Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi and al-Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

My Master, the Holy Prophet, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, said:

عَلَيْكُمْ بِالْجَمَاعَةِ وَإِيَّاكُمْ وَالْفُرْقَةَ

“Upon you is the Jama’ah, and beware of schism” (Jami al-Tirmidhi)

The blessed Hadith guides those with vision in their hearts to the path of Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, or Sunni Islam—the mainstream Islam—and away from the schismatic factions, old and new.

I have written at length concerning various non-Sunni, schismatic factions that appeared in North Africa in particular. In the early days of Islam, North Africa was a frontier region to which dissident political and religious factions sought refuge, away from the heartland of Islam and the Caliphate; Berber revolts animated by Kharijism, false prophets like Salih bin Tarif, fanatical Mahdist movements like those led by Ibn Tumart and later Ahmad bin Abi Mahalli, reformist and controversial pseudo-Sufi movements like those introduced by Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi and Ahmad al-Tijani, and in modern times the radical neo-Kharijite and Takfiri groups like GIA in Algeria.

I mentioned the controversial figure Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi in the previous entry. From the onset of activity he was considered controversial by our orthodox and traditional Sunni Ulama:

“He soon began to form a circle of students around him, to whom he inveighed against the popular practice of saint worship, exhorting them to go back to the sources (usul) of belief, the Qur’an and Sunna. This was to be the consistent theme of his teaching throughout his life. Ibn Idris seems to have become a figure of controversy, becoming involved in disputes with the ulama at the Qarawiyyin.” (Rex S. O’Fahey and Ali Salih Karrar. The Enigmatic Imam: The Influence of Ahmad Ibn Idris. International Journal of Middle East Studies, v.19, no.2 (May, 1987), Cambridge University Press, p.206)

“From the outset, he appears to have encountered hostility from the Meccan ulama” (ibid)

“the Meccan ulama seemed to have used the demarche to bring charges of heresy against Ahmad.” (ibid, p.207)

Damningly, Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi was respected by the Wahhabis: 

“[Sa’ud b. Abd al-‘Aziz] is said that have treated Ibn Idris with the greatest respect, giving him a silk robe and protecting his followers. Interestingly, Ahmad only left Mecca in 1813, the year that the Wahhabis were expelled from the holy city by the forces of Muhammad ‘Ali Pasha.” (Ibid, p.207)

Concerning the fitnah of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and the Wahhabis, Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi said:

“We do not deny his [Ibn Abd al-Wahhab] merit. His intention was righteous in what he did. He eliminated innovations and unfortunate practices, but that mission was sullied by excess.” (ibid, p.208)

So the perspective of Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi on Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Wahhabism mirrors that of the Ulama of Deoband to a great extent.

But what exactly was the teaching of Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi that made him so controversial from the point of view of the traditional Sunni Ulama?

“a rejection of taqlid and the madhhabs” (ibid), “In his rejection of taqlid, Ibn Idris was doctrinally very close to the Wahhabis and al-Shawkani. He expounded his own distinctively mystical interpretation of the Qur’an and hadith. This, naturally, brought him into conflict with the Meccan ulama” (ibid, p.209)

Incidentally, one of the initial followers of the way of Ahmad bin Idris later repented,

“a Sudanese holy man, Muhammad al-Majdhub (d. 1832), was initiated into the Khatmiyya by al-Mirghani during the latter’s journeys in the Sudan. Subsequently, he went to Mecca and studied with Ibn Idris. While in Medina, the Prophet appeared to him, ordering him to leave the Khatmiyya and return to the tariqa of his ancestors, the Shadhiliyya. He returned to the Sudan, settling in Sawakin on the Red Sea coast, where he established a zawiya from which he propagated his own order, known as al-Muhammadiyya al-Shadhiliyya al-Majdhubiyya.” (Ibid)

Incidentally, this reformist current originating in Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi, which self-styles itself “al-Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah”, is very similar to the reformist current in the Indian Subcontinent which also used the term “al-Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah” and which originates in the teaching of Sayyid Ahmad of Raebareli and Shah Isma’il of Delhi. Their teaching and movement influenced Titumir of the Bengal, who introduced that term “al-Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah” in the Bengal. The contemporary Deobandi and Ahl al-Hadith movements in the Indian Subcontinent are an outgrowth of the reformist current of Sayyid Ahmad and Shah Isma’il which they originally labelled “al-Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah”.

Prophet vs Philosopher

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace upon You, Apostle of Allah

My Master, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, said:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يَنْظُرُ إِلَى أَجْسَادِكُمْ وَلاَ إِلَى صُوَرِكُمْ وَلَكِنْ يَنْظُرُ إِلَى قُلُوبِكُمْ

“Indeed, Allah does not look at your bodies or at your appearances but He looks at your hearts” (Sahih Muslim)

The condition of the heart is what matters most to Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala. While Allah has, out of His generosity, provided every human with intelligence, save those He has excused in this world, the level and condition of that intellect differs from person to person just as the condition of their hearts differ person to person. Yet guidance from Allah to Faith and the Truth is not contingent upon a person’s degree of intelligence, rather it is contingent to the condition of his or her heart. Otherwise, we would observe that only those among mankind with the sharpest minds call themselves Muslims, while only those whose minds are dulled reject belief in Allah and His Apostle, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam. So the one who despite being unintelligent has a clean heart is dearer to Allah while a prodigy is deprived of guidance and the blessing of Faith due to the blackness and corruption of his heart.

Some Muslims are impressed with and deeply admire the ancient Greek philosophers like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, and even go to the extent of considering them Believers. Some even dare suggest those individuals were Prophets of God! This state of affairs is especially true of some of those Muslims who have become obsessed with metaphysics, philosophy and ilm al-kalam. The Batini Isma’ilis are particularly partial to Plato, while the Mu’tazilites are partial to Aristotle. Undoubtedly, those Greek philosophers were men of intelligence and made remarkable contributions to human understanding. But to understand such intellectual contributions as indicative of a divine, prophetic role is manifest error. Prophets of God do not come into this world to teach the people worldly sciences, rather they are sent to call the people to the worship of One God, to prophesy about the Resurrection and to command repentance. Theirs is a message that can be comprehended by all people regardless of degree of apparent intelligence. With all that has been documented as the original teaching of those Greek philosophers, the absence of any of the essential teachings of true Faith from them such as that concerning Angels, Resurrection and repentance is sufficient to dismiss any notion that they were Prophets sent by the One God. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Prophets and Apostles of God were from the progeny of Abraham, and the children of Israel. Therefore, one ought to be skeptical of claims that Buddha, Confucius, or some Greek philosopher was a Prophet. This is especially due to the fact that there is glaring omission of any teaching concerning Angels, Resurrection and repentance from the aforementioned figures. When it comes to a Prophet of God, we should picture an individual warning of imminent doom on the basis of personal revelations to him either directly from God or through an Angel, the Holy Spirit or a vision. Such an image does not come to mind when we consider Buddha, Confucius or one of the ancient Greek philosophers. Allah says:

وَمَا نُرۡسِلُ الۡمُرۡسَلِیۡنَ اِلَّا مُبَشِّرِیۡنَ وَمُنۡذِرِیۡنَ

And We send not the Messengers except as bearers of glad tidings and warners

(Surah 6, Ayah 48)

Then in this Ummah, despite the cessation of Prophesy after sayyidina Muhammad—sall Allahu alaihi wasallam—the best are those who reflect in themselves the prophetic role and persona and inferior to them are those theologians and thinkers who have busied themselves with the same intellectual pursuits that the philosophers of old embarked upon.

Pseudo-Sufi Paths

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace upon You, Apostle of Allah

In the world of Sufism, each Tariqa or Sufi path is a Silsila that is necessarily traced back to the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. With the exception of the Naqshbandi chain, which terminates in the Prophet, peace be upon him, via Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, the chains of all other Sufi orders reach the Prophet, peace be upon him, via Ali al-Murtada, may Allah honor his face. Today, there are four principal and valid Sufi orders, namely, the Naqshbandi, Qadiri, Chishti and Suhruwardi orders. Other valid and orthodox Sufi orders are the Rifa’i, Shadhili and Kubrawi orders.

Sunni Muslims should beware of the many heretical, antinomian and pseudo-Sufi cults, such as the Bektashis, Nurbakhshis, Warisis, Madaris and others. These fake Sufi orders are either non-Sunni, lack a chain back to the Prophet, peace be upon him, or are filled with misguided teachings and practices, especially antinomian tendencies. It is crucial that when a Muslim pledges bay’a to a Sufi shaikh or murshid that he be someone that is a Sunni with the correct creed, a person of knowledge and piety—observing the laws of the Shari’a and the practices of the Sunna—and that his silsila is recognized within al-Sunna wal-Jama’a.

One of the fake Sufi orders that has appeared is the so-called Idrisi path. This group was founded by a certain Moroccan named Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi (1760-1837). This pseudo-Sufi order does not have a valid silsila that goes back to the Prophet, peace be upon him. It is in fact a reformist current that has sought to pull the Muslims away from traditional and mainstream Sufism toward the direction of Wahhabism and Salafism. This order was introduced to Pakistan by a certain Shaikh Amin of Multan. He died recently. This individual issued some controversial statements and was generally Deobandi in orientation. Allama Turab al-Haq al-Qadiri, may Allah have mercy on him, issued a fatwa against Shaikh Amin and his Amini suborder of the Idrisi order, warning the people from becoming his disciples. Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi directly influenced other problematic individuals and pseudo-Sufi orders, such as Muhammad Uthman al-Mirghani (1793-1852), founder of the Khatmi order in Sudan, Muhammad bin Ali al-Sanusi (1787-1859), founder of the Sanusi order that spread in North Africa and played an outsized role in Libya’s struggle for independence from fascist Italy under Umar al-Mukhtar, his [Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi] nephew Sayyid Muhammad Salih (1854-1919), eponymous founder of the Salihi order, adapted by the “Mad Mulla” of Somalia.

IRGC vs Zionists

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace upon You, Apostle of Allah

The latest war against Iran and its IRGC, led by the United States and its junior partner, the State of Israel, has sparked fury in much of the Muslim world. Muslims have, by and large, rallied behind Iran. Yet Iran’s ruling regime is manifestly tyrannical and in recent history participated in the brutal suppression of the Sunni Muslims in neighboring Iraq and in Syria. The regime likewise brutalizes and oppresses its own people within Iran, especially the Sunni ethnic minorities. Its proxies, such as the various Shi’ite militias in Iraq, so-called Hizbullah in Lebanon, and the Huthis of Yemen, have drenched their hands with the blood of innocent Sunni Muslims. From our perspective both sides in this current war are zalimin (wrongdoers). We should not be partial to any side in this feud, especially considering that in its rage Iran has launched unprovoked attacks against its neighboring Muslim countries (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, UAE, Oman, Turkey and Azerbaijan). Yes, the IRGC regime did not even spare those countries like Turkey and Oman which were actively attempting to negotiate a settlement or enact a ceasefire between it and the USA.

Concerning the phenomenon of wrongdoers fighting each other, Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

وَکَذٰلِکَ نُوَلِّیۡ بَعۡضَ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ بَعۡضًۢا بِمَا کَانُوۡا یَکۡسِبُوۡنَ 

And in like manner do We set some of the wrongdoers over the others because of what they earned

(Surah 6, Ayah 129)

Commenting on this Verse, the eminent and righteous Fudail bin Iyad, may Allah have mercy on him, said:

إذا رأيت ظالماً ينتقم من ظالم فقِف وٱنظر فيه متعجِّباً

“When you see a wrongdoer take revenge against a wrongdoer then pause and watch in amazement.” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi)

So be not troubled about the current war between the evil IRGC and the evil Zionists. The Believers should merely watch this drama from the sidelines, without being partial to either side, as they fight and harm one another. It seems to me that ultimately the IRGC will either collapse or be severely weakened in this latest conflict, which will hopefully open the door for a Sunni infiltration and revival in Iran. That great nation was once predominantly Sunni until the wretched Safavids imposed through coercion the heresy of Twelver Shi’ism upon it.

But many of our own people, especially the simpleminded or those who lack ghairah (honor and jealousy) for their Sunni madhhab, are openly supportive of Iran. Their hatred for America and the Zionists has blinded them to the evil of the IRGC and the Rawafid. They have deluded themselves into thinking that it is the IRGC that has the best shot at liberating Jerusalem and Palestine from the terrible Zionist occupation. The truth is that in Islamic history Jerusalem and the Holy Land was first liberated by Caliph Umar, may Allah be pleased with him. How can it therefore be liberated by those who hate and curse him?! Then when the Crusaders conquered the Holy Land it was thereafter liberated again, this time by the great Salahuddin al-Ayyubi, may Allah have mercy on him, a righteous Sunni, Ash’ari warrior. Destiny has therefore reserved the third great liberation of Jerusalem for the Sunnis. As for the Twelver Shi’ites, they do not even recognize the location of Masjid al-Aqsa in Jerusalem. They openly disassociate themselves from the structure of the Dome of the Rock too since it was constructed by the Umayyads. For the Shi’ites Najaf, Karbala, Baghdad, Samarra, and Mashhad are holier than Jerusalem! They are more attached to the cursed land of Babylon than to the blessed Levant.

Those in authority among them (4:83)

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Allah says,

یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡۤا اَطِیۡعُوا اللّٰہَ وَاَطِیۡعُوا الرَّسُوۡلَ وَاُولِی الۡاَمۡرِ مِنۡکُمۡ

O you who believe! Obey Allah, obey the Apostle and those in authority among you

(Surah 4, Ayah 59)

Some of the astray sects of innovation and heresy, notably the Imamiyyah Shi'ah, say what is meant by "those in authority among you" refers exclusively to the Twelve Imams. 

However, "those in authority among them" occurs in another Ayah that makes it plain that it refers to fallible Muslim rulers and deputies:

 وَلَوۡ رَدُّوۡہُ اِلَی الرَّسُوۡلِ وَاِلٰۤی اُولِی الۡاَمۡرِ مِنۡہُمۡ

If they were to refer it to the Apostle and to those in authority among them

(Surah 4, Ayah 83)

"Those in authority among them" is in the plural, indicating that at least three individuals are intended in addition to the Apostle of Allah, peace be upon him. The Twelver Shi'ah interpretation, that it refers exclusively to Hadrat Ali, radi Allahu anhu, is therefore falsified.

Concerning "those in authority among them" it is explained in Tafsir al-Khazin (v.1, p.403):

يعني ذوي العقول والرأي والبصيرة بالأمور منهم وهم كبار الصحابة كأبي بكر وعمر وعثمان وعلي

"This refers to those among them who possess intellect, sound judgment, and insight into matters, namely the senior companions such as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali."

Sunni vs. Qadiani

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا خاتم النبيين

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

My master, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, predicted that division would occur in his Ummah such that it would fragment into seventy-three sects. Seventy-two of them are in the Fire while one is the Saved Sect. He explained that the Saved Sect is that which is upon what he and his companions are upon and that they are the Jama'ah. Naturally, the Saved Sect of Islam is therefore that which has been continuously existing since the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and his companions till the present including every era in between. It is illogical and false to claim that the true Islam was only understood in modern times and that it was nonexistent in every era prior to ours. The Qadiani sect, founded by the false prophet and antichrist Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, was established in 1889:

The Qadianis, who call themselves "Ahmadiyyah Movement in Islam" claim that they are the Saved Sect of Islam and all the other Muslim sects that oppose them are in the Fire. But ask these Qadianis which sect of Islam was the saved one prior to the establishment of their Ahmadiyyah Movement in 1889 and they will be stumped. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself was born into a Sunni Muslim family. His father, Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, his grandfather, Mirza Gul Muhammad, his great grandfather, Mirza Ata Muhammad, his great great grandfather Mirza Faiz Muhammad, and all his Barlas Mughal ancestors were Sunni Muslims like the overwhelming and vast majority of the Ummah in all eras since its inception through the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself said:

غرض وہ تمام امور جن پر سلف صالحین کو اعتقادی اور عملی طور پر اجماع تھا اور وہ امور جو اہل سنّت کی اجماعی راےٴ سے اسلام کہلاتے ہیں اُن سب کا ماننا فرض ہے

It is obligatory to believe in all those matters upon which the pious Salaf had consensus over, in creed and deed, and those matters which through the unanimous opinion of Ahli Sunnat are called Islam (Ruhani Khazain, v.14, p.323)

Evil of the Desert Arabs (UAE, KSA)

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

‌السَّلَامُ ‌عَلَيْكَ ‌أَيُّهَا ‌النَّبِيُّ ‌وَرَحْمَةُ ‌اللهِ ‌وَبَرَكَاتُهُ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of the worlds

Peace be upon you, you who are the Prophet, and the mercy of Allah and His blessing

Concerning the desert Arabs, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

اَلۡاَعۡرَابُ اَشَدُّ کُفۡرًا وَّنِفَاقًا وَّاَجۡدَرُ اَلَّا یَعۡلَمُوۡا حُدُوۡدَ مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ عَلٰی رَسُوۡلِہٖ ؕ وَاللّٰہُ عَلِیۡمٌ حَکِیۡمٌ

The desert Arabs are severest in unbelief and hypocrisy and least likely to know the limits sent down by Allah upon His Apostle. And Allah is knowing, wise

(Surah 9, Ayah 97)

وَمِمَّنۡ حَوۡلَکُمۡ مِّنَ الۡاَعۡرَابِ مُنٰفِقُوۡنَ

And of the desert Arabs around you are hypocrites

(Surah 9, Ayah 101)

یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ بِاَلۡسِنَتِہِمۡ مَّا لَیۡسَ فِیۡ قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ

They say with their tongues that which is not in their hearts

(Surah 48, Ayah 11)

قَالَتِ الۡاَعۡرَابُ اٰمَنَّا ؕ قُلۡ لَّمۡ تُؤۡمِنُوۡا وَلٰکِنۡ قُوۡلُوۡۤا اَسۡلَمۡنَا وَلَمَّا یَدۡخُلِ الۡاِیۡمَانُ فِیۡ قُلُوۡبِکُمۡ

The desert Arabs say, “We believe.” Say, “You have not believed but say 'We have accepted Islam' for Faith has not yet entered into your hearts.”

(Surah 49, Ayah 14)

Allah has made it plain that the desert Arabs are, generally speaking, a negative element within the broader Ummah and behave in a way that is hypocritical and ignorant. Like the Jews, they bear the stain of their ancestors who bitterly opposed the Holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

For much of Muslim history the desert Arabs and Bedouins remained in a state of ignorance, not bothering to observe the basic laws or moral teachings of Islam. This is why Allah says they are least likely to know the Hudud or limits prescribed by Him which He revealed upon the pure heart of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

This divine statement applies to both the two polar extremes the desert Arabs are known for. On one hand while these desert Arabs are sometimes totally negligent of observing even the basic teachings of Islam such as praying, fasting, and turning away from the major sins, at other times they have been the principal composition of the various Kharijite factions. Those desert dwelling Kharijite extremists also disregard the Hudud by spilling the blood of the Muslims so casually and raising the sword against the accepted Islamic authorities and the State. Closer to our time, the desert Arabs of Najd became the shock troops of the Wahhabi-Sa'udi tribulation, which may be characterized as a neo-Kharijite tendency responsible for causing much strife in Arabia and its surrounding countries.

Allah says the desert Arabs are the severest in hypocrisy. This begins to explain why there are actually Bedouins serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), and why the UAE and Bahrain recently allied themselves with the evil “State of Israel” under the outrageous “Abraham Accords” while the Zionists are determined to ethnically cleanse Palestine of Muslims. The Emiratis act hypocritically with regard to the ongoing conflicts in Sudan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia too. They actively back the genocidal RSF in Sudan which has committed unimaginable atrocities against Muslims in Darfur, and are backing the STC Marxists in Yemen to secularize and divide that great country. Shockingly, the Emiratis have been exposed for funding the most heinous Islamophobic campaign in Europe, thereby harming the Muslims. They have opened idolatrous Hindu mega temples in the UAE, while encouraging the Hindutva forces in India whose main target are the Muslims. The hypocritical behavior and Satanic misdeeds of the Emiratis and Saudis is precisely revealed in the Holy Quran. Their betrayal of Palestine and Al-Quds is unforgivable.

Stick to the Jama'ah of the Muslims and their Imam

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

‌السَّلَامُ ‌عَلَيْكَ ‌أَيُّهَا ‌النَّبِيُّ ‌وَرَحْمَةُ ‌اللهِ ‌وَبَرَكَاتُهُ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of the worlds

Peace be upon you, you who are the Prophet, and the mercy of Allah and His blessing

Previously, I mentioned the violent tendency of Quran-only or more fittingly Hadith-rejecting sects like the Yan Tatsine cult in Nigeria. The Yan Tatsine have now evolved into what is referred to as the Kala Kato movement. In December 2009, in Bauchi, Kala Kato members went on a rampage of killing. Their leader, Badamasi, was killed during these riots in which at least 38 people also lost their lives. We mainstream and orthodox Sunni Muslims must beware of the Quran-only movement in particular. It is an extreme heresy that has much potential for violence directed at the Ummah. The various Muslim states and governments of the world should proscribe any organization or group that has left Sunni orthodoxy and calls toward “Quranism”. These groups tend to view mainstream Sunni Muslims as polytheists and apostates and engage in much antisocial behavior. Although the original Kharijites were technically not a Quran-only movement, they rejected many established practices and doctrines from the Sunnah and so in a sense are the forebears of today's Hadith-rejecting sects. Likewise, the Wahhabis of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab may be characterized as a neo-Kharijite tendency. They share a disdain for mainstream Sunni Islam and Sunni Muslims with Quranists. And like the extreme Quranists (Yan Tatsine and Kala Kato), the Wahhabis have a history of violence and bloodshed directly inwardly to the Ummah. Terrorist factions like Al-Qaeda and ISIS are heavily influenced by the original Wahhabism of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and his followers, whereas that ideology was somewhat watered down by the present Saudi Kingdom under King Abd al-Aziz (d. 1953).

During Algeria's civil war in the 1990s, an extremely violent and brutal neo-Kharijite faction called the Armed Islamic Group or GIA, made mass-Takfir of Algerian society and on the basis carried out horrific massacres of ordinary civilians. Antar Zouabri was the leader of this faction from 1996 until he was killed in a shootout in 2002. The GIA had gone on a rampage in Algeria to such an extent that rival Salafi Jihadist groups accused it of being infiltrated by Algerian security and intelligence forces so as to destroy the credibility of the rebellion in general.

Another tendency that began in the late 20^th century was the establishment of organizations under the name Jama'at al-Muslimin, apparently with reference to the Hadith:

تَلْزَمُ جَمَاعَةَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَإِمَامَهُمْ

Stick to the Jama'ah [congregation] of the Muslims and their Imam

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

A former Salafi in Pakistan, Mas'ud Ahmad, BSc., founded a sect which he named Jama'at al-Muslimin in Karachi in 1962. He declared himself the Imam and Amir of this group, which views all other Muslims outside of it to be unbelievers. Although the group is non-violent (for the moment) its takfiri ideology and separation from the main body of the Muslims is concerning. Another group that was based in London, UK, also called itself Jama'at al-Muslimin and was led by an individual known as Muhammad al-Rifa'i. A third group branding itself Jama'at al-Muslimin was led by one Yasin Abu Bakr, based in Trinidad. This sect attempted to violently overthrow the Trinidadian government in 1990. But we shall see how merely naming one's organization Jama'at al-Muslimin does not make it the one intended in the Hadith quoted above. The true meaning of the Hadith is to stick with the main body of the Muslims and not to separate from it by joining schismatic sects and offshoots. Therefore, the real Jama'at al-Muslimin is not a registered organization but the worldwide community of mainstream Sunni Muslims, known as Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah. As for the Imam of this Jama'ah, after the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم passed away it was Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Uthman, then Ali رضى الله عنهم

During the Caliphate of Mawla Ali كرم الله وجهه there was a tragically division and civil war within the Ummah. According to this Hadith the Muslims were instructed to stick to the main body of the Muslims and their Imam, which was Mawla Ali رضى الله عنه

Mawla Ali رضى الله عنه was martyred and succeeded to the Imamate by his son al-Hasan رضى الله عنه who reconciled with the opposing party of Mu'awiyah رضى الله عنه

As part of that reconciliation, Imam Hasan رضى الله عنه surrendered his claim to the Caliphate and Mu'awiyah became the ruler of all the Muslims.

Hudayfah bin al-Yaman رضى الله عنه asked the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم what the Muslims should do in the event there is no Jama'ah or Imam, to which he عليه السلام replied:

فَاعْتَزِلْ تِلْكَ الْفِرَقَ كُلَّهَا وَلَوْ أَنْ تَعَضَّ بِأَصْلِ شَجَرَةٍ حَتَّى يُدْرِكَكَ الْمَوْتُ وَأَنْتَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ

Then withdraw from all those sects, even if you have to bite on to the root of a tree and death overtakes you while you are in that state (Sahih al-Bukhari)

This Hadith has been woefully misinterpreted and wrongly applied by the non-Sunni schismatics especially the Qadianis, Isma'ilis and those groups branding themselves Jama'at al-Muslimin.

While the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم used the word Imam when he said “Stick to the Jama'ah of the Muslims and their Imam” the meaning is to remain in obedience to whoever the Muslim ruler is in the land one resides in. The title of Imam may not be applied to every Muslim ruler, for it may only apply to a ruler who is just and righteous. But the Prophet عليه السلام used the word Imam because the immediate Muslim rulers who succeeded him were certainly Imams. Thus when Hudayfah رضى الله عنه asked about a scenario in which there is no Imam what he intended was a scenario of anarchy due to civil wars and chaos when it is unclear who the ruler is or when the State has collapsed. In such a frightening scenario the Muslims are instructed to avoid joining any of the various armed factions that are vying for power even if it means they have to flee to the wilderness. In this Hadith the term Jama'ah does not refer to an organization but the Muslim community whose majority naturally recognizes the authority of the State and the ruler. The non-Sunni schismatics wrongly teach that the Hadith means Muslims must join one of their many fringe organizations because the Ummah as a whole does not have a single Imam ruling them today.