Talk:Al-Ahbash

Al-Ahbash actually founded in 1930

According to "Muslims in Poland and Eastern Europe: Widening the European Discourse on Islam", a book edited by Katarzyna Górak-Sosnowska, Al-Ahbash or AICP was founded in 1930 by Shaykh Abd Al Rahman Al-'Ajuz. He was its leader and when he died he was replaced with Nizar Al-Halabi, the assassinated former head of the organization.

Also according to the book the group was founded in 1930 with the goal of disseminating religious knowledge.

This seems to give a good insight into the history of the polarizing group. I thought I'd mention this in the talk page before making the above changes since -- at least based on my perusing of the archive --this has been a contentious page. I might not include the bit about "disseminating religious knowledge" if it seems too unencyclopedic though I do think the author meant to describe the group's stated goal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZaynfromNY (talk • contribs) 05:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Dubious and attribution tags

I placed a "Dubious" tag after the extensive quoting from Tariq Ramadan in the Takfir section of this article. There should be more sources to ascertain the validity of the quote by Ramadan even if such extensive quoting should be included. Is it typical to quote extensively like that from one source?

I also placed attribution tags throughout the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:B088:7000:C597:5416:5908:CD47 (talk) 17:16, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't register. That was me above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZaynfromNY (talk • contribs) 17:19, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

You have lifted most of the above text from this forum

You have lifted most of the above text from this forum which is a known Al-Ahbash outfit along-with other web-sites run by the proponents of Al-Ahbash. It is Abdullah al-Harariy's teachings which the people behind Association of Islamic Charitable Projects follows which is a charitable upfront (i.e. storefront) of Al-Ahbash as rightly pointed out and highlighted by several of the authors. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 06:33, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes I have and it comes with proof (from the Sheikhs books). Im not looking to start a "war" but I refuted your claims. If you dont want to take the proofs because theyre from that website, then okay. But the ones about Rejection of anthropomorphism should be looked into as they support the Sunnah consensus of the Scholars and the Association does not need to prove itself to people rather it's #1 goal is to teach the Aqeedah, this is the same Aqeedah of AlAzhar AlShareef in Egypt and Zaytuna University in Tunis. The least you can do is look into this point. ProtectorOfHaq (talk) 07:07, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Please, try to understand that I am not the sole editor here on Wikipedia. The version (which includes Rejection of anthropomorphism) you are vandalizing hasn't been written by me but by the collection of editors who are bound to use independent, verifiable, academic and reputable sources as per the Wikipedia guidelines. You must understand that it is not only about what your Sheikh (or Al-Ahbash or AICP's forums or web-sites for that matter) had said in his books and / or recordings but what the independent, verifiable, academic and reputable sources say on / about the topic / teachings of your Sheikh, Al-Ahbash and AICP.

As far as I know, the "Aqeedah" and the teachings of Al-Ahbash or Association of Islamic Charitable Projects or your Sheikh Abdullah Al-Hariri are not compatible with the mainstream Sunnis nor taught at Al-Azhar contrary to your claim. The truth of the matter is that Al-Azhar distanced itself from the Al-Ahbash long time ago and some of the Al-Ahbash were arrested in Egypt. Please, see here:

• In August 2001, the President of the University of Al-Azhar in Egypt, Dr. Ahmad ʿUmar Hashim, issued a letter / statement on the official letter-head of Al-Azhar (The ORIGINAL image of that letter / statement in Arabic can be found here) in which he announced 'that Al-Azhar had nothing to do with the Ahbash of Lebanon and he stated that the position of Al-Azhar was that “that group [the Ahbash] is unwholesome, untrustworthy, and un-islamic in its thinking.”'
• It is extremely important to note that Al-Ahbash and Wahhabiyya: Interpretations of Islam by Mustafa Kabha and Haggai Erlich was published in November 2006, 5 years after the letter / statement issued (August 2001) by the President of Al-Azhar. Source: President of Al-Azhar's Letter / statement issued on the official letter-head of Al-Azhar and Exposing the Ahbash
• Dr. `Ali Jum`ah, Professor of the Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University, issued a Fatwa (Islamic Decree) against the Al-Ahbash in which he stated: "This sect follows `Abdullah Al-Harary Al-Habashi, and it has surface and deep levels. At the surface, this sect seems to adhere to the Shafi`i School of Jurisprudence, and to Imam Al-Ash`ari’s School as regards creed. However, at the deep level, their main intention is to corrupt the Muslim creed and incite sedition amongst the Muslim Ummah. Moreover, they are paid agents to the enemies of Islam." Source: Al-Ahbash: Evolution and Beliefs
• Jamaa’at al-Ahbaash (the Habashis) - Fatwa

It is important to note that the above information has NOT been added to the version you are vandalizing. The points or the complaints you are making have been discussed and re-discussed over and over and again throughout the years and the current version is the closest Wikipedia NPOV compliant version. Let's not reinvent the wheel here. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 08:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Then can you tell me why AlAzhar has a joint program with the "Ahbash" where they can do school transfers? Why does AlAzhar stamp the books of Sheikh Abdullah?

Why did AlAzhar approve the TIES book which has the SAME exact Aqeedah taught nowadays? Why have they approved ALL AICP books? Also about the Qiblah in NorthAmerica, dont forget AlAzhar also issued a fatwa in 2015 declaring the Qiblah SouthEast! ProtectorOfHaq (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

As per the above-mentioned letter / statement on the official letter-head of Al-Azhar (The ORIGINAL image of that letter / statement in Arabic can be found here) issued by the President of the University of Al-Azhar in Egypt, Dr. Ahmad ʿUmar Hashim (roughly translated here from Arabic to English):

• "When I visited Lebanon 2 years ago, I was presented with some papers to me and a lot of pressure had been exerted on me to sign them. However, I have learned from the Egyptian Ambassador and from other sources that this organization (AICP / Al-Ahbash / TIES) is not credible, and their Islamic mindset is unhealthy. Thus, we have broken off contact with them and we have withdrawn / canceled everything they had demanded of us. There is no longer any relationship between them and us. There is no single form of recognition / accreditation and cooperation between Al-Azhar University and them. All papers, in which what is otherwise claimed (by this organization) do not correspond to the truth.

• "We reject all attempts to abuse the name of the prestigious Al-Azhar University by this organizations or associations, which do not fully commit nor follow the Quran and Sunnah."

Conclusion: Under the light of above letter, it becomes abundantly clear that the AICP / Al-Ahbash / TIES has no "approved" book(s) by the Al-Azhar nor the "Aqeedah" it propagates is agreed upon by the Al-Azhar.

(I think the other editor @MezzoMezzo: / MezzoMezzo was referring to the same in his Talk Page edit.)

Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 03:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Did you write that yourself? KevinAbdulqader (talk) 00:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

What did I write myself? McKhan ^(talk) 01:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Azhar letter. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 01:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

That letter was written by the President of the University of Al-Azhar in Egypt, Dr. Ahmad ʿUmar Hashim. And it can be found all over the Internet along-with references to it. I can see that how quickly you created an account and went straight to remove it. How many other accounts do you have? I will be restoring the page as in one edit you did not only gave the false summary but removed "North American" along-with that letter and a verifiable sources. The very reason of creation of this account is to remove the information which you don't like regardless of the reason. From your edits one can tell that you are not a new user but an old user. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 01:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

It is unreliable and you have no consensus to restore it. I created this account to edit Wikipedia much like yourself. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Says who that it is unreliable? McKhan ^(talk) 01:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Why are you adding in unreliable sources? The source regarding Azhar was misrepresented. Reply back@mkhan. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 01:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

How is the source unreliable and how did I misrepresent it?? How many other accounts do you have? Why did you remove North America? McKhan ^(talk) 01:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The forged letter is only found in personal websites/blogs. Find it in reliable sources and post. I registered now after I observed your defamation and slander on this forum. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 02:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Who says that it is a forged letter? How does the sentence "The AICP claims to run its Islamic schools being affiliated with Al-Azhar,[1] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.[3][4]" constitute to "defaming" and "slandering"? Did you post this {https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:McKhan&diff=prev&oldid=730781454 preposterous claim}? Wikipedia is NOT forum NOR it is a personal blog for the Al-Ahbash or {{Wahabis]]. McKhan ^(talk) 03:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The source mentions not a claim for affiliation with Azhar, its stated as a fact. I cant find letter in Haggai Elrich's review it is forged my friend. It sure looks like a forum by the messages your spewing. In germany we say taten sagen mehr als worte. No it was not me nonetheless people are angry with you maybe KevinAbdulqader (talk) 03:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Which source are you referring to? Was the Haggai Elrich used ALONE in the sentence "The AICP claims to run its Islamic schools being affiliated with Al-Azhar,[1] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.[3][4]"? (The claim made by the Al-Ahbash - as mentioned in Haggai Elrich's article and rejection of that claim by Al-Azhar - as mentioned in that letter in Arabic by Dr. Umar and VERIFIABLE source by Markaz al-Nasr li Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaah, Jakarta, Indonesia published by As-Sunnah Foundation of America is right there along-with the letter in Arabic and source in English). Why did you remove North America? McKhan ^(talk) 03:42, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Jakarta based Islamic group is not verifiable source, it is non neutral source to be used. My apologies on removing qibla things, I am from europe, I presumed you were slandering the group, they dont have different qibla here. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 03:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

How can you say that it is not a verifiable source? What about As-Sunnah Foundation of America which published that? Is that also not a verifiable source? McKhan ^(talk) 04:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A Islamic group judging another Islamic group is not fair assessment. Foundation of America is competing for orthodoxy against AICP. The organizations are bitter enemies. Look at the article, all are cited by university publishers and academia. Look for a source other then blogs or competeing organizations, who want to discredit rivals. This is not posted on Azhar website. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 04:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

What does Wikipedia have to do with that competition? Did you know that Kabha is ALSO using http://www.alhabashi.info/ (An Al-Ahbash outfit) under the footnotes? As I clarified earlier that it is extremely important to note that Al-Ahbash and Wahhabiyya: Interpretations of Islam by Mustafa Kabha and Haggai Erlich was published in November 2006, 5 years after the letter / statement issued (August 2001) by the President of Al-Azhar. (Source: President of Al-Azhar's Letter / statement issued on the official letter-head of Al-Azhar). Al-Azhar's grand Mufit has also issued a Fatwa against the Al-Ahbash. Why would Al-Azhar issue a Fatwa against the Al-Ahbash if they have got affiliation with them? McKhan ^(talk) 04:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Given that the 'affiliation' of Al-Ahbash's with Al-Azhar is contentious, disputed and rejected by Al-Azhar itself under the light of many sources (I know you consider them all from Anti-Habashi, Wahabi, from the "competing" organizations and so on and so forth) available on-line (in Arabic and English) and given that President of Al-Azhar Dr. Ahmad Omar Hashem issued a letter in Arabic - roughly translated above in English - (which I know you and other adherents of Al-Ahbash considers to be "forged" for the mere reason that it hammers out and eliminates the false legitimacy and clout of having "affiliation" or "agreement" with Al-Azhar which the Al-Ahbash and AICP propagate through their web-sites including alsunna.org, alhabashi.info and more) and last but the not the least a Fatwa issued by yet another President of Al-Azhar and Grand Mufti of Egypt Dr. Ali Gomaa and Islamic Research Academy at Al-Azhar against the Al-Ahbash, I am going to remove that reference of AlCIP having an affiliation with Al-Azhar altogether. I am also going to restore "North America" portion of the Al-Ahbash article on Wikipedia which was removed for no apparent reason because the main target of the edit was the letter. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 07:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

No Elrich would of mentioned this since Goma's alleged fatwa was in 2003 and Elrich's review (2006. Al Azhar has a diverse faculty, to say one person (president) has monopoply over decisions is wrong. Azhar leaders are not a khalifa or pope of islam. This is all lies and you can not add it in to defame this organization. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 16:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Is Reuters and Al-Arabiya lying too about Ali Gomaa's Fatwa and arresting the men "who had been attempting to spread their beliefs on the campuses of al-Azhar University" and "belong to the al-Ahbash sect."? Why would Al-Azhar let Egyptian authorizes arrest the Al-Ahbash men if they had "affiliation" with the Al-Ahbash and they agreed to the preachings of Al-Ahbash? Apparently, if one buys your argument then everybody is out there to "defame" and "slander" the Al-Ahbash with "alleged" Fatwas and "forged" letters and everybody and every entity which disagrees with the Al-Ahbash on any level are just plain liars, Wahabis, Anti-Ahbash or just not worthy. I am glad that you agree that "Azhar leaders are not a khalifa or pope of islam." Thus, I am not adding anything new but simply removing the contentious and disputed "affiliation." Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 16:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A photocopied letter made by affiliates of your organization will not be used on wikipedia. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

