Wrongful wahabi roots.

২৩ শে আগস্ট, ২০১৬ রাত ১০:১৮

To me, I consider Wahabism as a disease just like cancer. If in the stage, it's cureble. If it's in the second stage, it's still cureable to some extent. But if it reaches to the final stage, then we can only wait for a miracle to happen.
Now let's talk about cause lately I have been watching quite a few videos of Zakir Naik. So the Wahabi sect classified doctrines into two categories. The first one includes all those doctrines based on a text in the Quran and the Rasul's (sallallualihI wassallam) Tradition, also know as His Sunnahs. They claim that such doctrines can be derived from these two sources directly and without resorting to the logical deductions of religious scholars regarding their meaning - even if these sources happen to be the Rasul's (sallallhualihi wassallam) Companions, as know as to be his beloved Sahabas, early Muslims or other scholars.

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

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

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

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

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

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

However, the Wahabi creed considers making a journey to a shrine for the purpose of visiting it a form of idolatry which deserve the extreme punishment of loss of life and possessions. In effect, they condemned Imam Ahmed, his contemporaries and early Muslims who practiced this ritual and condoned it as idolators who must be put to death and their possessions confiscated. Moreover, this Wahabi decree must also extend to the Prophet's Companions who approved or performed this ritual. Their claim to be followers of Imam Ahmed is thus unfounded.
Let me keep this short, Wahabism is nothing but an ideology filled up by extremist views, arrogancy with a few touch of fundamentalism.

৪ টি +১/-০