[Seesspoxy]

http://mobile.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/52814

The Saudis' relentless drive to destroy the historic sites of Islam
by Zafar Bangash
(Friday, July 11, 2008 02:53:52 pm)

"The important question is why there is such indifference among Muslims to the destruction of the symbols and sites of Islam."

Muslims are under attack on almost every front, from the military to the cultural and areas in between. Not only are tens of thousands of Muslims being slaughtered by foreign forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Chechnya, but in many Muslim countries (Pakistan, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco, for instance) their own armies are attacking them as well. The military assaults are compounded by cultural attacks from the West. But perhaps even this grim reality pales into insignificance when compared to what the Saudis are doing in the two holy cities of Makkah and Madinah, jointly known to the Muslims as the Haramayn. A toxic mixture of greed and Wahhabi zealotry has led to the destruction of Islamic monuments, which, in a few years, will have completely wiped out the rich historical heritage of early Islam forever.

While most Middle Eastern oil-producing countries are gripped by construction-mania, turning deserts into imitations of New York, Houston or Las Vegas, the Saudis have embarked on an enterprise that will destroy the physical heritage of the Ummah. If the Saudis had concentrated on building Riyadh in the image of Las Vegas few Muslims would be bothered, but they are going after Makkah and Madinah, obliterating the historical sites of Islam and replacing them with concrete and glass towers that not only surround the Masjid al-Haram but dwarf it, assaulting its spiritual ambience.

Most Muslims are already denied the opportunity to perform Hajj because of exorbitant prices that continue to increase each year. Instead of being the spiritual journey that Muslims long for, Hajj has been turned into a financial racket in which Saudi royals and their allies gouge the hujjaj of their life's savings. Categories of Hajj have been developed; travel agents in the West now offer Five-Star Hajj packages as if the Hajj were a holiday trip to Disneyland. Such distortion of one of the fundamental ibadaat of Islam is completely contrary to the spirit of Hajj and the principle of equality and brotherhood that the Hajj is supposed to demonstrate, as emphasized in the Qur'an and exemplified by Allah's Messenger (saws). But the House of Saud is not interested in the teachings of the Qur'an or Sunnah, although they are quick to denounce as bida‘ any act of which they do not approve. The Saudis' own mega-bidas are justified by their paid agents and court-ulama by spurious arguments for such violations of Islam's fundamental principles. Were the Prophet (saws) to appear today, the Wahhabis might well accuse him too of introducing innovations in the deen and indulging in bida‘ (nastaghfirullah min dhalik).

Although the court ulama seem to find nothing wrong with the Saudi desecration of Islam's historical sites and the commercialization of Hajj, it has not escaped the attention of others, including some non-Muslims. Zvika Krieger, for instance, writing in the New Republic magazine on March 26, drew attention to a promotional DVD that lures future “spiritual tourists” to Makkah. Prepared for the Abraj al-Bait Towers, a giant new skys****er complex that will be built at a cost of US$6 billion just across the street from one of the entrances to the Haram, it “shows a beautiful woman sitting in one of the towers' luxury apartments with floor-to-ceiling windows that overlook thousands of pilgrims circling the Ka‘aba below. Eyes flashing a come-hither stare from beneath her tightly wound headscarf, she asks prospective buyers in Arabic, ‘Would you like to be here in this place in front of the Ka‘aba year after year?'” Must hujjaj be enticed with such vulgar ads to visit the House of Allah? Surely they are coming as pilgrims and not as tourists going to a casino in Monte Carlo or Las Vegas?

Beyond this sort of vulgarity lies the even greater issue of historic buildings and sites that have either been destroyed or are scheduled for destruction. The vandalism to which the Baqi‘ Cemetery in Madinah has been subjected will seem minor if the Saudis succeed in their nefarious designs for the Prophet's (saws) grave in Madinah. Some ten years ago, Muqbil ibn Hadi al-Wadi'i, a student at the University of Madinah, wrote a thesis titled “About the Dome Built over the Grave of the Messenger,” sponsored by Shaykh Hammad al-Ansari. In this paper, Muqbil ibn Hadi demanded that the Prophet's grave be brought out of the Mosque. He said that its presence and the dome over it were major innovations (bidas) and that both have to be destroyed. His thesis was applauded and received high marks from the university, confirming their complete disrespect of the Messenger of Allah (saws).

