Talk:Abdullah al-Harari

Reverts on Page

Can I ask why the removal of the sources that were properly cited and returned misquoted statements? It is in the 6th citation that claims AICP' Islamic schools are affiliated with AlAzhar, not the way it is said that AICP claims this.

The denial of the claim by AlAzhar is not genuine or reliable. Who posted this image as it doesnt seem to be officially from AlAzhar source. It could be a fabrication as it has no origin through official AlAzhar channels.

The Scholars who visited the grave of Abdullah AlHarari only legitimize his position as a scholar trusted and loved by scholars, this is not information that is irrelevant to the topic rather it is important.AbeEll (talk) 08:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

As I earlier stated that I am not the sole contributor to this article nor I inserted the above citation. I will recommend that you should read Al-Azhar_and_Al-Ahbash discussion and the talk page in detail. The sentence, "The group follow the teachings of Ethiopian scholar Abdullah al-Harari.^[2] The AICP claims to run its Islamic schools being affiliated with Al-Azhar,^[3] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[4][5][6]" presents Neutral Point of View (NPOV) as it corroborates with what the AICP / Al-Ahbash claims and what the Al-Azhar denies. Wikipedia is not a platform to legitimize one's favorite personality (i.e. Abdullah al-Harari) or promoting favorite organization (i.e. Nahdlatul Ulama) or its clergy (i.e. "In 2009 Nuril Huda, chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama's dawah division visited his grave.[11]."). Once again, the points you are making have been discussed on the Al-Ahbash over and over again. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 08:39, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

As we already mentioned, it is the source that you used that mention that AICP is affiliated, it does no where mention that AICP is in anyway claiming this. The source for AlAzhars denial is not genuine nor is it reliable, and infact It presents proof that corroborates with other than official AlAzhar channels.

The Indonesian visit just provides proof that Abdullah is well known all over Asia by leaders of Islamic Ulema, which has no correlation with your claim of it making him a favorite personality.

The information you have posted claiming Abdullah is Shia has been nullified by not only the Sunnah visit of the Indonesian Scholars but also that his books being found in Somalia no where mentions his books being of Shia origin as YOU have already said they're from Iran. "These have been discussed on AlAhbash over and over again", if they have then there is an issue because you seem to be overlooking references and making personal claims.AbeEll (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Once again, you are picking and choosing and you don't seem to be reading the Talk Pages thoroughly and not understanding that I am NOT the sole editor of this article or any other Al-Ahbash related article on Wikipedia. With reference to another detailed discussion here (And trust me there are more) and Wikipedia guidelines, the source you are referring to (I did NOT add that source) and the information posted by the AICP on their own web-site (You don't even know what the AICP claims on their web-site. Do you? It proves that you don't know exactly what you are talking about.) about their affiliation with Al-Azhar (i.e. their books being endorsed by Al-Azhar) cannot be taken as genuine specially when that claim has been challenged by the very same person from Al-Azhar to whom the AICP claimed to have agreement with. That's is precisely why "...a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[4][5][6]" was added into that sentence.

For the second time, I was NOT the one who inserted those quotes but the Indonesian IPs 180.246.67.138 and 36.79.65.55 and you reinstated them by yourself. You have to read the article to see what is being condemned by the Sunni scholars and which controversial cleric's books have allegedly been uploaded from Iran. The article clearly states: "Islamic Scholars in Somalia’s northern eastern state of Puntland have condemned Shiite books allegedly loaded from Iran which tries to gain foothold in the Horn of African nation, Garowe Online reports......Books spotted in Somalia’s Puntland were largely authored by controversial cleric, Abdullahi Mohamed Yusuf (Al Harari), Sunni scholars said. Go and figure.

