. We say that the terms of this hadiyth are “3aamm makhsuws”;
general wording with specific meaning. The support for our claim is abundant and clear:
One hadiyth:

‫و كل عين زانية‬
literally means, “Every eye is a fornicator”. Despite the general wording, the Prophets,
pious people, blind men, and children are not included, so it has a specific meaning. It

84
truly means, “Most eyes glance with the forbidden look; the look that leads to
fornication”. The verse from the Qur’aan should convince the doubtful:
{ ‫} تـدمر ك شء‬
Literally, it means, “It destroyed everything”, but truly it means <<The wind destroyed
most of the things in that area>>. The violent wind that destroyed the tribe of 3Aad
blew on them for seven nights and eight days consecutively. Certainly, this verse does not
mean that the wind destroyed everything, for that would include the Heavens and Earth
entirely. Therefore, despite the general wording of the verse, the intended meaning is
specific.

PROOF FROM THE HADIYTH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS

A Wahhaabiyy may acknowledge these general expressions with specific
meanings, but deny that the hadiyth of innovations is one of them, because his heart is
firmly opposed to the idea of good innovations. We further substantiate our interpretation
of the hadiyth with another hadiyth about innovations:

‫من سلن في السلم سنة حسنة فله أجرها و أجر من عمل بها‬
“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islaam has its reward, and the reward of
whoever works according to it…” This hadiyth is an explicit proof for good
innovations. Al-Imaam Muslim narrated this hadiyth and because of it, we understand the
hadiyth which literally says that every innovation is misguidance to be of general
wording with a specific meaning. This is because it is impossible for two authentic
sayings of the Prophet to contradict each other.
Of course, the Wahhaabiyys have their routines for evading the ruling contained in
this hadiyth. Some of them say that it is specifically for the Companions. Others say that
it refers to the one who revives a Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam). Both claims
are easily countered. Definitely, this hadiyth is not restricted to the Companions, because
the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) gave a general statement that is not restricted: “Whoever
starts a good Sunnah…” In addition, it does not refer to the person who revives a
Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam), because then he would truly be restarting;
following something the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) already started. Easily seen by the

85
honest person, this hadiyth praises whoever innovates something that complies with the
rules of the Religion.
Some of the more ignorant Wahhaabiyys will argue that the word “bid3ah” is not
in this hadiyth. A true but petty argument, the reference to innovations is still contained
therein. Because of their blindness, they will not see our point, and still insist that this
hadiyth means, “Whoever revives a good Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam)...” If
you meet one of those, then recite the second half of the hadiyth:

‫و من سنن في السلم سنة سيئة كانِ عليه وزرها و وزر من عمل بها‬
“And whoever starts an evil Sunnah in Islaam, then upon him is its sin and the sin of
whoever works according to it…” There is no Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam) classified as an “evil Sunnah”. According to their method, the second half of this
hadiyth would mean, “And whoever revives an evil Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam)…” Hence, the word “Sunnah” in this hadiyth means “a way”; “a practice”- and
not exclusively the Sunnah of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam). This clarifies the meaning
of the word “Sunnah” in the first half of the hadiyth.

OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHAABIYYS IN THIS ISSUE, AND

HOW TO REBUTTLE THEIR CLAIMS
Being very staunch in this issue, they will produce more texts to substantiate their
claim. Do not be shaken if they recite the hadiyth of Al-Bukhaariyy:

‫من أحدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو رد‬

Then, they will say it means, “Whoever innovates into this affair of ours that which is not
from it is rejected”. Actually, this hadiyth supports what we have already stated, because
the meaning is, “Whoever invents something that does not comply with ( the rules of)
this Religion of ours is rejected.” The hadiyth does not say
‫“ من أحدث في أمرنا هذا فهو رد‬Whoever innovates into our religion is rejected”,
rather, the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) gave a qualifying statement:

‫ما ليس منه‬

“that which does not comply with it”. So if the new action does comply with the rules
of the religion, it is not rejected.

86
 They may deliver the verse:
{ ‫} اليوم أأكلتح لك دينك‬
claiming that it means, “Today I have perfected your Religion for you”. From there, they
say that anything coming afterwards would be an unacceptable innovation. This verse
does not support their claim at all. By this interpretation, they imply that the Religion was
imperfect until this verse came, and this is nasty blasphemy. Whoever has a sound mind
and seeks the truth would then inquire about our explanation. We say that the verse
means, <<On the day of this verse’s revelation, the rules of the Religion have been
completed>>. Out of His Wisdom, Allaah did not reveal all of the rules of the Religion at
once, but in stages, and all Muslims know this. For example, the obligation of the five
prayers was not revealed to the Prophet until the event of the night journey and ascension
up to the skies. The obligation of Praying the Friday prayer and of fasting the month of
Ramadaan came after the migration from Makkah to Al-Madiynah. Even the prohibition
of drinking wine was not revealed immediately. This verse came, confirming that the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) received the last of the rules, and he conveyed all of them-
even the general rules which the future top scholars (mujtahids) would need to deduce the
answers for cases not mentioned by the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam). Additionally, this
verse was not the last verse to be revealed. If they claim that anything that comes after
this verse is an unwanted innovation, then they say all the verses and hadiyths that came
later are abominable.

STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS

What has been mentioned is good ammunition and enough to protect a Muslim
from becoming doubtful about good innovations, but know that they recite other texts,
including reports from the Companions and other scholars. What helps to understand
many of the texts they would present is to know that when the scholars used the word
“bid3ah” without restriction, they meant the bad innovation; in particular they meant the
bad beliefs of the deviant factions. The context was understood, so they did not always
have to say, “bad bid3ah”- they just said, “bid3ah”. However, the sayings of the scholars
explicitly mentioning good innovations are abundant, like the saying of Ash-Shaafi3iyy:

87
 “The innovated matters are of two types: The first of them is that which was
innovated and conflicts with something from the Book, the Sunnah, the
consensus, or what was confirmed from the companions (athar). This is the
innovation of misguidance. The second is that good thing which was innovated
and does not conflict with anything from the Book, the Sunnah, or the consensus.
That is the innovated thing which is not dispraised.”
This is narrated in The Merits of Ash-Shaafi3iyy by Al-Bayhaqiyy. An-Nawawiyy
documented in his book Tah-thiybu-l-Asmaa’i wa-l-Lughaat:
“The imaam and shaykh whom his greatness, proficiency, mastery in the different
types of knowledge, and status of being an imaam are agreed upon, Abu
Muhammad 3Abdu-l-3Aziyz Ibn 3Abdu-s-Salaam13, may Allaah except his deeds,
said towards the end of the book Al-Qawaa3id, ‘The innovation is divided into:
obligatory, prohibited, recommended, disliked, and permissible. The way to reach
that is by applying the innovation to the rules of the religious law. So if it applied
to the rules of what necessitates an obligation, then it is obligatory, or the rules of
prohibition, then it is prohibited, or the recommendation then it would be
recommended, or the disliked then it would be disliked, or the permissible, then it
would permissible.’ ”
The statement of Ibn 3Aabidiyn, the famous Hanafiyy scholar clarifies this quote of Ibn
3Abdu-s-Salaam:
“The innovation could be obligatory, like the preparation of the evidences for
refuting the misguided sects, and learning grammar (an-nahw) which enables the
understanding of the Book and the Sunnah14; or recommended, like the innovation
of inns (for students of knowledge and the poor), schools, and every charitable
matter that did not exist in the first days (of Islaam); or disliked, such as
decorating the Mosque; or permissible, such as exaggerating in delicious foods,
drinks, and (luxurious) clothing.”
This is in his book called Raddu-l-Muhtaar. Amid the explicit scholarly sayings is that of
3Umar Ibnu-l-Khattaab, “What a good bid3ah this is,” narrated by Maalik, Al-
Bukhaariyy, and others.
13
He is also famous as: 3Izzu-d-Diyn Ibn 3Abdu-s-Salaam
14
This is in reference to the one who wants to convey the hadiyth and interpret the Qur’aan.

88
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF 3UMAR IBNU-L-KHATTAAB
3Umar, may Allaah increase his status, gave this statement after ordering the
people to pray the taraawiyh prayers behind one Imaam, and then returning on a different
night to find that the people kept praying as he ordered- something the Prophet (3alayhi-
s-Salaam) never ordered, nor did Abuw Bakr. This narration makes the Wahhaabiyys’
blood boil. They ridiculously say that 3Umar did not mean that what he did was an
innovation. They say that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) already prayed the taraawiyh
prayers in congregation, so 3Umar truly meant, “What a good revival of the Sunnah this
is”. Clarify for them that the taraawiyh prayer is not the innovation, not even praying it in
congregation, but the order for all the people to pray behind one Imaam establishes the
innovation. When the Prophet was alive, he did not order it, although some people did it.
He started praying at home because he did not want the people to think that it was an
obligation. Since then, the people used to pray the taraawiyh prayers in scattered groups-
a person here, a congregation there, another person there… and Abuw Bakr, after the
Prophet’s (3alayhi-s-Salaam) death, left it as such. After Abuw Bakr, 3Umar ordered a
change- for all the people to gather behind one Imaam. Since then, the Muslims
worldwide have prayed taraawiyh behind one Imaam. This perfectly discredits the
Wahhaabiyy belief, for if their understanding of this issue was correct, then 3Umar would
have said, “I will not order the people to pray behind one Imaam, I will leave it as the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) left it.” Add to that, that if 3Umar meant that he revived the
Sunnah, he would not have used the words ‫“ نعمت البدعة‬good innovation”,
especially after the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) already said, according to the
Wahhaabiyys, that every bid3ah is misguidance. So, they claim that 3Umar meant the
linguistic meaning of bid3ah, and they say it means, “to revive”. We tell them that
“ahyaa (to revive)” refers to what was already done, like what is mentioned in the
hadiyth:

‫من أحيىَ سنتي عند فساد أمتي فله أجر شهيد‬

“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a
martyr.” There is no way to replace the word “ihyaa’ (revival)” with the word “bid3ah

89
(innovation)”. This trick of theirs is a cheap attempt to hide the truth. Do not fall for it.
Rather, look at what Ibn Hajar said in explanation of 3Umar’s statement:
“The innovation is originally that which is done without a previous example, and
in the religious law it is applied to that which is contrary to the Sunnah, and so it
would be dispraised. The accuracy of the issue is that if it is from something that
is categorized under what is religiously considered good, then it is good, and if it
was from something that is categorized under what is religiously considered bad,
then it is bad, or else it would be permissible (mubaah; not rewardable nor
punishable), and it could be divided into the five judgments.15”

EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS

The examples of good innovations are also abundant. One of them is Abuw
Bakr’s order to compile the Qur’aan into one mus-haf, upon the suggestion of 3Umar
Ibnu-l-Khattaab, despite that Abuw Bakr explicitly told 3Umar, “This is something the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) did not do…” A second example is basing the Islaamic
calendar on the migration of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam), which was done by 3Umar,
and not the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam). The people differed about what to use as a
reference point for the calendar. Some said by the birth of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam), some said by his death, some mentioned the time when he first received
revelation. 3Umar chose the Hijrah (migration) because of its great importance.
3Uthmaan Ibn 3Affaan ordered for an additional athaan to be called for the Friday
prayer. The Companion, Khubayb, innovated praying two rak3ahs before being executed.
When the Companions found out about what he did, they said, “He made a Sunnah for
us.” The dots in the Qur’aan were innovated by the students of the Companions. The
titles of the suwrahs (chapters) and the other symbols in the Qur’aan, like the signs that
show where to stop reciting, are all innovated. The terminology of the science of hadiyth,
like “sahiyh”, “hasan”, and “da3iyf” are all innovated. Protect yourself and defend
Islaam with these facts.

15
Obligatory, recommended, forbidden, disliked, and permissible.

90
 THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF
PROPHET MUHAMMAD (3ALAYHI-S-SALAAM)
Not mentioning the commemoration of the Mawlid (birth) of the Prophet
(3alayhi-s-Salaam) would leave this section incomplete. The Wahhaabiyys find this good
Sunnah to be an abhorrent major sin, and some claim it to be shirk and kufr. Among their
attacks against it is to say, “The Companions of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) loved the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) more than others, so had the Mawlid been good, they would
have been the first to do it.” Our response is that there is no rule that says whatever the
Companions were not the first to think of is rejected. It is true that the Companions were
the best, but this does not mean that any goodness that would ever cross the minds of men
would cross the minds of the Companions beforehand. If the Wahhaabiyys are truthful, let
them extend this idea to other matters. Let them say, “If putting the dots in the Qur’aan
was good, then the Companions would have done it first.”
A proof for the validity of the Mawlid is the previously mentioned hadiyth of the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam):

‫ما كانِ ا ليجمع أمةي محمدد علىَ ضللة‬

“Allaah will not let (the scholars of) the nation of Muhammad agree on a
misguidance (Ibn Maajah).” When the Mawlid was first done some 800 years ago, not a
scholar objected, nor the scholars of the centuries after that, thereby establishing the
consensus of its validity. The fact is that the Wahhaabiyys deem it a trifling sin, and some
even say it is blasphemous, thereby breeching the consensus, and whoever disagrees with
the consensus has disagreed with the Messenger of Allaah. If they resort to a lie and say
that all of those scholars were misguided, and so Muhammad Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab
called the people back to the true belief, then we stun them with the hadiyth of Al-
Bukhaariyy:

‫ل تــــزال طــائـفة مـــن أمـــتي ظـــاهرين علىَ الحــــق‬

“There will always be a group from my nation which is very evidently adhering to
the truth.” If the Wahhaabiyys were correct, then this hadiyth would be wrong, because
they claim that centuries passed without a scholar speaking out against an atrocious
corruption that spread throughout all Muslim countries.