How this upstart Saudi came to the conclusion that building the dome was a bida‘ or that the grave needed to be taken out of the Masjid-e Nabawi needs critical review. Is he more knowledgeable about Islam than the illustrious Sahaba (Companions) of the noble messenger of Allah (ra), who did not object and in fact paid great respect to the messenger (saw) by visiting his grave? Further, two of his closest companions are also buried beside him. Does Muqbil ibn Hadi know more than Abu-Bakr and Umar (ra)? The question that Muslims must ask is: what right do the Saudis have to do whatever they like to these sites? The Saudis do not own the Haramayn; they are usurpers of the Arabian Peninsula, whose name they have illegally changed to “Saudi” Arabia. This is bida: Allah's Messenger named this land the Arabian Peninsula (Jazeerat al-Arab). In their zeal to impose their own distorted version of Islam on everyone, they have embarked on wholesale destruction of Islam's historical sites. Last year the city planning board of Madinah changed the colour of the famous green dome of the Prophet's Mosque and painted it silver. The green dome identifies and symbolizes the Prophet's grave; due to the Mosque's expansion, it has now been surrounded, yet it is a unique visual focal point. Was the purpose to pave the way for its destruction, since most Muslims might not even realize what had happened if they hear or notice that a silver dome has been destroyed in Masjid-e Nabawi? After all, a number of silver domes in the Masjid-e Nabawi have already been obliterated using the pretext of expansion and renovation. Intense protests by concerned citizens forced the board to restore the dome to its original color, but it would be wrong to conclude that the Wahhabis have realized the error of their ways.

In their zeal to “save” Muslims from shirk (associating partners with Allah) and bida‘ (innovations in the deen), the Wahhabis have been involved in the destruction of historic buildings and sites for decades. “It is not permitted to glorify buildings and historical sites,” proclaimed Sheikh Abdul-Aziz bin Baz, the kingdom's chief alim, in a much-publicized fatwa in 1994 when he was alive. He went on: “Such action would lead to shirk (polytheism). … So it is necessary to reject such acts and to warn others away from them.” But the Wahhabi zealots are not content with mere warnings. They have embarked on a plan, in conjunction with the hordes of Saudi princes, to destroy Islam's heritage. One is constrained to ask how many Muslims have become mushriks by visiting these places and what right the Wahhabis have to prevent Muslims from doing so?

Dr Irfan al-Alawi, historian, founder and former executive director of the Islamic Heritage Research Foundation, who is one of the most vocal opponents of the destruction of the Haramayn and their environs, says that last year the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs distributed a pamphlet in the Masjid-e Nabawi calling for the demolition of the green dome. Endorsed by Abdul-Aziz al-Sheikh, the kingdom's current grand mufti, the pamphlet brazenly declared: “The green dome shall be demolished and the three graves [where the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Umar are laid to rest] flattened in the Prophet's Mosque.” The groundwork for such sacrilegious statements was prepared by another prominent Saudi scholar, the late Muhammad ibn al-Uthaymeen, who for 35 years delivered khutbas in the Masjid al-Haram. “We hope one day we'll be able to destroy the green dome of the Prophet Muhammed [saws],” he said, in a recording provided by Dr Alawi.

Dr Alawi estimates that 300 historic sites have been destroyed or are scheduled for destruction. An old house that had belonged to Umm al-Mu'mineen Khadijah al-Kubra (ra) was recently razed to make room for a public toilet facility, among other things. The birthplace of the Messenger (saw) in Makkah was first turned into a library and named “Maktabat Makka al-Mukarrama”, and is now being turned into a parking lot. While libraries are important, the plan was not based on the Wahhabis' desire for learning but on their determination to destroy all vestiges of Islam's heritage. The few remaining historical sites in Makkah can be counted on one hand and will probably not survive much past the next Hajj, according to Dr Alawi. “It is incredible how little respect is paid to the House of Allah [in Makkah].”

