Debate With The So Called Salafiyyah

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS PRESENTS:
‫ﻜ ْﻴﻔِﻴﺔ‬
َ ‫اﻟ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮة اﻟﻤﺴﻤﱠﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻠﻔﻴﺔ‬
HOW TO DEBATE
WITH
THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYAH
a handbook for thoroughly refuting Wahhabiyys in the topics
of the attributes, madhhabs, innovations and tawassul
Al-KAYFIYYAH
HOW TO DEBATE WITH THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYAH
5th edition
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 2

Al-KAYFIYYAH
CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED .. 7

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE SO-CALLED SALAFIYYS
.................................................................................................................................... 8
THE PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE OBLIGATION OF FOLLOWING THEM ............... 9
THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE NATION AT LARGE.................................11
THE MAHHABS OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH ...........................................................................................13
NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE WAHHABIYYS ............................................17
THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAH ....................................................................... 20
THE WAHHABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAH ...................................... 22
THE WAHHABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR INCORRECT BELIEF .......... 24
HOW THE WAHHABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS .......................................................................26
THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJAZ (FIGURATIVE SPEECH) .................................................................28
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIL ..................................................................31
THE WAHHABIYYS REJECT LOGIC ..................................................................................................35
REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY CONFIRMED ..............................................36
THE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THE SCHOLARS MEANT WHEN THEY DISPRAISED
(RATIONAL) ARGUMENTATION (KALAM) ..................................................................................38
THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHABIYYS TRULY BELIEVE IN BODILY ATTRIBUTES
FOR ALLAH (TAJSIM) ........................................................................................................................41
THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE TEXTS ................................44
ISLAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHABIYY CREED ............................... 47
PROOF FROM THE QUR’AN THAT REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED ..................................48
THE PRIORITY OF THE DECISIVE VERSES OVER THE AMBIGUOUS .....................................50
PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED .................................55
SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHABIYY CREED .......................................................58
THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS ............................................................................................58
A DOCUMENTATION OF THE SALAF’S BELIEF ..........................................................................59
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE ......................................................... 62
EXPLAINING THE MEANING OF KUFR (BLASPHEMY) AND SOME OF ITS DETAILS .........62
JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAFIR (TAKFIR) .................................................................................65
HAVING THE CORRECT INTENTION .............................................................................................67
REFRAIN FROM PURPOSELY LEADING A PERSON TO SAY KUFR (BLASPHEMY) .............67
THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE....................................................................................69
THE IMPORTANCE OF FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF BELIEF..................................................70

Al-KAYFIYYAH
WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF? ............................................................................. 73
CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR MISUNDERSTANDING

OF THE HONORABLE TEXTS ................................................................. 74
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 75
TRANSLATING THE QUR’AN ...........................................................................................................75
THE WAHHABIYYS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE IGNORANT ....................................................77
THE WAHHABIYYS SHOW OUTWARD ADHERENCE TO THE SUNNAH ..................................78
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF THE FEMALE SLAVE ............................ 81
THE STORY BEHIND THE HADITH ................................................................................................81
THE WAHHABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADITH .......................................................82
THE ARABIC TERMS HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEANING ........................................................82
DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADITH ......................................................................................84
HAD THE WAHHABIYY UNDERSTANDING BEEN CORRECT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO
SAY “IN THE SKY” TO BE CONSIDERED A MUSLIM .................................................................85
THE FACT THAT THE HADITH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM ..86
THE HADITH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN THE ISSUE OF BELIEF ..........88
A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION ....................................................................................................89
THE WAHHABIYYS TA’WIL FOR THE HADITH ..............................................................................91
SIMILAR TEXTS .................................................................................................................................91
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(‫ﻟﻌـﺮش اﺳﺘﻮى‬
ِ ‫<< })اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ ا‬AR-
RAHMANU ÂLA-L-ÂRSHI-STAWA>> .......................................................... 94

THE TAFSIR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE WAHHABIYYS WHO
MISINTERPRET IT ..............................................................................................................................94
SIMILAR TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS AND HOW TO REFUTE THEIR CLAIMS .............101
THE SAYING OF IMAM MALIK ......................................................................................................104
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF AN-NUZUL ......................................... 106
THE EXPLANATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-ÂSQALANIYY..........................................................106
THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO IRRATIONAL MATTERS ...................110
SIMILAR TEXTS ...............................................................................................................................110
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(‫ }) ٕاﻟﻴﯿﻪ ﻳﯾﺼﻌﺪ اﻟﳫﻢ اﻟﻄﻴﯿﺐ‬........................ 112
<<ILAYHI YASÂDU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>> .............................................. 112
THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE VERSE ..................................................................................112
THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING ....................................................................113

Al-KAYFIYYAH
A SIMILAR TEXT..............................................................................................................................114
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN..................................................... 115
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE .....................................................116
VERSES MENTIONING THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH ..................................................................116
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND ................................................... 118
DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD ............................................................................................118
THE SAYING OF ABU HANIFAH ....................................................................................................118
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(‫ << })ﺑﻴﯿﺪي‬BIYADAYY>> ................................119
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE ................................................... 122

CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 123
CORNERING THE WAHHABIYY WITH THE ISSUE OF “CLOSENESS (QURB)” ......................125
ALLAH DOES NOT CAST A SHADOW ...........................................................................................127
ALLAH DOES NOT HAVE A FOOT .................................................................................................129
THREE EASY WAYS TO SMASH A WAHHABIYY ........................................................................130
APPENDIX ............................................................................................... 133

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAH ................................................ 134
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH: {(‫<< })إﳕﺎ ٔﻣﺮﻩ إذا ٔراد ﺷ ﺎ ٔن ﻳﯾﻘﻮل ﻦ ﻓ ﻜﻮن‬Surely if He willed
for something, He says to it, “Be”, and it shall be>> ..........................................................................135
THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AN”.............................................................................137
THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS .................................................................. 139
THE MEANING OF BIDÂH LINGUISTICALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY ......................................139
THE CORRECT MEANING OF: ‫ ﺿﻼﻟﺔ‬ ‫ ﺑﺪﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﻛﻞ‬ ‫“ ﻭو‬WA KULLU BIDÂTIN DALALAH” .............139
PROOF FROM THE HADITH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS ...................................................140
OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS IN THIS ISSUE, AND HOW TO REBUTTLE THEIR
CLAIMS ..............................................................................................................................................141
STATEMENTS OF SCHOLARS ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS ................................................143
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ÛMAR IBNU-L-KHATTAB ............................................145
EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS .........................................................................................146
THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬....148
WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHABIYYS? ............................................ 152
AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH .............................................................................................................152
MUHAMMAD IBN ÂBDU-L-WAHHAB ........................................................................................158
AL-ALBANIYY..................................................................................................................................159
OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A SUBTITLE ........................................160

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORSHIP AND TAWASSUL .........161

THE CORRECT MEANING OF WORSHIP .....................................................................................161
TAWASSUL .......................................................................................................................................165
CALLING AND SEEKING HELP (ISTIGHATHAH) IS NOT WORSHIP ......................................171
THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE ABSENT OR DEAD ....................................................176
HANGING WRITTEN WORDS AROUND ONE’S NECK FOR PROTECTION (AL-HIRZ) ........178
RECITING AT THE GRAVES ..........................................................................................................181
EPILOGUE ..............................................................................................................185
GLOSSARY ............................................................................................... 187
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 6
Al-KAYFIYYAH
CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 7
Al-KAYFIYYAH
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE

SO-CALLED SALAFIYYS
I
f Allah willed, this booklet will shed light on some of the deviant beliefs of the so-
called Salafiyys, those whom the Muslims call the Wahhabiyys. 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 Islamic knowledge on one’s own is not
encouraged by the Religion. This booklet is equipped with a glossary and footnotes for
unfamiliar terms, but one should not attempt to teach Islam to himself by simply reading
books and depending on his own understanding. The Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬said:
ِ ‫ِﱠ‬
َ ‫ْﻢ ﺑِﺎﻟﺘـ‬
‫ﱠﻌﻠﱡ ِﻢ‬ ُ ‫َوإﳕَﺎ اﻟﻌﻠ‬
“The knowledge is only by learning.1” This means taking the knowledge from the
inheritors of the Prophets: the scholars; from the mouths, chest to chest. Since this is so,
every accountable person is obligated to go to a knowledgeable teacher from Ahlu-s-
Sunnah2, and if there is no teacher in his area, he must travel to find one, as said by the
renowned Shafiîyy scholar Ahmad Ibn Rislan, in his famous millennial3 poem, Az-
Zubad:
‫ﻤﻣن ﻟم ﻴﻳﯿﯾﺠﺟد ﻤﻣﻌﻠﻤﻣﺎ ﻓﻠﻴﻳﯿﯾرﺤﺣﻝل‬ ‫ﻓﻠﻴﻳﯿﯾﺴﺳﺄﻝل‬

ِ ‫ﻤﻣن ﻟم ﻴﻳﯿﯾﻛن ﻴﻳﯿﯾﻌﻠم ذا‬
“Whoever does not know, then let him ask, and whoever does not find a teacher, then let
him travel.”
May Allah guide us to knowledgeable teachers who can fill us with knowledge.
1
Al-Bukhariyy
2
the Sunni Muslims
3
1000 lined
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 8
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE

OBLIGATION OF FOLLOWING THEM
Know that in a very well-known hadith with several narrations, the Messenger of Allāh
‫ ﷺ‬warned about 72 sects that would deviate from the correct path of the Muslims. He
said:
ِ ‫ ُﻛﻠﱡﻬﺎ ِﰲ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ ِر إِﻻﱠ و‬،٬ً‫ﲔ وﺳﺒ ِﻌﲔ ﻓِﺮﻗَﺔ‬ ِ ِِ

ً‫اﺣ َﺪة‬ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ ِ ْ ‫َوإِ ﱠن َﻫﺬﻩ اﻷُﱠﻣﺔَ َﺳﺘَـ ْﻔ َِﱰ ُق َﻋﻠَﻰ ﺛ ْﻨﺘَـ‬
“Surely, this nation will divide into 73 factions. All of them will be in Hell except
one.1” That path is the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l- Jamaâh; “the People of the Sunnah
and the Majority”. They are called Ahlu-s-Sunnah for short. They are referred to in a
hadith:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﻠﺰﻡم‬ ‫ ﺑﺤﺒﻮﺣﺔ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺭرﺍاﺩد‬ ‫ﻓﻤﻦ‬
“Whoever wishes for the prosperity of Paradise then let him stick to the Jamaâh,”2.
The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬taught his Companions that 72 out of 73 different sects would be in
Hellfire. Some will dwell in Hell forever because of a blasphemous conviction. Some
will dwell therein for a limited time known to Allah, due to a deviant creed that did not
reach blasphemy, for every creed that does not comply with the creed of the Prophet and
his Companions is a major sin if it does not reach the level of blasphemy3. Only one
group out of the 73 groups would deserve Paradise without first being tortured in Hell.
His Companions asked him about that single group, and he ‫ ﷺ‬told them:
‫ﺍاﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ‬
1
Narrated by Abuw Dawuwd and others
2
Narrated by At-Tirmithiyy
3
An example of a deviant creed that does not reach the level of blasphemy is the creed of those who say
that after the death of the Prophet, Abuw Bakr, ûmar and ûthman all took the rulership before âliyy
unjustly. This is deviant because it contradicts the agreement of the Companions.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
“The Jamaâh.” 1
Ahlu-s-Sunnah, the People of the Prophet’s Method, is the group with the largest
following. In one narration, the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said,
‫ ﺍاﻷﻋﻈﻢ‬ ‫ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻮﺍاﺩد‬ ‫ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﯿﻜﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﺧﺘﻼﻓﺎ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺃأﻳﯾﺘﻢ‬ ‫ﻓﺈﺫذﺍا‬
"If you see (unacceptable) differences among you, then adhere to As-Sawadu-l-
Aˆdham (the vast majority)”2. These different narrations of hadith comply with each
other. There is no contradiction between that single, guided group being the “Jamaâh”
and being “As-Sawadu-l-Aˆdham”. “Jamaâh” means “group”, and must be explained to
comply with the other hadiths, so in this context it means the majority.
In another narration, the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬named that group:
‫ ﺃأﺻﺤﺎﺑﻲ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬
“(The group which is upon) what my Companions and I are upon.”3 There is still no
conflict in the different descriptions of Ahlu-s-Sunnah, for 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 four
pious khalifahs after the Prophet, nor did they deny the torture of the grave, or believe
that major sins take a person out of Islam. They did not deny that Allah can be seen,
although He is seen without having a shape, form or color. They did not deny destiny, or
deny that there will be believers who will be tortured in Hell, or that people have will
voluntary acts and choice; all of which were beliefs held by different deviant groups
throughout history. Never has the majority disagreed about the basics of the correct
belief, and we challenge anyone to bring evidence of such a disagreement. Until today,
1
Narrated by Abuw Dawuwd
2
Narrated by Ibn Majah
3
Narrated by Al-Hakim and At-Tabaraniyy
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
75% to 80% of the nation has the same belief, and from that, we know that the so-called
Salafiyys are deviant people, since they consider most of the Muslims throughout the
world as mushriks and bad innovators, because the Muslims believe in good innovations,
and tawassul- which the Wahhabiyyah deem shirk. The clarification of tawassul and
innovations will come later, God willing.
THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE

NATION AT LARGE
A Wahhabiyy 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 Wahhabiyy, it is imperative to discredit this notion;
since he does not and cannot 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, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, say that the belief; the creed (âqidah) of the majority
of the nation will always be correct. They would not agree upon a misguided creed.
However, the Prophet foretold that his nation will become weak and sinful. There are
several narrations about this, among them:
‫ ﺷﻬﮭﻴﯿﺪ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﻓﺴﺎﺩد‬ ‫ ﻋﻨﺪ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﻴﯿَﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a
martyr.”1 This corruption in the nation does not mean that the majority will believe in a
deviant creed. Similar is the hadith:
‫ ﺗﻨﻜﺮﻭوﻧﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﻮﺭر‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺑﻼء‬ ‫ ءﺍاﺧﺮﻫﮬﮪھﺎ‬ ‫ ﺳﻴﯿﺼﻴﯿﺐ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺃأﻭوﻟﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻋﺎﻓﻴﯿﺘﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺟﻌﻠﺖ‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﺬﻩه‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺘﻜﻢ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻥن‬ ِ‫ﻭو‬
“Allah’s protection (the âfiyah) 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”1.
1
Narrated by At-Tabaraniyy
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
A Wahhabiyy may also produce the verse:
{( ‫}) َوﻗَ ِﻠﻴﯿ ٌﻞ ِﻣ ْﻦ ِﻋ َﺒﺎ ِد َي اﻟﺸ ُﻜ ُﻮر‬
<<Only few of My slaves (the slaves of Allah) are very thankful>>2.
We tell them that this is in reference to piety, in fact the Awliya’ (Muslims saints); the
waliyy is the shakur, the one who is exceedingly thankful. Few slaves of Allah are shakir
(thankful; those who refrain from using their endowments sinfully, which is
ungratefulness to Allah, and even fewer are shakur (awliya’). There are other narrations
about this issue, so know that they may produce several references. The hadiths already
mentioned are enough to prove them wrong, along with the fact that they believe
differently than the trustworthy, powerful Angel Jibril who said to the Prophet:
‫ﻚ‬
َ ُ‫ت أُ ﱠﻣﺘ‬
ْ ‫اﳋَ ْﻤ َﺮ ﻟَﻐَ َﻮ‬
ْ ‫ت‬َ ‫َﺧ ْﺬ‬
َ ‫َوﻟ َْﻮ أ‬
“Had you taken the wine, O Muhammad, your nation would have gone astray.” Since the
Prophet did not choose the wine, then his nation will not go astray.
The Wahhabiyys 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 “jamaâh”. To fool others, and to consider the millions
upon millions upon millions of Muslims as misguided, they say, “The Jamaâh can be
one person.” They may produce what the Prophet said about Zayd Ibn Âmr Ibn Nufayl:
ُ‫ﻳَﺄِْﰐ أُﱠﻣﺔً َو ْﺣ َﺪﻩ‬
“He will come on Judgment Day as a nation of his own.” However, this man died
before the Prophet received revelation and the Prophet said this about him because he
reached the correct creed in Allah without the message of a Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. This does not
1
Narrated by Muslim
2
As-Saba’, 13
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
prove that the general nation will go astray. We seek the protection of Allah from such
dishonesty and unsound inference.
THE MAHHABS 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 ‫ ﷺ‬and never deviated from it. Ahlu-s-Sunnah
follows the four famous madhhabs in obedience to Allah and His Messenger‫ ﷺ‬without
disputing the validity of any of them, despite the differences among them. It is important
to know that in the past, there were other valid schools, like the schools of Al-Awzaîyy,
Al-Layth, the two Sufyans as well as others, but these four are the remaining schools. The
followers of these schools took great care to document their schools and pass them down
to the following generations.
The largest of those four schools is the Hanafiyy School, the followers of the great Imam
Abu Hanifah. Imam Malik was a contemporary of his, and the greatest scholar in the city
of Al-Madinah at his time. His school, the Malikiyy school, is the most widely spread in
Africa, with the exception of the eastern African countries. Imam Ash-Shafiîyy was the
greatest student of Malik, and his school, the Shafiîyy School, is the most common in the
areas of Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Jordan, as well as Indonesia and Malaysia, but
many Syrians are Hanafiyy. As for the Hambaliyy school, the followers of Imam Ahmad
Ibn Hambal, it is the smallest of the four, because many of the people who likened Allah
to the creations attributed themselves to that school and have defamed it- repelling people
from adhering to it. In fact, in some of the works of the scholars, they referred to the
Mushabbihah (the Likeners; the people who liken Allah to the creation) as “the Hanabilah
(the Hambaliyys).” This is only due to those people defaming the Hambaliyy school, and
it is exactly like the people referring to the Wahhabiyys as “the Salafiyys”.
Here, we will take an opportunity to substantiate the validity of the schools, because this
is one of the deviances of the Wahhabiyys. They say that following the schools is an
innovation. Some of them, out of their ignorance, say, “Did the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬follow a

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
school?” The answer to that silly question is, “No, he did not follow a school. The
schools are based on following him.” This means that the schools use the hadiths of the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬as evidence. Therefore, Ahlu-s-Sunnah believes that if someone follows any
one of those madhhabs, he would be guided. By that, they respect the acceptable
differences within the boundaries of the Islamic shariâh (law), as validated by the
Prophet himself, and just as the Companions respected the different judgments given by
other mujtahid Companions.
Clear evidence from the incidents that took place between the Companions at the time of
the Prophet is what was narrated by Al-Bukhariyy from the route of Ibn Ûmar:
‫ ﻗﺎل اﻟﻨﱯ ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و ﺳﲅ ﻟﻨﺎ ﳌﺎ رﺟﻊ ﻣﻦ ا ٔﺣﺰاب ) ﻻ ﻳﯾﺼﻠﲔ ٔ ﺪ اﻟﻌﴫ إﻻ ﰲ ﺑﲏ ﻗﺮﻳﯾﻈﺔ‬: ‫ﻋﻦ اﻦ ﲻﺮ ﻗﺎل‬
‫( ﻓ ٔدرك ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ اﻟﻌﴫ ﰲ اﻟﻄﺮﻳﯾﻖ ﻓﻘﺎل ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﻻ ﻧﺼﲇ ﺣﱴ ﻧ ٔ ﳱﺎ وﻗﺎل ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﺑﻞ ﻧﺼﲇ ﱂ ﺮد ﻣ ﺎ ذ ﻓﺬ ﺮ ﻠﻨﱯ‬
‫ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و ﺳﲅ ﻓﲅ ﻳﯾﻌﻨﻒ وا ﺪا ﻣﳯﻢ‬
“Ibn Ûmar said, “When he returned from the battle against the united parties1 the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said to us, “No one prays Al-Âsr until reaching Bani Quraydhah2.” Some
of them were in route when the Asr prayer came in. Some said, “We do not pray until we
get there.” Some of them said, “No, we shall pray, that is not what he wanted from us.”
That was (later) mentioned to the Prophet and he did not scold anyone of them.” The
evidence contained in this hadith is that some mujtahid companions understood the
apparent expression of the Prophet, and thus took it to be permission to pray Âsr outside
of its time if it meant praying it only at their destination. Others understood that the
Prophet was telling them to rush to their destination so to pray the prayer in its time there,
but not to pray the Prayer outside of its time.
Had their difference been unacceptable, the Prophet would have scolded those who
disobeyed him, because the belief of the Muslims is that the Prophet does not remain
silent in the face of sins. This is exactly the difference between the schools. Some
1
Al-Ahzab
2
They were a tribe of Jews who had breached their treaty with the Prophet.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
understood a hadith this way, while others that way, some referred to a hadith while
others did not confirm its authenticity, etc., but most importantly, all of those mujtahids
were qualified. Thus, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, unlike the Wahhabiyys, follow the Companions in
what they did in reference to imitation (taqlid) of scholars and following schools. As a
result, they did not tamper with the rules of the Religion. More will be mentioned about
the validity of following the schools in the section about the Wahhabiyy grandfather,
Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah.
All of Ahlu-s-Sunnah have the same basic belief. They belong to one of two madhhabs
(schools) of âqidah (creed; belief), even if some do so without realization. Knowing
about this is important. In brief, the two madhhabs of âqidah do not have different
creeds. They carry the same basic belief. The difference between them is in such matters
as definitions and 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 âqidah, the Ashâriyy school or the Maturidiyy school, he follows the
belief of the Prophet of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬and his Companions, just as the one who follows the
method of the previously mentioned schools of fiqh follows the method of the Prophet of
Allah ‫ ﷺ‬and his Companions.
If someone says, “If their belief is the same, why have two different schools, and if they
have two different schools, how could they both be the guided faction?” The answers for
these two questions are as follows:
The first is that they are different schools because they were established by two different
men in two different areas, but both with the same basic belief. Naturally, being different
individuals, they would differ in their terminology and expressions, even if their belief
were the same. Then, the scholars who came after them applied the method of those two
scholars, and taught according to their ways, out of confession that those two scholars
were the masters of their time in the science of the creed, just as Al-Bukhariyy and

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Muslim were the masters in hadith narration1, and the Four Imams were the masters of
Fiqh. Thus, anyone who took by the way of Al-Ashâriyy in expressing the matters of the
creed was attributed to his school. Likewise is said about whoever taught and authored
according to the way of Al-Maturidiyy. Furthermore, it is valid to say that whoever is an
Ashâriyy is a Maturidiyy, and whoever is a Maturidiyy is an Ashâriyy.
The answer to the second question is that the fact that they share the same basic creed
confirms that both groups are the guided faction, just as the Companions, who had the
same basic creed, differed about whether the Prophet saw Allah. Some, like Ibn Âbbas,
said that he saw Allah with his heart2. Others, like Â’ishah, said that he did not see
Allah. Some of Ahlu-s-Sunnah said that he saw Allah with his eyes. Yes, what is correct
is that he saw Allah with his heart and not with his eyes, that is possible that what
Â’ishah meant was that he did not see Allah with his eyes, and that no one will see Allah
with their eyes in this lifetime, the proof for which does not befit this summarized
booklet, but the point is that this difference does not mean that the Companions have
divided into factions. They all still have the same basic belief, which is that Allah can be
seen. Likewise, the differing expressions between the Ashâriyys and the Maturidiyys do
not make them two different factions, because their basic creed is the same. Hence, what
is precise is to say that they are two schools within the same guided faction.
In explaining the Muslim’s creed, most scholars, like the Shafiîyy and the Malikiyy
scholars, are Ashâriyys, also known as Al-Ashaîrah. Others, usually Hanafiyy scholars,
are Maturidiyys, and it should be known that they are not few. The Wahhabiyys hate both
groups, claiming that Ashâriyys and Maturidiyys are deviants. They are cornered into
this claim, because both fountains of knowledge refute the Wahhabiyy creed, and all
other deviant creeds. Furthermore, since they claim that the Ashâriyys are deviant, and
since most of the scholars are Ashâriyys, they often quote scholars whom they would
consider deviant. The authority of heavy weight scholars like An-Nawawiyy, Ibn Hajar
Al-Âsqalaniyy, and Al-Bayhaqiyy give their books and lessons an authentic tone,
1
If someone asks, “Do Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim have a school in hadith? The answer is yes. Among the
scholars who followed the way of those two imams is Al-Hakim, the author of Al-Mustadrak.”
2
Not in his heart- with his heart instead of his eyes.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
although in reality such scholars refuted and disagreed with the Wahhabiyy beliefs. The
Wahhabiyys pick and choose what they like from the scholars’ comments and judgments,
then if one were to show them what those scholars believed, those Wahhabiyys would
say, “Oh, but he is an Ashâriyy!”
Ahlu-s-Sunnah is moderate, safe between the different extremes that are and have been
practiced. Unlike the Wahhabiyys, they do not liken the attributes of Allah to the
attributes of the creations. Nor do they deny the attributes or existence of Allah, as the
Wahhabiyys would accuse them. They do not deem the intellect as something that has
priority over the rules of Allah, nor do they stoop like the Wahhabiyys and read the
Qur’an and the hadiths 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 must accept the Revelation of Allah and use our minds (according
to the guidance of the great scholars of Islam).
NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE

WAHHABIYYS
Al-Mushabbihah, “the Likeners”, are among the ancient, deviant factions about which the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬warned. They are religiously defined as the people who liken the self of
Allah to the selves of His creations, or they liken His attributes to their attributes. The so-
called Salafiyys; “the followers of the Salafiyy Daˆwah”, as they call themselves, are a
modern branch of Al-Mushabbihah, as we will prove, if Allah 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”. If Allah willed, we will also speak about
the true Salaf.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Call them The Wahhabiyyah, the name given to them by the scholars when they first
deviated more than 200 years ago, emerging from the land of Najd in the Arabian
Peninsula, following their master, Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab. Some claim that
there is no such faction called the Wahhabiyyah. Refer them to the book of Muhammad
Ibn Âbdi-l-Wahhab’s brother, the good scholar, Shaykh Sulayman Ibn Âbdi-l-Wahhab,
who wrote a book refuting his brother and their followers: As-Sawaîq Al-Ilahiyyah Fi-r-
Raddi Âla-l- Wahhabiyyah (The Devine Bolts in Refuting the Wahhabiyys).
EXTRA DETAIL:
the validity of using the term “wahhabiyy”
One would find many Wahhabiyys who are offended by being called Wahhabiyys, and say
that it is sinful to use the term, claiming that it is derived from the name of Allah: “Al-
Wahhab” (the one who gives abundantly). They would say, “How can you use Allah’s
name 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 not argue this point. In the books of Arabic conjugation1 (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 not Qurayshiyy, and
if he was a follower of Imam Malik he would be “Malikiyy”.
We are not actually attributing those people to Al-Wahhab, who is Allah the Exalted, but
to Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab- or more specifically to the last part of his name:
Âbdu-l-Wahhab (the slave of Al-Wahhab). This name is composed of two words: “Âbd
(slave)” and “Al-Wahhab”, which is Allah’s name. When someone is attributed to a
person with this type of constructed name, one of the 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 Âbdu-l-Wahhab is not called “Âbdiyy”, but
“Wahhabiyy”.
1
Also called morphology
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
***
They also call themselves Ahlu-l-Haqq (the People of the Truth) and Ahlu-l- Hadith (the
People of [the science of] Hadith). When calling themselves Ahlu-l- Hadith, they truly
mean that they (unrightfully) make ijtihad from the hadiths- bypassing what the
mujtahids said. They have also been called La Madhhabiyyah (those who do not claim
any school of fiqh), and Ghayru-l-Muqallidin (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 hadiths, but in fact, it means that they do not follow qualified
scholarship.
Truly, they are Ahlu-l-Kibr (the People of Arrogance), Ahlu-d-Dalalah (the people of
misguidance), Al-Mushabbihah (the people who liken Allah to His creations), Al-
Mujassimah (anthropomorphists; the people who believe that Allah has a body), Al-
Jihawiyyah (Those who attribute a direction to Allah), Al-Hashwiyyah (people who speak
nonsense) and kuffar (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 do not believe the bad
belief of the Wahhabiyys, but may affiliate themselves with the so-called Salafiyys. The
Wahhabiyys are as The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫ َﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺟﻬﮭﻨﻢ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺑﻮﺍاﺏب‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ ﺩدﻋﺎﺓة‬ ‫ ﺗﻨﻜﺮ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻣﻨﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﺗﺴﻤﻊ‬ ‫ ﺑِﺄﻟﺴﻨﺘﻨﺎ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺘﻜﻠﻤﻮﻥن‬ ‫ ﺟﻠﺪﺗﻨﺎ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺱس‬
ٌ ‫ﺃأ‬
‫ ﻓﻴﯿﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻗﺬﻓﻮﻩه‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻴﯿﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ﺍاﺳﺘﻤﻊ‬
“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. They will throw
whomever listens to them in it,”1.
1
Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAH
T
o avoid confusion, the correct creed will be discussed before discussing their
incorrect creed. Know that Allah exists differently from anything else. His self
is His reality, and not a body. 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 Ârsh 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 anything possible 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
and 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 eternally sees and hears everything without eyes or ears, 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 Kalam (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. Allah 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 Allah. All
of His attributes are eternal and everlasting. They are not organs or emotions. Since His
Self is Eternal, His attributes cannot be created. He is different from whatever is

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
imagined. Let there be no doubt that this is the correct belief in Him, the mighty Lord
with the perfect names.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE WAHHABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAH
T
he focus of our discussion will be the Wahhabiyys’ disbelief in the attributes of
Allah. They claim Tawhid, but they really believe in tajsim (attributing bodily
attributes to Allah).
Their belief is that Allah has attributes whose linguistic meanings refer to the attributes of
a body. This means that the meanings they choose to ascribe to Allah 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 Allah 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 Allah spoke after He was not
speaking. They believe that Allah speaks Arabic, claiming that whenever Allah creates,
He literally says “Kun (be;; exist)”. They say that Allah is attributed with a very real pair
of hands that must be understood as stated, and that Allah 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 Allah 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 Allah sits on His
Ârsh, but it seems that was too easy to refute, so they reverted to saying that He is above
His Ârsh. They focus on attributing places and directions to Him. They say He is
“above”, and they mean it in the physical sense. They hate for someone to claim that his
highness is majestic, and not physical. They claim that He is above the seven skies, above
the Ârsh, the ceiling of Paradise. They believe that Allah is separate from His creations,
disconnected from them, existing in a very high location. Some of them say that Allah is
above the Ârsh and there is no place there, which is absurd and against what the Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬said about the book above it. They do not see this as drawing similarities between
Allah and His creations. Some of them said that Allah exists in the sky, but perhaps those
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
who say that He is above His Ârsh have overtaken them. Some may say that Allah is
above the Ârsh by a four-finger spaced distance. They believe that Allah descends from
above the Ârsh down to the first sky, and then ascends back up; that Allah comes and
goes- so that they believe that Allah moves from one place to another. Furthermore, they
bind Allah by time, believing that He descends during the last third of the night, and that
He is above the Ârsh during the day. They believe that Allah 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 Allah 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 “Allah”, 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- until he masters this book.
Some Wahhabiyys study and memorize, ready to bombard their opponent, but this book
should give you the answer for every trick they have up their sleeves. 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 hadiths to establish their beliefs, and
this is the result.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE WAHHABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR

INCORRECT BELIEF
W
hat complicates the issue is that they usually deny that they believe that
Allah has a body. On the contrary, they usually say that they do not
believe that He has a body. However, 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 Allah has a body, because they know that they would be clearly
admitting that He is like His creations. Taking this position may be the case of most of
them. Despite this denial, it is known that they secretly believe that Allah has a body
because they hate for someone to say that He has no place or direction, and they think
that denial of place and direction is denial of His existence. Had that been true, then
where was Allah before he created places and directions?
They may not confirm whether Allah has a body or not, because they would not want to
explicitly liken Allah 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 Allah has a body or not,” is like doubting about Allah. It is the same as
saying, “I do not say if Allah exists or not,” or “I do not say if Allah has a partner or not.”
The one who doubts about any attribute of Allah that is known by necessity1 (such as His
knowledge, power, the fact that He does not resemble the creations, etc) is not a Muslim,
as mentioned by the great Imam Abu Hanifah, one of the heads of the (real) Salaf, in his
book Al-Wasiyyah. He said, “Whoever says that Allah has a created attribute, or doubts2,
or is neutral3 is a blasphemer.” Whoever considers it possible for Allah to have a body,
even if he did not believe that Allah actually has a body, would blaspheme for deeming it
possible.
1
Known by both scholars and laymen
2
Doubt means to deem two matters equally possible without one of the two matters being more probable
3
Neutral means not to take one side or another side; neither to confirm nor deny either side.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
The less intelligent among them might say that Allah 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 Allah has a body unlike other
bodies blasphemes. In his book, “The creed of the distinguished Imam Ahmad Ibn
Hambal”, Abu Fadl At-Tamiymiyy, the head of the Hambaliyy scholars in Baghdad said,
“Ahmad objected to those who call Allah 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 Islam 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 Allah and
His attributes:
‫ﺒﺑﻼ ﻛﻴﻳﯿﯾﻔﻴﻳﯿﯾﺔ‬
"without a how (manner of being)". Thus, 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 have agreed that
there is no how, as narrated from the likes of Umm Salamah, the Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬wife and
Imam Malik. She said, "the ‘How’ (being attributed to Him) is not rational (ghayru
maˆqul),"1. If Allah willed, this point will be revisited in the section, "The Truth about the
saying of Allah {(‫َ َﲆ اﻟْ َﻌ ْﺮ ِش ْاﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى‬ ‫ })اﻟﺮ ْﲪ َُﻦ‬Ar-Rahmanu âla- l-ârshi-stawa".
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
1
Ibn Hajar Al-âsqalaniyy
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
is based on an unsound premise: that Allah 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 Allah is
one, and is three while He is one. The Wahhabiyys believe that Allah has these (human)
attributes, yet they claim that they believe that Allah is not similar to His creations. This
is clearly unsound and incorrect.
HOW THE WAHHABIYYS 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 Allah,
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”. They
openly use such words as “real”, “literal”, and “apparent” when they attribute these
(human) attributes to Allah. In Arabic, they use such words as “dhahir” and “haqiqah”.
But why do they believe these things? The following is the reasoning behind their bad
belief in Allah, the exalted:
They believe that Allah must be attributed with these (bodily) attributes because of some
literal meanings of Qur’anic verses and hadiths of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. They say that these
(bodily) attributes are found in Al-Qur’an 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 in 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 Allah is a real and literal hand, they
will accuse him of rejecting an attribute of Allah. If they find someone who does not
believe that Allah 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 Allah.
This twisted reasoning is a trick that lead many Muslims to blasphemy. They left Islam to
join the Wahhabiyys, 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

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
how to defend themselves or Islam against the lies of the Wahhabiyys is what inspired the
writing of this book. The Wahhabiyys are among those whom Allah warned us about in
the Qur’an when He told us:
{( ‫})ﻓ ٔﻣﺎ ا ﻦ ﰲ ﻗﻠﻮﲠﻢ زﻳﯾﻎ ﻓ ﺘﺒﻌﻮن ﻣﺎ ﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻣ ﻪ اﺑﺘﻐ ٓء اﻟﻔ ﻨﺔ و اﺑﺘﻐ ٓء ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ‬
<<As for those with perversion in their hearts, they follow what is ambiguous
(mutashabih) in it (the Qur’an), seeking tribulation, and seeking its
misinterpretation>>1.
The perversion in their hearts is their inclination towards falsehood. Their following the
ambiguous verses is there tracking them and putting them altogether and listing them one
after the other. Their tribulation is their argumentation and debating with the Muslim to
take him out of his Religion into their false creed. The meaning they seek is the wrong
meaning, and hence is a misinterpretation of the verses.
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,” and what they truly mean is that one must believe what they consider as proper
belief, regardless of logic or reasoning. They mean that logic’s place is outside of the
Religion.
They believe that assigning a meaning to a verse or hadith that is different from its literal
meaning, which is called “making ta’wil”, is sinful. This basic creed of theirs- that ta’wil
is sinful- is one of their greatest reasons for encountering contradictions, as will be shown
in the second chapter, if Allah willed. It is true that some texts may apparently suggest
some bodily attributes, but they can have other meanings, explicit verses of the Qur’an
negate that those verses should be taken by their literal, physical meanings, and sound
reasoning does not attribute bodily characteristics to the Creator. It is it valid for the
verses to contradict each other, and that is the result of their claims. The Wahhabiyys do
not believe that this is grounds to interpret these texts differently from the literal
1
‘Al Îmran, 7
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
meanings. As a result, they fell into Tajsim (attributing bodily attributes to Allah), which
is blasphemy, and they accuse the one who believes in a different (befitting)
interpretation of takdhib (the blasphemy of contradicting the religious judgments) and
taˆtiyl (the blasphemy of denying the attributes of Allah).
They say statements like, “If Allah revealed this word, then it must be understood by the
literal meaning, or He would have revealed a different word.” This reasoning has no
support from the Qur’an 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. It is a very
devious and weak-minded understanding, which may sound appealing to an ignorant
person. Furthermore, they do not apply this reasoning to every ambiguous text. There are
plenty of ambiguous texts that they give alternative explanations for, such as what Al-
Bukhariyy narrated from the route of Abu Musa Al-Ashâriyy that the Messenger of Allah
‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫ واﻟﺬي ﺗﺪوﻧﻪ‬،٬‫ إﻧﻜﻢ ﺗﺪﻋﻮن ﲰﻴﻌﺎ ﻗﺮﻳﺒﺎ‬،٬‫ارﺑﻌﻮا ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻔﺴﻜﻢ ﻓﺈﻧﻜﻢ ﻻ ﺗﺪﻋﻮن أﺻﻢ وﻻ ﻏﺎﺋﺒﺎ‬
‫أﻗﺮب إﱃ أﺣﺪﻛﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻨﻖ راﺣﻠﺔ أﺣﺪﻛﻢ‬
[which apparently means] “Take it easy on yourselves, for certainly you are not
calling on someone who is deaf, nor are you calling upon someone who is absent.
You are calling on Someone Who Hears and He is Close. The One that you are
calling is Closer to one of you then the neck of an animal that you are riding.” How
would Allah be closer to one than the neck of his animal when He is high above the
Throne according to them? They will refuse the literal meaning and say it means, “by His
knowledge”.
THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJAZ (FIGURATIVE SPEECH)
The Wahhabiyys have denied that there is any figurative speech in the Qur’an or the
Sunnah, and some of them have denied it from the speech of the Arabs completely.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Ibn Taymiyah said:1
ُ ‫ﺴ َﻠ‬
‫ﻒ‬ ٌ َ‫ ُﻣﺤْ ﺪ‬ ٌ‫ ُﻣ ْﺒﺘَﺪَﻉع‬ ‫ ﺗ َ ْﻘﺴِﻴﯿ ٌﻢ‬ ‫ﺎﺯز‬
‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ ِﺑ ِﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾَ ْﻨ ِﻄ ْﻖ‬ ‫ ﻟَ ْﻢ‬ ‫ﺙث‬ َ ‫ َﺣ ِﻘﻴﯿﻘَﺔ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟَﻰ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻠﱡﻐَ ِﺔ‬ ‫ ﻭوﺗ َ ْﻘﺴِﻴﯿ ُﻢ‬
ٍ ‫ ﻭو َﻣ َﺠ‬ ٍ ْ ِ‫ ﻓ‬ َ‫ َﻣ َﺠﺎﺯز‬ ‫ﻓَ َﻼ‬
ِ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘُ ْﺮ‬ ‫ﻲ‬
َ ‫ ﺑَ ْﻞ‬ ،٬‫ﺁآﻥن‬
“There is no figurative speech in the Qur’an. In fact, dividing the language into “literal
speech” and “figurative speech” is an innovated categorization. It was never uttered by
the Salaf.” This denial in reality is a fabrication and a fib, but to them, it is necessary for
their creed, and they only deny figurative speech because of the perversion in their hearts:
their incredible attachment to likening Allah to the creations. If they confirm that there is
figurative speech in the Religious Texts, the entire foundation of their claim will be
destroyed and all of their argumentation would be petty and useless. Thus, to justify
interpreting the mutashabih verses by their apparent meanings, Ibn Taymiyah made this
claim.
The ease of demolishing this absurdity frees us from having to give a detailed refutation.
Let us settle with a few clear examples and references. Allah describes His Prophet in the
Qur’an as:
{( ‫ﴎا ً ﺎ ُﻣ ِ ًﲑا‬
َ ِ )}2
<<A luminous lantern>>
If there is no figurative speech in the Qur’an, then the Prophet must be a literal lamp,
which is not true because he is a human being. The actual meaning is that the Prophet
eradicates the darkness of blasphemy and is a reason for misguided people to become
guided. In the Qur’an, Allah described a wall as:
{( ‫}) ِ ﺪَ ًارا ُ ِﺮﻳﯾﺪُ ْن ﻳﯾ َ ْﻨﻘَﺾ‬3
<<A wall that wants to fall>>
1
In Majmuw3 Al-Fatawa
2
Al-Ahzab, 46
3
Al-Kahf, 77
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
If there is no figurative speech in the Qur’an, then that wall would have to literally been
ascribed with a will, which is an attribute of the living. This verse gives the wall the
image of something living and willing, so to portray its leaning over as if it is ready to
fall. Taking this verse literally would necessitate confirming that the wall was alive.
Lastly, Allah informed us in His book:
{(‫}) ِ َﺴﺎ ُؤ ُ ْﰼ َﺣ ْﺮ ٌث ﻟَ ُ ْﲂ‬1
<<Your women are plots of land for your cultivation>>
Therefore, according those who deny figurative speech in the Book of Allah or the
sayings of His prophet, the women are actual plots of land, and not humans made of flesh
and blood. The verse actually contains a metaphor that refers to the impregnation of
women.
So, just as it is known to us that these texts should not be taken literally, it is known that
nothing in the Qur’an or the hadiths that would seemingly ascribe organs, places,
directions or motion to Allah should be taken literally. As for Ibn Taymiyah’s claim that
the Salaf did not confirm figurative speech in the Arabic language, that is refuted by the
fact that the Imams like Ibn Âbbas, Al-Bukhariyy, Ahmad Ibn Hambal and others from
the Salaf interpreted texts according to meanings different from the apparent meanings,
as will come in the second chapter. Ibn Âbbas said in confirmation of figurative speech
in the Qur’an:
‫إذا ﺧﻔﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻜﻢ ﺷﻲء ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﺮآن ﻓﺎﺑﺘﻐﻮﻩ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺸﻌﺮ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ دﻳﻮان اﻟﻌﺮب‬
“If anything in the Qur’an is unclear to you, then seek its meaning from the poetry, for
the poetry is the portfolio of the Arabs.” Also among the Salaf who confirmed figurative
speech is Abu Ûbaydah Maˆmar Ibn Al-Muthanna. He has a famous book entitled,
Majaz Al-Qur’an (the figurative speech within the Qur’an).
1
Al-Baqarah, 223
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIL
On the contrary, Allah taught us this lesson in His book:
{( ‫})ﻣ ﻪ ءا ٌت ﳏﻜﲈت ﻫﻦ ٔم اﻟﻜ ﺎب و ٔﺧﺮ ﻣ ﺸﺎﲠﺎت‬1
<<Within the Qur’an are decisive verses (which according to the Arabic language have
only one meaning). They are the base of the book, and other verses are ambiguous
(mutashabih; susceptible to more than one meaning).>>
Also, The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬made a supplication for Ibn Âbbas (may Allah accept his and his
father’s deeds) to know the ta’wil of the Qur’an, when he said:
‫ ﺍاﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏب‬ ‫ ﺗﺄﻭوﻳﯾﻞ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻤﻪﮫ‬ ‫ﺍاﻟﻠﻬﮭﻢ‬
“O Allah, teach him the Wisdom (the Sunnah) and the ta’wil of the Book (Al-
Qur’an)”2. Ta’wil is a non-literal inference; to interpret a text differently from its
apparent meaning. It is known that Ibn Âbbas interpreted many texts that the
Wahhabiyys use to liken Allah to His creations. The fact is that ta’wil is necessary for
making all of the texts free of contradiction.
EXTRA DETAIL:
how the Wahhabiyys deny ta’wil
Know that the Wahhabiyys may deny the validity of ta’wil by referring to the verse:
{( ‫})و ﻣﺎ ﻳﯾﻌﲅ ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ إﻻ ﷲ‬3
<<No one knows its ta’wil except Allah>>.
1
‘Al Îmran, 7
2
Narrated by Al-Bukhariyy, At-Tabaraniyy, At-Tabariyy and Ibn Majah
3
Al Îmran, 7
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
They say that it is not permissible to make a non-literal inference because no one can
know the ta’wil of the mutashabih verses except Allah; we must take them literally,
because only Allah knows the ta’wil. We answer, “Ta’wil has numerous meanings, and
when reciting this verse and stopping at the word ‘Allah’ so that it means, ‘No one knows
its ta’wil except Allah’, this actually means, ‘No one knows the manifestation; time of
happening (of certain matters like the Day of Judgment or the coming of the One-eyed
Imposter) except Allah’.”
According to this recitation of the verse, Allah dispraised the Jews who tried to
determine the exact time of the occurrence of Judgment Day by referring to some of the
mutashabih verses of the Qur’an like:
‫اﱂ‬
{( )}1
which are three letters among the Arabic letters. This verse, and similar verses, such as
{(‫})ن‬2
have been interpreted in different ways because of their ambiguity, and hence are
mutashabih. The word “ta’wil” can mean “the manifestation; the time of happening”, as
proven by the saying of Allah:
{( ‫})ﻳﯾﻮم ﻳﯾ ٔﰐ ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ‬3
<<The Day when its ta’wil (manifestation; time of happening) comes…>>
In order to interpret the word “ta’wil” as “meaning” or “interpretation”, recite past the
word “Allah”, and continue until reaching the word “al-îlm (the knowledge)”. Hence,
the verse would say:
{( ‫})و ﻣﺎ ﻳﯾﻌﲅ ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ إﻻ ﷲ و اﻟﺮاﲯﻮن ﰲ اﻟﻌﲅ‬1

