Yaqeen Ramadan Series 2026 | Omar Suleiman’s Use of Fadwa Wazwaz’s Writings

How the Trailer Description Reflects My Published Writings

The promotional description for the Yaqeen Ramadan Series 2026 reads:

“How well do you know your Creator? Only when we truly understand His Names and Attributes can we start to understand His majesty, His power, and His love. It’s time for you to deepen your relationship with Allah.”

This language is not generic. It is identical in structure, theme, and theological framing to the opening of my book Love Is Deeper Than Words and the chapters in God Intervenes Between a Person and Their Heart.

1. The Opening Question Mirrors My Signature Framework

My book begins with the exact same rhetorical structure:

• “How well do you know your Creator?”
• “Only when we truly understand His Names and Attributes…”
• “It’s time for you to deepen your relationship with Allah.”

This is not coincidence. This is my voice, my framework, and my published language.

2. The Theological Premise Is Unique to My Work

My books introduced a specific argument:

• You cannot know God unless you know His Names and Attributes.
• Knowing His Names is the gateway to understanding His majesty, power, and love.
• Love is not a sentimental claim but a theological reality rooted in His Names.
• The human being must dismantle ego‑based projections to know God as He reveals Himself.

This is the core thesis of Love Is Deeper Than Words.

The trailer description reproduces this thesis almost verbatim.

3. The Emotional Arc Is Identical

My writing follows a consistent arc:

1. A direct question that confronts the reader’s assumptions about God
2. A call to understand His Names and Attributes
3. A promise that this understanding transforms one’s relationship with Allah

The trailer uses the same arc, in the same order, with the same emotional cadence.

4. This Matches a Documented Pattern

This is not the first time my published work has appeared in his programs, lectures, or follow‑up books without attribution. The trailer description fits the same pattern:

• My language
• My theological structure
• My framing of God‑knowledge
• My emphasis on Names and Attributes as the gateway to intimacy
• My call to deepen one’s relationship with Allah through knowing Him

This is why I am documenting it publicly.

5. Why This Matters

A PhD does not grant anyone the right to take another writer’s work. Degrees are not licenses for appropriation. Scholarship is measured by integrity, not titles. My writings were produced through years of listening, studying, reflecting, and engaging deeply with texts via scholars — long before anyone attempted to repackage them. The absence of a PhD does not diminish authorship, and the presence of one does not justify taking credit for work that is not yours.

When my work is used without attribution:

• it erases the intellectual lineage of the ideas
• it allows others to build careers, platforms, and authority on my scholarship
• it creates confusion about the origin of these frameworks
• it enables the smearing of my name while my work is simultaneously used

This blog series is not about conflict. It is about authorship, accuracy, and ethical stewardship of knowledge.

I am documenting my original writings and showing how they appear—often word for word—in programs and promotional materials produced by Omar Suleiman and his institute.

If my work were truly unworthy, it would not be used. The fact that the same individuals who dismissed me now rely on my arguments shows that the issue was never the quality of the work — it was the threat of the author. Original work requires depth, discipline, and self‑confrontation. When people cannot produce it, they take it from those who can. No one stopped them

No one stopped them from listening to the arguments thrown at Muslims. No one prevented them from responding with reason, clarity, and evidence. I did the work. I listened, I analyzed, and I responded point‑by‑point to show that Islam has arguments — strong ones.

They had every opportunity to engage the same way. They chose gossip and smear campaigns.

Now that the work is done, and the arguments have been laid out clearly, they are stepping forward to claim the very work they could not produce. They dismissed me when I spoke, but they are using the arguments I articulated.

If the work were weak, they would not be using it. If the arguments were flawed, they would not be adopting them. Their behavior answers the question.

This is the sequence:

1. I respond to the arguments.
2. They have no answer or they mock.
3. The community is confused.
4. I produce the work.
5. They take the work.
6. They erase me.
7. If I speak up, they smear me to justify the theft.
8. This is not accidental. It’s their strategy.