An ATM (cash-dispensing machine) has opened on the site where the ancient mosque named after the first khalifah, Abu-Bakr Siddiq (ra), once stood. The sites of the historic battles at Uhud and Badr have become parking lots. The graves of Amir Hamza (ra) and the other shuhada of Uhud have suffered even greater indignity: garbage litters the site and the Wahhabis expressly forbid any identification-markers on them, again under the spurious excuse that this would lead to shirk. The 1,200-year-old mosque and tomb of Sayyid Imam al-Uraidhi ibn Ja‘far al-Sadiq, four miles from Masjid-e Nabawi in Madinah, was destroyed by dynamite and flattened on August 13, 2002. Imam al-Uraidhi was ninth in line from the Prophet (saw).

The Wahhabis' zealotry works in tandem with the greed of thousands of Saudi “royals”—sons, daughters and grandsons of Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud, founder of the Saudi dynasty. Destruction of Islam's historical sites facilitates the construction of hotels, restaurants and other modern structures on the pretext of providing better services for the hujjaj. This is a complete fraud: the overwhelming majority of hujjaj will never be able to afford the kind of prices such hotels charge.

To get an idea of what is afoot, consider this report by the Saudi British Bank (SABB), one of the kingdom's biggest lenders. It estimates that $30 billion will be invested in construction and infrastructure in Makkah alone, from local and foreign companies, in the next four years. Up to 130 new skys****ers are anticipated, including the $6-billion Abraj al-Bait Towers, a seven-tower project that, once completed in 2009, will be one of the largest buildings in the world, with a 60-floor, 2,000-room hotel; a 1,500-person convention centre; two heliports; and a four-storey mall that will house, among 600 other outlets, Starbucks, the Body Shop, UK-based clothing line Topshop (Kate Moss is a guest designer), and Tiffany & Co. Rich ‘pilgrims' can already shop at cosmetic superstore MAC, perfumery VaVaVoom, and Claire's Accessories. H&M and Cartier are on the way. “All the top brands are flocking here,” says John Sfakianakis, SABB's chief economist, proudly. Crass materialism of the worst kind is replacing the spiritual aspects of Hajj, all in the name of progress. When the house of Abu-Bakr (ra) was destroyed to make room for Makkah's Hilton Hotel, Ivor McBurney, a spokesman for Hilton, had the gall to say: “We saw tremendous opportunities to tap into Saudi Arabia's religious tourism segment.”

Most Muslims visiting Makkah long to climb to the top of Jabal al-Nur (“the mountain of light”), to visit the Cave of Hira. It was to this cave that the Prophet (saws) used to retire in the month of Ramadan for prayer and meditation. He (saws) received the first revelations of the Qur'an while in the cave. The Wahhabi zealots want to destroy the mountain to prevent pilgrims from visiting the cave. At the foot of the hill the Wahhabis have posted a fatwa: “The Prophet Muhammed (saws) did not permit us to climb on to this hill, not to pray here, not to touch stones, and tie knots on trees...” Can the Wahhabis provide any evidence that he forbade Muslims from going there, or are their rants based on their hatred of Islam and the Muslims' attachment to and love for Allah's Beloved Messenger?

By contrast, there is no doubt that both the Qur'an and the Prophet (saws) absolutely forbid Muslims to take the kuffar as their awliya (masters and protectors), yet Wahhabi ulama have never issued a fatwa condemning the subservience of the House of Saud to the greatest enemies of Islam. As recently as last May, US president George Bush was in the kingdom. Bush has the blood of millions of Muslims on his hands; perhaps that is of little concern to the Saudis, but if Muslims wish to climb the Jabal al-Nur to reach the Cave of Hira and link with the history of divine revelation, the Wahhabis go berserk. The Muslims' devotion to the Sunnah so irks the Wahhabis that they want to destroy an entire mountain. Such thoughts can only emanate from demonic minds. Perhaps in a few years' time the mountain will be dynamited to build a hotel owned by some prince, or even another parking lot.

