You’ve Been PDF’d!!! (Link Re-added)

With Allah’s praise, I’ve uploaded some of the translations and articles I’ve worked on for QSS to our server (only temporarily, however). I’m posting the links to them here for now, since they haven’t been made available on the QSSC site yet. All of these articles, with exception of one, have already been posted here to my blog, so you won’t really be getting a lot of new goodies, other than getting these articles in the format I intended them to be published in. Enjoy!

Previously Posted: 

  • The Entirety of Faith is Deed (blog) (PDF)

  • Ignorance, Dishonesty, or Both? (blog) (PDF)

  • Prostration for Recitation (blog) (PDF)

  • The Roots of Belief According to the People of Hadîth (blog) (PDF)

New (well, kind of):

  • From Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan al-Halabî’s at-Tanbîhât al-Mutawâ’imah: Rule and Deed-Related Disbelief (PDF) (Link replaced, document may be printed as well).

About Rasheed Gonzales
My name is Rasheed Gonzales. I’m a Muslim convert of Filipino descent. Born and raised in Toronto, Canada, I was guided to Islam through one of my younger brothers and a couple of friends, all of whom had converted to Islam sometime before me (may Allah reward them greatly). I am married with four children (and the praise is Allah’s) and also a volunteer for the Qur'an & Sunnah Society of Canada, based in Toronto.

16 Responses to You’ve Been PDF’d!!! (Link Re-added)

  1. Yusuf says:

    As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu,

    Dear brother,

    I am not necessarily promoting the work of ad-Dawsari, but the way it is being introduced to the reader who does not know Arabic and is relying on an English translation seems a bit incomplete and biased.

    One would have the impression that Raf’ al-La’imah is something from a slanderous tabloid magazine, whereas in reality it was praised by three major scholars of our times – Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Aziz ar-Rajhi, and Shaykh Sa’ad Aal Humayyid – all of whom refer to ad-Dawsari in a proper and respectful manner as a brother and shaykh rather than a musawwid in their introductions. These three great scholars of our time praise someone as a shaykh, and then we are to belittle them and refer to them as a drafter??

    If it is desired to concern the reader who is ignorant of Arabic with these detailed issues, I would suggest that it would be better and more just to give more of a history to the reader who is relying on you for that as translation is an amaanah that we will be asked about. It is a bit unclear to me how a person ignorant of Arabic can really benefit from a translation of a refutation of a book that itself is not even translated?

    Forgive me, I prefer to send this in private but do not see how to contact you in that manner. And Allah knows best.

  2. Wa ‘alaikum as-salâm wa rahmatullah wa barakâtuh, brother Yusuf.

    May Allah reward and bless you for your comment and your concern. I do not have a problem with you expressing your concern here in the comments section of my blog, so don’t worry about it. It’s cool. For future reference however, if you wish to contact me in private via email, I’ve mentioned my email address on the My Work … page of this blog.

    Regarding your concerns about introducing Muhammad bin Sâlim ad-Dawsarî’s book Raf’ al-Lâ’imah to English readers, I’m by no means the first to do so. Various other sites such as SPubs, Ahya, Islamic Awakening, Multaqa Ahl al-Hadeeth, SalafiManhaj, and others, have already introduced it to English readers, whether their mention of the book was positive or negative. Parts of it have even been translated into English (in both written and audio formats) by those who champion it. I don’t even think this is the first time anything from Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s at-Tanbîhât al-Mutawâ’imah (in refutation of Raf’ al-Lâ’imah) has been translated into English (or at least paraphrased) and presented to English readers.

    As for the history of the situation, then while I think it’s safe to assume that this situation will be new to some of those who visit my blog, many of the English speaking Salafî brothers and sisters who were around when the turmoil and contraversy first became known a few years ago (early 2000s) and are aware of it, will know that much of what was going on was introduced to the English readers by SPubs (as well as others-some for, some against) who wrote extensively on this situation. Along with all their other articles on the academic issues pertaining to the situation, SP also published The Halabi Papers (since removed from their site), which was supposed to be a four part article (they only published three, to my knowledge), in which they outlined the situation, translated the summary of Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s original reply to the Committee, and discussed various issues pertaining to the situation. I haven’t checked lately, but they probably still even have the news bulletin they wrote summarizing Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s reply to Raf’ al-Lâ’imah in their news archives on the site, and Allah is more knowledgeable. So I’m sure that if one really wanted, a simple search on Google or some other search engine would produce enough hits to bring one up to speed with what’s happened.

