2 religions in the peninsula of the Arabs (MORE)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

CARR

>He said that the Saudi insistence on no churches in the Hijaz (right

>term?) was a minority ruling of the Wahabi (sp?) sect and that most

>Muslims did not accept it.


SQUIRES
I forgot to comment on this.  To say that this was a ruling of the 
"Wahabi sect" is untrue. First of all, there is no such "sect" as such.  
There is a long trend in Islamic thought going back to Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, 
Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad 'Abd al-Wahab that is very literalistic.  
It's nothing new and existed long before Ibn Saud and Muhammad Ibn 'Abd 
al-Wahab (hence the name) conquered the Arab Peninsula.  In Sunnism 
today, anyone who opposes visiting tombs, praying to saints, wearing 
charms, etc., is labelled a "Wahabi".  Most of the people who are 
labelled "Wahabis" considered themselves to be "Salafi".  But 
anyway...the hadeeths in question are accepted by many scholars of the 
four traditional madhahib (Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki had Shafi'i).  You 
should always keep in mind that most people who use the label "Wahabi" 
in a derogatory way are either:  1) liberal Muslims who don't give a 
shit what the hadeeth say anyway; 2) nominal Muslims to which Islam is 
just an Arab or family tradition; or 3) a member of the Hanafi madhhab 
(usually from Turkey or the Sub-Continent) who just blindly follows 
whatever his leaders tell him.

Also, the "Salafi" (Wahabis) are usually much more interested in having 
textual proofs (i.e Qur'an and hadeeth) for their beliefs than are most 
other Muslims.  They also put a lot of weight on what traditional 
scholars say, but they don't follow them blindly (or so they claim).

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

• Previous message: What Have These Sheep Done?
• Next message: reasoning from scripture
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]