At every step, the Saudis are violating the principles of Islam. For instance, part of the $6 billion funding for Abraj al-Bait Towers is coming from the King Abdul Aziz Endowment (Waqf), which the towers' developers conveniently describe as a “religious property” created to serve interests “vital to the welfare of Islamic society.” What religious interest is being served and why is it considered vital to the interests of the Islamic society when the Saudi royals line their pockets with money even stolen from Waqf Funds? It is appallingly hypocritical and criminal of them to do so, but it is their wanton destruction of irreplaceable historical sites that is inexcusable.

“It's not just our heritage, it's the evidence of the story of the Prophet,” according to Dr Alawi. “What can we say now? ‘This parking lot was the first school of Islam'? ‘There used to be a mountain here where the Prophet Muhammed (saws) made a speech'? ... What's the difference between history and legend?” he asks. “Evidence,” he replies without waiting for an answer, “that the Wahhabi zealots are busy obliterating.” Regrettably, few people in the Muslim world have expressed any great concern, much less alarm, to prevent the Saudis' vandalism in order to preserve the most significant history and monuments of Islam.

The important question is why there is such indifference among Muslims to the destruction of the symbols and sites of Islam.



http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/52814

[Sotmoigma]

muslims dont protest about this because:

1, they feel powerless
2, more importantly, muslims dont know. most muslims dont know the difference between a wahabi and a sunni.

[thierabess]

as salamu alaikom
Realy sad... I will spread the news among the muslim I know to let then know what the saudis are doing ver there.

[Woziwfaq]

muslims dont protest about this because:

1, they feel powerless
2, more importantly, muslims dont know. most muslims dont know the difference between a wahabi and a sunni.

Salam Alaikum,


I believe you are correct in saying that most Muslims have no clue. Unless one lives in Saudi, have visits there regularly, or Made Hajj, one would be totally oblivious to the situation. Because, rest assured they are not putting it in the media, atleast not here in America.

My mom has been to Hajj 4x and Umrah once, and she said she noticed the changes everytime she went, and that's including the last time she went in 2004.

But I never thought it was this bad..I mean wow. I never even heard of most of the things they did until I read this thread.

May Allah (s.w.t) help us all!

[Woziwfaq]

And to add, I was just telling my mommy about this, and I said it's like the Pagan Arabs during the time of the Prophet (s.a.ws) are tryingto restore Makkah and Medina to what it once was before the advent of Islam.

And my mommy replied by saying, that because the media has made Islam into a terroist religion, and has essentially made people afraid to practice their religion, they feel comfortable enough to do these things, without feeling the wrath of the Islamic community like the community in times gones by.

I mean be realistic would this have even been thought of during the time of the Sahaba...I don't think so.

People have become comfortable in the images of Muslims being defeated, and afraid...and the Saudi Government (which is really the American government), has weaved their plot and plan based on this, But This is All In Allah's Plan and He is the Best of Planners

And Allah knows best.

[Sowsunese]

the historic sites are distructed so that u dont get any ibrath(inspiration) fromt them and a beautiful covering of tauheed is veiled over it

game every where

[RorieSorNearop]

What about 'Umar (radhiyAllahu anhu) cutting the tree where muslim made bayyaah to the prophet ? Any sahabah protested or not?

[bQXHsKzS]

Subhana Allah! Finally a good, relevant post on sunniforum!

Most people do not even know what and where the existing historical sites are. There is a rare book which mentions things that the religious Saudis don't even know exist. I recommend to everyone to find this book not only before going for Hajj and Umrah but before, it's very inspirational.

If your wondering why I am not telling the name of the book, its a rare jewel, a diamond, I have a diamond why would I publicize that? Or maybe I just don't know the name? Believe what you will

[Seesspoxy]

What about 'Umar (radhiyAllahu anhu) cutting the tree where muslim made bayyaah to the prophet ? Any sahabah protested or not?

The above is one of the two main reasons why the Saudis are perpetrating a mass cultural and historical genocide in Saudi Arabia. They've been doing it since the last 80 years. I'll reply to your comments soon In Sha Allah.