    As for the eulogies to the book by ad-Dawsarî, at least two of them have been translated into English and are available online (particularly those by Shaikhs Sâlih al-Fawzân and ‘Abdul-‘Azîz bin ‘Abdillah ar-Râjihî). Allah willing, Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s replies to those two introductions will be translated and published as well.

    As for the epithet “drafter”, that is of Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s doing, not mine. Your contention should be taken up with the shaikh. I’m merely conveying what the shaikh has written in response to the material against him (some of which, as I’ve mentioned have already been translated into English), because I see some sort of need for it (btw, I only intend to translate the portions of Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan’s book that address the portions of Raf’ al-Lâ’imah that have been translated, along with one or two small sections which I see some benefit in translating). Ironically, however, the same concern can be mentioned with regards to the manner by which some of those who attack Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan refer to him. Shaikhs Sâlih al-Fawzân and ‘Abdul-‘Azîz bin ‘Abdillah ar-Râjihî refer to Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan as “the brother” and “the shaikh” as well (in their eulogies for ad-Dawsarî’s books, at that). Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan has also been referred to as an “ocean” by the likes of Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaimîn, as “our companion”, “brother”, and “our pupil” by his shaikh Shaikh al-Albânî … yet you don’t see Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan afforded this same respect from his opponents, including ad-Dawsarî.

    For the time being, I’ve removed the link to the article. Allah willing, I’ll confer with some of my close friends about whether to put it back up, or remove it completely.

    Again, may Allah reward and bless you for your comment.

  3. Abu Salma says:

    Masha Allaah, a beneficial articles…
    Regarding the book of Muhammad Salim ad-Dusari, then the mashaikh of Madeenah that we asked them, saying that this person is not quallified in writing nor in aqeedah (faith) nor in imaan. I heard the kingdom of saudi jail him after the terrorist attack e few years ago. Raf’ul Laimah, mashaikh gave introduction to this book because they haven’t known the reality of Salim ad-Dusari yet.
    Shaikh Ibrahim ar-Ruhaili, in the past conference about a few years ago in my country (Indonesia), refute him. Also shaikh Abu ‘Umar al-Utaibi, and Jordanian Mashaikh themselves.

  4. sfsdf says:

    How come only the mashaikh of Madinah know the reality of ad-Dawsari ?

    Just because KSA jails some one does not mean anything, even Ibn taymiyya was jailed for his beliefs ( not comparing) ..just staying that it proves absolutely nothing.

    The mashaikh who gave intro only gave because the read it agreed with it, don’t attribute ignorance to them.

  5. Yusuf says:

    Abu Salma may Allah preserve you,

    And what about the mention of the book Al-As’ilah al-‘Iraqiyyah fi Masaail al-Emaan wat-Takfeer al-Manhajiyyah and it’s false attribution to Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan? What do the scholars of Madeenah say about this book?

    And why no mention of the order for lashes and prison for al-Utaybi from the Kingdom now after the conflict with one of the teachers of Masjid al-Haram, Shaykh Sulayman at-Tuwayjri??

    If you wish to bring up names and situations, please present a complete picture of the them to people who are ignorant of the Arabic language.

    I respect whichever position you hold on all of this, but I simply feel to discuss it without mentioning the complete details is unfair to people who are relying on you to explain it to them (i.e. brothers and sisters who don’t know Arabic).

  6. as-Salâm ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah brother Yusuf,

    While there has been mention and talk concerning the controversy surrounding al-As’ilah al-‘Irâqiyyah and its authenticity, to my knowledge, nothing has ever been mentioned on any of the English forums concerning Abū ‘Umar al-‘Utaibî and his situation. With all due respect, doesn’t your introducting this situation to those ignorant of the Arabic language make you guilty of what you’ve blamed others here for?

  7. Yusuf says:

    Wa ‘Alaykum as-Salaam wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu,

    Where was it mentioned in English previously about ad-Dawsari that he was in jail after a terrorist attack a few years ago in KSA?