91
 Another proof, coming from Ibn Hajar as narrated by As Sakhaawiyy, is found in
the hadiyth of 3Aashuwraa’, which is the tenth day of the Islaamic month of Muharram.
The Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) recommended for the Muslims to fast on that day every
year because that was the day when Muwsaa was saved from the Pharaoh, and the day
when the Ark of Prophet Nuwh settled on the mountain (3alayhima-s-Salaam). Ibn Hajar
said that this hadiyth proves that it is permissible to thank Allaah at specific times for an
endowment that He gave or for a calamity that He relieved, and the best of all is the
coming of Prophet Muhammad (3alayhi-s-Salaam), more specifically, his birth. When the
Prophet was asked why he fasts every Monday, he said, “I was born on Monday.”
There is no worship of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) involved in the Mawlid, as
the Wahhaabiyys accuse the Muslims. They may recite the hadiyth narrated by Abuw
Daawuwd:

‫ل ُتطروني كما أطر إ‬

‫ت النصارى عيسىَ ابن مريم‬
“Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians have done to Jesus the son of
Mary,” which does not mean that the Mawlid is forbidden, but that worshipping the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) is forbidden.
When left to stand on his last leg, the Wahhaabiyy may ask, “Why would you
want to do something that the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) did not do?” The answer is
simply, “To get the blessings.” The concept that is so hard to get through their skulls is
that it is not forbidden to do something just because the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) did
not do it, hence the saying of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam):

‫من سلن في السلم سنة حسنة فله أجرها و أجر من عمل بها‬
“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islaam has its reward, and the reward of
whoever works according to it…”
Then how is the Mawlid practiced? It is practiced by reciting the Qur’aan,
reciting the biography of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam), singing words of praise,
feeding the Muslims, and other recommended and rewardable worships. The
Wahhaabiyys would say that it is not permissible to gather all of these matters together on
one day in the name of commemorating the birth of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam). We
emerge triumphant by telling them that they have then discredited their claim of three
aspects of Tawhiyd, which is truly a wicked innovation because it is related to belief. Not

92
a soul from the Salaf stated it. Refusing to acknowledge that their division of Tawhiyd is
an innovation, when asked for an explicit text from the Qur’aan or the hadiyth, they say,
“We have only gathered the various verses about these issues and put them together.”
They are masters of the double standard.
Actually, Ahlu-s-Sunnah’s practice of the Mawlid is like the innovation of the
Muslims who followed 3Iysaa (Jesus, 3alayhi-s-Salaam). Allaah praised them in the
Qur’aan:
{ ‫و جعلنا ف قلوب اليذن ا يتبعوه رأأف اة و رح اة و رهبانيي اة ابتدعوها ما كتبناها عليمه إال ابتغاء‬
‫} رضوان ا فا رثعوها حق برعايذتا‬
<< And in the hearts of those who followed him, We (Allaah) created compassion,
mercy, and rahbaaniyyah which they innovated. We did not obligate it on them; they
only did it seeking the reward of Allaah. Those who came later did not observe it as
it should have been observed>> In this verse, Al-Hadiyd, 27, we are told that these
compassionate and merciful Muslims innovated a practice of leaving the people and the
luxuries of this world, even marriage, to dedicate all of their spare time to worship. They
were not obligated to do this, but it was rewardable and praiseworthy. What further shows
that it was a good innovation is the fact that the people who came afterwards did not
practice the rahbaaniyyah properly, and those are the Christian monks we know of today.
This verse benefits the nation of Muhammad and is a proof for good innovations in
Islaam. If the Wahhaabiyy says that there is no rahbaaniyyah in the nation of
Muhammad, tell him that this statement is not our point; the point is that they did a good
innovation.

93
 WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHAABIYYS?

Learn a bit of the biographies of some of their heads, and further see their
misguidance. While they claim not to follow a mathhab, they follow the explanations of
selected individuals. In essence, they do follow a mathhab; unfortunately it is not a valid
one.

AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH

Their grandfather is Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah Al-Harraaniyy, from some 700 years
ago. He is their master’s master, and reference for 3aqiydah (creed).
It is important to know that Ibn Taymiyah was not a Wahhaabiyy. He had many
beliefs contrary to theirs. He believed that saying, “O, Muhammad,” after the Prophet’s
(3alayhi-s-Salaam) death is good- something that the Wahhaabiyys consider
blasphemous. In his book called The Good Words, he narrated that 3Abdullaah Ibn
3Umar, the great Companion, said, “O, Muhammad,” after the death of the Prophet
(3alayhi-s-Salaam). So according to the Wahhaabiyy creed, Ibn Taymiyah is a mushrik.
Because of this fact, the Wahhaabiyyah have published this book of his with this hadiyth
omitted. In this issue, do not be sidetracked by the Wahhaabiyy saying, “that hadiyth is
weak”. Respond simply by saying, “whether the hadiyth is weak or strong is not the
issue; the issue is that He put it in a book that he called The Good Words, which means
that he considered it good.”
Nor did Ibn Taymiyah discredit the mathhabs. He claimed to follow the mathhab
of Ahmad Ibn Hambal, but to the contrary, he was far from Al-Imaam Ahmad’s path.
Whenever a Wahhaabiyy discredits following a mathhab, mention this fact. Only their
most ignorant followers will deny it. Also, make it clear for the Wahhaabiyy that this is a
single mathhab, since some Wahhaabiyys say you cannot follow one particular mathhab.
Ibn Taymiyah also did not discredit good innovations.
He is misguided because he breeched the consensus in more than 60 cases. He
was not a Wahhaabiyy, but he was a Mushabbih. He has books filled with blasphemy;
some of which he took from others before him and some of which he imagined on his
own. In The Book of the 3Arsh, one of his statements is, “Allaah could be carried on a