The other reason is because Imam Ibn Taymiyyah was in favor of such acts. And yes, Saudis don't do Taqleed !

[Vipvlad]

I don't know which is worst, the Saudi's profaning the Kabah by dwarfing it with modern Western skys****ers, or their wanton destruction of Islamic history. I hope I live to see the day that the Saudis and Wahhabism are sent back to Najd where they belong. The curse of the Ummah indeed!

[PRengine]

Just imagine, it would have been fantastic to do ziyaraa of these places, and to see them first hand. Woudl ahve boosted ones iman. Now if these thigns were in the west, the wets would have preserved them, looked after them and shown them to the whole world.

So angry at this. Our history being displaced by the monstrous buildings around the Ka'ba, all in the name of modernism.

[indocrew]

I've heard alot about the Saudi Family which i thought were lies. Stuff about them being Jews, Part of the Illuminati Conspiracy, Abdul Wahab was affilated with some british agent called Hempher and that the british made the Wahabiyya sect to further their aims.

Looking at what is happening presently this doesn't sound so far fetched anymore...

[Dominick Yo]

i read a article similar to this a while back and it is sad what is happening, i guess its just what one brother said previously which is the powerlessness of Muslims.

Wa'salam

[RorieSorNearop]

The above is one of the two main reasons why the Saudis are perpetrating a mass cultural and historical genocide in Saudi Arabia. They've been doing it since the last 80 years. I'll reply to your comments soon In Sha Allah.

The other reason is because Imam Ibn Taymiyyah was in favor of such acts. And yes, Saudis don't do Taqleed !

yeah they hate taqleed lol

But clearly what they're doing is definately not the wisest choice.
There should be some limits within what is acceptable or not.

[fd8IIys2]

As the kuffar advance, they look to save their heritages whilst we Muslims are going backwards and destroying our heritage.

[lagunaEl]

What about 'Umar (radhiyAllahu anhu) cutting the tree where Muslim made bayyaah to the prophet ? Any sahabah protested or not?

Ibn Saad has an authentic narration from Nafee that Umar RA came to know that some people were approaching the tree and performing Salah beside it. So he threatened them then he ordered its cutting and it was cut down. (Fathul Baari Kitaabul Maghaazi under Hadith #4165)

Before this in Kitaabul Jihaad under Hadith #2958: "Ibn Umar states when we returned the following year to perform Hajj (Umrah) no two of us came together under the tree where we made Bait with Nabi Sallahu alaihi wa sallam. And it was a mercy from Allah."

Hafiz Ibn hajr states that Ibn Umar and Musayyib ibn Hazn RA, the father of Saeed ibn Musayyib, agrees that the tree’s position was unknown. He further states that the Hikmah behind this is so that people don’t fall in to fitnah because of the Khair that took place under the tree. If it had remained then the Juhhal would have attached great importance to it and some might even start believing that it possesses the power to benefit or harm, like how we see today with things of even lesser importance.
This is indicated in Ibn Umar Ra's statement: "And it was a mercy from Allah", meaning its concealment on them was a mercy from Allah.
It is also possible that his statement "And it was a mercy from Allah" means that the tree was a place of Allah's mercy and a place of his pleasure because his pleasure for the mumeneen had descended there. (Fathul Baari 6/136)

When we go forward again to Kitaabul Maghaazi where there is a Hadith (4163) of Tariq ibn Abdur Rahmaan who said:

“I set off for hajj and I passed by a people performing Salah. I asked: What is this Masjid? They answered: this is the tree where the people made Baiatu Ridhwaan on the Rasool sallahu Alaihi wa sallam's hands. Tariq said I came to Saeed ibn Musayyib and informed him about them. He said My father told me he was amongst the people who made bait on Rasoolullah sallalahu Alaihi wa sallam's hands under the tree. He told me: When we set off the following year we forgot where it was and we never found it. Saeed then said Verily the Sahabah of Rasoolullah Sallahu alaihi wa sallam did not Know where it was and you all know where it is?! So you are more knowledgeable than them?!"