Wikipedia is NOT the place to prove "...that Abdullah is well known all over Asia by leaders of Islamic Ulema" and to promote Indonesian scholars of Nahdlatul Ulama or Al-Ahbash or its schoalr. I don't appreciate your constant accusation of personal bias. So, please, stop. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 00:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I can show you http://www.darulfatwa.org.au/en/the-historic-visit-of-al-azhar-ash-sharif-to-australia-2015/ which seems to prove that AICP's schools and institutions are affiliated with AlAzhar seeing this post here, as you probably know DarulFatwa was started by AICP. So do tell me how we cannot see your unreliable source for AlAzhars denial as proof? AbeEll (talk) 01:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The people behind Dar-ul-Fatwa belongs to Islamic Charity Projects Association (ICPA) and the ICPA in Australia is basically the Al-Ahbash / ACIP elsewhere. Thus, it is not surprising that Dar-ul-Fatwa, ICPA, AICP, Al-Ahbash and their other outlets post, publish and share the very same information. Indeed, the ICPA / AICP / Al-Ahbash can post whatever they want to post on their web-sites, publish in their material or issue Fatwas however they deem fit or suitable to their cause but it does NOT mean that they (i.e. their Fatwas, material) should be taken as a neutral or genuine source. In a nutshell, Dar-ul-Fatwa / ICPA / AICP / Al-Ahbash's own posting on their web-site proves NOTHING that their schools, institutions and / published material is endorsed by or they are affiliated with Al-Azhar. There is a reason that the mainstream Sunni Muslims in Australia (and elsewhere) don't mingle nor approve Dar-ul-Fatwa / AICP / ICPA / Al-Ahbash's Radio Station and / or any of their material or outfits. Please, note the following:

Reuters and Al-Arabiya has reported about Ali Gomaa's Fatwa (from Al-Azhar) 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."

It begs the question:

• 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?

• Why would Egypt's mufti Ali Gomaa issue a Fatwa against the Al-Ahbash in which he "described the group as "deviant" and said it sought to "corrupt the Muslim creed and incite sedition amongst the Muslim Ummah. Moreover, they are paid agents to the enemies of Islam."?

The truth of the matter IS that the Al-Ahbash claim to made an agreement with Dr. Ahmad ʿUmar Hashim (from Al-Azhar) and he himself 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.”' Following is the English translation of the Arabic text:

• "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."

(It is pretty sad and interesting that you want whatever Dar-ul-Fatwa / AICP / ICPA / Al-Ahbash publish regarding themselves as genuine and yet you simply want to ignore what Al-Azhar and others (e.g. Markaz al-Nasr li Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaah, Jakarta, Indonesia) have to say about the Al-Ahbash.)

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 either fake, forged, unreliable or 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,

The sentence "The AICP claims to run its Islamic schools being affiliated with Al-Azhar,^[3] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[4][5][6] is fair and neutral as it mentions 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 reinsert the same edits which were previously done by the Indonesian IPs 180.246.67.138 and 36.79.65.55 article? Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 03:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The factuality of Azhar's denial is, as has been proven on talk multiple times over the past few years, beyond doubt. It's upheld in reliable, mainstream media sources. I really don't think we need to go through the same exact discussion over and over again, never with anything new contributed by the supporters of the Ahbash, every time a new editor takes issue with it. Isn't there some sort of a way where we can provide a quick link to all the previous discussions? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:14, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Lets focus on one thing at a time here. You keep claiming that AICP makes things up but the darulfatwa link CLEARLY shows AlAzhar at their Mawlid celebrations, had they claimed AICP is a false misguided sect, they would not entertain with their presence or acknowledgement of AICP's actions. Also you claim Darulfatwa is hated by many yet you can see thousands of people in their Mawlid celebration (from the exact same link). You disregard AICP Affiliated websites and their proofs that are authentic in image/video while your own sources are sunnah.org and an image hosting website with "proof" from AlAzhar claiming they are against AICP while it can be made by an imposter. You keep accusing me of being a member of AICP while If i look at your profile you've been obsessed with these 2 wiki posts for many years as if you are paid to do it so should I call you a paid agent of wahhabis? So you tell me who is right and who is wrong, you claim AICP makes up its own websites to fool people? Fine, this is an Egyptian Website that says " It is a charitable organisation that runs schools in conjunction with Egypt’s venerable Al-Azhar University, one of the largest Sunni Muslim institutions in the world. Indeed, many African students at Al-Azhar have been introduced to Egyptian Sufi orders.". Seems more believable than the blogs you post that lack much professionalism.

1. Your AlAzhar "Proof" has NO BACKING by AlAzhar, if you want to prove me wrong you are welcome but you just keep pasting it as if it'll become a reality

2. Your "Verifiable Letter" from Indonesia is literally a PDF with hearsay and no signatures and again not through official channels meaning it could have been falsified.

