What is a Khariji and Who are the Khawarij?

Khariji or Kharijite: a follower of the Khawarij, or the attribute of following the Khawarij.

Khawarij: the group that expels people from the fold of Islam upon innovated principles and revolts against the rulers, causing much turmoil throughout the land

The original Khawarij were the descendents of a man named Dhul-Khuwaysarah, as prophesied by the Messenger of Allah (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace). They are the sect that were responsible for the killing of many of his companions. They differ from the followers of the Salaf (the Prophet and his companions) in that they do not restrict themselves to the understanding which the Salaf had when applying texts related to takfir (excommunication). Hence, they use textual evidences, but fall short in understanding them. This is why the likes of Osama Bin Laden make unrestricted takfir.

Regarding the Khawarij, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, one of the great Salafi scholars of this time, said: “So having enthusiasm and an over-protective love for the religion is not sufficient. They must be founded upon knowledge and understanding of Allah’s religion.”

- abridged from the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

 

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Lamha ‘an-il-Firaqid-Daallah

What is a Sufi and What is Sufism?

Sufi: a follower of Sufism

Sufism: a sect that has introduced many innovated practices and beliefs into the religion of Islam while claiming to be mystical

Sufism was not known in the time of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) or his Companions, nor was it well known in the first three generations after them. It first appeared in Basrah in Iraq, where some people went to extremes in worship and in avoiding the worldly life, something which is admonished in the Quran:

“The Monasticism which they invented for themselves; We did not prescribe it for them.”

Sufis belong to the Illumist school of philosophy which holds that knowledge and awareness is brought about in the soul by spiritual exercises. Orthodox Islam holds that one can achieve true knowledge and awareness through the acts of worship that exist in the Quran and Sunnah.

Sufis believe that their teachers are also a source for legislation in worship, as they will order them to carry out acts of worship that have no basis in either the Quran or the Sunnah. The extremists from amongst them often claim that Allah dwells within His creation (i.e. in people’s hearts, internal organs etc.). Consequently, they ascribe to their Sufi teachers attributes and powers which only belong to Allah, such as the knowledge of the unseen.

They often claim that the texts of the Quran and the Sunnah have an outer, apparent meaning, and as well, an inner, hidden meaning. They hold that the outer, apparent meaning is known to those who practice orthodox Islam, while the inner and hidden meanings of the Quran and Sunnah are known only to their teacher and order. These teachers will often claim that since they have advanced to the inner and hidden meaning of Islam, they no longer need to pray or fast, something that not even the Prophets were excused from.

- from a footnote in the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

 

Quran 57:27

Who was Hasan Al-Banna?

Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949) was a Sufi thinker and political activist, and the founder of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (The Muslim Brotherhood).

Hasan Al-Banna himself narrates that he used to visit the graves and shrines on a weekly basis at which greater acts of polytheism were being performed. In his book Muthakkiraatud-Da’wah, Al-Banna disclosed his fascination with Sufism, how he would accompany the Hasafiya Sufi order and how he would spend long periods of time at the shrines in Diminhoor.

Note: Hasan al-Banna, Abu Alaa Maududi, Sayyid Qutb and all of their followers are clearly not “Wahhabis”.

Hasan al-Banna, Muthakkiraatud-Da’wah, pp. 24-30

 

Who was Abu Alaa Maududi?

Abu Alaa Maududi (1903-79) was the founder of an Islamic sect in Pakistan called Jama’at-i Islami.

Maududi was what is now being termed a “contemporary Islamic revivalist thinker.” After originally opposing the formation of the nation state of Pakistan, he eventually accepted it during the 1940s, when he began a decades-long effort to dominate it.

Maududi wrote much about society, economy, and politics. He was a free thinker who helped introduce the dividing ideology of hizbiyyah (strict loyalty to a particular group or party) to the common masses. Concentrating on issues of social justice, Maududi promoted un-Islamic revolutionary modes of thought which led him to have a distorted view of Islam as being primarily a political system. Overlooking Islam’s fundamentals such as teaching tawhid (true monotheism) and the pillars of the religion such as understanding the realities of the testimony of faith, praying, giving charity, fasting and making Hajj, Maududi spoke in an exaggerated manner concerning the aspect of rulership in Islam.

