[pprropeciaaa]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Take a good look at our respected Brothers Fahid's thread:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29488

The English commentary:

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=68&tid=54820

Now look at the original Tafseer Ibn-Katheer in Arabic:

http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/Di...EER&tashkeel=0

Now take it to any Ulama and ask them to translate the Arabic into English fuly and it will become clear that Br Yahya's interpretation is correct and it is exactly what is mentioned in the Tafseer AFTER the discussion of Hadeeth.

The mention of Saaq to hardhsip is completely ommitted in English and all related narrations from Hadeeth are SKIPPED giving the reader the impression that ONLY the Hadeeth from Saheeh Bukhari is mentioned in Tafseer Ibn-Katheer , which is NOT the case!

So the Hadeeth is translated and the rest skipped, why is that?

[ssiikmuz]

Brother Muadh, The links in the post#1 to Darussalam turns with a error stating no page found and that to tampering of Riyadus salihin at Sunnipath goes to the mainpage.

Wassalam,

[UitEz0Qo]

Brother Muadh, The links in the post#1 to Darussalam turns with a error stating no page found and that to tampering of Riyadus salihin at Sunnipath goes to the mainpage.

Wassalam,

As Salamu Alaikum

Here is an article about the Tampering of the Riyadh ul-Saliheen

"Salafi" Tampering
of Riyad al-Salihin

Also brother GF. Haddad, who runs livingislam.org states regarding Salafi Tampering of works:

"A wanton, unethical manipulation of the great books of Islam has removed words or entire chapters from classical works by the great Imams such as al-Nawawi, al-Sawi, and Ibn `Abidin, while Tafsir al-Jalalayn and `Abd Allah Yusuf `Ali's Tafsirs have been reprinted with changes. This corrupt tampering of the motherbooks has been documented at length." (Article called: New Kharijism)

[meridiasas]

There's only 3 points raised that are actual tampering with text:



And with regards to the third one, than this can very well be the intended meaning (holding hands at the sides). The majority doesn't allow that except in the case of an injury or the like and the Salafis say that Imam Malik (rah) didn't use to allow it either except in those cases.

As Salamu Alaykum


That is why those types of salafis cannot be relied upon for knowledge. If one actually looked at the most reliable works of the Maliki madhhab and their proof text works they are very clear on their proofs and reasoning as to why the most relied upon position is sadl al yadayn.


Let us look at what the classical ulama actually say:


The Main Text
Irsal al-Yadayn - The Laying of the Hands


In sha Allah, I will be listing the reasoning that our Maliki scholars have given to support their opinion, that is, laying the arms straight in prayer (sadl).

Proof from Ahadith Regarding Hand Placement
1. Sadl (laying the hands straight in the prayer) is not an action, but rather, it is the natural position of the hands while standing. This is the asl (root, origin, source)

2. The scholars have differed on the matter of qabd (grasping: holding the left hand with the right). Ibn Rushd states in Bidayat al-Mujtahid (1:137)

The reason behind their differing is that there are some ahadith narrating the way the Prophet prayed which did not mention him placing his right hand over his left, and on the other hand, it was reported that the people were ordered to do that.

As for the ahadith that Ibn Rushd is referring to, one of the most commonly cited is the hadith of Abu Humaid al-Sa’idi, which is as follows:

Muhammad ibn ‘Amir ibn ‘Atta stated: "I heard Abu Humaid al-Sa’idi talking amongst ten of the Sahabah of the Messenger of Allah. Abu Qattada who was among them spoke up and said, "I am the most knowledgeable of you about the prayer of the Messenger of Allah." They replied, "How can that be when you were not following him for a longer period, nor were you a companion of his before us?" To this Abu Qattada replied, "Yes." "Well then prove it," the others challenged. He (Abu Qattada) said, "When the Messenger of Allah stood for prayer, he raised his arms until they were level with his ears, said the takbeer and didn’t being reciting until all of his limbs had rested in their natural position. After finishing his recital, he raised his hands until they were level with his ears, said the takbeer and from there, performed the ruku’. He placed his palms on his knees and posed his back straight, neither raising his head nor lowering it . . .

This version of the hadith is narrated by Imam Ahmad in his Musnad, al-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud in their Sunan, while Imam al-Bukhari narrates a shorter version of it in his Sahih. When Abu Humaid finished his description of the prayer, they all stated, "You are truthful, this is the way he used to pray."

