Further to the point that those who believe Aļļaah to be a body i.e. occupy a location are not Muslims, as mentioned in "The difference between the Wahabi creed and Islam", here are some quotes by well known scholars testifying to that :
Al-ˆAsqalaaniyy said they are not Muslims:
قال حذاق المتكلمين ما عرف الله من شبهه بخلقه أو أضاف إليه اليد أو أضاف إليه الولد فمعبودهم الذي عبدوه ليس هو الله وإن سموه به (فتح الباري, ابن حجر العسقلاني, دار المعرفة – بيروت ، 1379, 3 / 359)
The brilliant kalaam scholars said: "The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if he called it Aļļaah.
An-Nawawiyy and Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ said they are not Muslims:
قوله صلى الله عليه و سلم ( فليكن أول ما تدعوهم إليه عبادة الله فإذا عرفوا الله فأخبرهم إلى آخره ) قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله هذا يدل على أنهم ليسوا بعارفين الله تعالى وهو مذهب حذاق المتكلمين في اليهود والنصارى أنهم غير عارفين الله تعالى وان كانوا يعبدونه ويظهرون معرفته لدلالة السمع عندهم على هذا وان كان العقل لا يمنع أن يعرف الله تعالى من كذب رسولا قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله ما عرف الله تعالى من شبهه وجسمه من اليهود أو اجاز عليه البداء أو أضاف إليه الولد منهم أو أضاف إليه الصاحبة والولد وأجاز الحلول عليه والانتقال والامتزاج من النصارى أو وصفه مما لا يليق به أو أضاف إليه الشريك والمعاند في خلقه من المجوس والثنوية فمعبودهم الذى عبدوه ليس هو الله وان سموه به اذ ليس موصوفا بصفات الاله الواجبة له فاذن ما عرفوا الله سبحانه فتحقق هذه النكتة واعتمد عليها وقد رأيت معناها لمتقدمى أشياخنا وبها قطع الكلام ابوعمران الفارسى بين عامة اهل القيروان عند تنازعهم في هذه المسألة هذا آخر كلام القاضي رحمه الله تعالى. (المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392, 1 / 199-200)
The saying of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) "let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then when they know Aļļaah tell them…" etc. Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: "This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)) indicates that they (the Christians) do not know Aļļaah, and this is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى) even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name) and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah." Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion and a child, or said he could exist in created things, or move from one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians or attributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه), so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this point made by our predecessor shaykhs."
Ar-Raaziyy said they are not Muslims:
الدليل دل على أن من قال إن الإله جسم فهو منكر للإله تعالى وذلك لأن إله العالم موجود ليس بجسم ولا حال في الجسم فإذا أنكر المجسم هذا الموجود فقد أنكر ذات الإله تعالى فالخلاف بين المجسم والموحد ليس في الصفة بل في الذات فصح في المجسم أنه لا يؤمن بالله أما المسائل التي حكيتموها فهي اختلافات في الصفة فظهر الفرق وأما إلزام مذهب الحلولية والحروفية فنحن نكفرهم قطعاً فإنه تعالى كفر النصارى بسبب أنهم اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ في عيسى وهؤلاء اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ في ألسنة جميع من قرأ القرآن وفي جميع الأجسام التي كتب فيها القرآن فإذا كان القول بالحلول في حق الذات الواحدة يوجب التكفير فلأن يكون القول بالحلول في حق جميع الأشخاص والأجسام موجباً للقول بالتكفير كان أولى (مفاتيح الغيب – دار الكتب العلمية, 16 /24)
"Proofs tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God (who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself. This means that the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body, and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self (i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.) It is sound to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not believe in Aļļaah….
As for the ĥuluuliyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah settles in created things, such as the sky or a human body) and ĥuruufiyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah’s attribute of kalam/speech consists of letters and sounds) sects, we say that they are unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Aļļaah declared the christians blasphemers for believing that Aļļaah’s speech entered into Jesus, whereas the ĥuruufiyyah believe that it settles in the tongue of all those who recite Qur’aan, and in all physical things that the Qur’aan was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and bodies."