    This is my exact point of what continuing to concern people with this topic will lead to.. a biased, unproductive conversation that leads to each one trying to bring victory to it’s side. I mentioned al-‘Utaybi’s situation purely as an example, not to open up discussion to it but to give an example of how unfair and incomplete this discussion is to begin with. I was not intending to bring it into the topic of discussion itself as my main point here is that it is not proper to discuss it.

    And if I am guilty of what I am “blaming” others for here, then I ask Allah to forgive me as this was not my intention. And my advice initially and until now was not to “blame” anyone. I am not blaming you or any of the brothers here of being the first ones to open up this subject. As you said correctly that it has been mentioned by many others.

    Again, the point is that fair attention will never be given to all aspects and dimensions of this issue, regardless of which side the refutations are coming from and which scandals exist surrounding each of them. Do you agree with this? If so, then why spend time on it? Do you agree that this particular issue itself is a confusing one to people in Arabic? If so, how would it be possible for non-Arabic speakers to be able to understand it completely and correctly?

    Do our scholars advise us to translate this issue into English? This is a sincere question not a rhetorical one, as I do not personally know the answer and have never heard that we should busy our brothers and sisters ignorant of this issue with it at the expense of more critical productive issues. It just seems like this will continue to promote the culture of testing one another on their points of belief. And Allah knows best.

    I love all you brothers for Allah’s sake, perhaps it is sensing a further divide that already exists between Ahl as-Sunnah that prompts me to type all this.

    May Allah grant us and you tawfeeq to busy ourselves with that which pleases Him.

  8. Where was it mentioned in English previously about ad-Dawsari that he was in jail after a terrorist attack a few years ago in KSA?

    You’re right, probably nowhere. But then again, ad-Dawsarî, other than his name being made famous by his refutation on Shaikh ‘Ali Hasan, is a virtual unknown.

    His name, however, is out there contrary to Abū ‘Umar al-‘Utaibî, whose name the vast majority of the English speaking Muslim population (who are ignorant of the Arabic language) have probably never heard of until it was mentioned on this blog. So there’s a slight difference in the consequences of mentioning what Abu Salma mentioned and what you mentioned.

    Your point about giving an example of how unfair and incomplete this discussion is is taken and understood. I just find it strange how someone who has shown the concern you have would make your point in such a manner. Two wrongs don’t make a right, remember?

    As for asking the scholars what they advise with regards to translating these things, then we can definitely ask. If a brother I know is still in ‘Ammân, I can ask him to ask Shaikh ‘Aî Hasan personally what he thinks of me translating the portions of his book which reply to the portions of ad-Dawsarî’s book that have been already translated and distributed in English.

    Just out of curiousity though, what more critical productive issues do you think are being neglected which aren’t already being addressed by others? This is a sincere question on my part, which you don’t have to answer here if you don’t want to. But I am interested in knowing what your ideas are and you’re always welcome to email me.

  9. Yusuf says:

    Several things have been translated into English by him, such as “A Clarification Concerning the Issue of Taqneen” on SP. In any case, his name was not mentioned by me first in the comments. It’s not about me mentioning him in a negative or bad manner, but to show that there are many aspects to the entire situation not a few, or even many, articles selectively translated into English. I wish good for all Muslims, including al-‘Utaybi, and don’t ever take delight in the trial of any Muslim. Also I did not type the example to get back for what was said about ad-Dawsari – not at all.

    I don’t see what is strange about making my point by demonstrating a counter example of how the other side would respond to show how incomplete the discussion is in the mind of someone who does not know Arabic. It was to show that what is said by others and what has been translated is not the final word. I don’t see how providing this example with the intention of simply mentioning another situation is the same as two people slandering one another with bad names and insults, and Allah knows best.

    You said people have probably never heard of his name before, dear brother what I am saying is that there are entire aspects to this issue that people have never heard of.. so which is more confusing, one name or entire aspects? Further points can be made to show the discussion is incomplete and unfair but mentioning them would only continue to open up the discussion and further confusion.

    As far as ad-Dawsari’s book being translated and him being well-known, where has his name been mentioned besides on AHYA?

    Regarding more critical productive issues.. there are many. In shaa’ Allah ask the brother to ask Shaykh ‘Ali this question as well. Ask the Shaykh to help prioritize what should be translated. One particular, recent topic I can suggest is the correct means and principles for Ahl as-Sunnah to work with Ahl al-Bid’ah and whether or not these are different for us in the West. In light of pledges being made, many people have been left confused on this issue and I’ve seen responses negating these sorts of pledges but no clear, concise point-by-point guide as to what is acceptable in the West for us in how to cooperate with Ahl al-Bid’ah on various platforms as well as in doing good deeds such as feeding poor people.