Speaking about desiring authority in the land, Maududi said, “So without the desire for authority, there is no meaning for calling to a particular philosophy, and there is no meaning for what is lawful and what is forbidden, nor for the prescribed laws.”

Maududi said this, even though the Prophet of Islam (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) clearly forbade desiring positions of authority, because craving after authority corrupts absolutely. He said, “Do not ask for leadership, since if you are given it having requested it, then you will be left alone to discharge it, but if you are given it without requesting it, you will be helped (by Allah) in it.”

Maududi even went a step further by claiming that the principal goal of all of the Prophets was to establish a state: “Therefore the goal aspired for in the messengership of the Prophets in this world did not cease to be the establishment of the Islamic government upon the earth.”

Although orthodox Islam considers this to be an important matter, it does not consider this to be from the pillars of Islam that were mentioned in the source texts of the religion. Hence, it is a great error to overlook the true call of the Prophets while making the false claim that the principle goal which they aspired for was to establish an Islamic state.

Maududi used to base his conclusions upon intellectual and political analogies and deductions as opposed to returning to the textual sources of the religion understood by the early Muslims as a source of guidance. Consequently, he was oblivious to the polytheism, religious innovations and superstitions that were rampant in his political party and native homeland. Furthermore, he fell into the grave error of reviling some of the Prophets and the righteous companions of the last Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace).

His extremism in those things related to politics led him to compare the Prophet Joseph to Mussolini! Disregarding the honour of the Prophets of Allah, Maududi said the following about Joseph:

“This (his request to become the custodian of Egypt) was not a demand to be the Minister of Finance only, as some people understand, this was not a demand of the ministerial office of finance only, but a demand for dictatorship. As a result, this position which Sayyidinaa Yusuf (Joseph) got is almost the same which Mussolini enjoyed in Italy in these days.”

- abridged from the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

 

Abu Alaa Maududi, Tajdeedud-Deen, p. 32-33.

Muslim (no. 4692)

Abu Alaa Maududi, Tajdeedud-Deen, p.34.

Tafheemaat, Part II, p.122, 5th edition.

 

Who was Sayyid Qutb?

“Sayyid Qutb had no knowledge of the fundamental or subsidiary matters of Islam.”

- Shaykh Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee

Sayyid Qutb (1906-66) was born in a small town in Upper Egypt and moved to Cairo as an adolescent in order to further his education.

Qutb began to write in the late 1920s as a poet and literary critic, writing about social and political matters from a secular standpoint. By 1948, Qutb changed his mode of writing, and began to write from a more Islamic perspective, according to the limited knowledge of Islam that he had. Social Justice, his first Islamic book, was published in 1949.

After his return from a two-year study tour in the United States that ended in 1950, Qutb joined al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (the Muslim Brotherhood), becoming one of their leading spokesmen. After the movement openly opposed the government of Jamal Abdul Nasser, Qutb essentially spent the rest of his life in prison after 1954, except for a brief period in 1964-65. After being temporarily released, Qutb was re-apprehended, tried and executed for treason in 1966.

Qutb’s lack of knowledge in Islam coupled by his jailing led him to change his understanding of Islam according to the circumstances he was faced with. Consequently, his writings became more and more radical as time went by. Eventually, his revolutionary ideology of takfir (excommunication) and setting out against the authorities became ingrained in the minds and hearts of a new generation of youth who were looking for something greater than the failed way of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun. To this day, Qutb is considered to be the head of this ideology for all insurrectionary groups.

His new-fangled way of understanding Islam is evident in his attempt to write a tafsir (explanation) of the Quran called Fi Thilalil-Quran (In the Shade of the Quran). Qutb was not interested in following the traditional approach of explaining the Quran, which is to firstly refer to the Quran itself for other verses which clarify the meaning, then the Haadeeths of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) which deal with the meanings of specific verses, or if this does not exist, to refer to the explanations of his companions. Hence, it cannot be referred to as a tafsir in the conventional sense.

Referring to the explanations of the companions is a legislated matter in Islam, because they witnessed the revelation of the Quran and were taught its understanding and application by the one to whom it was revealed. Consequently, they were commissioned to transmit the texts of the Quran and Haadeeths that we read today and were also charged with the responsibility of retaining the explanations of the texts as well as their causes and occasions of revelation. Instead of referring to these important sources, Qutb used his own opinions to explain the Quran – over and above these sources. Consequently, this tafsir contains numerous errors which the Salafi scholars have already clarified for the people.

Because of his ignorance of the orthodox system of Islamic belief, Qutb came up with a hodgepodge of statements collected from all of the various Islamic sects which have sprung up since the earliest years of Islamic civilization. Far from being upon the creed of the “Wahhabis”, Qutb was influenced by the Mu’tazili/Sufi philosophical school of thought which prevails in that area of the Middle East. This system of belief runs completely contrary to the so-called “Wahhabi” creed.

Since he abandoned the methodology of returning to the understanding of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his companions when approaching the texts of the Quran and Sunnah, Qutb became engrossed in the faults and sins of those around him, particularly those of the rulers.

As the Islamic groups such as al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun sought to usurp the authority of the Egyptian rulers, the government responded by clamping down on them, sometimes in brutal ways. This environment caused Qutb to form a particular outlook of the world, and his absence of proper grounding in the methodology of the early rightly-guided Muslims caused him to fall into the dangerous orientation of expelling people from the fold of Islam due to their sins…

Sayyid Qutb’s ignorance of the fundamentals of Islam led him to utter the following statements of perilous excess, “Today, we are in jahiliyah (the days of ignorance), like that which was prevalent at the dawn of Islam, in fact more severe. Everything around us is jahiliyah…”

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, one of the great scholars of this time, was asked whether it is permissible to use the term jahiliyah in an unrestricted manner upon the present-day Islamic societies, to which he answered:

The general jahiliyah went away when the Messenger of Allah (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) was sent. So it is not permissible to employ it upon the Islamic societies in a general sense. As for applying something from its affairs upon individuals or upon some groups and societies, then this is permissible and allowed. Indeed, the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) said to one of his companions, “Verily you are a man who has jahiliyah in him.”

And he (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) said, “My nation will not leave off four affairs of jahiliyah: Pride in noble descent, cursing the lineage, seeking rain through the stars, and wailing over the dead.”

Elsewhere, Qutb said, “The time has reverted back to its original form on the very day this religion came to mankind with the phrase ‘There is no deity worthy of worship other than Allah.’ For mankind has apostatized and gone to the worship of the servants…”

This extreme belief led Qutb to conclude that “the (Islamic) Nation has ceased to be in existence and has not been perceivable for a very long time.”

In fact, Qutb went to such lengths of extremism that he refused to pray the obligatory Friday congregational prayer, believing that its obligation was no longer binding due to the fact that there was no Caliph ruling over the Muslim lands. In his book “The Secret History of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun, Ali Ashmawi said, “And the time for the obligatory Friday congregational prayer arrived so I said to him (Qutb), ‘Let us leave and pray,’ and it was a surprise that I came to know – and for the first time – that he did not use to pray the Friday prayer.”

Even the heads of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun, such as Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, bear witness to the menace of Qutb and his followers:

“And it was in this period that the books of the martyr, Sayyid Qutb appeared, the books that represented his final thoughts (in ideology, before his death). Those which justified the takfir (excommunication) of (whole) societies… the breaking of all sentimental attachments to society, breaking off ties with others, and the announcement of a destructive jihad against the whole of mankind. And showing contempt against the inviters who call for lenience and softness, accusing them of idiocy, and being defeatist… He made this manifest, in the most clear manner in the tafsir (explanation of the Quran), Fi Thilalil-Quran, in the 2nd edition and in Ma’alim fit-Tariq (Milestones), and the bulk of it is taken from Thilal and Al-Islam wa Mushkilatil-Hadharah and others.”

The senior Salafi scholars have clearly alerted the Muslims to these mistakes, which are far from limited to issues of takfir (excommunication). When asked for his opinion about whether or not it was correct for people to keep a copy of Qutb’s commentary of the Quran in their houses, Shaykh Muqbil Ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee, the great Yemeni scholar replied:

“As for the book ath-Thilal and the writings of Sayyid Qutb – may Allah have mercy upon him – then we advise that they not be read at all, because some people from Jamaa’atut-Takfir and some of the youth who were conceived by Jamaa’atut-Takfir were a direct product of the writings of Sayyid Qutb, may Allah have mercy upon him. And Sayyid Qutb was merely considered a writer, he was not considered a mufassir (explainer of the Quran).”

The late Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-’Uthaymin, one of the leading scholars of this century, was asked about the books of Sayyid Qutb, particularly Fi Thilalil-Quran (In the Shade of the Quran) and Ma’alim fit-Tariq (Milestones), wherein he replied:

“My statement – may Allah bless you – is that whoever is sincere to Allah, His Messenger, and his brother Muslims, then he should encourage the people to read the books of those who have preceded us, from the books of tafsir (explanation of the Quran) and other than (the books of) tafsir. These books contain more blessings, are more beneficial and are much better than the books of the later ones. As for the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb – may Allah have mercy upon him – then it contains great calamities, however we hope that Allah pardons him. It contains great calamities…”

Evidently, the senior Salafi scholars have clarified the overabundance of calamitous errors which are contained within Sayyid Qutb’s books. They have spoken about the subjects which have been mentioned in this book, and they have spoken about other areas of creed which Qutb fell into error in, which have not been mentioned in this book. Anyone who still insists on hanging on to certain personalities from amongst the Islamic “thinkers” such as Sayyid Qutb, Abu Alaa Maududi, and Hasan al-Banna, and refuses to reject the deviation of the contemporary groups and movements, has removed themselves from the methodology of Salafism, even if they attempt to ascribe themselves to it.

- abridged from the book, The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimun

(The Muslim Brotherhood)

Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (The Muslim Brotherhood) was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949), a Sufi revivalist thinker and activist.

Following Britain’s military occupation of Egypt, al-Banna’s sensitivity towards Western imperialism was heightened due to his country’s economic exploitation and cultural domination. Consequently, al-Banna saw fit to create an Islamic group which would oppose the secularist tendencies and corruption of state and society which existed by asserting a return to Islamic values and ways of life. He introduced this organization into Egyptian society by relying on pre-existing social networks. The group consistently attracted new recruits and established numerous businesses, clinics and schools. Appealing to a variety of constituencies, al-Banna recruited followers from a vast cross-section of Egyptian society by addressing issues such as colonialism, public health, educational policy, natural resources’ management, Marxism, social inequalities, Arab nationalism, the weakness of the Islamic world and the growing conflict in Palestine.

Al-Banna did not begin or end his call with the basic tenet of Islam, tawhid (singling out Allah in all forms of worship), as was the way of the Prophets. Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun have consistently overlooked the principal aspect of calling their followers to tawhid and forbidding them from polytheism, because these are matters which require time and effort to change, matters which people do not find easy to accept. Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun were more concerned with amassing groups of people together rather than calling the people to the way of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace).

Consequently, they accommodate every kind of religious innovator in their ranks, giving them a platform to openly call to their various contradicting beliefs. Amongst al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun can be found followers of Sufism, the Jahmiyyah (those who deny that Allah has any Attributes), the Shee’ah, the Mu’tazilah (a philosophical school of thought that also denies Allah’s Attributes), the Khawarij (those who expel people from the fold of Islam due to their sins), modernists, and many others. This methodology of political expediency results in Islam’s clarity being replaced with something that is bewildering and blurred. Allah has said,

“You consider them to be united, but their hearts are divided. That is because they are a people who understand not.”

As the group expanded during the 1930s, it quickly transformed into an entity which would become directly active in the Egyptian political scene. Directly confronting the rulers, the organization became highly clandestine. This religious innovation of secrecy can now be found in the other more dangerous sects such as al-Qaeda and Jamaa’atul-Jihaad. After a series of back and forth assassinations between group members and the government, Prime Minister Nuqrashi Pasha disbanded al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun in December 1948. Although it has pursued a considerably more peaceful approach to its call since the 1970s, they set the stage for the other Qutbist groups that would take up where they had left off.

It is from the fundamental principles of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun that they consider the lands, possessions and blood of the Muslim nations to be theirs, as if these nations which they preside in were places of experimentation. Accordingly, they sacrifice generations and generations of people for the attainment of rule. They believe that they can attempt to search for different ways to establish the religion of Islam, as if the texts of Islam do not actually contain an outline and divinely set method in which to do this. Directly contravening the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allah, they have yet to experience anything resembling success.

- abridged from a footnote in the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

 

Quran 59:14

 

What is a Salafi and What is Salafism?

The reader will notice that the word “Wahhabi” is always indented with quotation marks here. Those who are labelled with this word do not themselves use this term, as it is used as a means of belittlement. The reasons for the rejection of this term are clearly outlined throughout the book. The correct way of referring to them is by terming them Salafis, as they are those who adhere to the way of the Salaf – the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his companions.

Following the way of the Salaf is the way which has been legislated in the Quran and Sunnah, the very sources of Islam. The Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) said to his daughter Fatimah: “Indeed, I am for you a blessed Salaf.”

When asked about which was the correct and acceptable way of understanding Islam, the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) replied by saying: “That which I and my companions are upon.”

Similarly, Allah says in the Quran that He is pleased with the companions “and also those who follow them exactly (in faith).”

As such, He said regarding the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him security) and his companions:

“So if they believe as you (i.e. the Salaf) believe, they are indeed rightly guided.”

All of the orthodox scholars of Islam followed the way of the Salaf in understanding religion. Early scholars such as Imam al-Awzaa’ee, who died 157 years after the Prophet’s emigration to Medina, said: “Be patient upon the Sunnah, and stop where the people (i.e. the Salaf) stopped, and say what they said, and refrain from what they refrained from, and follow the path of your righteous Salaf; for verily, sufficient for you is what was sufficient for them.”

Today, one of the famous Sunni schools of jurisprudence is named after a scholar named Abu Haneefah. Millions of Muslims all over the world ascribe themselves to his school of jurisprudence; those who the media would term “mainstream” Muslims. Regarding adherence to the Salafi methodology, he said, “Adhere to the narrations and way of the Salaf, and beware of newly invented matters (in religion), for all of it is innovation.”

The orthodox scholars who came after these early generations also followed the understanding of the Salaf in religious matters. Imam ath-Thahabi said: “It is authentically related from ad-Daraqutni (a scholar from approximately 1,000 years ago) that he said: There is nothing more despised by me than ‘ilmul-kalaam (innovated speech and rhetoric). I (adh-Thahabee) say: The man never entered into ’ilmul-kalaam, nor did he enter into argumentation (i.e. philosophy), he did not delve into that. Rather, he was Salafee (a follower of the Salaf).”

The present day scholars who stick to the mainstream understanding of Islam also ascribe themselves to the way of the Salaf. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable of scholars alive today. Regarding Salafism, he made the following remark: “It is not a party from amongst the various parties… Hence Salafism is a group of people who are upon the way of the Salaf, upon what the Messenger (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) and his Companions were upon; and it is not a party from amongst the contemporary groups present today.”

The media claim that Salafis/“Wahhabis” believe that all those who do not follow their form of Islam are heathens” is a tall tale. Salafis believe that those Muslims who do not follow the understanding of the Salaf are not adhering to these and other clear texts. As such, they do not fall under the above-mentioned Quranic verse as being “rightly guided.” Salafis distinguish between those who fall into religious innovation and those who fall into disbelief.

When considering the proofs which are contained within the Quran and Sunnah and the statements of all the orthodox scholars of Islam from the earliest generations to the present time, it becomes obvious that it is a great blunder for the media to refer to Salafism as being a new movement called “Wahhabism” which came about only two centuries ago during the time of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab in Saudi Arabia.

“So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?” [Quran 10:32]

- abridged from the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth

 

al-Bukhaaree (no. 2652)

Saheeh Sunan at-Tirmidhee (3/54)

Quran 9:100

Quran 2:137

al-Hujjah (6/A-B) of Ismail Abu Fadhl

Sawnul-Mantaq wal-Kalaam (p. 32) of As-Suyuti

This statement does not come from the standpoint of being narrow-minded. On the contrary, any open minded individual will research the authenticity of any claim that something constitutes revelation from the Creator. If this claim is found to be true and its texts require the person to submit to its decrees, it would not be from wisdom to then proceed to search for contradicting knowledge that leads to uncertainty. Most philosophers would not try to claim that philosophy leads to certain knowledge. For that reason, you will find some philosophers looking at objects and discussing whether or not they are actually in existence.

Philosophizing and leaving the texts and understanding of the Salaf is what leads groups like al-Qaeda to establish new methodologies in religion. Consequently, conjecture is something which is censured in Islam.

“They follow nothing but conjecture; and verily, conjecture avails nothing against the truth.” [53:28]

Siyar A’laamun-Nubalaa’ (16/457) of Ath-Thahabi

Refer to the cassette, “at-Tahdheer min al-Bid’ah”, second cassette, delivered as a lecture in Hawtah Sadeer (Saudi Arabia).

Saudi Time Bomb? Analysis: Wahhabism, PBS Frontline (Nov. 15, 2001)

Who is Allah?

Is Allah the “God of the Muslims”?

“Allah, there is none deserving worship other than Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of everything. Neither slumber nor sleep overtake Him. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth…”

- Quran 2:255

Since September 11, many people have heard the name Allah for the first time. Europeans are used to hearing the word God in English, Got in Afrikaans, Gott in German and Gudd in the Scandanavian languages. The word Allah seems like something foreign to them, and therefore, they usually dismiss the whole concept of Allah as being a foreign God of a foreign religion.

Even government officials involved in the field of education seem to be ignorant about the reality of the name Allah. For example, on November 2, 1997, CAIR reported that Dr. Henry Jordan, a South Carolina Board of Education official stated that Islam is a “cult” that worships “Lucifer,” and hence he was quoted as saying, “Kill the Muslims.” After making an apology for his remarks, he said the following in a letter to a concerned South Carolina Muslim, dated September 2, 1997: “If you are not smart enough to read through the news and see what really transpired from this news event, it is no wonder that you think salvation can be obtained by good works and having faith in Allah…I would encourage you to…ask the God of the Bible, Jehovah, not Allah, and God, the Son, Jesus, to remove the veil from your eyes and heart and reveal the truth to you before it is too late.”

Dr. Henry Jordan would do well to know that Allah is actually “the God of the Bible,” and that the word God and Jehovah are not found anywhere in the original scriptures. Jehovah is an altered version of the four letters Y.H.W.H. which are found in the Old Testament. These letters are not found anywhere in the New Testament. The true name of God can be found in the revealed scriptures of the Semitic languages such as Hebrew and Arabic. In Hebrew, God is often transliterated as El, Elah, Eloh or Eloah. When it is used in the plural to express grandeur such as “We” instead of “I,” it is written as Elohim. A god in Arabic is transliterated as Ilah. In his footnote for Genesis 1:1 of the New and Improved Edition of the English Bible, the Rev. C.I. Scofield, D.D. alternatively transliterates the word Elah with Alah.

After being translated from Greek to English, the New Testament still contains an element of its Semitic roots. Mathew 27:46 refers to God as being Eli, and its twin narrative, Mark 15:34, refers to God as Eloi.

Muslims believe that the word Allah is the actual name of God which means “The God” in the definite form, meaning “the one God worthy of worship.”

Linguistically speaking, the word cannot be modified in the same manner as words like gods, goddess or tin god, and its true disposition can only be hidden behind incorrect transliterations of the word. El, Eli, Eloi, Eloh, Eloah, Alle, Elah, Alah, El-lah, Allah, or Allaah, all of these transliterations point towards one common name of the One God of the Hebrews, Arabs, and all of mankind.

- abridged from a footnote in the book: The ‘Wahhabi’ Myth