What’s the Deal with QSS?!

(PDF Version)

First, I’d like to start off by saying that it’s really unfortunate that disclaimers like this need to be made, but quite often, people read a statement from someone associated with a particular group and suddenly that person becomes a spokesperson for said group and whatever he says is assumed to be what the group says, when that’s not necessarily the case. So let it be known to those who suffer from this disease that I am not a spokesperson for QSS and what I am writing here is not an official QSS statement (or even an unofficial QSS statement for that matter), nor does the organization or those associated with it necessarily hold to what I will be saying here. What is written here is something purely from myself.

With that said, I really did not want to write this post. Quite a while ago, I mentioned in the comments to one of my posts from 2007 that I did not want to get into these issues on my blog. Unfortunately, it seems that like a bad case of herpes, however, this crap will just not go away. Over the past year or so, I’ve gotten a few emails asking about various issues concerning QSS, its president (Abdulmonem Burkhes), some of the speakers that have been invited to its conferences, and some of the positions it appears to have taken—usually in relation to something Shaikh Rabî’ bin Hâdî al-Madkhalî has said. Now, as far as I’m aware, no official (or unofficial) statements have ever really been issued by the organization regarding these things. Much of what has been said has usually come from the organization’s opponents and critics, or those who have some sort of tie to it, whether they be associates of or volunteers for the organization, friends of associates or volunteers, or those who attend QSS’s classes and lectures. I can really only think of one statement issued by QSS regarding any sort of “controversial” topic; an email sent out to address a copyright infringement matter involving Khalid bin al-Walid Mosque several years ago. Other than that one aberration, QSS as an organization has usually remained silent on controversial issues and remained focused on its main objective: the propagation of Islamic knowledge within its community and inviting scholars from overseas to lecture here in the West.

Now, with regards to these emails I’ve received, I’ve tried to answer them in the best manner I could think of, rarely addressing their specific questions directly while trying to advise them of what would be of most benefit to them. A few days ago, however, I came across a post on one of the English Islamic forums written by a brother here in Toronto in reply to the following question:

as salaamu alaikum who is the head of QSS now and is there any problems surrounding him or the organization?in the past our shaykh rabee had spoke about the president of the organization

The brother answered saying:

It remains ‘Abdul-Munim al-Leebee, the one who Shaykh Rabee’ (and others) have warned about, they remain tied to Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee, Usaamah al-Qoosee, Abu Usaamah adh-Dhahabee, Alee Hasan al-Halabee etc. and their youth continue to warn against/mock/ridicule the Salafees in Toronto and their belittlement of Shaykh Rabee’ has increased much more since that time.

Their issues are more than Shaykh Rabee’ warning against there[sic] leader alone as the above would alude[sic] to. An invitation was made (by Shaykh Rabee’) to the followers of QSS to leave ‘Abdul-Munim, unfortunately some stuck with him regardless.

This post, in addition to the emails I’ve received mentioned above in which the senders sincerely asked what the deal was, prompted me to write this post. The fact that this crap keeps coming up time and time again got me thinking that it should be addressed publicly. Hopefully, what I write here will answer some of the questions I chose not to address directly in at least one of my replies to those emails, as well as prevent any future questions directed to me regarding these same issues; I hope this isn’t taken the wrong way, especially by those sincerely looking for the truth of the matter, but quite frankly, I’m rather tired of being asked about it and of having people bring up the same topics over and over again whenever the “other side” publicly makes some retarded statement; it’s nothing against those sincerely wanting to know what the deal is, it just becomes very reduntant and very draining and disheartening having to explain and clarify things time and time again.

Let me start off by saying that I find it rather pathetic—and almost hilarious—how some people behave with regards to the people of knowledge. Once a person has been refuted for whatever reason, in whatever issue, and subsequently kicked off the list of those upon the correct methodology, these people make it a point to drop any sort of honorific the refuted person was referred to with in the past. I’m speaking with specific respect to the scholars and shaikhs mentioned on their lists of supposed deviants, innovators, and heretics to avoid. In this case: Shaikhs Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribî, Usâmah al-Qūsî, and now ‘Alî Hasan al-Halabî, who, at one time was referred to by some of these people as ‘Allâmah, is currently the latest victim of Shaikh Rabî’ al-Madkhalî’s dreaded ire. It’s as if these scholars have suddenly lost the seas of knowledge that Allah had blessed them with and thus, the right to be referred to as “shaikh” merely because their “flag bearer of disparagement and accreditation” has spoken ill of them. These people have no real respect for knowledge or its carriers. Their respect lies solely with specific individuals and personalities and whoever these individuals and personalities approve of. And rather than making the evidences their guiding light, they’ve taken the opinions of men as infallible revelation, never to be questioned or rejected.

As for brother Abdulmonem Burkhes, QSS Chairman, he is a man, along with these others mentioned on the list, who has been unjustly demonized and oppressed; may Allah give him and the others what is rightfully theirs on Judgement Day. I swear by Allah, why Shaikh Rabî’ warned against Abdulmonem boils down to the latter’s refusal to toe the line and unjustly warn against Shaikh Abul-Hasan (that’s right, unjustly!!!); the same goes for Shaikhs Abū Hâtim (al-Qūsî) and Abul-Hârith (al-Halabî); they also refused to toe the line with regards to Shaikh Abul-Hasan and were punished for it. Shaikh Abul-Hasan, likewise, was punished for refusing to toe the line, but in his case, it was with regards to attacking Shaikh Muhammad al-Maghrâwî of Morocco, something that has been testified to by Shaikh Salîm bin ‘Îd al-Hilâlî during a question and answer session that took place at Brixton Mosque in London, England in August of 2002 (an audio recording of this statement is available on the internet, but will soon be published here in text, with Allah’s permission, retranslated; what’s mentioned at the end of this recording also has some relevance to what’s going on with Shaikh Abul-Hârith).

This claim that “[QSS's] youth continue to warn against/mock/ridicule the Salafees in Toronto,” is nothing short of retarded. Firstly, QSS openly regards itself as a Salafî organization. Likewise, its associates and volunteers, including myself, openly profess Salafism as our chosen methodology. It should be a well known fact to all who know the slightest bit about QSS that it now operates out of Toronto, so even if this claim were true, it should be painfully obvious to anyone with half an ounce of common sense that the “QSS Youth” (who are these anonymous “QSS Youth” anyhow?) wouldn’t be warning against, mocking, or ridiculing themselves. There is also the fact that there are a large number of Salafî brothers and sisters (a lot more than the mere 200-300 Salafîs the Toronto Sun reported the same brother from Toronto who wrote the reply quoted above claimed lived in Toronto—where and how he came up with this number, only Allah knows) who live in the city and do not align themselves with either TROID (who this brother obviously intends by “the Salafees in Toronto”; as if they’re the only ones) or QSS; I also highly doubt that the “QSS Youth” are warning against, mocking or ridiculing these brothers and sisters.

Secondly, and I’m extremely sorry to shatter any delusions of grandeur these brothers might have about themselves, but many of us—those actually considered “QSS brothers”—don’t have this obsession with them that they seem to want us to have. Perhaps because they seem to take every opportunity they get to attack and demonize QSS and those affiliated with it they think that QSS does the same. Quite frankly, however, QSS has better and more pressing things to tend to than to approach anyone and everyone they come across to warn them against the “evils” and “deviances” of “the Salafees in Toronto,” i.e., TROID. Now, while I’m sure that there are those affiliated with QSS who have made statements criticizing TROID for the bigotry, the partisanship, the blind adoption of opinions and positions, and the sometimes outright retarded behavior they’ve displayed, I’m absolutely certain that if you were to collect and compare the instances where either side has made public verifiable recorded statements about the other, whether written or spoken, you would find very little coming from QSS and those affiliated with it about TROID and literally pages upon pages of statements from TROID about QSS and its affiliates. Honestly, what need does anyone affiliated with QSS really have to warn against, mock, and ridicule TROID when their behavior and methodology of dealing with controversial matters speaks volumes on its own and gives many others more than enough reason to turn away from them and their way?