94
mosquito if He willed, so how about a great 3Arsh?” It is true that he was a scholar, in
fact a haafidh of hadiyth. Because of his knowledge and outward character, he gained the
title, “Shaykhu-l-Islaam (the shaykh of Islaam)”. However, the scholars who knew of his
situation said that his knowledge exceeded his intelligence; he memorized more than he
could comprehend.
The Wahhaabiyys are very impressed by his misleading title, which he was not the
only one to receive. His title has been given to others, like Al-Imaam Al-Ash3ariyy.
Moreover, other scholars have other titles. Al-Ghazaaliyy is “Hujjatu-l-Islaam (the proof
of Islaam)”, and Abuw Mansuwr Al-Baghdaadiyy was called “Al-Ustaath (the highly
ranked teacher)”. Strangely, the Wahhaabiyys are not impressed with these big scholars.
The Wahhaabiyys believe that Ibn Taymiyah was the mujaddid (renewer) of his time, but
he is not worthy of standing in the shadow of the true mujaddid of his time, Taqiyyu-d-
Diyn As-Subkiyy, who wrote several books refuting Ibn Taymiyah.
Ibn Taymiyah claimed that Hellfire will end- something an ignorant Wahhaabiyy
denies, and an evasive Wahhaabiyy makes excuses for. For those who deny, we tell them
not to deny what they do not know. Those who know that he said it make excuses. Some
may say that Allaah will reward him for his mistake. Some may say he retracted his
statement. Both excuses are wrong. Claiming that Hellfire will end is blasphemy, because
its everlastingness is explicitly repeated throughout the Qur’aan. How would this man,
who memorized the Qur’aan and knew Arabic very well, be rewarded for contradicting
the explicit verses of Allaah’s book? Allaah rewards the mujtahids when they make
ijtihaad in the fiqh judgments, even if they deduce a wrong answer (as mentioned in a
hadiyth), but an unqualified person who breeches the basics of belief that are explicitly
mentioned in the Qur’aan is not rewarded, in fact he loses all of his reward. As for saying
that he retracted the statement, let the Wahhaabiyy produce the retraction, or else refrain
from lying to protect a deviant man. This claim breeches one of the most fundamental
Muslim beliefs, and is merely one case where Ibn Taymiyah strayed.
His fate was that he died in prison according to the consensus of the head judges
of the four schools in his era. To that, the Wahhaabiyys compare his situation to that Al-
Imaams Maalik and Ahmad, who are clear and very far from the straying of Ibn
Taymiyah. They were not beaten or imprisoned by prestigious and just judges of Ahlu-s-

95
Sunnah as Ibn Taymiyah was, nor were they blamed for bad statements by other scholars
of their era. They were tortured by the deviant faction of their time, the Mu3tazilah.
There is no comparison in this issue. The Wahhaabiyys have the nerve to imply that Ibn
Taymiyah and his students were the only guided people of their time, and all of the other
scholars were influenced by the bad innovators and the Suwfiyyah (they believe that the
practice of tasawwuf is categorically invalid, which is also not true). They dare claim that
he was imprisoned out of jealousy of his knowledge.
His books were burned, except what the scholars kept for records, he was warned
against from the tops of the minarets, and people were forbidden to teach from his route.
He became outdated until Muhammad Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab revived and added to his
teachings.

MUHAMMAD IBN 3ABDU-L-WAHHAAB

Muhammad Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab is their father, after whom they were named.
He was a deviant man from just over 200 years ago, of the land of Najd, the land that the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) said,

ِ‫بها تـطلـع قـرنِ الشـيطان‬

“The horn of the devil will emerge from Najd.” His father, 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab, and his
brother, Shaykh Sulaymaan, and the other scholars of his time shunned him. Unlike his
master, he was not a scholar. His father was disappointed in him because he did not study
as his ancestors had. One of the easiest angles to expose his deviance may lie in the fact
that he was not authenticated by any scholar of his time. He was not a scholar of
3aqiydah (creed), nor fiqh (detailed rules), nor lughah (Arabic language), nor tafsiyr
(Qur’aanic interpretation), nor hadiyth, nor history, etc. He was so ostracized, that he
deemed everyone who did not follow him a blasphemer. He claimed to be the mujaddid
of his time, calling Muslims back to their religion. He claimed that the Muslims all over
the Earth worshipped graves, Prophets and awliyaa’ (Muslims of the highest levels of
piety), and this belief is still held by his followers until today. It was reported that he was
a funded British agent. He was the first person to misinterpret the hadiyth claiming that
all innovations are bad, which has lead to intense tribulations in our times. He instigated
his followers to rebel against the khaliyfah, which is a major sin even if the khaliyfah is

96
an unjust Muslim. As a result, he shed the blood of many Muslims. He has a book called
The Book of Tawhiyd, in which he gives Allaah the descriptions of a man, as well as
other misleading beliefs. He died after more than 100 years and left the legacy of the
worst faction alive today.