1
Al-Baqarah, 1
2
Al-Qalam, 1
3
Al-A3raf, 53
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<No one knows the ta’wil (true interpretation) except Allah and those who are deeply
rooted in the knowledge. >>
In this way, both recitations are in compliance, for just as there is no contradiction
between the meanings of the verses of the Qur’an, there must be no contradiction
between the meanings in its recitations; since one recitation means that no one knows its
ta’wil except Allah, and the other means that no one knows its ta’wil except Allah and
those who are deeply rooted in the knowledge, the word ta’wil must have a different
meaning in each recitation.
Furthermore, the Wahhabiyys absolutely do make ta’wil for any verse or hadith whose
literal meaning contradicts their beliefs, as will be made obvious in the second chapter,
in sha’a-llah, but take this verse as another example:
<( ‫ﻮن ِﻣ ْﻦ َ ْﳒ َﻮى ﺛَ َﻼﺛ َ ٍﺔ اﻻ ﻫ َُﻮ َرا ِﺑ ُﻌﻬُ ْﻢ َو َﻻ َ ْﲬ َﺴ ٍﺔ اﻻ ﻫ َُﻮ َﺳﺎ ِد ُﺳﻬُ ْﻢ‬
ُ ‫>) َﻣﺎ َ ُﻜ‬
Which would apparently be translated as, “There is no secret amongst three except that
He is the fourth of them, nor amongst five except that He is the sixth of them.” They
explain this verse to be in reference to His knowledge, and not that he is with those
people in person.
In their so-called Noble Qur’an translation, they put a period after the word “Allah”
because of their disregard and disbelief in the other recitation (qira’ah)2 of the verse,
known as the recitation of Mujahid, the student of Ibn Âbbas.
Lastly, the claim that there are verses in the Qur’an whose meanings cannot be possibly
known by any creature is actually a blasphemous claim, because it implies that there are
verses that have no benefit for the people, since the people could never understand their
meanings. Had this been true, the old Arabs would have discredited the Prophet by
saying, “This book is not a miracle as you claim, for our language is understood and
intelligible, and you have come with something that has no meaning to us, and cannot be
1
Al Îmran, 7
2
Qira’ah “recitation” could refer to any of the proper ways of reciting the Qur’an.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
known by anyone.” This claim is mentioned in some of the footnotes of their so-called
Noble Qur’an translation in reference to some of the verses. Do not be impressed by it
because it is a trap. It contradicts the verse of the Qur’an that proves that everything in
the Qur’an has a meaning that can be possibly known to the creatures:
ّ ٍ ِ ‫}) ِﺑ ِﻠ َﺴ ٍﺎن َﻋ َﺮ‬1

{( ٍ‫ﰊ ُﻣ ِﲔ‬
<<(The Qur’an is revealed) in a clear Arabic tongue>>.
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 Wahhabiyy who raises this point, then here is the answer.
***
They quote the verse from the Qur’an:
{(‫}) َوﻗَﺎﻟُﻮا َ ِﲰ ْﻌﻨَﺎ َو َﻃ ْﻌﻨَﺎ‬
<<They said, “We hear and we obey”>>2,
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 Allah willed. If the Wahhabiyy were to ask,
“How could we be misguided by merely believing what is in the Qur’an? We are just
taking what is in the Book and going no further.” Tell him, “But your method of
interpretation is sinful, and Allah told us about His book:
1
Ash-Shuâra’, 195
2
Al-Baqarah, 285
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
{(‫})ﻳﯾُ ِﻀﻞ ِﺑ ِﻪ ﻛَ ِﺜ ًﲑا َوﳞَ ْ ِﺪي ِﺑ ِﻪ ﻛَﺜِ ًﲑا َو َﻣﺎ ﻳﯾ ُ ِﻀﻞ ِﺑ ِﻪ اﻻ اﻟْ َﻔ ِﺎﺳ ِﻘ َﲔ‬1
<<He misguides many by the Qur’an and guides many by it, and He only misguides the
major sinners by it>>.”
THE WAHHABIYYS REJECT LOGIC
So let us address the intellectual and logical issues pertaining to this blasphemy. They do
not agree that the mind (al-âql) should have consideration in deciphering what Allah
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 by their mere tongues and not their
hearts, 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-âqidah),
which is a lie. They teach people to just believe in the texts by their literal and apparent
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
Nuh (Noah, ‫)ﷺ‬. Allah told us in the Qur’an about their rejection of the truth:
{(‫َ ٓ َذاﳖِ ِ ْﻢ‬ ‫}) َوا ِ ّﱐ ُﳇ َﻤﺎ َد َﻋ ْﻮﲥُ ُ ْﻢ ِﻟﺘَ ْﻐ ِﻔ َﺮ ﻟَﻬُ ْﻢ َﺟ َﻌﻠُﻮا َﺻﺎ ِﺑ َﻌﻬُ ْﻢ ِﰲ‬2
<<(Noah said), “And surely, whenever I call them so that You would forgive them (by
guiding them to Islam), they put their fingers in their ears”>>.
They refer to a saying of Imam Âliyy (may Allah accept his deeds), but they pervert its
text and distort its true meaning. They say that Âliyy (may Allah accept his deeds) said,
“If the Religion were by logic, we would wipe the bottom of the khuff (foot gear)3 instead
of the top.” They would then tell the person to forget about logic, and just accept the
literal interpretations.
1
Al-Baqarah, 26
2
Nuwh, 7
3
The khuff refers to foot gear with specific qualities that one is allowed to wipe instead of washing the feet
in wuduw’.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
REASONING IS NECESSARY AND RELIGIOUSLY

CONFIRMED
It is important to have the correct understanding of this saying. Âliyy (may Allah accept
his deeds) actually said:
‫ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ﷲُ َﻋﻠَْﻴ ِﻪ‬ ِ َ ‫ﺖ رﺳ‬ ِ ِّ ُ‫اﳋ‬ ِ

َ ‫ﻮل ا ﱠ‬ ُ َ ُ ْ‫ َوﻗَ ْﺪ َرأَﻳ‬،٬ُ‫ﻒ أ َْو َﱃ ﺑِﺎﻟ َْﻤ ْﺴ ِﺢ ﻣ ْﻦ أَ ْﻋ َﻼﻩ‬ ْ ‫ﻳﻦ ﺑِﺎﻟ ﱠﺮأْ ِي ﻟَ َﻜﺎ َن أ‬
ْ ‫َﺳ َﻔ ُﻞ‬ ُ ‫ﻟَ ْﻮ َﻛﺎ َن اﻟ ّﺪ‬
ِ َ‫وﺳﻠﱠﻢ ﳝَْﺴﺢ َﻋﻠَﻰ ﻇ‬
‫ﺎﻫ ِﺮ ُﺧ ﱠﻔ ْﻴ ِﻪ‬ ُ َ َ ََ
“Had the Religion been by opinion (ra’y), wiping on the bottom of the foot gear instead
of the top would have been better (because the bottom is the side that gets dirty), however
I saw The Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬wiping the top”. Do not be surprised at this misquote.
They are dishonest and they do it all the time. Imam Âliyy did not negate the use of logic.
Logic, reasoning, and use of the intellect are praised throughout the Qur’an. The two
Sayings of Allah are repeated many times in the Qur’an:
{( ‫}) ٔﻓﻼ ﺗﻌﻘﻠﻮن‬

<<Do you not use your minds?>>, and
{( ‫}) ٔﻓﻼ ﻳﯾﻌﻘﻠﻮن‬

<<Do they not use their minds?>>.
Imam Âliyy, the most knowledgeable of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with all
of them), would not say anything against the Qur’an, and if so, then his saying would be
rejected for the revelation of Allah. In fact, consideration of the mental judgments is an
integral part of understanding the belief, and has its origin in Al-Qur’an and As-Sunnah.
Hence, it is not philosophy or innovation.
The scholars of âqidah (belief; creed), like Al-Ashâriyy also pointed out the fact that the
Prophets, the greatest of Allah’s creations (âlayhimu-s-Salatu wa-s-Salam), used logical

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
arguments to refute the blasphemers they encountered and to establish the correct belief
in Allah, such as what was narrated in the stories of Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham, ‫)ﷺ‬.
Among those stories was Ibrahim’s debate with the tyrant, Nimrod, mentioned in the
chapter (surah) Al-Baqarah, 258:
ِ ْ ‫ﻴﯿﺖ ﻗَﺎ َل َ ْﺣ ِﲖ َو ِﻣ ُﺖ ﻗَﺎ َل ا ْ َﺮا ِﻫ ُﲓ ﻓَﺎن ا َ ﻳﯾ َ ِﰐ ِ ﻟﺸ ْﻤ ِﺲ ِﻣ َﻦ اﻟْ َﻤ‬

‫ﴩ ِق ﻓ َ ِت ﲠِ َﺎ ِﻣ َﻦ اﻟْ َﻤ ْﻐ ِﺮ ِب‬ ُ ‫})ا ْذ ﻗَﺎ َل ا ْ َﺮا ِﻫ ُﲓ َر ِ ّ َﰊ ا ِ ي ُ ْﳛ ِﲖ َوﻳﯾ ُ ِﻤ‬
{(‫ﻓَﳢُ ِ َﺖ ا ِ ي َﻛﻔَ َﺮ‬
<<When Ibrahim said, “My Lord creates life and makes the living die.” Nimrod said,
“I create life and make the living die.” Ibrahim said, “Surely, Allah brings the sun
from the east, so bring it from the west.” Upon that, the one who blasphemed was
dumbfounded>>.
By this simple and clever logic, Ibrahim silenced Nimrod, who claimed to be God. This
verse is evidence for the permissibility of debating deviant people to establish the truth.
So, if a Wahhabiyy claims that debating is forbidden, or that mental evidence is not from
the Religion, use this verse as your evidence. In fact, it is obligatory on some Muslims
(communal obligation) to know the mental and textual evidence, and to refute the deviant
people.
Thus, Imam Âliyy’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
Allah ‫ﷺ‬. Prophets are sent as a mercy to humans and jinn, who otherwise cannot know
how to worship their Lord properly. However, those humans and jinn can use their minds

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
to know what is and what is not befitting to say about their Lord. For that reason, some
scholars even said that whoever is sane and pubescent is accountable1 to confirm the
existence of the Creator and to believe in His oneness correctly; 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.
Allah said:
{( ِ ٔ ‫})وﻗﺎﻟﻮا ﻟﻮ ﻛﻨﺎ ﺴﻤﻊ ٔو ﻧﻌﻘﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻛﻨﺎ ﰲ‬2

‫ﲱﺎب اﻟﺴﻌﲑ‬
<< They will say, “Had we listened used our minds, we would not have been
inhabitants of Hell.”>>
This verse proves that the mental judgment has weight and should be considered.
THE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THE SCHOLARS MEANT

WHEN THEY DISPRAISED (RATIONAL) ARGUMENTATION
(KALAM)
Many Wahhabiyys will attempt to thwart your rational argumentation by telling you that
what you are doing is called “kalam”, and the scholars dispraised kalam; they referred to
the Book and the Sunnah and went no further, and the Prophet and the Companions never
used it. Therefore, accept what came in the Book and the Sunnah and do not try to
rationalize what they did not.
The answer to that, in summary, is that those early scholars who did not use the kalam to
argue did not do so because of how few the misguided people were. It was enough to
1
According to most scholars, accountability refers to being sane, pubescent, and having heard the basic
message of Islam, which is the meaning of the shahadah. Whoever dies as an accountable non-Muslim will
be tortured everlastingly in Hell on the Day of Resurrection.
2
Al-Mulk, 10
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
refer to the Book and the Sunnah. However, later the misguidance spread, and the people
of deviance claimed that the People of Truth were using weak narrations and ambiguous
verses with explanations that do not agree with the intellect. So the scholars refuted them
with their own standard: intellectual argumentation, however, the Sunniyy’s
argumentation was derived from the Book and the Sunnah, as will be demonstrated.
Someone once said to Abu Hanifah, “Why do you talk with the Knowledge of Kalam and
the Companions did not talk with it?” He said, “Their example is like people who do not
have in their presence those who fight them, so they did not need to wield their weapons,
and our example is like those who have among them those who fight them, so they had to
wield their weapons.” This means that they had the tools and the means; they had the
same belief system, but they did not have to use such argumentation often. They did use
it occasionally, and the references for that are not appropriate for this summarized
refutation.
If they produce for you a quote from Ash-Shafiîyy that he dispraised rational
argumentation, such as:
ٔ ُ ‫ٔﻻﻥن َﻳﻟﻘﻰ ﷲ‬
‫ﺍاﻠﻌﺒﺪ ﺑﻛﻞ ﺫذﻧﺐ ﻤﺎ ﺧﻼ ﺍاﻠﺸﺮﻙك ﺧﻴﺮ ﻤﻦ ﺍاﻥن ﻳﻟﻘﺎﻩ ﺑﺎﻠﻛﻼﻡم‬
“For the slave to meet Allah 1 with every sin except shirk is better than to meet Him with
kalam,” we tell them that this is clarified by other more specific texts, such as that he
said:
ٔ ٔ ُ ‫ٔﻻﻥن ﻳﻟﻘﻰ ﷲ‬
‫ﺍاﻠﻌﺒﺪ ﺑﻛﻞ ﺫذﻧﺐ ﻤﺎ ﻋﺪﺍا ﺍاﻠﺸﺮﻙك ﺧﻴﺮ ﻤﻦ ﺍاﻥن ﻳﻟﻘﺎﻩ ﺑﺸﻲﺀء ﻤﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍاﻻﻫﻮﺍاﺀء‬
“For the slave to meet Allah with every sin except shirk is better than to meet Him with
any hint of these deviant beliefs.” This is why Al-Bayhaqiyy said said in Manaqib Ash-
Shafiîyy:
By this talk, Ash- Shafiîyy, may Allah have mercy upon him, only meant Hafs and
his likes among the people of heresy. This is what he meant in all that was
conveyed about him about dispraising the Kalam and its people, except that some
1
“Meeting Allah (liqa’u-llah)” can refer to death, or being judged on Judgement Day. It is said in English,
“He met his Maker”, meaning that he died.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
narrators generalized, and some specified. In the specification of those who

specified, there is evidence of his intent.
Actually, Ash-Shafiîyy debated on more than one occasion. Ishaq said, “My father said
to me, ‘One day Ash-Shafiîyy was talking to one of the scholars, and he was very tight
on him, precise, he sought evidence from him, and put him in a corner. I said to him, ‘O
Abu Âbdillah, this is for the people of Kalam, not for the people of halal and haram.’
Ash-Shafiîyy said, ‘We have mastered this before we mastered that’.”
Al-Muzaniyy said,
A debate took place between a man and me. He asked me about something, as if it
were about to make me doubt about my Religion. I went to Ash- Shafiîyy, and I
said to him, ‘This is what happened...’ Ash- Shafiîyy said to me, ‘Where are
you?’ I said, ‘I am in the Masjid.” He said to me, ‘You are in the likes of the sea
of Taran while its waves are smacking you around. This is a question of the
atheists, and the answer for it is this and that. For the slave to be inflicted with
every harm that Allah created is better for him than to be inflicted with arguing
for deviant beliefs.’
This proves that he was skilled at intellectual argumentation. And as usual, the
Wahhabiyys say one thing and do another, because they use the kalam that Ash-Shafiîyy
dispraised: the argumentation of the deviant people. Here are some of their so called
rational arguments, and the refutations for them:
1. They say that denying that Allah is in a place is denying His existence, just as
saying that a person is neither in the Mosque somewhere nor outside of the
Mosque somewhere is denying his existence. We say, this is true when the one
you are talking about is a body, and look at how you have compared Allah to a
person in the Mosque or outside of it. As for the one who is not a body, then it is
not impossible that He would exist without a place, and Allah existed before
places existed.
2. They say that Allah is either inside of the creation or outside of it, and He is not
inside of it, so He must be outside of it, and if He is outside of it, He is either

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
connected to it or disconnected from it. They say that He is not connected to it, so
He must be disconnected from it, and in fact is high above the creation, above the
seven skies. We answer that by saying that what they have described is something
with edges and limits; a bodily object. Allah is not a body and does not resemble
the creation.
3. They say that everything witnessed in existence is either a body, like the people,
trees, buildings, water, etc., or a feature of a body, like the motion, stillness, color,
smell, etc. It is not valid that Allah would be the feature of a body, because ten He
would be in need of a body to exist, so He must be a body Himself. We tell them
that Allah is not similar to what is witness in existence. All of what they have
described is a creation. They have blatantly likened Allah to the creations.
4. They say that Allah must be higher in a place because He is higher in status. We
tell them that highness of place does not dictate highness in status. The Angels in
the sky have a lower rank than the Prophets on the earth, and the guards on the
roof have a lower rank than the king or president in the basement or bunker.
They have other so-called logical arguments, but this should be enough to give you an
understanding of their twisted reasoning.
THE MENTAL PROOF THAT THE WAHHABIYYS TRULY

BELIEVE IN BODILY ATTRIBUTES FOR ALLAH (TAJSIM)
Because the true goal is to help the misguided person and to let him accept the truth, not
to debate, tell the Wahhabiyy in a wise way that it is blasphemy to attribute a body to
Allah. Unfortunately, it is known through experience that the one infected with the
disease of tashbih (likening Allah to the creations) does not usually want to be cured. If
the Wahhabiyy 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
Allah. On the other hand, he will still insist that Allah is attributed with those (bodily)
attributes. He will say, “We must believe in them as they are without changing their
meanings.”

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
If this is his position, how could you still say that he truly believes that Allah has a body?
They want you to believe that Allah 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’an, 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 Allah occupies is above the Ârsh,
although they will deny the terms “occupying space”. They have sayings about whether
Allah is bigger than, smaller than, or the same size as the Ârsh. 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 Allah moves consequently
believes in his heart that He has a body, even if he denies it with his tongue.
They say that “Highness (al-ûluw)” is Allah’s attribute1, 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 Allah,
although 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 Allah‫ ﷺ‬ that
even Al-Albaniyy says is authentic (although he is not qualified and thus has no right to
grade any hadith, as will come):
‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﺩدﻭوﻧﻚ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺒﺎﻁطﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺖ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﻓﻮﻗﻚ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻈﺎﻫﮬﮪھﺮ‬ ‫ﺃأﻧﺖ‬2
"O Allah, You are Adh-Dhahir (the One whose existence is obvious) and there is
nothing above You, and You are Al-Batin (the One Who cannot be reached by
1
It is true that Allah has the attribute of ûluww (highness), but its correct meaning refers to His majesty
and perfection, not a direction
2
Al-Bukhariyy, Muslim, Al-Hakim, At-Tirmithiyy, Al-Bayhaqiyy and others
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
delusions) and there is nothing below You." Because of this devastating refutation, Ibn
Taymiyah, contradicted himself when he said:
ِ ِ ‫ش وأَﻧﱠﻪ ﻳـ ْﻨ ِﺰ ُل َإﱃ اﻟ ﱠ‬
ُ ‫ﺴ َﻤﺎء اﻟ ﱡﺪﻧْـﻴَﺎ َوَﻻ َﳜْﻠُﻮ ﻣ ْﻨﻪُ اﻟ َْﻌ ْﺮ‬
‫ش‬ َ ُ َ ِ ‫أَﻧﱠﻪُ ﻓَـ ْﻮ َق اﻟ َْﻌ ْﺮ‬
“He is above the Ârsh, and He descends down to the sky, but the Ârsh is never devoid
of Him.1” It is unacceptable to the sound mind that Allah would be on the Ârsh above the
sky, then descend down to the sky, and still upon the Ârsh.
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 Ârsh and the
Angels in the sky, or a low place, like the bottom of Hellfire. These are descriptions of a
body.
So, tell the Wahhabiyy that he is implying that Allah has a body, and for him to deny that
Allah has a body is ta’wil; negating the literal meanings. It is helpful for you to know
and understand a rule of the scholars:
‫ﻻزم اﳌﺬﻫﺐ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ إذا ﻛﺎن ﺑﻴﻨﺎ‬
“The implication of one’s opinion is his opinion, if that implication were obvious.”
Muhammad Îllaysh2 said:
‫ﺲ َﻣ ْﺬ َﻫﺒًﺎ إذَا َﱂْ ﻳَ ُﻜ ْﻦ ﺑَـﻴِّﻨًﺎ‬ ِ ِ ‫ِ ﱠ‬

َ ‫َوﻷَن َﻻزَم اﻟ َْﻤ ْﺬ َﻫﺐ ﻟَْﻴ‬
“The implication of one’s opinion is not his opinion if it is not obvious.” This means that
if one holds an opinion or a belief, such as if one were to say that Allah sits upon a grand
throne, then the obvious implication of his belief is that Allah is a body. Therefore, since
this implication is obvious, it is confirmed as his belief, even if he does not state it
1
Majmuˆ Al-Fatawa
2
Al-Minah Al-Jalil
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
explicitly. Do not be fooled by some weak or sly people who tell you that the scholars
said that the implication of one’s opinion is not his opinion. Ad-Dasuqiyy said1:
ْ ‫اﻟﻼ ِزِم‬
.ِ‫اﳋَِﻔ ّﻲ‬ ‫ﻮل َﻋﻠَﻰ ﱠ‬ ٍ ‫ﺐ ﻟَْﻴﺲ ِﲟَ ْﺬ َﻫ‬
ٌ ‫ﺐ ﻓَ َﻤ ْﺤ ُﻤ‬ َ
ِ ‫َوأَ ﱠﻣﺎ ﻗَـ ْﻮُﳍُ ْﻢ َﻻ ِزُم اﻟ َْﻤ ْﺬ َﻫ‬
“What some said, that the implication of one’s opinion is not one’s opinion, is in
reference to the implication that is not obvious.” Also, As-Sawiyy said2:
ْ ‫اﻟﻼ ِزِم‬
‫اﳋَِﻔ ِّﻲ‬ ‫ﺐ ِﻷَﻧﱠﻪُ ِﰲ ﱠ‬
ٍ ‫ﺐ ﻟَْﻴﺲ ِﲟَ ْﺬ َﻫ‬
َ
ِ ‫َوَﻻ ﻳَ ِﺮ ُد َﻋﻠَْﻴـﻨَﺎ ﻗَـ ْﻮُﳍُ ْﻢ َﻻ ِزُم اﻟ َْﻤ ْﺬ َﻫ‬
“What some said, that the implication of one’s opinion is not his opinion, does not
discredit what we have said, because that is in reference to the vague implication.”
However, saying Allah is above the throne, and ascends and descends, and hands real
hands, face, eyes, etc., is all very obviously the description of a body.
So, do not let the Wahhabiyys hold both points. In one hand, they hold literal meanings
that apply to bodies, and in the other, they deny that Allah 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
Tawhid (oneness of Allah) into three categories (which is a bad innovation)!?
THE RATIONAL CONCLUSION WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY

THE TEXTS
Then, a sound mind concludes that Allah exists without being in any place or direction,
since places and directions are attributes of created things; bodies. This sound reasoning
complies with the verse:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬1
1
Al-Hashiyah Âla Ash-Sharh Al-Kabir
2
Al-Hashiyah Âla Ash-Sharh As-Saghir
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<Nothing is similar to Allah in any way. >>
If Allah were in a place, many things would be similar to Him. His Existence without a
place is not impossible, as Wahhabiyys think. On the contrary, the mental judgment
confirms that Allah exists without a place, because He existed before He created places.
If someone says that clearing Allah from all places is negating His existence, then we
pose a question similar to that of Abu Hanifah’s, “If Allah needed a place, where was He
before He created them?” Such a person tries, but cannot imagine Allah existing without
a place, so he thinks that would be denying His existence. The Wahhabiyy does not know
what it means to say that nothing is whatsoever like Allah. In fact, some of them blatantly
ignore this aforementioned verse. He believes that Allah needs something. Actually,
negating a place for Allah is denying that Allah has a body, since the place is the space
that a body occupies.
It is confirmed that Allah 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, as supported by the
explicit texts of the Religion.
EXTRA DETAIL:
seeing Allah
Another indication that these people truly liken Allah to the creation and believe that He
is a body, and that they imagine something although they claim that they do not, is that
when it is said to them that Allah exists without a place, and is not a body, shape or
color, they say, “Don’t you believe that Allah can be seen?” As already mentioned, we
do believe that Allah will be seen, but the reason for this question of theirs after our
negation of created attributes for Allah, is that what we say wipes away whatever they
have been unconsciously imagining; once they truly understand what we mean by saying
that Allah is not a body, and He exists without a place, they find themselves unable to
imagine that, and thus ask, “But don’t you believe that Allah can be seen?”
1
Ash-Shura, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Yes, we believe that Allah can be seen, but He is seen unlike the creation is seen. Their
belief is that Allah is seen in a direction and a place- like a creation. Our belief is that
Allah is seen UNLIKE the creation is seen, so He is seen without being in a place or a
direction. This is a topic that can be explained for pages, so we will summarize by
producing some of the Sunniyy quotes that clarify the correct belief. Abu Hanifah said:
‫َوﷲ ﺗَـ َﻌ َﺎﱃ ﻳﺮى ِﰲ ْاﻵ ِﺧ َﺮة َوﻳَـ َﺮاﻩُ اﻟ ُْﻤ ْﺆِﻣﻨُﻮ َن وﻫﻢ ِﰲ ا ْﳉﻨﱠﺔ ﺑﺄﻋﲔ رؤوﺳﻬﻢ ﺑِ َﻼ ﺗَ ْﺸﺒِﻴﻪ َوَﻻ َﻛ ْﻴﻔﻴﱠﺔ َوَﻻ ﻳﻜﻮن‬
‫ﺴﺎﻓَﺔ‬
َ ‫ﺑَﻴﻨﻪ َوﺑَﲔ ﺧﻠﻘﻪ َﻣ‬
“Allah the Exalted is seen in the Afterlife. The Believers will see Him with the eyes of
their heads, without any resemblance, without a manner of being, and without their being
between Him and the creation any distance.” This means Allah will not be close or far,
high or low, big or small, etc. Imam An-Nasafiyy said:
ٍ ‫ ﻓﲑى ﻻ ﰲ‬،٬ِ‫ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﰲ دا ِر اﻵﺧﺮة‬
‫ وﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ‬،٬‫ﻣﻜﺎن‬ ‫اﳌﺆﻣﻨﲔ‬ ِ ‫ﻤﻌﻲ ﺑﺈﳚﺎب‬
‫رؤﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﺴ ﱡ‬ ‫اﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ اﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ورد‬
َ ‫وﻗﺪ‬
ُ َ ُ
‫وﺑﲔ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﱃ‬ ٍ ِ ِ ٍ ‫ﺟﻬﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣ‬ ٍ
َ ‫ﻌﺎع أو ﺛﺒﻮت ﻣﺴﺎﻓﺔ ﺑﲔ اﻟﺮاﺋﻲ‬
ٍ ‫اﺗﺼﺎل ُﺷ‬ ‫ﻘﺎﺑﻠﺔ أو‬ ُ
“The certainty of the Believers seeing Allah the Exalted in the Afterlife was narrated in
the transmitted evidence. He will be seen without a place, or being in an opposing
direction, and without the connection of light rays, or the establishment of a direction
between the seer and Allah the Exalted.” Allah exists without a place, and despite that,
He is seen. This is why the Prophet said:
‫ ﺭرﺅؤﻳﯾﺘﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺗﻀﺎﻣﻮﻥن‬ ‫ﻻ‬
“You will not crowd together to see Him.”In Paradise, they will not have to gather or
face any special direction to see Allah. Whereever they may be in Paradise, as wide and
vast as it is, and whatever direction they may be facing, Allah empowers them to see Him.
As for the Prophet saying:
‫َﻛ َﻤﺎ ﺗَـ َﺮْو َن اﻟ َﻘ َﻤ َﺮ ﻟَْﻴـﻠَﺔَ اﻟﺒَ ْﺪ ِر‬

“Like you see the full moon on a clear night,” this does not mean that Allah is a circle
that is seen like the moon is seen, and some mindless Wahhabiyys really believe it does,
rather, it means that you will have no doubt that you saw Allah, like you have no doubt
about seeing the full moon on a clear night. In other words, the Prophet did not compare
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Allah to the moon, he compared the certainty of seeing Allah to the certainty of seeing the
moon; he compared the sighting to the sighting, not the Creator to the creation. This is
the proper belief in seeing Allah, and it does not mean that He is a body.
***

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
ISLAMIC TEXTS THAT REFUTE THE WAHABIYY

CREED
A
n ignorant person may ask, “What does it matter if they believe that Allah has
a body? What is wrong with that?” The answer is that such a bad creed is
against the explicit texts of the Qur’an, the hadiths, the Consensus of the
scholars, and as just addressed, the judgment of the mind.
PROOF FROM THE QUR’AN THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHABIYY CREED
Besides the mental proof, 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 creed about the self of Allah 1. One verse from The Qur’an refutes
their entire foundation:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬2
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>.
This verse means that nothing is similar to Allah in any way. It is a decisive (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 Allah. It means that there is nothing common between Allah and His creations;
that Allah is not like anything, and nothing is like Him; that every creation is not similar
to Allah in any respect. This is the meaning. This is enough to protect you from falling
into the blasphemy of likening Allah to His creations, which is shirk.
Take a closer look at this explicit verse: Allah said:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬
1
Since they believe that Allah is made of parts, they had to refer to many verses to establish their creed
about the bodily self that they worship. However, since Allah is not a body or made of parts, it is enough to
refer to one verse to establish the correct understanding about the reality of His self.
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<laysa kamithlihi shay’>>. The word ‫“ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬laysa” is the word of negation. The first
letter prefixed to the next word is the ‫“ ﻙك‬Kaf” 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 ‫“ ﻩه‬ha’” with
a kasrah, so it is actually pronounced “he”. It is a third person masculine pronoun
meaning “him”, and it refers to Allah. The last word in the verse is ‫“ ﺷﻲء‬shay’ ”, which
means “thing”. It is a general, indefinite term referring to all of the creations.
It is easily noticed that Allah revealed the word “mithli” in this verse, with the addition of
revealing the “kaf”. The negation of this combination emphatically denies any likeness to
Him. If the “kaf” were removed (‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﻣﺜﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫) ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬, it would still mean that nothing is
like Him. However, Allah revealed the “kaf” added to the “mithli”, and this emphasizes
the meaning that nothing is similar to Him. Furthermore, the term ‫“ ﺷﻲء‬shay’ ” 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 Allah
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 Allah and His creatures.
Many other verses negate likeness between Allah and His creations, like Al-Ikhlas 4:
{( ‫})و ﱂ ﻜﻦ ﻛﻔﻮ ًا ٔ ﺪ‬1
<<Never has there been one equal to Him>>,
or the 65th verse of Surat Maryam:
1
Al-Ikhlas, 4
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
{( ‫})ﻫﻞ ﺗﻌﲅ ﲰ ّﻴﯿﺎ‬1
posing the rhetorical question, <<Do you know of anything similar to Him?>>.
However,
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬2
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>
is the most explicit verse in the Qur’an that clears Allah 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 for staying afloat. Never liken Allah to His
creations, no matter how many verses a Wahhabiyy may bring to you to convince you
that Allah is like a body.
We say that it is not permissible to interpret any text in a way that attributes bodily
characteristics to Allah, because doing that will make the verses of The Qur’an
contradictory, which is impossible. For the Wahhabiyys, this contradiction is minute,
acceptable, and insignificant, because they do not believe that logic is associated with
belief.
THE PRIORITY OF THE DECISIVE VERSES OVER THE

AMBIGUOUS
As mentioned,
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬3
1
Maryam, 65
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
3
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
is a decisive verse, and again, a decisive verse is a verse that can only have one
interpretation according to the Arabic language. It is important to know the merit Allah
gave to the decisive verses. In ‘Al Îmran, verse 7, Allah told us:
{( ‫})ﻣ ﻪ ءا ٌت ﳏﻜﲈت ﻫﻦ ٔم اﻟﻜ ﺎب و ٔﺧﺮ ﻣ ﺸﺎﲠﺎت‬1
<<Within the Book are decisive verses. They are the base of the book, and other verses
are ambiguous (susceptible to more than one meaning; mutashabih). >>
The mutashabih verses are not the base of the book, but the Wahhabiyys act as if they are,
which shows that they do not understand the true meaning of this verse, or the true
meaning of
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬2
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>.
The true Sunniyy Muslims follow the rule of Allah that proves that the decisive verses are
the base of the book. They base their belief on
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬3
<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>,
because it is a decisive verse. Then, when encountering attributes of Allah like “Al-Yad”,
“Al-Âyn”, “Al-Wajh”, “Al-Istiwa’”, etc, whose literal meanings would liken Allah to the
creations, they interpret them in a way that does not give Allah a body or an attribute of a
body, because these words can have more than one meaning, as will be seen in the second
chapter, if Allah willed. This is the straight and sound way, which stations the decisive
verses as the base of the Book.
1
Al Îmran, 7
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
3
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
EXTRA DETAIL
the Wahhabiyy misinterpretation
The Wahhabiyyah have tricks to avoid being cornered by this verse. Among them is that
they say, “When reciting this verse, you should not stop there, rather, you must continue
and read the rest of the verse:
{( ‫}) َوﻫ َُﻮ اﻟﺴ ِﻤﻴﯿ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﺒ ِﺼ ُﲑ‬1
<<And He is the one who hears and sees>>.”
From there they will accuse you of distorting the meaning of the verse by saying, “Just as
it is valid that He hears and sees while nothing is like Him, it is valid that He has a face
and hands while nothing is like Him.” The answer for this is in two steps. The first is to
prove the validity of reciting:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬2
and stopping there. That is achieved in two ways: The first is the fact that the Wahhabiyy
has no proof that it is invalid to stop the recitation where we have stopped, and in if one
looked into the book of the Qur’an, he would find a sign over top of the verse proving
that the reciter is allowed to stop there. If the Wahhabiyy says, “That is for the recitation,
not the meaning,” respond by saying, “Would it be valid for the recitation to give an
invalid meaning?” The second way to foil the Wahhabiyy’s attempt to dodge this verse’s
ruling is to say to him, “Even if we recited the saying:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء َوﻫ َُﻮ اﻟﺴ ِﻤﻴﯿ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﺒ ِﺼ ُﲑ‬3

<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him, and He hears and sees>>,
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
3
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
that is not the beginning of the verse, so what made it permissible for you to start at
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬1
when it is in itself the continuation of previous statements? Why have you not recited the
entire verse from its beginning to its end?” If he says, “Because this is the part of the
verse related to our topic,” We answer, “For the same reason we have recited the
amount that we have recited.”
The second step is to clarify that the hearing and sight of Allah are not by eyes and ears,
have no beginning or end, and are not restricted to time, direction, volume, or light, and
thus do not resemble the hearing and sight of the creatures. The scholars said that this
was the benefit of being mentioned after the confirmation that He does not resemble
anything. In other words, Allah told us in His book:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬2
then, after knowing that He does not resemble anything, we are informed that:
{(‫}) َوﻫ َُﻮ اﻟﺴ ِﻤﻴﯿ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﺒ ِﺼ ُﲑ‬
<<He is the one Who hears and Sees>>,
so that we would know that His hearing and sight are different from that of the creations.
This is the key for answering their question to us, “Why is it valid for you to say that
Allah has hearing, sight, knowledge and power, but you prevent us from saying that He
has hands, fingers, face and eyes?” You can respond by saying that hearing, sight,
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
knowledge and power do not necessitate a body. They are meanings that do not dictate
composition and physical structure. As for their claim of a face and hands, etc.:
1) If they say that they are real, literal face and hands, then they have likened Allah
to the creation, because real, literal face and hands require composition and
physical structure. If they say that they are not literal, then they have made ta’wil.
2) If they say that they do not know the meanings of face and hands in reference to
Allah, then we ask them how they could translate something without knowing its
meaning.
3) If they say that they translated the Arabic terms into their English counterparts,
we tell them that the Arabic terms have many possible meanings, so the intended
meanings must be translated according to the context, and not the mere word by
its face value.
4) If they choose to use only the Arabic words, such as al-wajh and al-yad, without
confirming any specific meanings for them except that they are attributes of Allah
and that Allah knows about them, then they have complied with us.
The origin of their twisted understanding of the verse:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء َوﻫ َُﻮ اﻟﺴ ِﻤﻴﯿ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﺒ ِﺼ ُﲑ‬1

