Wahhabism

[anajmi]

By the way,

literal interpretations of Qu’ran and Hadith

I have no clue what that means.

[anajmi]

One other thing, the foundation stone for Al-Qaeda and Taliban was probably laid down by the CIA.

[jawanmardan]

Originally posted by anajmi:
So in short, a wahhabi is one who does not agree with you.

I follow a school based on Falsafa, Sunni follow Ashariyya system, and Twelver Shia follow Mut'zilite position, so yes we don't agree.

Originally posted by anajmi:
By the way,

literal interpretations of Qu’ran and Hadith

I have no clue what that means.

The Wahabbi (salafi) are highly critical of or reject Asharism theology, and believe that Islam is complete within the first few generations after the Prophet, thus any form of theological discourse such as kalam are considered innovation (bid'ha), further they reject scholars like Ibn Arabi as being heretics..

Originally posted by anajmi:
One other thing, the foundation stone for Al-Qaeda and Taliban was probably laid down by the CIA.

Anajmi, the CIA passed funds onto the ISI in Pakistan who then chose to support the most extreme adherents of Qutbism in their Jihad against the Soviet union, in that sense your right. But the theology and believers emanated from the Gulf, and Egypt.

[porus]

Example of literal interpretation of Quran:

5:38 "As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power." (Yusufali translation)

Literally, punishment rquires cutting hands off.

Most Muslims would interpret the verse to mean that the thief is deprived of the ability to commit the crime again without actually cutting hands off.

Literal application of Quran absolves Wahhabis from responsibility to create laws which serve Muslims. They believe that Allah has already created laws and Muslims only have to apply. There is no need to argue about compassion or mercy in this particular punishment because the divine laws already incorporated these characteristics of Allah.

Literal application also creates narrow-mindedness which destroys the ability of people to create the civilization that Islam has produced in history which was a beacon for mankind. In their zeal, Wahhabis and their off-shoots do not care what others think of them. They can all go to hell. They are doing God's work. An example is the Taliban's destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha (a literal interpretation of idol destruction in Kaaba by Prophet). Civilized world was left aghast at this barbaric action in the name of Islam. Most Muslims in the world would condemn this practise. But Wahhabis would praise it. (I shudder to think what Wahhabis would do if they conquered India. Fortunately, Moghuls were mainstream Muslims.)

Many scholars around the world were silent on this disgrace to Islam because they would not gain visa for Haj.

[anajmi]

Are there examples from hadith of how the prophet treated the thieves during his time?

Are there examples of what the prophet did with idols that people worshipped during his time?

[anajmi]

(a literal interpretation of idol destruction in Kaaba by Prophet).

huh!!

[anajmi]

porus,

I found this on the answering-islam web site

Some Muslim apologists, especially on the worldwide web, seek to squirm out of the plain and harsh meaning of Sura 5:38 with dubious translations.

He is talking about "Muslim apologists" who seek to squirm out of the plain and harsh meaning of 5:38. You've said something similar to this in regards to ayah 4:34 haven't you? You called people who give an alternative translation of 4:34 as Muslim apologists, haven't you?

[porus]

anajmi,

You are an incorrigible Wahhabi. And since you do not even know that you are a Wahhabi, it is appropriate to call you a Wahhabi dupe.

When Quran states clearly to chop hands of a thief, why do you want a hadith?

Wll here it is:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 1.sbt.html

Volume 8, Book 81, Number 790:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Prophet cutoff the hand of a thief for stealing a shield that was worth three Dirhams.

*************

Prophet destroyed the idols that were in the Kaaba. That is history. They were not there for decoration. They were object of worship. We have no idea if they were pointers to the divine like Hindus understand the term when they 'worship' idols.

You are an apologist if you explain away the ayat. But here we are confronting it head-on. Let us get personal. Have you ever stolen? Quran, literally, does not allow repentance for a thief. If you have, I suggest you go to Arabia and have you hands chopped off.

If you wish to engage in personal ego-massage by insulting others on this forum, I will not engage in any further discussion with you or the other literalist Wahhabi dupe, Muslim First.

[anajmi]

porus,

Please don't get too excited. Get back to the discussion.

So according to you, the prophet literally interpreted the quran and hence he was a wahhabi?

[anajmi]

By the way, according to Maulan Maududi's Tafheem-ul-Quran, a person who steals food is not to be punished by cutting off his hands. There are a couple of other categories where the hands are not to be cut off. I will get the exact categories when I go through it again later on. I think only a person who steals as hobby or entertainment is to be punished by chopping off of the hands. A person who steals for necessity does not get this punishment.

[porus]

Originally posted by anajmi:
porus,

Please don't get too excited. Get back to the discussion.

So according to you, the prophet literally interpreted the quran and hence he was a wahhabi?

No, I would dispute the hadith.

[porus]

Originally posted by anajmi:
By the way, according to Maulan Maududi's Tafheem-ul-Quran, a person who steals food is not to be punished by cutting off his hands. There are a couple of other categories where the hands are not to be cut off....

Maududi was a Wahhabi. Quran does not give these categories. I suspect that they are in hadith.

[jawanmardan]

Originally posted by anajmi:
A person who steals for necessity does not get this punishment.

When time permits would you post the categories, and how the categorization is proved through evidence by the scholar in question?

[porus]

Originally posted by porus:
I shudder to think what Wahhabis would do if they conquered India.

Wahhabis would level the Taj Mahal!!

[anajmi]

This is the reason why you choose to reject hadith or sunnah of the prophet. By doing away with the sunnah of the prophet, you can now interpret the quran as you want.

I will cut you some slack. Is there any evidence from Shia hadith or Nahjul Balagha about how Hazrat Ali or any of the other Imams treated thieves in their kingdom?

[anajmi]

Maududi was a Wahhabi. Quran does not give these categories. I suspect that they are in hadith.

That would mean Maududi is not a wahhabi per your definition of a wahhabi. Or did I miss something?

[anajmi]

Most Muslims would interpret the verse to mean that the thief is deprived of the ability to commit the crime again without actually cutting hands off.

According to you, what is the best way to deprive the thief of the ability to commit the crime again? Chopping off the hands would pretty much ensure that he doesn't commit the crime again. However, I think the responsibility of his livelihood now falls with the state since the state is depriving him of a means of earning an honest livelihood as well. There is one other way, and that is to make him richer than everyone else around him so he doesn't need to steal anymore. Even that is not a guarantee that he won't steal again. Look at the politicians of today. So, I would love to hear suggestions by Islamic scholars on this board.

By the way, here is my take on 5:38 and 5:39 and I may be wrong.

According to Arberry

5:38 and 39

And the thief, male and female: cut off the hands of both, as a recompense for what they have earned, and a punishment exemplary from God; God is All-mighty, All-wise. But whoso repents, after his evildoing, and makes amends, God will turn towards him; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

005.038
YUSUFALI: As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

005.039
YUSUFALI: But if the thief repents after his crime, and amends his conduct, Allah turneth to him in forgiveness; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

The "But" in there along with "makes amends" tells me that if he repents, and makes amends (obviously with his hands intact, as if they have been chopped off, even if he doesn't want to, his lifestyle would be amended!!) he should be given at least one other chance.

[anajmi]

jawanmardan,

When time permits would you post the categories, and how the categorization is proved through evidence by the scholar in question?

Here is the link to the tafheem in urdu for surah Maida. You can read it on page 36, 37

http://www.tafheemulquran.org/Tafhim_u/ ... ah_all.htm

or you can listen to the audio of the suran over here

http://maududi.org/tafheemulquran/showt ... h=Al-Maida

[anajmi]

This is the beauty with a lot of these wahhabis. Their thoughts and beliefs are so easily accessible. Now try to find the interpretation of 5:38 by the Hazar Imam and see how you run into a wall.

[porus]

Originally posted by anajmi:

Maududi was a Wahhabi. Quran does not give these categories. I suspect that they are in hadith.

That would mean Maududi is not a wahhabi per your definition of a wahhabi. Or did I miss something?

Try not to be a nit-picker.

Wahhabis are literalists of both Quran and Hadith.

Do not ride your hobby horse. We are not discussing Aga Khan or Ismailies here. We are discussing Wahhabism.

[anajmi]

porus,

You can't discuss wahhabism in isolation now can you? Although I am sure you would like to do that. Now, what is the Shia interpretation of 5:38 and based on what?

For the Ismailis, what is the Hazar Imam's interpretation of 5:38 and based on what?

Wahhabis are literalists of both Quran and Hadith.

The category is getting broad and the ice that you are skating on is getting thin.

[anajmi]

By the way, do you think the Shias have literally interpreted the hadith of the prophet about combining prayers?

Also, let us discuss how the bohras have literally interpreted the Daimul Islam.

[porus]

anajmi,

Wahhabism can be discussed in relation to mainstream sunni Islam which is its main target. Wahhabis are not interested in Ismailies or Shia except to eliminate them.

Wahhabism is a threat to Islam and has made disastrous inroads into it. Neither Bohras nor Ismailies figure in this epic except as very marginal players.

I will not discuss interpretation, literal or otherwise, of Hadith or Quran by the Shia as they are irrelevant here. I am prepared to discuss the views of Sunni vs Wahhabis in relation to Quran and Hadith and the madha'ib.

[jawanmardan]

Originally posted by anajmi:
porus,

You can't discuss wahhabism in isolation now can you? Although I am sure you would like to do that. Now, what is the Shia interpretation of 5:38 and based on what?

For the Ismailis, what is the Hazar Imam's interpretation of 5:38 and based on what?

Wahhabis are literalists of both Quran and Hadith.

The category is getting broad and the ice that you are skating on is getting thin.

anajmi,

A Wahabbi would interpret 5:38 literally, and cut off the hand. Since they reject systems of Jurisprudence that were created in the medieval period.

The four surviving Madhabs of Sunni Islam use the Asharite system of thought within their jurisprudence, and may or may not cut off the hand.

Shia use the Mut’zilla system and would also reach a judgement on theft.

An Isma’ili would use our system of jurisprudence and then make a ruling.

Also, let us discuss how the bohras have literally interpreted the Daimul Islam.

Daimul Islam is a compendium of final rulings, it’s not a source text. So it can’t be compared to Wahabbi literalism, that makes no sense.

[anajmi]

Since they reject systems of Jurisprudence that were created in the medieval period.

And your source for this information is?

[anajmi]

The four surviving Madhabs of Sunni Islam use the Asharite system of thought within their jurisprudence, and may or may not cut off the hand.

So if they decide to cut off the hands, do they become wahhabis?

[anajmi]

Shia use the Mut’zilla system and would also reach a judgement on theft.

What is this system based on? Which countries implement this system?

[jawanmardan]

Anajmi,

The Asharite and Mutazilla are theological schools of thought, not proscriptive legal systems like the madhabs. They have an impact legal fatwas, and culture. But are not themselves intended for that purpose.

Sunni Madhabs switched from Mutazilla to Ashariyya. The Twelver remained Mutazilla. These systems are based on the discourse that took place between Muslims, on the nature of God, the hereafter, etc etc during Islams “Golden Age”.

A Hanafi Muslim jurist would use the Hanafi madhab, through the theological viewpoint of the Ashariyya to interpret Quran and Hadith and reach a legal opinion.

A Wahabbi would claim that the Hanafiyya should not be followed blindly and that one ought instead to directly consult the Qu’ran and Hadith and follow word for word what is proscribed literally, and should seek guidance from only scholars who interpret literally what is proscribed a scholar for a wahabbi is someone who is aware of more texts to support his argument, he cannot engage in interpretation, or interpret metaphorically.

They further reject the Ashariyya system as bid’ha, since it developed as a system of thought after the first three generations of the Sahaba, any religious discourse that comes after the first three is considered corrupt and dangerous in that it may inspire shirk.

[jawanmardan]

Originally posted by anajmi:

The four surviving Madhabs of Sunni Islam use the Asharite system of thought within their jurisprudence, and may or may not cut off the hand.

So if they decide to cut off the hands, do they become wahhabis?

No, it’s not the judgement that defines a wahabbi (salafi), it’s the methodology used to reach an opinion.

[anajmi]

jawanmardan,

Thanks for that information. Although I still need to find out the source of all this wahhabi information. If I can't find anything that traces this back to the original wahhabi, I will dismiss it as straw-man.