Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaah  

Dear readers we have a Facebook page where you can join us for LIVE updates.

Our readers (and haters!) can join us and be regularly updated on our latest articles and announcements.

We will be adding more features on our facebook page including media reels to which we will be introducing on our blog in the near future, Insha’Allaah!

Here is the Link:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=109638875729113

Join us now and stay tuned!!!

Jazakallahu khayran

wa salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakathu

The Fakehead Report Team

Advertisements

Many adore them as icons, Many see them as idols, many see them as ‘Muslim Superstars’. We simply know them to be Fakeheads who do not represent Islaam or Muslims.

Bollywood is known to push the likes of Shah Rukh Khan, Salman Khan etc in order to pull in Muslim audiences.

The true reality behind these ‘superstars’ is that stardom, fame and wealth has become more dear to them then the deen of Allaah SubHanu wa ta ‘ala.

Recently, a talk show in India did a program on the “Muslim Identity”, on which they invited a panel of famous Muslims to express their opinion. On the panel were some famous Muslim actors and film personalities, including the famous actor Shah rukh khan (star of many famous bollywood films incl the latest “hit”  ‘My name is Khan’); Dr. Zakir Naik was also invited to this panel.

(Click on the video twice to see the rest of the clips)

Usually Muslim film personalities are known to express strange opinions on Islam, and their voice reaches the general film going folk. This time however, with the involvement of Dr. Zakir naik, this event was widely promoted and publicized in Islamic circles, and the statements of Kufr and heresy uttered were heard by many practicing Muslims, who normally would not be subjected to this talk.

As expected the film personalities got all the talk time, Dr. Zakir wasn’t allowed to clarify much, and the actors said many things that contradict the very foundations of Islam.

The people who promoted this event, and amongst them are heads of organization that claim to specialize in comparative religion and calling non-Muslims to Islam, did not find it necessary to respond to the false ideas people were exposed to as a result of this program.

Their reviews were mostly that the media is biased against Muslims and it was a conspiracy that Dr. Zakir Naik was given very little time. Extremely deficient reviews!!!

What was displayed on that show seemed like  a complete mockery of Islaam, with the likes of shah rukh khan saying it is ok for a woman to dress in a miniskirt!

The main purpose of this article is because many bollywood actors/actresses still have an influence today on the Muslims, especially the youth.

Let your role models be the ones that have done something for the Ummah and Islaam…and not for filthy entertainment.

And with Allaah is the source of Success.


Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaah

Today Brothers and sisters we’re going do as what they call ‘put the final nail in the coffin’ with part 2 of the decisive refutation of Andrew Sanders.

I am sure no doubt, that he will try with all his might to refute this article with nothing short of lies and pure slander. However if one was to read this article (and the rest on him) sincerely, then these articles should be sufficient proof that Andrew Sanders deserves the title of a ‘fakehead’.

Not long ago Andrew composed a post on his ‘ask me’ site describing who the khawaarij are, and deemed them as kuffaar.

On his site he was questioned;

“Where is the evidence that the Khawaarij are Kuffar?”

To which he answered….

“The Khawaarij are those who have exited Islam. The Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam reffered to them as the dogs of the hell fire. Without a doubt a lot of the Khawaarij are kuffar, especially given the fact they accused Ali’ of being a Kaafir. Still today they takfeer many, like Fakehead Faisal and his company who have called Abu Ja’far a Mushrik and have called the whole dawat e Islami organization as Kuffar. I have the emails to prove this.”

A few points that is interesting to note:

1)-Even though there is a difference of opinion of the khawaarij being kuffaar, amongst those who didn’t consider Kharijites to be out of the fold of Islam are al-Nawawi, al-Khattabi, al-Bayhaqi, Abu Hamid al-Isfaraa’eeni, Ibn Aabideen, Ibn Daqeeq ‘l-Eid, Ibn Battal, al-Shatibi (who quoted Ali and Umar bin Abdil Azeez too), Ibn Taymiyyah (quoting Ibn Abbas), Ibn Umar, Ibn Qudaamah, Abu Hanifah, ash-Shafee’i, Imam Malik in a narration, Ahmed bin Hanbali in a narration, al-Baqillani, Qadhi Iyadh, al-Juwayni and the list goes on. This list includes those who sat on the fence.

(by the way it was Imaam Ibn Qudaama’s(rh) book Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad that Andrew translated and added his own little deviant ideas in, however yet again it is shown that the Imaam is not upon what Andrew is upon)

See———-> http://www.dorar.net/enc/firq/1129

2)-There is a blatant lie from him stating that Faisal (Ibn Saif Allaah) called Abu  Jafar a mushrik & the whole dawat e islami organization to be kuffaar (to which no evidence can be given on his part)

3)-He condemns the use of the word ‘fakehead’claiming it is calling someone a munaafiq (no, we have no idea where he got this from either) however funnily enough he uses the word himself!

However brothers and sisters, lets delve deeper into this issue of this fakehead’s claims.

Just exactly who are the Khawaarij in the eyes of Andrew Sanders?

Even though he believes that the Salafis are the Khawaarij, Andrew is actually confused about the whole issue. Maybe he needs some time to himself to reflect on his confusion.

He stated in an email to Ibn Saif Allaah (co-admin of The Fakehead Report) “Your my brother in Islam. I may not agree with everything Salafis agree with, or take from certain scholars from the Saudi Establishement, but i certainly do not agree that everybody from the Salafis are Khawaarij. There are elements of Khawaarij behaviour that has arrisen amongst the Salafis, but that has also arisen in the Deobandi, in the Brelvi etc.

Just a little statemtn like “he cannot be a Muslim, he drinks shiraab” manifests a Khawaarij attitude.”

All of a sudden now all Salafis are Khawaarij??

The Salafis declare those who make Tawassul to be Kuffaar

Let it be known that the Salafis do not declare those who perform Tawassul to be Kuffaar. We have already given him the statement of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdal Wahhaab in which he stated that he does not declare Takfeer on the one who performs Tawassul as this does not involve asking the dead but rather asking Allaah directly. This statement Andrew claimed is an ‘unknown’. It is only unknown to the one that doesn’t want it to be known. Also the Shaikh clarified in a letter to the people of Qaseem that he does not declare those perform Tawassul to be Kuffaar. Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan also confirmed this by saying “So their statement that that the Shaikh (Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab) declares unrestricted Takfeer is a lie”. And this is the case aslong as the act of worship is not been directed to other than Allaah! He has not given one reference for one to refer back to.

We wonder why!  For one obvious reason, is because there is nothing to show. This fakehead has nothing. This man knows for a fact that he will be refuted due to the fact that he will have to answer for the lies and accusations of Kufr he had made against the Scholars of Orthodox Islam (i.e Salafi Da’wah).

We even asked him to sit with us and have this out in the open and that we will record our discussion but he refused!

On his ‘ask a jahil’…sorry ‘ask me’ site, he was questioned:

“Are you willing to meet up with them (i.e. The Fakehead Report Team) and have it recorded?”

To which he cowardly (and hilariously) answered….

“There is no platform for falsehood. Would you meet up with Shaytaan if he offered? I do not think so, so what makes you think I want to meet up with cult members to discuss matters of truth? Ignorant pigs are not worthy of pearls, especially my time.”

Funny how he doesn’t find it beneficial to meet up with ‘khawaariji’ (as he claims) and is “not worth his time”. However Ali (RadiAllaahu anu) sent Ibn Abbas (RadiAllaahu ‘anhu) to meet the khawaarij to debate and establish truth. In fact, due to that, many of them repented and followed orthodox Islam after that.

Furthermore, if we are lying and not telling the truth, shouldn’t it be his duty to dispel myths from us face to face and publicly to show everyone the truth?! Why not debate publicly? Not only is this a British Tradition it is rooted in Islam where Ahlul Bid’ah were confronted from the people of Sunnah.

Not surprisingly though, Andrew continues to be the fakehead he is and gives slanders and empty claims without proof, all from the comfort of his house!

Take note dear readers! We have made it EXPLICITLY clear that we are willing to sit with ANY of the local people we have exposed PUBLICLY on the condition that it is recorded.

We declare Abu Ja’far and Da’wat e Islami to be Kuffar

Andrew claims he has emails from Ibn Saif Allaah in which he declared Abu Ja’far to be a Mushrik and the Dawat e Islami to be Kuffar. Let it be known that this is a pure lie! He has nothing to prove this. Andrew needs to know that we file EVERY email we send out! He may resort to forging one but this can easily be verified. Anyway we have emails and statements to prove otherwise. Andrew is simply using the fear factor now in order to scare Muslims away from us and doesn’t mind lying at all in order to justify his aim. Laa hawla wa laa quwuta illa billaah!

This person is the same guy who was spat at by his so called ‘Sunni’ brothers and was threatened with violence. Looks like these events have had an impact on him and now he is using the same tactics against us!

These guys know for a fact that Ibn Saif Allaah nor does any other salafi declare them to be Kuffaar, Who am we to declare Takfeer? However, these brothers DO and HAVE declared us Kuffaar. The Khawaarij are those that have exited Islaam according to Andrew Sanders and this is what he calls us openly.

Those reading this do not need any lessons in this. You all know that the ‘Wahhabi’ are seen as Kuffaar by the likes of Dawat e Islami who will not even pray behind the Imaams at the Masjid al-Haraam in Makkah and Madinah.

However brothers and sisters ponder on this serious hadith:

The Hadith of the Prophet Sallallaahu alaihi Wasallam is clear “Whoever says to his brother O Kaafir! Then surely one of them is such” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Good manners).

This is issue is apparent. The kids among the Sufis will know what a ‘Wahhabi’ is before they even know who Allaah is!
Another lie

This Fakehead claimed once he was testing our understanding of Bid’ah and whether we could provide him a reference for a Hadith. Andrew claimed “I knew the reality of linguistic bid’ah very well, I was just testing Faisal al-Fakhead’s knowledge see if he could even provide me the reference, but he never answered because I would have took him in the next direction.”

His email asking for the reference:

From: brotherandrew@hotmail.co.uk
To: sheikh_faisal82@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Did the Prophet sal Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam mean every innovation in the absolute sense?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:05:43 +0000

Salaamun ‘alaykum

al Hamdu Lillah I am well.  I would like to request you for the reference to the linguistic bid’ah mentioned by Imaam Ibn Rajaab in shaa’Allah, I will look it up in the ‘Arabic.

Our response:

From: sheikh_faisal82@hotmail.com
To: brotherandrew@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: RE: Did the Prophet sal Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam mean every innovation in the absolute sense?
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:49:03 +0000
“Alaikum Assalaam Warahmatullaah.

Firstly The discussion on the linguistic meaning of
Bid’ah can be found in Jami al Ulum wal-Hikam Hadith # 28 (Hadith of following the Prophets Sunnah and the rightly guided Khulafaa after him….)”

So as you can see, we did respond, the very next day!

A clear cut example of a liar.

Not long ago he was asked on his site:

By definition, can somebody who lies be a Muslim?”

To which he answered and unnecessarily abused Ibn Saif Allaah, saying …..
No, as seen from one of the ahaadeeth of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam a Muslim can never be liar. The term fakehead defined by fakehed Faisal still boils down to the same meaning, which is to call somebody a hypocrite.

However judging from the evidences it looks like Mr.Sanders fits that category like a glove, more than anybody else.

In fact due to his comment, he may have made takfeer on himself without him even realising it!

Does he not remember the statement of Allaah “O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allâh and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allâh. Verily, Allâh is Well­Acquainted with what you do”. (Al-Ma’idah 5:8)

Conclusion

This fakehead will continue to blast his mouth against us but this fool refuses to sit down with us to settle these issues and this is because we have enough proof to declare him a liar and deceiver. If he has nothing to hide then why refuse to sit down and discuss these issues?

It’s sad how people accuse of slander and backbiting yet they don’t even know the definition of slander whatsoever. The Hadith states that a Slander is when one LIES about someone behind their backs. Show us where we have lied against anyone? These are the same people that sat back while our scholars were being mocked and slandered (the proof of these slanders are all contained within this blog), They sat back and allowed Fitnah to begin when they gave platform to the likes of Abu Ja’far etc declaring salafis to be kuffaar. These are the same people that attack our scholars without proof! The funny thing is the second we defend the honour of our scholars and refute and expose the liars we get accused of slander and causing disunity. No, Disunity started long ago.

We say finally again: We are willing to discuss this face to face with anyone that is sincere and we will show you how these people LIE and DECIEVE provided the sitting is recorded and that we have with us one student of knowledge that will simply be there to verify any reference they quote. These people will never sit down with us.  We did not start this Fitnah, We are simply trying to show people the truth behind it.

Finally The Prophet Sallallaahu alaihi wasallam said “Whoever has the following four (characteristics) will be a pure hypocrite and whoever has one of the following four characteristics will have one characteristic of hypocrisy unless and until he gives it up:

1. Whenever he is entrusted, he betrays.

2. Whenever he speaks, he tells a lie.

3. Whenever he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous.

4. Whenever he quarrels, he behaves in a very imprudent, evil and insulting manner.

(Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Faith)

Ever since we exposed Andrew al-Fakehead he has resorted to lying on many occasions and has acted in an evil manner. In  fact we do not know who is more of a liar, Andrew or Iblees!

He has responded to us in an evil manner and used terms like “Bulls***t and S**t” and threatened to punch us and make us pay with blood!

As mentioned, he tries to use the term Fakehead on us. However I think to any sincere person its clear, who the Fakehead is….

And Allaah is our witness to everything we state.


Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaah,

Recently the munaafiqeen at Quilliam Foundation have released a report on Islam Channel, on 26th March 2010.

Below it reads;

New Quilliam report released

Re-programming British Muslims: A study of the Islam Channel

A new report by Quilliam has found that the Islam Channel, the UK’s most watched Muslim TV channel, is sowing suspicion between different religious communities and promoting intolerance and prejudice.

The report, based on Quilliam’s recording and monitoring of the channel’s output over a three-month period, found that there were several key problematic trends in its output:

– Promotion of backward attitudes to women.-The Islam Channel’s presenters and preferred guests repeatedly promote socially conservative, Wahhabi-influenced views of women, which see female freedom as a threat to social harmony.

– Intolerance towards other sects and religions.-Religious preachers featured on Islam Channel programmes such as IslamiQA repeatedly make derogatory remarks to the followers of other forms of religious expression and urge viewers to reject the practices of non-Muslims and non-Wahhabi Muslims alike.

– Promotion of extremism.-The Islam Channel has also promoted extremist individuals and groups, for instance, by advertising recorded lectures by Anwar al-Awlaki, the pro-al-Qaeda preacher, on the channel and allowing members and supporters of Hizb ut-Tahrir to host religious programmes. The Channel also uses the phrase ‘human bombs’ to describe suicide bombers.

The Islam Channel’s Chief Executive is Mohammed Ali Harrath who has been convicted in Tunisia on terrorism-related offences and who is the subject of an Interpol Red Notice. He was most recently arrested in relation to this in South Africa in January 2010. Harrath has regularly advised key parts of the British government, including the police force, on how they should tackle extremism and terrorism.

Quilliam calls on Ofcom, the UK broadcasting regulator, to hold a full investigation into the Islam Channel’s recent output.

Talal Rajab, the report’s author, says:
“Islam Channel is the most watched Muslim TV channel in the UK. Unfortunately during the three-month period that we monitored its output, it repeatedly promoted bigoted and reactionary views towards women, non-Muslims and other Muslims who follow different versions of Islam. Although the channel does not directly call for terrorist violence, it clearly helps to create an atmosphere in which religiously-sanctioned intolerance and even hatred might be seen as acceptable.”

“By promoting a single narrow version of Islam – namely Saudi Wahhabism – at the expense of more diverse and tolerant schools of Islamic thought, the Islam Channel is wasting an enormous opportunity to positively shaping British Islam. Young British Muslims need real answers on how to live as citizens in a pluralist, secular and diverse society. Unfortunately instead of providing useful guidance the Channel promotes an intolerant rigid and out-of-date form of Islam that is of no benefit to either Muslims or society as whole.”

The full report is available to download as a PDF here.

An executive summary is available here.

Take note Oh Muslims! Islam Channel DOES have its faults, however what is pertinent to this article is that when the issue of Walaa and Baraa is involved you do not backstab your fellow Muslim for a miserly cost like these slaves of tawagheet did at Quilliam.

What is also interesting, is that the term ‘Wahhaabi’ is used by these snakes to further push their ‘divide and conquer’ tactic. However it should all make us think….if these dogs are using the term ‘Wahhaabi’, can the term really be taken seriously by any other indicter that uses this word for their agenda?

Don’t be deceived by these devils.

May Allaah protect the Muslims from the shayateen of Man and Jinn. Ameen.


Today we are gonna take some time out to expose this fakehead in great detail. He is a man who contradicts himself heavily.

 

Andrew Sanders on Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab

Not along ago Andrew Sanders was on a mission to defend Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab from the onslaught by Abu Ja’far. Today he is back to attacking him again.

A little history lesson: Andrew sanders sent out many emails attacking Abu Ja’far and defending Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab. All these emails I have in my possession Alhamdulilaah. The problem now is that ever since he became a ‘Hanbali’, he has used this title to further push a deviant agenda.

Andrew Sanders sent out an email dated: 10 November 2007 01:16:44 entitled : The Lie of Abu Jafar al-Hanbali pt. 1

In this email Andrew al-Fakehead stated: “This letter is the unfortunate exposure of the liar known as Abū Jafar al-Hanbalī.” He states in this email that he accused of Abu Ja’far of “Intentionally lying, causing people to fight and setting up his students for defeat.” The purpose of his email was to defend Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab from the accusations made by Abu Ja’far.  MashaAllaah we were overjoyed that the brother took his time out to study the facts. He himself used to email me asking me for help on refuting him and getting hold of Hanbali literature and I helped him sincerely. He would email me asking me if anyone has the ability to teach Umdat al-Fiqh. At time he would ask me to put him in touch with decent books. The book Lumat al-Itiqaad that he translated was a gift to him from myself.

Now let’s see more contradictions coming from this Fakehead:

In an email dated: 28 December 2008 16:31:20 Andrew Sanders stated “Another overwhelming evidence is the fact that the Prophet salallahu alayhi wasallam showed fairness to the Tamīmī tribe even though the Khawārij were to appear from them. A Sahīh hadith found in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed reads as follows, in which the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him has been reported to have said:

‘Say nothing but good of the Bani Tamim, for they indeed are the severest of people in attacking the Dajjal.’ Also a similar hadith can be found in Sahih al-Bukhari vol. 3, No. 179

Since, Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab was from the Banu Tamim, i cannot result to backbiting his flesh as the bigots do, as this results in the disobedience of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him. This goes for any other Salafi scholar.

All because i refuse to backbite them, does that make me  a Wahaabi? No.

I refuse to backbite them, i refuse to have bad considerations towards them. because of this i have been threatened with violence by people who used to be somewhat smiley and all brotherly towards me. Now it is all frowns, and backbiting and threatening behaviour. Who’s changed me or them?

This is what he himself stated in his own words. All of a sudden now he decides to renew his attack on Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab and begins to backbite the Shaikh. Can this fakehead not act on his own words? These attacks are nothing but a misunderstanding on his part. We thought he would by now have the sense to see this but obviously not!

Now we need to destroy Andrew Sanders claims against the Salafi Dawah.

 

The Salafis Declare those who make Tawassul to be Kuffar

Andrew Sanders claims that the Salafis declare anyone making Tawassul to be Kuffaar. Clearly he doesn’t understand the difference between shirk and Tawassul. Wanna know what Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab said regarding Tawassul?

Read this: There is no harm in making Tawassul through the righteous’ and Ahmad’s statement: ‘Tawassul is only allowed through the Prophet – Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam’, while they all say: ‘Istighatha (seeking aid) from the creation is not allowed’, then the difference (between the two is very clear, and it is irrelevant to what we are concerned with. For some scholars to allow Tawassul through the righteous, or for some to restrict it to the Prophet – Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam, while majority of the scholars forbidding and disliking it; these issues are from fiqhi issues. Even though the correct opinion in our view is the majority opinion that it is disliked, we still do not censure one who practises it (Tawassul), for there is no censuring in issues of ijtihad.

However, our censure of one who calls upon the creation, is greater than the censure of one who calls upon Allaah Ta’ala (alone); for he travels to the grave beseeching, next to al-Sheikh ‘Abd al-Qadir or others, seeking the alleviation of calamites, aiding the grief-stricken, attaining the desirables; where is this all from one who calls upon Allaah, purifying His religion for Him, not calling upon anyone besides Allaah, except that he says in his supplication: I ask you by Your Prophet, messengers, or the righteous servants, or travels to Ma’ruf’s grave or others’ to supplicate there, yet only supplicates to Allaah, purifying the religion for Him, how is this relevant to what concerns us here? (Fatawa wa masa’il al-Shaikh Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Wahhab page 41)

As it is clear that Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab did not condemn Tawassul nor did he declare them to be kuffaar as Andrew claims. Where you gonna hide Andrew?

These blind Fakeheads keep using the statements of the Shaikh from his work Nawaqid al-Islaam and apply this to Tawassul. However. the Shaikh was not referring to Tawassul but shirk as he said The Second (nullifier of Islaam): Whoever places intermediaries between himself and Allaah, calling unto them and asking intercession from them, and seeking reliance in them, has committed disbelief according to the unanimous agreement (Ijmaa’).

This fakehead also translated the Book Lumat al-Itiqaad and used this as a means of adding his own Baatil speech to justify the Ashari Aqidah and also Bid’ah Hasanah. Heres the funny bit: Andrew added his own words at the end of the book on the discussion of Bid’ah. He said: The hadeeth of ‘Umar [radiyAllahu anhu] “ni’imatul bida’atu hadhihi” Those who opine that the hadeeth “every bid’ah is misguidance” – kulla bid’ah dalaalah – is in its most absolute sense argue that ‘Umar’s [radiyAllahu anhu] statement “ni’imatul bida’atu hadhihi” – i.e. This is an excellent innovation – refers to a linguistic innovation and is not really an innovation due to the fact it has roots in the Sharee’ah.  Our answer to this: Firstly, this argument negates the “every” because if “kullu” – every – is meant in its most absolute sense then the Prophet sal Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam would have also been speaking about such “linguistic bid’ahs”. Secondly, this very same argument of “linguistic bid’ah” can be used to permit Milaad un-Nabi as this also has its origins in the Sharee’ah and thus returns to it. This argument of “linguistic bid’ah” is therefore fallacious, nothing more than a semantic somersault in which the feet land on the very same surface they sprung from.

He clearly referred to the argument of the ‘Linguistic Bid’ah’ as being fallacious. Upon reading this I emailed him stating: From those that have said it refers to the linguistic sense is al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali in his Jami al-Ulum wal Hikam. He statedAnd as for what has occurred from some of the Salaf in their declaring some bid’ahs to be good then this is regards to bid’ah in it’s linguistic meaning not it’s sharee’ah meaning, and from these is the saying of ‘Umar radiallaahu ‘anhu when he gathered the people for the standing of Ramadhaan behind one Imaamto which he replied “would like to request you for the reference to the linguistic bid’ah mentioned by Imaam Ibn Rajaab in shaa’Allah, I will look it up in the ‘Arabic”

Note: He made an attack on the argument of the Linguistic Bid’ah without knowing the reality behind it and those who were of the same opinion such as Imaam Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali.

This fakehead has friends that are from the Sufi background. He once asked me to be careful when quoting Arabic in English and saidthe sufis may clock this cos many of them are into arabic language sciences”.

His whole manhaj is flawed, He says one thing on day and changed his mind the other. He attacks Abu Ja’far one day then apologises to him, He defends Muhammad Ibn Abdal-Wahhaab one day and attacks him another.

We seek refuge in Allaah from such deviancy.

[TAKE NOTE: We have possessions of these emails of Andrew Sanders, if you want them as evidence then please request Insha’Allaah]


Abu Ja’far al Fakehead’s misuse of the words of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab With regards to Tawassul and Shirk.

Abu Ja’far translated a book, which was written by a Mustafa Ibn Ahmad ash-Shatti. The book was supposed to be refutation of Muhammad ibn Abdal Wahhaab, however nothing convincing was brought forth. Abu Ja’far at times made his own comments in the text. In a section of the book Abu Ja’far misuses the words of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab in order to justify his accusations against the Shaikh. His ‘proof’ again becomes a proof against himself.

Abu Ja’far quotes many statements of the Imaams of the past in which they made Tawassul by the virtues of the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam. Now I would ask you all (especially Abu Ja’fars followers) to open your eyes and bear witness to another blatant misquote of Abu Ja’far.

The quote are as follows:

Abu Ja’far states about Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi

“Renewer of the faith and depended on source of Fiqh and creed mentioned the hadith of the making intercession with the Messenger Sallallahu alahi Wasallaam and advised its use. He also stated that the first three generations used to ask the dead for their needs in similar supplications. A word of Advice, pp. 78-79 He also made a supplication, part of which was speaking in the second person and advised its use during Hajj when believers are in front of the Grave of The Messenger Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam: “I have come to you seeking forgiveness of my sins by seeking your intercession with my lord. So I ask you Lord” I ask that you grant forgiveness based upon this intercession just as you granted it for the one who came during his lifetime” (al Mughni Vol 3 pp.600-601)

Here Abu Ja’far claims that the first three generations used to ask the dead for needs. “Ask the dead”, he claimed. However he fails to mention the sentence before it, which would give the reader a better understanding of what is being mentioned. It states “And it is narrated from al-`Utbi who said, ‘I was sitting at the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) when a Bedouin approached and said, ‘Peace be upon you, O Messenger of Allah. I have heard that Allah says {And if when they wronged themselves, they came to you and repented to Allah and the Messenger seeks their pardon they would have found Allah All-Forgiving and Most Merciful.} So I have come to you seeking forgiveness….”

There are a few points to consider here:

  1. The Bedouin did not say ‘oh Prophet forgive me’
  2. 2. The Bedouin went based upon his understanding of the verse “and they came to you and repented to Allaah” repented to who? Allaah! So he did not ask the Prophet Sallallahu alayhi Wasallam for repentance nor did he rely on the assistance of the Prophet Sallallahu alayhi Wasallam

And Abu Ja’far further quotes:

Imaam Mar’ii Ibn Yusuf al Karnmi (d. 1033 AH/AD 1862): “And I ask that I might be saved from being led far astray by the one who migrated for for the sake of Allaah( i.e. the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallaam)”(As-suhub ul Wabilah fi dara’ih il-Hanaabilah vol 3, pp.1121 – 1123)

Imaam Muhammad Badr Ud-deen al Balbani: “And we ask Allaah that he suffices us with the blessings of the Imaams and that he benefits us and the Muslims with this book. We also ask that he make this work purely for the sake of seeing the generous One, The Bestower, that he forgives me whatever mistakes I have made in this endeavour as no one is infallible besides an angel, a messenger or a prophet.” The Imaam said further “We ask the Glorified and the exalted One that keeps us established on the orthodox creed by the blessing of our Prophet, the master of all creation” ( Mukhtasar ul-Ifadat fee rub’il-Ibadaab wal Adabi wa Ziyadaat pp.492-493)

Imaam as-Safarani: I make intercession to Allaah with the noble rank of the chosen one, his pure family, his chosen nobles and his choice companions, his champions of righteousness from the rest of the emigrant and helpers. I make intercession with the rank with the rank and sacred essence of all the Prophets, Messengers, Noble and high rankling Angels, the scholars always doing righteousness, the people who know Allaah intimately and the pious ones. I make Intercession with the scared essence of all whom commentary might sincerely be done, for the sake of seeing the face of The Most Generous, that it be a cause of being saved in front of him and being given immediate admittance to the gardens of delight, that He should look to me and those who wrote it, read it and studied it with pure intention. I Ask further with this intercession that Allaah preserve me, my household, my brothers and everyone from every astray action, that whoever wrote this text, read it, understood and considered it to be given favour. Indeed he is Noble, generous, Benevolent and compassionate. Peace and blessings be upon our Master Muhammad, Master of the Messengers, his family, his companions his illuminated ummah all those who pray that we might be given good. Lord of Creation! Let it be! (Lawami ul-Anwar ul-Bahiyyah Wa Sawati ul-asrar ul-Athariyyah Vol 2 p468-469)

Imaam Muhammad ibn Humaid an-Najdi: “….Begged in prayer at the end of his work “the author has completed his work May Allaah have mercy upon him, with the mercy of the righteous and give him a place in the highest ranks of the paradise and keep him away from the great fire. Let all this be done by the sacred essence of the prophet, The chosen one, his family, and his pure companions. Make it so! The peace and blessings be upon him, his family and his righteous companions” (As-Suhub ul-Wabilah Fi Dara’ih-Hanaabilah Vol 3 pp. 1241-1242)

These are some of the quotes that Abu Ja’far presents on p.148 of the translation of ‘The Divine texts’, the so-called ‘refutation’ of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab

Now. Abu Ja’far mentions the Imaams and their statements regarding intercession. Notice how each Imaam clearly makes du’aa to Allaah directly in each supplications as it states “And we ask Allaah”, “and I ask Allaah”, “I make intercession TO Allaah” etc. None of the Imaams asked the Prophet in manners like “oh Messenger of Allaah grant me such and such” or “Oh Prophet save me from the fire”. NO! They all asked Allaah directly! How then does Abu Ja’far justify his statement when he states that according to Muhammad Ibn Abdal Wahhaab “The Men quoted above were all guilty of idolatry and Kufr for they made them intermediaries, called upon them, asked from them” (page 150) where did they call upon the Prophet? Where did they ask the Prophet?

What the Imaams are doing is Tawassul, which the scholars past and present differed over. However none considered it to be shirk at all as it involves calling upon Allaah and NOT the Prophet Sallallahu alayhi Wasallam.

Abu Ja’far then tries to use Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaabs’ statements to say that according to Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab they would be kuffar for the supplications they made because Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab states in his work Nawaaqidh al-Islaam

“The Second (nullifier of Islaam): Whoever places intermediaries between himself and Allaah, calling unto them and asking intercession from them, and seeking reliance in them, has committed disbelief according to the unanimous agreement (Ijmaa’).

What Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab states is clear. He states that those who call upon the dead and asks them for help and relies upon their assistance has committed kufr by consensus! Even if you were to read the explanation of his book of the scholars you will see that they are stating the same thing:

“This Second Nullifier is a form of Shirk. Shirk is a general term, but this act is more specific, which is why the author has mentioned it here, even though it falls under the meaning of the First Nullifier. Nevertheless it is specific, such as when a person places the intermediary of (Prophet) Muhammad between himself and Allaah and calls unto him, saying: “O Muhammad, Assist me!” or “O Muhammad, intercede for me before my Lord!” So he places Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as an intermediary between himself and Allaah. Or he places one of the angels or a wali (close friend of Allaah) or a Jinn or a grave (as an intermediary) or he supplicates to the sun or the moon, thus making them intermediaries between himself and Allaah. So he supplicates to these things until they become intermediaries between himself and Allaah; or he sacrifices an animal to them or makes an oath to them or calls to them, so that there can be an intermediary between himself and Allaah. But yet all the while he claims that this brings him closer to Allaah, as Allaah says:

“And those who take supporters besides Allaah, they say: ‘we don’t worship Them except for the purpose of bringing us closer to Allaah.’” [Surah Az-Zumar: 3]

(Explanation of Shaikh Abdul-Aziz Bin Abdillaah Ar-Raajihi) And other explanations such as the one by Shaikh Salih al Fawzan state the same thing. That what Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab is referring to those who call upon the dead, he is not referring to Tawassul. For Abu Ja’far to apply a statement regarding shirk to statements of Tawassul shows his either his ignorance or his tricks to deceive the reader.

Now we want to know what Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab does say about Tawassul and what his opinion would have been regarding the quotes of the Imaams that Abu Ja’far displayed in his book: ‘There is no harm in making Tawassul through the righteous’ and Ahmad’s statement: ‘Tawassul is only allowed through the Prophet – Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam’, while they all say: ‘Istighatha (seeking aid) from the creation is not allowed’, then the difference (between the two is very clear, and it is irrelevant to what we are concerned with.

For some scholars to allow Tawassul through the righteous, or for some to restrict it to the Prophet – Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam, while majority of the scholars forbidding and disliking it; these issues are from fiqhi issues. Even though the correct opinion in our view is the majority opinion that it is disliked, we still do not censure one who practises it (Tawassul), for there is no censuring in issues of ijtihad.

However, our censure of one who calls upon the creation, is greater than the censure of one who calls upon Allaah Ta’ala (alone); for he travels to the grave beseeching, next to al-Sheikh ‘Abd al-Qadir or others, seeking the alleviation of calamites, aiding the grief-stricken, attaining the desirables; where is this all from one who calls upon Allaah, purifying His religion for Him, not calling upon anyone besides Allaah, except that he says in his supplication: I ask you by Your Prophet, messengers, or the righteous servants, or travels to Ma’ruf’s grave or others’ to supplicate there, yet only supplicates to Allaah, purifying the religion for Him, how is this relevant to what concerns us here?
(Fatawa wa masa’il alShaikh Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Wahhab page 41) So the Shaikh states that he does not censure those that practice Tawassul Through the Prophet as there is not censure in areas of Ijtihaad! Alhamdullilaah this means that the Shaikh would not have considered them Kuffaar as Abu Ja’far al Fakehead wrongly claims, rather he states he does not censure the one who practices Tawassul.


Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaah 

As we get closer and closer to the Day of Reckoning, we are seeing difficult times for the Muslims. These are times where Allaah is testing us and making it manifest who the true Muslims are from the fakeheads.

At this moment in time, a new wave of ‘American Islam’ is coming out which is just another variant of modernism in Islam.

However to truly know American Islam, you have to know what modernism in Islam is. Here are some quick points about Modernism in Islam. To find out more,click here.

-The basic concept of modernism is that the religion should change according to the circumstances, and that it is not fixed.

The people of this modernist movement judge Islam according to their ‘aql. Some of their faults in regards to it are:

1) use it for things which it can’t comprehend;

2) refer everything to it: accept what agrees with it, reject what does not;

3) judge the revelation by it. However, Ahl As-Sunna Wal Jamaa’ believes that using the sound ‘aql should lead one to the conclusion that the Qur’an and the Prophet are true and that their teachings should take precedence over pure ‘aql.

Modernist are saying that the West and the world has changed, and that Islam must become “civilized”. Modernism has spread the most in the U.S. because:

1) there are no scholars available to refute them, or they won’t refute them because people don’t want to criticize them;

2) much of the literature, scholars, and institutions in the U.S. reflect the modernist thinking.

3) it allows Muslims from overseas to become part of American society and they do not have to be recognized as Muslim. Also, new American Muslims will not have to change their old lifestyle -This is where the term ‘American Islam’ originates.

Certain Organisations overseas have adopted that trend and are slowly culturing the muslim masses to their way of thinking. .

Their speakers use their status to their advantage to attain the masses and are well known for initiating strange views and having odd traits,  including;

-To encourage the ‘necessity’ to vote in order to help establish the ‘lesser of the two evils’

-To feel sorry for the oppressors and make du’a for them

The belief to protect dawah in exchange of Tawhid

-The Institute and it instructors and the dawah in the west has become more important than walaa’ and baraa’.

-and many other traits including the ones mentioned above…

This wave of American Islam has started to slowly creep into the Muslims in the UK, especially the youth. The main reasons why it is so dangerous, is due to the youth not knowing any better and being led astray by these ‘mainstream’ islamic organisations.

Don’t be one of the ones decieved by them.

And with Allaah is the source of all guidance.