As for this allegation that QSS belittles Shaikh Rabî’ al-Madkhalî, it is something that often is mentioned when these people criticize it, or any other Salafî organization or group that opposes them for that matter. It is a false and baseless accusation and those who utter this lie need to «bring [their] proof if [they] are truthful» (2:111 & 27:64). Shaikh Rabî’ al-Madkhalî is a Salafî shaikh and one of the scholars from the People of the Sunnah of our time. The shaikh, however, is not Allah. He is not a prophet. His words and opinions are not revelation and just as is the case with any man, his statements can be accepted or rejected. No one is under any sort of obligation whatsoever to take what he says, let alone impose it on others. His being labelled “the flag bearer of disparagement and accreditation of our time” by some does not mean that he cannot err in his judgements and cricitisms, nor does it mean that his judgements and criticisms will always be fair and just. Stating these facts and basing one’s own opinions and stances on knowledge of instances where the shaikh has erred or was unjust in his judgements is not belittling the shaikh; anyone who thinks it is seriously needs to get his head checked. For some reason, many people forget the fact that our scholars and shaikhs are human. They suffer from some of the same vices and shortcomings we “mere mortals” suffer from. We feel jealousy and envy towards others, they can feel jealousy and envy towards others. We let our anger get the best of us, they can have their anger get the best of them. We can have our personal feelings cloud our judgements, they can have their personal feelings cloud their judgements. Yes, Allah has blessed our scholars with knowledge, piety and godliness, and they deserve our love and respect for what Allah blessed them with, but He has not made them infallible or superhuman. If the imams and scholars of the past can have personal beefs occur between them (e.g., what happened between Imams al-Bukhârî and adh-Dhuhlî concerning the issue of the articulation of the Qur’an), then who are the likes of Shaikh Rabî’ al-Madkhalî and the other scholars of our time in comparison to them?!?!

Concerning this invitation to “the followers of QSS to leave ‘Abdul-Munim,” I have personally known brother Abdulmonem for several years. Throughout the time I’ve known him, I have never known him to have lied, carried tales, or display blameworthy partisanship to a particular individual or group. Although I do not agree with everything he says or does, I see him to be an upright Salafî brother. I have benefited enormously from his direction and advice and not only consider him one of my teachers, but also a dear friend; someone I have a great deal of respect for. You cannot tell me the brother is a liar, a tale carrier, and a partisan and expect me to believe these accusations when they are made without giving any evidences whatsoever. It’s downright foolish to expect anyone to abandon another person merely on the basis of empty accusations, regardless of who makes them. If you want me to give the shaikh’s words regarding Abdulmonem any weight, you’re going to have to come with something more substantial than unsupported accusations. Provide legitimate evidences to back them up, otherwise, the accusations mean nothing to me. This is Salafism; we accept statements and opinions based on the evidences that support them and their conformity with the truth, not merely on the basis of who made them. If anyone wants to accept what the shaikh said about Abdulmonem on this basis alone though, that’s fine by me. Those of you who do, however, shouldn’t fool yourselves thinking that you’re doing anything more than just blindly adopting the shaikh’s position as your own, because that’s all you’re doing.

Stay tuned as there’s possibly more to come regarding specific issues and claims made against QSS and those who affiliate themselves with it.

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.

143 Responses to What’s the Deal with QSS?!

  1. Islam Blog says:

    Salamualaykum,

    Are the Troid ‘salafis’ a sizeable group or is it a fitnah that is Insha’Allah dying down.

    I ask this because I am from India and don’t have first hand knowledge about these groups except for what is available on the internet, by which I was at one time influenced.

    Jazakallah

  2. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah,

    TROID, as an organization isn’t that large.; they have a small community in their end of the city, as well as followers scattered throughout the rest of the Toronto and the neighbouring cities (e.g., Mississuaga). Their presence on the internet is definitely a lot larger than it is in the city.

    Personally, I’m noticing an increasing number of brothers and sisters who are beginning to seek benefit from where they find it, whether it be with QSS, with TROID, or with some other mosque or organization that has a presence in the city (e.g., the Abu Huraira Center, al-Maghrib Institute, etc.), which is a good thing, because they are starting to use their brains and making up their own minds regarding these matters, rather than remaining content with being spoonfed what to believe or how to think. The advices from scholars like Shaikhs ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbâd, ‘Alî Hasan al-Halabî, Usâmah al-Qusî, and others, regarding these issues has had a positive effect, I think; and to Allah is the praise.

    Sadly, however, you still find that this tribulation continues to be fuelled by organizations like TROID, as well as their counterparts in various other countries (e.g., SPubs in the UK, Sunnah Publishing in the US, etc.). You also still see people being affected by their spindoctoring and biased partisanship. Hopefully, this current controversy revolving around Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan opens more eyes than the controversy revolving Shaikh Abul-Hasan did and more and more of those who follow this methodology of exaggeration and excessive roughness and harshness leave this destructive and harmful path.

  3. Islam Blog says:

    Jazakallahu Khayran

  4. Wa iyyakum.

  5. Pingback: Shaikh Salîm al-Hilâlî On Manhood & Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribî « Rasheed Gonzales

  6. omar says:

    “Secondly, and I’m extremely sorry to shatter any delusions of grandeur these brothers might have about themselves, but many of us—those actually considered “QSS brothers”—don’t have this obsession with them that they seem to want us to have.”

    I think, with such a lengthy response, you have inadvertently undone your own point :P

  7. Omar! as-Salam ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah. How’s it going?

    Why’m I not surprised you’d crack on that :P .

    Hope you and the family are doing well. When are you coming up to visit the in-laws next?

  8. ms says:

    sallam,
    Ok this is a bit long but please give it a shot.
    I see your point(s) and agree with much of what was said. Although I would like to note on something concerning the seeking of ilm. I am sure you agree that it should be taken from the correct source (the people of ilm). I bring this up only because of your reference to al-magrib institute. I have had personal encounter with at least two their teachers. One of them in my estimation is far away from ilim and salafiyah, and the other better in terms of ilm but openly discourages those around him from being or becoming close to salafiyah or it people. The other teachers I am don’t know much about but I do know they all studied but is that enough? Even though they might posses some ilm the direction they call to is not salafi as far as my observations. Other than that the majority of the folks that attend their classes start having a cult like mentality, by Allah at times they will not return the sallam of a person they might view as salafi. I am speaking concerning the ones I have run into in Cali. And Seattle here in the US, so this might or might not be the case elsewhere.

    The other point I wanted to point out was that the reverse of your relationship with brother Abdillmunnim might be true as well, and we need to keep that in mind. Meaning the person might have a strong trust or relationship with the shaykh and thus take his words to heart, barrakallah feek. So if he says something about a person the trust him.

    May Allah bless you and brother Abdillmunnim and all those that contribute to the good you folks are doing. But I just wanted to point these things out to you not as any type of criticism but rather as sharing a brotherly point of view.

    I would like to know your input on what I said, for my own sake. And we ask Allah to keep our shaykhs (especially shaykh Ali at this point in time) and our brothers safe from what is being trumped up of fittnah.
    Barrakallah feek,
    Wassalam

  9. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam, “ms”.

    With regards to al-Maghrib institute, I’m aware of some of the issues with their teachers. I for one will not go to their seminars myself (for various reasons, not all religiously based or even reasons that are founded on concern for what they’re upon). With that said, however, I do have a few very close friends who have gone to their seminars and found quite a bit of benefit in them. al-Maghrib provides a service to the Muslim communities in the cities they hold their seminars in: they are teaching those who wish to attend their courses basics of Islamic theology and jurisprudence and are helping their students build a foundation from which they can grow; this is something that very few groups, if any, are providing.

    Often you find new Salafîs who get immersed in controversial issues while having very little to no foundation of Islamic knowledge or understanding whatsoever. Very few of them understand the principles they regurgitate after having them shoved down their throats, and even fewer understand that while these principles are true and something that the scholars of Islam have formulated, they don’t always apply; Shaikh Ahmad bin Sâlih az-Zahrânî has a very nice article on the difference between founding principles and their application that will hopefully be made available to English readers in the near future.

    Now, with respect to al-Maghrib Institute, I see a lot of benefit in what they provide, especially with regards to what they’re providing to Muslims who’ve just begun their quest to seek knowledge. So long as their benefits outweigh their potential harms, I see no reason to block and prevent people from that benefit by warning against them or disparaging their effort and work. Doing so will only harm those who are actually in need of what al-Maghrib provides, i.e., a foundation for learning: the basics of Islamic theology and jurisprudence.

    As for what you mentioned regarding the reverse situation regarding brother Abdulmonem, like I mentioned at the end of my post, if anyone wants to trust what Shaikh Rabî’ said about him and blindly adopt the position the shaikh has told others to take against him, that’s fine by me. Like I said, however, these people shouldn’t fool themselves thinking that they’re doing anything other than blindly adopting the shaikh’s position, i.e., taqlîd of the shaikh.

  10. ms says:

    Barrakallah feek,
    This seems to be the point that most people are arguing about at this time. As far as you see the good is more than the harm, but in my estimation from what I have witnessed the harm is more case and longer lasting in thier case, and Allah knows best. Not becasue nothing is being learned but rather the implementation of what the brothers and sisters learn at almagrib is not correct. And I think that is in a large part due to the direction of the institute. As example is what i said before about giving the sallam, rather I have wittness them brand the salafi’s as trouble makers and on a few occations attack one alim in specific (shaykh salih as-suhaymee). And i personaly know many of the attendents end up with a takfeeri type attitude. And view thier teachers as “the ullamah”, and don’t forget the cult like almost hizbee vibe they have. these are all things that can be witnessed, becasue i don’t want to speculate here, and Allah knows best. I do know from them that they are our brothers and sisters and they have a love for the sunnah but why are they taking up enmity with the salafis. This is very true esspesialy where i am here in so.cal.
    As for the salafi brothers then what is found in them is found in every group, and my fear is continuly attacking that topic will cause the enemies of the dawwah to use your words or mine against our brothers. And most of the salafi brothers don’t just end up taking their “ilm” from the internet (which i think is a big cause of pre-occupying them with the fitnnah) and are well read and do seek knowledge and grasp the foundations and thier implementation better than any other students.
    Anyhow you may see things from a different angle than me, but is that a cause to differ. I personaly warn most people from al-magrib and its likes, but here we have antoher place to be able to learn the deen properly that is taought by a salafi teacher. So I aknowledge my case is different but should we not still expose or warn from the mistakes they do have, because the problems they pose are real?
    Plus Inshallah organizations such as yours and others can work on fullfiling that gap that is missing of educating the muslims. This is what we hope for.

  11. May Allah reward and bless you, “ms”. Allah willing, as I do not wish to get into a prolonged discussion about al-Maghrib Institute, its teachers or its students, this will be the last post regarding them here. This blog post is not about al-Maghrib, it’s about some of the things being levied against QSS and those who affiliate themselves with it, like myself. Any future posts to prolong the discussion will be deleted.

    As I mentioned, I’m aware of some of the issues with al-Maghrib’s teachers. I’m also aware of the issues seen with some of their students and the attitudes some of them display. I don’t necessarily disagree with much of what you’ve said here. However, some of the criticisms you’ve expressed here are the very same criticisms others have levied at us (Salafîs, not to suggest that those affiliated with al-Maghrib are not Salafîs, as I believe that some of them definitely are); sometimes unjustified, sometimes very justified. So, personally, I don’t see much of a difference between them and some of our “openly” Salafî brothers and sisters. At the end of the day, it all boils down to ignorance and arrogance. And these two things can only really be cured by knowledge and godliness.

    To answer your question at the end about warning from their mistakes, for me, it would depend on who I was dealing with. If I saw a need for it, then I would caution the person to the extent it was needed. Otherwise, if I saw more benefit in their attending the seminars, I’d actually advise them to go if they felt it would benefit them. As I mentioned, I do have a few very close friends who attend their seminars. They witness the problems for themselves and they know to stay clear of those things. They’re there for the benefit provided, and at the end of the day, attaining and maximizing the benefit a person receives is what matters.

  12. omar says:

    dont know when ill be visiting next, i have wanted to go back for a while. hit me up sometime i dont see you online anymore.

  13. Raashid alHindi says:

    alHamdu Lillaah
    Wassalaatu wasSalaamu ‘ala Ashraf alAnbiyaa

    I came across this post completely accidentally, finding the biography of Shaikh alMaghraawee, may Allaah guide us and him. When I saw the name Rasheed Gonzales I thought that I knew the name – an African American brother I met some years ago who spent some time in Dammaaj and who spoke the Arabic language. However, Wallaahi, I find it impossible to believe that this may be the same brother afer reading the Balaawee contained in this small article.

    Wallaahu alMusta’aan.

    Akhee Fillaah, there is much oppression in what you have written here. I hesitate to write this but consider it from the obligatory Naseehah to try to turn you from the direction you have taken. I ask Allaah to open your heart to any benefit that may be in these words and to awaken you from your misguidance.

    1) Akhee Fillaah, it is from the greatest of oppression upon yourself and anyone who may be misguided by what you are spreading on the web to speak about any matter concerning the religion upon ignorance. And by Allaah, the sincere student of knowledge does not speak about affairs that he is incapable of and refers them to those who are capable of that. And nether does he spread everything he hears, good or bad. Without continuing further on this point, though it would be plenty for all of us if we could just understand this, and so much of the Deen rests upon understanding this great Asl, I will try to address some of what you have said.

    2. The ‘Ulema as Allaah has described them are those who fear Allaah above the fear of Allaah possessed by the ignorant servants of Allaah, no matter how much worship and good deeds they may possess.
    {إنما يخسى الله من عباده العلماء}
    “Innamaa” benefits us in understanding that Allaah intends Hasr in this statement, meaning that the scholars have this attribute which is not possessed by other than them, and that is the knowledge which is grounded and firm.

    He also said, may His name be praised,
    {قل هل يستوي الذين يعلمون و الذين لا يعلمون}
    commanding this Ummah to ask those who speak without knowledge, “are those who know equal to those who don’t know?”

    He did not say as you have said:
    ” They suffer from some of the same vices and shortcomings we “mere mortals” suffer from. We feel jealousy and envy towards others, they can feel jealousy and envy towards others. We let our anger get the best of us, they can have their anger get the best of them. We can have our personal feelings cloud our judgements, they can have their personal feelings cloud their judgements. Yes, Allah has blessed our scholars with knowledge, piety and godliness, and they deserve our love and respect for what Allah blessed them with, but He has not made them infallible or superhuman.”

