Saturday, August 29, 2009

Judaism And Zionism Are Not The Same Thing

To those who think im anti-semitic; im not. Below are views on Zionist from a Judaism point of view.

We would like to take a few minutes of your time to prevent you from making a terrible mistake that may have disastrous results for many.

You have always without a doubt heard and read much about the political crises in the Middle East in which the State of Israel plays a central role. This is, in fact, an ongoing series of crises with potential to bring the greatest misfortune on the entire world. Tragically many believe that Zionism and Judaism are identical. Thus they conclude that the entire Jewish people is responsible for the actions of the Zionist government and the world crises which emanates from it. This is a Grave Error!

The truth is that the Jewish faith and Zionism are two very different philosophies. They are as opposite as day and night. The Jewish people have existed for thousands of years. In their two thousand years of Divinely decreed exile no Jew ever sought to end this exile and establish independent political sovereignty anywhere. The people's sole purpose was the study and fulfillment of the Divine commandments of the Torah.

The Zionist movement created the Israeli state. The latter is a persuasion less than one hundred years old. Its essential goal was and is to change the nature of the Jewish people from that of a religious entity to a political movement. From Zionism's inception the spiritual leaders of the Jewish people stood in staunch opposition to it.

To this day Torah Jewry remains forever loyal to its faith. Zionists want the world to believe that they are the representatives of the entire Jewish people. This is false! The Jewish people never chose them as their leaders.

The Zionists have deceived many well meaning Jewish people via terror, trickery and false propaganda. They have at their disposal the use of a nearly universally subservient media. Whoever attempts to criticize them puts his livelihood and, at times, his very life in danger.
However, despite the media blackout and easy resort to terror the simple truth remains unrefuted and irrefutable: ACCORDING TO THE JEWISH FAITH AND TORAH LAW THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE FORBIDDEN TO HAVE THEIR OWN STATE WHILE AWAITING THE MESSIANIC ERA!

The Creator gave us the Holy Land thousands of years ago. Yet, when we sinned, He took it away and sent us into exile. Since that time our task is to wait for Him to send the Messiah. At that time, the Creator alone, without any human being lifting a hand or saying a word, will bring us together and take us out of exile. He will likewise establish universal peace among all mankind and all will serve Him in good will.

Some religious Jews, confused by Zionist propaganda quote Biblical verses that state that G-d gave the children of Israel the Holy Land. They overlook, unfortunately, those verses which say that He took it away due to our sins. They further ignore those prophecies which explicitly describe the last exile's conclusion as a Divine, not a human process.
The Creator has commanded every Jew to follow the ways of peace and to be loyal to the country where he lives.

Torah true Jewry waits patiently for the Messianic redemption. They have nothing to do with any kind of pseudo "Jewish State" and its aggressions against other peoples. They have a deep sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians who have suffered the most from Zionism's false teachings and barbaric actions. The Zionist state is not a Jewish state. The Zionists alone are the only ones responsible for their actions. Authentic Jewry has and will continue to oppose the very existence of this blasphemous state.

May all mankind witness the true redemption

Friday, August 7, 2009

King ‘Abdul ‘Azeez makes a clarification of the term “Wahhabism”

King ‘Abdul ‘Azeez makes a clarification of the term “Wahhabism”

Written by/Said by: King 'Abdul 'Azeez ibn 'Abdur Rahmaan al-Sa'ud (رحمه الله) Taken from: Mujmalu I'tiqaadil A'immatis-Salafee, Pages 117-118

King ‘Abdul ‘Azeez (رحمه الله) said:

“They have labeled us with the term ‘Wahhabiyoon’, and they have named our madhhab as ‘Wahhabi’ considering it as a specific madhhab, and this is a wicked mistake, appearing from the false propaganda which has been spread by the people of gossip. We are not the people of a new madhhab or new ‘aqeedah. Our ‘aqeedah is the ‘aqeedah of the rightly guided predecessors, we respect the four Imaams and we make no distinction between Maalik, ash-Shaafi’ee, Ahmad, and Abu Haneefah, all of them are deeply respected in our view. This ‘aqeedah is the one, that was re-established by Shaykhul Islaam, Muhammad bin ‘Abdul Wahaab (رحمه الله), and the one that he called towards. This is our ‘aqeedah and it is the structured ‘aqeedah upon the tawheed of Allaah (سبحانه وتعالى), free from defect, far removed from any innovation.”

The Purpose if the Term Wahabi

The Purpose of the term 'Wahhabi'
Shaykh Muhammad Khalil Harras
Translation by: Aboo Waheeda as-Salafee

Is there a religious sect called 'wahhabi' ?


There is no such sect with this name.