<<Nothing is whatsoever like Him, and He hears and sees>>
is taken from their grandfather, Ibn Taymiyah, who confessed that he likens Allah to the
creation when he said in his book Bughyah Al-Murtad:
‫ﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻛﻤﺜﻠﻪ ﺷﻲء ﻓﻨﺰﻩ وﻫﻮ اﻟﺴﻤﻴﻊ اﻟﺒﺼﲑ ﻓﺸﺒﻪ وﻫﻲ أﻋﻈﻢ آﻳﺔ أﻧﺰﻟﺖ ﰲ اﻟﺘﻨﺰﻳﻪ وﻣﻊ ذﻟﻚ‬
‫ﱂ ﲣﻞ ﻋﻦ اﻟﺘﺸﺒﻴﻪ‬
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
The Exalted said: {( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬1 <<Nothing is whatsoever like Him>>, and
thereby He was exalted from resemblance; {( ‫<< }) َوﻫ َُﻮ اﻟﺴ ِﻤﻴﯿ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﺒ ِﺼ ُﲑ‬and He hears and
sees>>, and thus He was likened. This is the greatest verse revealed in clearing Allah
from resembling the creation, and despite that, it was not devoid of resembling Him
to others.
The reality of Ibn Taymiyah’s claim is that the Qur’an contradicts itself.
***
PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT REFUTES THE

WAHHABIYY CREED
As for the honorable sayings of the Prophet of Allah ‫ﷺ‬, we recite the hadith:
‫ ﻏﻴﯿﺮﻩه‬ ‫ ﺷﻲ ٌء‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻜﻦ‬ ‫ ﻟﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻥن‬
“Allah existed (eternally), and there was nothing other than Him.2” This is a very
basic and easy-to-understand proof. It shows that Allah was eternally alone. There was no
Ârsh, sky, body, place, direction, light, darkness, nor anything else.
If a Wahhabiyy insists on his bad belief, mention this hadith and then ask, but without the
intention to make him say blasphemy, “Is a place something other than Allah?” He can
give three possible responses:
1) He may totally ignore your question, and instead of answering, he would ask you
a different 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 hadith
and do not let him get away with not answering the question. If he refuses to
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
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 Allah, 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 Allah, then say, “Allah existed
without anything, and you agree that the place is something other than Him, so by
this hadith, Allah existed without a place.” If the Wahhabiyy says, “Well, Allah is
now in a place,” then he likened Allah to the creations, attributing change to Him.
Places are not eternal, because Allah is the only eternal One.
This is why the scholars said that if someone says that Allah is in a place, he is either
saying that Allah is created or that the place are eternal.
EXTRA DETAIL:
the shirk of Ibn Taymiyah
Because of the clarity of this refutation, Ibn Taymiyah went to claim the existence of the
types of things eternally with Allah. He said in his book Minhaj As-Sunnah An-
Nabawiyyah:
‫وإن ﺟﺎز أن ﻳﻜﻮن ﻧﻮع اﳊﻮادث داﺋﻤﺎ ﱂ ﻳﺰل ﻓﺈن اﻷزل ﻟﻴﺲ ﻫﻮ ﻋﺒﺎرة ﻋﻦ ﺷﻲء ﳏﺪد ﺑﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻦ وﻗﺖ‬
‫ﻳﻘﺪر إﻻ وﻗﺒﻠﻪ وﻗﺖ آﺧﺮ‬
“… Even though it is valid that the creations in their kind would be everlasting,
beginningless, for eternity is not an expression of something specific. Instead, there is no
moment of time, except that before it there was another moment… ” Does not Ibn
Taymiyah know that time is a creation of Allah, and hence was preceded by non-
existence? If that expression is not clear enough, then here is his statement from his book
called: Muwafaqatu Sahih Al-Manqul liSarih Al-Maˆqul:
‫ﻓﺈن اﻷزﱄ ﻫﻮ ﻧﻮع اﳊﺎدث ﻻ ﻋﲔ اﳊﺎدث‬

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
“Because the eternal one is the type of the creation, not the created thing itself.” What
lead Ibn Taymiyah to say these things is the fact that he wants to confirm a place and
direction for Allah no matter what the cost. Thus, if it were said that attributing a place
to Allah means that Allah changed, he would respond by saying, “No, actually the place
as a type of thing is beginningless, and so Allah was always in a place.” This creed of Ibn
Taymiyah is a shameful exposure and a confirmation of his belief that something existed
with Allah eternally, which is shirk.
***
Also, the Wahhabiyys believe that Allah 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 Wahhabiyys confirm that Allah literally descends and ascends, when the Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬told us that Allah is eternal? According to the Wahhabiyys, Allah 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 Abu Hanifah said in Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar,
‫اﻟﺘﻐﲑ واﻻﺧﺘﻼف ﳛﺪث ﻋﻨﺪ اﳌﺨﻠﻮﻗﲔ‬
“Changes and variations occur on the creations (only).” Allah is not a creation, so no one
gives Him attributes. Ahlu-s-Sunnah agreed that He does not give Himself attributes,
because whatever Allah creates is a creation, and He does not have a created attribute.
Allah is not like us. He is the One Who changes things, but He does not change. He is
eternal. This hadith 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.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
SCHOLARLY TEXTS REFUTING THE WAHHABIYY CREED
After creating the creations, Allah 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 Allah.
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-Tahawiyy, a true Salafiyy, in his book famous as the Âqidah of
At-Tahawiyy, said:
‫ﺼ َﻔﺎﺗِِﻪ أ ََزﻟِﻴﺎ‬ َ َ
ِ ‫ َﱂ ﻳـ ْﺰ َد ْد ﺑِ َﻜﻮِِﻢ َﺷ ْﻴﺌًﺎ َﱂ ﻳ ُﻜﻦ ﻗَـ ْﺒـﻠَ ُﻬﻢ ِﻣﻦ‬،٬‫ﺼ َﻔﺎﺗِِﻪ ﻗَ ِﺪﳝًﺎ ﻗَـ ْﺒﻞ َﺧﻠ ِْﻘ ِﻪ‬
ِ ِ‫ وَﻛﻤﺎ َﻛﺎ َن ﺑ‬،٬‫ﺻ َﻔﺘِ ِﻪ‬
ْ ْ ْ َْ ْ ْ َْ َ
ِ ِ‫ال ﺑ‬
َ ‫َﻣﺎ َز‬
.‫َﻛ َﺬﻟِ َﻚ َﻻ ﻳَـ َﺰ ُال َﻋﻠَْﻴـ َﻬﺎ أَﺑَ ِﺪﻳﺎ‬
“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.”
THE VALIDITY OF THE CONCENSUS
A good thing about At-Tahawiyy’s book is that it conveys the Consensus; agreement (al-
ijmaˆ) of the Muslim scholars about the matters of Belief. Unfortunate for Wahhabiyys,
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 ‫ﷺ‬:
‫ ﺿﻼﻟﺔ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ٍ‫ ﷴ‬ َ‫ﻣﺔ‬

‫ ﺃأ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺠﻤﻊ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬
“Allah will not let (the scholars of) the nation of Muhammad agree on a
misguidance.1” The Wahhabiyys restrict this hadith to the Companions, may Allah
accept their deeds and grant them high status. To that, tell them that they are making
ta’wil. This hadith guarantees protection for the ummah (nation) in general, which
follows its guided scholars. If the scholars would agree upon a mistake, this would
1
narrated by Al-Hakim and others
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
mislead the entire nation. Such was the fate of Banu Isra’il (the Children of Israel),
whose scholars contravened the Islamic laws revealed to Prophet Musa (Moses), and thus
strayed the entire nation. The nation of Prophet Îsa (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-Tahawiyy is, “Allah 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 SALAF’S BELIEF
Yet another benefit is that this book was written during the time of the Salaf. When At-
Tahawiyy wrote this book, no one objected to it. The scholars of the Salaf were generally
the best in Islam, 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 Wahhabiyys do not agree with
everything that he conveyed, as explicitly stated by the now deceased Wahhabiyy leader,
Ibn Baz, in his corrupted explanation of At-Tahawiyy’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 Allah an attribute with a meaning among the
meanings pertaining to mankind has blasphemed.” If the Wahhabiyys are truly Salafiyy,
then why do they not agree with this belief that was documented by the Salaf, agreed on
by them, and thus passed on? It is because they take what they want and leave what they
want. If the Salaf believed that the one who ascribes a humanistic meaning to Allah is a
kafir (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 Allah, but it is a

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
different kind of hand, face and eye. By this, they attribute the meaning that relates to
humans to Allah, and as just mentioned, for that, the Salaf made takfir (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-âyn” and “al-wajh” (the Arabic terms) are not the same when attributed to
Allah, then they agreed with us. If they say that the meanings of those terms are not the
same when attributed to Allah, 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’s
meaning; the bodily meaning.
EXTRA DETAIL:
“agreement in expression”
It is important to know the difference between “agreement in expression” and
“agreement in meaning” Similarity between two things does not always take place by
merely using the same expression. For example, we say that Allah exists and the
creatures exist, but this agreement in expression does not necessitate that He resembles
the creations, since His existence is without a body, soul, time or place. Thus, if they ask
us, “What made it acceptable for you to say that His hearing, sight and speech are
different from the creations?” We respond by saying, as previously mentioned, “It is true
that the expression is the same, but the meaning is different, for His sight is without
pupils, His hearing is without ears, and His speech is without letters, words or sounds.”
We oppose the Wahhabiyys, not because they confirm “yad”, “âyn” and “wajh” to
Allah, but because they do not accept for someone to deny that Allah has hands or a face
according to the apparent meanings. They say, “We must take those attributes as they
are, without looking for other linguistic meanings.” We, Ahlu-s-Sunnah, say, “We must
believe in the attributes that are mentioned in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, but any
attribute that would apparently imply a physical meaning is not taken by its apparent
meaning.” Therefore, if one of them were to say that Allah has hands, face and eyes that
are not organs nor pieces, and are not dimensional or physical, then if this is truly his

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
understanding, he then agreed with us, except in the expression. Upon that, we only
object to his usage of English words that delude people to think that Allah has organs.
We then advise him to stick to the Arabic words, and to explain to the people that those
Arabic words as attributes of Allah are not to be taken by their apparent meanings.
***

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND ADVICE
T
hus far, we have covered the blasphemous, twisted and devious beliefs of the
Wahhabiyys, their reasoning, or (twisted) logic behind it, and some basic
reasons why they are in error. To recap and summarize: they believe that Allah
has a body because they take some verses and hadiths literally. They will usually deny
that they believe that Allah 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’an contradict each other (as will be
elaborated on, if Allah willed), it is against the explicit, decisive sayings of The Prophet
(hadith can be decisive and ambiguous 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 iman (faith or belief), that which cancels and nullifies the validity of
one’s Islam had he been a Muslim. A blasphemer is a kafir, and a kafir is not a Muslim. A
Muslim who becomes a blasphemer is called an apostate (murtadd), and there are special
rules for him. Kufr is the worst sin that the slaves of Allah commit, and it can be
committed without knowing. Being ignorant that something makes a person a blasphemer
and takes him out of Islam does not protect him from becoming a blasphemer, or else
Jews, Christians, Hindus, and others would not be blasphemers. Had ignorance been an
excuse, it would be better than knowledge, because then people would choose ignorance
so that they would be excused.
Also, an intention is not needed to commit blasphemy. That is why The Prophet ‫ﷺ‬
said:

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
ً ‫ ﺎ‬ ‫ ﺧﺮﻳﯾﻔ‬ ‫ ﺳﺒﻌﻴﯿﻦ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨﺎﺭر‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻬﮭﻮﻱي‬ ً‫ ﺑﺄﺳﺎ‬ ‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺮﻯى‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﻠﻤﺔ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺘﻜﻠّﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌﺒﺪ‬ ‫ﺇإﻥن‬
“Surely the slave of Allah will utter the word. He does not see anything wrong with
it. Because of it, he will fall for 70 autumns1 into Hellfire.2” The depth of 70 years into
Hellfire is the bottom of Hell, a place that no Muslim will reach. Therefore, the Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬was talking about how someone committed blasphemy because of something he
said, but without realizing that he even did anything wrong. Even a new Muslim who
acquired a bad belief in Allah would not be excused from kufr. This is so because the
correct belief and saying the shahadah are the minimum requirements for becoming a
Muslim. In other words, just saying the shahadah by itself is not enough to make a person
a Muslim, if that utterance is not associated with the proper belief. This is why the
Prophet said:
‫ﳜﺮج ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﺎر ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎل ﻻ إﻟﻪ إﻻ ﷲ وﰲ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ وزن ذرة ﻣﻦ إﳝﺎن‬
“Whoever says, “No one is God but Allah”3 will exit Hellfire, as long as there is a
particle’s weight of faith in his heart.”4 Also, believing without uttering the shahadah
does not validate ones Islam, or else the Prophet’s uncle Abu Talib would have been a
Muslim, because he knew that his nephew, Muhammad, was truthful, but he refused to
utter the shahadah.
There is absolutely no excuse for having a bad belief in Allah, His Messenger ‫ﷺ‬, or
His Religion. People with bad beliefs in Allah, like five per-centers, the so-called Nation
of Islam, and the Wahhabiyys fell into kufr. Some groups have bad beliefs in The
Messenger of Allah ‫ﷺ‬, like the Ahmadiyyah who deny that Muhammad is the last to
receive the status of prophethood. Some people claim Islam, but disbelieve in its
exclusiveness; that Islam is the only valid Religion, like those who misunderstood some
Qur’anic verses and believe that the Jews’ and Christians’ Religions will be accepted by
1
i.e. 70 years
2
At-Tirmithiyy, Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim
3
This means, “Whoever says no one is God but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.”
4
Al-Bukhariyy
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Allah 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 intact 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 has not heard about them, his Islam is still valid.
A Muslim who commits kufr leaves Islam and becomes a kafir. This terrible action is Ar-
Riddah (apostasy), and because of it, all good deeds are erased, as we are told:
{( ‫})وﻣﻦ ﻜﻔﺮ ﻻٕﳝﺎن ﻓﻘﺪ ﺣ ﻂ ﲻ‬1
<<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 Allah
because of a Wahhabiyy influence, or any belief like it, like some people who believe that
Allah is light, must say the Shahadah 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 Shahadah is to say: “No one is God except
Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” This can be said in any language, and
no witness or shower is needed. One should be keen to say it properly, by clearly
pronouncing the “h” in the name of Allah, and also pronouncing the name of Prophet
Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬correctly. Whoever cannot pronounce the name of Allah can translate
it, and whoever cannot pronounce the name of Muhammad can call him by his other title:
Abu-l-Qasim [abul\cau`\sim], like to say: “No deity is worthy of worship except God, and
Muhammad (or Abu-l-Qasim2) is the Messenger of God.
If someone says the Shahadah while believing something that contradicts its basic
meaning, then what he uttered did not make him a Muslim.
1
Al-Ma’idah, 5
2
Even saying Abu-l-Gasim [gas`\im] is valid if Abu-l-Qasim is difficult
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
JUDGING SOMEONE AS A KAFIR (TAKFIR)
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 Wahhabiyy. Some people
refuse to call a person a kafir, claiming that judging others is forbidden, which is not true.
We do judge- by the rules of Allah. Ask the one who claims that judging is forbidden,
“How do you judge a person who utters the shahadah?” 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 Ûmar Ibnu-l-
Khattab, 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 kafir if you witness him uttering
blasphemous things. This is the creed of the Muslims. At-Tahawiyy said:
ٌ ‫ﺑﺸﺮﻙك ﻭوﻻ ﺑﻨﻔﺎﻕق ﻤﺎ ﻠﻢ ﻳﻈﻬﺮ ﻤﻨﻬﻢ‬

‫ﺷﻰﺀء ﻤﻦ ﺫذﻠﻚ‬ ٍ ‫ـﻔﺮ ﻭوﻻ‬ ُ
ٍ ٍ ‫ﻭوﻻ ﻧﺸﻬﺪ ﻋﻟﻴﻬﻢ ﺑﻛ‬
“We do not testify against any of them that they committed blasphemy, shirk or
hypocrisy as long as nothing of that sort appeared from them.” Some people are reluctant
because of the hadith:
‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺟﻌﺖ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻻ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﺇإﻥن‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﺪﻫﮬﮪھﻤﺎ‬ ‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺑﺎء‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻓﺮﻓﻘﺪ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺎ‬ ‫ ﻷﺧﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
“Whoever says to his brother, ‘O, kafir’, then one of those two would truly be
inflicted with being a kafir. Either it is as he said, or else it comes back to him.1” This
means that if a person calls someone else a kafir, then he had better be correct, or else he
will become a kafir for labeling a Muslim with kufr without evidence2. It means that if the
1
narrated by Muslim
2
Sometimes a person labels a Muslim as a kafir unrightfully, but would not be judged as a kafir himself,
which is the case of a person who is confused and thinks that something is kufr when it is not. For example,
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
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
person is correct in calling another person a kafir, then it is as he said- that person is a
kafir, 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 kafir unless that person
testifies for himself that he is a kafir. 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 Allah. In fact,
Allah told us:
‫ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎﻟﻮا و ﻟﻘﺪ ﻗﺎﻟﻮا ﳇﻤﺔ اﻟﻜﻔﺮ و ﻛﻔﺮوا ﺑﻌﺪ إﺳﻼ ﻢ‬

{( ‫})و ﳛﻠﻔﻮن‬1
<< They swear by God (that) they did not say it, and by God, they (actually)did say the
word of blasphemy and blasphemed after their state of Islam>>.
If a person commits kufr, he is a kafir, 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 unknowingly fall into everyday. 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.
If someone says, “this verse was revealed about the hypocrites who used to pretend to be
Muslims, so it does not pertain to the Muslims,” respond by saying, “Before it became
clear that those people were hypocrites, how were they treated, as Muslims or not?”
Indeed they were treated according to what they showed outwardly. Therefore, any
person who outwardly shows Islam, and then shows blasphemy is judged as a
blasphemer.
mentioned in the hadith pertains to the one who judges a person as a kafir without any reason or evidence,
and not even out of confusion.
1
At-Tawbah (Bara’ah), 74
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
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 ‫ ﷺ‬did not debate unless it was to show the truth, nor did he ever
lose a debate. Imam Ash-Shafiîyy 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 permissible to keep debating with
him. If you believe he will not listen, but you need to protect the people who are around,
and to show the truth to those who are listening, you can direct you speech to them and
clarify for them what needs to be clarified. Do not leave him to talk to the people and
spread his blasphemy among them if you are able to protect them from him.
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 Wahhabiyy, “Do you believe that Allah has a real face?” or “Do
you believe that Allah is in a place above His Ârsh?” The Wahhabiyy 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. The evidence that this is
forbidden is the verse:
ِ ‫َ َﲆ ْاﻻ ْ ِﰒ َواﻟْ ُﻌﺪْ َو‬

{(‫ان‬ ‫}) َو َﻻ ﺗ َ َﻌ َﺎوﻧُﻮا‬1
<<Do not assist each other in sins and transgression>>.
1
Al-Ma’idah, 2
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
If Allah forbade us from assisting in sins, then more so it is forbidden to assist in the
worst of sins, which is blasphemy.
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, then the one who posed the question also blasphemes.
Whoever tempts, prompts or encourages a blasphemer to confess to his blasphemy also
falls into blasphemy. Avoiding this sin requires you to be clever, quick and thoughtful.
The one who is able to refute a deviant person without asking him such questions is much
more effective and skilled than someone who cannot do that, and moreover is safe by
protecting himself from blasphemy.
The evidence that the one who encourages another to blaspheme shares their sin of
blasphemy is the hadith1 that in reference to wine, the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬damned:
whoever squeezes the grapes, whoever drinks the wine, whoever delivers it, the one to
whom it is delivered, whoever pours it, whoever sells it, whoever consumes its price,
whoever buys it, and he for whom it is purchased. They all share in the sin. There are
similar narrations about the people who participate in usurious gain (riba). Furthermore,
the scholars of the four schools, as well as other schools, have confirmed and agreed that
it is blasphemous to knowingly aid any person commit blasphemy. Consequently, helping
someone commit a small sin is a small sin, helping someone commit a major sin is a
major sin, and helping someone blaspheme is blasphemy. So fear Allah, and do not think
that this matter is light or less than blasphemy. The one who engages in a debate must
learn the proofs and strategies explained by the scholars, learn the Islamic rules
pertaining to debate, and avoid sinful matters, such as missing the prayers and asking
blasphemous questions.
1
Narrated by At-Tirmithiyy, Abuw Dawuwd, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, Al-Hakim and others.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THINK FIRST AND HOLD YOUR TONGUE
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. Allah advised us:
{(‫ْﺣ َﺴ ُﻦ‬ ‫})ا ْد ُع ا َﱃ َﺳ ِ ﻞِ َرﺑ ّ َِﻚ ِ ﻟْ ِﺤ ْﳬَ ِﺔ َواﻟْ َﻤ ْﻮ ِﻋ َﻈ ِﺔ اﻟْ َﺤ َﺴ ﻨَ ِﺔ َو َ ﺎ ِدﻟْﻬُ ْﻢ ِ ﻟ ِﱵ ِ َﱔ‬1
<<Call to the path (i.e., the Religion) of your Lord with wisdom and good
admonishment, and debate them with what is better>>.
This verse is yet more evidence that it is permissible to debate in the Religion if there is a
benefit.
Furthermore, whoever wants to present the proof 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 Wahhabiyy will ask for proof, and you
will have backed yourself into a corner. On the other hand, do not be afraid to ask a
Wahhabiyy for his proof. Do not forget that the burden of presenting evidence is on the
one who makes the claim, as the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫اﻟْﺒَـﻴِّﻨَﺔُ َﻋﻠَﻰ اﻟ ُْﻤ ﱠﺪ ِﻋﻲ‬
“The evidence is upon the claimer.2” 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, he
may reply, “Prove me wrong.” Do not fulfill his request. This is an attempt to avoid the
question. Tell him, “The burden of proof is upon whoever made the claim, so do not ask
me to prove that you are wrong. Prove that you are correct. I have not made a claim yet. I
have only asked for your proof.” This is one of the most important rules of debate and it
is extremely effective in refuting Wahhabiyys, because it makes them run around in
1
An-Nahl, 125
2
Narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy and others.
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
circles like headless chickens. The most frequent response we get from Wahhabiyys when
we ask, "What is your proof?", or "Who said that?" is everything except the answer.
Nevertheless, be careful. Do not think that every Wahhabiyy 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 Allah ‫ ﷺ‬when he said:
‫ ﻓﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺷﻚ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻳﯾﻤﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﺍاﻷﻋﻤﺎﻝل‬ ‫ﺃأﻓﻀﻞ‬
“The best of deeds is (the correct) belief (in Allah and His messenger) without a
doubt in it.” Belief is higher in status 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 Allah. If a person does not have the correct belief, then he is not a Muslim. The
first thing to address 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 Islam 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
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

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
who are giving the Muslims a bad reputation these days. They prohibit traveling to visit
The Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬grave, 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.
It would be appropriate to clarify a fallacy presented by some who claim our Religion. It
is not valid for someone to claim the need for striving for absolute unity with all factions
ascribed to Islam, for that does not comply with the Religious Texts. The Messenger of
Allah ‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫ﻣﻦ رأى ﻣﻨﻜﻢ ﻣﻨﻜﺮا ﻓﻠﻴﻐﲑﻩ ﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻓﺈن ﱂ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ ﻓﺒﻠﺴﺎﻧﻪ ﻓﺈن ﱂ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ ﻓﺒﻘﻠﺒﻪ‬
“Any one of you who saw something forbidden, then let him change it by his hand.
If unable, then by his tongue. If unable, then with his heart (he must hate it)… 1” The
point of evidence is that if we were to unite with all factions, we would either be silent
about their deviance, or warn from it and forbid it. If we are silent about their deviance
and invalid creeds, then we have abandoned the hadith of the Prophet, and the Prophet
warned us from being silent in the face of evil and deviance when he said:
‫إن اﻟﻨﺎس إذا رأوا اﳌﻨﻜﺮ وﱂ ﻳﻐﲑوﻩ أوﺷﻚ ﷲ أن ﻳﻌﻤﻬﻢ ﺑﻌﻘﺎﺑﻪ‬
“Surely, if the people saw the forbidden and they did not change it, they are on the
verge of a general punishment from Allah.2” If we are forbidding them and warning
against them, then we are not uniting with them, instead, we would be calling them to
join us, agree with us, and to leave out everything that opposes what we are upon. Thus,
it is clear that claiming that all factions should unite and put their differences aside is
invalid, unless it means for them to unite under the Sunniyy creed and leave all other
1
Narrated by Muslim
2
Narrated by Ahmad and others
WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
deviant creeds. The only correct way is to call to the truth and oppose whatever opposes
the truth, and Allah knows best.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF?
T
he Salaf (predecessors, forerunners, pioneers) is the first three generations of
Muslims, as narrated by At-Tirmithiyy:
‫ ﻳﯾﻠﻮﻧﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺬﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻠﻮﻧﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺬﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﺮﻧﻲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨﺎﺱس‬ ‫ﺧﻴﯿﺮ‬
“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 from the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet from Makkah to Al-Madinah. 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: Abu Bakr, Ûmar, Ûthman, and Âliyy. Add to that list Al-Hasan and
Ûmar Ibn Âbdu-l-Âziz (may Allah accept their deeds). The schools of fiqh were
established, and four remain since then- the followers of the great Salafiyy mujtahids,
Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafiîyy, and Ahmad Ibn Hambal. The books of hadith were
compiled during this time. It was the time of the greatest scholars of hadith. Among them
was Al-Bukhariyy, Muslim, At-Tirmithiyy, Abu Dawud, An-Nasa’iyy and Ibn Majah, and
others. Also during this time, the great scholars of âqidah emerged, Abu-l-Hasan Al-
Ashâriyy and Abu Mansur Al-Maturidiyy. 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 facilitated ease in terms of learning Islam.

WAHHABIYY CREED
Al-KAYFIYYAH
CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE

HONORABLE TEXTS
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR 74

MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HONORABLE TEXTS
Al-KAYFIYYAH
INTRODUCTION
I
t is vital to speak about some texts that the Wahhabiyys use, because many
people see the invalidity of their belief, but feel compelled to follow them
because they do not want to reject the Islamic texts. Many people know that
likening Allah to His creatures is not sound or correct, but when shown verses and
hadiths, they feel that they must accept what the Wahhabiyys say. Then they make
themselves believe that the Wahhabiyys’ belief in Allah does not liken Him to the
creations, thus rejecting sound reasoning. Some people feel like they are rejecting the
Islamic texts if they reject what the Wahhabiyys say, but this is not the case. Rejecting
their claims is not rejecting the Islamic texts, it is simply rejecting the Wahhabiyy
misunderstanding of those texts.
TRANSLATING THE QUR’AN
Beware of their so-called Qur’anic translation, The Noble Qur’an. It should be called,
“the Wahhabiyy mistranslation of The Qur’an”. In it, they attribute organs to Allah by
translating the verses literally, and supporting their mistranslations with mistranslated
hadiths and terrible footnotes. They even explicitly attribute more than one shape to
Allah. Of course, they believe it is the best translation available.
We point out the fact that translating the text of the Qur’an and presenting that translated
text as a representation of the Qur’an is an innovation. The scholars did not encourage it.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah wa-l- Jamaâh did not translate the Qur’an; they explained it, and what a
difference between explaining and translating there is. They wrote books of tafsir
(interpretation) in which they explained each word or group of words in the verses. These
books of tafsir 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 that their
translation is infallible, never thinking that there could be mistakes in it. If they were
asked, “What are you reading?” they would say, “The Qur’an.” It is truly and merely a
translation of the Qur’an. Instead of giving word for word translations, the scholars gave

Al-KAYFIYYAH
detailed tafsir (interpretation; explanation), leaving the text of the Qur’an in Arabic.
Allah told us in many places in the Qur’an that the Qur’an is in Arabic, such as:
{(‫})ا َﺟ َﻌﻠْﻨَﺎ ُﻩ ﻗُ ْﺮ َ ٓ ً َﻋ َﺮﺑِﻴﯿﺎ‬1
<<Surely We (Allah) have made it an Arabic Qur’an >>.
Instead of translating the Qur’an into different languages, the Muslims learned Arabic.
Like the rest of the religious knowledge, tafsir must be acquired from a teacher. Even an
Arab is forbidden from making tafsir without first learning its rules from the mufassirun
(interpreters). There are many good books of tafsir, like the books of Abu Hayyan and Al-
Qurtubiyy. There are also books of tafsir that need the scrutiny of a strong scholar, like
that of An-Nasafiyy, which has good explanation and numerous weak hadiths. To the
contrary, there are also bad books of tafsir, such as the tafsir of Ibn Kathir, who was a
Mushabbih (someone who likens Allah to the creations) affected by the teachings of Ibn
Taymiyah. The Wahhabiyys have translated his tafsir and propagated it to be the finest
tafsir in Islamic history. There are rules and ways of making tafsir, so the Qur’an is not
left to be interpreted by any unqualified person. Hence, know that when we use the term
“interpretation”, it is not meant to refer to merely reading the Qur’an, especially not a
translation, and to produce 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’an
and the hadiths 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’an. 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:
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬1
1
Az-Zukhruf, 3
Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<Nothing resembles Allah in anyway>>.
By following this method, we avoid both mental and textual contradictions. They
understand the texts according to the verse:
{( ِ ‫})اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬2
‫اﻟﻌـﺮش اﺳﺘﻮى‬
<<Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>>,
which they believe is the proof that Allah is secluded in a place above the Ârsh. Its
meaning will be addressed in detail in what follows, God willing. By that, they fell into
many contradictions, both mental and textual.
THE WAHHABIYYS 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 proof.
He may become consumed before he knows it, confident that he has learned Islam. Also,
they take advantage of whoever is ignorant of Arabic by showing their so-called proof. 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 worshipped
except Allah alone! Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬is His slave and Messenger! Jesus is the slave of
Allah and His Messenger...” Then, they disclose their dark side by adding, “We must
believe that Allah rose above His Ârsh, and that Allah settled Himself on the Ârsh, and
that Allah has two real hands…” In this way, they overtook many. It is imperative to
critically analyze what they say in order to understand their contradictions.
Conversely, in the Muslim countries, they are known and cautioned against- in the
lessons, books, and Jumuâh speeches. There, they are minorities, so it is not as easy for
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
Taha, 5
Al-KAYFIYYAH
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 Allah while describing Him with the
attributes of bodies, however it is confirmed in the Qur’an and by The Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, so
no matter what reasoning dictates, we do verify these bodily attributes to Allah.” In their
minds, the Qur’an confirms bodily attributes to Allah, so they believe that they should
confirm bodily attributes to Allah, 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’an, but they missed a point- the
correct belief does not defy logic, so there is no need to abandon it.
THE WAHHABIYYS SHOW OUTWARD 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. Ibn Majah reports that the Prophet
said:
‫ﺗﻜﻮن دﻋﺎة ﻋﻠﻰ أﺑﻮاب ﺟﻬﻨﻢ ﻣﻦ أﺟﺎ ﻢ إﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻗﺬﻓﻮﻩ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻗﻮم ﻣﻦ ﺟﻠﺪﺗﻨﺎ ﻳﺘﻜﻠﻤﻮن ﺑﺄﻟﺴﻨﺘﻨﺎ ﻓﺎﻟﺰم‬
‫ﲨﺎﻋﺔ اﳌﺴﻠﻤﲔ‬
“There will be preachers at the gates of Hell. They will throw whomever responds to
them into it. They are people who resemble us and speak with our tongues. Adhere to
the Jamaâh of the Muslims…”
They say that cutting the beard is sinful, and although some mujtahids did say that, they
unrightfully 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 wearing the pants below the ankles is a

Al-KAYFIYYAH
major sin, while the truth is that it is not sinful if someone wears his pants below his
ankles without arrogance or vanity. Some of the mean and ignorant ones will not return
the greetings of the Muslim whose pants are below his ankles.
They falsely believe that it is obligatory for women to wear black or navy blue, and to
wear over-garments. The truth is that when the Prophet was asked if the woman could
pray with a scarf and a shirt without a garment from the waist down (izar), he said:
‫إذا ﻛﺎن اﻟﺪرع ﺳﺎﺑﻐﺎ ﻳﻐﻄﻲ ﻇﻬﻮر ﻗﺪﻣﻴﻬﺎ‬
“If the shirt was flowing and covered the top of her feet.” Abu Dawud narrated this, and
it proves that she does not have to wear an over-garment, which is the garment worn over
the shirt and the rest of her clothes. The Wahhabiyys also believe that the women must
cover their faces. However, there is more than one hadith that confirms that women were
in the presence of the Prophet with their faces uncovered, and he did not object to them or
forbid them from that.
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 Allah is not similar to His creations, even if the Wahhabiyy has a huge beard and may
have memorized many chapters of the Qur’an. The Muslim would say to himself, “I don’t
know Arabic, but I know the rule. The verse or the hadith would not contradict the rule.”
The Muslim is confident about the rule, because the rule makes sense: Nothing is like
Allah. Nothing resembles Him. No one has His Attributes. He does not have the attributes
of anyone else. Allah is different from whatever you can imagine. This is how a person
protects himself from likening Allah to the creations. The many verses and hadiths they
produce might seem overwhelming to a weak or doubtful person, nevertheless if you
learn the correct tafsir (interpretation) of each and every one of those texts, you’ll see that
those people are very, very, very misguided.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
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 Wahhabiyy. Those are recommended acts for the Muslim. Use your mind and
seek the truth with the sincere intention of seeking the blessings and acceptance of Allah
(liwajhi-llah).

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF THE FEMALE

SLAVE
T
here is good reason for starting with Imam Muslim’s narration of Hadithu-l-
Jariyah1; the Hadith of the Female Slave. They use it very much to convince
people that Allah 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 ‫ ﷺ‬likened Allah to His creations falls into kufr (blasphemy).
THE STORY BEHIND THE HADITH
According to the narration of Imam 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 ‫ﷺ‬
and asked him, “O, Messenger of Allah, should I set her free?” The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said,
“Bring her to me,” so he brought her to him, and according to Imam Muslim, the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬asked her:
‫ ﻣﺆﻣﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻋﺘﻘﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺖ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺎ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻝل‬
“Ayna-llah?” She said, “Fi-s-sama’.” He said, “Who am I?” She said, “You are the
Messenger of Allah.” He said, “Free her, for she is a believer.”
The explanation of the untranslated terms will come, if Allah willed.
If a person does not understand the correct creed or the rules of interpreting the Islamic
texts, he would take this hadith literally and confirm the created attribute of being in the
sky to Allah. 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 Allah
willed, we will only mention a few.
1
The “jariyah” can refer to a free, enslaved, child or pubescent female.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE WAHHABIYY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HADITH
May Allah protect us as we scrutinize their understanding of this hadith. They claim it to
be proof that Allah exists in a place, saying that The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬asked the girl, “Where
is Allah?” -inquiring about a location. Thus they deduce that Allah 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 Allah must be in the sky. This understanding likens Allah 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
hadith: Reject the meaning that confines Allah to a space and limits Him like a body,
without rejecting the hadith 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, breaching the correct belief. May Allah strengthen our (correct) beliefs
and our intellects.
The truth is that in this hadith, The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬was asking the girl about her belief in
Allah, and not about a place for Him, and she expressed that Allah has the highest status.
This hadith does not prove their claim because its words can have more than one
meaning (mutashabih). The word “ayna” does not only ask about the makan (place), but
also the makanah (rank; status). This is proven by various sources, including sayings of
Companions, and Muslim scholars. The line of poetry:
‫ ﻋﻠﻲ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻣﻌﺎﻭوﻳﯾﺔ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺜﺮﻳﯾﺎ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺜﺮﻯى‬ ‫ﺃأﻳﯾﻦ‬
apparently says, "Where is Pleiades compared to the soil, and where is Muâwiyah
compared to Âliyy?” The locations of Muâwiyah and Âliyy are not actually sought,
although “ayna” is used. It compares the high status of Âliyy, the rightly guided caliph,
Al-KAYFIYYAH
(which is high like the stars) to the status of Muâwiyah, who was unjust and committed
major sins by rebelling against the rightly guided caliph.
The terms “fi-s-sama’” 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 ‫ﷺ‬, An-
Nabighah, the Companion, said:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤــــــﺎء‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻐﻨﺎ‬
“We reached the sky,” as narrated by Ibn Âbdu-l-Barr. He meant that by the blessing of
Islam, Allah raised their ranks.
EXTRA DETAIL:
“the meaning of ‘makan’”
We do not object to saying that “ayna” asks about the “makan”, but know that
“makan” does not only mean, “place”, it also means “makanah (status)”. So if a
Wahhabiyy 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 “makan” (and
he will say, “which means the place”). We agree, but makan can also mean “makanah
(status)”. Hence, the Wahhabiyy has no proof. If he asks for proof that “makan” can
mean “the status (makanah)”, then refer to the narration in which Al-Âbbas said “O
Allah, the people are directing their supplication to you by me because of my MAKAN to
your prophet.” This is narrated by Al-Bazzar, and they narrate this hadith when
attempting to discredit tawassul by the Prophet after his death. Truly, Al-Âbbas was
referring his status of being The Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬companion and uncle, and not to the
place he was in, because even blasphemers stood there. As such, the word “ayna” does
ask about the “makan”, which can mean “place” or “status”.
***
And so, this hadith neither proves that Allah is in a place, nor that it is permissible to ask
about a place for Him. It is permissible to ask “ayna-llah?” in Arabic, if the person
Al-KAYFIYYAH
means, “What do you believe about the status of Allah?” but one cannot ask, “Where is
Allah?” or “What place is Allah in?” because this is implying that Allah is in a place,
which is blasphemy. Everyone must be certain with no doubt that Allah 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 hadith.
One is the rejected literal meaning, which contradicts
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬1
<<Nothing resembles Allah >>.
The other interpretation is that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬asked her about her belief in Allah, and
her reply meant that Allah 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 hadith.
DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE HADITH
Know that in many cases, a hadith would have several narrations. This is because the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬did 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
hadith would vary from one narrator to another. Take an example from the previously
mentioned hadith:
‫ ﻏﻴﯿﺮﻩه‬ ‫ ﺷﻲ ٌء‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻜﻦ‬ ‫ ﻟﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻥن‬
“Allah existed, and there was nothing other than Him.2” Al-Bayhaqiyy narrated the
same hadith, but with different wording:
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
narrated by Al-Bukhariyy
Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻥن‬
“Allah existed before everything.” These are examples of one hadith having different
narrations. This hadith 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, Imam Malik, which is stronger
than Imam Muslim’s narration. In his book called Al-Muatta’, Malik narrated that the
Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬asked the girl:
‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺗﺸﻬﮭﺪﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻻ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ ﺃأﺗﺸْﻬﮭﺪﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻝل‬
“Do you testify that no one is God except Allah (Atashhadina an la ilaha illa-llah)?”
she said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah?”
She said, “Yes.”
As we can see, this narration does not ask about a place for Allah. In it, The Prophet ‫ﷺ‬
asked the girl about her belief in Allah. 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, and not about a place for Allah, because they are merely different narrations of the
same hadith. It would only be ludicrous to interpret the narration of Imam Muslim by the
literal meaning, for then it would not comply with a stronger narration, the narration of
Malik. We do not interpret two different narrations of the same hadith so that they would
conflict with each other; we interpret them to comply with each other.
HAD THE WAHHABIYY UNDERSTANDING BEEN

CORRECT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SAY “IN THE
SKY” TO BE CONSIDERED A MUSLIM
A third reason this hadith does not prove their claim is the fact that the Wahhabiyy
understanding of it contradicts a basic, fundamental rule that all Muslims know: A
person’s Islam is confirmed upon uttering the Shahadah. According to the Wahhabiyys,

Al-KAYFIYYAH
The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬taught 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 Wahhabiyys should consider the Jews
and Christians believers, but they do not. Therefore, the narration of Malik clarifies what
The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬was asking, and the narration of Muslim is understood according to
Malik’s narration, in which she actually was asked about the Shahadah, and that complies
with the basics of the Religion. For this reason, An-Nawawiyy said when explaining the
narration of Muslim,
In the hadith is evidence that the blasphemer does not become a believer except
by confessing about (the oneness of) Allah, and the message of the Messenger of
Allah, ‫ﷺ‬, and in it is evidence that whoever confesses about the two shahadahs
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...
THE FACT THAT THE HADITH IS NARRATED BY MUSLIM

DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM
If they say that this hadith is narrated by Muslim, whose book is the second most
authentic book of hadith, we agree (according to most scholars), but this fact does not
benefit the Wahhabiyy. Firstly, not every hadith narrated by Muslim is strong. To think
that there is not a single weak hadith in the book of Muslim whatsoever is an evidence of
one’s ignorance in the science of hadith. It is confirmed in even the smallest books of
hadith terminology that there are hadiths for which Imam Muslim has been criticized,
which is one of the reasons that his book is the second strongest book of hadith narration.
Furthermore, Muslim did not explain this hadith of the slave woman; he only narrated it.
Narrating and explaining are two different issues not to be confused. As a blow below the
belt, the Wahhabiyys may claim that because of their prestige, the narrations of Al-
Bukhariyy and Muslim are enough without taking other books of hadith into
consideration. This is utter stupidity and foolishness. It is not the way of Ahlu-s-Sunnah