    Yes, you said that they “can” feel jealousy, and that they “can” have this and that. But this is not how the people of knowledge have been described, nor is this how one refutes their mistakes, to insinuate their mistakes stemming from jealousy and lowly emotions. Yes, they are above these things and the rules are not made for the exceptions. Again, it is wrong, and oppression, to describe the ‘Ulemaa, whom Allaah has described with the highest of character, and who the Messender of Allaah, may peace be upon him, has described as such, with such lowly sins which many of the ignorant ones are free of, as being normal for them. Just as it is oppression to refute a mistake by using this kind of low and base insinuation which is founded on holding ill thought for them.

    Rather, they are the true possessers of Khashyah and Taqwa, and above the injustices of those who chase wealth and dunya, spiting each other for what they have. They are also greater in piety than the pious worshippers, and you will never hear someone of piety, not to mention knowledge, describe the scholars as you have described them. As for them not being infallible, then this is true. So bring your proof if you wish to refute them and leave alone what their hearts contain.

    ِAs for your mentioning the differing between two scholars which is sometimes personal, then this is being taken out of it’s context altogether. For you are abusing Shaikh Rabee’ in order to defend a man whom the whole world has refuted, including the most respected and capable of scholars. So where is this from what the Salaf warned about and advised to ignore, of the differing between the Aqraan?

    3. Akhee Fillaah, don’t prepare yourself to be asked on the day you will stand before your lord why you told such and such to benefit from such and such, and to stay away from such and such. Who are you and I to praise and criticize scholars and organizations? Ask the people of knowledge if you don’t know, and don’t take such responsibility upon yourself.

    Wallaahi you have eaten flesh which is poisonous when saying, that Shaikh alHalabi ” is currently the lastest victim of Shaikh Rabî’ al-Madkhalî’s dreaded ire”. Tabaarakallaah. This is slander Akhee. What “ire” do you dread from the scholars?
    Then this information has no asl to it whatsoever, for the Shaikh has not said anything himself about Shaikh alHalabi as far as I can tell from his advice posted on sahab.net to leave this matter between the Mashaykh and Shaikh alHalabi, which you would be best served by adhering to. Wallaahu alMusta’aan, Wallaahi the Muslim Shabaab, except those whom Allaah has guided, speak about their religion without a thought as to what their tongues commit from transgression.
    و ما يكب الناس في النار إلا حصائد ألسنتهم
    And what throws people into the fire on their faces except the earnings of their tongues.

    Then your praising of alMaghrib Institute and advising with it and offering reasoning for that, then this must be easy for you after eating the flesh of the scholars. And this is an oppression to yourself and those who follow you, may Allaah guide us all.

    Make Tawbah brother from speaking ill of the scholars and speaking upon falshood. Make distance from ‘Abd alMun’im who cannot hear anyone’s advice (I saw him only when he visited Detroit and sat with Abu Hafs and Abu Dujaanah who advised him to no avail) and get connected to the people of knowledge. Stay away, Akhee, from those people who make light speaking about the scholars and have become experts at dressing up falsehood with truth.

    As for your saying about TROID and Salafi Publications:
    ” Sadly, however, you still find that this tribulation continues to be fuelled by organizations like TROID, as well as their counterparts in various other countries (e.g., SPubs in the UK, Sunnah Publishing in the US, etc.). You also still see people being affected by their spindoctoring and biased partisanship. Hopefully, this current controversy revolving around Shaikh ‘Alî Hasan opens more eyes than the controversy revolving Shaikh Abul-Hasan did and more and more of those who follow this methodology of exaggeration and excessive roughness and harshness leave this destructive and harmful path.”

    Allaahu alMusta’aan. This is the real “spindoctoring and biased partisanship”. Akhee you have thrown more abuse in your writing than I have ever heard from those whom you malign. alHamdu Lillaah the Salafee Shabaab are more and more careful of speaking about what they are not qualified to speak of, and leaving Jarh and Ta’deel to the scholars. Wallaahi S. pubs have come a long way, and the scholars praise them and hold them in esteem. I hope you realize who you are abusing and stop yourself in your tracks.

    As for those who have spoken about Abul-Hasan and about ‘Ali alHalabi recently are not the likes of what you are describing. It would be better for you to follow this handful of Mashaykh who you have decided to cling to silently than to harm yourself with this abuse which falls on heads more noble than all lives in the West. I don’t see roughness and harshness with this Da’wah, Da’wah asSalafiyyah, for Ahl as-Sunnah are the upholders of justice and mercy. And they have united upon for the most part in condemning the heads of Bid’ah, such as AbulHasan and such as Faalih alHarbee, for they refute the bid’ah and the person who calls to it whether it be a Mufrith or Mufarrith, Ghaalee or Mutasaahil. So take heed Akhee and stop yourself for you are the one on a destructive and harmful path Wallaah.

    I ask Allah to make my words a benefit and to correct our affairs. Verily He is All-Capable and All-Aware.

    Wallaahu A’lam wa bihi atTawfeeq
    Wa Salilllahumma ‘ala Nabiyyina Muhammad wa ‘ala Aalihi wa Sahbihi Ajma’een

    ِAbu Zahrah Raashid alHindi
    3-25-09

  14. as-Salam ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah, brother Raashid.

    Normally, one begins with some sort of greeting, something like “hi,” or “hello,” or in the case of Muslims greeting other Muslims, “as-salam ‘alaikum,” or one of its variations. But that’s ok, it’s not a big deal; just thought I’d mention it.

    As for your advice, then I have the following to say …

    First, may Allah reward and bless you for your concern and for what I’m sure was a well-intentioned advice. It seems, however, that it would have been better for you to have remained silent on things you’re clearly ignorant of and saved the time you’ve wasted in arguing your case against me.

    Second, I’m prepared to stand before my Lord and be held accountable for the things I’ve done and said. If I weren’t sure about the things mentioned in my above blog entry, I wouldn’t have taken the time to write it and have it reviewed by several friends (some of them actual students of knowledge) before posting it. What I’ve expressed here in my blog entry and in the subsequent comments I’ve written in response to other comments posted by others is what I believe to be the truth; I believe I’ve been fair and just in the stances I’ve taken and am ready to stand before Allah with what I’ve said here, whether it be in defence or criticism of anyone mentioned.

    Third, Gonzales isn’t a very African-American sounding surname; I’m Filipino. Add this to the fact that I haven’t set foot in Dammaj, and that while I have friends and acquaintances who’ve spent some time there, I wouldn’t ever consider setting foot in that place as long as it remains in its current state with Shaikh Yahya al-Hajuri in charge, and I think it’s pretty safe to assume that I’m not the African-American brother you thought of (to say that Dammaj is not the same place it once was when Shaikh Muqbil was still alive and in charge is putting it very nicely).

    Fourth, regarding the two things you mention at the outset of your advice: speaking about affairs one is incapable of and spreading everything one hears, good or bad, I’m not exactly sure what leads you to believe that I somehow disagree with these principles, given the fact that they’re principles derived from an authentic texts, or that I’m opposing it in any way by what I’ve written above, either in the actual article or the subsequent comments I’ve posted in reply to comments by others. Are you suggesting that I’m someone who freely spreads rumours and doesn’t know what I’m talking about? Are you suggesting that you do know what you’re talking about and are more responsible in disclosing information to the public and thus what you say must be taken while what I’ve said should be completely disregarded? As I’ve mentioned just above, if I weren’t sure of the things I’ve mentioned, I wouldn’t have written any of it. The fact that the article is about QSSC and my stance towards it, I think that of all people, I’d be capable of explaining that. There is also the fact that I’ve left out a large number of details concerning some of the things I’ve mentioned. This was done intentionally and should be evidence enough that I don’t believe that everything should be disclosed to the public and that there are some details that are better left unmentioned.

