[wentscat]

Brother you are a real agitator arent' you. Where did I speak Turkish? And where did I criticize salafis more than others, did you even see my final conclusion. Its better than many peoples view here on Salafis. And finally where did I make a statement that Adnan Oktar is the Mahdi. Now tell me, if I said Allah make them mahdi's exemplar students. I take my masters statement. He frequently repeats that both he and his aides are the Mahdi's students. You are a fool in short. Infact I hate to say it but you are acting like an open liar. You can say that you think or suspect that mubakr believe's Adnan Oktar is the mahdi or that mubakr your paragraph can be implied to mean that. And that can be done in the same thread as that shameful titled thread accusing of the great sheikh. You can call me hypocrite but you are acting like one right now in instigating and alleging things I didnt say.

Read the reply by Sister Acacia to your post in that thread: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...l=1#post787561 I never said you spoke Turkish. I mentioned Sister Acacia who understands Turkish and knows the truth about Adnan Oktar and his students.

There is a difference between agitation and bringing to light those that seek to agitate. And the fact that you consider him a shaykh when he is not one in any way, either through ijazah or knowledge of the sciences of Islam, already speaks volumes about you. I don't have to say anything.

[Wavgbtif]

Brothers can see for themselves:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...384#post787384

Sister Acacia, who actually understands Turkish as well, called you out on this issue.

Criticizing Salafis before setting your own house straight is extremely hypocritical, especially when no Sunni would refer to Adnan Oktar the way you have.

Brother you are a real agitator arent' you. Where did I speak Turkish? And where did I criticize salafis more than others, did you even see my final conclusion. Its better than many peoples view here on Salafis. And finally where did I make a statement that Adnan Oktar is the Mahdi. Now tell me, if I said Allah make them mahdi's exemplar students. I take my masters statement. He frequently repeats that both he and his aides are the Mahdi's students. You are a fool in short. Infact I hate to say it but you are acting like an open liar. You can say that you think or suspect that mubakr believe's Adnan Oktar is the mahdi or that mubakr your paragraph can be implied to mean that. And that can be done in the same thread as that shameful titled thread accusing of the great sheikh. You can call me hypocrite but you are acting like one right now in instigating and alleging things I didnt say.

[Gcromqgb]

The salafi sect make a great play of their supposed following of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. On close examination it will be discovered that while they call themselves salafis, they are not the followers of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. In their own definition of the Salf, they include the Fuqaha and Ulama of Khairul Quroon (the Noblest Ages) which according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) were the ages of the Sahaabah, Taabi-oon and Tab-e-Taabi-oon. On this score there is consensus. If these salafis do have love and respect for the Salf-e-Saalihoon as they vociferously claim in their talks to unwary audiences, why do they condemn the Taqleed of the Salf-e-Saalihoon? If they honour and love the Salf-e-Saalihoon, why do they hurl vile epithets at those Muslims who follow the Salf-e-Saalihoon? It should be noted that all the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen (the Four Imaams and other Mujtahideen) belonged to the Quroon-e-Thalaathah. They are the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim who are in actual fact the Imaams of the salafi sect (but they do not overtly proclaim this) are not among the Salf-e-Saalihoon. The following dates of birth of these personalities will indicate who the Salf actually are:

Imaam Abu Hanifah 80 Hijri
Imaam Maalik 94 Hijri
Imaam Shaafi 150 Hijri
Imaam Hambal 164 Hijri.

All four illustrious Imaams of the Mathaahib belonged to the initial noble epoch of Islam, hence all are among the Salf-e-Salihoon whose obedience is commanded by the Qur'aan and Hadith

http://themajlis.net/Article21.html

[wbeachcomber]

Sh. Yasir Qadhi despite the various criticism, i love his talks on the Seerah on the Prophet , I used to watch them when he used to appear on Islam Channel several years ago. I learnt immensely. There are a few people's voices that are made for Bayans in the English Language, him, and my favourite Shaykh Riyadhul Haq.

[Snocioncilm]

just curious, who has criticized OBL from among the salafis?

A whole host of salafi scholars have condemned Osama bin Laden.
http://afatwa.com/category/ibn-ladin-and-khawarij/
Thats a salafi website. I had heard alot of audio fatwas by salafi scholars condemning OBL. This was on easyonetwothree, a salafi youtube audio channel publishing fatwa of salafi ulema. Its now under afatwa.com

As for brother abdulwahhab I leave the allegation conjectured by him that I made an explicit statement saying that AO is the mahdi. He can keep his childish mentality to himself. This is the internet mate, people can learn whether you contribute or not.

[medifastwoman]

Sister aram salafis didnt burn those books, you are referring to haddaadis, a group who is heavily refuted by the salafis

[fedelwet]

Sister aram salafis didnt burn those books, you are referring to haddaadis, a group who is heavily refuted by the salafis

do they also refer to themselves as salafis?

some of the salafis (madkhalis) have also been saying we should burn some books by yasir qadhi because he quoted imam Al-Ghazzali RA in them

[Brewpralgar]

From - "you called him The Mahdi" changed to now "you referred to him as sheikh".

Do you have no concept of context? You referred to him as shaykh in the post that I was quoting. I could have easily copied down everything you wrote about Adnan Oktar in that other thread. And it is really disingenuous that you're trying to backtrack from your claim when it is clear as day to any reader who is being referred to as the Mahdi. On the other hand, you're implying that the Mahdi is already out and is instructing Adnan Oktar and his ilk to do what was revealed in that other thread, which is even worse.

Its better you remain that way. Lets see if you can after your flip-flop. It appears English isn't your first language or you are poor in your comprehension of it. Again, context is an amazing thing. I don't have to say anything more for your strange views to be exposed.

[dicemets]

oh...well...that's awkward.

[sttrqiss]

since there's like 100's of types of salafis out there...its hard to have one opinion on all of them

good points:
I agree that its good they are strict with tawheed
Their dawah efforts to non-muslims is very strong
They provide a lot of help and support to reverts
some of their scholars are admirable in the fact that they don't water down Islam to suit government/non-muslims

bad points:
caused further divisions within muslims..not just against sufis and madhab followers but within themselves too
lack of tazkiyyah = bad adab, arrogance
some of them have shia traits, with suggestions sahabah RA did not follow sunnah and introduced bidahs
annoying slogans that are deceptive, such as following quran and sunnah only etc
disrespect towards great ulemah such as imam Abu Hanfiah RA, Imam Nawawi RA...to the extent that they burn their books
Many scholars who give fatwas in favour of governments/non-muslims and water down Islam
Ignorance and intolerance on differences of opinion...its my way or the high way attitude

[foI3fKWv]

mostly the madkhalis that criticize obl..or those on government payrolls

[Nifoziyfar]

The salafi sect make a great play of their supposed following of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. On close examination it will be discovered that while they call themselves salafis, they are not the followers of the Salf-e-Saalihoon. In their own definition of the Salf, they include the Fuqaha and Ulama of Khairul Quroon (the Noblest Ages) which according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) were the ages of the Sahaabah, Taabi-oon and Tab-e-Taabi-oon. On this score there is consensus. If these salafis do have love and respect for the Salf-e-Saalihoon as they vociferously claim in their talks to unwary audiences, why do they condemn the Taqleed of the Salf-e-Saalihoon? If they honour and love the Salf-e-Saalihoon, why do they hurl vile epithets at those Muslims who follow the Salf-e-Saalihoon? It should be noted that all the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen (the Four Imaams and other Mujtahideen) belonged to the Quroon-e-Thalaathah. They are the Salf-e-Saalihoon. Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Qayyim who are in actual fact the Imaams of the salafi sect (but they do not overtly proclaim this) are not among the Salf-e-Saalihoon. The following dates of birth of these personalities will indicate who the Salf actually are:

Imaam Abu Hanifah 80 Hijri
Imaam Maalik 94 Hijri
Imaam Shaafi 150 Hijri
Imaam Hambal 164 Hijri.

All four illustrious Imaams of the Mathaahib belonged to the initial noble epoch of Islam, hence all are among the Salf-e-Salihoon whose obedience is commanded by the Qur'aan and Hadith

http://themajlis.net/Article21.html

I believe you are right. The implication of the so-called Salafi's of this age, is that the majority of Muqallid's (those adhering to the four major schools) are following in the footsteps of the Salaf-Saliheen. It is not an abstract term, rather description of an era that spanned three generations beginning with the Prophets generation and ending with those who had the grace to live alongside the Tabieen.

As you say, those outside this era, although great scholars in their own right, are not from the Salaf-Saliheen.

Allahu A'lam

[Immerymopay]

in my opinions Salafis are idiots as they reject the SALAFS(pious Imams) & there are various sects of Salafis

1. Accommodating Salafis - these salafis accomodate other groups and love them, but stick to their own stupid agenda
2. Dangerous Salafis - these people are arrogant on their views and ll do anything to oppose other people. they ll even make u a kafir or hit you - if you do something different. Stay away from these group
3. Super Salafis - these Salafis are different from normal Salafis as they invent more things in deen. For example - one adhan in Jumma, one Zakat per lifetime, scolding Sahabas, they also declare that they are the 73rd group which will enter Jannah
4. Ahle Salafis - The above categories atleast try to move with other people. These foolish sect is followed in a masjid close to my city. For eg : if you have a beard and wear a thobe you cant lead the Salah. IF you wear shorts, you are permitted to lead the Salah. I heard that STUPID salafi guy stopped a moulana from leading Salah and permitted some half pant guy.

Make dua for these deviant sects.

There are many types of Salafis which can broadly be divided to 8 groups. Here is an important article on their types and who are the khawarij within them.

p.s I disagree with the jihadist salafis part though

[foonlesse]

OBL on allegations of being khawarij, responded by claiming the Saudi state itself was the khawarij who fought against the caliphate and declared the Muslims of hijaz as disbelievers and fought against them and so on. "Salafi jihadism" is just another big mess that covers its mess by opposition against west.

Osama bin Laden was not representative of the Salafis or the traditional Sunnis as far as I can see.

He may have been influenced Syed Qutb (ra) also, but he wasn't on his path exactly either.

He associated with Abdullah Azam (ra) also, but Abdullah Azzam was the opposite of a terrorist and was very against killing innocents in Jihad. OBL wasn't on his path.

Osama bin Laden and those following him or inspired by him into terrorism were on their own unique mistaken path if you ask me. Don't blame Salafis or anyone else for him or those on his way.

[CelexaNY]

just curious, who has criticized OBL from among the salafis?and how is their version of j!had different from that of the likes of dr. al-zawahiri and OBL?
tbh most well-informed scholars wont ever reveal in public what they really feel about OBL and AlQ@eda J!had. because this means instant incarceration or death. the other option is that one leaves their sanctuary after their public praise for the J!had and goes and fights alongside them. then again you may be equally surprised at how many people know actually what is going on. i believe the kuffar may have been routed in afghanistan but they have won the media war. so many people going about like headless chickens giving wild theories. i kid you not.

'I usually tell people salafis are overall good but they are not the best and have mistakes like many other groups'
i believe this is fair. on academic level one can disagree with them on a lot of things but against the kuffar who are rapidly engaging us on multiple fronts those differences do not count for much.

[zoppereurvito]

Sister aram salafis didnt burn those books, you are referring to haddaadis, a group who is heavily refuted by the salafis

brother who are the Haddaadis? I am not familiar with them, unless it is by another name.

[Guaranano]

Osama bin Laden was not representative of the Salafis or the traditional Sunnis as far as I can see.

He may have been influenced Syed Qutb (ra) also, but he wasn't on his path exactly either.

He associated with Abdullah Azam (ra) also, but Abdullah Azzam was the opposite of a terrorist and was very against killing innocents in Jihad. OBL wasn't on his path.

Osama bin Laden and those following him or inspired by him into terrorism were on their own unique mistaken path if you ask me. Don't blame Salafis or anyone else for him or those on his way.

Fear Allah before writing such things at least about someone whom you have not met neither have spent time with. How can you blindly trust 2nd hand or 3rd hand knowledge that is fed by the media?

[finasteride]

If one views the happenings and incidents of the prophet peace and blessing be upon him as having higher cosmological significance than purely the literalistic interpretations stagnant within the time they were revealed then;

There is one particular narration when after a particular battle, one of the men involved in the aftermath reprimanded the prophet peace be upon him for being unjust in dividing the war booty.
The companions were enraged at the suggestion that one would question among the most just human beings ever to walk the planet. The prophet told the companions to leave the reprimander alone, and let him be, and when he had left the vicinity he added, that
some people would come from the Ummah that would recite the Quran, yet the words would not go past their throats.

The reprimander (of that incident) happens to be from amongst the peoples of the same locality as are generally associated with the title of this thread in modern times.

The companions can be seen as a corroraly today of those who are "enraged" at the notion of those who argue the Justice of islam is somehow lacking in the modern day, in the same way the Justice and fairness of the prophet was questioned that day.

The prophets example can be seen as a admonition of takfir or making wholesale judgements on those with such notions, in that he told his companions to let the reprimander be.

The prophet then qualified the reprimander by giving you a clue of the state of those who question the principles of Justice in Islam.

So the prophet's peace be upon him example was to show you cannot make takfir, one should incline towards peace, yet one should recognise the spiritual sickness of those of such notions. In that the Quran will not have penetrated their hearts and they would pay mere lip service to the Statements of the messenger peace be upon him

I personally beleive the prophet of Islam, was giving the believers a lesson on how to regard such iniquities within the ummah.

But im just an ordinary muslim, with miniscule amounts of knowledge, so Allah, The Most Just, knows best of course.