DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Kingdom will continue to follow Salafist ideology: Prince Naif

**herawaq** · 12-29-2011, 01:31 PM

In addition, salafism is a most divided sect. From the jihadi (jihadi salafis) salafis on one end, to the staunch nationalists at the exact opposite end of the spectrum (aka saudi salafis).

That's why it's completely pointless to refute salafis as a single group - since their own creed varies wildly (Group A calls B Murji'ah, whilst Group B calls A Khawaarij - sounds familiar?)

In general the "jihadi salafis" tend to be more sympathetic towards muqallids (and Hanafis in particular), in part because of their staunch and unwavering support for the Taliban. It's hypocritical to support the Taliban and condemn Taqleed. It's encouraging to see them supporting both rather than condemning both.

This is a good sign for unity of our fragmented ummah, inshaa Allah.

That's why this conference is probably pointless. Someone with more familiarity with it could correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like these are palace scholars, and so they're going to tow that line, while other Salafis will pay no heed to what they have to say. Perhaps they will even attempt their own definition of Salafiyyah to refute these people.

As for the "Jihadi Salafis", I used to be more sympathetic towards them as well. However, their support of the Taliban has for years rested on them lying to Arab Salafis and claiming that the Taliban either aren't Deobandis at all, or are Salafi-inclined ignorant Hanafis that don't know much about the differences between the various sects. Not only that, but they tend to be the most extreme with regards to their beliefs, claiming things even most garden variety Salafis would shudder at.

12-29-2011, 01:31 PM	#6
herawaq Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 563 Senior Member	In addition, salafism is a most divided sect. From the jihadi (jihadi salafis) salafis on one end, to the staunch nationalists at the exact opposite end of the spectrum (aka saudi salafis). That's why it's completely pointless to refute salafis as a single group - since their own creed varies wildly (Group A calls B Murji'ah, whilst Group B calls A Khawaarij - sounds familiar?) In general the "jihadi salafis" tend to be more sympathetic towards muqallids (and Hanafis in particular), in part because of their staunch and unwavering support for the Taliban. It's hypocritical to support the Taliban and condemn Taqleed. It's encouraging to see them supporting both rather than condemning both. This is a good sign for unity of our fragmented ummah, inshaa Allah. That's why this conference is probably pointless. Someone with more familiarity with it could correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like these are palace scholars, and so they're going to tow that line, while other Salafis will pay no heed to what they have to say. Perhaps they will even attempt their own definition of Salafiyyah to refute these people. As for the "Jihadi Salafis", I used to be more sympathetic towards them as well. However, their support of the Taliban has for years rested on them lying to Arab Salafis and claiming that the Taliban either aren't Deobandis at all, or are Salafi-inclined ignorant Hanafis that don't know much about the differences between the various sects. Not only that, but they tend to be the most extreme with regards to their beliefs, claiming things even most garden variety Salafis would shudder at.
	Quote