AL-ALBAANIYY
Their uncle is Naasiru-d-Diyn Al-Albaaniyy, a deviant contemporary who died.
The Wahhaabiyys elevated him to the status of a muhaddith (hadiyth scholar). He worked
in a library, and indulged in reading the six books of hadiyth. He misunderstood a lot, and
imagined himself to be a scholar. We discredit him by telling the Wahhaabiyys that he had
no shaykh to teach him the science of hadiyth, and we challenge any Wahhaabiyy to bring
us his chain of teachers if they think this is a lie. Not to mention that the true scholars had
many, many, many shaykhs, so even upon the presentation of one chain of teachers
(which they have yet to produce) we would not be impressed. Despite this, they take him
as the brightest hadiyth scholar of our day, and some go as far as to label him as the
mujaddid of our time. He has endeavored diligently in perverting the hadiyth and its
science, but the true scholars have not been hesitant in refuting and warning against him.
The only people who do not know him as a fraud are his followers and whoever has been
poisoned by them.

OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A SUBTITLE

The Wahhaabiyys have other heads, such as the recently deceased 3Abdu-llaah
Ibn Baaz. He has been falsely called “the Grand Muftiy of Makkah”. He has also worked
hard in solidifying the call of the Wahhaabiyys. Now that he and Al-Albaaniyy are dead,
we find the Wahhaabiyys breaking into small groups, bickering among themselves.
Hopefully, their end will come soon. Among their heads is a Caribbean man named Bilal
Philips. He believes that Allaah must be above the creations since it is not befitting to say
He is below them. Ibn Baaz and Philips are among the Wahhaabiyys who documented the
so-called three aspects of Tawhiyd. In America there is a man named Dawud Adeeb, who
has been refuted by our brothers on more than one occasion. In one lecture called, “The
Existence of Allaah”, he said that he did not know whether dividing Tawhiyd into three

97
categories was an innovation or not, yet he proceeded to teach the people about it
anyway. Be warned about these men, and others, like 3Uthaymiyn, who said that we do
not know exactly how Allaah sits, and that Allaah has a glorious face and two real eyes.
He did not try to camouflage his blasphemy. They have many stooges and plenty of
money to back them. It is important that the information in this book is learned properly,
understood, and taught to as many people as possible, so to help in defending the religion
of Muhammad (3alayhi-s-Salaam). There are only a few standing between the
Wahhaabiyys and the people.

98
 EPILOGUE

Let us end with some statements given about the Wahhaabiyys by the scholars in
a book called Fitnatu-l-Wahhaabiyyah (the tribulation of the Wahhaabiyys), by the real
Muftiy of Makkah, Shaykh Ahmad Zayniyy Dahlaan. He said, “What Ibn 3Abdu-l-
Wahhaab’s father, brother, and shaykhs speculated about him came true by the will of
Allaah, the exalted. Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab innovated deviant and misleading ways and
beliefs and managed to allure some ignorant people to follow him.” He also said, “In an
effort to give credibility to his innovations, Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab embellished his
sayings with quotes he selected from Islaamic sources, that is, quotes used for proofs in
many issues, but not the issues which Ibn 3Abdu-l-Wahhaab was attempting to support.”
He also said:
“Initially, the Wahhaabiyys sent a group to Makkah and Al-Madiynah , thinking
that through lies and fabrications, they would be able to spoil the belief of the
scholars of those two holy cities. When they arrived and declared their beliefs, the
scholars of Makkah and Al-Madiynah refuted them and established the Islaamic
evidences against them- which they could not refute. The scholars were certain
about the Wahhaabiyys ignorance and misguidance, and found them absurd and
thoughtless. After observing their beliefs and finding them full of many types of
blasphemy, the Wahhaabiyys fled like frightened zebras fleeing from a lion.
Hence, after establishing the proofs, the scholars wrote an attestation against the
Wahhaabiyys to the head judge of Makkah, confirming them as blasphemers
because of their beliefs.”