Al-KAYFIYYAH
to reject any authentic text from the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, and the fact is that the authentic
hadiths are spread throughout hundreds of books.
Thus, when a hafidh judges a hadith as authentic, that is according to his own research.
Some scholars said that Muslim’s narration is weak; a specific type of weakness called
“shuthuth” (oddness). This is when a hadith seems to be authentic, but it opposes other
authentic narrations from those who are stronger in memorization or more numerous. In
this case, the preserved narration would be the narration of Malik:
‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺗﺸﻬﮭﺪﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻻ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ ﺃأﺗﺸْﻬﮭﺪﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻝل‬
He said, “Do you testify that no one is God except Allah?” she said, “Yes.” He said,
“Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah?” She said, “Yes.”
Other scholars refrained from applying any version of the hadith because of a different
type of weakness called "idtirab (disorder; inconsistency)". This is when the differences
in the versions of one hadith do not comply with each other and there is no way to give
priority to one over the other. They said that the different narrations of this hadith have
too great of a discrepancy in their texts and chains; One narration says “ayna-llah”, one
narration says “Do you testify that no one is God but Allah?”, one says that the female
slave was mute and could not speak at all, and one narration says, “Who is your Lord?”
Abu Hanifah even narrates a version of the hadith 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. There are also
inconsistencies in the chains of this hadith. Hence, this hadith is unreliable in the issues
of belief, and among a small number of hadiths for which Imam Muslim was criticized.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE HADITH IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO BE A PROOF IN

THE ISSUE OF BELIEF
Additionally, unless narrated through many, many different routes (mutawatir by the
statement) the scholars do not claim that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said those exact words to the
very letter. The Qur’an is an example. Its wording can be traced back to the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬
through so many chains that we can confirm that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬recited those exact
words to the very letter (while believing that the Qur’an he conveyed was not his own
Qur’an wording, but was the wording revealed unto him). In such a case, they would say
that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬used those very words. If not narrated like that, they do not give a
100% guarantee that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬used those exact words. This hadith of the slave
woman is not mutawatir, and is not even mashhur (narrated from at least three people).
Some of the very stern scholars of âqidah 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 ‫ ﷺ‬could 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 hadith, the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬asked 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 Allah.
They put all of the different narrations together and came up with a common meaning,
like Imam Al-Bayhaqiyy. Parenthetically, the narration in which she was mute and raised
her finger is weak, but can be interpreted to mean that Allah is one, or that He has the
high majesty. Some of the Wahhabiyys claim that Muslim narrated that the female slave
pointed up and said, "In the sky." Saying "fi-s-sama’ " 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 Malik, and do not interpret
the narration of Muslim to comply with the narration of Malik is an indication that they
are misguided, since they pick and choose which narrations they want, and hide the
others.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
A SCHOLARLY CLARIFICATION
Among the trustworthy, reliable scholars who explained this hadith, is An-Nawawiyy, in
his very famous explanation of Sahih Muslim. Among what he said about this hadith is:
This hadith is among the hadiths of attributes, and there are two methods in
explaining it,”... “One is to believe in it without delving into its meaning,
confirming
{( ‫})ﻟ ﺲ ﳈﺜ ﳾء‬ 1
<<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’wil 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 doer2 (of whatever He willed) is indeed
Allah 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 Kaˆbah- and that is
not because He is limited to the sky, just as He is not limited to the direction of the
Kaˆbah, rather because the sky is the qiblah of those who supplicate, just as the
Kaˆbah 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
‫( ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬fi-s-sama’, which apparently means “in the sky”) He knew that she was
a monotheist, and not an idol worshipper. Al-Qadi Îyad said, ‘There is no
difference between the Muslims altogether; the scholar of fiqh, the scholar of
hadith, the scholar of belief, the skillful debater, and the common Muslim, that the
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
2
The Creator (Al-Khaliq) and the Manager (Al-Muddabbir) are capitalized as they are names of Allah. The
scholars said that Allah is a “doer”, not as a name but as a description. Thus it was not capitalized.
3
Meaning that they do not direct themselves to the sky because their idols are in front of them.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
outward meanings of what is narrated in mentioning Allah the exalted being in

the sky, like His saying:
{( ‫}) ٔ ٔﻣ ﱲ ﻣﻦ ﰲ اﻟﺴﲈء ٔن ﳜﺴﻒ ﲂ ا ٔرض‬1
and texts like it, are not by their literal meanings, rather they are all given
ta’wil 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 Kaˆbah …” The Wahhabiyys say that
we hold our hands to the sky when supplicating, because Allah is above us. Truly, it is
not proof. If lifting the hands to the sky proves that Allah is above us, then facing the
Kaˆbah would prove that Allah is in Makkah, which they do not believe. Nor do not say
that the saying of Allah in the Qur’an:
{( ‫})ﺑ ﱵ‬
<< My house >>,
referring to the Kaˆbah, means the place where Allah 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 Kaˆbah in prayer because the Kaˆbah is
the qiblah for the prayer. Besides that, Muslim narrated that on occasions, the Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬made 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 hadith. So do the Wahhabiyys know better than An-Nawawiyy?
Do they claim to know better about the hadith than the scholars of hadith? Can they
produce the name of a reliable scholar who said that An-Nawawiyy was wrong- other than
Al-Albaniyy, who truly is not a scholar? If they say that it is possible that An-Nawawiyy
1
Al-Mulk, 16 (which apparently translates as, “Do you feel secure from who is in the sky that he would not
make the ground split from beneath you?”)
Al-KAYFIYYAH
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 WAHHABIYYS TA’WIL FOR THE HADITH
They moreover claim to take the literal meaning of Imam Muslim’s narration, yet they
claim that Allah is high above His Ârsh, above the sky. How then, can they go by the
apparent meaning of this hadith which apparently says that Allah is in the sky? In their
English translations of this hadith, they say that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬asked her, “Where is
Allah?” and she replied, “He is above the heavens,” which is ta’wil on their part. The
word ‫“ ﻓﻲ‬fi” apparently means “in”, although it could mean ‫ˆ“ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ala (on, over,
upon)”. The word ‫“ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬as- sama’” apparently means “the sky”. The term mentioned
in Muslim’s narration is singular ‫( ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬sky; heaven), not plural ‫( ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﻮﺍاﺕت‬skies;

heavens). If they take the literal meaning, they have to say that Allah is in the sky, but
they believe that Allah is above the skies. If they want to say that it means that Allah is
above the skies, then they are not taking the literal meaning (ta’wil), and cannot accuse us
of anything when we do not take the literal meaning.
SIMILAR TEXTS
In the Wahhabiyy mistranslation of the Qur’an, they do the same for the aforementioned
verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, 16:
{( ‫}) ٔ ٔﻣ ﱲ ﻣﻦ ﰲ اﻟﺴﲈء‬
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 Allah 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 ‫“ ﻣﻦ‬man” (who;; whoever) can be singular or plural. If used in the
singular context to refer to Allah, it means the One with the highest status. If used in the
Al-KAYFIYYAH
plural context, then it refers to the angels who live in the sky, and on occasions have
come down by the order of Allah to inflict the punishment on the transgressors.
This hadith of the female slave, this verse in the chapter of Al-Mulk, and other texts like
them are reasons why some of the Wahhabiyys said that Allah exists in the sky. Among
those hadiths is:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺮﺣﻤﻜﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻷﺭرﺽض‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ﺍاﺭرﺣﻤﻮﺍا‬
“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
hadith, with the terms ‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬ ‫ﺃأﻫﮬﮪھﻞ‬, “the people of the sky”. They would say that Allah
is in the sky, He ascends up, and sits on the Ârsh, mounts it, or establishes Himself on it.
They would say that He is above the Ârsh and He descends down to the sky at nighttime.
They do not usually say that He sits on the Ârsh in America (although Ibn Taymiyah said
that Allah sits), but our brothers from overseas report that they do. Here, they say, “He is
above the Ârsh” (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 Ârsh. Allah 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 Imam Malik’s narration before mentioning that the terms of
the hadith 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’an. In
the chapter of Az-Zumar, verse 68, Allah said:
{( ‫})و ﻧﻔﺦ ﰲ اﻟﺼﻮر ﻓﺼﻌﻖ ﻣﻦ ﰲ اﻟﺴﻤﻮات و ﻣﻦ ﰲ ا ٔرض إﻻ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺎء ﷲ‬

Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<The Horn will be blown, and whoever is in the skies or on Earth will faint, except
those whom Allah willed.>>
Fainting does not befit Allah. If the Wahhabiyy says, “It means that those whom Allah did
not will to faint will not faint, so Allah will not faint while He is in the sky when the horn
blows,” we say, “Allah 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-Ambiya’, verse 104, Allah said:
{( ‫ﻄﻲ اﻟﺴ ﻞ ﻠﻜ ﺐ‬
ّ ‫})ﻳﯾﻮم ﻧﻄﻮي اﻟﺴﲈء‬
<<The Day when We (Allah) will fold the sky like books…>>
According to their belief, Allah 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, with angels at their entrances.
Once, a new Muslim was shaken by this hadith. He had never heard about it before, but
he knew that Allah is not like His creations in any way. Knowing this rule and hearing
this hadith explained by a Wahhabiyy 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.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SAYING OF ALLAH:

ِ ‫})اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬
{(‫اﻟﻌـﺮش اﺳﺘﻮى‬
<<AR-RAHMANU ÂLA-L-ÂRSHI-STAWA>>
I
f not for Hadithu-l-Jariyah, this verse:
{( ِ ‫})اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬1
<<Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>>
would be our first reference. It is their favorite verse. They claim it to be proof that Allah
is above His Ârsh, or that He sits upon it. Let us take a closer look at this honorable
verse that is clear of their incorrect interpretation:
THE TAFSIR OF THE VERSE AND HOW TO REFUTE THE

WAHHABIYYS WHO MISINTERPRET IT
The word { ‫"}اﻟﺮﲪﻦ‬Ar-Rahman" is a name of Allah. 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”2.
The word { ‫ˆ"}ﻋ ﲆ‬ala" is what in English would be a preposition. It may mean "on",
"over (by status or by place)”, “according to”, and more.
The word { ِ }"The Ârsh" apparently means "the throne", but is not really a chair; it
‫اﻟﻌـﺮش‬
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 { ‫" }اﺳﺘﻮى‬Istawa" has many, many meanings. It is a verb that refers to the
eternal attribute of Allah called Al-Istiwa’. It has a befitting meaning, and Allah knows its
1
Taha, 5
2
Al-Asma’ wa-s-Sifat
Al-KAYFIYYAH
reality. One of its meanings is "sat", which does not befit Allah, and this is why some
Wahhabiyys said “Allah sits on His throne.” Al-Qamus, the famous dictionary by Al-
Fayruz’abadiyy, lists 15 meanings for it. Because of this dictionary, every Arabic
dictionary was called “qamus”. More meanings will be mentioned as we go along, if
Allah willed.
There are two methods of interpreting texts like this, as An-Nawawiyy mentioned about
the hadith of the female slave: One is to believe in it without assigning any 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 Allah and His Messenger ‫ﷺ‬
know about it. We confirm that its meaning is becoming without stipulating what that
meaning is, and we merely say, “Allah is attributed with istawa.” This is actually the
general way of the Salaf, and the meaning of Ash-Shafiîyy’s saying, “I believe in what
came from Allah according to the meaning that Allah willed and I believe in what came
from the Messenger of Allah according to the meaning that the Messenger of Allah
meant.” So let the Wahhabiyys follow it.
Do not be fooled by the misquoted translations produced by Wahhabiyys. They bring

mistranslated quotes from the Imams about this issue, claiming that they said, "We
believe that Allah rose above His Ârsh," while truly they only said, "We believe in
Istiwa’ ". They DID NOT say, "We believe that istawa means that Allah rose above His
Ârsh." Nor did they say, "We believe that istawa means that Allah sat…" They said,
"Istawa without a how", not “He sat without a how.” They said, “The meaning of istawa
is not like what is imagined,” and not, “It is impossible to say how Allah mounted the
Ârsh”. For that reason, if a Wahhabiyy 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 istawa when attributed to Allah means
"rose above" or "sat". In other words, tell him to bring the proof that those scholars
assigned a particular definition to “istawa” over another, and do not accept a simple

Al-KAYFIYYAH
translation that of course, is by a Wahhabiyy. If the Wahhabiyy brings some statements

from some of the old, reliable scholars, like Mujahid the student of Ibn Âbbas and Al-
Farra’, claiming that those scholars said it means “rose above” by using such words as
“‫( ﺍاﺭرﺗﻔﻊ‬irtafaâ)” or “‫ˆ( ﻋﻼ‬ala)”, then know that even those words still can have the
meaning of highness in status and majesty, not only highness in place. That is assuming
that the narrations are authentic. Do not be shaken by this, because it is known that there
are two types of highness: physical, which is impossible to be an attribute of Allah, and
majestic, which is permissible. Thus, had they used words that attribute “highness” to
Allah, that is not evidence that Allah is in a place. Furthermore, had they intended by
those expressions that Allah exists in a physical location, they would be rejected by virtue
of the definitive evidence that Allah does not resemble His creation.
The other method is to look into the Arabic language and select what is befitting to Allah.
For example, do not use “he sat (jalasa)”, because that implies that Allah has a body. Do
not use “to become upright (iˆtadala)”, for that would liken Allah to the plants that stand
tall on their stalks, as Allah told us about the crops:
{( ‫})ﻓَ ْﺎﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى َ َﲆ ُﺳﻮ ِﻗ ِﻪ‬1
<<It stood upright on its stalk>>.
Do not use the meaning “to ripen (nadija)”, for that would liken Allah to the fruits, nor
“to become complete (tamma)”, for that would liken Him to the men who reach the prime
of their strength, as Allah told us about Prophet Musa:
{( ‫}) َوﻟَﻤﺎ ﺑَﻠَ َﻎ ُﺷﺪ ُﻩ َو ْاﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى َ ٓﺗَ ْ َﺎ ُﻩ ُﺣ ْﳬًﺎ َو ِﻠْ ًﻤﺎ‬2
<<When he reached the prime of his strength and was complete, We granted him
prophethood and knowledge>>.
1
Al-Fath, 29
2
Al-Qasas, 14
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Do not use “to dwell in a place or to be firmly established upon something (istaqarra)”,
or else He would be similar to the Ark. Allah told us in His book about that Ark:
{( ‫}) َو ْاﺳ َﺘ َﻮ ْت َ َﲆ اﻟْ ُﺠﻮ ِد ِّي‬1
<<It settled upon (the peak of ) Mt. Judiyy>>.
None of these meanings befit Allah, even though they are linguistically applicable to
“istawa”, and there are many more meanings.
One of the meanings of “istawa” is ‫“ ﻗﻬﮭﺮ‬qahara (to subdue)”. If a Wahhabiyy says that
this does not befit Allah, because it implies that Allah did not have control over the Ârsh,
and then conquered it, we say, “Then do not say it means He rose above the Ârsh,
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 Allah, are His two names, ‫ﺍاﻟﻘﺎﻫﮬﮪھﺮ‬
‘Al-Qahir’ and ‫ﻬﮭﺎﺭر‬

ّ ‫‘ ﺍاﻟﻘ‬Al-Qahhar’, which are mentioned in the Qur’an and hadiths, and
derive from qahara. The correct explanation is that when the Ârsh was created, it was
subjugated by Allah’s power. There is no implication of struggle.” In this verse, Allah
informed us that He subdues the Ârsh, the largest of creations, and subsequently controls
everything else, and this is what many of the Salaf said. Al-Bukhariyy narrated about
Mujahid:
ِ ‫اﻟﻌ ْﺮ‬
{‫ش‬ ِ َ َ‫وﻗ‬
َ ‫}ﻋﻠَﻰ‬
َ «َ‫ » َﻋﻼ‬: {‫}اﺳﺘَـ َﻮى‬
ْ :‫ﺎل ُﳎَﺎﻫ ٌﺪ‬ َ
“Mujahid said, istawa means âla (subjugated) the Ârsh.” Az-Zajjaj said in Maâni-l-
Qur’an:
‫وﻗﺎﻟﻮا ﻣﻌﲎ )اﺳﺘﻮى( اﺳﺘﻮﱃ‬
“They said that the meaning of istawa is ‘subjudgated’.” Al-Akhfash said:
1
Hud, 44
Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﻗَ َﺪر‬:"َ‫"ﻋﻼ‬
َ ‫"ﻋﻼَ" وﻣﻌﲎ‬
َ ‫اﺳﺘَـ َﻮى{ ﻳﻘﻮل‬
ْ ‫ش‬ِ ‫}ﻋﻠَﻰ اﻟ َْﻌ ْﺮ‬
َ
“Istawa over the Ârsh means subjugated (âla), and the meaning of subjugated (âla) is
the ascription of power.” And there are many more references.
However, you may need to know that they have another deception they practice: They
say that whenever the verb َ‫ﻋﻼ‬

َ (âla) is made transitive by the particle ‫ˆ( َﻋﻠَﻰ‬ala), such as
Mujahid’s statement: “âla âla-l-Ârsh” means emphatically “rose over the Ârsh”, and
cannot refer to domination or supremecy. This is another lie that is refuted by the 91st
verse of Al-Mu’minun:
<(‫>)و َﻣﺎ َﰷ َن َﻣ َﻌ ُﻪ ِﻣ ْﻦ ا َ ٍ ا ًذا َ َ ﻫ ََﺐ ُﰻ ا َ ٍ ِﺑ َﻤﺎ َ ﻠ َ َﻖ َوﻟ َ َﻌ َﻼ ﺑ َ ْﻌﻀُ ﻬُ ْﻢ َ َﲆ ﺑ َ ْﻌ ٍﺾ‬

َ
<<There was never a god with Him. Had there been, then every god would have
taken what it created and some of them would have dominated (the verb َ‫ﻼ‬
‫ˆ[ َﻋ‬ala])
over (the particle ‫ َﻋﻠَﻰ‬ [âla]) others.>>
EXTRA DETAIL:
“their denial that istiwa’ means subjugation”
Their claim that the meaning “subjugation” for “istawa” is unfounded in the Arabic
language is easily countered by the statements of many linguists, some already
mentioned, and others such as Ar-Raghib Al-Asbahaniyy, in his famous book Mufradat
Al-Qur’an, where he said:
{ ‫وﻣﱴ ﻋﺪي ﺑﻌﻠﻰ اﻗﺘﻀﻰ ﻣﻌﲎ اﻻﺳﺘﻴﻼء ﻛﻘﻮﻟﻪ } اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﺮش اﺳﺘﻮى‬
“Whenever it (istawa) is made transitive by (the preposition) “âla”, it has the meaning
of subjugation.” Yes, even scholars from the Salaf have documented that, such as the
mujtahid and hafidh, At-Tabariyy in his book of tafsir, where he said, “In the speech of

Al-KAYFIYYAH
the Arabs, al-istiwa’ is used to have different meanings…,” then he said after listing
several:
‫وﻣﻨﻬﺎ اﻻﺣﺘﻴﺎز واﻻﺳﺘﻴﻼء‬
“Among those meanings is “taking possession” and “subjugation”.” This is enough to
counter a Wahhabiyy who says that Ibn Al-Aˆrabiyy was asked if he knows about
“istawa” having the meaning of “istawla” (subjugation), and he said, “I do not know
it”. The scholars have a rule:
‫ ﻳﯾﺤﻔﻆ‬ ‫ ﻟﻢ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ ﺣﺠﺔ‬ ‫ ﺣﻔﻆ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
“The one who knows or memorizes something is given priority over he who does not.” If
they produce another narration in which he said, “The Arabs do not say that a person
conquered something (‫ ﺍاﻟﺸﻲء‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ )ﺍاﺳﺘﻮﻟﻰ‬unless he had an opponent…,” respond by
saying, “this narration contradicts the first, because he is confirming that he knows the
meaning.” If they say, “At first he did not know it, but then he learned it,” respond by
saying, “Then it is also possible that he did not know that they use subjugation without a
reference to any previous struggle or the existence of an opponent.” What proves that
they did use the meaning of subjugation without the existence of a struggle or an
opponent is the famous verse of Arabic poetry:
‫ﻣﻦ ﻏﲑ ﺳﻴﻒ ودم ﻣﻬﺮاق‬ ‫ﻗﺪ اﺳﺘﻮى ﺑﺸﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﺮاق‬
“Bishr conquered Îraq without a sword and without blood spill.” If they say that the
poet who said this line is unknown, we respond by saying that several scholars, such as
Az-Zabidiyy1 and Ibn Kathir2 (whom they consider an authority) have confirmed him to
be Al-Akhtal, the Christian Arab poet. Additionally, anyone who has studied Arabic
properly knows that there are many lines of poetry used as references in the Arabic
1
In Taj Al-âruws
2
In his history book called Al-Bidayah wa-n-Nihayah
Al-KAYFIYYAH
language, despite that their authors are unknown. The condition is that they are
confirmed to be from the period of those whose speech is used as references and evidence
in the Arabic language. If they say, “But he was a Christian, so how can you use his
speech as evidence?” The simple answer is that it is not a condition for the poet to be a
Muslim. The condition is that he came from the period of those whose speech is used as
reference for the rules of the language. Many lines of poetry that were said by the idol
worshippers were quoted by Ibn Âbbas when he would interpret verses of the Qur’an.”
***
The Wahhabiyy might ask, “Why is the Istiwa’ over the Ârsh specifically mentioned if
Allah did not rise over it? What is the benefit of specifying that He subdues and controls
the Ârsh in particular- since He has power over all things?”, The response is, “To point
out the status of the Ârsh, just as He said in the Qur’an:
{( ‫})وﻫﻮ رب اﻟﻌﺮش اﻟﻌﻈﲓ‬1

<<He is the Lord of the great Ârsh>>,
and this does not negate the fact that He is the Lord of all things.”
What further validates this meaning of istawa are the verses that come before and after
the verse in question. Allah said in the Qur’an:
‫( َ ُ َﻣﺎ ِﰲ اﻟﺴ َﻤ َﺎو ِات َو َﻣﺎ ِﰲ ا ْ ْر ِض َو َﻣﺎ ﺑ َ ْﳯَ ُ َﻤﺎ َو َﻣﺎ‬5) ‫( اﻟﺮ ْﲪ َُﻦ َ َﲆ اﻟْ َﻌ ْﺮ ِش ْاﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى‬4) ‫} ﺗ ْ َِﲋ ًﻳﯾﻼ ِﻣﻤ ْﻦ َ ﻠ َ َﻖ ا ْ ْر َض َواﻟﺴ َﻤ َﺎو ِات اﻟْ ُﻌ َﲆ‬
{((6) ‫اﻟﱶى‬ َ ‫َ ْﲢ َﺖ‬
The first verse, which is the fourth in the chapter of Taha, contains the meaning that
Allah created the Earth and the heavens, and the third of the three verses, which is the
sixth verse in the chapter, contains the meaning that Allah owns the heavens and the earth
and all that is in between them. Since the Qur’an is the most eloquent speech, then by
virtue of the context, it is more likely that the meaning of the fifth verse is that Allah
1
At-Tawbah, 129
Al-KAYFIYYAH
controls and subdues the Ârsh. This is so because Allah 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?
One of the meanings of “istawa” is ‫“ ﺣ ِﻔﻆ‬hafidha (to preserve; to protect)”. From which
the name of Allah ‫“ ﺍاﻟﺤﻔﻴﯿﻆ‬Al-Hafidh” is derived. If interpreted by this, it means that

Allah preserves the Ârsh and keeps it high above Paradise. If not for Allah’s preservation
of the Ârsh, 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, as well as weakness in the pure Arabic
language, so there was a necessity to specify meanings for those verses. The scholars of
the Salaf occasionally assigned particular meanings to the ambiguous 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 WAHHABIYYS AND HOW TO

REFUTE THEIR CLAIMS
The Wahhabiyys do not stop there. They believe that since Allah attributed Al-Istiwa’ to
Himself more than once in the Qur’an, this emphasizes the meaning that Allah is above
in a place, We simply tell them that they are wrong. If they say that Allah said:
{(‫}) َﰒ اﺳﺘﻮى ﲆ اﻟﻌﺮش‬1
<<Thumma-stawa âla-l-ârsh>>,
we say it does not mean that He is in a place. We combat their misinterpretation with the
verse:
{( ‫})وﻫﻮ ﻣﻌﲂ ٔﻳﯾ ﻛﻨﱲ‬1

1
Ar-Ra3d, 2
Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<Wa hua maâkum aynama kuntum>>.
Apparently, it means “He is with you wherever you are”. They do not take this literally
because it contradicts their belief that Allah is above us. If they say the verse:
{(‫}) ُﰒ ْاﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى ا َﱃ اﻟﺴ َﻤﺎ ِء‬2
<<thumma-stawa ila-s-sama’>>,
then we counter with the verse:
{( ‫ﲁ ﳾ ٍء ﳏﻴﯿﻂ‬
ّ ‫}) ٔ ٓ إﻧﻪ‬3
<<Ala innahu bikulli shay’in muhit>>,
which apparently means: “Does not Allah surround everything?” They also do not take
this verse literally.
If they believe that Allah revealed istawa 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’wil, denying that Allah 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.
If they say, “Had Allah willed for a meaning other than being above the throne, He would
have used such an expression to clarify that, so do not say it means that Allah subjugated
the throne,” We respond by saying, “You have fallen into what you are trying to escape,
because according to your method, you cannot say that it means that Allah is above the
1
Al-Hadiyd, 4
2
Al-Baqarah, 29
3
Fussilat, 54
Al-KAYFIYYAH
throne, because that is not the expression mentioned; rather, the mentioned expression is
merely “istawa”.”
EXTRA DETAIL:
“their attribution of time to Allah”
The Wahhabiyyah have attributed time to Allah, which is one of the greatest indications
that they believe that He has created attributes. Among what they use to ascribe time to
Him is the verse:
{( ‫})ان َر ُ ُﲂ ا ُ ا ِ ي َ ﻠَ َﻖ اﻟﺴ َﻤ َﺎو ِات َوا ْر َض ِﰲ ِﺳ ﺘ ِﺔ ٍم ُﰒ ْاﺳ ﺘَ َﻮى َ َﲆ اﻟْ َﻌ ْﺮ ِش‬1
which they say means, “Surely, your Lord created the skies and the Earth in six days,
then He rose above the throne.” They explain by saying, “The word (thumma ( )) ‫َﰒ‬
means, “then”, which expresses “delay”; the occurrence of something after the
occurrence of something else by considerable time (tarakhi)”. We answer by saying,
‫َﰒ‬
“Thumma ( ) originally means, “then”, but it can also mean “and” and thus does not
give the meaning of delay and time. Allah told us in the Qur’an:
{( ‫}) َ ﻠَﻘَ ُﲂ ِّﻣﻦ ﻧ ْﻔ ٍﺲ َوا ِ ﺪَ ٍة ُﰒ َﺟ َﻌ َﻞ ِﻣﳯْ َﺎ َز ْو َ َﺎ‬2”
<<He created you from one soul and He created from that soul its spouse>>.
This verse is reference to the creation of Adam, his wife and their progeny. If taken
apparently it would mean, “He created you from one soul, then He created from that soul
its spouse”, which would imply that his children were created before their mother. This
meaning is impossible, since it is known that His spouse was created before his progeny.
Likewise, it is known that Allah did not physically rise above the Ârsh at a time after the
creation of the skies and Earth, and had they had a proper creed about the eternal
1
Ar-Ra3d, 2
2
Az-Zumar, 6
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Creator, they would not have said such a thing. The true meaning is, <<Surely your Lord
created the skies and the Earth in six days, and He istawa âla-l-ârsh>>;” according
to the aforementioned possibilities previously mentioned.
***
THE SAYING OF IMAM MALIK
To close this section, know that these people refer to an unconfirmed narration from
Imam Malik. They say that he said, "Istawa is known but the 'how' is not." This narration
is discredited by two narrations from Al-Bayhaqiyy, one in Al-Asma’u wa-s-Sifat, and the
other in Al-Iˆtiqad.
In the former, he narrates from the route of Âbdu-llah Ibn Wahb that he said, “We were
with Malik Ibn Anas when a man came in and said, ‘O Abu Âbdu-llah,
{( ِ ‫})اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬1, how is His Istiwa’? ’, Then Malik lowered his head and
was overtaken by sweat, then he raised his head and said, ‘{( ِ ‫})اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬2,
just as He attributed to Himself; how is not said, and how is inapplicable (ânhu marfuˆ).
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 Yahya Ibn Yahya that he said, “We
were with Malik Ibn Anas when a man came and said, ‘O Abu Âbdu-l-lah, 3{( ‫اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ‬
ِ )}, How did He istawa?’ So Malik lowered his head, then started sweating,
and then said, ‘Istawa is not unknown, ‘how’ is not rational (ghayru maˆqul), 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.”
1

He recited the verse: {‫ﻟﻌـﺮش اﺳﺘﻮى‬
ِ ‫<< }اﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﻋ ﲆ ا‬Ar-Rahmanu âla-l-ârshi-stawa>> (Taha, 5)
2
Taha, 5
3
Like the previous footnote.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Remember, there is a great difference between saying, "We do not know how Allah is",
and saying " Allah has no 'how' ". It is important to know that some people use this type
of expression to mean, “the reality”. Thus they would say, “I do not know how Allah is.”
What they mean is that they do not know His reality. According to this meaning, it is not
blasphemy. As for those Wahhabiyys, they say that they do not know how His two hands
are, and how He puts His foot in Hell, and how He goes up and down in the sky, and this
is blasphemy.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HADITH OF AN-NUZUL
A
n appropriate third reference would be the hadith of An-Nuzul:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺪﻧﻴﯿﺎ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻤﺎء‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻰ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺑﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﯾﻨﺰﻝل‬1
“Yanzilu Rabbuna ila-s-sama’i-d-dunya”, which literally says, “Our Lord descends to
the lowest sky.”
According to the Arabic language, “nuzul” would literally be movement from one place
to a lower one. If a Wahhabiyy says, “Allah 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 nuzul of Allah is not motion, and that His nuzul
is not like the descent of the creatures, but what is meant is that they were not specifying
a meaning for nuzul, as mentioned numerous times already. So the difference between
what the scholars said, and saying, “Allah 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. Also, the Wahhabiyy actually does believe that Allah moves, as we
will show, but he only denies it with his tongue when challenged.
THE EXPLANATION OF IBN HAJAR AL-ÂSQALANIYY
If they say, “But Al-Bukhariyy narrated this hadith, and his book of hadith is known to be
the most authentic,” we say, “There is a difference between narrating a hadith to illustrate
its authenticity, and explaining the correct meaning of the hadith.” If they want to refer to
the scholars who explained it, then let us refer to the great scholar, Ibn Hajar Al-
Âsqalaniyy, Amiru-l-Mu’minina fi-l- Hadith (The prince of the Muslims in the science
of hadith), also known as “The Seal of the Hafidhs”. His is the most famous of the
explanations of Al-Bukhariyy’s book. Here are some statements given when speaking
about this hadith in his sharh (explanation) called Fathu-l-Bari:
1
Al-KAYFIYYAH
This hadith is used as a proof by those who confirm a direction to Allah, claiming
it is the direction of above, and the majority has rejected that, because such a
saying leads to (attributing) containment to Allah, and Allah is exalted from that.
There are different sayings about the meaning of “An-Nuzul”. Among them are
those who carry it on its apparent and literal meaning, and those are the
Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to the creations), and Allah 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 Allah 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-Ârabiyy said, ‘...as for his ‫ ﷺ‬saying “yanzilu” (which literally means
"he descends"), it refers to His doings 1 and not His self; it refers to Allah’s Angel
that descends with His order and prohibition. Nuzul, just as it exists in bodies,
also has an allegorical meaning, so if you carry the hadith 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 nuzul from one rank to another
rank, and that is correct Arabic.’, The summary is that he (Ibnu-l-Ârabiyy)
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 kindness2 towards those who supplicate, and the answering of their
supplication, and the like.
Abu Bakr Ibn Furak said that some shaykhs have narrated it with a dammah3 on
the beginning4, while omitting the direct object, i.e. descends an Angel, and what
strengthens that is what was narrated by An-Nasa’iyy,
1
His act of creating
2
i.e. mercy
3
the “oo” sound
4
so that it reads: ‫ ﺭرﺑﻨﺎ‬ ‫“ ﻳﯾُﻨﺰﻝل‬yunzilu Rabbuna”
Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ﱠ‬
‫ ﺩدﺍاﻉع‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﻞ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻘﻮﻝل‬ ‫ ﻣﻨﺎﺩدﻳﯾﺎ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺄﻣﺮ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻠﻴﯿﻞ‬ ‫ ﺷﻄﺮ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻤﻀﻰ‬ ‫ ﺣﺘﻰ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻤﻬﮭﻞ‬ َ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ﺇإﻥن‬
‫ ﻟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﯿﺴﺘﺠﺎﺏب‬
“After the middle of the night passes, certainly Allah orders a caller to
(descend and) call out 'Is there anyone making supplication, so that it
would be answered for him?” Al-Qurtubiyy said, ‘This lifts any
ambiguity’.”... “Al-Baydawiyy said, “Since it is confirmed by the definite
evidence 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...
Here, towards the end of the quote, Ibn Hajar mentioned narrations of this hadith that
prove that the one who descends from above to below is the Angel, not Allah. This
aforementioned narration of An-Nasa’iyy explains the narration of Al-Bukhariyy that the
Wahhabiyy would use to object to our explanation:
،٬‫ َﻣ ْﻦ ﻳَ ْﺪﻋُ ِﻮﱐ‬:‫ﻮل‬ ِ ‫ﺚ اﻟﻠﱠﻴ ِﻞ‬ ِ ِ ‫ﻳـ ْﻨ ِﺰ ُل رﺑﱡـﻨﺎ ﺗَـﺒﺎر َك وﺗَـﻌ َﺎﱃ ُﻛ ﱠﻞ ﻟَﻴـﻠَ ٍﺔ إِ َﱃ اﻟ ﱠ‬
ُ ‫اﻵﺧ ُﺮ ﻳَـ ُﻘ‬ ْ ُ ُ‫ﲔ ﻳَـ ْﺒـ َﻘﻰ ﺛـُﻠ‬ َ ‫ﺴ َﻤﺎء اﻟ ﱡﺪﻧْـﻴَﺎ ﺣ‬ ْ َ َ ََ ََ َ
ِ
ُ‫ َﻣ ْﻦ ﻳَ ْﺴﺘَـﻐْ ِﻔ ُﺮِﱐ ﻓَﺄَ ْﻏ ِﻔ َﺮ ﻟَﻪ‬،٬ُ‫ﻴﺐ ﻟَﻪُ َﻣ ْﻦ ﻳَ ْﺴﺄَﻟُِﲏ ﻓَﺄُ ْﻋﻄﻴَﻪ‬ ِ ْ ‫ﻓَﺄ‬
َ ‫َﺳﺘَﺠ‬
The Wahhabiyy would say, “This means: Our Lord, tabaraka wa taâla, descends every
night to the lowest sky while the last third of the night remains, and He says, ‘Who calls
upon Me so that I might answer him? Who asks Me so that I may grant him? Who seeks
My forgiveness so that I may forgive him?’ It must be Allah who descends in person,
because the Prophet said, ‘Our Lord descends and He says such and such.’ Had it been
the Angel who descended, it would not be valid for the Angel to say, “Who is asking Me
so that I may grant him, who is repenting to Me so that I may forgive him.” The answer is
that the Angel, just as he was ordered to descend, he was ordered to call out and convey
from Allah. It is as if the Angel says, “O people, your Lord says, ‘Who is calling me, who
is asking me, who is repenting to me’, etc.” This is why in the other narration it says:
‫ﰒﱠ ﻳـﺄﻣﺮ ﻣﻨﺎدﻳﺎ ﻳـُﻨَﺎدي ﻳَـ ُﻘﻮل َﻫﻞ ﻣﻦ َداع ﻳُ ْﺴﺘَ َﺠﺎب ﻟَﻪُ َﻫﻞ ﻣﻦ ُﻣ ْﺴﺘَـ ْﻐ ِﻔﺮ ﻳ ْﻐﻔﺮ ﻟَﻪُ َﻫﻞ ﻣﻦ َﺳﺎﺋﻞ ْﻳﻌﻄﻰ‬

Al-KAYFIYYAH
“…Then He commands a caller to call out, ‘Is there a supplicator so that he would
be answered, is there a repenter so that he would be forgiven, is there and asker sioo
that he would be given?’”
Always remember what Al-Îraqiyy said:
‫ ﺑﺎﻟﻮﺍاﺭرﺩد‬ ‫ ﻓﺴﺮﺗﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ ﺧﻴﯿﺮ‬ ‫ﻭو‬
“The best of what you used to interpret it (the hadith) was by that which was narrated
(i.e., another hadith).”
The synopsis is that the word “malak (angel)” is omitted, and omission (hathf) 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’an:
{(‫})و ْاﺳ لِ اﻟْﻘَ ْﺮﻳﯾ َ َﺔ‬

َ
<<Ask the village>>. The word “people (of)” is deliberately omitted, because that is
valid in Arabic. Another example is the saying of Allah:
َ ‫ُﻮن اﻻ ﻧْ ُﻔ َﺴﻬُ ْﻢ َو َﻣﺎ َْﺸ ُﻌ ُﺮ‬

<(‫ون‬ َ ‫>)ﳜَﺎ ِدﻋ‬
َ ‫ُﻮن ا َ َوا ِ َﻦ ٓ َﻣ ُﻮا َو َﻣﺎ َ ْﳜ َﺪﻋ‬ ُ
<<The hypocrites deceive (the Messenger of) Allah and those who believe, and they
fool no one but themselves.>>
This means that they show outwardly what is different from what they have inwardly,
and if translated word for word, it woud say that they deceive Allah, which is impossible.
The decent was only attributed to Allah because He commanded it. It is also like saying,
“The general bombed until nightfall,” or, “The judge imprisoned the criminal.” This does
not necessitate that the general or the judge did it himself, nor is that which was bombed
mentioned.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET DO NOT LEAD TO

IRRATIONAL MATTERS
Furthermore, if they say that Allah 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 Allah 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 lapses in one
area, it will shortly become the last third of the night in another, which means that
according to them, Allah would be going up and down relentlessly. Such a contradiction
is the result of this bad belief. To that they say with disgust, “May Allah protect us, you
are using your mind.”
Forget not that they are contradiction the authenic hadith:
ِ َ ْ‫ وأَﻧ‬،٬‫ﻚ َﺷﻲء‬ ِ ‫وأَﻧْ َ ﱠ‬

ٌ‫ﻚ َﺷ ْﻲء‬
َ َ‫ﺲ ُدوﻧ‬
َ ‫ﺖ اﻟْﺒَﺎﻃ ُﻦ ﻓَـﻠَْﻴ‬ َ ٌ ْ َ َ‫ﺲ ﻓَـ ْﻮﻗ‬
َ ‫ﺖ اﻟﻈﺎﻫ ُﺮ ﻓَـﻠَْﻴ‬ َ
“You, Allah, Are Adh-Dhahir, and there is nothing above you, and you are Al-Batin,
and there is nothing below you.” If Allah rose above something then something is
below him, and if He descends down, then He would be below something, and hence
something would be above Him.
SIMILAR TEXTS
For extra benefit, let us mention verse 157 of Al-Anâm:
<(‫ون اﻻ ْن ﺗ َ ِﳱَ ُ ُﻢ اﻟْ َﻤ َﻼ ِ َﻜ ُﺔ ْو ﻳﯾ َ ِ َﰐ َرﺑ َﻚ‬

َ ‫>) َﻫ ْﻞ ﻳﯾ َ ْﻨ ُﻈ ُﺮ‬
Literally translated it would say, “Are they awaiting other than the Angels to come, or for
Allah to come?”, and this is what the Wahhabiyys believe; that Allah will come to the

Al-KAYFIYYAH
people on Judgement Day. It truly means that the signs of Allah’s power will come, as
clarified by the 33rd verse of An-Nahl:
<(‫ون اﻻ ْن ﺗ َ ِﳱَ ُ ُﻢ اﻟْ َﻤ َﻼ ِ َﻜ ُﺔ ْو ﻳﯾ َ ِ َﰐ ْﻣ ُﺮ َرﺑ ّ َِﻚ‬

َ ‫>) َﻫ ْﻞ ﻳﯾ َ ْﻨ ُﻈ ُﺮ‬
<< Are they awaiting other than for the Angels to come, or for the Command (i.e.,
the traces of His power) of Allah to come?>>
If this is clear, then the true meaning of verse 22 of the chapter of Al-Fajr should be
clear:
{(‫})و َ َﺎء َرﺑ َﻚ َواﻟْ َﻤ َ ُ َﺻﻔﺎ َﺻﻔﺎ‬

َ
<<(The signs of the power of) your Lord will come and the angels will be standing
row after row>>.
Apparently, it says “And your Lord will come…” It does not mean that Allah is a body
who will move from one place to another, as the Wahhabiyys think. Imam Ahmad Ibn
Hambal gave this ta’wil, as authenticated by Imam Al-Bayhaqiyy in his book Manaqibu
Ahmad. Let us end this section with the proper explanation of An-Nahl, 26:
َ ‫>)ﻓ َ َﰏ ا ُ ﺑ ُ ْ َﺎﳖَ ُ ْﻢ ِﻣ َﻦ اﻟْﻘَ َﻮا ِ ِﺪ ﻓَﺨَﺮ َﻠَﳱْ ِ ُﻢ اﻟﺴ ْﻘ ُﻒ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻓ َ ْﻮ ِﻗﻬِ ْﻢ َو َ ُ ُﱒ اﻟْ َﻌ َﺬ ُاب ِﻣ ْﻦ َﺣ ْ ُﺚ َﻻ َْﺸ ُﻌ ُﺮ‬
<(‫ون‬
<<Allah (created tremors and clefts that) came to their construction, the roof fell upon them, and
the torture came to them from whence they did not expect>>.