3. Also its strange you post AlArabiya as your source considering it is bias and funded by the Saudi government who reportedly fund Wahhabism world Wide.

Also to answer your question about reinserting edits from indonesian IP's, we have many things saying he isnt supported by scholars so maybe we should also mention scholars that do support him? I thought you said we were going for a nonBias approach here? AbeEll (talk) 04:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Al-Azhar and Al-Ahbash (Yet another discussion)

MezzoMezzo is absolutely right that the "The factuality of Azhar's denial is, as has been proven on talk multiple times over the past few years, beyond doubt. It's upheld in reliable, mainstream media sources."

Let me try one more time.

Let's dissect "...which claims to run its schools affiliated with Cairo's Al-Azhar University,^[6] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[7][8][9]

For "...which claims to run its schools affiliated with Cairo's Al-Azhar University,^[6], following is the reference (Al-Ahram reference pretty much says the same thing):

• Mustafa Kabha; Haggai Erlich (November 2006). Al-Ahbash and Wahhabiyya: Interpretations of Islam (PDF). Cambridge University Press. p. 529. Retrieved 27 October 2014. (Refers to Al-Ahbash's own monthly magazine, Manar Al-Huda 93 (December 2000): 36-42 and their other sources and web-sites.)

Please, note that Mustafa Kabha and Haggai Erlich throughout the above article (i.e. reference) are using AICP / Al-Ahbash / ICPA / The Habashis' sources. In [18] footnote of their above article, they are using Manar Al-Huda (Here is the exact wording: [18] On those activities, see, for example, Manar Al-Huda 93 (December 2000): 36-42).

Manar Al-Huda and Dar-ul-Fatwa (Australia) also belongs to Al-Ahbash / AICP / ICPA / The Habashis. Nevertheless, it was left as that's what the Al-Ahbash / AICP / ICPA / The Habashis claim.

Now let's move on to "...a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[7][8][9]"

• "Egypt arrests 22 men for corrupting Islam"- Reuters, 13 December 2007. ("The source said they belong to the al-Ahbash sect – which has a significant following in Lebanon and strong historical ties to Syria – and which is considered unorthodox by many Islamic clerics including the ones at Al-Azhar.")

The first source is from - Reutersor Al-Arabiya

Reuters is NOT a Wahabi organization nor Al-Arabiaya. Thus, one wonders and common sense and logic begs the question that IF the Al-Azhar have had any sort of "affiliation" with the Al-Ahbash / AICP / ICPA / The Habashis then

• Why would Al-Azhar let Egyptian authorities arrest the Al-Ahbash men if they had "affiliation" with the Al-Ahbash and they agreed to the preachings of Al-Ahbash?

and

• Why would Egypt's mufti Ali Gomaa (also from Al-Azhar) issue a Fatwa against the Al-Ahbash in which he "described the group as "deviant" and said it sought to "corrupt the Muslim creed and incite sedition amongst the Muslim Ummah. Moreover, they are paid agents to the enemies of Islam."?

Let me offer you the following reference:

• Liz Fuller (September 14, 2016). "Analysis: Grozny Fatwa On 'True Believers' Triggers Major Controversy". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty/RFE/RL, Inc. Retrieved March 27, 2017. (Excerpt: "Conference participants, who included Ahmed El- Tayeb, rector of Cairo's Al-Azhar Islamic University, adopted a fatwa stipulating that the sole true adherents of traditional Islam are those who abide by Kalam scholastic theology, belong to one of the four madhhabs (legal schools)......It identifies the Salafi strain of Sunni Islam professed in Saudi Arabia as a "dangerous and erroneous contemporary sect," along with the extremist group Islamic State, Hizb ut-Tahrir, and the Habashis.")

Why would a rector of Al-Azhar support a Fatwa which goes against the Habashis as well as the Wahabis?

Now come to the following two references:

• Dr. Ahmed Omar Hashem (August 28, 2001). "President of Al-Azhar's Letter / statement issued on the official letterhead of Al-Azhar (Arabic)". Al-Azhar University. Retrieved July 17, 2016. (Excerpts from the letter from Arabic to English regarding AICP or Al-Ahbash: "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 prestigious name of Al-Azhar University by this organizations..")