    Fifth, it is enough for me to mention what occurred between Imams al-Bukhari and adh-Dhuhli to show that our scholars are not above falling into personal disputes where one scholar may feel jealousy or anger towards another for whatever reason, which in turn causes him to be unjust to that other scholar (see Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s account of what occurred in his biography of Imam al-Bukhari in Fat·h al-Bari). I’ve already made mention of this incident in my article to prove my point. If you think our scholars of today are above this very human tendency, then what can we assume about your thoughts of scholars far greater than them, like Imams al-Bukhari, adh-Dhuhli, Malik bin Anas, Muhammad bin Ishaq, and many others, who weren’t, as history testifies to? Books like Mukhtasar Minhaj al-Qasidin, Jami’ Bayan al-’Ilm wa Fadlih, and Talbis Iblis to name a few, speak of these things affecting scholars. Have the authors of these books been unjust to their brethren (i.e., other scholars) and oppressed them by ascribing human tendencies to them? Prophet Muhammad, may Allah send salutations and peace upon him, mentioned that among the first of those who will enter the Fire will be an insincere scholar who was praised and viewed as a legitimate scholar by the people in the worldly life. He also mentioned that most of the hypocrites of his nation will be from the Qur’an recitors (not the mere recitors of today, but actual scholars). This is about scholars, so where on earth did you get this ridiculous notion that many of “the ignorant ones are free of” “such lowly sins”?!?!?! I’m sorry, but what kind of delusional utopian bubble are you living in?

    Sixth, to claim that “the whole world” has refuted Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribi is embarassingly retarded—seriously, brother, you should be embarrassed. This is a perfect example of the type of wretched and disgusting over-exaggeration, oppression, and spin doctoring that I’m referring to. Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbad defended Shaikh Abul-Hasan and also explicitly stated that what is between Abul-Hasan and Rabi’ is “things in the souls (أشياء في النفوس),” i.e., something personal between them. Is Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin not from “the most respected and capable scholars” of today? Shaikh ‘Abdus-Salam bin Barjas defended him and called him “salafi, in spite of your noses!”. Was he not a well respected and very capable scholar? Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan acknowledged Abul-Hasan as one of the People of the Sunnah. Is he not also from “the most respected and capable scholars” of today? The Jordanian shaikhs have openly defended Shaikh Abul-Hasan and explicitly said he is salafi. Are they not well-respected and very capable scholars (or if you ascribe to the foolish notion that they’ve somehow fallen off, were they not at one time)? … and the list can go on. This is all despite the “criticisms” of Shaikh Rabi’ against Shaikh Abul-Hasan. Are these scholars who defended the shaikh and acknowledged his being salafi somehow not part of “the whole world”?

    Seventh, just yesterday Falih al-Harbi was not only a shaikh, but an ‘allamah. He was also, according to Shaikh Rabi’, from “the most knowledgeable of the people concerning the methodology of the Predecessors,” and “one of the most knowledgeable of the people concerning the hiding places of the Qutbis, partisans, and others.” Today, not only is he just “Falih al-Harbi,” having the honorific of “shaikh” forever dropped from his name, but he is also now one of the “heads of heresy,” as you claim. This is another perfect example of something I mentioned at the very start of my article. Thank you for proving me right, once again. In his book, al-Hathth ‘ala Ittiba’ as-Sunnah wat-Tahdhir min al-Bida’, Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbad strongly criticized Shaikh Falih for his behaviour. He clarified that he is from the smaller students of knowledge and exposed the true level of his knowledge (i.e., that he wasn’t as great a scholar as people like SP and TROID were portraying him to be). He also strongly criticized him for attacking his brothers from the People of the Sunnah, many of whom were far more knowledgeable and virtuous than he, and for opposing the methodology of Shaikhs Ibn Baz and Ibn ‘Uthaimin. Despite this, Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin didn’t completely rape Shaikh Falih of any honour or respect by striping him of the honorific of “shaikh”. Heck, he didn’t even name him by name, but referred to him as merely as “Shaikh …”. Now compare this to how the shaikh’s been treated by those like you and some of those you claim to follow.

    Eighth, related to what is mentioned above, while criticizing Shaikh Falih, Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin also criticized three other shaikhs for resembling him in his behaviour and in his opposition to the methodologies of Ibn Baz and Ibn ‘Uthaimin. These three were none other than Shaikhs Rabi’, ‘Ubaid al-Jabiri, and Ahmad an-Najmi. To add to this, in the introduction to the second edition of his book, Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah bi Ahl as-Sunnah, ‘Abdul-Muhsin mentions portions of a letter he wrote to Shaikh Rabi’ concerning his behaviour trying to advise him to cool it down a bit and get back to spreading real knowledge and stop attacking his brothers from the People of the Sunnah. From his words was clear mention that Rabi’ has a tendency to let his emotions get the best of him and get overly aggitated and hostile, and that this in turn has an effect on the shaikh’s health; again, proving that our scholars, contrary to your claims, do fall into what you claim are lowly sins.

    Ninth, regarding your suggestion to distance myself from Abdulmonem and get connected to the people of knowledge, then I’m sorry, but I had to laugh—no, really, I did. I find it almost comical when people like you (who’ve have never met him at all, or in your case, have just met him once) tell me that I should distance myself from not only a person I consider to be a friend and teacher, but someone I’ve known for several years, a person I know to be an honorable, respectful, knowledgeable, upright, and wise person, without any evidence to show why I should. I say to you what I explicitly stated in my article above:

    You cannot tell me the brother is a liar, a tale carrier, and a partisan and expect me to believe these accusations when they are made without giving any evidences whatsoever. It’s downright foolish to expect anyone to abandon another person merely on the basis of empty accusations, regardless of who makes them. If you want me to give the shaikh’s words regarding Abdulmonem any weight, you’re going to have to come with something more substantial than unsupported accusations. Provide legitimate evidences to back them up, otherwise, the accusations mean nothing to me.

    I’m still waiting for anyone to provide me one (just one!!!) legitimate reason to distance myself from the brother. Thus far, no one has been able to bring me anything worth consideration.

    Tenth, at the risk of sounding arrogant, anyone who knows me fairly well knows I often attend private sittings and gatherings (including meals) with scholars we invite when they come to visit us to give talks and lectures at QSSC. Although I’m not one of the prominent brothers at QSSC or one of those who are pretty tight-knit with the shaikhs who come, I’m not just another face in the crowd during QSSC lecture or conference. So while I believe that your advice to get connected with the people of knowledge is good, praiseworthy, and something I wholly accept and agree with, I find it amusing that you assume that I (or anyone else for that matter) don’t have any sort of connection with scholars. Even if it were the case that I wasn’t “connected” with the people of knowledge, the fact that you don’t know me should be enough to deter you from making assumptions (though it obviously hasn’t, as you’ve made quite a number of assumptions about me throughout your comment).

    There is so much more I could mention regarding the things you’ve said in your advice to me, but this should suffice for now; Allah willing.

  15. Raashid alHindi says:

    Salaamun ‘Alaika Warahmatullaahi Wabarakaatuhu

    I will suffice with this reply and with that I wash my hands of this issue.