Al-KAYFIYYAH

{(‫}) ٕاﻟﻴﯿﻪ ﻳﯾﺼﻌﺪ اﻟﳫﻢ اﻟﻄﻴﯿﺐ‬
<<ILAYHI YASÂDU-L-KALIMU-T-TAYYIB>>
A
great sign of their ignorance is their reference to Suratu Fatir, 10:
{( ‫}) ٕاﻟﻴﯿﻪ ﻳﯾﺼﻌﺪ اﻟﳫﻢ اﻟﻄﻴﯿﺐ‬
<<Ilayhi yasâdu-l-kalimu-t-tayyib>>.
They say that this verse proves that Allah exists above, because the verse apparently says,
“The good words ascend to Him.” They say that { ‫“ } ٕاﻟﻴﯿﻪ‬ilayhi” means “to (the place of)
Allah”, and the word { ‫“ }ﻳﯾﺼﻌﺪ‬yasâdu” 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
Allah >>. The Wahhabiyys may deny this interpretation because of their ignorance, but
we verify it by referring to another verse: As-Saffat, 99:
{( ‫ذاﻫﺐ إﱃ رﰊ ﺳﳱﺪ ﻦ‬

ٌ ‫})وﻗﺎل إﱐ‬
<<Wa qala inni thahibun ila rabbi sayahdin>>.
Apparently, this verse means that Prophet Ibrahim ‫ ﷺ‬said, “I am going to my Lord, He
will guide me.” He did not mean that He was going to the place of Allah, because he was
going to the land of Ash-Sham, the land of the Prophets (Âlayhimu-s-Salatu wa-s-
Salam), and an honorable place on Earth. If Allah exists in a place above us, then that
great Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬would not say that he was going to Allah if he was not going up. What

Al-KAYFIYYAH
he meant, is that he was going to the place honored by his Lord. Hence, just as in this
verse
{( ‫})إﱃ رﰊ‬
“ila rabbi (to my Lord)” means “to (the place honored by) my Lord”, the word
{( ‫}) ٕاﻟﻴﯿﻪ‬
“ilayhi (to Him)” means “to (the place honored by) Him (Allah)”. So, we 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 Allah.
THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE LITERAL MEANING
Furthermore, the Wahhabiyys 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 hadith says the angels write down the good words (which is
true), and they understand the verse in conjunction with the hadith, then we say, “There is
also another hadith:
‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﺩدﻭوﻧﻚ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺒﺎﻁطﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺖ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﻓﻮﻗﻚ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻈﺎﻫﮬﮪھﺮ‬ ‫ﺃأﻧﺖ‬
‘O Allah, 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,’ (Muslim and Al-Bayhaqiyy) so understand the verse according to this hadith
also.”

Al-KAYFIYYAH
A SIMILAR TEXT
Similar to the aforementioned texts, is the famous hadith of the Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬ascent to
the seven heavens, and what is above them (and since Allah is not similar to the Prophet,
He did not ascend above the seven heavens). In it, Prophet Musa ‫ ﷺ‬said to our Prophet
‫ﷺ‬:
‫ ﺭرﺑﻚ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﺍاﺭرﺟﻊ‬
“Irjiˆ ila rabbik” which apparently means, “go back to your Lord”. The proper meaning
is, “Go back to the honorable place where you heard the Eternal Kalam (The
Speech) of your Lord”.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A SHIN
T
he Wahhabiyys refer to the verse:
{( ‫})ﻳﯾﻮم ﻜﺸﻒ ﻋﻦ ﺳﺎق‬
<<Yawma yukshafu ân saq>>
to claim that Allah has a shin. They say that this verse means “The Day when Allah will
expose His shin” or “The Day when the shin will be laid bare.” They say that because of
the word { ‫“ }ﺳﺎق‬saq”, which apparently refers to the organ between the knee and the
foot and is composed of skin and bone. We say that the “saq” mentioned in this verse is
not even an attribute of Allah. The verse does not say "the saq of Allah ". It refers to the
hardship of The Day of Judgment, as mentioned by many scholars, like Abu Hayyan Al-
Andalusiyy in his famous tafsir of the Qur’an called Al-Bahru-l-Muhit. Ibn Hajar also
confirms this meaning from Ibn Âbbas; that he interpreted the verse to refer to the
severity (shiddah) of the situation of that day.
If a battle reached a very fierce point, it is said in Arabic,
‫ﻛﺸﺷﻔت اﻟﺤﺣرب ﻋن ﺴﺳﺎق‬
"The battle exposed a saq". We say as Ibn Âbbas said, that the verse refers to the Day
when the justice and wrath of Allah 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 "saq".

Al-KAYFIYYAH
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A FACE
T
he Wahhabiyys also believe that Allah 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 Allah, but we do not agree that Allah has a face. We say
that the Wajh of Allah is His eternal and everlasting attribute that is not similar to the
attributes of the creations. We do not say that the Wajh of Allah 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 Wahhabiyys.
VERSES MENTIONING THE ATTRIBUTE OF WAJH
For example, look at the saying of Allah in the chapter of Al-Qasas, verse 88:
{( ‫})ﰻ ﳾء ﻫﺎ إﻻ و ﻪ‬
<<Kullu shay’in halikun illa 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
Wahhabiyys 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, and thus contradicting themselves.
Furthermore, we point out the fact that this verse has the word ‫“ ﻛﻝل‬kull” in it, which
apparently 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 Allah will be destroyed.
One interpretation of this verse is the ta’wil of Al-Bukhariyy. In his chapter of tafsir, in
the section pertaining to this chapter of Al-Qur’an, he said “<<Illa Wajhah>> means
<<Illa Mulkah>>”;; what would apparently be interpreted as “Except for His face” means

Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<Except for His Dominion (supreme ownership)>>. One interpretation of this verse,
also mentioned by Al-Bukhariyy is that everything done without seeking the blessings of
Allah alone is not accepted (rewarded). This is a valid interpretation that conforms to the
Arabic language, like the verse:
{( ‫})إﻻ اﺑﺘﻐﺎء و ﻪ رﺑﻪ ا ٔ ﲆ‬1
<<Except to be done for the Wajh (acceptance) of his Lord>>.
There are also other interpretations for the verse.
We also look at the verse:
{( ‫})ﻓ ٔﻳﯾ ﺗﻮﻟﻮا ﻓﱸ و ﻪ ﷲ‬2
<<Fa’aynama tuwallu fathamma wajhu-llah>>.
It apparently says, “Wherever you turn yourselves, there is the face of Allah,” which
contradicts their established belief because it implies that Allah 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, Allah’s face is in that direction. They believe that Allah
has a real face that is with Him, and that He is physically above the Ârsh. 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 Kaˆbah, while traveling and
riding on an animal, and with other conditions that need to be satisfied, as mentioned by
Mujahid the student of Ibn Âbbas.
Allah 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.
1
Al-Layl, 20
2
Al-Baqarah, 15
Al-KAYFIYYAH
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH A HAND
DEFINITIONS FOR THE WORD YAD
T
o briefly clear Allah 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
Allah, like power, and some do not, like hand (as an organ). Ibn Hajar lists over 20
meanings in his explanation of Al-Bukhariyy, and references many of them with verses of
the Qur’an 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-Ma’idah, 6, Allah revealed it to mean “thira’ (arm)”:
{(‫})ﻓﺎﻏﺴﻠﻮا وﺟﻮﻫﲂ و ٔﻳﯾﺪ ﲂ إﱃ اﳌﺮاﻓﻖ‬
<<Wash your faces and hands (i.e. arms) up to the elbow>>.
THE SAYING OF ABU HANIFAH
The saying of Abu Hanifah, the most explicit of the Four Imams in clearing Allah from
tashbih (likeness to the creation): “It is not said that the Yad of Allah is His power, nor
His endowment, because in saying that, there is negation of His attribute, and that is the
saying of the Muˆtazilah. Rather, His yad is His attribute and it has no how.” is used by
the Wahhabiyys. They say that he said that Allah’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 Allah’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, Allah said:

Al-KAYFIYYAH
{( ‫})ﻳﯾﺪ ﷲ ﻓﻮق ٔﻳﯾﺪﳞﻢ‬
<<Yadu-llahi fawqa aydihim>>,
which apparently says “the hand of Allah is above their hands. ” It truly means that their
allegiance to the Prophet is a commitment to Allah, not that Allah put His hand on top of
the Muslim’s hands, which is physical contact, which they believe is valid for Allah.
In one hadith:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﻣﻊ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ﻳﯾﺪ‬
“Yadu-llahi maâl-Jamaâh”, which apparently says, “The hand of Allah is with the
Jamaâh.” The Jamaâh is on Earth, but they believe that Allah is above the sky. The
correct meaning is that the support of Allah is with the Jamaâh.
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 ALLAH:

{( ‫})ﺑﻴﯿﺪي‬
<< BIYADAYY>>
In the chapter of Sad, verse 75, Allah said:
{( ‫إﺑﻠ ﺲ ﻣﺎ ﻣ ﻌﻚ ٔن ﺴ ﺪ ﳌﺎ ﻠﻘﺖ ﺑﻴﯿﺪي‬ )}
<<O Iblis, what prevented you from prostrating to what I created biyadayy?>>
The word { ‫“ }ﺑﻴﯿﺪي‬biyadayy” apparently means “with my two hands”, however, it may
also have other meanings. Some scholars said that it was mentioned that ‘Adam was
created “biyadayh” (with His yadayn) as an expression drawing attention to his special

Al-KAYFIYYAH
honor. Because to the contrary, Iblis was created by Allah, 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 Allah to the humans.
Ibn Hajar narrates from some of the scholars: “This (verse) was put forth to facilitate an
understanding1, for it is known that whoever takes care of something and has interest in it
attends to it with both hands. It is thus understood from that, that the heed given to the
creation of Adam was more perfect2 than that of other creations.”
The fact is that the dual form of the word does not always denote a pair. An example is
the saying in Al-Hajj,
‫ﻟﺒﺑﻴﻳﯿﯾك اﻟﻠﻬم ﻟﺒﺑﻴﻳﯿﯾك‬
“Labbayka-llahumma labbayk”, meaning, “O Allah, I am quick in responding to your

order in Al-Hajj”, or “I obey you one time after another, O Allah”. 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:
{ (‫})ﰒ ارﺟﻊ اﻟﺒﴫ ﺮﺗﲔ‬3
Which apparently means, “look twice”, (using the dual form) but actually means <<Look
time and time again (at the creation of Allah)>>
Because the Wahhabiyys believe that this verse is very clear evidence that Allah 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 71st verse of Yasin:
1
This means to make something closer to a person’s understanding
2
Perfection as an attribute of the creatures has levels. Thus, it is possible for one creature to be more
perfect than another. For example, beauty is an attribute of perfection for creatures, and it varies between
them. Likewise is said about bodily strength and intelligence. However, when speaking about Allah’s act of
creating, it is not said to be more perfect in reference to one thing or another. Allah created all things
perfectly, meaning that they all existed in accordance with His will, whether they were big or small, strong
or weak, ugly or beautiful. This is the meaning of the verse: {( ‫ﳾ ٍء َ ﻠَﻘَ ُﻪ‬
ْ َ ‫[})ا ِ ي ْﺣ َﺴ َﻦ ُﰻ‬As-Sajdah, 7] <The one
who perfected everything He created>.
3
Al-Mulk, 4
Al-KAYFIYYAH
{(‫َ ﻠ َ ْﻘ َﺎ ﻟَﻬُ ْﻢ ِﻣﻤﺎ َ ِﲻﻠ َ ْﺖ ﻳﯾ ْ ِﺪﻳﯾﻨَﺎ ﻧْ َﻌﺎ ًﻣ َﺎ‬ ‫}) َوﻟ َ ْﻢ َ َﺮ ْوا‬
<<Did they not think about how We created for them livestock…>>.
Apparently: “That We created for them from what We have done with Our (more than
two) hands….” The plural form (ayd) is used, not the singular form (yad), nor the dual
form (yadan). In Arabic, the plural form of the word is for counting items from three to
ten.
One hadith or verse would apparently say that He has one hand. Another would say two,
and another would apparently 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 Allah is attributed with Al-Yad, and it does not resemble
anything, it is not an organ and Allah knows its reality.
May Allah bless Abu-l-Hasan Al-Ashâriyy, whom the scholars followed in defending the
belief of the Muslims. Let us end this section with Sad, 45:
َ ‫}) َو ْاذ ُﻛ ْﺮ ِﻋ َﺒﺎ َد َ ا ْ َﺮا ِﻫ َﲓ َوا ْﲮ ََﺎق َوﻳﯾ َ ْﻌ ُﻘ‬

{(‫ﻮب ِوﱄ ا ْ ﻳﯾ ْ ِﺪي َوا ْ ﺑْ َﺼﺎ ِر‬
It apparently says, "Remember Our (Allah’s) slaves, Abraham, Issac and Jacob, who had
hands and vision." In the Wahhabiyy mistranslation, they make ta’wil and say that it
means they had strength and religious understanding. So, they make ta’wil for creations
that really have hands, but for Allah, supremely exalted beyond the descriptions of men,
they insist on the literal meanings.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE
T
he word “âyn” can connote “eye”, “evil eye”, “spring of water”, “self”,
“individuality”… and much more. For example, take the term “fard âyn
(personal obligation)”. Learning the matters of belief is a personal obligation. In
Suratu-l-Ghashiyah, âyn refers to a spring of water, one in Paradise and one in Hell:
{( ‫ })ﻓﳱﺎ ﲔ ﺎرﻳﯾﺔ‬and {(‫ }) ﺴﻘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﲔ ءاﻧﻴﯿﺔ‬
Prophet Nuh’s ‫ ﷺ‬Ark was sailing by the guidance of Allah:
{(‫})ﲡﺮي ﺑ ٔﻋﻴﯿ ﺎ‬
Apparently, it means, “running by Our eyes”. There is no proof that Allah has eyes in the
hadith:
‫ ﺑﺄﻋـﻮﺭر‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺑﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﻭوﺇإﻥن‬

“Your Lord is not one-eyed,”. The Wahhabiyys use this to say that Allah has two eyes.
This hadith is in reference to the one eyed imposter who will claim to be God. The
Prophet informed us that this ugly ascription is not an attribute of the true God.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
CONCLUSION
B
y now, the reader can clearly see the deviance of the so-called Salafiyys. In
another verse, Allah tells us:
{( ‫})ﷲ ﻧﻮر اﻟﺴﻤﻮات و ا ٔرض‬1

<< Allah is the guide of the people of the skies (the angels) and the people of the
earth to the light of belief>>.
It apparently says, “Allah is the light of the Heavens and Earth.” The Wahhabiyys do not
usually say that Allah 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
ambiguous text literally and another figuratively? All of it is from Allah and His
Messenger ‫ﷺ‬. Nay, instead of being honest and submitting to the truth, after all of this
explanation, the Wahhabiyys will stubbornly 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’wil by saying that they
only give the proper tafsir (interpretation). We say to them, “Then we have also given the
tafsir”. This double standard is due to arrogance and lack of intelligence.
Take heed, O seeker of truth, and benefit from what the great scholar, Âbdu-r-Rahman
Ibnu-l-Jawziyy said about some of the people who likened Allah to the creations centuries
before the Wahhabiyyah, in his book called Akhbaru-s-Sifat:
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 Allah, and they said, “This is not the madhhab!” I said, “This is not
YOUR madhhab nor the madhhab of your shaykhs whom you have imitated, for I
have cleared the madhhab of Imam Ahmad and denied the lies that have been
transmitted”... “And I saw some of our colleagues talking about the matters of the
creed inappropriately. Three people were authorized to author: Abu Âbdu-llah
1
An-Nuwr, 35
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Ibn Hamid, his companion Al-Qadi, and Ibnu-z-Zaghuniyy. They wrote books by
which the madhhab was defamed, and took the attributes by a physical meaning.
They heard that Allah created Adam with his image1, and so they confirmed a
picture, a face, two eyes, a mouth, an 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 Allah having a head2. 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 Allah, and then innovatively called those
(apparent meanings) “the attributes of Allah”- 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 Allah, 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”3; 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 maji’ and
the ityan4 mean grace and mercy, or that the saq 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) were possible, so if there is an indication to do otherwise, then it is
taken figuratively. They are stubbornly adherent to likening Allah 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 imam is the great Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, and
he used to say while being under the whip, “How would I say that which was not
1
This either means that Allah created Adam with an honorable image, or that Allah created Adam with
Adam’s image, which is the image given to all the humans after him.
2
Meaning that they know of no narration from the Prophet about that, so they do not confirm it.
3
Like what was said about the hadith of An-Nuzuwl.
4
which both apparently mean ‘coming’
Al-KAYFIYYAH
said?” And so beware of innovating into my madhhab that which is not a part of
it...
Let us close with several additional examples.
CORNERING THE WAHHABIYY WITH THE ISSUE

OF “CLOSENESS (QURB)”
According to them, Allah is above the Throne, and if He is above the Throne, then He is
very far away, because as confirmed in the hadith, the distance between the earth and the
first heaven above the earth is 500 years. There are seven heavens, and between one
heaven and the other, there are 500 years. That is 3,500 years away. Furthermore, the
thickness of each of the seven heavens, like the distance between them, is also 500 years.
That is an additional 3,500 years. Now, add to that 7,000 year distance, that above the
seventh sky there is Paradise, which is disconnected from the seventh sky and larger than
it, and above Paradise there is the ceiling Paradise, the Ârsh; the Throne, and it is larger
than the heavens and earth combined. Therefore, He must be very far away according to
their creed. They also very often say that Allah is disconnected from His creation, very
high above them. Some of them even say that He is so high above, that He exists without
a place. However, how could He be so far away when there are many texts that
apparently say Allah is close? For example, when the Companions were raising their
voices while mentioning Allah, the Prophet said in the hadith of Al-Bukhariyy and others:
ِ ِ ِ ‫ِ ِﱠ‬ ِ
ُ ‫ إِ ﱠن اﻟﱠﺬي ﺗَ ْﺪﻋُﻮ َن أَﻗـ َْﺮ‬.‫ﲑا‬
‫ب‬ َ ‫ْارﺑَـﻌُﻮا َﻋﻠَﻰ أَﻧْـ ُﻔﺴ ُﻜ ْﻢ؛ ﻓَِﺈﻧﱠ ُﻜ ْﻢ َﻣﺎ ﺗَ ْﺪﻋُﻮ َن أ‬
ً ‫ إﳕَﺎ ﺗَ ْﺪﻋُﻮ َن َﲰ ًﻴﻌﺎ ﺑَﺼ‬،٬‫َﺻ ﱠﻢ َوَﻻ ﻏَﺎﺋﺒًﺎ‬
ِ ‫إِ َﱃ أَﺣ ِﺪ ُﻛﻢ ِﻣﻦ ﻋﻨ ِﻖ ر‬
‫اﺣﻠَﺘِ ِﻪ‬َ ُُ ْ ْ َ
“Take it easy on yourselves. You are not calling upon one who is deaf or absent, you
are calling upon one who hears and He is ‘qarib (apparently: close)’, and the One you
are calling upon is ‘aqrab (apparently: closer)’ to one of you than the neck of his
animal upon which he rides.” Forget not also the 16th verse of Qaf:

Al-KAYFIYYAH
<(‫>) َو َ ْﳓ ُﻦ ﻗْ َﺮ ُب اﻟ َ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪ ِﻣ ْﻦ َﺣ ْﻞِ اﻟْ َﻮ ِرﻳﯾ ِﺪ‬

<We (Allah) are ‘closer’ to the human than the jugular vein>.
Additionally, how can they claim that Allah is far away, above the Throne, when He said
in the 19th verse of Al-Âlaq:
{( ‫})واﲭﺪ واﻗﱰب‬
<<Wa-sjud wa-qtarib>>.
It apparently means, “Prostrate and draw nearer (to Allah)”. This will be like a smack to
the face that will lead them to make another ta’wil, because this verse apparently implies
that Allah is below us, since prostration requires going down to the floor. In their
conviction, one’s head is closer to Allah when standing than when prostrating, because
when standing his head is closer to the sky and when prostrating, his head is closer to the
floor. So if prostrating brings one closer to Allah, and if they do not believe in ta’wil, then
they would have to say that there is something close to Allah, and they would have to say
that Allah is below so that the prostrating person can draw near to Him. There is also a
hadith from Imam Muslim:
‫ ﻓﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺪﻋﺎء‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻓﺄﻛﺜﺮﻭوﺍا‬ ‫ ﺳﺎﺟﺪ‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﻮ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺭرﺑﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻰ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌﺒﺪ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻜﻮﻥن‬ ‫ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺃأﻗﺮﺏب‬
“The slave would be closest to Allah while prostrating, so make lots of supplication
while prostrating...” So stand back and watch the Wahhabiyy eat his own words about
denying ta’wil.
To escape this obvious contradiction, they make ta’wil and say that their closenesss to
Him is by their obedience, not distance, and His closeness to them is His knowledge of
them. Say, “If the closeness is by obedience or knowledge, and not distance, then His
highness is by majesty, not place.”
Several Wahhabiyys have made ta’wil for the hadith that we have repeated frequently,
because of its devastating refuation of their corrupted creed:

Al-KAYFIYYAH
1
‫ ﺷﻲء‬ ‫ ﺩدﻭوﻧﻚ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﻴﯿﺲ‬
“…there is nothing below You.” Since they believe that He is above everything, they
hate the hadith that says that nothing is below Him, and thus they explained it as,
“…there is nothing close to You”, and sometimes they say it means, “… there is nothing
beside You.” Here, if they say that it means that nothing is close to Him, we attack them
with the aforementioned references, and if they say it means nothing is beside (or next to)
Him, then Ibn Taymiyah commited kufr and shirk when he likened the Prophet to Allah
when he said in supporting his sick creed:
‫اﻟﻌﺮش ﱂ ﳝﺘﻠﺊ ﺑﻪ وأﻧﻪ ﻳﻘﻌﺪ ﻧﺒﻴﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ اﻟﺴﻼم ﻣﻌﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﺮش‬
“The Throne does not get filled up by Allah, and He sits His Prophet with Him on the
Throne.” What ugly blasphemy, and O, what a vicious exposure. This is in his book
called Bayan Talbis Al-Jahmiyyah, and he says the same in Majmu^ Al-Fatawa. This the
man they call the Shaykh of Islam, and this is their creed, although they claim that they
do not believe that Allah is a body. So according to him, there is not only something close
to Allah, but also beside Him.
By this senseless explanation of the hadith, they claim the Prophet was not eloquent.
According to them, instead of saying, “O Allah, You are the First and there is nothing
before You, You are the Last, and there is nothing after You, You are the (One
whose existence is) Obvious and there is nothing above You, and You are (from
delusions and imaginations) the Hidden and there is nothing below You,” he said,
“there is nothing near You,” or “nothing is next to You.” Which is more harmonious?
ALLAH DOES NOT CAST A SHADOW

Clear evidence that they believe that Allah is a bodily structure is they say that Allah will
cast a shadow. The hadith truly refers to the shade of the Ârsh.
‫ﻅظﻠــﻪﮫ‬
1
narrated by Al-Bukhariyy , Al-Bayhaqiyy and others
Al-KAYFIYYAH
“Dhilluhu (His shadow)”, as mentioned in the hadith 1, is the honorable shadow that is
owned by Allah, and the only shade available on 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 Allah:
{( ‫})ﺑ ﱵ‬2
<<bayti (My house)>>,
referring to the honorable Kaˆbah that is owned by Allah, and
{( ‫})رو‬3
<<ruhi (My soul)>>,
referring to the honorable soul of Adam owned by Allah. The Kaˆbah and the soul of
Adam should not be associated with the self of Allah. It is as Allah reported in the
Qur’an, that Salih, the Messenger of Allah ‫ﷺ‬, said:
‫}) ﻗﺔ ﷲ‬4
{(
<<(Be aware of) the Camel of Allah >>,
which expresses the status of that camel, and does not mean that the camel is an attribute
of Allah. If the shadow is an attribute of Allah, then the camel, the Kaˆbah, and the soul
would all have to be attributes of His, something they do not say. All of these are
examples of “relation by ownership and honor”, called in Arabic: “idafatu milk wa
tashrif”. Not to mention that there is another version of the hadith from the route of
Salman that explicitly mentions the Ârsh:
1
Narrated by Muslim and Al-Bukhariyy
2
Al-Baqarah, 125
3
Al-Hijr, 29
4
Ash-Shams, 13
Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﻋﺮﺷﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻅظﻞ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻈﻠﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ﺳﺒﻌﺔ‬
“There are seven types of people whom Allah will shade in the shadow of His
Ârsh1”.
ALLAH DOES NOT HAVE A FOOT

From another ambiguous hadith, they say that Allah will put His foot in Hellfire:
‫ ﻗﺪﻣﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌﺰﺓة‬ ‫ ﺭرﺏب‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻀﻊ‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻰ‬

There is a lot to be said about this hadith, but it is solid enough to produce the verse:
{( ‫})ﻟﻮ ﰷن ﻫﺆﻻء ءاﻟﻬ ًﺔ ﻣﺎ وردوﻫﺎ‬

<<Had those (idols) been worthy of worship, they would not enter Hell>>.
Allah the exalted will order for the idols to be thrown in Hell with those who worshipped
them. This verse proves that Allah, the only one who deserves worship, does not enter the
Hellfire, because the one who deserves worship does not enter Hell. The true meaning of
the hadith was explained by An-Nawawiyy as Allah putting a group of people in Hell. He
said,
This hadith is among the famous hadiths 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 the
scholars of belief, that its meaning should not be spoken about, rather that we
believe that it is true according to what Allah 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 to that, they have differed about the meaning of this
hadith. It was said that what is meant by the term ‫( ﻗﺪﻡم‬qadam; which apparently
means foot), in this case is ‫( ﻤﻣﺘﺗﻘدم‬mutaqaddam; that which is advanced;
1
Narrated by Ahmad, At-Tabaraniyy and others.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
brought to the forefront), which is commonly used in the language. And so the
meaning would be: ‘until Allah the exalted puts in it (i.e. Hell) those whom He
has put forward for it among the people of torture...
THREE EASY WAYS TO SMASH A WAHHABIYY
May Allah have mercy upon you. Throughout the book, several strategies and arguments
were presented for defense and offense; however, here are three cases- although already
mentioned in the book in one way or another- that if used properly, one should be able to
use any one of them to silence a Wahhabiyy swiftly and easily:
The first is that we ask the Wahhabiyy what he says about the verse:
{(‫}) َوﻫ َُﻮ َﻣ َﻌ ُ ْﲂ ْ َﻦ َﻣﺎ ُﻛ ْﻨ ُ ْﱲ‬1
which apparently means, “He is with you wherever you are”. He will either take it
literally or not. If he takes it literally, He has fallen into explicit contradiction of their
creed, for they confirm the direction of highness for Allah, believing without evidence
that highness of place confirms highness of status. If he says that it means that Allah
knows about everything everywhere, then say, “Just as you saw it fit to interpret the verse
in a way that is different from the apparent meaning so to save yourself from
contradiction, we also make ta’wil for every verse and hadith that apparently implies that
Allah is in the direction of the sky, because that is necessary for escaping contradiction.”
However, the difference between us and them is that we escape all contradictions, while
they are stuck with contradicting the verse:
ْ َ ِ ِ ْ‫})ﻟَ ْ َﺲ َ ِﳈﺜ‬2
‫ﳾ ٌء‬
{(
<Nothing resembles Him in any way>.
1
Al-Hadiyd, 4
2
Ash-Shuwra, 11
Al-KAYFIYYAH
It may be said to him, “What made it permissible for you to make ta’wil and made it
forbidden for us?” It may also be said to him, “Based on what rule did you make ta’wil
for one verse and leave it for the other verse?” This deed of the Wahhabiyyah is called in
Arabic “tahakkum”;; being arbitrary, or in other words, saying something without
evidence. Do not let him move to another subject until he answers the question or submits
to Ahlu-s-Sunnah.
The second case is to refer immediately to the aforementioned hadith known as “the
hadith of Îmran Ibn Al-Husayn”:
‫ﻛﺎن ﷲ و ﱂ ﻳﻜﻦ ﺷﻲء ﻏﲑﻩ‬
< Allah existed and there was nothing other than Him>. From the great strength of the
evidence in this hadith, you may even refer to it before you mention any verse from the
Qur’an. This hadith is a very mighty weapon against them. The way to use this hadith
has already been explained in the section “PROOF FROM THE HADITH THAT
REFUTES THE WAHHABIYY CREED”, so review it there. If the Wahhabiyy says

that he does not know the hadith, tell him that his ignorance does not change the fact that
the hadith exists, and do not let him move to another point. If he claims that it is weak,
tell him that it is actually sahih, narrated in Al-Bukhariyy, in the chapter of Tawhid, and
add that he should not talk without knowledge. Out of desperation, he may claim that this
hadith does not prove that Allah exists without a place or direction. If so, tell him that it is
not permissible to shut off your mind on purpose. The hadith is as clear as daybreak in
negating the existence of anything with Allah eternally, and that includes places and
directions.
The third way is to ask the Wahhabiyy, “Must the Muslim creed be built upon something
definitive1 or speculative2?” If he says speculative, and he most likely will not say that,
then his ignorance and stupidity will be obvious to anyone with mental discrimination. If
he says that the creed of the Muslims must be built upon something definitive and not
1
Meaning: something definite and absolute
2
Meaning: something that could possibly be true or not be true
Al-KAYFIYYAH
speculative, then we agree, but then say to him, “How many meanings can istawa have?”
If he says that it can have only one meaning, then he is either a ruthless liar or a pathetic
ignoramus. If he confesses that it can have many possible meanings, then for him to
choose “rising above” is a speculation on his part. The secret of using this point is in
clarifying that speculation comes into play when there is more than one possibility for
something. The rule the scholars used was:
‫ ﺍاﻻﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝل‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﻄﻊ‬ ‫ ﺳﻘﻂ‬ ،٬‫ ﺍاﻻﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﺛﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﺇإﺫذﺍا‬
“If more than one possibility is confirmed, then the certainty of the evidence is dropped”.
For this reason, the real Salaf used to say “Istawa, as He ascribed to Himself,” because
that is definitive. They did not choose one meaning over another, because that would be
speculative, and they definitely did not say, “Rose above as He ascribed to Himself.” As
for the verse:
{( ْ َ ِ ِ ْ‫})ﻟَ ْ َﺲ َ ِﳈﺜ‬1
‫ﳾ ٌء‬
<Nothing resembles Him in any way>.
It can only have one meaning, so it is definitive and thus the creed is built upon it.
***
Allah knows best and He grants the success
1
Ash-Shuwra, 11
Al-KAYFIYYAH
APPENDIX
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | APPENDIX 133

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SPEECH OF ALLAH
T
he Speech of Allah is an eternal and everlasting attribute of Allah, as previously
mentioned. It is not of a sound, letter, or language. With this attribute, Allah
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 so
that 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. The evidence from the Book of Allah that He is not attributed with
parts is the verse:
{( ‫}) َو َﺟ َﻌﻠُﻮا َ ُ ِﻣ ْﻦ ِﻋ َﺒﺎ ِد ِﻩ ُﺟ ْﺰ ًءا‬1
<<They made Him from the parts of His slaves>>
This attribute of Allah is confirmed in the Qur’an and the hadith. It was established from
the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬that he said:
‫ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﺑﻴﯿﻨﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺑﻴﯿﻨﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﻴﯿﺎﻣﺔ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻮﻡم‬ ‫ ﺭرﺑﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺳﻴﯿﻜﻠﻤﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻻ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﺪ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻣﻨﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬
“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.2” Whoever denies the Speech
of Allah has attributed imperfection to Allah 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 Allah.
1
Az-Zukhruf, 15
2
Narrated by Ahmad and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH
The belief of those who liken Allah to the creations is that Allah has speech, but that His
speech is similar to the speech of the creation, although they will not say it like that1.
They believe that Allah speaks Arabic, but that His speech is eternal, which as usual, is a
contradictory matter.

{(‫})إﳕﺎ ٔﻣﺮﻩ إذا ٔراد ﺷ ﺎ ٔن ﻳﯾﻘﻮل ﻦ ﻓ ﻜﻮن‬2
<<Surely if He willed for something, He says to it, “Be”, and
it shall be>>
What lead those who liken Allah to the creations to believe that Allah speaks Arabic is
this verse, and other verses like it. They would say that Allah said:
{( ‫}) ٔن ﻳﯾﻘﻮل ﻦ ﻓ ﻜﻮن‬
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 Allah 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 Allah existed before the Arabic
language and all other types of things existed, so the result of their claim is that Allah was
silent and then started speaking, which is impossible since that is the attribute of the
creatures, as well as an imperfection.
Their claim that Allah always utters these two letters before the creation of every
individual thing also leads to saying that Allah addresses things that do not exist. In other
1
They will not blatantly say that his speech is like the speech of creations. But they say that He speaks
Arabic, and they say other things that imply that His speech is created.
2
Yasiyn, 82

Al-KAYFIYYAH
words, according to them, when He gives the command to exist, who was being
addressed? The thing did not yet exist so to receive the address. 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 Allah 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 Allah 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 simultaneously come into existence, whether
bodies, sounds, motions, thoughts or otherwise.
Additionally, their belief leads to say that Allah creates the creations by a creation, which
is the utterance of (‫( )ﻛن‬kun). Based on this creed, that a creation, which is the utterance
of (‫( )ﻛن‬kun) was the reason for the creation of other things, that creation must have
been preceded by the utterance of (‫( )ﻛن‬kun), and since it is created, it would also have
to be preceded by the utterance of (‫( )ﻛن‬kun). The belief of Ahlu-s-Sunnah is that Allah
creates with His eternal will and power, in accordance with His eternal knowledge.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah said that if it were valid that Allah 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, 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

Al-KAYFIYYAH
{( ‫})إﳕﺎ ٔﻣﺮﻩ إذا ٔراد ﺷ ﺎ ٔن ﻳﯾﻘﻮل ﻦ ﻓ ﻜﻮن‬
<<Surely, if He willed for something, He says to it, “Be,” and it shall be>>
means that Allah 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 Allah’s eternal judgment. His judgment is His command,
and His command is His eternal speech, not an Arabic expression. The word in the
Qur’an: { } (kun) facilitates an understanding, and refers to the eternal Speech of Allah,
‫ﻦ‬
just as the word (‫( )اﷲ‬Allah) itself facilitates an understanding and refers to the eternal
self whom we worship. The first interpretation was given by Al-Maturidiyy himself, and
the second was mentioned by the Ashâriyys like Al-Bayhaqiyy.
THE MEANING OF THE WORD “AL-QUR’AN”
It is very important to know that the term “Al-Qur’an” has two usages. The first is the
eternal and everlasting speech, which is an attribute of Allah. It has no beginning and no
end, as mentioned previously. According to this meaning, the first thing that may come to
mind when hearing the word “Al-Qur’an” , which is the Book of Allah, is not intended.
The second meaning for “Al-Qur’an” 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’an” is
synonymous to the term: “the Speech of Allah”, because “the Speech of Allah” also has
these two meanings: the eternal and everlasting attribute of Allah, and the revealed
expressions.
Because of this interchangeable word usage and meaning, the people who liken Allah to
the creations got confused and misunderstood the statement of the scholars, “Al-Qur’an is
the Speech of Allah and it is not created.” They thought that the scholars meant that the
Al-KAYFIYYAH
revealed expressions are the eternal Speech of Allah and that those revealed expressions
are not created, which is a blasphemous, illogical understanding, because it attributes
eternity to the created thing. Had they adhered to the saying of Al-Junayd Al-Baghdadiyy
they would have been safe: “At-Tawhid (monotheism) is distinguishing the eternal from
the event.”
The scholars of the Salaf said that it is forbidden to say, “The Qur’an is created”, for fear
of someone misunderstanding and believing that the attribute of Allah is created. They
also forbade people from saying, “The Qur’an is not created”, for fear of someone
believing that the revealed expressions are eternal. They said, “The Qur’an is the Speech
of Allah 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’an and say, “Allah said”, it is not with the meaning that Allah speaks
Arabic, but meaning that those expressions are not the work of a creature; no human,
angel, or jinn authored the Qur’an, rather it is a revelation that refers to the eternal
Speech of Allah, clarifying for the creatures Allah’s orders, prohibitions, promise, and
threat.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT INNOVATIONS
THE MEANING OF BIDÂH LINGUISTICALLY AND

RELIGIOUSLY
O
ne of the greatest tribulations these people have brought upon the Muslims is
their misunderstanding of innovations. Linguistically, “bidâh (innovation)”
means, “that which was done without a previous example”. There is no
dispraise in the word itself. Religiously, a bidâh is something not revealed explicitly in
the Qur’an or the Sunnah. In this issue, the Wahhabiyy’s mistake lies in believing that
anything not done by the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬is 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:

‫ ﺿﻼﻟﺔ‬ ‫ ﺑﺪﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ﻭو‬
“WA KULLU BIDÂTIN DALALAH1”
Because of a hadith, they claim to shun any innovated matter- but we know better:
‫ ﺿﻼﻟﺔ‬ ‫ ﺑﺪﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ﻭو‬

Apparently, the hadith says, “Every innovation is misguidance.” This is the basis of their
deviance in this issue, so may the hadith be cleared of their falsehood. This hadith is
sahih, but their interpretation is invalid. The true meaning of the hadith is, “Every
innovation (which does not comply with the rules of the Religion) is misguidance.”
The Wahhabiyys would deny this interpretation with disgust, relying on the word “kull
(‫( )ﻛﻞ‬every;; each;; all)”. We say that the terms of this hadith are “âmm makhsus”;;
general wording with specific meaning. The support for our claim is abundant and clear:
One hadith:
1
Narrated by Abuw Dawuwd and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﺯزﺍاﻧﻴﯿﺔ‬ ‫ ﻋﻴﯿﻦ‬ ‫ ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ﻭو‬

apparently 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
truly means, “Most eyes glance with the forbidden look; the look that leads to
fornication1”. The verse from the Qur’an should convince the doubtful:
{(‫})ﺗ ﺪﻣﺮ ﰻ ﳾء‬2

Apparently, 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 Âd 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 HADITH ABOUT GOOD INNOVATIONS
A Wahhabiyy may acknowledge these general expressions with specific meanings, but
deny that the hadith 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 hadith with
another hadith about innovations:
ّ
‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮﻫﮬﮪھﺎ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺣﺴﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻹﺳﻼﻡم‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islam has its reward, and the reward of whoever
works according to it…3” This hadith is an explicit proof for good innovations. Imam
Muslim narrated this hadith and because of it, we understand the hadith which apparently
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.
1
Narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy and Ibn Khuzaymah
2
Al-Ahqaf, 25
3
Narrated by Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH
Of course, the Wahhabiyys have their routines for evading the ruling contained in this
hadith. 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 ‫ﷺ‬. Both claims are easily
countered. Definitely, this hadith is not restricted to the Companions, because the Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬gave 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 ‫ﷺ‬,
because then he would truly be restarting; following something the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬already
started. Easily seen by the honest person, this hadith praises whoever innovates
something that complies with the rules of the Religion.
Some of the more ignorant Wahhabiyys will argue that the word “bidâh” is not in this
hadith. A true but petty argument, for the reference to innovations is still contained
therein. Because of their blindness, they will not see our point, and still insist that this
hadith means, “Whoever revives a good Sunnah of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬...” If you meet one
of those, then recite the second half of the hadith:
‫ﱠ‬
‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻭوﺯزﺭر‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻭوﺯزﺭرﻫﮬﮪھﺎ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﺳﻴﯿﺌﺔ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻹﺳﻼﻡم‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺳﻦ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ﻭو‬
“And whoever starts an evil Sunnah in Islam, then upon him is its sin and the sin of
whoever works according to it…1” There is no Sunnah of the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬classified as
an “evil Sunnah”. According to their method, the second half of this hadith would mean,
“And whoever revives an evil Sunnah of the Prophet ‫ ”… ﷺ‬Hence, the word “Sunnah”
in this hadith means “a way”; “a practice”- and not exclusively the Sunnah of the Prophet
‫ﷺ‬. This clarifies the meaning of the word “Sunnah” in the first half of the hadith.
OTHER TEXTS USED BY WAHHABIYYS 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 hadith of Al-Bukhariyy:
1
Narrated by Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﺭرﺩد‬ ‫ ﻓﻬﮭﻮ‬ ‫ ﻣﻨﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﺬﺍا‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺮﻧﺎ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﺪﺙث‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬

Then, they will say it means, “Whoever innovates into this affair of ours that which is not
from it is rejected”. Actually, this hadith 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 hadith does not say
‫“ ﻤﻣن أﺤﺣدث ﻓﻲ أﻤﻣرﻨﻧﺎ ﻫذا ﻓﻬو رد‬Whoever innovates into our Religion is
rejected”, rather, the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬gave a qualifying statement:
‫ ﻣﻨﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﻣﺎ‬
“that which does not comply with it”. So, if the new action complies with the rules of
the Religion, it is not rejected.
They may deliver the verse:
{‫}اﻟﻴﯿﻮم ٔﳈﻠﺖ ﻟﲂ دﻳﯾﻨﲂ‬1

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, Allah 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
Ramadan came after the migration from Makkah to Al-Madinah. Even the prohibition of
drinking wine was not revealed immediately. This verse came, confirming that the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬received the last of the rules, and he conveyed all of them- even the general
1
Al-Ma’idah, 3