As-Subkiyy calls them idol worshipers:
As-Subkiyy in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily attributes:
طبقات الشافعية الكبرى : إنما المصيبة الكبرى والداهية الدهياء الإمرار على الظاهر والاعتقاد أنه المراد وأنه لا يستحيل على الباري فذلك قول المجسمة عباد الوثن الذين في قلوبهم زيغ يحملهم الزيغ على اتباع المتشابه ابتغاء الفتنة عليهم لعائن الله تترى واحدة بعد أخرى ما أجرأهم على الكذب وأقل فهمهم للحقائق طبقات الشافعية الكبرى ج 5 ص 192
"the saying of the mujassimah (anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol, makes them always focus on ambiguous aayahs."
Al-Qurţubiyy and Ibn Al-ˆarabiyy
الصحيح القول بتكفيرهم ، إذ لا فرق بينهم وبين عباد الأصنام والصور.
Similarly, Al-Qurtubīy in his commentary in the Qur’ān narrates from his Shaykh Ibn Al-‘Arabīy regarding the those who say Allāh has a body: "The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and pictures." (Tafsiir Al-Qurţubiyy, 4/14).
Sunni Answers 
Salam.
Those who liken Allah to the creation are of 2 types.
1]Those who really believe that Allahu ta’ala is in the form or image of Man, as did by the sects ofMujassima.They are ,no doubt, disbelievers.
2]Those who stick to the literal meanings of Wajh,yaad, ayn etc for Allah, by saying as is suitable to Him,without likening them to Man, as today’s Wahabis.They are only Ahlul Bid’a and not disblievers.
The 1st group worships a God of their imagination , as made clear by above great scholars of Islam as also by Imam Hujjathul Islam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali.Rah, in his ‘Iljamul Awam’.
Not only “in the form or image of Man.” What Al-Ghazaaliyy said in Iljaamu-l-ˆawaam is:
أعني بالجسم عبارة عن مقدار له طول وعرض وعمق
“I mean by a body something with quantity that has length, width and depth.” Then he says:
من عبد جسمًا فهو كافر بإجماع الأمة السلف منهم والخلف
“The one that worship a body is a blasphemer by the consensus of the nation, both early and later generations.”
Further to this:
Aţ-Ţaĥaawiyy stated {in brackets}: {This is a detailed remembrance of the belief of the People of the Sunnah and following {the Jamaaˆah}. Later he stated, as part of this remembrance,{Aļļaah is above} the status of {having limits, extremes, corners, limbs or instruments.} {The six directions} up, down, front, back, left and right {do not contain Him} because that would make Him {like all created things}. He also agreed that believing that anything else is an insult to Islam, for he said in the same remembrance: {Whoever attributed to Aļļaah an attribute that has a meaning among the meanings that apply to humans has committed blasphemy.} Note that he said this after having already pointed out that the six directions apply to all created things, which includes humans. In other words, the Sunni belief is that attributing a limit to Aļļaah makes one a non-Muslim.
Abu-l-Muˆiin An-Nasafiyy, who is the main authority among the Maaturiidiyys after Al-Maaturiidiyy himself states: “The one who says that Aļļaah is settled over the ˆarsħ has said either that He is like the ˆArsħ, or that the ˆArsħ is bigger, or that He is bigger. Whatever the case may be, this person is a kaafir, because He has claimed that Aļļaah has a boundary (Baĥru-l-Kalaam, 51-52).
Similarly, it was stated by Abuu Manşuur Al-Bagħdaadiy about those who say that Aļļaah has a body, or that events happen in Him or His attributes (such as hearing or seeing one thing after another as they happen to creation) : “All those who disagreed with them say that they are blasphemers, so in this respect they are the worst of all the deviant sects (‘Uşuulu-d-Diin, 338).” He also commented: “By claiming that Aļļaah has events happen to Him, they ruined for themselves the proof of the monotheists which holds that bodies are creations since they have events in them. Based on this principle of theirs, they cannot prove that the world has a beginning, and thus they have no way of knowing the Creator of the world. Consequently, they are like all others who do not know Him (‘Uşuulu-d-Diin, 337-338).” (Ed. That is, they are idolaters.)
In other words, to believe that Allaah has a boundary or size is kufr without a doubt.
Regarding your saying “2] Those who stick to the literal meanings of Wajh, yaad, ayn etc for Allah, by saying as is suitable to Him, without likening them to Man, as today’s Wahabis. They are only Ahlul Bid’a and not disbelievers.”