Hafith Ibn hajr states that this negation of Saeed bn Musayyib does not negate the knowledge of its position all together, because there is a Hadith of Jabir RA in Bukhari where he says " If I could see today I would have shown you the place of the tree." this indicates that he knew exactly where the tree was. and when he knew its position after a long time in his old age it shows that he knew the exact position because it is apparent that when he was making this statement the tree had already been destroyed either by drying up or some other way. And Jabir RA still knew its exact spot. Then I saw Ibn Saad has an authentic narration from Nafee that Umar RA came to know that some people were approaching the tree and performing Salah beside it. So he threatened them then he ordered its cutting and it was cut down. (Fathul Baari Kitaabul Maghaazi under Hadith #4165)

Now first in Kitaabul Jihaad Hafith Ibn Hajr mentioned the Hikmah behind the position of the tree not being known to the Sahabah according to his understanding.

Then in Kitaabul Maghaazi he says well its position was not all together forgotten but Jabir Ra knew where it was. To prove this opinion he brought Ibn Saad's narration where Umar RA ordered to cut the tree down, which means he knew where the tree was and he cut it down.

Now the Salafees put Umar's narration (where according to Ibn hajr the tree's position was known) and Ibn Hajr's explanation of the Hikmah (with some editing) behind the tree's position being unknown together and say:

Umar RA cut the tree down because it is Bidah to make tabbaruk from such sites where the mercy of Allah Ta’alaa descends.

It’s quite a big mess.

However this mess is cleaned up by a few words of the great Hadith Imaam Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi. He said in his Dars while explaining Jabir RA"s statement: " If I could see today I would have shown you the place of the tree." This is what he presumed because of his confidence other wise it is a known fact that its position was unknown to the Sahabah.

Shaikh Zakariyah Ra further explains that this is a better interpretation than Hafith Ibn Hajr's opinion... When Umar RA cut the tree down this does not imply that he knew that this was the exact tree but it is obvious that it was the tree which Tariq had mention to Saeed ibn Musayyib (and he said how do they know which tree it is, when the Sahabah didn’t know which one it was).
And it is narrated that Umar RA passed by that place after the tree was gone and he asked Where was it? Some said here others said there and when their Ikhtilaaf increased Umar Ra said walk on the tree is gone. (Lamiud Daraari Sharh Bukhari 3/144)

Therefore Umar RA did not cut the tree down because it is Bidah to make tabbaruk from such blessed places where, according to his son Ibn Umar RA, the mercy of Allah descends. Instead he cut it down because the tree was unknown so the people would be taking Barakah from a place that was not blessed.

And Allah Ta'alaa knows best.

[lagunaEl]

It is also surprising that Umar RA knew where the tree was many years after while his Son and the Sahabah didn’t know where it was the exact next year after the Bait in the Rasool Salllahu alaihi wa sallam's time. Therefore Hafith's evidence is weak.

A next thing to note is that Saeed ibn Musayyib did not rebuke them for committing a Bidah but informed them that the tree is not the tree. It’s more important to rebuke them on a Bidah than on the position of the tree. Alas it is not a Bidah.

And Allah knows best.

[darieBarexish]

Ibn Saad has an authentic narration from Nafee that Umar RA came to know that some people were approaching the tree and performing Salah beside it. So he threatened them then he ordered its cutting and it was cut down. (Fathul Baari Kitaabul Maghaazi under Hadith #4165)

mufti saab isn´t the riyawayah of this hadihts is munqati? in kaza fil tahjib it has been said that hazrat nafe ibn has narrated from ibn umar but nafe had never met ibn umar(rd). please entlighten me.

2nd one.JPG

mufti saab u can remember this hadiths, cause i scanned this from the book , so its not so clear. where itban ibn malik(rd) requested prophet mohammad(sw) to come in his home and pray on a place where he also wants to fixed as his prayer place. does it mean that he wanted to have barakah from the place where prophet mohammad(sw) prayed?

1st one.JPG

and in this pic i wanted to say about the reference of bukhari where i read that hazrat ibn umar(rd) when he travel through mecca and madina , he used to search the place where prophet mohammad(sw)during his travel prayed and he(ibn umar) also prayed there.