Perhaps this is more than sufficient. If we can refute the Wahhaabiyy

understanding of the aforementioned texts, then the others that they use can also be
explained. By composing this booklet, we comply with the verse:
{ ‫} كنت خي أأمة أأخــرجتح للناس ت أأمرون بلعروف و تثنون عن النكر و ت أأمنون بـالا‬
<<You are the best nation ever sent out to the people. You bid the good, forbid the
evil, and believe in Allaah>>. We thank Allaah for the blessings that He gave without
being obligated to give anything. We thank Him for enabling us to know who these

99
wicked people are and granting us the ability to refute them. We ask Him to enable us to
see the truth as truth so that we may abide by it, and to see the evil as evil so that we may
avoid it. We ask Him to grant us the correct belief and a good understanding of it. We ask
Him to let us die with belief, and escape His torture. We ask Allaah to grant us the lawful
sustenance. May Allaah make this booklet beneficial in life and after death, forgive those
who worked it spreading it, make it a shield and a weapon for the Muslims, and make it
weigh heavy in the scale on the Day of Judgment. O, Allaah, we ask you by the merit and
honor of Your beloved Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam) to answer this humble supplication,

And Allaah knows best.

100
 TRANSLITERATION AND GLOSSARY
We do not claim that our transliteration system is the best. If simplicity is a
standard of being better, then there are better transliteration systems. Our system is an
attempt to bring harmony to the sounds of the Arabic letters and their English
counterparts, the rules of reading Arabic, and the rules of English grammar.
For example, the Arabic letter ‫ ذ‬is represented by “th”, because these English
letters produce a sound more comparable to ‫ ذ‬than “dh”, which has no actual sound, or
“z”, as commonly found in many books, for example: “the”; “that”.
The strikethrough instead of an underline eliminates ambiguity between this
symbol and symbols like “t” for (‫ )ط‬and “h” for ( ‫)ح‬, if they happen to fall consecutively
in one word; and likewise other double-lettered symbols with a strikethrough. As for
transliterating the (‫)ث‬, we were compelled to use a double strikethrough, realizing that
readers will probably find “th” strange. Some Arabic letters are transliterated with
underlined English letters. What is mentioned so far eradicates inconsistency between the
symbols.
Whenever a book title is mentioned, it is underlined, as per the rules of American
English documentation. To avoid confusion between these two uses of the underline, any
underlined transliterated letter will alternatively have a strikethrough when appearing in a
book title. Unfortunately, the problem of ambiguity returns when underlining book titles.
The limited options of the word processing program makes escaping this issue very
difficult, and any ambiguity therein would only be cleared by having knowledge of
Arabic or referring to someone who does.
In the case of the Arabic letter 3ayn (‫)ع‬, we transliterated it with the numeral “3”,
a popular transliteration symbol used on the internet for its resemblance to its antecedent.
Of course, a single fathah is transliterated with an “a”, a dammah with a “u”, and
a kasrah with an “i”, and not an “e” for fear of someone pronouncing the “e” with its
short sound.
The extension of the Alif (‫ )ا‬is represented by “aa” with the thought that a doubled
“a” is a clearer indication of extending the sound than an underlined, overlined, or dotted
“a”. The extension of the waaw (‫ )و‬is represented by “uw” to better match the
combination of a dammah (ُ) and a waaw than “oo”, and with the hope that it is a clearer
indication for extending the sound than an underlined, overlined, or dotted “u”. The
extension of the yaa’ (‫ )ي‬is represented by “iy” to better match the combination of a
kasrah (‫ )إ‬and a yaa’ than “ee”, and with the hope that it is a clearer indication for
extending the sound than an underlined or overlined “i”. This was also done because it
makes typing faster.
The definite article, explained in the glossary, is always separated by a dash from
the word it modifies, and is spelled per its pronunciation, not its original Arabic spelling (
‫)ال‬, for example: al-hadiyth, ad-dahr, an-naar, etc. Words that have been run together by
the hamzatu-l-wasl are also separated by a dash, for example: 3Abdu-llaah. Also, the first
letter of all transliterated Arabic words is capitalized if that word would be considered a
proper noun in English, even if a dash, apostrophe, or a “3” precede that letter, for
example: 3Abdu-llaah. If in the Arabic language that proper noun begins with “al” (‫)ال‬,
then both the first letter, as well as the letter after the dash will be capitalized, for

101
example: “Al-Bukhaariyy”, “At-Tirmithiyy”. This is done both to avoid beginning a name
with a lower cased letter, and to observe the meaning of the name. We have justified this
by the existence of such names in English as: MacGyver, McDonald, Ny’Kisha, and the
like.
Lastly, we draw attention to the fact that due to lack of the average English
speaking readers’ acquaintance with the Arabic language, we have intentionally broken
some of the rules of Arabic grammar when transliterating to reduce confusion. So where
it would have been correct to say, “Abaa 3Abdi-l-laah” for example, we instead said,
“Abuw 3Abdu-l-laah, which actually in Arabic a horrific mistake.
The transliteration system is as follows:

‫ا‬ aa ‫ز‬ z ‫ق‬ q

‫ب‬ b ‫س‬ s ‫ك‬ k
‫ت‬ t ‫ش‬ sh ‫ل‬ l
‫ث‬ th ‫ص‬ s ‫م‬ m
‫ج‬ j ‫ض‬ d ‫ن‬ n
‫ح‬ h ‫ط‬ t ‫ه‬ h
‫خ‬ kh ‫ظ‬ dh ‫و‬ w
‫د‬ d ‫ع‬ 3 ‫ي‬ y
‫ذ‬ th ‫غ‬ gh ‫ء‬ ‘
‫ر‬ r ‫ف‬ f

102
Allaah is the proper name of the Creator.
Accountable refers to being sane,
pubescent, and having heard the basic message
of Islaam, which is the meaning of the
shahaadah. Whoever dies as an accountable non-
Muslim will be tortured everlastingly in Hell on
the Day of Resurrection.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah is the group which follows
the method of the Companions of the Prophet
(3alayhi-s-Salaam).
Al- Whether capitalized or not, it represents the
definite article alif laam (‫)ال‬, “the”. Because of
the idghaam (merging) of the laam with 14
specific letters (the shams letters), the definite
article will also be written throughout the text
with the following letters “At-”, “Ath-”, “Ad-”,
“Ath-”, “Ar-”, “Az-”, “As-”, “Ash-”,
“As-”, “Ad-”, “At-”, “Adh-”, and “An-”.
3Aqiydah “creed; belief; conviction” It is the
science of belief.
3Aql “mind; intellect” It is the faculty given to
some creatures which enables them to
distinguish between what is valid and what is
invalid.
3Arsh “throne” It is the ceiling of Paradise.
Blasphemy is the opposite of belief (kufr).
Companion refers to those who met the
Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam), believed in him, and
died as Muslims.
Fiqh is the science of the detailed practical
rules of the religion.
Hadiyth refers to the narrated sayings,
doings, and approvals of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-
Salaam). It is often referred to as the Sunnah.
Haafidh refers to the top scholars of hadiyth
who are qualified to grade the levels of the
narrations. These scholars are higher than
muhaddiths. Someone who memorized the
Qur’aan is also called a haafidh, but this does not
make him a scholar.
Ijmaa3 “consensus” It is the unanimous
agreement among the mujtahids in any era about
the judgment of a particular case. Once
established, no one has the right to later disagree.
Ijtihaad is the effort put by the mujtahids to
deduce judgments not explicitly mentioned in the
Qur’aan or hadiyth.
Jahannam is a name of Hell
103
Khuff refers to specific foot gear that one is
allowed to wipe instead of washing the feet in
wuduw’.
Jaariyah can refer to a free, enslaved, child or
pubescent female.
Mathhab “school of practical rules” refers to
the work of scholars following a particular
mujtahid. Sometimes the word is used for other
meanings.
Muhkam is a verse or hadiyth that has only
one meaning in the Arabic language.
Mujaddid “renewer” refers to a great scholar
who would appear every century to renew the
religion for the Muslims.
Mujtahid refers to the top scholars who
deduce judgments in case the ruling is not
explicitly mentioned in the Qur’aan or Hadiyth.
Mushabbihah is the plural of Mushabbih,
someone who likens Allaah to the creations.
Mutashaabih is a verse or hadiyth that can
have more than one meaning. Even an Arab may
not reach its true meaning.
Mushrik is someone who associates partners
with Allaah.
Qiraa’ah “recitation” It could refer to any of
the proper ways of reciting the Qur’aan.
Sahiyh “valid; authentic” It often refers to a
narration which fulfills the highest conditions of
authenticity.
Salaf “predecessors” It refers to the first three
centuries of Muslims. Some scholars said it only
refers to the Companions, their students, and
their students- and not the first three centuries
entirely. The first saying is the strong one.
“Salafiyy” is an adjective.
Shirk is associating partners with Allaah.
Suwfiyy is a person who practices tasawwuf.
The true application of tasawwuf is in leaving
the mundane and worldly desires. It is not by
neglecting the obligatory prayers for optional
deeds, spinning in circles, dancing, touching
women, or belittling the status and pleasures of
Paradise.
Sunnah has many meanings. Linguistically, it
means, “a way”. Religiously, it could refer to the
hadiyth of the Prophet (3alayhi-s-Salaam); to the
optional, recommended, and rewardable matters;
and to the Prophet’s (3alayhi-s-Salaam) practice
of the religion in general, including the
obligations.
Tafsiyr is the science of interpreting the
Qur’aan. It may refer to the actual interpretation.
Tajsiym is believing that Allaah has a body.
Tawhiyd is the Oneness of Allaah;
monotheism. This word may also be
synonymous with 3aqiydah; the science of the
104
correct belief in Allaah and His Messenger
(3alayhi-s-Salaam).
Ta’wiyl is interpreting a text to have a
meaning different from its apparent meaning.
We when referring to Allaah denotes majesty,
not plurality.