| |
Examples of the lies or errors that were stated by Keller in his attacks
against Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah.
Below are a list of some of the errors [insha’allaah] that
Keller fell into in his attacks against the Salafee madhab. These are taken from
one of his talks and some of his articles written in Q-News. I have not gone in
great detail in most of the issues as I feel their error is clear for any
sincere Muslim who considers the quotes and claims carefully. Some of the issues
that required some depth have been dealt with in separate articles.
- Talking about taking Allaahs Attributes Literally (alaa dhaahirihaa or
alaa haqeeqatiha) he says, "but in tenants of faith and particularly in
interpreting the relation of the mustashaabihaat to the Attributes of Allaah,
litera lism has never been accepted as an Islamic School of thought neither
among the salaf - early Muslims - nor those who came later" [Literalism
and Allaahs Attributes]. The fallacy of this claim is dealt in a separate
article, "the madhab of Ahlus Sunnah and Ta’weel
- His claim that taking Allaahs Attributes literally is anthropomorphism
[ibid], thus betraying his total lack of comprehension of the intended
meaning behind these words when the early scholars used these terms. This is
also dealt w ith on the same leaflet as mentioned above.
- His statement "As for ibn Hazm, traditional scholars have not
accepted his claims to be a mujtahid" [ibid] If he means by
‘traditional scholars’ the contemporary so-called Ash’arees then maybe
he is telling the truth. As f or the true traditional scholars, then they
have accepted his capability of making fatawaa.
- His claim that most of the Salafee Scholars are merely trained in hadeeth
alone. [ibid]
- His claim that "Kitaab as-Sunnah" of Imaam Abdullaah bin Ahmad
is forged due to it’s containing two unknown narrators in it’s chain of
narration, and that it’s editor al-Qahtaanee tries to sweep this fact
under the rug by saying that ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim authenticated
the attribution to the author. [ibid].
Suffice it to say that the authenticity of the sanad is
not the only thing that can be used to attribute a book to it’s author
rather there are other conditions that can be met, and due to these being
fulfilled the researching scholars firmly attributed the book to it’s
author, such as those that Qahtaanee mentioned: not only ibn Taymiyyah and
ibn al-Qayyim as Keller incorrectly claims, but ibn al-Jawzee, al-Bayhaqee,
al-Laalikaa’ee and others.
- As for the rest of his argument against ‘as-Sunnah’ [ibid] then it is
empty words, for he has not given any new information, the fact that it
contains fabrications is known, and they have been pointed out by the
various scholars who have done tahqeeq to it. To reject a book because it
contains fabrications is unjust as any person will understand
- Following on from (5) his then going on to quote from ‘as-Sunnah’ of
al-Khallaal a narration going to Imaam Ahmad that he apparently made tafweed
of the meanings of the Attributes of Allaah. [ibid]. But this book has more
than two u nknown narrators in it’s chain. So why the discrepancy? Why
reject one book for a specific deficiency, but accept another book with that
same deficiency? The answer is that justice is rare to find! In the case of
the first book it contains [in it’s authen tic narrations] things which
contradict the innovations of the Ash’arees, so they try to find something
to discredit it. In the second case, the book contains one narration [out of
many that contradict the Ash’aree stances] that agrees with them, so they
in turn sweep under the rug the deficiencies [in their eyes] of the book!
Suffice it say, in case anyone is now in doubt of the authenticity of this
books ascription, that in the same way that the researching scholars firmly
attributed ‘as-Sunnah’ to Imaa m Abdullaah, they firmly attributed
‘as-Sunnah’ to al-Khallaal.
- His criticism that ibn al-Qayyim believes that Allaah has Two eyes, and
the fact that he derived this from the hadeeth, "and your Lord is not
one-eyed" [ibid] what would he say, now to the same argument being
presented in the works of the very Imaam he claims to follow, Abul Hasan al-Ash’aree
and other Imaams?!
- His examples in which he tries to show that ta’weel was delved into by
the salaf [ibid] this is dealt with in the same article as mentioned above
and in the article on the biography of ibn Taymiyyah.
- His claim that Abul Hasan al-Ash’aree performed ta’weel and did
tafweed of the meanings of the Attributes [ibid]. To see the fallacy of this
just read the work ‘al-Ibaanah’ of the Imaam!
- His claims that Salafees are anthropomorphists!
- His claim that Salafees try to reduce ‘gatherings of dhikr’ to
‘education gatherings alone’ [Q-News. "Do the practice of the
whirling dervishes fall within orthodox Islaam?"] This is not the case,
rather they allow dhikr but not in the manner performed by the Sufis, rather
as taught by the sunnah.
- His claim that the hadeeth ‘shirk is more hidden in my Ummah than the
creeping of ants across a great smooth stone…" was used by the
‘Wahhaabees’ to prove that "the majority of Muslims may not be
Muslims at all, but rather mushrikun or polythiests, and those that do not
subscribe to the view of their Shaykhs may be beyond the pale of
Islaam." [Q-News, "would you advise individuals to study hadith
from Bukhari and Muslim on their own?"] Subhaanallaah this is a
grievous lie! The salafee scholars have explained this hadeeth in it’s
true understanding, that this refers to minor shirk and warns of the danger
of shirk in general. For if the Messenger feared for him nation minor shirk,
than what of major shirk?[See ‘fath al-Majeed’, the commentary to
‘Kitaab at-Tawheed’ of ibn Abdul Wahhab for example.] Kellers accusation
that those that ‘do not subscribe to the views of their Shaykhs may be
beyond the pale of Islaam’ is pure sectarianism and bigotry that is blind
to the truth.
This is a glimpse of how this person has quoted erroneous
facts, made up arguments that the Salafees are supposed to have used and then
refuted them in an attempt to show the ‘weakness’ of the Salafee stances.
For a great deal of more d etail see the forthcoming refutation of him by Shaykh
Dr. Saleh as-Saleh.
And Allaah the Most High knows best, and it is He Alone Who
guides to attaining the truth.
|