    One: You found it strange that I posted in your website without starting with Salaam. To explain, I wrote this as an open advice, and for that reason I didn’t start out addressing the speech to you. Allah knows who reads this and possibly makes this website a source of knowledge.

    Two: You said, “I’m prepared to stand before my Lord and be held accountable for the things I’ve done and said.” Enough said, Wa La Hawla wa la Quwwata Illa Billaah. Really, the only reason for my even writing this at this point is for anyone who may benefit from it besides yourself. May Allaah make easy for you and I that day.

    Three: Your last name doesn’t disqualify you from being African American – it’s a small multicultural world these days; and I already realized by other means clearer than genetics that this was not him lighting up his keyboard.

    Four: Your first statement about Dammaaj is unprecedented (“I wouldn’t ever consider setting foot in that place as long as it remains in its current state with Shaikh Yahya al-Hajuri in charge”) – whoever advised not to set foot there in it’s current state? Speak with an isnaad about affairs you are nobody to speak about with your opinion and manner of speaking. Regardless of what may be going on in Dammaaj, and regardless of what you personally feel like doing (take note of my wording here) it is not correct to make such statements about a place of learning Shar’ee knowledge without an isnaad to the major scholars capable of fatwa. On top of that, there was really no reason for you to make such a comment anyway, but it seems as if you like to volunteer your unexpert opinion.

    You also said: “regarding the two things you mention at the outset of your advice: speaking about affairs one is incapable of and spreading everything one hears…”

    See the above point, you are now just doing more of the same.

    Five: You said: “I’m not exactly sure what leads you to believe that I somehow disagree with these principles”

    I’m not sure what makes you think that I would consider you as disagreeing with these principles? If I tell you to fear Allaah, as I should and as you should tell me, for we both are in dire need of that, that doesn’t mean that we don’t uphold the principle of Taqwa Allaah or negate Allaah’s Rububiyyah. Rather it is a reminder to return back to what we both know to be correct.
    {فذكر إن نفعت الذكرى}

    “…or that I’m opposing it in any way by what I’ve written above.”

    Yes, that’s the one. As for your complete lack of connecting this to any particular criticism, then the point of contention was your describing the scholars in a way that is unbefitting, and speaking about Shaikh Rabee’ specifically with oppression.

    Six: The core of the issue, and Allaah only knows if you truly didn’t understand or pretend ignorance. But we allow for both Inshallaah, and hope for the best. You now reaffirm that “our scholars are not above falling into personal disputes”, while I clearly said when advising you:

    “Yes, you said that they “can” feel jealousy, and that they “can” have this and that. But this is not how the people of knowledge have been described, nor is this how one refutes their mistakes, to insinuate their mistakes stemming from jealousy and lowly emotions. Yes, they are above these things and the rules are not made for the exceptions. Again, it is wrong, and oppression, to describe the ‘Ulemaa, whom Allaah has described with the highest of character, and who the Messender of Allaah, may peace be upon him, has described as such, with such lowly sins which many of the ignorant ones are free of, as being normal for them. Just as it is oppression to refute a mistake by using this kind of low and base insinuation which is founded on holding ill thought for them.

    Rather, they are the true possessers of Khashyah and Taqwa, and above the injustices of those who chase wealth and dunya, spiting each other for what they have. They are also greater in piety than the pious worshippers, and you will never hear someone of piety, not to mention knowledge, describe the scholars as you have described them. As for them not being infallible, then this is true. So bring your proof if you wish to refute them and leave alone what their hearts contain.

    ِAs for your mentioning the differing between two scholars which is sometimes personal, then this is being taken out of it’s context altogether. For you are abusing Shaikh Rabee’ in order to defend a man whom the whole world has refuted, including the most respected and capable of scholars. So where is this from what the Salaf warned about and advised to ignore, of the differing between the Aqraan?”

    Looking at your reply, it is clear that the intended meaning was not absorbed.

    “If you think our scholars of today are above this very human tendency…”

    No. What I do believe is that you have oppressed them and described them in a way that is unbefitting. And that what truth you have mentioned then you are clearly taking it to a faulty conclusion.

    “where on earth did you get this ridiculous notion that many of “the ignorant ones are free of” “such lowly sins”?!?!?!”

    Any of the books of Zuhd, Raqaaiq, or Siyar of the Salaf. They are full of such examples. Again, I am speaking about your description of the scholars and your manhaj of insinuating reasons for their correction of others upon evidence and knowledge. And again, the rules are not made for the exceptions, for both: 1) The scholars in their being above these lowly tendencies generally, therefore making them deserving of our Husn adhDhunn; and 2) The people of taqwa and zuhd and khuluq, especially from the early generations which had plenty of examples of ordinary men who weren’t knowledgeable but were above wanting what another has while at the same time wishing that they lose possession of it (which is the actual definition of hasad or jealousy, as opposed to alGhabth). We describe them as such in general terms, those whose khuluq is higher than such and their fear of Allaah not allowing such low character, though anyone can fall into sin of any type, and we ask Allaah to preserve us.

    “I’m sorry, but what kind of delusional utopian bubble are you living in?”

    The United States of America, may Allaah shorten our stay in it to what benefits us. As for the insincere scholars, and the hypocrites from those known for their knowledge, then it is not for us to insinuate these things about the scholars of the Sunnah. Rather, Shaikh alIslaam ibn Taimiyah used to consider the innovator as being as near to a munaafiq as can be judged from the apparent. So describe the scholars of the Sunnah with what befits them and leave the hidden to Allaah.

    And this is such a futile argument on top of being a foul way to think about the ‘ulemaa. If Shaikh alWassabee and Shaikh alImaam have refuted AbulHasan then are you going to insinuate they are also jealous of AbulHasan? What will you say when you have hundreds of jealous scholars all wanting what AbulHasan has? Tabaarakallaah. No amount of evidence can expose what is hidden in a man’s heart and only the most ignorant can be deceived by such speech which is absolutely baseless.

    Seven: To very briefly discuss your problems with my statements about alMa’ribi.

    “to claim that “the whole world” has refuted Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribi is embarassingly retarded—seriously, brother, you should be embarrassed”

    I said this and reaffirm it as a permissible overstatement Inshaa’ Allaah when literally hundreds of scholars and students of knowledge have exposed this man.

    “Are these scholars who defended the shaikh and acknowledged his being salafi somehow not part of “the whole world”?”

    If you were aware of another worthy exception to the “whole world” then I am sure you would have made us aware of it (though there are more, while those who you mentioned have also had a share in criticizing AbulHasan and their defense for him also was not a tazkiyah with salafiyyah the likes of what you have mentioned). But, it stands that the “whole world”, in what is clearly intended by that – which is Jamhoor Ahl al’Ilm – is not affected by their defense of him which has also been explained and put in it’s context. As for someone lowering them for this stance then that is foolishness, and absurd. And there are plenty of articles on the internet explaining the rules of following the detailed criticism (alJarh alMufassal) over the generalized praise (atTa’deel alMujmal).

    Eight: To continue (though no longer with heart, to be honest):
    “just yesterday Falih al-Harbi was not only a shaikh, but an ‘allamah”.

    As was Abul-Hasan. Both loved by the “whole world” mentioned above. So what? Are you blaming the one in error or the one who made his error known?

    As for your quotations of Shaikh Rabee’s tazkiyah for him from before his innovation became apparent, then what is intended by this? Who and what are you contesting? If the Shaikh differed with Shaikh al’Abbaad about him at that time then the truth became apparent, walHamdulillaah.