First, why did you not read the first post which is linked in the above article? Please do, and see the comments also. The major wahabis affirm to Allaah a boundary, which is kufr.
Second, to be exact, this second group are blasphemers also if they mean by this that Allaah has a boundary or size. The reason why one does not make takfiir for the one that says such a phrase right away is because he might be a stupid person who is just repeating phrases he has been told, and he does not understand what they imply. He may not understand that the literal meaning is bodily, but if he understands that, then he is a kaafir, because the meaning is then “a body not like man’s”.
those who believe Allah has an image or form regardless if they say like man or not are non-believers. One of Allah’s names is al-Musawwir (The One Who forms His creatures in different pictures/images) not al-Musawwar.
If Allah had a form or image he would have been in need to the one who specified Him with this form or image.
Those who interpret literally and believe Allah has a real physical hand face or shin are also worshipping something they have imagined. These are also classified as Mujassimah.
Imam Shafiyy explicitly said al-Mujassim kaffir.
As did Imam Ali when he said a group of this umma when Judgement Day is near will return to being kuffar, when asked the reason why he replied “They deny their Creator by attributing to Him a body and limbs.” (Najmal-Muhtadi by Ibn alMuallim al-Qurashi)
Sheikh Abu Adam
you say:
“because he might be a stupid person who is just repeating phrases he has been told, and he does not understand what they imply.”
Sorry if this comes across as rude to the sunni ulema, may allah forgive me, but its been wearing on me for some time and i’d really like to finally get a clear understanding of the reality of situation. please forgive my lack of tact/subtlety and my over-forward way of asking about this. May Allah guide me.
So what do we say about their Ulema…? do we assume that maybe their ulema are stupid and ignorant as well therefore nothing should be said?
I find there to be a strange difference between the minhaj of ulema of the past and almost all modern scholars. (i recognise i could be my misunderstanding something here, may Allah guide me)
It is my understanding that many Ulema of the past would write about those of thier time who they believed to be spreading kufr and make takfir of them when their beliefs endangered the aqidah of the awwam.
E.g ulema of his own time called ibn taymiyya a kafir/deviant/etc and he was jailed for his heretical beliefs and told to recant. (This being an obvious example.)
How come very few modern sunni ulema ever come out and say “so and so is teaching ideas that are kufr, he is not of the muslims” or “his beliefs arent from islam etc”.
if wahhabi ulema are mujassim (or even if just particular indiviuals in their jama’ah are,), why dont sunni ulema publically make takfir of them and make things clear for the awwam?
or if a group are borderline mujassim, why dont we see the big ulema coming out and publically saying “these groups, these institutes, etc are teaching borderline kufr – they might still be muslism but its better to avoid their teachings and here is why: a, b, c.”
I get really confused when i see.. for example, … yasir qadhi or tawfique chaudhury and (insert wellknown sunni scholar here) working together on the same initiative (charity drive for example)
I would’ve thought that if someone is a heretic or borderline heretic that rather than being seen to be hobnobbing with them (and potentially lending legitimacy to them), the sunni ulema would be actively warning others away from them?
Is there some reason that ulema seem to be holding back? is it to not create fitnah and try and convince with dialogue or something? (i’m not even sure thats a valid minhaj, dont we have to call a spade a spade?)
Anyway, appreciating your assistance in this confusing issue.
jazakamullahu khairan
Wassalamu alaikum
You said, “do we assume that maybe their ulema are stupid and ignorant as well therefore nothing should be said?”
I did not say nothing should be said about any such case. In SOME cases, depending on the culture, situation, the state of the individual, a judge may determine that a certain phrase stated was kufr, and in other cases not, because understanding differs among people and their culture. Just because something is not kufr, however, does not mean that one remains silent.
As for scholars remaining silent about deviation, even what does not reach the extent of kufr, this is, in most cases, in itself deviation. It is a duty of every Muslim to stop sins if he is able.
alhamdulilah, thanks for your response and clarification, jazakallahu khairan.
SUBHANALLAH ,SHEIKH I LIKE YOUR APPROACH TOWARDS THESE SO CALLED SALAFIS,NO NEED TO BE SOFT HEARTED TOWARDS THEM. THIS IS REALLY ON OF THE BEST AHLUSUNNAH SITE.