    Honestly I feel this discussion is becoming more lengthy than necessary and both of us are repeating ourselves in different ways. I was merely making a suggestion to you and do not think it is useful for us to spend much time on this. If you want to continue then I ask Allah to put blessing in your effort and pray that people benefit from it – and Allah knows best.

  10. In any case, his name was not mentioned by me first in the comments.

    Correct. My apologies. I had not noticed Abu Salma mentioning his name in his post.

  11. Yusuf says:

    Not to dig it back up, but I made a mistake in a previous comment. It should be Shaykh Sulayman ad-Duwaish not Shaykh Sulayman at-Tuwayjri. And Allah knows best.

  12. sfsdf says:

    Bro Rasheed,
    If you want to translate some thing really beneficial , you can translate
    http://www.almijhar.net/la_shirk.htm
    You can summarise and cut out the personalities there in…
    Walaikumussalam

  13. “sfsdf”, may Allah reward and bless you for your suggestion and the link. If the article you sent me is an extract from Ilâ ain, Ayyuhâ al-Habîb?, I’ve actually been sent the entire book and was thinking that it’s something that may be good to translate, albeit a bit lengthy. I haven’t read any of it yet though, as I haven’t had the time.

    As I’ve mentioned to brother Yusuf (via email), I’m currently working on a number of things. Some of these have been on hold for quite some time, which I need to get back to. I will keep it in mind though, and if I can find someone who may want to give translating that particular artice (rather than the whole book) a shot, I’ll ask him/her to do it.

    Again, may Allah reward and bless you for the suggestion.

  14. Abū Zayd says:

    Assalâmu ‘Alaykum,

    Brother Rasheed,

    I actually wanted to translate portions of this book as well. This guy Ḥabīb Al-Jifry has many followers in my locality. I think it would be nice if we could both translate this book even though its bit lengthy.

    Let me know what you think insha’Allāh

    wassalam

    Maḥmood Abū Zayd

  15. ilyas says:

    شبهات وردود عن حكم المولد النبوي
    الشيخ عادل بن علي بن أحمد الفريدان

    This is a book refuting this habib al jiriy about mawlid an nabi…..

    This is translated which shows the cunningness of this sufi…..

    Anyway salam akhi rasheed and other brothers and sisters….

    Re your article, then those who are seeking a balanced position, i have a question:

    Do we know the issue of imaan correctly and perfectly to determine the balanced view?

    If yes, then the haqq is clear to you, so why do they not make the issue of imaan clear with regards to the khwaarij of the modern day?

    I live in uk, and the most takferies and the puppies, they use Ad dawsaris papers in making takfeer of muslims….. they say as the article indicates, that action are in ESSENCE IMAAN, so abandoning ACTIONS like Salaat, and NOT RULING BY WHAT ALLAH HAS REVELEAD 100% is proof of KUFUR of ITIQAAD, as they argue, Imaan= belief, saying and action, then kufur= belief, saying and action…….

    I say That what brother rasheed is doing a service to the sunnah and defending the Correct definition of imaan in accordance to the salaf and the scholars of today……

  16. Yusuf says:

    The Khawaarij of our time quote Shaykh al-Islam and the Imaams of Da’wah from Najd as well so according to the guilty by association principle laid out then they are from the Khawarij as well. This is a principle that the other “anti-Wahabi” extreme falls into and causes them to call the da’wah of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab (rahimahullah) a da’wah of takfeer and khurooj.

    The usage of ad-Dawsari’s book doesn’t make him guilty of the actions of those who use it. One must be calm and hesitant to raise accusations and understand that people use different writings for all types of agendas. However, this does not make the actual writing necessarily guilty.

    If the book itself, not the interpretations of those who use it, promotes takfeer then I highly doubt it would have been read, approved and praised by Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Aziz ar-Rajhi, and Shaykh Sa’ad Aal Humayyid. And it unclear how one could charge ad-Dawsari with such a major accusation of being a takfeeri khaariji and then be silent about those who praised the book he wrote, knowing that it would give his work strength.

%d bloggers like this: