That is another thing. I don't get- why not study the sufi metaphysics you're talking about?Shirk -polythiesm
when you accuse a muslim of shirk, you declare that muslim a kafir. When you declare a muslim a kafir, you yourself become a kafir.
Why is that? really think about why accusing someone of kufr makes you a kafir? it's primarily because in doing this, you're closing the doors of Allah infinite Mercy on another person, so Allah closes the door on you.
An example of this
in sufi metaphysics, the 3 highest levels are Hahut, Lahut and Jabarut.
Hahut=the Essence of Allah.
Lahut=His eternal expression (His Word/Logos) representing the level where His attributes are known
Jabarut=Where those attributes manifest ie Allah is The Creator, so jabarut represents causation.
In this sense, Allah's bestowing of mercy on all creation (al-Raheem) represents jabarut.
The prophet SAW for example was a proof of Allah's jabarut.
In one speech a shia talked about how the imam mahdi will be proof of Allah's jabarut.
This video went viral in wahabi circles on social media..the titles, captions and message they added to the video was what?
"shias are kafirs, proof"
In other contexts it justifies them killing muslims ie as 'kafirs'.
So when the prophet SAW spoke of najd, he didn't merely talk of the house saud but he spoke of what would come from there within a religious context
ie
they will have the best of speech
their salat will put yours to shame
they will recite the Quran in abundance
YET they will all be thrown into hell. They will 'invite others to the doors of hell'
The only context justifying these hadith is that this group is actively engaged in destroying islam ie like in the above examples.
Aside from that, the way they're destroying the holy cities of Mecca and Medina says it all.
As an aside, it might be worth mentioning that, as I only superficially understand, many of the so called (for the sake of convenience and categorization) Wahhabi/Salafists do draw from establishment Islamic theology, philosophy and tradition. Ibn Wahhab himself, for instance, was reportedly much influenced by Ibn Taymiyyah, whose writings are complex and voluminous. Many of the current intellects -and jihadist militants- of the school of thought refer to the late (Egyptian) Sayyid Qutb, practically our contemporary, and to his largely anti-modernist, anti-secular and anti-American works. That is not to suggest, though, that all Wahhabi/Salafists are anti-American and accept Sayyid Qutb uncritically. I am speaking in general terms.
I think, in some ways, and though the final chapter has yet to be written, obviously, the future might show that, for instance, what Marx's Das Kapital and Hitler's Mein Kampf were to the prior generation, some of Sayyid Qutb's writings will be to our own. Lines are drawn. Some will align themselves with while others will oppose them, often violently. This we are seeing. Oxford University and others have published Qutb bios and readers, but I am unable to find any of his writings translated into English and available online within the public domain.
Yes you have made yourself clearer and it makes sense.Thanks. I am still somewhat lurking, or, rather, listening, but I always enjoy reading your insights as well. The subject of "Wahhabism" interests me.
I am primarily trying to be a sort of "ideas reporter," reporting on some of the theological and philosophical underpinnings of Wahhabism/Salafism. The subject interests me.
In that case, I tend, at times, to be radical myself, speaking generally.
I mention both as examples of men whose ideas were powerful and affected especially the past generation. World wars were fought in response to them; entire ideologies arose which were built upon them. In the near future, that might also be said of Qutb.
Have I made myself clearer?
No problem. And thank you for clarifying.
Good. Thank you.Yes you have made yourself clearer and it makes sense.
There are. That is why I was hoping to find his actual writings, or articles, translated into English and available online (in the public domain). I still want to read him, but might have to buy the two above-linked books to do so.I think the critique-of-decadence aspect of Qutb could definitely be long lasting and have long-term influence and relevance. I think there are aspects of his thinking that were interesting.
As I see it, the struggle, in a sense, continues. We are seeing the rise, not necessarily of Nazism as such, but certainly the far right both in Europe and here in the States (and elsewhere), and some, though not all, of those alt-rightists and nationalists are students of Hitler, at least of his tactical mistakes and blunders. The alt-right often position themselves against the so called "cultural Marxists" of the Frankfurt School, the new Marxists who, following their lack of success in the economic spheres, reportedly decided to concentrate on culture rather than economy.With Marx and Hitler..... the reason they cannot be considered both as giants of modern thought..... is that the spirit of Marx's philosophy will bury the spirit of Hitler's philosophy.
This was beautifully said.Good. Thank you.
There are. That is why I was hoping to find his actual writings, or articles, translated into English and available online (in the public domain). I still want to read him, but might have to buy the two above-linked books to do so.
As I see it, the struggle, in a sense, continues. We are seeing the rise, not necessarily of Nazism as such, but certainly the far right both in Europe and here in the States (and elsewhere), and some, though not all, of those alt-rightists and nationalists are students of Hitler, at least of his tactical mistakes and blunders. The alt-right often position themselves against the so called "cultural Marxists" of the Frankfurt School, the new Marxists who, following their lack of success in the economic spheres, reportedly decided to concentrate on culture rather than economy.
With all of that said, and given that Hitler's was a fiercely "national" as opposed to, say, Trotsky's "International" socialism, I think it can be reasonably argued that both Marx and Hitler were operating from the political left end of the spectrum. I am not necessarily the guy to argue that, though, because I don't claim to understand either of their ideologies in any great detail. I am just a spectator, sitting in the seat at Wimbledon, watching the tennis matches, hoping to not get hit in the head by flying balls and rackets in the process.
Here you go..http://www.holybooks.com/milestones-by-syed-qutb-shaheed/As an aside, it might be worth mentioning that, as I only superficially understand, many of the so called (for the sake of convenience and categorization) Wahhabi/Salafists do draw from establishment Islamic theology, philosophy and tradition. Ibn Wahhab himself, for instance, was reportedly much influenced by Ibn Taymiyyah, whose writings are complex and voluminous. Many of the current intellects -and jihadist militants- of the school of thought refer to the late (Egyptian) Sayyid Qutb, practically our contemporary, and to his largely anti-modernist, anti-secular and anti-American works. That is not to suggest, though, that all Wahhabi/Salafists are anti-American and accept Sayyid Qutb uncritically. I am speaking in general terms.
I think, in some ways, and though the final chapter has yet to be written, obviously, the future might show that, for instance, what Marx's Das Kapital and Hitler's Mein Kampf were to the prior generation, some of Sayyid Qutb's writings will be to our own. Lines are drawn. Some will align themselves with while others will oppose them, often violently. This we are seeing. Oxford University and others have published Qutb bios and readers, but I am unable to find any of his writings translated into English and available online within the public domain.
anyone with half an ounce of intelligence would reject salafism/wahabism. The problem with imran hossein on this matter is that he's clearly an agent of russia/iran since he praises them to high heaven.
Sheikh Imran beat me to it!
I had been thinking how Salafism/Wahhabism was so similar to a protestant version of Islam and had been thinking about how to conceptualize this.... Sheikh Imran beat me to it!
And if you look at Sheikh Imran...... Sheikh Imran- as he himself explains here- is only able to be the Sheikh Imran who is so known and loved because he rejects the Wahhabi methodology.