What organization are you referring to? I belong to no religious or political organization (not even a membership of any organization of any kind) nor I posted that letter on the Internet. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 16:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Don't damage the reputation of Wikipedia by removing citations. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

How am I damaging the "reputation" of Wikipedia by removing a contentious and disputed "affiliation"? I thought we have already discussed enough. McKhan ^(talk) 17:31, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Cambridge is a respectable source. Removing it only reveals your intentions on the forum. KevinAbdulqader (talk) 18:15, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Why did you remove North America? Since the time you showed up on Wikipeida, you went straight to that letter and removed North America? What does it reveal about your intentions? How many other ids do you have? McKhan ^(talk) 18:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I meant to re-add your removal of Azhar see here p.523 http://aigaforum.com/documents/Al-Ahbash-whaibyya.pdf KevinAbdulqader (talk) 19:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Yet you did remove North America from the Al-Ahbash article from the get go. After having an extensive discussion with me, I am fully aware of the fact that why you are trying to "re-add" that article after admitting that "Azhar leaders are not a khalifa or pope of islam." My point is that the article you are trying to "re-add" is using the following Al-Ahbash own sources (i.e. Manar Al-Huda, www.namradio.com) for the alleged "affiliation" with Al-Azhar, which has been denied by Al-Azhar and more than one verifiable sources :

"It has issued a monthly, Manar al Huda, since 1992, and has had its own radio station, Nida' al-Marifa,[16] since 1998. Its members are very active on the internet and have websites that spread the word of the shaykh and his polemics with their rivals.[17] In addition, the Association runs networks of kindergartens, elementary and secondary schools, and Islamic colleges affiliated with Cairo's Jami at al-Azhar.[18]

• [16]- On the radio station, see http://www.namradio.com/
• [17]- On the Ahbash usage of the Internet, see Thomas Pierret, "Internet in a Sectarian Islamic Context," The International Institute for the Study of lslam in the Modern World 15 (2005): 50.
• [18]- On those activities, see, for example, Manar Al-Huda 93 (December 2000): 36-42.
• [20]- http://www.aicp.de and www.islami.de/

One can CLEARLY see that it is the Al-Ahbash who keep on insisting that they have got "affiliation" and "agreement" with Al-Azhar (Why? Because claiming so gives them the false legitimacy and clout of having "affiliation" or "agreement" with Al-Azhar and that's what the Al-Ahbash and AICP want and propagate through their web-sites including alsunna.org, alhabashi.info and more) despite the fact that Al-Azhar denies that (See above). In other words, they are misusing Al-Azhar's as a Marketing tool to buy legitimacy and clout.

Why should we trust Manar Al-Huda (An Al-Ahbash's own monthly magazine) and not the other sources by other organizations (i.e. Al-Azhar by itself)?

Since we don't see eye to eye, I removed the "The AICP claims to run its Islamic schools being affiliated with Al-Azhar,[1] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.[3][4]" (Although, it is a fair statement as it quotes the claim made by Al-Ahbash and then the rejection in lieu of it.) in order to be fair. But you are still not satisfied.

Going through your edits and the above discussion, it becomes very clear that you are here to make sure that this article remains being a Marketing tool for the Al-Ahbash as this is the very first page which shows up on the Search Engine Results when someone types Al-Ahbash, AICP or Association of Islamic Charitable Projects. You were never genuinely interested in the discussion as per your first edit and the last edit. There isn't much difference. Isn't it? And the way you are editing, one can easily tell that you are an old user.

You still haven't answered that why did you exactly remove North America. McKhan ^(talk) 20:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Responding to a tag...wowza, this is quite a discussion. It appears that activity ceased at one point...am I to understand that the issue is the fatwa from Azhar? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)