Observations on Jamaa’at ut-Tableegh and Their Innovated, Shirk-Ridden Foundations, Origins, and Practices – Part 3

The fourteenth observation: They make it permissible to carry amulets in which there are talismans and the names of unknown people – perhaps they are the names of shayaateen (devils) – and this is not permissible.

The fifteenth observation: They believe that the life of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and the lives of the Awliyaa’ (saints/pious persons) are worldly lives and not the lives of barzakh.[1]

The sixteenth observation: They are ignorant of Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah and do not give it any value or any importance in their considerations. This is due to that whose clarification has preceded in the previous observations [of this treatise].

The seventeenth observation: And in Tawheed ul-Asmaa’ was-Sifaat, they are Ashaa’irah, Maatureediyyah, even if they do read the hadeeth for blessings.[2]

The eighteenth observation: That their phrases are centered around Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah, and [affirming] this tawheed does enter one into Islaam, just as it did not enter the Arab Mushrikeen into it.[3]

The nineteenth observation: That they hate the callers to tawheed, whom they call “Wahhaabiyyah”[4], such Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, and Ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhaab. And this indicates their deviance and wickedness.

The twentieth observation: That they do not proclaim the obligation of disbelieving in at-Taaghoot[ 5] and they do not like it that one should speak about disbelieving in at-Taaghoot. And they hate with a severe hatred that one should speak about this, rather, they will expel him from amongst them.

The twenty-first observation: That they do not forbid the evil and they do not permit a person to forbid any evil. Rather, they consider the stipulations regarding some evils to conflict with wisdom, as they allege. And indeed, Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta’aala censured the Children of Israa’eel and cursed them due to their lack of forbidding the evil. So he said:

Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dawûd (David) and ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allâh and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. [Al-Ma’idah (5):78]

Do you see them as being more knowledgeable or Allaah?

Source: al-Mawrid al-‘Adhb al-Zalaal (p. 284)
شبكة سحاب السلفية

———— ——–
[1] It is the life of the grave which occurs between one’s worldly death and the Day of Resurrection. When a person dies in this life, he passes on to the life of barzakh. The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and those who have died from the Awliyaa’ are currently living this life of barzakh and not the worldly life.

[2] In their endless quest to devalue knowledge and its importance, the Tableegh adamantly state that they do not read ayaat or ahaadeeth to gain knowledge or understanding, rather, they do so for “barakah” (blessings only). That is why they only read the last ten suwar from the Qur’aan as has preceded in the fatwa of the Lajnah – they are not interested in learning the meanings of the Qur’aan nor acting upon it, but rather, they seek blessings by reading only these specific suwar and nothing else. And as the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Whomsoever Allaah desires good for, He gives him understanding of the Religion.” Thus, their having no understanding nor care for understanding indicates that Allaah does not desire good for them. So they achieved neither understanding nor barakah, but rather, humiliation and disgrace for their playing with Allaah’s Deen.

[3] Refer to the first principle of al-Qawaa’id al-Arba’ by al-Mujaddid al-Muslih Muhammad Bin ‘Abdil-Wahhaab and it various explanations for further insight on this important issue.

[4] This is a derogatory ascription to Muhammad Bin ‘Abdil-Wahhaab (d. 1206). In order to justify such an ascription, one must show that the Shaykh brought something new from himself. The Shaykh did not do this, rather, he revived the Religion of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and removed the doubts of the Mushrikeen by way of textual proofs from the Book of Allaah, the Sunnah of His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and the statements of the Salaf [the first three generations] , as is evident in his works – most notably Kitaab ut-Tawheed. So the callers of shirk and misguidance tried desperately to defame this Imaam and failed miserably, with the summit of their efforts being the pathetic book “ad-Durar as-Sunniyyah fir-Radd ‘Ala al-Wahhaabiyyah” – a book filled with such horrendous lies and fabrications that, rather than harming the Shaykh, it only exposed the humiliating status of its author and his likes. Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh has delivered more than one excellent lecture clarifying Shaykh ul-Islaam and his da’wah and refuting his critics, so refer to them. It is also sufficient to know that many ‘Ulamaa’ outside of Najd from his time and after his time praised him, like as-San’aanee, a contemporary of his, Jamaal ud-Deen al-Qaasimee, and many others. As for the head callers of shirk and bida’, like the Muhammad Illiyaas, then the ‘Ulamaa’ have not only not praised them, but have extensively exposed and refuted them, as this thread proves.
[5] A Taaghoot is anything worshipped alongside/instead of Allaah ‘Azz wa Jal and is pleased with it. So if if the object of worship was a pious Muwahhid, such as ‘Eesa Bin Maryam (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), al-‘Uzayr (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), al-Husayn, ‘Abdul-Qaadir al-Jeelaanee, etc. In that case, the Taaghoot becomes Satan, who is responsible for deceiving the people and calling them to this shirk.