    As for your statement, “Today, not only is he just “Falih al-Harbi,” having the honorific of “shaikh” forever dropped from his name, but he is also now one of the “heads of heresy,” as you claim.”

    I was afraid that may have been misunderstood (I didn’t intend to say he was from the heads of innovation) may Allaah forgive my error. In fact, I retract from the statement “And they have united upon for the most part in condemning the heads of Bid’ah, such as AbulHasan and such as Faalih alHarbee” altogether, and ask Allaah to forgive this error. This is while reaffirming that Ahl asSunnah don’t pick and choose who they pay attention to. Rather, as I said, they “refute the bid’ah and the person who calls to it whether it be a Mufrith or Mufarrith, Ghaalee or Mutasaahil.” As for the word heresy, then I never used it, while you have clearly quoted me as saying so.

    You then continue to oppress yourself by saying:
    “…Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin didn’t completely rape Shaikh Falih of any honour or respect by striping him of the honorific of “shaikh”. Heck, he didn’t even name him by name, but referred to him as merely as “Shaikh …”. Now compare this to how the shaikh’s been treated by those like you and some of those you claim to follow.”

    Is this just an emotional argument with no real logic or do you see that every innovator should continue to be known as “Shaikh” such and such. And the scholars did refer to him and everyone they advised from the earliest of times with respect until their matter became clear and they persisted upon what they were upon. And they continue to show respect to them if they feel there is a chance of their returning to the Sunnah. So our Mashaykh such as Shaikh anNajmee Rahimahullaah and Shaikh Zaid, when they advised him, they did so with respect. Then, the issue with alHarbee is beyond what our Shaikh al’Abbaad mentioned in his book, do you not see that? Or are you trying to say that all he was advised about by these scholars was his “being a small student of knowledge” etc. from the general criticisms of Shaikh al’Abbaad and that is what they advised him to return from? No, it is an issue more dangerous that that (from changing the principles of Jarh watTa’deel, and opening the doors of oppression upon Ahl asSunnah, and accusing scholars of Ahl asSunnah of Irjaa’, and many other issues). Then from what came from him and his student alGhaythee and others showed the man’s true status and opposition. Yet you feel no shame to call this effort of the scholars whom you Wallaahi have been poisoned by eating the flesh of as “rape”, as well as anyone who has “stripped” alHarbee of being referred to as Shaikh, and to Allaah alone we complain.

    Then you turn back and contradict yourself, speaking about Shaikh Rabee’ like he is some kind of confused youth like yourself:

    “From his words was clear mention that Rabi’ has a tendency to let his emotions get the best of him and get overly aggitated and hostile.”

    Where did Shaikh al’Abbaad say this? This is not from Rifqan Ahl asSunnah, which you are as far from as can be (meaning from having Rifq with Ahl asSunnah, not from Ahl asSunnah itself). Which is closer to “rape”, this speech, which is not a quotation but from your own self, or the speech of the Mashaykh regarding alHarbee? Unless you are able to bring the exact statement of Shaikh al’Abbaad, you are lying upon him. The least of what is possible is that you are far distorting his words and especially the manner of speaking, which exceeds all bounds of disrespect.

    Nine: “regarding your suggestion to distance myself from Abdulmonem and get connected to the people of knowledge, then I’m sorry, but I had to laugh”

    Most of what you write sounds like you like laughing more than contemplating what you read. Actually his visit wasn’t even necessary for that advice, but confirmed what was already known. It is the Sunnee who laughs when he’s told he shouldn’t stay away from someone until he first gets to know him well. Rather Imaam Ahmad said about Haarith alMuhaasibee after listening to his speech while hidden behind a curtain that it was the best speech he ever heard, and not to sit with him ever again, and it was accepted from him (See Min Ma’een alImaam Ahmad, Shaikh Saaleh Aal ashShaikh). His students understood from him that the man was in opposition to the madhab of the salaf though his speech was in itself full of good.

    As for your challenge to bring one legitimate reason, then why would you ever distance yourself from him anyway when he is upon your very manhaj of pick and choose? I am sure you have access to the many refutations of AbulHasan and his abaatheel, but, like him and others with him, choose to cling to general defences of him by scholars who did not free him from the vast errors he has been shown to have made with evidence and bayyinah. You choose to speak ill of and insinuate that jealousy drives the refutations of scholars who you would be better off not mentioning without an isnaad to your statements. So why would you distance yourself from someone you choose to sail the same ship with in the same ocean? Therefore I find your question as being rather strange (or “retarded” as you would call it) when you haven’t found anything worth accepting from my advice to you anyway.

    Ten: “I find it amusing that you assume that I (or anyone else for that matter) don’t have any sort of connection with scholars”

    No such assumption made, I actually expected something better than what you mentioned of yourself. Your “being amused” in itself shows your level of connection to the scholars.

    فالمرء يظهر عورته مما يدونه و إن كان لا يدري بإنه عارٍ
    و الحجة نادرة مع الذي يلتجي إلى التسخير في نقضه لمن يعاني
    ببذل النصح للبكم يا ليته كانت الإصابة في لسانه لا في الأذنان

    In other words, your disgusting disrespect of the Salafee mashaykh (and you have thrown tens of them into what you called “rape”) and absolute lack of manners when responding to words written with sincerity Inshallaah show your connection with knowledge and it’s people better than your QSS ticket stubs. I ask Allaah to guide us both to what He is pleased with, and instill fear in our hearts that reaches our tongues and fingertips. Make Tawbah from your poisonous statements and your poisoned manhaj while you are able. And truth welcomes all except those who refuse it.

    تركتكم على بيضاء ليلها كنهارها ، لا يزيغ هنها إلا هالك

    If you decide to post a reply, I request that you send me a direct email as well if you would like me to read it.

    Wallaahu A’lam
    Wa Sallillahumma ‘ala Nabiyyina Muhammad wa ‘ala Aalihi wa Sahbihi wa sallamma tasleeman katheeran

    Wassalaamu ‘Alaikum
    Abu Zahrah
    3-29-09

  16. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh, Raashid.

    There’s so much one can say regarding your follow up comment here, but as is clear to me, if I reply to all the points of contention I have with what you’ve written, this discussion will just become an unnecessarily massive waste of my time. Judging by the little pot-shots taken by both sides, I have no doubt that this will also degenerate from the tiny implicit insults into more explicit and blatant ones as well, which doesn’t help anyone’s cause. Thus, I will suffice with mentioning these few things:

    First, although you claim your advice was open and generally for anyone who reads it, pretty much from beginning to end, the advice was directed soley at me. Add to this the fact that regardless of whether the advice was specifically for me or open for whoever reads it, normally people still begin with a greeting of some sort; there are numerous examples of this from many lectures and talks given by scholars, as well as Friday sermons. But whatever, like I said, it wasn’t a big deal to begin with.

    Second, regarding my supposed volunteering of my “unexpert opinion,” the very same can be said about what you’ve done here, not only once, but twice.

    Third, regarding my supposed “disgusting disrespect of the [Salafi scholars],” I notice you haven’t even come close to addressing what I mentioned of these same descriptions about the scholars of Islam in general from books like Mukhtasar Minhaj al-Qasidin, Jami’ Bayan al-’Ilm wa Fadlih, and Talbis Iblis. Previously, I had just made mention of these things being discussed in these books and others like them. Now I give you actual quotes.