Rather this is just a nick name that the people of falsehood have branded it on the people who uphold the truth , the people of tawheed (Oneness of Allaah in everything).

And this name they refer it to Shaykh Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab (may Allaah have mercy on him.)

And he is a great Imaam from the Imaams of who brought religious rectification in the lands of Najd. [1]

Thus he called to going back and establishing Tawheed (after people were into shirk).

And reviving the methodology of the Salaf (pious predecessors) .

And in this effort of his; the clan of Saud helped him; until they managed to relinquish and remove almost all the shirk and bid'a (innovations) , like calling on the dead people in the graves, and extremism in praising other humans.

Thus all of the lands of Najd returned to Tawheed (Oneness of Allaah in everything) and Ikhlaas (sincerity in worshipping of Allaah)

May Allaah have mercy on them and reward them greatly.

[1] Najd is part of The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Source :

Shaykh ‘Ubayd clarifies the usage of the term “Al-Wahabiyyah”


This (female) questioner from France says that she has just professed Islaam and always hears of (the term) “Al-Wahabiyyah", so she desires clarification from the Shaykh regarding this issue, may Allaah protect him.


I ask Allaah, O my daughter, that He establish you on Islaam and the Sunnah. O Allaah, establish her! [The Shaykh made this supplication three times]

(The term) “Al-Wahabiyyah” is attributed to Ash-Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhaab (رحمه الله) because he was the one who revived the call of Tawheed in the middle part of the twelfth century of the hijrah. He was aided upon this revival by the Ameer, the Imaam, Muhammad ibn Saud, may Allaah have mercy upon them both.

This ascription (Al-Wahabiyyah) is used by the enemies; the enemies of Tawheed, the enemies of the Sunnah. So it has become, that every enemy of Tawheed and the Sunnah ascribes the person of Tawheed and the Sunnah with being “Wahabee". This is the explanation of the word “Al-Wahabiyyah” .

And perhaps you should know that it is an evil ascription both blameworthy and faulty, because Ash-Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhaab (رحمه الله) did not ascribe himself with this. Likewise, this ascription was never attributed to him by the Scholars of the da’wah after him, nor from amongst his sons, grandchildren and brothers of the da’wah up until the present time.

It is not known from anyone from amongst them attributing him with this ascription except the people of superstitions, innovations, and Shirk. They are the ones who ascribe the people of the Sunnah with this ascription.

Written by/Said by: Shaykh 'Ubayd ibn 'Abdullaah al-Jaabiree Taken from: Tape recorded lecture

Written by/Said by: Shaykh 'Ubayd ibn 'Abdullaah al-Jaabiree Taken from: Tape recorded lecture

TAKEN FROM www.masjiduthaymeen .org

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Misteri Istilah Wahabi

Perkataan ‘wahhabi’ dalam penulisan Barat mempunyai berbagai huraian. Kesemuanya menjurus kepada aliran Islam yang dilihat begitu berpegang kepada nas-nas al-Quran dan al-Sunnah secara literal dan enggan melihat tafsiran yang lebih moden atau tafsiran yang agak ‘western influence’. Clinton Bennet memasukkan ‘wahhabis’ dan deobandis dibawah kelompok ‘traditionalists’ yang bererti sekaligus berada di bawah aliran ‘fundamentalist’ (lihat: Muslim and Modernity 18-20, London: Continuum).

Sebahagian penulisan Barat melihat wahhabi sebagai aliran yang menganggap ‘hanya Islam agama yang benar’, wajib menegakkan ‘Islamic State’, adanya ‘jihad’ menentang kuffar dan lain-lain ciri-ciri yang dianggap unsur ‘padang pasir’ sekaligus cuba dikaitkan dengan terrorism.
Di Malaysia pula, perkataan ‘wahhabi’ adalah perkataan misteri. Apa tidaknya, ramai yang menyebutnya atau menfitnah orang lain dengan menggunakan perkataan itu, padahal mereka pun tidak faham. Bagi mereka, itu adalah senjata untuk mempertahankan diri ketika dikritik. Saya masih ingat, di satu tempat di sebelah Utara, apabila ada imam yang mengenakan bayaran untuk solat dan zikirnya, lalu dia dikritik atas sikap salahguna agama untuk kepentingan diri, dengan mudah dia menjawab: “siapa tak setuju dengan saya dia wahhabi”. Pemberi nasihat yang barangkali tidak terdedah kepada banyak maklumat dan kali pertama mendengar perkataan itu, terpinga-pinga bertanya: “apa itu wahhabi?”. Jawab tok imam: “Siapa yang mengkritik ustaz dia wahhabi”. Maka tidaklah berani lagi ‘penasihat’ itu berbeza pandangan dengan ‘tok imam’ dan mempertikaikan ‘infallibility’ ustaz, takut jadi wahhabi.

Di sesetengah tempat seseorang dituduh wahhabi kerana menentang amalan-amalan khurafat. Umpamanya, menggantung gambar orang tertentu seperti sultan atau tok guru dengan kepercayaan boleh menambah untung atau rezeki, atau mengikat benang hitam di tangan bayi yang baru lahir atas kepercayaan menolak sial atau bala dan berbagai kekarutan yang menghantui sebahagian masyarakat. Malangnya amalan-amalan ini bukan sahaja mendapat restu sesetengah yang bergelar ‘ustaz’, bahkan merekalah punca. Jika ada yang mengkritik, untuk mempertahankan diri maka ‘sang ustaz’ itu dengan mudahnya akan menyebut: ‘awak wahhabi’.

Sama juga, mereka yang tidak bersetuju dengan kenduri arwah dituduh wahhabi. Padahal kitab melayu lama Bughyah al-Talab karangan Syeikh Daud al-Fatani sendiri menyebut: “(dan makruh) lagi bid’ah bagi orang yang kematian membuat makanan menserukan segala manusia atas memakan dia sama ada dahulu daripada menanam dia dan kemudian daripadanya seperti yang diadatkan kebanyakan manusia (dan demikian lagi) makruh lagi bid’ah bagi segala yang diserukan dia memperkenankan seruannya”. Jika pun mereka tidak dapat menerima bahan mereka sendir, mengapa mereka merasa diri infallible, dan mengharamkan orang lain berbeza dengan mereka dengan menggunakan senjata ‘awak wahhabi’.

Sesetengah kelompok agama pula, mereka membaca dan menyebarkan riwayat-riwayat yang tertolak; seperti Israliyyat yang bercanggah dengan nas-nas Islam, hadis-hadis palsu atau kisah-kisah wali atau sufi yang menjadikan manusia keliru tentang keanggunan Islam. Mereka menyebarkannya dalam ceramah dan sesetengahnya menjadikannya modal untuk ‘bisnes’ mereka. Islam menjadi kabur dengan cerita-cerita itu dan menyebabkan agama agung ini kelihatan bagaikan ‘kartun’ dan ‘lucu’. Jika ada yang menegur para penceramah ini; jawapannya ‘awak wahhabi’. Walaupun yang menegur itu tidak pernah pun membaca buku Muhammad bin ‘Abdul Wahhab.

Lebih buruk lagi apabila isu wahhabi digunakan oleh pihak berkuasa agama. Jika ramai pegawai agama itu atau yang sealiran dengan mereka bertarekat, atau pembaca hadis-hadis palsu dan lucu, maka mana-mana sahaja guru yang mengajar al-Quran dan hadis sahih serta tidak bersetuju dengan kekeliruan itu akan disenaraikan sebagai wahhabi dan diharamkan mengajar di masjid dan surau. Nama sultan akan digunakan.

Dalam masa yang sama mereka membiarkan kemungkaran yang jelas di sana sini, lalu sibukkan diri dengan kelompok revivalist yang tidak mengancam masyarakat sama sekali. Jika ada pun, ancaman itu kepada pemikiran kejumudan dan kekolotan, bukan kepada masyarakat. Untuk menjustifikasikan kesibukan mereka dengan kelompok ini sehingga meninggalkan kemungkaran hakiki, mereka kata: “ini lebih bahaya kerana wahhabi”. Apa itu wahhabi? Jawab mereka wahhabi itu wahhabi! Sikap ini menjadi lebih panas apabila munculnya di Malaysia ‘aliran pengkafir umat’ yang bernama Ahbash yang bersekongkol dengan sesetengah pihak agama.

Di peringkat yang lebih tinggi, istilah wahhabi dikenakan kepada mereka yang tidak terikat dengan mazhab al-Syafi’i. Kononnya, mereka yang tidak ikut mazhab itu wahhabi. Saya telah sebut nas-nas ulama tentang hal ini dalam artikel-artikel yang lepas.
Persis seperti yang disebut oleh Dr al-Qaradawi:

“Golongan yang taksub ini tidak membolehkan sesiapa yang mengikut sesuatu mazhab keluar daripadanya, sekalipun dalam beberapa masalah yang jelas kepada pengikut mazhab bahawa dalil mazhabnya lemah. Sehingga mereka menyifatkan sesiapa yang keluar mazhab sebagai tidak berpendirian. Perbuatan ini sebenarnya mewajibkan apa yang tidak diwajibkan oleh Allah swt” (Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Sahwah al-Islamiyyah bain al-Ikhtilaf al-Masyru’ wa al-Tafarruq al-Mazmum , m.s 202, Kaherah: Dar al-Sahwah).

Apa yang menariknya di Malaysia, sesetengah ‘mereka ini’ apabila menjadi ‘penasihat-penasihat’ bank, bagi memenuhi keperluan bank-bank yang beroperasi atas nama Islam itu, mereka bersetuju pula dengan pandangan-pandangan hukum yang diambil tanpa mengikut mazhab. Bahkan pandangan Syeikhul Islam Ibn Taimiyyah r.h begitu banyak diambil dalam masalah muamalat ini. Ini kerana, di seluruh dunia pandangan-pandangan beliau memang dikutip dalam memajukan masyarakat Islam. Padahal ‘sesetengah mereka ini’ di luar mesyuarat bank yang ber‘elaun’ itu, mereka menuduh Ibn Taimiyyah wahhabi, dan sesiapa yang bersetuju dengan Ibn Taimiyyah sebagai ‘wahhabi’. Bahkan di luar bank mereka bersekongkol dengan golongan yang mengkafirkan atau menyesatkan Ibn Taimiyyah.

Demikian ketika saya menjadi mufti dahulu, apabila saya memberikan padangan larangan mengintip (tajassus), boleh menjawab salam bukan muslim, wajib membinkan kepada bapa asal sekalipun bapanya bukan muslim, masjid untuk kaum cina, keluasan menerima pandangan dan lain-lain lagi, maka pandangan-pandangan ini dituduh oleh sesetengah pihak agama sebagai wahhabi. Padahal pandangan tersebut jika dibincangkan di Barat dianggap dalam aliran modernism atau rationalism dan penentangnya mungkin akan dimasukkan kepada kelompok wahhabism.

Di Malaysia, sebaliknya, yang terbuka itu wahhabi dan sesat, yang tertutup itulah yang ‘membolot segala kebenaran’. Cara fikir beginilah yang menguasai sektor-sektor agama kerajaan dan mencepatkan ‘pereputan’ kekuatan kerajaan yang ada. Cara fikir begini jugalah yang menguasai sesetengah aliran agama dalam pembangkang. Sebab itu barangkali, lima puluh tahun kemerdekaan, bukan muslim bukan sahaja tidak bertambah faham, sebaliknya bertambah keliru dan tegang mengenai Islam

Tindakan mereka ini mengingatkan saya kepada artikel David Brubaker bertajuk Fundamentalisn vs Modernism: A Consideration of Causal Conditions bahawa penentangan terhadap pembaharuan lebih merujuk kepada masalah survival kelompok. Dalam usaha untuk hidup dan terus mendapat tempat dalam masyarakat dan kerajaan maka golongan pembaharuan akan ditentang. Bagi saya, bukan isu wahhabi sebenarnya, tetapi bimbang terpinggirnya tempat dan kedudukan. Namun, apabila mereka merasa ada ruangan untuk mendapat ‘kedudukan’ seperti isu perbankan tadi, mereka dapat pula menerima pandangan yang berbeza tanpa menuduh bank yang memberi elaun bulanan dan elaun mensyuarat itu sebagai ‘bank mazhab wahhabi’.

David Brubaker menyebut untuk survival mereka terpaksa memilih antara dua ‘occomodation or resistance’. Maka, di Malaysia ramai yang dituduh wahhabi, namun ia adalah tuduhan misteri. Saya juga tidak menafikan ada yang dianggap wahhabi itu sendiri perlu bertolak ansur dalam sebahagian pendapat. Namun, untuk menuduh orang lain wahhabi hanya kerana perbezaan pendapat, itu adalah sikap jakun yang cuba hidup di zaman globalisasi.

ditulis oleh Dr Asri Zainul Abidin

Different types of Muslims

Saturday, June 6, 2009

Position of Jesus (pbuh) in Islam

1. Islam is the only non-Christian faith, which makes it an article of faith to believe in Jesus (pbuh). No Muslim is a Muslim if he does not believe in Jesus (pbuh).

2. We believe that he was one of the mightiest Messengers of Allah (swt).

3. We believe that he was born miraculously, without any male intervention, which many modern day Christians do not believe.

4. We believe he was the Messiah translated Christ (pbuh).

5. We believe that he gave life to the dead with God’s permission.

6. We believe that he healed those born blind, and the lepers with God’s permission.

So know that Laa ilaaha ill Allah (that there is no deity worthy of worship but Allah), and ask forgiveness for your sin, and also for (the sin of) believing men and believing women. And Allah knows well your moving about, and your place of rest (in your homes)."
[Surah Muhammad 47:19]