Al-KAYFIYYAH
rules which the future top scholars (mujtahids) would need for deducing the answers for
cases not mentioned by the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. 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 hadiths that came later are abominable, which
itself is an abominable claim.
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
“bidâh” 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 bidâh”- they just said, “bidâh”. However, the sayings of the scholars
explicitly mentioning good innovations are abundant, like the saying of Ash-Shafiîyy:
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-Shafiîyy by Al-Bayhaqiyy.
An-Nawawiyy documented in his book Tahthibu-l-Asma’i wa-l-Lughat:
“The Imam and Shaykh whom his greatness, proficiency, mastery in the different
types of knowledge, and status of being an imam are agreed upon, Abu
Muhammad Âbdu-l-Âziz Ibn Âbdu-s-Salam1, may Allah except his deeds, said
towards the end of the book Al-Qawaîd, ‘The innovation is divided into:
1
He is also famous as: Îzzu-d-Diyn Ibn âbdu-s-Salam

Al-KAYFIYYAH
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, 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 Âbidin, the famous Hanafiyy scholar clarifies this quote of Ibn
Âbdu-s-Salam:
“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 Sunnah1; 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 Islam); 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-Muhtar. Among the most devastating references
against these people is what Ibn Taymiyah said in his book Qawaîd Jalilah fi-t-Tawassul
wa-l-Wasilah:
‫وﰻ ﺑﺪ ﺔ ﻟ ﺴﺖ واﺟ ﺔ وﻻ ﻣﺴﺘﺤﺒﺔ ﻓﻬﻲ ﺑﺪ ﺔ ﺳ ﺔ وﱔ ﺿﻼ ﺗﻔﺎق اﳌﺴﻠﻤﲔ وﻣﻦ ﻗﺎل ﰲ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﺒﺪع إﳖﺎ ﺑﺪ ﺔ ﺣﺴﻨﺔ ﻓﺎٕﳕﺎ‬
‫ذ إذا ﻗﺎم دﻟﻴﯿﻞ ﴍﻋﻲ ٔﳖﺎ ﻣﺴﺘﺤﺒﺔ‬
“Every innovation that is not obligatory or recommended is an evil innovation and a
misguidance by the agreement of the Muslims, and whoever said about some innovations
that they are good innovations, would be correct only if a religious evidence stands as
proof that it is recommended.” Here, He explicitly confirms the existence of good
innovations, although he was not as precise as An-Nawawiyy, Îzzu-d-Din and Ibn
Âbidin in his categorization. What is correct is that if it is not obligatory, recommended
1
This is in reference to the one who wants to convey the hadith and interpret the Qur’an.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
or permissible, then it is a bad innovation, and that includes the disliked innovations that
did not reach the level of being forbidden, like writing “S.A.W.” after the Prophet’s
name. Amid the explicit scholarly sayings is that of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, “What a good
bidâh this is,” narrated by Malik, Al-Bukhariyy, and others.
THE MEANING OF THE SAYING OF ÛMAR IBNU-L-

KHATTAB
Ûmar, may Allah increase his status, gave this statement after ordering the people to
pray the tarawih prayers behind one imam, and then returning on a different night to find
that the people kept praying as he ordered- something the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬never ordered,
nor did Abu Bakr. This narration makes the Wahhabiyys’ blood boil. They ridiculously
say that Ûmar did not mean that what he did was an innovation. They say that the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬already prayed the tarawih prayers in congregation, so Ûmar truly meant,
“What a good revival of the Sunnah this is”. Clarify for them that the tarawih prayer is
not the innovation, not even praying it in congregation, but the order for all the people to
pray behind one imam 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
tarawih prayers in scattered groups- a person here, a congregation there, another person
there… and Abu Bakr, after the Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬death, left it as such. After Abu Bakr,
Ûmar ordered a change- for all the people to gather behind one imam. Since then, the
Muslims worldwide have prayed tarawih behind one imam. This perfectly discredits the
Wahhabiyy belief, for if their understanding of this issue was correct, then Ûmar would
have said, “I will not order the people to pray behind one imam, I will leave it as the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬left it.” Add to that, that if Ûmar meant that he revived the Sunnah, he
would not have used the words ‫“ ﻨﻧﻌﻤﻣت اﻟﺒﺑدﻋﺔ‬good innovation”, especially after the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬already said, according to the Wahhabiyys, that every bidâh is
misguidance. So, they claim that Ûmar meant the linguistic meaning of bidâh, and they
say it means, “to revive”. We tell them that “ahya (to revive)” refers to what was already
done, like what is mentioned in the hadith:
Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ ﺷﻬﮭﻴﯿﺪ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﻓﺴﺎﺩد‬ ‫ ﻋﻨﺪ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﻴﯿﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬

“Whoever revives my Sunnah upon the corruption of my nation has the reward of a
martyr.1” There is no way to replace the word “ihya’ (revival)” with the word “bidâh
(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 Ûmar’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 (mubah; not rewardable nor
punishable), and it could be divided into the five judgments.2
EXAMPLES OF GOOD INNOVATIONS
The examples of good innovations and things that the Prophet did not doare also
abundant. One of them is Abu Bakr’s order to compile the Qur’an into one mus-haf, upon
the suggestion of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, despite that Abu Bakr explicitly told Ûmar,
“How can you do something that the Messenger of Allah did not do?” Ûmar said to him,
“By Allah, it is good.3” A second example is basing the Islamic calendar on the migration
of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, which was done by Ûmar, and not the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. The people
differed about what to use as a reference point for the calendar. Some said by the birth of
the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, some said by his death, some mentioned the first reception of the
revelation. Ûmar chose the Hijrah (migration) because of its great importance. He also
was the first to have registered soldiers; an army reserve. Ûthman Ibn Âffan ordered for
an additional athan to be called for the Friday prayer.
1
Al-Hakim and others
2
Obligatory, recommended, forbidden, disliked, and permissible.
3
If a Wahhabiyy says that this is not an innovation because there was a need for its compilation, respond by
saying that the need for the issue does not deny the fact that the Prophet did not do it or order for it to be
done.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
Here the Wahhabiyys have a trick: They say that the Prophet said to adhere to my Sunnah
and the Sunnah of the righteous caliphs after me, so these aforementioned Imams did not
innovate anything, rather, all of what they have contributed is called sunnah, not bidâh.
One can ask the Wahhabiyy upon that, “Then tell me, in the Religion, is it permissible for
someone to do what the Prophet did not do or it is not permissible for someone to do
what the Prophet did not do?” He will never say that it is permissible to do what the
Prophet did not do, and if he does, he will validate good innovations.
Furthermore, the Wahhabiyy does not truly understand the hadith about the sunnah of the
Caliphs, because he does not realize that by his understanding, he has made the Caliphs
as impeccable and infallible as the Prophet himself. If he says that he does not elevate
them to the level of the Prophet, we ask if they might make a mistake in what they say
and do. If the Wahhabiyy says yes, then we tell them that adhereing to their sunnah does
not mean “everything they do is called a sunnah and that they do not make good
innovations”;; it means that we must adhere to them as long as they comply with the
Religion.
The Companion, Khubayb, prayed two rakâhs 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’an were innovated by the students of the Companions. Even Ibn
Taymiyah acknowledges that the dots are an innovation, and he accepts them. He said in
his book Majmuˆ Al-Fatawa:
‫ َواﻟﺼ ِﺤ ُﻴﯿﺢ ﻧ ُﻪ َﻻ ﺑ َ َس ِﺑ ِﻪ‬. ‫ﲁ ِﻟ َﺒ َﻴﯿ ِﺎن ْاﻻﻋ َْﺮ ِاب‬ َ ‫ َو ِﻗ َﻞ ُ ْﻜ َﺮ ُﻩ اﻟﻨﻘَﻂُ د‬. ‫ َﻻ ُ ْﻜ َﺮ ُﻩ ِﻠْ َ ﺎ َ ِﺔ ٕاﻟ َ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪ‬: ‫ َو ِﻗ َﻞ‬: ‫ ُ ْﻜ َﺮ ُﻩ َذ ِ َ ِ ﻧ ُﻪ ﺑِﺪْ َ ٌﺔ‬: ‫ِﻗ َﻞ‬
ِ ْ ‫ُون اﻟﺸ‬
“It was said that it is disliked because it is an innovation, it was said that it was not
disliked because of the need, it was said that the dots are disliked and not the harakat
because they clarify the syntactical case, and what is correct is that there is nothing wrong
with it.” The titles of the surahs (chapters) and the other symbols in the Qur’an, like the
signs that show where to stop reciting, are all innovated. The terminologies of the science
of hadith, like “sahih”, “hasan”, and “daîf” are all innovated. Protect yourself and
defend Islam with these facts. The commonly known arrangement of the Arabic letters

Al-KAYFIYYAH
was initiated by someone from thre nation of Muhammad. Before that, they were
arranged according to the “Abjad” sequence.
THE COMMEMORATION OF THE MAWLID (BIRTH) OF

PROPHET MUHAMMAD ‫ﷺ‬
Not mentioning the commemoration of the Mawlid (birth) of the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬would
leave this section incomplete. The Wahhabiyys 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 ‫ ﷺ‬loved the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬more 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 Wahhabiyys are truthful, let them extend this idea to other matters. Let
them say, “If putting the dots in the Qur’an was good, then the Companions would have
done it first.”
A proof for the validity of the Mawlid is the previously mentioned hadith of the Prophet
‫ﷺ‬:
‫ ﺿﻼﻟﺔ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ٍ‫ ﷴ‬ َ‫ﻣﺔ‬

‫ ﺃأ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺠﻤﻊ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬
“Allah will not let (the scholars of) Muhammad’s nation agree on a misguidance.1”
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 Wahhabiyys 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 Allah‫ﷺ‬. If they resort to a lie and say that all of those
1
Narrated by Ibn Majah

Al-KAYFIYYAH
scholars were misguided, and so Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab called the people back
to the true belief, then we stun them with the hadith of Al-Bukhariyy:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺤــــﻖ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ ﻅظـــﺎﻫﮬﮪھﺮﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣـــﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﻣـــﻦ‬ ‫ ﻁطــﺎﺋـﻔﺔ‬ ‫ ﺗــــﺰﺍاﻝل‬ ‫ﻻ‬

“There will always be a group from my nation which is very evidently adhering to
the truth.” If the Wahhabiyys were correct, then this hadith would be wrong, because
they claim that centuries passed without a scholar speaking out against an atrocious
corruption that spread throughout all Muslim countries.
Another proof, coming from Ibn Hajar as narrated by As Sakhawiyy, is found in the
hadith of Âshura’, which is the tenth day of the Islamic month of Muharram. The
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬recommended for the Muslims to fast on that day every year because that
was the day when Musa was saved from the Pharaoh, and the day when the Ark of
Prophet Nuh settled on the mountain (Âlayhima-s-Salatu wa-s-Salam). Ibn Hajar said
that this hadith proves that it is permissible to thank Allah 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 ‫ﷺ‬, 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 ‫ ﷺ‬involved in the Mawlid, as the Wahhabiyys

accuse the Muslims. They may recite the hadith:
‫ ﻣﺮﻳﯾﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﺑﻦ‬ ‫ ﻋﻴﯿﺴﻰ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭرﻯى‬ ِ‫ ﺃأﻁطﺮﺕت‬ ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ‬ ‫ ﺗُﻄﺮﻭوﻧﻲ‬ ‫ﻻ‬

“Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians have done to Jesus the son of
Mary,1” which does not mean that the Mawlid is forbidden, but that worshipping the
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬is forbidden.
When left to stand on his last leg, the Wahhabiyy may ask, “Why would you want to do
something that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬did 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
1
narrated by Ahmad and others

Al-KAYFIYYAH
to do something just because the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬did not do it, hence the saying of the
Prophet ‫ﷺ‬:
ّ
‫ ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮﻫﮬﮪھﺎ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺣﺴﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻹﺳﻼﻡم‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
“Whoever starts a good Sunnah in Islam has its reward, and the reward of whoever
works according to it…1”
Then how is the Mawlid practiced? It is practiced by reciting the Qur’an, reciting the
biography of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, singing words of praise, feeding the Muslims, and other
recommended and rewardable worships. The Wahhabiyys 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 ‫ﷺ‬. We emerge triumphant by telling them
that they have then discredited their claim of three aspects of Tawhid; the Tawhid of
godhood, the Tawhid of lordship and the Tawhid of the names and attributes, which is
truly a wicked innovation because it is related to belief. Not a soul from the Salaf stated
it. Refusing to acknowledge that their division of Tawhid is an innovation, when asked
for an explicit text from the Qur’an or the hadith, 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 Îsa (Jesus, ‫)ﷺ‬. Allah praised them in the Qur’an:
‫})و ﺟﻌﻠﻨﺎ ﰲ ﻗﻠﻮب ا ﻦ اﺗ ّﺒﻌﻮﻩ ر ٔﻓ ًﺔ و رﲪ ًﺔ و رﻫﺒﺎﻧ ّﻴﯿ ًﺔ اﺑﺘﺪﻋﻮﻫﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺘ ﺎﻫﺎ ﻠﳱﻢ إﻻ اﺑﺘﻐﺎء رﺿﻮان ﷲ‬2
{(‫ﳁﺎ ر َﻋﻮﻫﺎ ﺣﻖ ِر ﺎ ﳤﺎ‬
<< And in the hearts of those who followed him, We (Allah) created compassion,
mercy, and rahbaniyyah which they innovated. We did not obligate it on them; they
1
Narrated by Muslim
2
, Al-Hadiyd, 27

Al-KAYFIYYAH
only did it seeking the reward of Allah. Those who came later did not observe it as it
should have been observed>>
In this verse, we are told that these compassionate and merciful Muslims innovated
rahbaniyyah; 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
rahbaniyyah 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 Islam. If the
Wahhabiyy says that there is no rahbaniyyah in the nation of Muhammad, tell him that
this is not our point; the point is that they did a good innovation. What is strange is that
the Wahhabiyy government have an entire week dedicated to celebrating the birth of
Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
WHO ARE THE HEADS OF THE WAHHABIYYS?
L
earn a bit of the biographies of some of their heads, and further see their
misguidance. While they claim not to follow a madhhab, they follow the
explanations of selected individuals. In essence, they do follow a madhhab;
unfortunately it is not a valid one.
AHMAD IBN TAYMIYYAH
Their grandfather is Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah Al-Harraniyy, from some 700 years ago. He is
their master’s master, and reference for âqidah (creed). It is important to know that Ibn
Taymiyah was not a Wahhabiyy. He had many beliefs contrary to theirs.
He believed that saying, “O, Muhammad,” after the Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬death is good-
something that the Wahhabiyys consider blasphemous. In his book called The Good
Words1, he narrated that Âbdullah Ibn Ûmar, the great Companion, said, “O,
Muhammad,” after the death of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. Thus, according to the Wahhabiyy
creed, Ibn Taymiyah is a mushrik. Because of this fact, the Wahhabiyyah have published
this book of his with this hadith omitted. In this issue, do not be sidetracked by the
Wahhabiyy saying, “That hadith is weak”. Respond simply by saying, “Whether the
hadith 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.” Anyway, the scholars
considered it acceptable to narrate weak hadiths if they were in reference to doing good,
optional deeds, but not for confirming rules or matters of the creed. Al-Îraqiyy in his
millennial2 poem said:
‫أوا‬
ْ‫َر‬
‫َو‬،٬ ‫ٍف‬
‫ْﻌ‬‫َﻀﺿ‬
‫ﻴﻳﯿﯾنِﻟ‬
ٍ‫ِﻴﻳﯿﯾ‬
‫ْﺒﺑ‬
‫ِرَﺘﺗ‬
‫ْﻴﻳﯿﯾ‬
‫ْنَﻏ‬
‫ْوا ِﻤﻣ‬
‫َو‬‫ٍعَر‬
‫ْو‬‫ُﻀﺿ‬
‫ْو‬‫ِرَﻤﻣ‬
‫ُﻠوا ﻓﻲَﻏ‬
‫ﱠﻬ‬‫َﺴﺳ‬
‫َو‬
‫ِد‬
‫اﺤﺣ‬
ِ‫ِرَو‬
‫َﻏ‬‫ﱟ(َو‬
‫ِدي‬
‫ْﻬ‬‫)اﺒﺑنَﻤﻣ‬
ِ ‫ِن‬
‫َﻋ‬ ‫ِد‬
‫ﺎﺌﺋ‬
ِ‫َﻘ‬
‫اﻟﻌ‬
َ ‫ِمَو‬
‫ْﻛ‬‫اﻟﺤﺣ‬
ُ ‫ُﻪ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺎﻨﻧ‬
َ‫َﻴﻳﯿﯾ‬
‫َﺒﺑ‬
1
Al-Kalim At-Tayyib
2
1,000 lined poem

Al-KAYFIYYAH
“They (the scholars of hadith) were lenient in more than one area when they narrated,
without clarifying the weakness in the hadith, but they considered that the level of the
hadith must be clarified in reference to rulings and convictions. This was said by Ibn
Mahdiyy and others.”
Therefore, whether or not the hadith is weak does not change the fact that he considered
it good, and thus narrated it in a book that he called “the good words”. This is one of the
strongest issues for breaking Wahhabiyys. Either they admit that calling upon someone
who died does not necessitate that the caller is worshipping the one who died, or they
consider Ibn Taymiyah as a blasphemer for considering it something good.
Nor did Ibn Taymiyah discredit the madhhabs. He claimed to follow the madhhab of
Ahmad Ibn Hambal, but to the contrary, he was far from Imam Ahmad’s path. Whenever
a Wahhabiyy discredits following a madhhab, mention this fact. Only their most ignorant
followers will deny it. Also, make it clear for the Wahhabiyy that this is a single
madhhab, since some Wahhabiyys say you cannot follow one particular madhhab.
How could anyone who understands the Religion deny the validity- in fact the necessity-
of following the schools? It is enough to clarify for whoever denies the schools, that he
does not have enough knowledge to the deduce rulings that were not explicitly mentioned
in the Qur’an or the hadith, and thus must follow someone who does, like any one of the
Four Imams, just like the one who does not have knowledge of medicine or mechanics
must refer to a doctor or a mechanic. He does not know enough about what is general in
the Book of Allah, or what is specific, what is abrogating, what is abrogated, what is
absolute, what is restricted, what has more than one meaning, what has only one
meaning, the reasons for the revelation of the different verses, etc. How can he then be
sure that he can successfully deduce the rulings that he needs by just reading the Qur’an?
The same is said about the hadith of the Prophet, or is that Wahhabiyy the type of foolish
person who thinks it is enough to have (translations of) Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim on his
shelf? In order to deduce rulings, one must have vast knowledge of the hadiths, their
varying narrations, their chains, and the books that are not arranged according to the

Al-KAYFIYYAH
chapters of fiqh, like Musnad Ahmad1, as well as many other issues. The proof that there
are cases not explicitly mentioned and thus are in need of the deduction of qualified,
mujtahid scholars is the hadith in which the Prophet asked Muâth Ibn Jabal upon
sending to him Al-Yaman:
‫ ﻓ ﺴﻨﺔ رﺳﻮل‬: ‫ ﻓ ٕﺎن ﱂ ﻜﻦ ﰲ ﻛﺘﺎب ﷲ ؟ ﻗﺎل‬: ‫ ٔﻗﴤ ﻜ ﺎب ﷲ ﻗﺎل‬: ‫ﻗﻀﺎء ؟ ﻗﺎل‬ ‫ﻴﯿﻒ ﺗﻘﴤ ٕان ﻋﺮض‬
‫ ٔﺟﳤﺪ ر ٔﱚ وﻻ ﻟﻮ‬: ‫ ﻓ ٕﺎن ﱂ ﻜﻦ ﰲ ﺳﻨﺔ رﺳﻮل ﷲ ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و ﺳﲅ ؟ ﻗﺎل‬: ‫ﷲ ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و ﺳﲅ ﻗﺎل‬
‫ اﶵﺪ ا ي وﻓﻖ رﺳﻮل رﺳﻮل ﷲ ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و‬: ‫ ﻓﴬب رﺳﻮل ﷲ ﺻﲆ ﷲ ﻠﻴﯿﻪ و ﺳﲅ ﺻﺪرﻩ وﻗﺎل‬: ‫ﻗﺎل‬
‫ﺳﲅ ﳌﺎ ﺮﴈ رﺳﻮل ﷲ‬
“How will you rule if a case is presented to you?” He said, “I will rule according to the
Book of Allah.” The Prophet said, “And if it is not in the Book of Allah?” He said,
“Then by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah.” The Prophet said, “And if it is not in
the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah?” He said, “I will deduce the ruling (make
ijtihad) to the best of my ability.” Then the Messenger of Allah hit him on the chest and
said, “Praise and thanks be to Allah, the one who gave success to the messenger of the
Messenger of Allah to do what pleases the Messenger of Allah.”
Ibn Taymiyah also did not discredit good innovations, as presented. He is misguided
because he breeched the Consensus in more than 60 cases. He was not a Wahhabiyy, but
he was a Mushabbih (a likener). 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 Ârsh,2 one of his statements is, “Allah could be carried on a mosquito if He willed, so
how about a great Ârsh?” It is true that he was a scholar, in fact a hafidh of hadith.
Because of his knowledge and outward character, he gained the title, “Shaykhu-l- Islam
(the shaykh of Islam)”. However, the scholars who knew of his situation said that his
knowledge exceeded his intelligence; he memorized more than he could comprehend.
1
Some books of hadith are not arranged according to the chapters of fiqh, so researching whatever is
narrated about the prayer or Zakah would not as simple as looking into the table of contents and turning to
the chapter of prayer or Zakah.
2
Kitab Al-ârsh

Al-KAYFIYYAH
The Wahhabiyys are very impressed by his misleading title, which he was not the only
one to receive. His title has been given to others, like Imam Al-Ashâriyy and Ibn Hajar
Al-Âsqalaniyy. Moreover, other scholars have other titles. Al-Ghazaliyy is “Hujjatu-l-
Islam (the proof of Islam)”, and Abu Mansur Al-Baghdadiyy was called “Al-Ustath (the
highly ranked teacher)”. Al-Juayniyy was called “Imamu-l-Haramayn (the Imam of the
two holy cities)”. Strangely, the Wahhabiyys are not impressed by these big scholars. The
Wahhabiyys 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-Din As-
Subkiyy, who wrote several books refuting Ibn Taymiyah.
Ibn Taymiyah claimed that Hellfire will end- something an ignorant Wahhabiyy denies,
and an evasive Wahhabiyy makes excuses for. He has a book with a misleading title: The
Refutation Against Whoever Claims that Paradise and Hell are Finite. What he actually
wants to say is that only Hell is Finite, not that both Paradise and Hell are finite. He said
therein:
‫ ﺍاﻟﺼﺤﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻗﻮﺍاﻝل‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻛﺘﺎﺏب‬ ‫ ﻣﻌﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﻟﻴﯿﺲ‬ ‫ ﺑﺒﻘﺎﺋﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﺎﺋﻠﻴﯿﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ﻣﻊ‬
“Those who claim that Hell will remain have no evidence from the Book, the Sunnah or
the statements of the Companions.” Then how about this verse from the Book:
{( ‫}) َﺎ ِ ِ َﻦ ِﻓﳱَﺎ ﺑَﺪً ا‬1
<<They will be in it forever and ever>>,
or this statement from the Prophet:
َ ‫َوِﻷ َْﻫ ِﻞ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ ِر ﻳَﺎ أ َْﻫ َﻞ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ ِر ُﺧﻠُﻮ ٌد َﻻ َﻣ ْﻮ‬

‫ت‬
“(and it will be said) to the people of Hell, “O, People of Hell, everlastingness without
death”.1”? Even his faithful student, Ibnu-l-Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah, whom the scholars
1
Al-Ahzab, 65

Al-KAYFIYYAH
nicknamed: “The Shadow of Ibn Taymiyah who walks upon the face of the Earth”,
agreed with Ibn Taymiyah, and said out of conveying the conviction of Ibn Taymiyah:
‫ ﻭوﺍاﺣﺪ‬ ‫ ﺩدﻟﻴﯿﻞ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺴﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﺮﺍاﻥن‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻓﺄﻳﯾﻦ‬ ‫ ﻛﺎﻟﺠﻨﺔ‬ ‫ ﺗﻔﻨﻰ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻟﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻧﺘﻬﮭﺎء‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺑﺪﻳﯾﺔ‬ ‫ ﻛﻮﻧﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻭو‬
‫ ﺫذﻟﻚ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﯾﺪﻝل‬
“As for Hell being everlasting with no end, and not vanishing like Paradise (is
everlasting), where is there not a single piece of evidence of that from the Qur’an and the
Sunnah?2”
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 Allah 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’an. How would this man, who memorized the Qur’an and knew Arabic very well, be
rewarded for contradicting the explicit verses of Allah’s book? Allah rewards the
mujtahids when they make ijtihad in the fiqh judgments that not that are not explicitly
mentioned..” even if they deduce a wrong answer, as proven by the hadith:
‫ﻣﻦ اﺟﳤﺪ ﻓ ٔﺻﺎب ﻓ ٔﺟﺮان و ﻣﻦ اﺟﳤﺪ و ٔﺧﻄ ٔ ﻓ ٔﺟﺮ وا ﺪ‬
“Whoever3 deduces a ruling and was correct has two rewards, and whoever deduces a
ruling and is mistaken will have one reward.4” However, an unqualified person who
breeches the basics of belief that are explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an is not rewarded,
in fact he loses all of his reward. As for claiming that he retracted the statement, let the
Wahhabiyy 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.
1
2
In his book Hadi-l-Arwah
3
It is not meant by saying “whoever” that anyone who deduces rulings is rewarded. This is restricted to the
qualified person, as proven by other hadiths is which the Prophet dispraised those who gave rulings without
being qualified.
4
Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH
His fate was that he died imprisoned according to the Consensus of the head judges of the
four schools in his era. To that, the Wahhabiyys compare his situation to that of Imams
Malik and Ahmad, who are clear and very far from the straying of Ibn Taymiyah. They
were not beaten nor imprisoned by prestigious and just judges of Ahlu-s-Sunnah as was
Ibn Taymiyah, nor were they blamed for bad statements by other scholars of their era.
They were tortured by the deviant faction of their time, the Muˆtazilah. There is no
comparison in this issue. The Wahhabiyys 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 Sufiyyah (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. Upon overwhelming exposure such as what
is mentioned here, the Wahhabiyy would say, “It is not permissible to defame the
scholars, this is backbiting and gossip.” The answer to this attempt to overlook the truth
is to say that the Prophet warned against many people when there was a need to do so,
such as the hadith:
‫ﺎن ِﻣ ْﻦ ِدﻳﻨﻨَﺎ َﺷ ْﻴﺌًﺎ‬

ِ َ‫ﻣﺎ أَﻇُﻦ ﻓَُﻼﻧًﺎ وﻓَُﻼﻧًﺎ ﻳـ ْﻌ ِﺮﻓ‬
َ َ ّ َ
“I do not think that so and so and that so and so know anything about our Religion,1”
and the hadith of Fatimah Bint Qays when she sought the Prophet’s advice about two
men who wanted to marry her:
‫ﺼﺎ َﻋ ْﻦ َﻋﺎﺗِﻘﻪ‬ ُ َ‫ ﻓ‬: ‫أَ ﱠﻣﺎ ُﻣ َﻌﺎ ِوﻳَﺔ‬

َ َ‫ ﻓَ َﻼ ﻳ‬: ‫ﺼ ْﻌﻠُﻮك َوأَ ﱠﻣﺎ أَﺑُﻮ َﺟ ْﻬﻢ‬
َ ‫ﻀﻊ اﻟ َْﻌ‬
“As for Muâwiyah, he is poor, and as for Abu Jahm, he never takes the stick from his
shoulder (meaning that he beats women).2” There is also the hadith of Hind the wife of
Abu Sufyan, who said to the Prophet, “Abu Sufyan is certainly a miserly man. Would it be
sinful if I took some of his money secretly?” the Prophet did not say to her, “How could
you expose him like that? This is backbiting and gossip,” rather, he said:
1
2
Narrated by Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH
‫ﺧﺬي أﻧﺖ وﺑﻨﻮك ﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﻔﻴﻚ ﺑﺎﳌﻌﺮوف‬
“You and your children (may) take what is normally needed.1” Therefore, our exposure
of Ibn Taymiyah’s deviance is not mere gossip, but a religious duty.
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 Âbdu-l-Wahhab revived and added to his
teachings.
MUHAMMAD IBN ÂBDU-L-WAHHAB
Muhammad Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab 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
‫ ﷺ‬said,
‫ ﺍاﻟﺸـﻴﯿﻄﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﻗـﺮﻥن‬ ‫ ﻳﯾـﻄﻠـﻊ‬ ‫ﺑﻬﮭﺎ‬
“The horn of the devil will emerge from Najd.2” His father, Âbdu-l-Wahhab, and his
brother, Shaykh Sulayman, 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 âqidah
(creed), nor fiqh (detailed rules), nor lughah (Arabic language), nor tafsir (Qur’anic
interpretation), nor hadith, 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 awliya’ (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 hadith claiming that all
1
2
Narrated by Ahmad

Al-KAYFIYYAH
innovations are bad, which has lead to intense tribulations in our times. He instigated his
followers to rebel against the khalifah, which is a major sin even if the khalifah is an
unjust Muslim. As a result, he shed the blood of many Muslims. His followers have
confirmed his belief of likening Allah to the creation in many of their books, of course
without calling it “likening”. He died after more than 100 years and left the legacy of the
worst faction alive today.
AL-ALBANIYY
Their uncle is Nasiru-d-Din Al-Albaniyy, a deviant contemporary who died. The

Wahhabiyys elevated him to the status of a muhaddith (hadith scholar). He worked in a
library, and indulged in reading the books of hadith. He misunderstood a lot, and
imagined himself to be a scholar. We discredit him by telling the Wahhabiyys that he had
no shaykh to teach him the science of hadith, and we challenge any Wahhabiyy 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 hadith 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 hadith 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.
It was narrated about him that in one of his sessions, a Jordanian lawyer requested from
Al-Albaniyy to recite 10 hadiths with their chains of narration from memory. Al-Albaniyy
responded by saying, “I am not a muhaddith of memorization, I am a muhaddith of the
book.” The lawyer responded by saying, “Then I am able to do what you do” Upon that,
Al-Albaniyy felt embarrassed.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
OTHERS WHOSE NAMES ARE NOT DESERVING OF A

SUBTITLE
The Wahhabiyys have other heads, such as the recently deceased Âbdu-llah Ibn Baz. He
has been falsely called “the Grand Mufti of Makkah”. He has also worked hard in
solidifying the call of the Wahhabiyys. Now that he and Al-Albaniyy are dead, we find the
Wahhabiyys 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 Allah must be above the creations since it is not befitting to say He is below
them. Ibn Baz and Philips are among the Wahhabiyys who documented the so-called
three aspects of Tawhid. 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 Allah”, he said that he did not know whether dividing Tawhid into three categories was
an innovation or not, yet he proceeded to teach the people about it anyway. Be warned
about these men, and others, like Ibn Ûthaymin, who said that we do not know exactly
how Allah sits, and that Allah has a glorious face and two real eyes. He did not try to
camouflage his blasphemy. He also said that denying total dissimilarity from every aspect
between Allah and the creations is a mistake; it is a must that there be some sort of
resemblance between the attributes of Allah and the attributes of the creation so that we
can understand them. Not only did he not camoflauge his blasphemy, but it overcame him
to the extent that could not hide it. 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
‫ﷺ‬. There are only a few standing between the Wahhabiyys and the people.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORSHIP

AND TAWASSUL
A
mong their strongest fallacies and wickedest of heresies is their corrupted talk
about tawassul. Perhaps they misguide more people with this fallacy than with
their talk about likening Allah to the creations. They say to the unsuspecting
person, “Do you worship the graves? Do you worship the Prophets? Do you call upon the
dead?” And of course, that unsuspecting Muslim would say, “Never!” They would say to
him, “Beware of those who do shirk throughout the Muslim lands, calling upon the
Prophets and the Waliyys, rubbing themselves on their graves and asking for their
intersession.” They say more than this, and this is a very dangerous poison. It is like the
bite of the so-called vampire, quickly turning its victims into practically incurable
deviants. The one who learns before encountering this talk of theirs can protect himself,
but the one who has leant them a listening ear in this issue may never return to the truth,
even if he heard all of the evidence. In fact, he would just ignore all of the evidence and
believe that it is all weak, even if their own authorities authenticate the references. Let us
not make this introduction longer than it needs to be, and bring the remedy for their sick
poison. However, one must know that the key to refuting Wahhabiyys in this issue is
textual evidence. You must understand and memorize the proof. An essential mistake of
the Wahhabiyy in this topic is his rejection of religious proof for his opinion. To
successfully refute them, it is imperitive that you know the references that disprove them,
and enforce those references on them.
THE CORRECT MEANING OF WORSHIP

The first thing one must do to protect himself and others, and to refute the Wahhabiyys in
this menacing deviance, is understand the meaning of “îbadah (worship)”, because they
accuse the Muslims of worshipping other than Allah when they never did so. To
understand the meaning of worship, one must understand that worship (îbadah) is a
concept;; a description of one’s actions. Therefore, one may walk, and depending on his
intention, his walking may be worship or may not be. His eating might be worship or
might not be. His fighting might be worship or it might not be. Even his prostrating might

Al-KAYFIYYAH
be worship to someone or it might not be. For this reason, when we prostrate to Allah we
are worshipping Him, and when the Angels prostrated to Adam, they were not
worshipping him, and when Muâdh Ibn Jabal prostrated to the Prophet, he was not
worshipping the Prophet. The references for these prostrations are as follows:
It was confirmed that when Muâth Ibn Jabal came from the lands of Ash-Sham, he
prostrated to the Messenger of Allah‫ﷺ‬. The Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫ َﻫﮬﮪھﺬَﺍا‬ ‫َﻣﺎ‬
“What is this?” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, I saw the people of Ash-Sham
prostrating to their generals and priests, and you are more deserving of that. The Prophet
said:
ْ َ ‫ ﺗ‬ ْ‫ ﺃأَﻥن‬ َ‫ ﺍا ْﻟ َﻣ ْﺭرﺃأَﺓة‬ ُ‫ ﻷ َ َﻣ ْﺭرﺕت‬ ٍ‫ ﻷ َ َﺣﺩد‬ َ‫ﺳ ُﺟﺩد‬

‫ ﻟ َِﺯز ْﻭو ِﺟ َﻬﮭﺎ‬ َ‫ﺳ ُﺟﺩد‬ ْ َ‫ ﻳﯾ‬ ْ‫ ﺃأَﻥن‬ ‫ ﺃأ َ َﺣﺩدًﺍا‬ ‫ ﺁآﻣِﺭر‬ ُ‫ ﻛُ ْﻧﺕت‬ ‫ ﻟَ ْﻭو‬ ،٬‫ ﺗ َ ْﻔﻌَﻝل‬ ‫ﻻ‬
“Do not do that. Had I ordered anyone to prostrate to anyone, I would have ordered
the woman to prostrate to her husband.” This is narrated by Ibn Hibban, Ibn Majah
and others. Yes, it may be forbidden in the Laws of Muhammad to prostrate to a human,
but that is beside the point. Always beware of a Wahhabiyy reaching for something
beside the point. The point is that the great Companion prostrated to the Prophet, and the
Prophet did not accuse him of shirk. Also, Allah commanded the Angels to prostrate to
Adam:
1
<(‫>)وا ْذ ﻗُﻠْﻨَﺎ ِﻠْ َﻤ َﻼ ِ َﻜ ِﺔ ْاﲭُﺪُ وا ِ ٓ َد َم ﻓَ َﺴ َ ﺪُ وا‬
َ
<And when We said to the Angels, “Prostrate to Adam,” so they prostrated…>
So what makes one prostration worship and the other not? Why is seeking refuge with
Allah worshipping Allah, and seeking refuge with the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬not
worshipping him? Imam Ahmad narrated in his Musnad, with a hasan chain of narration,
1
Al-Baqarah, 34

Al-KAYFIYYAH
as said by Hafidh Ibn Hajar1, that Al-Harith Ibn Hassan Al-Bakriyy said in the presence
of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬:
ُ ُ
َ ‫ﻮﺫذ ﺑﺎ ِ َﻭو َﺭر ُﺳﻮ ِﻠ ِﻪ ﺍا ْﻥن ﺍا ُﻜ‬
‫ﻮﻥن َﻜ َﻮ ِﺍاﻓ ِﺪ َﻋ ٍﺎﺩد‬ ِ ‫ﺍاﻋ‬
“I seek refuge with Allah and his Messenger from being like the delegate of the tribe of
Âd.” The Prophet did not object to him. Had what he done been shirk, the Prophet would
have clarified that. How we know that the Wahhabiyys are misguided in this issue, is that
they would consider the one who seeks refuge with Allah and His Messenger ‫ ﷺ‬a
mushrik, even after knowing of the strong hadith in this issue. If you were to tell him the
hadith before he ever knew about it, he would assume that it is weak or fabricated, and
find such a doing very ugly and despicable.
Worship is the ultimate submission, the extent of humility, and the maximum humbleness
and fear for another. Take some of the quotes of the Sunniyy linguists for the true
definition of îbadah (worship):
The hafidh, faqih and linguist, Taqiyyu-d-Din Âliyy Ibn Âbdi-l-Kafi As-Subkiyy defined
it as:
ُ ‫ﺍاﻠﺨ ُﻀﻮﻉع‬
‫ﺍاﻠﺨ ُﺸﻮﻉع‬ ُ ‫ﺎﻳﺔ‬ُ ‫َﻏ‬
ِ
“the extremity in humbleness and fear”, as mentioned by the imam, hafidh and linguist,
Muhammad Murtada Az-Zabidiyy. Others have mentioned the likes of this, such as Abu
Mansur Al-Azhariyy in Tahthib Al-Lughah. He said in conveying the words of Az-Zajjaj,
who is among the most famous linguists2:
‫ ﺍاﻠﻄﺎﻋﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍاﻠﺨﻀﻮﻉع‬:‫ﻭوﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﺍاﻠﻌﺒﺎﺩدﺓة ﻓﻲ ﺍاﻠﻟﻐﺔ‬
1
578 / 8) ‫ ﺣﺟﺭر‬ ‫ ﻻﺑﻥن‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺑﺎﺭرﻱي‬ ‫)ﻓﺗﺢ‬:
‫ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ا ﱠُ َﻋﻠَﻴْ ِﻪ‬ ِ ِ ‫ﻀﺮِﻣ ِﻲ إِ َﱃ رﺳ‬ ِ ‫ ْﳊﺎ ِر‬ ‫ﻋﻥن‬
َ ‫ﻮل ا ﱠ‬ ُ َ ّ َ ْ َ‫ﺖ أَﻧَﺎ َواﻟ َْﻌ َﻼءُ ﺑْ ُﻦ ا ْﳊ‬ُ ‫ﺎل َﺧ َﺮ ْﺟ‬ َ َ‫ي ﻗ‬ِّ ‫ﺴﺎ َن اﻟْﺒَ ْﻜ ِﺮ‬
‫ث ﺑْ ِﻦ َﺣ ﱠ‬ َ َ ‫ ﻥن‬ ٍ ‫ َﺣ َﺳ‬ ‫ ﺩد‬ ٍ ‫ ِﺑﺈِ ْﺳﻧَﺎ‬ ُ ‫ ﺩد‬ ‫ ﺃأَﺣْ َﻣ‬ ‫ ﺔ‬ ِ َ‫ ﺍاﻟﺛﱠﺎ ِﻧﻳﯾ‬ ‫ ﺩد‬ ٍ ‫ َﻋﺎ‬ َ‫ ﺔ‬ ‫ﺻ‬ َ ‫ ﺃأ َ ْﺧ َﺭر‬ ‫ ﺩد‬ ْ َ‫َﻭوﻗ‬
‫ ِﻗ ﱠ‬ ‫ﺝج‬
ٍ ‫ْﺖ أَﻋُﻮذُ ﺑِﺎ ﱠِ وﺑِﺮﺳﻮﻟِ ِﻪ أَ ْن أَ ُﻛﻮ َن َﻛﻮاﻓِ ِﺪ َﻋ‬
‫ﺎد‬ ُ ‫ﻳﺚ َوﻓِ ِﻴﻪ ﻓَـ ُﻘﻠ‬
َ ‫َو َﺳﻠﱠ َﻢ ا ْﳊَ ِﺪ‬
َ ََُ
2
231 ‫ ﺹص‬ / 1 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﻠﻐﺔ‬ ‫)ﺗﻬﮭﺬﻳﯾﺐ‬
Al-KAYFIYYAH
“Worship in the Arabic language is the (special) obedience with the (ultimate) humility.”
This does not mean that any obedience is worship, or any humility, or else anyone who
obeyed another, even his parent or employer, would be worshipping that one, and anyone
who humbled himself to another, even his parent or commanding officer would be
worshipping that other. Ibn Mandhur said similar to that in Lisanu-l-Ârab1, as well as
Al-Farra’ and Ar-Raghib Al-Asbhaniyy in his book Mufradatu-l- Qur’an 2. Ibn Athir
said, “Îbadah in the language is the obedience with the submission.” Also, Al-
Fayyumiyy, one of the famous linguists said in Al-Misbah3:
‫ﻭوﻫﻲ ﺍاﻻﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩد ﻭوﺍاﻠﺨﻀﻮﻉع‬

“...it is the submission and the humility.”
Hence, to refute the Wahhabiyy, you must understand firmly that worship is not merely
calling upon someone- whether alive or dead- nor merely seeking help from someone
other than Allah, nor fearing someone, nor being hopeful of something from someone,
nor merely glorifying someone, nor merely going to the grave of a waliyy to seek
blessings. Nor is it worship to request something from someone in an unusual way,
because when the Children of Israel were searching for the body of Prophet Yusuf, a
woman requested from Prophet Musa that she would be his companion in Paradise, and
she did not request that from Allah. Had she done an act of shirk, Musa, the Messenger of
Allah‫ﷺ‬, would have clarified that.
None of these matters in themselves are applicable to the meaning of îbadah according
to the linguists, as you have just seen. The Wahhabiyys use all of these matters to
wrongfully define worship, and then accuse the Muslims of worshipping someone other
than Allah. What we have presented as the definition of îbadah is what is linguistically
confirmed, what is normal (ûrf), and in compliance with what came in the Religion.
Take, for example, a person who goes to the grave of his dead parent, falls to his knees
):271 / 3) ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌﺮﺏب‬ ‫ﻟﺴﺎﻥن‬1

‫ﱡ‬ َ
‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟﺘﺬﻟﻞ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟ ُﺨﻀﻮﻉع‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌُﺒﻮ ِﺩدﻳﯾﱠﺔ‬ ‫ ﻭوﺃأﺻﻞ‬ ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟﻌَ ْﺒ ِﺪﻳﯾﱠﺔِ؛‬ ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟﻌُﺒﻮ ِﺩدﻳﯾﱠﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻌُﺒُﻮﺩدَﺓة‬ ‫ ﺑَﻴﯿِّﻦ‬ ٌ‫ ﺪ‬ ‫ﻋ ْﺒ‬ ٌ ‫ ﻓُ َﻼ‬ :‫ﻝل‬
َ ‫ﻥن‬ ُ ‫َﻭوﻳﯾُﻘَﺎ‬
:(542 / 1) ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﺮﺁآﻥن‬ ‫ ﻏﺮﻳﯾﺐ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺍاﻟﻤﻔﺮﺩدﺍاﺕت‬2
‫ ﺃأ َ ﱠ‬ :‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﻭوﻟﻬﮭﺬﺍا‬ ،٬‫ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻫﮬﮪھﻮ‬ ،٬‫ ﺍاﻹﻓﻀﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﻏﺎﻳﯾﺔ‬ ‫ ﻟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻻ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺴﺘﺤﻘّﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻻ‬ ،٬‫ﺬﻟﻞ‬
‫ ِﺇإ ﱠ‬ ‫ ﺗ َ ْﻌﺒُﺪُﻭوﺍا‬ ‫ﻻ‬
‫ﻻ‬ ّ ّ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺘ‬ ‫ ﻏﺎﻳﯾﺔ‬ ‫ ﻷﻧﻬﮭﺎ‬ ،٬‫ ﻣﻨﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻎ‬ ُ ‫ ﺃأﺑﻠ‬ ُ ‫ ﺓة‬ َ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟ ِﻌﺒَﺎﺩد‬ ،٬‫ ﺍاﻟﺘّﺬﻟّﻞ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻅظﻬﮭﺎﺭر‬ :ُ‫ ﺔ‬ ‫ﺍاﻟﻌُﺒُﻮ ِﺩدﻳﯾﱠ‬
ُ‫ ﻩه‬ ‫ِﺇإﻳﯾﱠﺎ‬
3
389 ‫ ﺹص‬ / 2 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﻜﺒﻴﯿﺮ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺸﺮﺡح‬ ‫ ﻏﺮﻳﯾﺐ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻤﻨﻴﯿﺮ‬ ‫)ﺍاﻟﻤﺼﺒﺎﺡح‬
Al-KAYFIYYAH
crying and says, “O Father!” It is not normally thought that this person has worshipped
his dead parent, except by a Wahhabiyy, because to him, calling a dead person is
forbidden and worship of him. According to him, whoever says, “O, Prophet
Muhammad,” has blasphemed for calling upon someone who has died.
TAWASSUL
Tawassul linguistically means: “to seek a means”. Allah said in His Book:
<( َ َ ‫>) َواﺑْ َﺘ ُﻐﻮا اﻟ َ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪ اﻟْ َﻮ ِﺳ ﻴﯿ‬

<Seek the means to Him>.
This means seek everything that grants you a higher status to Allah, and by that, Allah
will make the results of those means manifest for you, and Allah has the power to make
them manifest without those means. This verse is not restricted, and therefore it is not
valid for a Wahhabiyy to restrict it to particular conditions that he believes in, as will be
made clear. It means to take advantage of the means, and Allah will manifest for you the
results you seek. Technically, tawassul is to seek from Allah the occurrence of a benefit
or the repulsion of harm by mentioning the name of a Prophet or a waliyy, out of honor
of the one by whom the tawassul is made.
That is our answer to the Wahhabiyy who asks, “Why make tawassul? Cannot Allah grant
you what you seek without that? The answer is, “Yes, but He made tawassul an optional
resort. There is nothing wrong with it, and in fact it is beneficial and helpful.” Allah
made the matters of life based on reasons and consequences, although He has the power
to grant us reward without us doing any deeds. Allah made the tawassul by the Prophets
and waliyys during their lives and after their deaths a means for the manifestation of what
we seek. We ask Allah by them, hoping that we would get what we asked for. We say, “O
Allah, we certainly ask You by the status or honor of the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬to
fulfill our need or to relieve us of our calamity.” We also say, “O Allah, we ask you by
the status of Âbdi-l-Qadir Al-Jaylaniyy…” and the like. It is not a condition to say, “by
the status of”. One can say, “I ask you by Muhammad,” as will be seen. This is

Al-KAYFIYYAH
permissible and has only been made forbidden by the Wahhabiyyah, thus they have
deviated from Ahlu-s-Sunnah.
There is no real evidence that tawassul by the Prophets and the Waliyys is forbidden,
whether that was done in their absence or after their deaths. The Wahhabiyyah have
claimed that this is shirk, unless done in their presence or during their lives, but the
Prophet said:
‫ َوإِ ْن َﻛﺎ َن ِﻣﺎﺋَﺔَ َﺷ ْﺮ ٍط‬،٬‫ﺎﻃ ٌﻞ‬

ِ ‫ﺎب ا ﱠِ ﻓَـﻬﻮ ﺑ‬
َ َُ ِ َ‫ُﻛ ﱡﻞ َﺷ ْﺮ ٍط ﻟَْﻴﺲ ِﰲ ﻛِﺘ‬
َ
“Every condition that is not in the Book of Allah is invalid, even if it were 100
conditions.” The condition of being alive and present is a fabrication, as we will prove
by first referring to “The Hadith of the Blind Man (Hadithu-l-Aˆma)”. This hadith
perfectly discredits the claims of the Wahhabiyyah, that making tawassul or calling upon
someone is only permissible if that one were alive and present, or else it is skirk:
1. Within it is evidence that calling on someone is not worship, because the blind
man was personally ordered by the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬to call upon the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬,
who would never order someone to worship him. The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said to him:
‫ ﷴ‬ ‫ ﺑﻨﺒﻴﯿﻨﺎ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻴﯿﻚ‬ ‫ ﻭوﺃأﺗﻮﺟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺳﺄﻟﻚ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻧﻲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻠﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﻗﻞ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ ﺭرﻛﻌﺘﻴﯿﻦ‬ ‫ ﺻﻞ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻓﺘﻮﺿﺄ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻤﻴﯿﻀﺄﺓة‬ ‫ﺍاﺋﺖ‬
‫ ﻟﻲ‬ ‫ ﻟﺘﻘﻀﻲ‬ ‫ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺑﻲ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻟﻰ‬ ‫ ﺑﻚ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺗﻮﺟﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻧﻲ‬ ‫ ﷴ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺎ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ‬ ‫ ﻧﺒﻲ‬
“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray two rakâhs, then say, ‘O
Allah, I surely ask you, and direct myself to You by our Prophet,
Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself by youto
my Lord in my time of need so that my need would be fulfilled’.”
2. There is also proof that calling upon someone in his absence is permissible,
because the man, obeying the Prophet, went away from the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬when he
called upon him, as proven by the saying of Ibn Hunayf, the Companion who
narrated the hadith:

Al-KAYFIYYAH
ٔ
‫ﻗﺎﻝل ﻓﻮﷲ ﻤﺎ ﺗﻔﺮﻗﻨﺎ ﻭوﻻ ﻃﺎﻝل ﺑﻨﺎ ﺍاﻠﻣﺠﻟﺲ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩدﺧﻞ ﻋﻟﻴﻨﺎ ﺍاﻠﺮﺟﻞ ﻜﺎﻧﻪ ﻠﻢ ﻳﻛﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺿﺮ ﻗﻂ‬
“I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the session been long, when the
man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.” This means that he went
away from the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, as the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬ordered him, said the
supplication that contains calling on the Prophet, and then came back.
3. There is also proof that calling upon someone after his death is not worship,
because the Companions continued to teach this supplication after the Prophet’s
death ‫ﷺ‬, as Ûthman Ibn Hunayf did. Also, the hadith scholars continued to
narrate this supplication without forbidding the people from applying it after the
death of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬.
Here is the hadith in its entirety as narrated by At-Tabaraniyy in his two books Al-
Muˆjam Al-Kabir and Al-Muˆjam As-Saghir1:
ٔ
‫ ﺍاﻥن ﺭرﺟﻼ ﻜﺎﻥن ﻳﺨﺘﻟﻒ ٕﺍاﻠﻰ ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﻋﻔﺎﻥن ﺭرﺿﻲ ﷲ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﻠﻪ ﻓﻛﺎﻥن ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﻻ ﻳﻟﺘﻔﺖ‬: ‫ﻋﻦ ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﺣﻨﻴﻒ‬
ٔ ٔ
‫ٕﺍاﻠﻴﻪ ﻭوﻻ ﻳﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻪ ﻓﻟﻘﻲ ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﺣﻨﻴﻒ ﻓﺸﻛﺎ ٕﺍاﻠﻴﻪ ﺫذﻠﻚ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﺍاﺋﺖ ﺍاﻠﻣﻴﻀﺎﺓة ﻓﺘﻮﺿﺎ ﺛﻢ ﺻﻞ ﺭرﻜﻌﺘﻴﻦ ﺛﻢ ﻗﻞ‬
ٔ ٔ ٔ ٔ
‫ﺍاﻠﻟﻬﻢ ٕﺍاﻧﻲ ﺍاﺳﺎﻠﻚ ﻭوﺍاﺗﻮﺟﻪ ٕﺍاﻠﻴﻚ ﺑﻨﺒﻴﻨﺎ ﷴ ﻧﺒﻲ ﺍاﻠﺮﺣﻣﺔ ﻳﺎ ﷴ ٕﺍاﻧﻲ ﺍاﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻚ ٕﺍاﻠﻰ ﺭرﺑﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻲ ﻠﺘﻘﻀﻲ ﻠﻲ ﺛﻢ ﺭرﺡح ﺣﺘﻰ‬
ٔ ٔ ٔ ٔ
‫ﺍاﺭرﻭوﺡح ﻤﻌﻚ ﻓﺎﻧﻄﻟﻖ ﺍاﻠﺮﺟﻞ ﻓﻔﻌﻞ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻝل ﺛﻢ ﺍاﺗﻰ ﺑﺎﺏب ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﻓﺠﺎﺀء ﺍاﻠﺒﻮﺍاﺏب ﻓﺎﺧﺬ ﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻓﺎﺩدﺧﻟﻪ ﻋﻟﻰ ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﻋﻔﺎﻥن‬
ٔ
‫ﻓﺎﺟﻟﺴﻪ ﻋﻟﻰ ﻃﻨﻔﺴﺘﻪ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﻤﺎ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻚ؟ ﻓﺬﻜﺮ ﻠﻪ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻪ ﻓﻘﻀﺎ ﻠﻪ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻪ ﻭو ﻗﺎﻝل ﻤﺎ ﺫذﻜﺮﺕت ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻚ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻜﺎﻧﺖ ﻫﺬﻩ‬
‫ﺍاﻠﺴﺎﻋﺔ ﺛﻢ ﺧﺮﺝج ﻤﻦ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﻓﻟﻘﻲ ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﺣﻨﻴﻒ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﺟﺰﺍاﻙك ﷲ ﺧﻴﺮﺍا ﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻥن ﻳﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﺟﺘﻲ ﻭوﻻ ﻳﻟﺘﻔﺖ ٕﺍاﻠﻲ ﺣﺘﻰ‬
ٔ
‫ﻜﻟﻣﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﻋﺜﻣﺎﻥن ﺑﻦ ﺣﻨﻴﻒ ﻭوﷲ ﻤﺎ ﻜﻟﻣﺘﻪ ﻭوﻠﻛﻦ ﺷﻬﺪﺕت ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل ﷲ ﺻﻟﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻟﻴﻪ ﻭو ﺳﻟﻢ ﻭوﻗﺪ ﺍاﺗﺎﻩ ﺿﺮﻳﺮ ﻓﺸﻛﺎ‬
:‫ﻋﻟﻴﻪ ﺫذﻫﺎﺏب ﺑﺼﺮﻩ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل‬
‫ ﻟﻚ‬ ‫ ﺩدﻋﻮﺕت‬ ‫ ﺷﺌﺖ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻥن‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺻﺒﺮﺕت‬ ‫ ﺷﺌﺖ‬ ‫ ﺇإﻥن‬
:‫ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﻳﺎ ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل ﷲ ٕﺍاﻧﻪ ﺷﻖ ﻋﻟﻲ ﺫذﻫﺎﺏب ﺑﺼﺮﻱي ﻭو ٕﺍاﻧﻪ ﻠﻴﺲ ﻠﻲ ﻗﺎﺋﺪ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل‬
‫ ﺍاﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕت‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﺆﻻء‬ ‫ ﻗﻞ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ﻦ‬
ٔ ‫ ﺭرﻛﻌﺘﻴﯿ‬ ‫ ﺻﻞ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻓﺘﻮﺿﺄ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻤﻴﯿﻀﺄﺓة‬ ‫ ﺍاﺋﺖ‬
‫ﻓﻔﻌﻞ ﺍاﻠﺮﺟﻞ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻝل ﻓﻮﷲ ﻤﺎ ﺗﻔﺮﻗﻨﺎ ﻭوﻻ ﻃﺎﻝل ﺑﻨﺎ ﺍاﻠﻣﺠﻟﺲ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩدﺧﻞ ﻋﻟﻴﻨﺎ ﺍاﻠﺮﺟﻞ ﻜﺎﻧﻪ ﻠﻢ ﻳﻛﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺿﺮ ﻗﻂ‬
A man used to go back and forth to Ûthman Ibn Âffan, may Allah accept his
deeds, because of an issue that he needed fulfilled. Ûthman did not look into his
issue. This man met Ûthman Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about that. So
Ûthman Ibn Hunayf said to him, “Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray
two rakâhs, and then say, ‘O Allah, I surely ask you, and direct myself to you by
1
306 ‫ ﺹص‬ / 1 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﻄﺒﺮﺍاﻧﻲ‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﺼﻐﻴﯿﺮ‬ ‫)ﺍاﻟﻤﻌﺠﻢ‬

Al-KAYFIYYAH
our Prophet, Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself to

my Lord by you in my time of need so that my need would be fulfilled,’ then come
to me so that I would go with you.” The man left and did as he said, but then went
directly to the door of Ûthman. The doorman came, took him by the hand and
took him in to see Ûthman Ibn Âffan. He sat him on his carpet and said, “What
is it that you need?” So he told him about his need, and Ûthman fulfilled his need
for him and said, “I did not remember your need until this moment.” Then the
man left Ûthman, met with Ûthman Ibn Hunayf and said, “May Allah
compensate you. He would not look into my need until you spoke to him about
me.” Ûthman said, “I swear by Allah, I did not speak to him, however, I
witnessed the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬when a blind man came to him and
complained about the loss of his sight. He said to the blind man:
“If you want, you will be patient, and if you want, I will make supplication for
you.”
The man said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, The loss of my sight has surely been a
hardship on me, and I certainly have no one to guide me.’ So he said to the blind
man:
“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, then say these words…”
The man did as he said, and I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the
session been long, when the man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.
Ibn Taymiyah was the first to prohibit making tawassul by the Prophet, as mentioned by
Taqiyyu-d-Diyn As-Subkiyy, in his book Shifa’u-s-Saqam. He said:
Know that it is permissible and good to make tawassul, to seek help (istiânah),
and to seek intercession (tashaffuˆ) by the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬to one’s Lord, the
glorified and exalted. The permissibility and goodness of that is known by every
religious person. It is known by the doings of the Prophets and Messengers, and
the biographies of the righteous Salaf, and no one has denied that from any

Al-KAYFIYYAH
religion, and the denial of it was never heard of at any time in history until Ibn
Taymiyah came and spoke about it with speech by which he fooled those who are
weak and inexperienced. He innovated what was not preceded before him at any
time in history.”
It is permissible to make tawassul by what is attributed with life and what is not attributed
with life. Allah said:
{( ‫}) َوا ْﺳ ﺘَ ِﻌﻴﯿﻨُﻮا ِ ﻟﺼ ْ ِﱪ َواﻟﺼ َﻼة‬ 1
<Seek help through patience and prayer>.
Another evidence for the validity of tawassul by the Prophets and the pious, and by what
is alive and what is not alive, is the hadith narrated from the route of Abu Saîd Al-
Khudriyy:
‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﺫذﺍا‬ ‫َﺎﻱي‬
َ ‫ َﻣ ْﻣﺷ‬ ‫ﻕق‬ َ َ‫ﻋﻠَ ْﻳﯾﻙك‬
ِ ّ ‫ ﻭوﺑِ َﺣ‬ َ َ‫ﺳﺎﺋِ ِﻠﻳﯾﻥن‬ ِ ّ ‫ ﺑِ َﺣ‬ َ‫ﺳﺄَﻟُﻙك‬
‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ﻕق‬ ْ َ ‫ ﺃأ‬ ‫ ﺇإِﻧِّﻲ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻠﱠ ُﻬﮭ ﱠﻡم‬ ‫ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل‬ ‫ﺻ َﻼ ِﺓة‬
‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ ﺇإِﻟَﻰ‬ ‫ ﺑﻳﯾﺗﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻣﻥن‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺭرﺟﻝل‬ ‫ ﺧﺭرﺝج‬ ‫ﺇإﺫذﺍا‬
“If someone left his house to go to the prayer and he said, “O Allah, surely I ask you
by the right of those who ask You, and by the right of this walking of mine…”.”
The Prophets and the pious are among those who ask Allah, so it is lawful to make
tawassul by them; this hadith promotes the meaning: “I ask you by the right of the
Prophets”, or “by the right of the waliyys”. “By the right of” means, “I ask you by the
status that those have with You”.
1
٤٥ :‫ﺍاﻟﺑﻘﺭرﺓة‬
Al-KAYFIYYAH
Furthermore, those people have a higher status to Allah than the status of the walking, so
if it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the walking to the prayer- which is
not something living-, it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the Prophets and
the pious people, whether living or not living. Take the tawassul of Adam by the Prophet
as an example. Al-Bayhaqiyy narrates in Dala’il An-Nubuwah:
َ ‫ُﻚ ِﲝَ ِّﻖ ُﳏَ ﱠﻤ ٍﺪ ﻟ ََﻤﺎ ﻏَ َﻔ ْﺮ‬

‫ت ِﱄ‬ َ ‫َﺳﺄَﻟ‬
ْ‫بأ‬ َ َ‫ ﻗ‬،٬َ‫اﳋَ ِﻄﻴﺌَﺔ‬
ِّ ‫ ﻳَﺎ َر‬:‫ﺎل‬ ْ ‫آد ُم‬
َ ‫ف‬َ ‫ﻟَ ﱠﻤﺎ اﻗْـﺘَـ َﺮ‬
“When Adam committed the sin, he said, ‘O my Lord, I ask you by the status of
Muhammad to forgive me’…” If making tawassul by someone who is not alive is shirk,
then according to the Wahhabiyys, Adam, the father of men, is a mushrik, because he
made tawassul by the Prophet before the Prophet was created.
If they say, “Ûmar Ibn Al-Khattab made tawassul by Al-Âbbas after the Prophet’s
death. Does not that prove that it is forbidden to made tawassul by him after his death,
since Ûmar would not leave out doing what is best had it been permissible?” The answer
is that Ûmar did not leave out tawassul by the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬because he died. Rather, had
the Wahhabiyy understood the text at all, he would have never asked the question,
because the answer for his question is contained in the story; Al-Âbbas gave the reason
for why they made tawassul by him when he said:
‫ﺍاﻠﻟﻬﻢ ٕﺍاﻥن ﺍاﻠﻘﻮﻡم ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻮﺍا ﺑﻲ ٕﺍاﻠﻴﻚ ﻠﻣﻛﺎﻧﻲ ﻤﻦ ﻧﺒﻴﻚ‬

“O Allah, certainly the people have directed themselves by me to You because of my
status to your Prophet.1” He did not say, “They directed themselves by me to You
because Your Prophet has died.” Thus, Ûmar did so out of observing the status of the
relatives (Al) of the Prophet. This incident is narrated by Az-Zubayr Ibn Bakkar.
Furthermore, leaving out something is not evidence that it is forbidden, as confirmed in
the books of the Foundations of Fiqh. The Prophet left out many permissible things, and
that is not evidence that they are forbidden. Ûmar wanted to clarify the permissibility of
making tawassul by other than the Prophet, and that is why Ibn Hajar said after narrating
1
424 ‫ ﺹص‬ / 10 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﺒﺨﺎﺭرﻱي‬ ‫ ﺻﺤﻴﯿﺢ‬ ‫ ﺷﺮﺡح‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘﺎﺭرﻱي‬ ‫)ﻋﻤﺪﺓة‬, 497 ‫ ﺹص‬ / 2 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺣﺠﺮ‬ ‫ ﺍاﺑﻦ‬ - ‫ ﺍاﻟﺒﺎﺭرﻱي‬ ‫)ﻓﺘﺢ‬, ‫ ﺹص‬ / 26 ‫ )ﺝج‬ - ‫ ﺩدﻣﺸﻖ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭرﻳﯾﺦ‬
358)

Al-KAYFIYYAH
this story, “Among the benefits taken from the story of Al-Âbbas is the recommendation
of seeking intercession by the people of goodness, piety, and the family of the Prophet
(Ahlu-l-Bayt).” No one said that this story proves that tawassul by the Prophet after his
death is forbidden.
CALLING AND SEEKING HELP (ISTIGHATHAH) IS

NOT WORSHIP
To refute a Wahhabiyy in this issue, you must memorize the proof and not be intimidated
by his spooky talk of grave worshippers. One proof that calling is not worship, whether
the called one were alive or dead, present or absent, is the aforementioned hadith of the
blind man. Take a few more references:
Among what proves the validity of calling upon other than Allah without worshipping
that one, even if he were absent, is what was narrated by Al-Bazzar from the route of Ibn
Âbbas:
ٔ ٔ ٔ ٔ
‫ٕﺍاﻥن ﻤﻼﺋﻛﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺍاﻻﺭرﺽض ﺳﻮﻯى ﺍاﻠﺤﻔﻈﺔ ﻳﻛـﺘﺒﻮﻥن ﻤﺎ ﻳﺴﻘﻂ ﻤﻦ ﻭوﺭرﻕق ﺍاﻠﺸﺠﺮ ٕﻓﺎﺫذﺍا ﺍاﺻﺎﺏب ﺍاﺣﺪﻜﻢ ﻋﺮﺟﺔ ﺑﺎﺭرﺽض ﻓﻼﺓة‬
ٔ
‫ﻓﻟﻴﻨﺎﺩد ﺍاﻋﻴﻨﻮﺍا ﻋﺒﺎﺩد ﷲ‬
“Surely, Allah has angels who roam the earth, other than the angels who record the deeds.
They document the leaves that fall to the ground. So if one of you were in an open land
and was inflicted with a difficulty, let him call out, “Help, O slaves of Allah.” Hafidh Al-
Haythamiyy said that At-Tabaraniyy narrated this hadith and its narrators are trustworthy.
Ibn Hajar also narrated this hadith in his sessions of dictation (amali) as a hadith of the
Prophet ‫( ﷺ‬marfuˆ), and he judged it as hasan. The different narrations of this hadith
support each other, and strengthen whatever weakness exists in some of the narrations.
It is also documented by the scholars of hadith, like Al-Bayhaqiyy in Al-Madkhal, that

weak narrations can be used for doing good acts, supplications, and interpretation of the
Qur’an, and this was already addressed in the book previously, when we produced Ibn
Taymiyah’s approval of what he and his followers consider shirk (because Ibn Taymiyah
contradicting himself is nothing strange). In his book Al-Kalimu-t-Tayyib, his quote is:

Al-KAYFIYYAH
ٔ
‫ ﺍاﺫذﻜﺮ ﺍاﺣﺐ ﺍاﻠﻨﺎﺱس‬:‫ ﻓﺨﺪﺭرﺕت ﺭرﺟﻟﻪ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل ﻠﻪ ﺭرﺟﻞ‬،‫ ﻜﻨﺎ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻣﺮ ﺭرﺿﻲ ﷲ ﻋﻨﻬﻣﺎ‬:‫ﻋﻦ ﺍاﻠﻬﻴﺜﻢ ﺑﻦ ﺣﻨﺶ ﻗﺎﻝل‬
ٔ
‫ ﻓﻛﺎﻧﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﻂ ﻤﻦ ﻋﻘﺎﻝل‬،‫ ﻳﺎ ﷴ‬:‫ ﻓﻘﺎﻝل‬،‫ٕﺍاﻠﻴﻚ‬
“From Al-Haytham Ibn Hanash that he said, ‘We were with Âbdullah Ibn Ûmar, may
Allah accept his and his father’s deeds, when his leg was inflicted with the ‘khadar’. A
man said to him, ‘Mention the most beloved of people to you’, and so he said, ‘Ya
Muhammad’, and it was as if he was untied from a knot’.”
So is Ibn Taymiyah a mushrik or not, O Wahhabiyy? Rather, the Wahhabiyy will make
every excuse for Ibn Taymiyah for what he has done here, and accuse anyone else who
does the exact same thing of shirk.
1. If the Wahhabiyy says that the hadith is weak, we tell him that is beside the point;
Ibn Taymiyah considered it a good practice, weak or not, and even if it were
weak, weak narrations can still be used for doing good deeds.
2. If he says that what is meant in the hadith is that Ibn Ûmar wanted to conjure up
the remembrance of the Prophet in his heart, not to call on the Prophet, we tell
him that it says “Ya Muhammad,” which is calling. What grammarian said that
saying “Ya So and So” is not calling if one wanted to conjure up the
remembrance of another in one’s heart? Are you actually a sane person who
accepts this excuse? And how come it was only Ibn Ûmar who meant to conjure
up the Prophet in his heart and anyone else who says the exact same words after
the Prophet’s death is a mushrik according to you (except Ibn Taymiyah)?
3. If he says, “He was told to MENTION the most beloved person to him, so when
he said, ‘ya Muhammad’, he was only MENTIONING the Prophet, not calling on
him.” The answer is that he said, “Ya Muhammad (O Muhammad). The fact that
a person told him to MENTION the most beloved to him is beside the point. He
called the Prophet after his death.” They play all of these word games because
they believe in Ibn Taymiyah more than they believe in the Prophet. They did not
play these word games for the sake of Ibn Ûmar, it was for the sake if Ibn
Taymiyah.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
EXTRA DETAIL:
“the munada (the vocative case in Arabic)”
It is helpful to digress into the Arabic language in this issue. The ‘munada’, literally:
‘the called one’, and grammatically: ‘the vocative case’, is in essence a direct object
(mafûl bih). This is because had one said, “‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻋﺒﺪ‬ ‫( ﻳﯾﺎ‬O Âbdallah)”, it is as if he said
“‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻋﺒﺪ‬ ‫( ﺃأﺩدﻋﻮ‬I call Âbdallah).” The verb (‫‘ ﺃأﺩدﻋﻮ‬I call’) is omitted, and the particle (‫‘ ﻳﯾﺎ‬O’)
took its place.
There are a number of particles used for it: Its most famous is (‫‘ ﻳﯾﺎ‬Ya’), like ‘Ya Zayd (O,
Zayd)’. With it, you can call the close and the far, the one who is present and the one who
is not present. Among them is (‫‘ ﺃأ‬A’), like: ‘AZayd!’;; ‘O Zayd!’, if he is close, and there
are others. Al-Haririyy said1:
َ ‫ﺍاﻭو ﻫﻣﺰ ٍﺓة ﺍاﻭو ٔﺍا ْﻱي ﻭو ٕﺍا ْﻥن ﺷ‬ ٔ

‫ﺌﺖ َﻫ َﻴﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﺪﻋﻮ َﺑﻴﺎ ﺍاﻭو ِﺑﺎ َﻳﺎ‬
ُ ‫ﻭوﻧﺎﺩد َﻤﻦ‬
ِ
َ
“Call whomever you want to call by (using) ‘ya (‫’)ﻳﺎ‬, ‘aya
ٔ
(‫’) َﺍاﻳﺎ‬, by using a Hamzah (‫)ﺍا‬, ‘ay
ٔ
(‫’)ﺍا ْﻱي‬, and if you want, then by using ‘haya’ (‫) َﻫ َﻴﺎ‬.”
It has many cases and branches. One of those branches is the special munada named “al-
mustaghathu bih (one whose help is sought).” In his grammar book, the explanation of
Qatru-n-Nada, Ibn Hisham, may Allah have mercy upon him, defined this specific
munada as:
‫َﻭو ُﻫ َﻮ ﻜﻞ ْﺍاﺳﻢ ُﻧﻮﺩدﻱي ﻠﻴﺨﻟﺺ ﻤﻦ ﺷﺪﺓة ﺍاﻭو ﻳﻌﻴﻦ ﻋﻟﻰ ﺩدﻓﻊ ﻤﺸﻘﺔ‬
‘Every name that is called (out) for being relieved of something harsh, or for assistance
in repelling difficulty.” The only particle used for this type is (‫“ ﻳﯾﺎ‬ya”), which means, ‘O’,
and it has details that are not directly related to this discussion. Therefore, for the
Wahhabiyys to say that Ibn Taymiyah did not approve of “calling on the dead” as
theywould call it, or “seeking help (isthighathah) from the dead” is a lie.
***
1
54 / 1) ‫ ﺍاﻹﻋﺮﺍاﺏب‬ ‫ )ﻣﻠﺤﺔ‬Mulhatu-l-Iˆrab

Al-KAYFIYYAH
Among the evidence of tawassul by the Prophet and others, using them as a means for the
supplication to be answered, whether during their lives or after their deaths, is what was
narrated by Hafidh Abu Bakr Al-Bayhaqiyy with his chain of narration mentioned in the
Arabic text:
ٔ َ ْ ْ ْ
،‫ ﺣﺪﺛﻨﺎ ﺍاﺑﻮ ﻋﻣﺮﻭو ْﺑ ُﻦ َﻤ َﻄ ٍﺮ‬:‫ ﺍا ْﺧ َﺒ َﺮَﻧﺎ ﺍا ُﺑﻮ َﻧ ْﺼ ِﺮ ْﺑ ُﻦ َﻗ َﺘ َﺎﺩد َﺓة َﻭوﺍا ُﺑﻮ َﺑ ْﻛ ٍﺮ ﺍاﻠ َﻔ ِﺎﺭر ِﺳﻲ َﻗﺎﻻ‬:‫َﻗ َﺎﻝل ﺍاﻠ َﺤ ِﺎﻓ ُﻆ ﺍا ُﺑﻮ َﺑ ْﻛ ٍﺮ ﺍاﻠ َﺒ ْﻴ َﻬ ِﻘﻲ‬
‫ َﻋ ْﻦ ﺍا ِﺑﻲ َﺻﺎ ِﻠ ٍﺢ‬،‫ﺶ‬ َ ‫ َﻋﻦ ْﺍاﻻ ْﻋ‬،‫ َﺣﺪ َﺛ َﻨﺎ ﺍا ُﺑﻮ ُﻤ َﻌﺎﻭو َﻳ َﺔ‬،‫ َﺣﺪ َﺛ َﻨﺎ َﻳ ْﺤ َﻴ ـﻰ ْﺑ ُﻦ َﻳ ْﺤ َﻴ ـﻰ‬،‫َﺣﺪ َﺛ َﻨﺎ ﺍا ْﺑ َﺮ ِﺍاﻫ ُﻴﻢ ْﺑ ُﻦ َﻋ ِﻟ ّﻲ ﺍاﻠﺬﻫ ِﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻣ‬
ِ ِ ِ ٍ
ُ ‫ﺎﺏب َﻓ َﺠ َﺎﺀء َﺭر ُﺟ ٌﻞ ﺍا َﻠﻰ َﻗ ْﺒﺮ ﺍاﻠﻨﺒ ّﻲ َﺻﻟﻰ ﺍا‬ َْ ْ ٔ ْ
ِ ِ ِ ِ ‫ ﺍاﺻﺎﺏب ﺍاﻠﻨﺎﺱس ﻗﺤﻂ ﻓﻲ ﺯزﻤﻦ ُﻋ َﻣ َﺮ ﺑ ِﻦ ﺍاﻠﺨﻄ‬:‫َﻋﻦ َﻤﺎ ِﻠ ٍﻚ ﺍاﻠﺪﺍاﺭر ﻗﺎﻝل‬
‫ َﻳﺎ َﺭر ُﺳ َﻮﻝل ﺍا ِ ْﺍاﺳ َﺘ ْﺴ ِﻖ ﺍا َ ِﻻﻤ ِﺘ َﻚ َﻓﺎﻧ ُﻬ ْﻢ َﻗ ْﺪ َﻫ َﻟ ُﻛﻮﺍا‬:‫َﻋ َﻟ ْﻴ ِﻪ َﻭو َﺳﻟ َﻢ َﻓ َﻘ َﺎﻝل‬
ٔ ٔ
‫ ﺍاﺋﺖ ﻋﻣﺮ ﻓﺎﻗﺮﻩ ﻤﻨﻲ ﺍاﻠﺴﻼﻡم ﻭوﺍاﺧﺒﺮﻩ ﺍاﻧﻬﻢ‬:‫َﻓﺎ َﺗ ُﺎﻩ َﺭر ُﺳ ُﻮﻝل ﺍا ِ َﺻﻟﻰ ﺍا ُ َﻋ َﻟ ْﻴ ِﻪ َﻭو َﺳﻟ َﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍاﻠﻣﻨﺎﻡم ﻓﻘﺎﻝل‬
ْ
‫ ﻭوﻗﻞ ﻠﻪ ﻋﻟﻴﻚ ﺑﺎﻠﻛﻴﺲ ﺍاﻠ َﻛ ْﻴﺲ‬،‫ﻤﺴﻘﻮﻥن‬.
ٓ
‫ َﻳﺎ ﺭرﺏب ﻤﺎ ﺍاﻠﻮﺍا ﺍاﻻ َﻤﺎ َﻋ َﺠ ْﺰ ُﺕت َﻋ ْﻨ ُﻪ‬:‫َﻓﺎ َﺗﻰ ﺍاﻠﺮ ُﺟ ُﻞ َﻓﺎ ْﺧ َﺒ َﺮ ُﻋ َﻣ َﺮ َﻓ َﻘ َﺎﻝل‬
From the route of Malik Ad-Dar, that the people were inflicted with a drought1 at
the time of Ûmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, and so a man came to the grave of the Prophet
and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, seek the rain for your nation, for certainly they
are perishing!’ Then, the Messenger of Allah came to him in the dream and said,
‘Go to Ûmar and pass the salam to him from me and inform him that they will be
irrigated, and say to him, ‘Endeavor, endeavor’. And so the man and informed
Ûmar, and so Ûmar said, ‘O my Lord, I do not fall short except in what I am
unable to do.’
Hafidh Ibn Kathir, who is trustworthy to them, narrated this and said immediately
afterwards:
ٌ ‫َﻭو َﻫ َﺬﺍا ﺍا ْﺳ َﻨ ٌﺎﺩد َﺻ ِﺤ‬

‫ﻴﺢ‬
1
The drought lasted six months.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
“This is an authentic chain of narration.” The confirmation of that person who went to the
grave being the Companion, Bilal Ibn Al-Harith is found in another version of the story,
also narrated by Ibn Kathir:
َ ْ َ ْ
‫ َﻓ َﻔ ِﻄ ُﻨﻮﺍا َﻭوﻠ ْﻢ َﻳ ْﻔ َﻄ ْﻦ‬- ‫ َﻭو ُﻫ َﻮ ِﺑﻼ ُﻝل ْﺑ ُﻦ ﺍاﻠ َﺤ ِﺎﺭر ِﺙث‬- ‫َﻓﺎ ْﺧ َﺒ َﺮ ُﻫ ْﻢ ِﺑ َﻘ ْﻮ ِﻝل ﺍاﻠ ُﻣ َﺰِﻧ ّ ِﻲ‬
ْ ‫ ﺍاﻧ َﻣﺎ ْﺍاﺳ َﺘ ْﺒ َﻄﺎ َﻙك ِﻓﻲ ِﺍاﻻ ْﺳ ِﺘ ْﺴ َﻘ ِﺎﺀء َﻓ‬:‫َﻓ َﻘ ُﺎﻠﻮﺍا‬
‫ﺎﺳ َﺘ ْﺴ ِﻖ ِﺑ َﻨﺎ‬
“…And so Ûmar informed them about what Al-Muzaniyy said-and he is Bilal Ibn Al-
Harith-and they understood and he did not understand. They said, ‘He is only considering
that you have been slow in performing the prayer for seeking rain (al-istisqa’), so lead us
in the prayer of seeking the rain.’…” So how do the Wahhabiyys play with this narration?
1. If the Wahhabiyy lies and claims that the hadith is weak, we have produced Ibn
Kathir’s authentication of the hadith, and he is reliable to them.
2. If they say that there is no evidence in dreams, we tell them that that is beside the
point. The evidence is not in the dream, it is in the doing of the Companion while
no one objected to him.
3. If they say their silence to his deed was the proof that they objected to it, we tell
them, You claim to follow the Salaf, so stop talking; do like them and be silent.
We also tell them that objecting to the deed is by speaking up, not being silent.
The Messenger of Allah‫ ﷺ‬ said:
‫ﻣﻦ رأى ﻣﻨﻜﻢ ﻣﻨﻜﺮا ﻓﻠﻴﻐﲑﻩ ﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻓﺈن ﱂ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ ﻓﺒﻠﺴﺎﻧﻪ ﻓﺈن ﱂ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ ﻓﺒﻘﻠﺒﻪ‬
“Any one of you who saw something forbidden, then let him change it by his
hand. If unable, then by his tongue. If unable, then with his heart (he must
hate it)…1”
1
Narrated by Muslim

Al-KAYFIYYAH
THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE ABSENT OR

DEAD
The Wahhabiyys said that it is not permissible to call someone who died (or is not alive)
or is absent, because they do not hear, so this is why the person commits shirk; he must
have believed in the godhood of the dead or absent one to think that he can hear him and
then help him. We say that this is a claim that has no evidence, and in fact is against the
evidence. Ibn Âbbas narrated:
ِ ‫اﻟﺮ َﺟ‬
‫ﺎل َوأ َْر َﺣ ِﺎم‬ ِ ‫َﺻ َﻼ‬ ِ ‫ﺎل ﻳﺎ أَﻳﱡـ َﻬﺎ اﻟﻨ‬ ِ ِ َ‫ﻗ‬
ِّ ‫ب‬ ْ ‫َﲰَ َﻊ َﻣ ْﻦ ِﰲ أ‬
ْ ‫ﺐ َﻋﻠَْﻴ ُﻜ ُﻢ ا ْﳊَ ﱡﺞ ﻓَﺄ‬
َ ‫ﱠﺎس ُﻛﺘ‬
ُ َ َ ‫ﻴﻢ َﻋﻠَﻰ ا ْﳊَ َﺠ ِﺮ ﻓَـ َﻘ‬
ُ ‫ﺎم إﺑْـ َﺮاﻫ‬
َ
ِ ِ ِّ‫اﻟﻨ‬
َ ‫آﻣ َﻦ َوَﻣ ْﻦ َﻛﺎ َن َﺳﺒَ َﻖ ِﰲ ِﻋﻠ ِْﻢ ا ﱠِ أَﻧﱠﻪُ َﳛُ ﱡﺞ إِ َﱃ ﻳَـ ْﻮم اﻟ ِْﻘﻴَ َﺎﻣ ِﺔ ﻟَﺒﱠـ ْﻴ‬
َ ‫ﻚ اﻟﻠﱠ ُﻬ ﱠﻢ ﻟَﺒﱠـ ْﻴ‬
‫ﻚ‬ َ ‫َﺟﺎﺑَﻪُ َﻣ ْﻦ‬
َ ‫ﺴﺎء ﻓَﺄ‬
َ
“Ibrahim stood upon the stone and said, ‘O people, Hajj has been made obligatory upon
you.’ He made those who were in the spines of the men (as seminal fluid) and the wombs
of the women hear, and whoever was to believe and whoever was eternally known by
Allah that he would perform the Hajj until Judgment Day responded, ‘labbayka-
llahumma, labbayk!’.” In some narrations, it is mentioned that he made everyone in the
heavens and earth hear him. If the Wahhabiyy says, “He was a Prophet,” we say, “then
you are going back on your invalid rule, that those who are not alive or far cannot hear.
You did not say, ‘unless the one who calls them is a Prophet’, nor do you believe that.”
So we pose the question wanting only a “yes-or-no” answer: is it a condition that the one
who hears be alive and present? He must say no. If he says, “Not if the caller is a
Prophet,” we object because statements without evidence are not accepted in our
Religion. It is confirmed that Ûmar was in Al-Madinah giving a speech, then interrupted
himself to call out to Sariyah, the commander of the army in Persia, “Sariyah, take the
mountain, take the mountain!” Later, the messenger of the army told of how the enemy
had prepared an ambush, and then they heard Ûmar’s voice saying to take the mountain,
so they took the mountain as cover and avoided the ambush. This is narrated by Al-
Bayhaqiyy in Al-Iˆtiqad, and by others, and is very famous. The Imams use it as evidence
for the karamahs of the waliyys. Most likely, the Wahhabiyy will deny this story- without