The statement of Abu Qattada that, "[A]nd didn’t being reciting until all of his limbs had rested in their natural position" is proof that the Prophet did not always place his right hand over his left, for this is not the natural position at which the limbs rest, rather, this is what is known as sadl. If the Prophet placed his right hand over his left in the prayer all the time, then (at least) one of the Sahabah would have objected to Abu Humaid’s failure to report that in his narration.

Furtherstill, and most importantly perhaps, amongst those Sahabah was Sahl ibn Sa’d, the narrator of the hadith: "The people were ordered (literally "used to be ordered") that a man place his right hand over his left arm in the prayer," as stated by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (2:334).

3. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr narrated in his book, al-Tamheed that:

Mujahid said, "If the right hand is to be placed over the left, then it should be on the palm or the wrist on the chest." The narrator added from Mujahid, "and he hated that."

It is understood from this that placing the right hand over the left was not what Mujahid was accustomed to, proof that he did not witness the Sahabah doing it.

4. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr also narrates in the same book (20:76):

‘Abd Allah ibn al-Izar said, "I used to make tawaf around the Kaba with Said ibn al-Jubayr. Once, he saw a man placing one hand over the other, so he went to him, separated his hands, and then returned to me.

From this, we notice that placing one hand over another in prayer was considered by him to be a munkar, because he changed it with his hand, which is only acceptable in relation to the munkarat. Furthermore, it is apparent from this athar that at the Masjid al-Haram, there were few people seen putting their hands over each other in the prayer, indicating that the custom was otherwise. And this was during the time of the Sahabah and Tabi’een.

5. Also narrated in al-Tamheed:

‘Abd Allah ibn Yazid said, "I never saw Said ibn al-Musayyib holding his left hand with his right hand in the prayer, he used to lay them straight.

Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib was one of the biggest Tabi’een in Madina, and this was thus the practice of the people of Madina that Imam Malik witnessed.

6. Ibn Abu Shaybah narrated that al-Hasan al-Basri, Ibrahim al-Nakh’ai, Ibn al-Musayyib, Ibn Sirin, and Sa’id ibn Jubayr all laid their arms straight in the prayer.

Imam Malik’s View Concerning Sadl and Qabd

1. The dislike of qabd in the fard and its permissibility in the nafl if one is standing for a long time in order to make it easier on him. (i.e. a rukhsa)

This is the opinion narrated by Ibn al-Qasim in al-Mudawanna (1:74) and in al-Tamheed (20:75) al-Layth as-Sa’d is reported to have said:

The laying of the hands if prayer is preferred, unless he is standing for an extended period and becomes tired, then there is no problem (la ba’as) in putting the right hand over the left.

Al-Bukhari narrated in his Sahih (1:401) in the chapter entitled, "Using the Hands in Prayer for Help, if it is Part of the Prayer" that Ibn Abbas said:

A person can use any part of his body for support. Abu Ishaq placed his head cover (over his arms) in prayer and raised it (as a sling), and ‘Ali placed his palm over his left wrist, unless scratching his skin or straightening his clothes.

Thus, putting the hands over each other in prayer is permissible when used as a means for support in cases of standing in prayer for a prolonged period of time, as is narrated of ‘Ali and as Ibn Hazm explicted stated in his al-Muhalla (4:113),

[A]nd we have narrated of ‘Ali that when he stood in prayer for a long time, he used to hold his left arm with his right hand at the origin of the palm, unless straightening his clothing or scratching his skin.

Standing for extending periods of time is a characteristic of the nafl rather than the fard prayer, as the Prophet ordered the imam to be light in the fard.

Imam al-Shawkani mentioned in Nayl al-Awtar (2:201),

[A]nd the narration of irsal (laying the arms straight in prayer) is the narration of the majority of his students, and it is the famous among them (referring to Malik and the Maliki scholars).

Imam al-Shawkani also stated:

Ibn al-Munthir narrated that Ibn al-Zubayr, al-Hasan al-Basri and al-Nakh’ai all used to lay their arms straight in the prayer, and not put the right hand over the left.

‘Abd al-Razzaq in his Musanaf ‘Abd al-Razzaq states: "I saw Ibn Jurayr praying while laying his arms straight, and al-Awza’i said that whoever wished to do the same (then let him do so) and whoever wanted to leave it (then let him leave it), and it is also the saying of ‘Atta."

2. The permissibility of qabd in both the fard and nafl.

This is the saying of Ashhab and Ibn Nafi. It is also the statement of Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr.

3. The performance of qabd in the fard and nafl.

This is narrated of the two brothers: Mutrif and Ibn al-Majishun from Malik, as stated by Ibn Rushd in al-Tahsil (1:395).

4. The prohibition of qabd.

And this is the narration of the ‘Iraqi scholars from Malik, as mentioned in by al-Bagi in al-Mutawa (1:281).

And Allah knows best.




Appendix I
Opinions from the Scholars of the Maliki School
Shaykh Ahmad ad-Dardiri:

The Maliki scholar Shaykh Ahmad ad-Dardir said in his Arqab al-Maasilik li Madh’hab al-Imam Malik that:

It is allowable to grasp the hands during the nafl prayer and it is reprehensible to grasp the hands during the fard.

Shaykh Ahmad az-Zarruq:
And to end this, we would like to quote from one of the greatest Maliki ‘ulama, Shaykh Ahmad az-Zarruq, in his commentary on the Risala of Ibn Abu Zayd:

The person praying is not to place his right hand over his left in the fard, although it is allowable in the nawafil due to the length that one stands in prayer in order to support oneself in standing. Shaykh at-Turtushi said, "It is forbidden to grasp the hands during the fard because it becomes like something he supports himself upon during the prayer" . . . The People of Learning in Madina disagreed regarding the grasping of the hands for support as to whether it was part of the outward aspects of the prayer or not.

Shaykh ‘Usman dan Fodio:
It is mentioned in the Bayan (by Shaykh ‘Uthman ibn Fudio),

Grasping the hands for support during the prayer is summed up in three opinions:

some say it is allowed absolutely
it is reprehensible except when standing long in the nawafil
it is highly recommended and its matter is to grasp the left wrist with the right hand and place them under the chest.
And Allah knows best.


Also noting Imam ibn Rushd, he never related any position of any of the four schools or mujtahid Imams that one can only do sadl when one has an injury or the like. I want to know what classical work of fiqh from any of the four schools that says that. The only people I hear and read say that are certain groups of Salafis.

That is why their tampered works, websites, and what not cannot be trusted especially when it knowingly deceived everyday Muslims into thinking that the only reason why Malikis pray like that is because Imam Malik got injured. To claim that Imam Malik based a ruling on his own injuries is an insult not only to Imam Malik but the entire Maliki school as well as classical Islamic heritage.

I dont know for the life of me why people insist on perpetuating straight up lies and propaganda. Its sickening to the stomach that people would do that to the deen. I guess those sorts would stop at nothing even stooping that low to win an argument or push their version of Islam.

I dont trust any of those salafi publishers, especially dar us salam. Until they become a lot more honest in publishing classical works, they won't get a cent from me. Alhamdulillah i'm glad that traditional oriented publishers are coming out with a lot better unaltered material.

[ppaelkos]

That is why their tampered works, websites, and what not cannot be trusted especially when it knowingly deceived everyday Muslims into thinking that the only reason why Malikis pray like that is because Imam Malik got injured. None of them have said this, everyone is well aware of what the mashoor opinion is but because their are multiple narrations from Imaam Malik (rah) than they gave this as the sharh (i.e. Bilaal Philips and one other man).

To claim that Imam Malik based a ruling on his own injuries is an insult not only to Imam Malik but the entire Maliki school as well as classical Islamic heritage. If you only listen to half of what people say, than everything is an insult. None of the Salafis said Imaam Malik (rah) made this ruling (i.e. sadl) - they said this was the position of his student based on what he saw, not what Imaam Malik (rah) actually gave as a ruling.

As for your statements on qabd/sadl, or even on the madhab which neither of us is on, I would rather not speak about it until I've learned what I can.

[meridiasas]

None of them have said this, everyone is well aware of what the mashoor opinion is but because their are multiple narrations from Imaam Malik (rah) than they gave this as the sharh (i.e. Bilaal Philips and one other man).



If you only listen to half of what people say, than everything is an insult. None of the Salafis said Imaam Malik (rah) made this ruling (i.e. sadl) - they said this was the position of his student based on what he saw, not what Imaam Malik (rah) actually gave as a ruling.

As for your statements on qabd/sadl, or even on the madhab which neither of us is on, I would rather not speak about it until I've learned what I can.

As Salamu Alaykum

The best way to find out how the Malikis derive their rulings is to look at the Maliki sources themselves.


I used to be a Maliki and studied the following works

1) al Akdhari w/ Shaykh Muhammad Rami Nsour who studied under Shaykh Murabit al Hajj of Mauritania and others

2) al Murshid al mu'in (of Abdul Wahid ibn Ashir) w/ Shaykh Hamza Yusuf who also studied it from Shaykh Murabit al Hajj, and other scholars in Mauritania

3) 1/2 of Risala ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawani with Ustadh Muhammad Yahya who studied with Shaykh Murabit al Hajj and other Maliki maurianian scholars for 2 years.

4) Studied the sections of Tahara and Salah of the Mukhtasar Khalil (The top Maliki primer ) with Shaykh Khatry of Mauritania at the Advanced Deen Intensive 1999

So my education in the Maliki madhhab was strictly from the mauritanian way which is highly respected amongst the other Malikis as strictly adhering to only the dominant position of the school.


If you read the above text which is from the Maliki scholars it quotes al mudawwana al qubra which is a Q and A book of the fatawa of Imam Malik as transmitted by his direct student ibn al Qasim and compiled by Sahnun.

In al-Mudawwana (vol. 1, pg. 75-76), Imam Malik has been recorded to have said, "Putting the right hand on the left in salah, I have no knowledge of it in the compulsory (fard) prayer, it is thus disliked (makrooh). But in the supererogatory (nafl) prayer there is no harm (in folding the hands), it is left to the individual to decide."

The overwhelming majority of Maliki scholars hold that the sadl is the mashhur position of the madhhab whereas qabd is a minority position.


Now what does Dr Bilal Philips says the reason is in his book evolution of fiqh?

"Malik was tied and beaten until his arms became severely damaged to such a degree that he became unable to clasp them on his chest in Salaah and thus he began the practice of praying with his hands to the sides according to some reports." p. 78 Evolution of Fiqh 2nd Edition


If you check on that page there is no footnote to substantiate that claim and as already noted, the Maliki scholars including Imam Malik himself is recorded as to why he did so and it wasn't because of an injury. This is further substantiated in Ibn Rushd's book Bidayat al Mujtahid which is a work on khilaf amongst the mujtahidun and the work by the Shafi'i scholar Imam Sha'rani in his Mizan al Kubra as well as other works.For more evidence I recommend you reread my original post on the primay proofs and secondary proofs for why the Maliki do so. There is even a short work in Arabic produced on the very topic of sadl and how the Malikis defend that position and their proofs.

So we have to ask ourselves how did the Salafis like Dr Bilal Philips and others substantiate that claim about why the Maliki school prays like that. Did they consult what Imam Malik actually said as recorded by his direct student ibn al Qasim in Sahnun's Mudawwana? Did they look at the most reliable primers and text proof encyclopedias of the Maliki school?

Based on what was written in Evolution of Fiqh and recycled ad naseum in some Salafi websites and books, they didn't. As a person who had an opportunity to study some of the most well known short primers of the Maliki madhhab from 1998-2002 it shouldn't have been difficult to find (and I'm considered just a student).

With all those works and proofs available in both Arabic and now in English, there was no excuse for Salafi scholars like Dr Bilal Philips to present what he did in that book. That shows he was either unaware of what the Malikis have said, which is irresponsible when publishing a book to be read by everyday people, or ....the worst, which I hope it isn't..that he knowingly misled people into believing that this is why Malikis pray like that ...because of an injury their Imam had with the local governor of Madinah.


Wa Llahu Alim

[Shemker394]

Who knows more about the positions of Imam Malik (ra), Bilal phillips or the maliki ulama?
Cant believe were having this sort of discussion.

[ppaelkos]

As Salamu Alaykum

The best way to find out how the Malikis derive their rulings is to look at the Maliki sources themselves.

Wa 'alaikum Asalaam

Which is what I'm doing, and that's why I don't want to discuss it.

Now what does Dr Bilal Philips says the reason is in his book evolution of fiqh?

"Malik was tied and beaten until his arms became severely damaged to such a degree that he became unable to clasp them on his chest in Salaah and thus he began the practice of praying with his hands to the sides according to some reports." p. 78 Evolution of Fiqh 2nd Edition

If you check on that page there is no footnote to substantiate that claim and as already noted, the Maliki scholars including Imam Malik himself is recorded as to why he did so and it wasn't because of an injury. This is further substantiated in Ibn Rushd's book Bidayat al Mujtahid which is a work on khilaf amongst the mujtahidun and the work by the Shafi'i scholar Imam Sha'rani in his Mizan al Kubra as well as other works.For more evidence I recommend you reread my original post on the primay proofs and secondary proofs for why the Maliki do so. There is even a short work in Arabic produced on the very topic of sadl and how the Malikis defend that position and their proofs.

So we have to ask ourselves how did the Salafis like Dr Bilal Philips and others substantiate that claim about why the Maliki school prays like that. Did they consult what Imam Malik actually said as recorded by his direct student ibn al Qasim in Sahnun's Mudawwana? Did they look at the most reliable primers and text proof encyclopedias of the Maliki school?

Based on what was written in Evolution of Fiqh and recycled ad naseum in some Salafi websites and books, they didn't. As a person who had an opportunity to study some of the most well known short primers of the Maliki madhhab from 1998-2002 it shouldn't have been difficult to find (and I'm considered just a student). I never concurred with Philips, I merely mentioned what he said.

With all those works and proofs available in both Arabic and now in English, there was no excuse for Salafi scholars like Dr Bilal Philips to present what he did in that book. He is not an aalim...

That shows he was either unaware of what the Malikis have said, which is irresponsible when publishing a book to be read by everyday people, or ....the worst, which I hope it isn't..that he knowingly misled people into believing that this is why Malikis pray like that ...because of an injury their Imam had with the local governor of Madinah. If I said the same thing about material published by the Ahnaaf concerning masah 'ala jawrabayn where the Hanbali position is misrepresented - and than further used it as a basis in my bigoted approach to avoid and zealously warn against all things Hanafi, nobody would lend me an ear.

[Lebybynctisee]

I was just reading tahdhib ahwal al-qubur by Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali and the Salafi editor just stated dead normal that he removed some stories of the Tabi'in, and some narrations about gravediggers, simply because they had 'no proof' according to him.

http://www.waqfeya.com/book.php?bid=1155 (p. 6)

If only if they had let the reader decide!

[KraskiNetu]

I was just reading tahdhib ahwal al-qubur by Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali and the Salafi editor just stated dead normal that he removed some stories of the Tabi'in, and some narrations about gravediggers, simply because they had 'no proof' according to him.

http://www.waqfeya.com/book.php?bid=1155 (p. 6)

If only if they had let the reader decide!

I guess that the "verify the authenticity or strongest position" yourself tendency among Salafis is being replaced, just as many of us have always hoped for, but it's leading down another path just as disturbing.

I guess it's true when they say "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it."

[Jorcelirl]

Sealed Nector has some serious problems in it.

[Abnorbprootly]

is this thread in keeping with the pledge of respect and mutual cooperation signed between salafi scholars and deobandi scholars?

Isnt it about time salafis and deobandis united together. Salafis consider deobandis to be the closest to the sunnah, they advocate studying fiqh with them, working with them in common good, no problems praying in their masajid, sending your children to their islamic schools, doing projects such as mosques, charity, dawah etc togrther, when teaching your theological views, advoiding any type of name calling or mentioning deobandi faults (basically teaching what you hold to be the truth instead of teaching what erors you believe others are upon) etc etc. I hope inshallah that at least some of you hold the same sentiments. Surely those muslims who attend hindu shrines and such like are more of a concern to you, differences between deobandis and salafis are very small in reality and i dont know why people have suddenly stopped acknowledging athari aqeedah as a valid aqeedah of ahlas sunnah considering imam ahmad ibn hanbali rahimahullah was neither an ashari nor maturidi. I actually think its quite dangerous, saudi arabia is a salafi nation with a lot of power and opposing them instead of uniting with them is only causing more weakness. Dont forget saudi supported the taliban despite taliban being deobandi.

Also arabic words can be differed over by scholars, riyadh us saliheen has thousands of hadeeths in there and you felt the need to start a whole thread on their translation while causing division and hatred towards them over a few hadeeth which they translate and interpret differently to you.

Please remember they only wipe over socks because they arrived at that conclusion from their fiqh, its not like they hold this oppinion with some agenda in mind, please respect scholarly discourse unless you want to be the deobandi version of madkhalis. I feel sad to think that last night i was sitting with, studying with, and eating with deobandis out of desire for unity and to benefit from my muslim brothers and meanwhile my own scholars were having their flesh eaten here over a few hadeeth that only centred around a few fiqh issues.

I myself follow the athari aqeedah but view it as a small theological difference between scholars, not an issue to divide over (like shirk, cursing companions, finality of the prophet, validity of shariah as a legal system etc).

Surely all salafi views are still within the pale of islam unlike many other sects

[Abnorbprootly]

i think a line needs to be drawn between who you can and cant unite witj, especially policially. For example, if an islamic state was formed tommorrow would it cooperate with salafis in saudi? What and about shia in iran? What about barelwis and ahmadiyyah in pakistan? What about secularists in turkey?

A line needs to be drawn over what is islam and what isnt. Islam can have different sects within it who are still muslim and cooperate, and some sects should be cast out of islam because their deviation is too serious. If we're going to try and destory sects, surely those upon kufr akbar are the ones to focus on while working together with those who are still muslim?

[etdgxcnc]

Salafis consider deobandis to be the closest to the sunnah, they advocate studying fiqh with them, working with them in common good, no problems praying in their masajid, sending your children to their islamic schools, doing projects such as mosques, charity, dawah etc togrther, when teaching your theological views, advoiding any type of name calling or mentioning deobandi faults (basically teaching what you hold to be the truth instead of teaching what erors you believe others are upon) etc etc.

Masha'Allah, I wish they were like this here also. Nevertheless at my place Deobandis are gaining more and more respect among the (Salafi) masses.

[Abnorbprootly]

Masha'Allah, I wish they were like this here also. Nevertheless at my place Deobandis are gaining more and more respect among the (Salafi) masses.

which city are you from. There are two types of salafis. Really strict harsh ones who attack everyone including the other group of salafis. They are commonly known as super salafis, madkhalis etc.

Then there are the more chilled out kinds like yasser qadhi, tawfique chaudry, mercy mission, al kauthar,green lane mosque, al maghrib, mrdf etc and they are the ones who have a much better view of deobandis, however both sides consider deobandis to be muslims that you can pray behind.

The harsher salafis are a seperate group who only associate amongst themselves and are clear and distinct from the other type and the strict salafis are few in number obviously due to their nature being so shadeed

also, the more chilled out group actually advocates studying madhahib while the hardcore ones say there is no problem following a madhab but better to follow qur'an and sunnah

[polleroy]

is this thread in keeping with the pledge of respect and mutual cooperation signed between salafi scholars and deobandi scholars?

Isnt it about time salafis and deobandis united together. Salafis consider deobandis to be the closest to the sunnah, they advocate studying fiqh with them, working with them in common good, no problems praying in their masajid, sending your children to their islamic schools, doing projects such as mosques, charity, dawah etc togrther, when teaching your theological views, advoiding any type of name calling or mentioning deobandi faults (basically teaching what you hold to be the truth instead of teaching what erors you believe others are upon) etc etc.

Those are noble goals but what is your opinion of those who claim to be salafi and because of their differences don't pray in Masajid lead by Ahnaaf, don't socialize with them, and consider them to be ahlul bid'ah or imply through their arguments that we do some forms of Shirk? How should we deal with them? There are quite a few I know that tow that line. We desire to work together for the greater goal and khair and put subsidiary differences aside but how would you address a situation of working together with people for months on some recognized Deeni thing and then because of associating with these types of people, they stop socializing with us, and even to the extent of not giving or returning salam?

Surely all salafi views are still within the pale of islam unlike many other sects

That is not entirely correct

[Abnorbprootly]

Those are noble goals but what is your opinion of those who claim to be salafi and because of their differences don't pray in Masajid lead by Ahnaaf, don't socialize with them, and consider them to be ahlul bid'ah or imply through their arguments that we do some forms of Shirk? How should we deal with them? There are quite a few I know that tow that line. We desire to work together for the greater goal and khair and put subsidiary differences aside but how would you address a situation of working together with people for months on some recognized Deeni thing and then because of associating with these types of people, they stop socializing with us, and even to the extent of not giving or returning salam?




That is not entirely correct

1 deal with it by being able to distinguish between the two. The two groups are very distinct and its very easy to distinguish which one is which, the same way its easy for us to distinguish between a deobandi and barelwi.

2 you believe salafis are kafirs in the same category as ahmadiyyah? On what basis?

[polleroy]

1 deal with it by being able to distinguish between the two. The two groups are very distinct and its very easy to distinguish which one is which, the same way its easy for us to distinguish between a deobandi and barelwi.

Sometimes it's hard to distinguish because there's different types of Salafis whose positions in Deen are not clear.

2 you believe salafis are kafirs in the same category as ahmadiyyah? On what basis?

All salafis don't hold the same beliefs so you can't make a general statement like that. I'm referring to those beliefs that are not in line with Ahlus Sunnah wal jama'ah like not negating Jism for Allah, subjecting Allah to occurrences etc.

You should also be cautious about labeling or questioning others with/about takfir.

[Taunteefrurge]

Sealed Nector has some serious problems in it.

I heard it revolves more around wars and battles so there is nothing wrong with the book.

That is what I heard...

[KraskiNetu]

please provide examples as the book is widespread.