Above Letter/statement has been reiterated and referred to by the The Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA) which also includes yet another former Professor of Al-Azhar University

• "About the Abyssinians sect". Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA). Retrieved March 27, 2017. (Excerpt: "These announcements are embedded in the following literature and media: Professor Dr. Ahmad Omar Hashim`s letter, Al-Azhar University President, to Muslim World League`s Secretary-General in August 24, 2001.")

So, you have Dr. Ahmed Omar Hashem (to whom the Al-Ahbash / AICP / ICPA / The Habashish claimed to have agreement with), Ali Gomaa (from Al-Azhar) and Ahmed El-Tayeb, rector of Al-Azhar (in 2016) all not approving the Al-Ahbash and asking people to stay away from them and then Al-Azhar letting Egyptian authorities arrest the Al-Ahbash men on their own campus for preaching..... and yet your insistence that Al-Azhar has some sort of affiliation with the Al-Ahbash is totally beyond common sense and logic.

And last but not the least, the following paper to which you are calling "literally a PDF with hearsay," it was published on the web-site of As-Sunnah Foundation of America

• "Exposing Abd Allah al-Harari and his sect the Ahbash of Lebanon ("Association of Islamic Charitable Projects")" (PDF). Markaz al-Nasr li Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaah, Jakarta, Indonesia / As-Sunnah Foundation of America. pp. 23, 24. Retrieved July 17, 2016.

Under the light of above and several other discussions which I have had in the past on the Talk Pages of Al-Ahbash and Abdallh al-Hariri pages, it is safe to conclude that "...which claims to run its schools affiliated with Cairo's Al-Azhar University,^[6] a claim which has been denied by Al-Azhar.^[7][8][9] is very much fair and neutral sentence as it presents what th Al-Ahbash claim and what the Al-Azhar deny. I hope it helps. Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 06:32, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Well it seems we have confirmed you're good at one thing, repeating yourself and claiming "its verifiable". I would like to refer you to a proper citation, one that was written in 2008 that does not even mention a fatwa by Ali Gomaa (Which you have yet to prove, not surprisingly).

Here

Where it says "In 1993, representatives of the APBI visited Cairo to present their publications to the authorities of al-Azhar University. Six years later, on 17 November 1999, an official document handed out during a ceremony in the Lebanese capital recognized the APBI as a "legal Islamic society" and a "fortress of knowledge", assuring that "its scientific and Religious "was sealed, sealing an agreement of" cultural collaboration "to promote" Islamic knowledge, culture and ethics "or" authentic Islamic heritage "against" infectious propaganda "reaching the Islam of a 66 the "exaggerations" and "extremism" of the other. Al-Azhar was represented by Dr Ahmad Hashem 'Omar, Director General of Cultural and Scientific Affairs of the institution, accompanied by Dr Mohammad Saleh. They were received by APBI authorities: Sheikh Hussam Qaraqira, Adnan Traboulsi, vice-president of the association, and Sheikh Osama al-Sayed-Sayed, head of the APBI branch in the Beka'a . The choir closed the ceremony at the Commodore Hotel and the participants met with Sheikh Hirari to pay tribute and exchange views on the Islamic mission in the world."

Do you have more denial to throw at me? Or are you going to repeat yourself?AbeEll (talk) 04:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Also,just a reminder that I have so far aided by the rules of citing by providing only academic and valid proofs while you have given me random pieces of paper you claim are verified from a prestigious university yet its hosted on a photobucket type website (could be forged) and a PDF that claims so & so wrote a fatwa multiple times without not even once showing said fatwa, just text on a white slate you call proof :)AbeEll (talk) 04:32, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Please, don't forget that the topic of Al-Ahbash is very much contentious and controversial.

Having said that I know very well that why the Al-Ahbash keep coming back to Al-Ahbash related pages on Wikipedia. It is NOT about respect for Al-Azhar or academic integrity or Wikipedia. It is basically all about marketing.

They keep coming back to the the Al-Ahbash related pages on Wikipedia because these are the pages which shows up on most of the search results on Google, Yahoo and other major search engines. Thus, it is very important for the Al-Ahbash to keep all good, positive and sanitized information being posted about themselves and their scholar Abdullah_al-Harari on Wikipedia in order to make sure that they are able to keep their current adherents as well as recruit potential adherents.

That's where having the "affiliation" with Al-Azhar or using the banner of "Jamat Ahal Wa Sunnah" becomes handy and important because Al-Azhar being one of the oldest Sunni Institution and Jamat Ahl Wa Sunnah being the majority of the World Muslims being Sunnis can really be good for marketing and to buy the clout and legitimacy. Otherwise, the Al-Ahbash couldn't care less about Al-Azhar or Jamat Ahal Wa Sunnah or the mainstream Sunni Muslims.

Don't believe me? Please, read this:

At first sight, devices such as live interactive lessons or voice chat groups seem to encourage debates within the movement, but, on the contrary, close examination reveals that these instruments are primarily used by the leadership to increase its ideological control on their followers and to attract new devotees. Similarly, if one checks the AICP’s unofficial e-forums (www.talkaboutislam.com), one discovers that they function as ideological spider webs. Nothing points to the fact that these websites, which only present themselves as being “Islamic,” are actually part of the Ahbash’s cyber network. For instance, they are not related to the official websites by any hypertext link. Therefore, the random visitor is normally unaware that he or she is exposed to a set of selected opinions through carefully controlled debates. Firstly, zealous participants frequently post chapters of books edited in Lebanon by the AICP, but without any reference to the author or the editor. Secondly, veteran members answer questions concerning fiqh (jurisprudence) and reprimand novices whose religious knowledge is considered “deviant.” Thirdly, a team of regulators supervise the discussions and are in charge of censoring the Ahbash who are too keen to use takfir (excommunication) —since such a stance is considered a mark of extremism by most of the Sunnis—but above all of eliminating most of the messages posted by participants of Salafi persuasion.

Notes

• [1]. Olivier Roy, L’Islam mondialisé (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 2002), 127.
• [2]. Michael Gilsenan, Saint and Sufi in Modern Egypt: an Essay in the Sociology of Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973).

Source: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/16971/ISIM_15_Internet_in_a_Sectarian_Islamic_Context.pdf?sequence=1

What I described above is just the tip of the iceberg.

~*~*~*~

AbeEll, Your personal attacks and contemptuous behavior aside, you have not provided "only academic and valid proofs."

Here is what you have provided so far:

• With reference to this edit of yours in which you reinstated / reinserted the quotes, which were inserted by the Indonesian IPs 180.246.67.138 and 36.79.65.55 previously, from this article without even reading carefully that what is being condemned by the Sunni scholars and which controversial cleric's books have allegedly been uploaded from Iran. Although, the article clearly states: "Islamic Scholars in Somalia’s northern eastern state of Puntland have condemned Shiite books allegedly loaded from Iran which tries to gain foothold in the Horn of African nation, Garowe Online reports......Books spotted in Somalia’s Puntland were largely authored by controversial cleric, Abdullahi Mohamed Yusuf (Al Harari), Sunni scholars said.

Yes, this is the only "reference" you have provided so far. And interestingly and ironically enough, it basically undermines Abdullah_al-Harari. I am sure you didn't realize that till late.

Now let's come to the above excerpt from the article you quoted: That would have really been nice should you have looked into the footnote [66] (in the above excerpt which you quoted) and seen where it is referring to.

Let me help you out. Following is the exact wording of that footnote:

• [66] Publication of the undated APIB center Askandari Sheikh al-Islami. Also given information on the site: www.alsunna.org/azhar2.htm.

And YES, you guessed it right: www.alsunna.org is NOT an independent web-site but a web-site which belongs to the Al-Ahbash. And don't be surprised if you find the same names including the name of Dr. Ahmad Umar (also spelled as Omar) Hashim because the author in the above quote is referring to the information posted on the above URL. AND now read the following (Yes, I will repeat it) again:

The truth of the matter IS that the Al-Ahbash claim to made an agreement with Dr. Ahmad ʿUmar Hashim (from Al-Azhar) and he himself 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.”' Following is the English translation of the Arabic text:

• "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."

Go and figure.

Now here are the references which I have provided:

• "Egypt arrests 22 men for corrupting Islam"- Reuters, 13 December 2007. ("The source said they belong to the al-Ahbash sect – which has a significant following in Lebanon and strong historical ties to Syria – and which is considered unorthodox by many Islamic clerics including the ones at Al-Azhar.")
• Liz Fuller (September 14, 2016). "Analysis: Grozny Fatwa On 'True Believers' Triggers Major Controversy". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty/RFE/RL, Inc. Retrieved March 27, 2017. (Excerpt: "Conference participants, who included Ahmed El- Tayeb, rector of Cairo's Al-Azhar Islamic University, adopted a fatwa stipulating that the sole true adherents of traditional Islam are those who abide by Kalam scholastic theology, belong to one of the four madhhabs (legal schools)......It identifies the Salafi strain of Sunni Islam professed in Saudi Arabia as a "dangerous and erroneous contemporary sect," along with the extremist group Islamic State, Hizb ut-Tahrir, and the Habashis.")

Here is another one:

• McGregor, Andrew (2012). "Al-Al-Qaeda Cell on Trial as Ethiopia becomes a Religious Battleground?". Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume 10, Issue 11. Washington DC: The Jamestown Foundation. Retrieved 27 March 2017.

Here are some questions which hasn't been answered:

• Why would Al-Azhar let Egyptian authorities arrest the Al-Ahbash men if they had "affiliation" with the Al-Ahbash and they agreed to the preachings of Al-Ahbash?
• Why would Egypt's mufti Ali Gomaa (also from Al-Azhar) issue a Fatwa against the Al-Ahbash in which he "described the group as "deviant" and said it sought to "corrupt the Muslim creed and incite sedition amongst the Muslim Ummah. Moreover, they are paid agents to the enemies of Islam."?

• Why would a rector of Al-Azhar support a Fatwa which goes against the Habashis as well as the Wahabis?

No matter how many sources or references are provided, the Al-Ahbash will only accept those sources which will help them to "demonstrate" to the world (through Wikipedia) that they do have "affiliation" with Al-Azhar although Al-Azhar has denied it and challenged it. And once they have achieved this goal, they will come back to the Wikipedia for something else. Because...remember... it is all about marketing, buying the clout and legitimacy by hook or crook.

Thank you. McKhan ^(talk) 07:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Alot of speculation. But I guess since you keep repeating the same baseless things I will repeat something that makes sense.

1. Your AlAzhar "Proof" has NO BACKING by AlAzhar, if you want to prove me wrong you are welcome but you just keep pasting it as if it'll become a reality (Probably the 3rd time Ive said this yet you havent been able to prove it which begs to question your credibility).

Here is yet ANOTHER academic piece speaking about the Mawlid celebration where Dr Abbas Shaman, Vice Chairman of Al-Azhar University was present. Mate you're failing really hard right now.

2. Your "Verifiable Letter" from Indonesia is literally a PDF with hearsay and no signatures and again not through official channels meaning it could have been falsified. (Find me every single fatwa it claims from verifiable source :))

3. Also its strange you post AlArabiya as your source considering it is bias and funded by the Saudi government who opposes Ahbash (Makes sense, they oppose Ahlu-Sunnah entirely). As for your "Why didnt Alazhar stop the arrest" that is baseless because I can go to AlAzhar and claim I am Ahbash while I doing something very illegal and get arrested, any other source than the biased AlArabiya? Or Sheikh Abdullah's books proving what the people in the article did is taught by him?

Also to answer your question about reinserting edits from indonesian IP's, we have many things saying he isnt supported by scholars so maybe we should also mention scholars that do support him? I thought you said we were going for a nonBias approach here? (You havent answered this)

"At first sight, devices such as live interactive lessons or voice chat groups seem to encourage debates within the movement, but, on the contrary, close examination reveals that these instruments are primarily used by the leadership to increase its ideological control on their followers and to attract new devotees. Similarly, if one checks the AICP’s unofficial e-forums (www.talkaboutislam.com), one discovers that they function as ideological spider webs." Again the above is baseless, the website you speak about doesnt even work, nice try though!

Again, you keep claiming Im Habashi and that Ahbash are against Wahhabis, so do you want me to call you a wahhabi? You're good at claiming everyone who edits this page is Habashi or supporting Ahbash while you lean to the side that is 100% against them and claim you are just some random guy who wants to uphold and defend the wiki. Try harder.AbeEll (talk) 15:29, 29 March 2017 (UTC)