[lagunaEl]

mufti saab isn´t the riyawayah of this hadihts is munqati? in kaza fil tahjib it has been said that hazrat nafe ibn has narrated from ibn umar but nafe had never met ibn umar(rd). please entlighten me.

.

Yes Imaam Ahmed ibn Hanbal said : Nafe from Umar is Munqate, (Tahtheebut Tahtheeb of Ibn Hajr 10/414) meaning that Nafe did not narrate any ahadith directly from Umar, therefore where ever there is "Nafe an (from) Umar" a raawi (narrator) is dropped off between them which makes the Hadith weak.

So In Fathul Baari hafith meant the sanad from Ibn Saad till Nafe was authentic, but since there is an Inqitaa (fall out) between Nafe and Umar Ra it makes the hadith weak. Wallahul Musta'aan.

[Seesspoxy]

Jazakumullah Mufti Sahib. Those were some really good answers.

Also, streetwalker, those were some really good scans.

So folks, the Salafees/Wahhabis/Saudis/Ibn Taymiyah followers use the story of Umar Radhiallahu Anhu as evidence for perpetrating a cultural genocide by demolishing historical artifacts.

Hence they say that you can not derive Barakah from any place on the surface of the earth. And that is why, the Saudis have gone on a demolishing spree since the last 80 years or so. The Saudis are quite good at demolishing things...no?

The answer by Mufti Sahib is sufficient to prove that Umar (R.A.) cut down the tree because no one knew where it was. Also, that narration of Umar (R.A.) cutting down the tree is not found in any of the six authentic hadith books. The Salafees like to stick to Bukhari and Muslim but I wonder why they don't stick to the books in this case? Is it because their Imam, Ibn Taymiyyah held the opinion of no barakah so that's why they are 'blindly' following him? As mentioned previously, the narrator of the cutting down of the tree incident is Nafi' who never met Umar (R.A.) which makes the narration Munqati which is not considered to be strong as mentioned by Mufti Sahib in the previous post.

Also, the scan put up by streetwalker clearly proves that a Sahabi requested the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihe Wasallam to come and pray in his house so that he can derive Barakah from it later.

Also, in the second scan, it clearly proves that on the occasion of Israa and Me'raj, the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhe Wasallam descended from his means of conveyance and performed prayers where Isa (A.S.) was born. Isn't this a clear incident of showing reverence to a historical event and place?

Also, what about all the various things we do in Hajj and Umrah? That is nothing but showing reverence to history! The many actions which were done by Ibrahim (A.S.) and his family are reenacted by every Haji.

What about performing two rakats behind Muqamu Ibrahim? Isn't that nothing but showing reverance to a historical piece? Why do we have to perform two rakats behind a pair of footsteps which are the foot prints of Ibrahim (A.S.)? This is nothing but a clear proof that it is ok to show reverence to historical religious artifacts!

I've taken the above mentioned points from an Urdu book titled, "Mulfoozat Muhaddith Kashmeeri". (Yes, we should learn Urdu. ) Some of them are my own. : )

There's more stuff in the book and I'll post it up later. The above should suffice for now.

The reason why I started this thread was that I had read this discussion many months ago in the above mentioned book and I always wanted to translate it to English and I thought the best way to do it was to start off a thread on SF and write up a few points at a time.

Masha Allah, Mufti Sahib's posts were really useful and it saved a lot of my time.

So folks, the bottom line is...Saudis/Salafees/Wahhabees/Ibn Taymiyyah followers are clearly wrong in this matter and that is why they should cease and desist from demolishing the historical aspects of Islam.

Can you believe it...the Saudis demolished the house of Khadijah (R.A.), the beloved wife of the Prophet Sallallahu Alihe Wasallam, and built toilets over it! I mean like what were they thinking? They could have built the toilets anywhere else! But no, they had to demolish a blessed place- a place where many Quranic verses were revealed. A place where the Wahi was revealed.

Insanity I tell you...Insane... SIGH....