ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī’s Oppression and Tabdīʿ Against Shaykh Dānā ʿAbd Allāh
IN A PREVIOUS ENTRY (arafat-lies), I documented the many lies and fabrications of ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī and his followers which they based on some private voice notes of mine from May 2021 that were shared with only one person. They made the most horrendous fabrications and distortions of intent in order to declare me misguided and a hater of the scholars. While they were slandering and attacking me, I had sent the voice notes for a fair evaluation to one of the shaykhs, and he had multiple translations done from different people, and his conclusion was far different from the confirmed and established liar, ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī.
They made assumptions, claims and accusations against me for months and months without producing the audio, even after multiple requests, proving they knew of their error in bringing this private audio as a way to attack and slander me in public.
However, that episode which is still ongoing and continues to gain momentum as we speak is not an isolated occurrence. Rather, it is one of numerous examples where individuals like ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī think that they have the clout and authority to trash and trample upon other Salafī shaykhs and students, lie upon them, make tabdīʿ of them, declare them misguided in religion, and demand acceptance of these rulings.
In this entry, I want to address a similar occurrence that happened earlier this year in January 2026 involving a Kurdī shaykh, Shaykh Dānā ʿAbd Allāh, who is another victim of ʿArafāt and his gang. This is from the angle of the Prophetic command: “Aid your brother, whether he is the oppressor or the oppressed one.”[1] And the command, in the ḥadīth of al-Barāʾ bin ʿĀzib:[2] “Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) commanded us with seven and prohibited us from seven. He commanded us to visit the sick, follow the funeral, invoke mercy for the one who sneezes, respond to the (invitation of the) one who invites, spreading the salām (salutations), aiding the oppressed, and help others to fulfil their oaths.”
And in the ḥadīth of the emigrants who returned from the sea and were asked by Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) what they had seen in Abyssinia. So they described a woman among their ascetics who was carrying a jug of water on her head and a young man pushed her between her shoulders until she fell to her knees and the jug broke. So she protested against them and told them that justice will be done on the Day of Resurrection, saying: “You will know, O treacherous one, when Allāh places the Kursī, gathers the first and the last, and the hands and feet will speak with what they earned (of deeds), then you will know how my affair and your affair will be with Him.” So Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: “She has spoken the truth, she has spoken the truth. How can Allāh sanctify a nation in which their weak are not given their rights from their strong.”[3]
Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz bin Bāz (رحمه الله) said, commenting on āyāt and ḥadīths pertaining to oppression:[4]
These are āyāt and aḥādīth regarding the prohibition of oppression and oppression has a dire outcome and (leads to) great evil. This is why Allāh prohibited it, due to the agression, evil, corruption, hatred and enmity that results from it.
And he (رحمه الله) also said:[5]
So aiding the oppressed is an individual obligation upon everyone who has the ability
Given that this behaviour of ʿArafāt and his gang is not restricted to a country, or to one person, but is a clear pattern, and given that his orbit continues to expand in the English language and he continues to gain new helpers into his cause, from the students of knowledge, then it is important to make a principled stance, in this case, to defend the honour of a brother which has also been trashed and trampled upon with insolence.
A note about “muwāfaqah”. It has been suggested by those within ʿArafāt’s orbit that certain mashāyikh and issues are being raised due to “muwāfaqah”, i.e. agreement of interests. A similitude can be given. Imagine there is a thief who steals from ʿAbd Allāh, Zayd, Khālid and ʿAmr. These four discover, through reports, communication and interation, that they have all been stolen from by the same person. So then they all speak out and warn against the thief. To say here, that they only got together because of “muwāfaqah” indicates that one has not been given tawfīq (success) from Allāh in grasping the reality and abiding by truth and justice. Rather, all four of these individuals getting together to prohibit the evil and establish justice is what is necessitated by the Sharīʿah.
In a like manner, when different people discover that they are victims of an individual (and those behind him and with him) who is proven to be a liar and a mischief-maker, one who attacks Salafīs unjustly, sows the seeds of division between them while praising innovators, and works sedition in Muslim lands, then if they cooperate in order to clarify the truth, or on their own independent initiative, establish the obligation of aiding the oppressed, no intelligent person says that this is “muwāfaqah”.
Once, the above is clear, let us proceed:
A Glimpse into the Modus Operandum of ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī
On 26 January 2026, a question and answer was posted in which the speech of Dānā ʿAbd Allāh, originally in Kurdish, was presented in a question. Despite the reason behind his statement being very clear in the question itself, ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī, with no care or concern at all, proceeded to wildly exaggerate and judge the speaker of the words with tabdīʿ and taḍlīl.
Here is the question (as posted in the message pictured) and the answer in the audio:
Question: What is the ruling on this expression? What was done by the Companions of the Messenger (عليه الصلاة والسلام)! We do not say “Companions (Ṣaḥābah)”, rather, “Those new (to Islām)”. This wording is better and most beautiful, as it contains good manners (i.e. respect) towards the station of the Companions…
ʿArafāt then responded and from what he said was the following:
This is false and repugnant speech, it is misguidance and deviation…
Then went on to mention the levels and virtues of the Companions, and their striving and efforts.
The one who says about them, that we do not say “Companions”, then he is astray, a deviant, an innovator. This resembles the speech of Ḥasan bin Farḥan al-Mālikī, the Mutaraffiḍ, al-Rāfiḍī. He is the one who innovated this innovation.
He then outlines what this al-Mālikī did of dividing the companionship into two types, one which is defined in the Sharʿīyy sense (the Muhājirūn and Anṣār to the time of the Treaty of Ḥudaybiyyah) and one which is linguistic, which is no different to the mixing taking place between the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and the disbelievers and hypocrites. Hence, he removed this label of “Companions” from a large number of them.
He then says:
This speech (i.e. that of Dānā ʿAbd Allāh) is just like it, in that he stripped the label of “Companions” and made them only “Those new (to Islām)”, and this indicates his ignorance and misguidance… so upon the one who made this statement is to repent and recant.
Then he went on to mention names of such Companions who accepted Islām later on, and that they numbered around two thousand, and that they are all “Companions”, and then he said:
So the one who says: “We do not say ‘Companions’ because of what happened from them regarding Dhāt Anwāṭ, this is dangerous speech, it is innovation and misguidance, and the one who said it is an innovator, perishing in his innovation, so he must repent or he is declared an innovator for this saying.
The following should be immediately obvious to the reader:
01 The actual reason for why Shaykh Dānā ʿAbd Allāh said what he said is in the very question itself, and required no further explanation. He did not negate the companionship of those Companions, but simply said that one should stick to what is in the ḥadīth, “Those new (to Islām)”, out of respect for the label of “Ṣaḥābah”, so that the excused error that did occur from some, due to being new to Islām, is not extended to the rest. There is nothing here, neither from near nor afar, where the label of “Ṣaḥābah” is being negated from those involved in the incident.
02 However, ʿArafāt totally missed the point, despite it being as clear as day, from within the very question that he read out himself, and knowingly went on to mispresent the issue, twisting and distorting it into something else, and then making a display of jealousy for the Companions, making wild exaggerations, stupefying his audience, wherein the shock and awe generated from this type of pseudo-scholarship leaves his audience unable to critically think about what they are hearing, the gross misrepresentation and the extremely harsh judgements being issued.
03 For something that he either misunderstood, or deliberately exaggerated, he used all the following descriptions and judgements:
Astray, deviant, innovator, resembles the Mutaraffiḍ, Rāfiḍī Fariḥān al-Mālikī, ignorance, misguidance, must repent and recant, an innovator, perishing in is innovation, he is declared an innovator if he does not repent.
It is from the strangest of affairs, that the followers of ʿArafāt, those who have entered his orbit, and are on the same side of the fence as him, cannot see the simple, comical reality they have been sucked into. That ʿArafāt either has severe problems in comprehension of speech, as the best scenario, or it is deliberate and intended. Then he exaggerates and distorts the matter, makes wild extrapolations, gives false analogies (such as the mention of al-Mālikī), and issues the most oppressive judgements. Then his followers think that he has such jealousy for the religion and is a defender, when all you have is pseudo-scholarship, lies, fabrications and layers of oppression.
This then led Dānā ʿAbd Allāh to issue short clarification and exoneration of himself.
Dānā ʿAbd Allāh’s Exoneration of Himself
Very shortly afterwards, Shaykh Dānā ʿAbd Allāh released the following clip:
Translation:
Regarding this audio that Shaykh ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī refuted that I say that “Those new (to Islām)” are not from the Companions. This (claim) is absolutely false. I challenge everyone who translated my speech from the Kurdish language to the Arabic language to Shaykh ʿArafāt (to prove) that I negated the label of “companionship” or “Companions” from those new to Islām (in that story).
I said: Do not say “Companions” so that this opposition, or what occurred from them does not fall on all of the Companions. For they were only a faction, and they had their excuse, they were new to Islām, (and this was out of) preservation of the name (label) of “The Companions”, this great name, so that this (occurrence) does not fall on all of the Companions. I did not negate the label of “companionship” from them.
Whoever transmitted this speech from me has been treacherous in translation to Shaykh ʿArafāt. I hope you can convey it, may Allāh reward you.
One should note here that Dānā ʿAbd Allāh thought it was treachery in translation, but that does not appear to be the case, because just from the question itself, which ʿArafāt himself read out, it is clear what he intended.
Dānā ʿAbd Allāh’s Article of 7 February 2026
Then Dānā ʿAbd Allāh wrote a lengthy PDF article titled: “Respecting the Name of the Companionship and the Companions: From the Etiquette of the People of Truth. A Study in Explanation of Oppression and Darknesses” (32 pages) to defend his honour and demonstrate the correctness of what he had said, on the basis of which he had been declared a misguided innovator, following the path of the “Mutaraffiḍ Rāfiḍī Ḥasan al-Mālikī”. All of this is an indication of how ʿArafāt treats the honour and standing of Salafīs who have efforts in daʿwah and imparting knowledge of Allāh’s religion.
One of the many notable points that Dānā ʿAbd Allāh pointed out is the blatant contradiction in the speech of ʿArafāt where he said, “He is astray, a deviant, an innovator. This resembles the speech of Ḥasan bin Farḥan al-Mālikī” and afterwards, “This is dangerous speech, it is innovation and misguidance, and the one who said it is an innovator, perishing in his innovation, so he must repent or he is declared an innovator for this saying.
Commenting on this Dānā ʿAbd Allāh said:
Your contradiction is that you judged him to be an “Innovator, perishing, misguided”, then you said, “He must repent, otherwise he is declared an innovator due to this saying.” So I do not know, which of the two rulings is correct, and it is apparent that there is a merging of two clips (in the audio), because there is clear change in the voice in the middle of it.
Note: I have been informed that this is what ʿArafāt and his helpers sometimes do, they take a recording of an answer, or a clip, then part of it will be redone (as in re-recorded), and then merged with the original, and this has been noted by more than one person.
Dānā ʿAbd Allāh’s Post of 11 February 2026
Then—some days after the above article, when he had sent the above article for the attention of ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī—Shaykh Dānā ʿAbd Allāh wrote a post (original Arabic here), a translation of which is below.
Discharge of Liability from Denigration, Division, and Blame
I said previously that my response would reach Sheikh Arafat tonight—regarding his criticism of me—out of goodwill, so that he might reconsider himself and his unjust judgment, and to ward off discord. Otherwise, it is my legitimate right to respond to him, since he made his criticism public and did not advise privately, having attacked me twice and declared me misguided without even understanding the essence of the issue.
After our honorable brother Sheikh Abu Ayyub contacted Sheikh Arafat al-Muhammadi yesterday and informed him: “I am carrying a message to you from our brother Dana Abdullah regarding the issue of the Hadith of ‘Dhat Anwat’…”
Sheikh Arafat replied: “I am not prepared to read anything from it. Let him write a retraction… then I will read it. Let him retract so that there is less gossip about the matter of the Companions…”
Such was the response of Sheikh Arafat to Sheikh Abu Ayyub.
So I say to you, O Sheikh Arafat, out of compassion and sincere advice for you: By Allah, the easiest thing for us is repentance and retraction regarding matters concerning the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), if I have indeed erred in that regard.
The Companions are the delight of our hearts, the crowns upon our heads; we take pride in them and defend them. We fervently strive, seeking reward from the Almighty. But these methods, behaviors, and stances from you, O Sheikh Arafat, are utterly lacking in fairness!!!
You passed judgment, declared innovation, and labeled misguidance in a matter whose details you do not know, nor what was said about it—especially since it was in the Kurdish language!!
Yet, despite that, you are not prepared to read a letter written to you by the wronged party concerned in the matter, with full respect, politeness, and consideration for brotherhood. By Allah, this conduct and arrogance from you are more deserving of review and return.
I will add and say:
First: You and those who translate for you from the followers of Muhammad Abdul-Jabbar want to prove something I never said!! By Allah, this is a lie against me, and this eagerness I see from you to prove it points to serious psychological issues such as vanity and arrogance. Your state of mind says, “I only show you what I see”!! I find myself compelled to quote Sheikh Rabee’s statement on this matter, where he said:
“But the Haddadiyyah have a malicious principle: when they attach to a person a statement he is innocent of and he declares his innocence from it, they insist on continuing to accuse that wronged person of what they have attributed to him. With this malicious principle, they surpass the Khawarij!!” [From: It-haaf Ahl al-Sidq wal-‘Irfan bi-Kalaam al-Shaykh Rabee’ fi Masaa’il al-Eemaan]
Second: It indicates the weakness of your academic level!! You pass judgment on a person, yet you refuse to read the opposing viewpoint—especially since what occurred was not in Arabic. Fairness, rather obligation, required you to hear from the person whose words are in question…
Third: I ask you and those with you to cease the threats and intellectual terrorism—sometimes through declaring innovation, sometimes through warnings, and sometimes through advice laced with threats and slander!!
You demand repentance from me without even understanding the essence of the issue??!!
Let it be known to you: We are not frightened by these unjust exaggerations and strictures, nor do they hold any weight with us as long as your arsenal is empty of evidence and fairness. The Salafi is raised upon the Sunnah, evidence, and proof—he is not deceived by such exaggerations and knows that falsehood has its moment, then fades away. Imam Rabee’ al-Sunnah, when accused of impropriety toward the Companions in several instances and statements, repented and apologized for two issues and recanted them, refuted most of the accusations, exposed their dishonesty in quoting his words, and clarified in some cases that it was not revilement as understood by the bigoted and ignorant…
Fourth: I say with all frankness: Now I understand why Sheikh Nizar uses certain words and methods that contain some firmness; because you exhibit strange, bizarre, unjust, and dangerous behaviors and attitudes, etc. Therefore, Sheikh Nizar is excused in that regard.
Further clarification on this matter will follow.
And Allah is the one whose help is sought, and may blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his family and Companions.
Dana Abdullah Ahmad
23 Sha’ban 1447
Comments and Observations
From what has preceded, the reader can easily relate this situation to the one regarding myself which is pretty much the same, and it is for no reason that ʿArafāt has been declared a liar by many different people, all having their own experiences, or commenting on those of others, after a detailed investigation. There are some notes and observations that can be made.
01 The ease with which ʿArafāt lies, fabricates and distorts in matters that are plain and obvious at first glance to a person with the least amount of knowledge.
02 The ease with which he passes mighty judgements upon people of standing and who are held in respect or deserve it.
03 The arrogant disdain with which he treats people after having slandered and oppressed them, refusing to admit that he was wrong, and refusing to even read their protest and defence of themselves, after they have been slandered.
04 Demanding their repentance from something he either misunderstood (at best) or deliberately lied about, and then made tabdīʿ and taḍlīl of them, indicating the mockery he represents, as a person, of the noble science and endeavour of al-jarḥ wal-taʿdīl.
05 Unleashing his loyalists, trolls and soldiers against those whom he speaks ill of, all of them thinking they are engaged in lofty jihād against misguided innovators and deviants to defend the Companions in this case, or the scholars in other cases, all based on the misunderstanding (at best) or clear dishonesty of their shaykh.
06 The poor victim is then left having to explain himself in a lengthy manner, his voice being drowned out because ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī has already passed the infallible judgement which is deemed irreversible and final, and his helpers make sure of it through various types of intellectual terrorism.
07 Bringing about splits, enmities and hatreds within Salafī communities by polarising them and demanding that his oppressive judgements be enforced and acted upon.
08 The tremendous urgency in what Shaykh ʿAlī al-Ḥudhayfī has been advising for a long time, and he is another victim of long-standing abuse and slander simply for advising with the Sunnah and the advice of the senior scholars, such as Shaykh Rabīʿ in grave and serious matters affecting regional security.
Dr. ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī is the Cause of These Tribulations
By Shaykh ʿAlī al-Hudhayfī
As long as Arafat Al-Muhammadī continues to treat the callers in this way, the problems, the discord, and the disagreements will persist.
ʿArafāt is a very evil man, and I hope you will listen to the wise witnesses, those who desire goodness for the Salafi daʿwah and are far more virtuous than ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī, and there is no enmity between them and ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī.
If a man becomes notorious for evil things, and news about him to that effect circulates widely from all sides, then it is not permissible to ignore these reports as if one had not heard anything and was unaware of anything.
I have highlighted certain matters concerning Dr ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī, including things I personally observed during my acquaintance with him, such as his positions regarding some political parties, and numerous accounts about him shared by many esteemed brothers from various countries, including Arab countries and beyond, which no fair person could deny. All these reports indicate that he is a very dangerous man for the Salafi daʿwah.
Reports of his corruption have received wide circulation (tawātur), in ways that make it impossible for the people involved to collude to lie, and these reports have come from Madinah, Yemen, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, the United Kingdom, and other countries. In some of these countries, the reports are abundant and have been received from more than one location. So, how then, if these reports are combined with other reports? And if these reports are abundant from just one person due to the multitude of routes (of reporting), what if they are abundant from many trustworthy and virtuous individuals, and from various countries?
Therefore, even if some of them were not independenly true, these reports (due to their abundance) cannot be ignored. So what, then, if they are independently true? It is not permissible—by Allah, it is not permissible to disregard this plentiful transmission.
Dr ʿArafāt al-Muḥammadī has divided the Salafis in many parts of the world through his deception, oppression, and conspiracies. He conceals the truth, he endorses certain innovators and deviants, covers for other deviants, and harasses students of knowledge who oppose his conspiracies, targeting them by unleashing his gang of fools against them, and so on.
This man's conspiracies have reached the point where he conceals information about knowledge and fatwās (of scholars), supports certain political parties in their endeavours, the shedding of innocent blood and the overthrow of the ruler. His conspiracies even went so far as to support those calling for the partition of Yemen. What vileness could there be after this?
By Allāh, this man should receive a fair trial and be punished in a way that deters him and other traitors like him.
He deceived some young people and threw them into the arms of certain political parties in Yemen, so these poor young people became (sacrificial) victims of this man.
Scholars have criticised the Ḥaddādiyyah because they make tabdīʿ of errant Salafis on account of errors that do not warrant tabdīʿ. As for ʿArafāt al-Muhammadi and those with him, they fought the honourable people and expelled them from Salafiyyah because they were honourable and protective of the daʿwah. They refused to involve Salafiyyah in the conflicts of political parties.
Many people have attacked the integrity of ʿArafāt al-Muhammadi. Those who have done so include scholars and students of knowledge, and they are numerous. They knew him very well. They accused him of serious things so it is not permissible, by Allāh, to remain silent about these widely-reported deviations. In remaining silent about them, there is great harm to the Salafi daʿwah.
By Allāh, we will be held accountable before Allāh for the daʿwah, for the splitting of the youth, and for allowing the innovators to rejoice (with malice) about the (harms to the) daʿwah.
From his article of 17 Shaʿbān 1447 (5 February 2026)
https://t.me/AliAlHuthaifi55/3145
In closing, we can only recall what that women said in Abysinnia, whose speech the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said was truthful: “You will know, O treacherous one, when Allāh places the Kursī, gathers the first and the last, and the hands and feet will speak with what they earned (of deeds), then you will know how my affair and your affair will be with Him.”
For the record, I have no link or relationship with this brother, Dānā ʿAbd Allāh, I have never heard of him before, however, between Ahl al-Sunnah, there is love and loyalty no matter where they are, and having seen and tasted this oppression, I desired to fulfil the individual obligation mentioned by Shaykh Bin Bāz (رحمه الله) upon whoever has ability, hoping that a burden may be lifted from me on the Day of Resurrection, and that Ahl al-Sunnah recognise and reject his menacing evil and stand up to its perpetrators without fear of anyone but the Lord of the Worlds.
May Allāh protect this brother and anyone else from Ahl al-Sunnah who has suffered the same treatment from these types of people who make tabdīʿ of Salafīs while praising Ḥaddādī innovators, and who claim to love the scholars, but conspire to lie to them regarding the most serious matters affecting states and populations, Āmīn.
Footnotes
1. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (no. 2444).2. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (no. 5635).
3. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaghīr (no. 4597).
4. https://binbaz.org.sa/audios/2228/79-من-باب-تحريم-الظلم-والامر-برد-المظالم
5. https://binbaz.org.sa/discussions/56/عدوان-حاكم-العراق-على-دولة-الكويت-فتنة-ومحنة