Al-KAYFIYYAH
evidence, of course- because he would rather adhere to his empty, false beliefs than
submit to religious evidence. So if calling someone depends on him being alive and
present, or else it is shirk, then to the Wahhabiyys, Ibrahim the Messenger of Allah ‫ﷺ‬
committed shirk, and so did Ûmar.
As for the dead hearing, we confirm this because we believe in the life of the Barzakh;
the life in the grave. When the person is buried, his soul returns to him, and he returns to
consciousness, but in a different state than the people who did not lose their souls yet. He
remains like that until his body decays, if his body is among those that decay. For
example, there is the hadith of Ibn Âbbas from the Prophet:
ِ ِِ ٍ ‫ﻣﺎ ِﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻼم‬ َ ‫أﺣﺪ ﳝَُﱡﺮ ﺑ َﻘ ِْﱪ أﺧﻴﻪ اﳌﺆﻣ ِﻦ َﻛﺎ َن ﻳَـ ْﻌﺮﻓﻪُ ﰲ اﻟﺪﱡﻧﻴﺎ ﻓَـﻴُ َﺴﻠّ ُﻢ ﻋﻠَﻴﻪ‬
َ ‫إﻻﻋَﺮﻓَﻪُ َورﱠد ﻋﻠﻴﻪ اﻟ ﱠﺴ‬ َ َ
“There is not one of you that passes by the grave of his fellow believer that he knew
in the dunya and gives him the salam, except that he [i.e., the dead one] would know
him and return his salam.” This hadith was narrated by Ibn Âbdul-Barr and Âbdul-
Haqq Al-Ishbiliyy, and he deemed it as authentic. Also, Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim
narrated from the route of Anas from the Prophet that he said:
‫ﺼَﺮﻓُﻮا‬ ِ ِ ‫إ ﱠن اﻟﻌﺒﺪ إ َذا و ِﺿﻊ ﰲ ﻗَـ ِﱪﻩ وﺗَـﻮﱠﱃ ﻋْﻨﻪ أﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ وإﻧﱠﻪ ﻟَﻴﺴﻤﻊ ﻗَـﺮ‬
َ ْ‫ع ﻧ َﻌﺎﳍﻢ إ َذا اﻧ‬
َْ َُْ َ ُ ْ ُ َ َ ْ َ ُ َ َْ
“Certainly, the slave, if he is put in his grave, and his companions turn away from
him, he will surely hear the steps of their sandals as they leave…”
As for the saying of Allah that the Wahhabiyys always use:
<(‫>)ا َﻧﻚ َﻻ ُ ْﺴ ِﻤ ُﻊ اﻟْ َﻤ ْﻮ َﰏ‬1

<O Muhammad, you cannot make the dead hear>,
it likens the blasphemers to the dead, and does not mean that the dead cannot hear,
because there are several pieces of evidence proving that the dead do hear.
1
An-Naml, 80

Al-KAYFIYYAH
You should know that the Prophets are alive in their graves and their bodies do not decay.
You should also know that the Wahhabiyy conviction about the Prophet is that he loses
his status after death, and for that reason many of them bad-mouth the Prophet and call
him a corpse, or say that a stick is more useful than he is because he has died. They
would never dare to say something like that about Ibn Taymiyah.
HANGING WRITTEN WORDS AROUND ONE’S NECK

FOR PROTECTION (AL-HIRZ)
Wearing the ‘hirz’, also called the ‘hijab’ and the ‘ta^widh’, which is a paper or the like
on which Qur’an and supplications are written for protection against harm, is religiously
substantiated. It is not kufr (blasphemy) or shirk (worship of other than Allah). The
Religious evidence has priority over all opinions. At-Tirmidhiyy narrates the hadith:
‫ ﻓﺮﻍغ‬ ‫ ﺇإﺫذﺍا‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﺳﻠﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺻﻠﻰ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺳﻮﻝل‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ : ‫ ﺟﺪﻩه‬ ‫ ﻋﻦ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺑﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻋﻦ‬ ‫ ﺷﻌﻴﯿﺐ‬ ‫ ﺑﻦ‬ ‫ ﻋﻤﺮﻭو‬ ‫ﻋﻦ‬
‫ ﻭوﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻋﺒﺎﺩدﻩه‬ ‫ ﻭوﺷﺮ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻋﻘﺎﺑﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻏﻀﺒﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺘﺎﻣﺎﺕت‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﺑﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕت‬ ‫ ﺃأﻋﻮﺫذ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﻘﻞ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨﻮﻡم‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺃأﺣﺪﻛﻢ‬
‫ ﺑﻠﻎ‬ ‫ ﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﻌﻠﻤﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻋﻤﺮﻭو‬ ‫ ﺑﻦ‬ ‫ ﷲ‬ ‫ ﻋﺒﺪ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ ﻗﺎﻝل‬ ‫ ﺗﻀﺮﻩه‬ ‫ ﻟﻦ‬ ‫ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺤﻀﺮﻭوﻥن‬ ‫ ﻭوﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺸﻴﯿﻄﺎﻥن‬ ‫ﻫﮬﮪھﻤﺰﺍاﺕت‬
‫ ﻋﻨﻘﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻘﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺛﻢ‬ ‫ ﺻﻚ‬ ‫ ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﻣﻨﻬﮭﻢ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺒﻠﻎ‬ ‫ ﻟﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻣﻦ‬ ‫ ﻭوﻟﺪﻩه‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬
‫ ﻏﺮﻳﯾﺐ‬ ‫ ﺣﺴﻦ‬ ‫ ﺣﺪﻳﯾﺚ‬ ‫ ﻫﮬﮪھﺬﺍا‬ ‫ ﻋﻴﯿﺴﻰ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺑﻮ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻝل‬
From the route of Âmr Ibn Shuâyb, from his father, from his grandfather: The
Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬said, “If one of you wakes up frightened, then let him say,
‘I seek refuge with the perfect Words of Allah, from His wrath and His
punishment, the evil of His slaves, from the whispers of the devil, and that the
devil will approach me on my death-bed’,” and Âbdullah Ibn Âmr used to teach
it to his pubescent children, and whoever did not reach puberty among his
children, he wrote it and hung it on their necks.
At-Tirmidhiyy said, “This hadith is “hasan gharib,” which means the hadith is reliable.
“Gharib” means that it was narrated through one route. An ignorant Wahhabiyy might
think he is saying that the hadith is strange. May Allah protect you from a deviant who
tries to fool you by telling you, “This means the hadith is strange.”

Al-KAYFIYYAH
Al-Albaniyy’s weakening this hadith is weightless, because he is not qualified to grade

any hadith, as we already touched upon. He is not a hafidh of hadith, or even a
muhaddith. In fact, he is not a hadith scholar, and not even a ‘musnid’, contrary to what
those who follow him and need his opinions for their beliefs would say. Here are some
references from the old scholars and imams; from the Salaf and beyond. In Al-Majmuˆ,
the explanation of al-Muhadhdhab, An-Nawawiyy said:
‫ ﻓِﻲ‬ (ِ‫ﺼ َﻼﺡح‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ ﺑ ُْﻦ‬ ‫ﻋ ْﻤ ِﺮﻭو‬ َ ‫ )ﺃأَﺑُﻮ‬ َ‫ﻭوﻗَﺎﻝل‬... َ َ‫ ﺍاﻟ ُﺤ ُﺮﻭوﺯز‬ ْ َ‫ ﻳﯾَ ْﻌﻨُﻮﻥن‬ ِ‫ ﺍاﻟﺘﱠﻌَﺎ ِﻭوﻳﯾﺬ‬ ُ‫ َﺣ ْﻤﻞ‬ ِ‫ ِﻟ ْﻠ ُﻤﺤْ ِﺪﺙث‬ ُ‫ ﻳﯾُ ْﻜ َﺮﻩه‬ ُ‫ﻏﻴﯿ ُْﺮﻩه‬ َ ‫ ﻭو‬ َ ‫ﺴﻴﯿ ٌْﻦ‬ َ ‫ ُﺣ‬ ‫ﺎﺿﻲ‬ ْ ‫ﻗَﺎﻝل‬
ِ َ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘ‬ َ
ُ‫ ﻭوﻧَﺤْ ُﻮﻩه‬ َ ‫ ﺷ َْﻤ ٌﻊ‬ ‫ ﻠَ ْﻴﯿ َﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ﻋ‬
َ ُ‫ ﻭوﻳﯾُﺠْ ﻌَﻞ‬
َ ‫ﺍاﻟﺮ َﺟﺎ ِﻝل‬ ّ ِ ‫ ﻭو‬
َ ‫ﺎﻥن‬
ِ َ‫ﺼ ْﺒﻴﯿ‬ ّ ِ ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟ‬
َ ‫ﺎء‬ َ ِّ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨ‬ ‫ﻋﻠَﻰ‬
ِ ‫ﺴ‬ ٌ ‫ ﻗُ ْﺮ‬ ‫ ﻓِﻴﯿ َﻬﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﱠﺘِﻲ‬ ‫ﻭوﺯز‬
َ ‫ﺁآﻥن‬ ِ ‫ ﺍاﻟ ُﺤ ُﺮ‬ ْ ‫ﻴﯿﻖ‬ ُ ‫ ﺗ َ ْﻌ ِﻠ‬ ‫ﻮﺯز‬ ُ ‫ ﻳﯾَ ُﺠ‬ ‫ ﺃأ ُ ْﺧ َﺮﻯى‬ ‫ ﺘْ َﻮﻯى‬ َ‫ﻓ‬
ُ‫ ﻭوﻧَﺤْ ُﻮﻩه‬ َ ‫ﺷ ْﻤ ٌﻊ‬ َ ‫ﻋﻠَ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ُ ‫ ﻭو ْﺍاﻟ ُﻤ ْﺨﺘ‬ ‫ﺎ‬
َ َ‫ ُﺟ ِﻌﻞ‬ ‫ ﺇإﺫذَﺍا‬ ُ‫ ﻳﯾُ ْﻜ َﺮﻩه‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ َُ ‫ ﺃأ َﻧﱠﻪﮫ‬ ‫َﺎﺭر‬ ْ ‫ ﺩدُ ُﺧﻮ ِﻝل‬ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬
َ ‫ ﺑِ َﻬﮭ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺨ ََﻼ ِء‬ ِ ‫ِﻳﯾﺮ‬ِ ‫ ﺑِﺎﻟﺘﱠﺤْ ﺬ‬ ‫ ﻭو ِﺷ ْﺒ ِﻬﮭ ِﻬﮭ ﱠﻦ‬ َ ‫ﺎء‬ ِ ‫ﺴ‬ َ ِّ‫ ﺍاﻟﻨ‬ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬ ِ ‫َﻭوﻳﯾُ ْﺴﺘ َْﻮﺛ َ ُﻖ‬
‫ﺎء‬ِ ‫ﺴ‬ َ ّ‫ ﺍاﻟ ِﻨ‬ ‫ﻋﻠَﻰ‬ َ ‫ ﻳﯾُﻌَﻠﱠ ُﻖ‬ ‫ ﺑِ َﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺱس‬ َ ْ ‫ ﺄ‬ َ‫ ﺑ‬ ‫ ﻻ‬ َ ٌ‫ َﻣﺎ ِﻟﻚ‬ َ‫ ﻗَﺎﻝل‬ َ‫ ﻓَﻘَﺎﻝل‬ ‫ َﻫﮬﮪھﺬَﺍا‬ ‫ ﻧَﺤْ َﻮ‬ ٍ‫ َﻣﺎﻟِﻚ‬ ‫ﻋ ْﻦ‬ َ ‫ﻱي‬ ‫ﻳﯾﺮ ﱠ‬
‫ ﺍاﻟﻄﺒَ ِﺮ ﱡ‬ ٍ ‫ َﺟ ِﺮ‬ ‫ ﺍاﺑ ُْﻦ‬ َ‫ ﻭوﻧَﻘَﻞ‬ َ ‫ﻲ‬ ٌ ‫ ﻧَ ْﻬﮭ‬ ‫ ﻓِﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ْ‫ ﻳﯾَ ِﺮﺩد‬ ‫ ﻟَ ْﻢ‬ ُ‫ِﻷَﻧﱠﻪﮫ‬
‫ ﺑﺤﺪﻳﯾﺚ‬ ‫ ﻟﻼﺑﺎﺣﺔ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺴﺘﺪﻝل‬ ‫ ﻭوﻗﺪ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾﺨﺮﺯز‬ ‫ ﺟﻠﺪ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻭو‬ ٍ‫ َﺣﺪِﻳﯾﺪ‬ ‫ﺼﺒَ ِﺔ‬ َ َ‫ َﻛﻘ‬ ‫ ِﻛ ٍّﻦ‬ ‫ ﻓِﻲ‬ َ‫ ُﺟ ِﻌﻞ‬ ‫ ﺇإﺫذَﺍا‬ ‫ﺁآﻥن‬ ْ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬
ِ ‫ ﺍاﻟﻘُ ْﺮ‬ ِ ‫ﺎﻥن‬ ِ َ‫ﺼ ْﺒﻴﯿ‬ّ ِ ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟ‬ َ ‫ﱠﺾ‬ ِ ‫ْﺍاﻟ ُﺤﻴﯿ‬
ُ‫ﻋﻮﺫذ‬ ُ َ ‫ ﺃأ‬ ٍ‫ َﻛ ِﻠ َﻤﺎﺕت‬ ِ‫ ﺍا ْﻟﻔَﺰَ ﻉع‬ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬ ِ ‫ ﻳﯾُ َﻌ ِﻠّ ُﻤ ُﻬﮭ ْﻢ‬ َ‫ ) َﻛﺎﻥن‬ ‫ﺳﻠﱠ َﻢ‬ َ ‫ﻋﻠَ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬
َ ‫ ﻭو‬ َ ُ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ ‫ﺻﻠﱠﻰ‬ َ ِ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ َ‫ﺳﻮﻝل‬ ُ ‫ ﺭر‬ َ ‫ ﺃأ َ ﱠﻥن‬ ِ‫ َﺟ ِﺪّﻩه‬ ‫ﻋ ْﻦ‬َ ‫ ﺃأ َ ِﺑﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ‫ﻋ ْﻦ‬ َ ‫ﺐ‬ ٍ ‫ﺷﻌَ ْﻴﯿ‬ ُ ‫ﻋﻤﺮﻭوﺑﻦ‬
‫ﻋ ْﻤ ٍﺮﻭو‬ َ ‫ ﺑ ُْﻦ‬ ِ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ ُ‫ﻋ ْﺒﺪ‬ َ ‫ ﻗَﺎﻝل‬ (‫ﻀ ُﺮﻭوﻥن‬
َ َ‫ ﻭو َﻛﺎﻥن‬ َ ُ ْ‫ ﻳﯾَﺤ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ﻴﯿﻦ‬ ِ ‫ﺎﻁط‬ ِ َ‫ﺸﻴﯿ‬‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ِ‫ َﻫﮬﮪھ َﻤﺰَ ﺍاﺕت‬ ‫ ﻭو ِﻣ ْﻦ‬ ِ
َ ‫ ِﻋﺒَﺎ ِﺩدﻩه‬ ‫ ﻭوﺷ ِ َّﺮ‬ َ ‫ﻀﺒِ ِﻪﮫ‬ َ ‫ﻏ‬ َ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬ ِ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺘﱠﺎ ﱠﻣ ِﺔ‬ ِ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ ِ‫ِﺑ َﻜ ِﻠ َﻤﺎﺕت‬
:‫ﺴ ٌﻦ‬ َ ‫ َﺣ‬ ‫ِﻳﯾﺚ‬ٌ ‫ َﺣﺪ‬ َ‫ ﻭوﻗَﺎﻝل‬ َ ‫ﻱي‬ ‫ ﻭوﺍاﻟ ِﺘ ّ ْﺮ ِﻣ ِﺬ ﱡ‬ ‫ﺩد‬ َ
َ ‫ ﺩدَ ُﺍاﻭو‬ ‫ ﺃأﺑُﻮ‬ ُ‫ ﺭر َﻭوﺍاﻩه‬ (َ ‫ﻋﻠَ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ َ
َ ُ‫ ﻓَﺄ ْﻋﻠَﻘَﻪﮫ‬ ُ‫ َﻛﺘَﺒَﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾَ ْﻌ ِﻘ ْﻞ‬ ‫ ﻟَ ْﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭو َﻣ ْﻦ‬
َ ‫ ﺑَﻨِﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﻣ ْﻦ‬ َ ِ ‫ﻋﻘَﻞ‬ َ ‫ َﻣ ْﻦ‬ ‫ﻳﯾُ َﻌ ِﻠّ ُﻤ ُﻬﮭ ﱠﻦ‬
Judge Husayn and others said that it is disliked for the one who needs to make
wudu’ (muhdith) to carry the taâwidh, and they mean the hirz1…”Abu Âmr
Ibnus-Salah said in another fatwa (religious answer) that it is permissible to
hang the hirz, which has in it Qur’an, on the women, children and men. Some wax
or the like would be used to seal it. The women and their likes are discouraged
from entering the bathroom with it. What is preferred is that it is not disliked if it
were sealed with wax or the like, because there was no prohibition narrated about
it. Ibn Jarir At-Tabariyy transmitted from Malik what is similar to this. He said:
Malik said that there is no problem about the Qur’an being hung on the
menstruating women and the children… Evidence that this is permissible is the
hadith of Âmr Ibn Shuâyb, from his father, from his grandfather:
‫ ِﻋﺒَﺎ ِﺩد ِﻩه‬ ‫ﺷ ِ ّﺮ‬

َ ‫ ﻭو‬ َ ‫ َﻏ‬ ‫ ِﻣ ْﻦ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺘﱠﺎ ﱠﻣ ِﺔ‬ ِ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ ِ‫ ﺑ ِ َﻜ ِﻠ َﻤﺎﺕت‬ ‫ َﺃأﻋُﻮ ُﺫذ‬ ٍ‫ َﻛ ِﻠ َﻤﺎﺕت‬ ِ‫ ﺍا ْﻟ َﻔ َﺰﻉع‬ ‫ ِﻣ ْﻦ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾُﻌَ ِﻠ ُﻤ ُﻬﮭ ْﻢ‬ ‫َﺎﻥن‬
َ ‫ﻀﺒ ِ ِﻪﮫ‬ َ ‫)ﻛ‬
‫ َﻣ ْﻦ‬ ‫ ﻳﯾُﻌَ ِّﻠ ُﻤ ُﻬﮭ ﱠﻦ‬ ‫ َﻋ ْﻤ ٍﺮﻭو‬ ُ‫ ْﺑﻦ‬ ِ ‫ ﺍا ﱠ‬ ُ‫ َﻋ ْﺒﺪ‬ ‫َﺎﻥن‬ َ ‫ ﻭوﻛ‬ َ ‫ َﻗﺎ َﻝل‬ (‫ﻀ ُﺮﻭوﻥن‬ ُ ‫ ﻳﯾَ ْﺤ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻥن‬ ‫ﺸﻴﯿَﺎ ِﻁطﻴﯿ ِﻦ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟ ﱠ‬ ِ‫ ﻤ َﺰﺍاﺕت‬ َ ‫ َﻫﮬﮪھ‬ ‫َﻭو ِﻣ ْﻦ‬
(‫ َﻋ َﻠ ْﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ‫ َﻓ َﺄ ْﻋ َﻠ َﻘ ُﻪﮫ‬ ‫ َﻛﺘَﺒَ ُﻪﮫ‬ ْ‫ ﻳﯾَ ْﻌ ِﻘﻞ‬ ‫ َﻟ ْﻢ‬ ‫ ﻭو َﻣ ْﻦ‬
َ ‫ ﺑَﻨِﻴﯿ ِﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ِﻣ ْﻦ‬ ‫َﻋ َﻘ َﻞ‬
1
I.e., it is not forbidden, let alone an act of worshipping other than Allah or any other
type of blasphemy.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
“The Messenger of Allah used to teach them words for waking up from a
nightmare: "I seek refuge with the perfect Words of Allah, from His wrath, the
evil of His slaves, from the whispers of the devils, and that the devil will approach
me on my deathbed", and Âbdullah Ibn Âmr used to teach them to whoever had
mental discrimination among his children, and whoever did not reach mental
discrimination, he wrote it down and hung it on their necks." This is narrated by
Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhiyy, who said the hadith is hasan (strong, reliable).
Here, An-Nawawiyy, At-Tirmidhiyy, Judge Husayn (a high ranking Shafiîyy scholar,

nicknamed ‘Habrul-Ummah [the scholar of the nation]’), Ibnus-Salah (the fore-runner of
the science of hadith terminology, a strong scholar, and a high ranking waliyy from the
Salaf), At-Tabariyy (who is a mujtahid, hafidh of hadith and Qur’an interpreter from the
Salaf), Malik (who needs no introduction), the Companion Âbdullah Ibn Âmr, and
others, all validated this practice of wearing the hirz. These are among the biggest
scholars; much, much bigger than Al-Albaniyy, who is not truly a scholar, and over a
thousand years earlier. They definitely know better about what is shirk and what is not
shirk than Al-Albaniyy. However, we have alreadyestablished in the beginning of the
book that they believe that the majority of the nation believes in kufr.
And what do those people who believe that this issue is blasphemy and shirk say about
Malik? Is he a blaspheming non-Muslim to them? He is one of the most fundamental
imams of the nation. They would never dare to say that he is a blasphemer, although they
might believe it, and although they would say it about others for the same reason.
As for the Tama’im (talismans) that the Prophet said are shirk, these are things from the
Jahiliyyah (Era of Ignorance). They are not the same as the hirz; they do not have the
same ruling in our Religion. This is what was established by Ahlus-Sunnah and
understood from the hadith centuries before people misunderstood the case and mixed the
two issues. Those people from the Era of Ignorance believed that those talismans created
benefit, and this is blasphemy. The hirz does not create anything. It is hoped that Allah
will create the benefit by it.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
If someone asks, “Why rely on these written words? Rely on Allah. Can Allah protect
you without these words?” The answer is that wearing the hirz is another example of
seeking a reason (sabab) to get what you want (which is the protection), like drinking
water for quenching the thirst, or taking medicine seeking cure. A person should not
believe that these reasons create anything, or that they benefit without the power and
creating of Allah. To believe these words create benefit is shirk, because Allah is the only
Creator. The benefit of wearing them is that one hopes that Allah will create the benefits
by them, and not that they create anything. Allah is the only Creator.
Therefore, it is valid for us to also ask them, “Why do you drink water and not merely
rely on Allah? Do you believe that the water creates? Can Allah relieve that thirst without
water? And why do you have a lock on your door? And why do you take medicine? And
why do you recite words for protection? Do you believe that these creations benefit
without the power of Allah? Cannot Allah create the cure without the medicine, and the
protection without the lock, etc?” Even reciting the words of protection with the tongue is
done with the same reasoning- that one HOPES that Allah will protect him by those
uttered words. Those uttered words do not create. Likewise, the Muslims are innocent of
shirk or believing in a creator other than Allah when wearing a hirz. If drinking water,
taking medicine, using a lock and uttering words do not make a person fall into shirk,
then also wearing written words would not make a person fall into shirk.
So again, the tama’im mentioned in the hadith are not the same as the hirz. They are the
practice of the Jahiliyyah. The people from the jahiliyyah used to believe that they create-
not that Allah creates- just like they used to worship the idols and believe that sicknesses
were contagious by themselves, not by the creating of Allah. Those who used the hadiths
that mentioned the tama’im to forbid the hirz did not learn or believe about this issue
properly.
RECITING AT THE GRAVES

Those mean people also forbid the Muslims from reciting the Qur’an over the graves of
their dead. They have nothing to substantiate this but their meanness and dry character,

Al-KAYFIYYAH
may Allah deform their faces. Let us give a brief, yet ample clarification of its being a
religious recommendation.
Ahlus-Sunnah have a consensus that the dead benefit from the supplication of the living
and their charities given on the behalf of the dead. An-Nasafiyy, may Allah have mercy
upon him, said in his famous document about the Muslim Creed:
ِ ِ ِ ِ
ٌ َ‫وﺻﺪﻗَﺘ ِﻬﻢ ﻋﻨﻬﻢ ﻧ‬
.‫ﻔﻊ ﳍﻢ‬ َ ‫وﰲ ُدﻋﺎء اﻷﺣﻴﺎء ﻟﻸﻣﻮات‬
“The supplication of the living for the dead and the charities on their behalf is beneficial
to them (for the dead).” Muhaddith Murtada Az-Zabidiyy said in the Explanation of Al-
Ihya’ that As-Suyutiyy said in the explanation of As-Sudur,
As for reciting the Qur’an at the grave, our scholars and colleagues (meaning the
Shafiîyys) and others are definitive of its religious legitimacy. Az-Zaˆfaraniyy
said, ‘I asked Ash-Shafiîyy about reciting at the grave, and he said there is no
problem with it.’ An-Nawawiyy said in the Explanation of Al-Muhadhdhab, ‘It is
recommended for the one who visits the graves to recite what is easy for him of
the Qur’an and to make duâ’ for them after it. Ash-Shafiîyy explicitly mentioned
this and the mujtahids within the Shafiîyy school have agreed upon it.’ An-
Nawawiyy added in another place, ‘If he completes the recitation of the entire
Qur’an that would be even better.’ It is mutawatir that Ash-Shafiîyy visited the
grave of Al-Layth Ibn Saˆd and praised him a lot and recited the Qur’an from the
beginning to the end there, and he said, “I hope that this will continue to
happen,” and then the issue persisted.
Al-Qurtubiyy said, “Some of our scholars have used as evidence for the recitation of the
Qur’an over the grave the hadith of the moist stick, the one that the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬broke
into two, then he planted a half into one grave and another half into the other grave and
then he said:
‫ﻟﻌﻠﻪ ﳜﻔﻒ ﻋﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻣﺎ ﱂ ﻳﻴﺒﺴﺎ‬

Al-KAYFIYYAH
“It is so that the torture will be lightened for them as long as the sticks do not dry.”
That is narrated by the Two Shaykhs. He said, “This promotes the legitimacy of planting
the trees on the graves and reciting the Qur’an, and if it is lightened for them by the
plants then how about by the recitation of the Qur’an by the believing person?” An-
Nawawiyy said, “The scholars have recommended the recitation of the Qur’an at the
grave and they considered it good by the hadith of the two sticks. They said that if the
benefit reached the dead by the tasbih (saying subhanallah) of the sticks while they were
moist, then for the dead to benefit from the recitation of the Qur’an at the grave is even
more so valid, because the recitation of the Qur’an from a person is greater and more
beneficial than the tasbih (saying subhanallah) of a stick.
Among what testifies to the dead person benefiting from the recitation of another is the
hadith of Maˆqil Ibn Yassar that the Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬said:
‫اﻗﺮءوا ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮﺗﺎﻛﻢ‬
“Recite on your dead.” Abu Dawud narrated it. There is also the hadith:
‫اﻗﺮءوا ﻳﺲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮﺗﺎﻛﻢ‬
“Recite Yasin on your dead.” That is narrated by An-Nasa’iyy, Ibn Majah, and Ibn
Hibban. There is also the hadith:
‫ ﻓﺎﻗﺮؤﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮﺗﺎﻛﻢ‬،٬‫ﻳﺲ ﺛﻠﺚ اﻟﻘﺮءان ﻻ ﻳﻘﺮؤﻫﺎ رﺟﻞ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ ﷲ واﻟﺪار اﻵﺧﺮة إﻻ ﻏﻔﺮ ﻟﻪ‬
“Yasin is a third of the Qur’an. No man who wants the reward from Allah and he
wants the pleasureful life of the hereafter recites it except that he would be forgiven,
and so recite it over your dead.”
Ahmad narrated it. Some of the Followers of the Companions have interpreted the
recitation over the dead to be in reference to the one who is on his deathbed, but this
explanation (ta’wil) is against the apparent meaning of the hadith, and there is no need to
make such an inference. Furthermore, it would be said that if the one on the deathbed
benefits from the recitation of Yasin although this recitation is not from his own deeds,
then the dead person would likewise benefit, because the dead person is like the present,
living person; he hears like the present living person, as confirmed in the hadith.
Al-KAYFIYYAH
It was narrated from Âliyy Ibn Musa al-Haddad that he said, “I was with the Ahmad Ibn
Hambal in a funeral, and Muhmmad Ibn Qudamah al-Jawhariyy was with us. When the
dead person was buried, a blind man came reciting at the grave, and Ahmad said, “Hey
you! Certainly, reciting at the grave is an innovation. When we left from the graves,
Muhammad Ibn Qudamah said, “O Abu Âbdillah, what do you say about Mubashshir
Ibn Ismaîl al-Halabiyy?’ He (Ahmad) said, “Trustworthy. Have you copied anything
from his route?” He (Muhammad Ibn Qudamah) said, “Yes. Mubashshir Ibn Ismaîl
informed me from Âbdurahman Ibn Âla’ the son of Al-Lajlaj, from his father, that he
made a will that when he is buried, the beginning and end of Al-Baqarah would be
recited at his grave, and I heard Ibn Ûmar making the same will.” Then Ahmad said, Go
back to the man and tell him to recite.” This is how al-Qurtubiyy narrated it in his book
at-Tadhkirah, and Allah knows best.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
EPILOGUE
L
et us end with some statements given about the Wahhabiyys by the scholars in
a book called Fitnatu-l-Wahhabiyyah (the tribulation of the Wahhabiyys), by
the real Muftiy of Makkah, Shaykh Ahmad Zayniyy Dahlan. He said, “What Ibn
Âbdu-l-Wahhab’s father, brother, and shaykhs speculated about him came true by the
will of Allah, the exalted. Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab 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 Âbdu-l-Wahhab embellished his
sayings with quotes he selected from Islamic sources, that is, quotes used for proofs in
many issues, but not the issues which Ibn Âbdu-l-Wahhab was attempting to support.”
He also said:
Initially, the Wahhabiyys sent a group to Makkah and Al-Madinah, 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-Madinah refuted them and established the Islamic evidences
against them- which they could not refute. The scholars were certain about the
Wahhabiyys ignorance and misguidance, and found them absurd and thoughtless.
They took note of their beliefs and found them full of many types of blasphemy,
and thus the Wahhabiyys fled like frightened zebras fleeing from a lion. Hence,
after establishing the proofs, the scholars wrote an attestation against the
Wahhabiyys 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 Wahhabiyy understanding of the
aforementioned texts, then the others that they use can also be explained. This booklet
complies with the verse:
1
َ ُ ‫وف َو َﳯْ َ ْﻮ َن َﻋ ِﻦ اﻟْ ُﻤ ْﻨﻜَ ِﺮ َوﺗ ُ ْﺆ ِﻣ‬
{( ِ ِ ‫ﻮن‬ ِ ‫ون ِ ﻟْ َﻤ ْﻌ ُﺮ‬
َ ‫}) ُﻛ ْﻨ ُ ْﱲ ْ ََﲑ ﻣ ٍﺔ ْﺧ ِﺮ َﺟ ْﺖ ِﻠﻨ ِﺎس ﺗ َ ُﻣ ُﺮ‬
1
Al Îmran, 110

Al-KAYFIYYAH
<<You are the best nation ever sent out to the people. You bid the good, forbid the evil,
and believe in Allah>>.
We thank Allah for the blessings that He gave without being obligated to give anything.
We thank Him for enabling us to know who these 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 Allah to grant us the lawful sustenance. May Allah make this
booklet beneficial in life and after death, forgive those who worked on it, spread 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, Allah, we ask you by the merit and honor of Your beloved Prophet
‫ ﷺ‬to answer this humble supplication,
And Allah knows best.

Al-KAYFIYYAH
GLOSSARY
Allah is the proper name of the Creator. the judgment of a particular case. Once
established, no one has the right to later disagree.
Ahlu-s-Sunnah is the group which follows Ijtihad is the effort put by the mujtahid to
the method of the Companions of the Prophet
deduce judgments not explicitly mentioned in the
‫ﷺ‬.
Qur’an or hadith.
Al- Whether capitalized or not, represents the Jahannam is a name of Hell

definite article alif lam (‫)ﺍاﻝل‬, “the”. Because of the
idgham (merging) of the lam with 14 specific
letters (the shamsiyy letters), the definite article Madhhab “school of practical rules” refers to
will also be written throughout the text with the the work of scholars following a particular
following letters “At-”, “Ath-”, “Ad-”, “Adh-”, mujtahid. Sometimes the word is used for other
“Ar-”, “Az-”, “As-”, “Ash-”, meanings.
“As-”, “Ad-”, “At-”, “Adh-”, and “An-”.
Muhkam (decisive) is a verse or hadith
âqidah “creed;; belief;; conviction” It is the that has only one meaning in the Arabic
science of belief. language.
âql “mind;; intellect” It is the faculty given to Mujaddid “renewer” refers to a great scholar
some creatures which enables them to who would appear every century to renew the
distinguish between what is valid and what is Religion for the Muslims.
invalid.
Mujtahid refers to the top scholars who
ârsh “throne” It is the ceiling of Paradise. deduce judgments in case the ruling is not
explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an or Hadith.
Blasphemy is the opposite of belief (kufr).
Mushabbihah is the plural of Mushabbih,
someone who likens Allah to the creations.
Companion refers to those who met the
Prophet ‫ﷺ‬, believed in him, and died as
Muslims. Mutashabih (ambiguous) is a verse or
hadith that can have more than one meaning.
Even an Arab may not reach its true meaning.
Fiqh is the science of the detailed practical
rules of the Religion.
Mushrik is someone who associates partners
with Allah.
Hadith refers to the narrated sayings, doings,
and approvals of the Prophet ‫ﷺ‬. It is often
referred to as the Sunnah. Sahih “valid;; authentic” It often refers to a
narration which fulfills the highest conditions of
authenticity.
Hafidh refers to the top scholars of hadith
who are qualified to grade the levels of the
narrations. These scholars are higher than Salaf “predecessors” It refers to the first three
muhaddiths. Someone who memorized the centuries of Muslims. Some scholars said it only
Qur’an is also called a hafidh, but this does not refers to the Companions, their students, and
make him a scholar. their students- and not the first three centuries
entirely. The first saying is the strong one.
“Salafiyy” is an adjective.
Ijmaˆ “consensus” It is the unanimous
agreement among the mujtahids in any era about
SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | GLOSSARY 187

Al-KAYFIYYAH
Shirk is associating partners with Allah. Tafsir is the science of interpreting the
Qur’an. It may refer to the actual interpretation.
Sufiyy is a person who practices tasawwuf.
The true application of tasawwuf is in leaving Tajsim is believing that Allah has a body.
the mundane and worldly desires. It is not by
neglecting the obligatory prayers for optional Tawhid is the Oneness of Allah; monotheism.
deeds, spinning in circles, dancing, touching
This word may also be synonymous with
women, or belittling the status and pleasures of
âqidah; the science of the correct belief in Allah
Paradise.
and His Messenger ‫ﷺ‬.
Sunnah has many meanings. Linguistically, it

means, “a way”. Religiously, it could refer to the
Ta’wil is interpreting a text to have a meaning
different from its apparent meaning.
hadith of the Prophet ‫ ;ﷺ‬to the optional,
recommended, and rewardable matters; and to
the Prophet’s ‫ ﷺ‬practice of the Religion in We when referring to Allah denotes majesty,
general, including the obligations. not plurality.
188

Debate With The So Called Salafiyyah

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Debate With The So Called Salafiyyah

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS PRESENTS:

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 2

CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED .. 7

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 3

WHO ARE THE REAL SALAF? ............................................................................. 73

CHAPTER TWO: A REFUTATION OF THEIR MISUNDERSTANDING

RAHMANU ˆALA-L-ˆARSHI-STAWA>> .......................................................... 94

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 4

ALLAH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED WITH AN EYE ................................................... 122

APPENDIX ............................................................................................... 133

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | 5th edition 5

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORSHIP AND TAWASSUL .........161

GLOSSARY ............................................................................................... 187

CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE WAHHABIYY CREED

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND THE

‫ﻤﻣن ﻟم ﻴﻳﯿﯾﺠﺟد ﻤﻣﻌﻠﻤﻣﺎ ﻓﻠﻴﻳﯿﯾرﺤﺣﻝل‬ ‫ﻓﻠﻴﻳﯿﯾﺴﺳﺄﻝل‬

THE PATH OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH AND THE

ِ ‫ ُﻛﻠﱡﻬﺎ ِﰲ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ ِر إِﻻﱠ و‬،٬ً‫ﲔ وﺳﺒ ِﻌﲔ ﻓِﺮﻗَﺔ‬ ِ ِِ

‫ ﺍاﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻓﻠﻴﯿﻠﺰﻡم‬ ‫ ﺑﺤﺒﻮﺣﺔ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺭرﺍاﺩد‬ ‫ﻓﻤﻦ‬

‫ ﺍاﻷﻋﻈﻢ‬ ‫ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻮﺍاﺩد‬ ‫ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﯿﻜﻢ‬ ‫ ﺍاﺧﺘﻼﻓﺎ‬ ‫ ﺭرﺃأﻳﯾﺘﻢ‬ ‫ﻓﺈﺫذﺍا‬

In another narration, the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬named that group:

‫ ﺃأﺻﺤﺎﺑﻲ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﯿﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬

THE WAHHABIYY ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE

‫ ﺷﻬﮭﻴﯿﺪ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺟﺮ‬ ‫ ﻓﻠﻪﮫ‬ ‫ ﺃأﻣﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﻓﺴﺎﺩد‬ ‫ ﻋﻨﺪ‬ ‫ ﺳﻨﺘﻲ‬ ‫ ﺃأﺣﻴﯿَﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬

A Wahhabiyy may also produce the verse:

{( ‫}) َوﻗَ ِﻠﻴﯿ ٌﻞ ِﻣ ْﻦ ِﻋ َﺒﺎ ِد َي اﻟﺸ ُﻜ ُﻮر‬

<<Only few of My slaves (the slaves of Allah) are very thankful>>2.

ُ‫ﻳَﺄِْﰐ أُﱠﻣﺔً َو ْﺣ َﺪﻩ‬

THE MAHHABS OF AHLU-S-SUNNAH

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 13

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 15

NAMES THAT HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 17

THE CORRECT BELIEF IN ALLAH

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 20

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 21

THE WAHHABIYYS ATTRIBUTE A BODY TO ALLAH

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 23

THE WAHHABIYY REASONING BEHIND THEIR

HOW THE WAHHABIYYS INTERPRET THE TEXTS

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 26

THE TRUTH ABOUT MAJAZ (FIGURATIVE SPEECH)

SUBMISSION PRODUCTIONS | CHAPTER ONE: BASIC REFUTATION OF THE 28

Ibn Taymiyah said:1

{( ‫}) ِ ﺪَ ًارا ُ ِﺮﻳﯾﺪُ ْن ﻳﯾ َ ْﻨﻘَﺾ‬3

<<A wall that wants to fall>>

Lastly, Allah informed us in His book:

{(‫}) ِ َﺴﺎ ُؤ ُ ْﰼ َﺣ ْﺮ ٌث ﻟَ ُ ْﲂ‬1

<<Your women are plots of land for your cultivation>>

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE LAWFULNESS OF TA’WIL

On the contrary, Allah taught us this lesson in His book:

{( ‫})ﻣ ﻪ ءا ٌت ﳏﻜﲈت ﻫﻦ ٔم اﻟﻜ ﺎب و ٔﺧﺮ ﻣ ﺸﺎﲠﺎت‬1

‫ ﺍاﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏب‬ ‫ ﺗﺄﻭوﻳﯾﻞ‬ ‫ ﻭو‬ ‫ ﺍاﻟﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﻤﻪﮫ‬ ‫ﺍاﻟﻠﻬﮭﻢ‬

{( ‫})و ﻣﺎ ﻳﯾﻌﲅ ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ إﻻ ﷲ‬3

<<No one knows its ta’wil except Allah>>.

{( ‫})و ﻣﺎ ﻳﯾﻌﲅ ﺗ ٔوﻳﯾ إﻻ ﷲ و اﻟﺮاﲯﻮن ﰲ اﻟﻌﲅ‬1

ّ ٍ ِ ‫}) ِﺑ ِﻠ َﺴ ٍﺎن َﻋ َﺮ‬1

<<(The Qur’an is revealed) in a clear Arabic tongue>>.

They quote the verse from the Qur’an:

{(‫}) َوﻗَﺎﻟُﻮا َ ِﲰ ْﻌﻨَﺎ َو َﻃ ْﻌﻨَﺎ‬

<<They said, “We hear and we obey”>>2,

THE WAHHABIYYS REJECT LOGIC