    From Mukhtasar Minhaj al-Qasidin, by Imam Ahmad bin Qudamah al-Maqdisi, on page 177 it states,

    Certainly, envy (hasad) is abundant among peoples, [and] the reasons among them that we mention are abundant. That occurs predominantly among the peers (aqran), the equivalents, the brothers, and the cousins … .
    Due to that, you see the scholar envies the scholar but not the worshipper, the worshipper envies the worship but not the scholar, the merchant envies the merchant, the shoemaker envies the shoemaker … .

    From Hady as-Sari, by Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani in his Fat·h al-Bari, Imam al-Bukhari is quoted as saying,

    And I entrust my affair to Allah; surely, Allah is well-acquainted with the servants. O Allah, you surely know I never wanted the position in Nisabur out of arrogance, nor pride, nor out of seeking leadership. On the contrary, I longed for myself the return to the homeland due to the predominance of the opposers. And surely, this man (i.e., Imam Muhammad bin Yahya adh-Dhuhli) was angry with me out of envy (hasad) for what Allah granted me, nothing else.

    He also quotes Imam adh-Dhuhli as saying,

    This man (i.e., Imam al-Bukhari) could not live with me in the [same] city, so al-Bukhârî became afraid and left.

    From Talbis Iblis, by Imam Ibn al-Jawzi, on page 135 he mentions,

    From Iblis’s deceiving the companions of hadith is their defamation of one another seeking gratification [for one's thirst for revenge] and they gather that as an excuse for disparagement and accreditation.

    There are many, many more of these types of quotes that one can mention to prove this point again and again. Now compare my statement with these above mentioned quotes, then after that, compare them to these:

    “The filthiest and the greatest liar of those on the face of the earth,” or “more of a liar than the Christians, for the Christians have dignity (sharaf) and if the Chritian knew that he lied, he would commit suicide, because they have dignity, contrary to Abil-Hasan and his followers,” and “Abul-Hasan’s followers are more astry than Pharaoh’s soldiers,” and “if the anti-christ emerged they would truly rush behind him,” and “if a man emerged claiming divinity (uluhiyyah) and lordship (rububiyyah) with the exclusion of Allah, they would truly rush behind him,” and “Abul-Hasan is more harmful than Pharaoh,” and “more astray than al-Jahm bin Safwan, ‘Amr bin ‘Ubaid, Bishr al-Marisi, Saddam Husain, and Ataturk.”

    I’ll leave the mention of who made these statements out, but let me ask you: are these descriptions befitting of a Muslim, let alone befitting desciptions of a Muslim scholar?! You tell me what’s more disgusting, disrespectful, and unbefitting, what I’ve written or these last few (documented) quotes I present to you?

    Fourth, regarding what I mentioned of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin’s comments about Shaikh Rabi’, it’s obvious it wasn’t a direct quote, otherwise I would have had quotation marks around the statement; it was paraphrased. As mentioned it was taken from the shaikh’s second introduction of the book, which can be found in the second edition of the book. I’ve posted a link to a PDF copy of it here on my blog, as well as a link to my translation of it. They’re not that difficult to find, just search for “Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah” using the search function to the right. You’ll find the statement on pg. 12 of the original Arabic (pg. 7 of the PDF) and on pg. 8 of my translation (pg. 9 of the PDF).

    Fifth, regarding the issues concerning Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribi, then as I’ve mentioned previously elsewhere, I’ll let the articles I post do the talking. I’ve already posted a couple articles regarding the controversy and there will be, Allah willing, more to come.

    Sixth, check your inbox and you should find a copy of this reply.

  17. Abu Fulan says:

    Salam.

    Brother rasheed gonzales, you are wasting your time with people like this. They have hardcore ta’assub to some of these shaikhs and are not willing to even read the replies of abul-hasan. Even though many shaikhs have critised him, this is not proof. Normally a lot of these shaikhs just rally behind shaikh rabee .. personally they do taqleed of shaikh rabee on the criticism. It should be known that they have a manhaj and the ulema likes of shaikh bin baz, albani, uthaimin, abdul muhsin have a different manhaj when it comes to jarh wa tadeel. If you look at the issues in detail without looking at who is on which side .. it will be clear without doubt .. you will find the same sort of split between other issues .. ihya turath and how to deal with their hizbiyyah, adnan uroor and how the scholars have split on him, maghrawi too .. just look at shaikh ib uthaimin verdict .. All the time people have been deluded into thinking all shaikhs are on one manhaj in jarh wa tadeel but it is clear there is big difference. These people believe that major scholars dont know about people and their shaikhs know better in this area. why do you think these people never ask questions about manhaj to the major scholars? They have live links to abdullah ghudyan etc see for yourself what questions they ask?

  18. talib-ilm says:

    as salamu aleykum

    brother rasheed, could you explain why you have negative feelings to studying at damaaj, under yahya alhajooree.

    wa jazak allah khairan

  19. Yusuf says:

    As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum,

    Here are some major scholars who have stated that no scholars of the science of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel are alive in our time.

    - Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan
    - Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan
    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajhi
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan

    When asked who are the scholars of this science in our times, Shaykh al-Fawzaan even swore by Allah when he said that no scholar of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel is alive, and that this science is with regards to chains of narrations and so the scholars who carried this science are in their graves now – may Allah have mercy on them – and what is left behind is their books. He went further than that and acknowledged the current situation of slandering other scholars, by saying that this science has nothing to do with this, which shows that he also understood what was behind the question.

    Shaykh al-Ghudayaan likewise swore by Allah and said that no scholar of this science is alive. He was then specifically asked about whether Shaykh Rabee’ was the carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel and he said no and that if he encountered Shaykh Rabee’ on the street he possibly wouldn’t recognize him.

    Some scholars disagree with these above scholars and state that scholars of this science are alive – but no scholar responded to these major scholars accusing them of being astray or misguiding others.

    So the question is: why are common Muslims subject to chastisement and abuse when they are simply following what these scholars are teaching?

    I pray Allah guides those who are still blindly following Shaykh Rabee’. A day which lasts 50,000 years is near. Otherwise, they must prepare themselves to stand before Allah agreeing with this oppressing against Shaykh Abul-Hasan:

    - “The filthiest and the greatest liar of those on the face of the earth,”
    - “more of a liar than the Christians, for the Christians have dignity (sharaf) and if the Chritian knew that he lied, he would commit suicide, because they have dignity, contrary to Abil-Hasan and his followers,”
    - “Abul-Hasan’s followers are more astary than Pharaoh’s soldiers,”
    - “if the anti-christ emerged they would truly rush behind him,” and “if a man emerged claiming divinity (uluhiyyah) and lordship (rububiyyah) with the exclusion of Allah, they would truly rush behind him,”
    - “Abul-Hasan is more harmful than Pharaoh,”
    - “more astray than al-Jahm bin Safwan, ‘Amr bin ‘Ubaid, Bishr al-Marisi, Saddam Husain, and Ataturk.”

    Billahi ‘alayk! Is it even permissible to say that another KAAFIR is more harmful and more astray than Pharaoh, let alone a Muslim scholar?!! Shaykh Abul-Hasan is worse than Ataturk??! Are you really prepared to meet Allah with this on your record?!

    The major scholars in Saudi Arabia – who belong to Hay’at al-Kibaar al-’Ulamaa and Al-Lajnah – have not labeled Shaykh Abul-Hasan an innovator, why should I? I shouldn’t.

    Beware of blindly following a scholar which will cause you to follow his mistakes. Do you realize how much Shaykh Rabee’ has erred in judging others from Ahl as-Sunnah, with absolutely no evidence??

    For example, Shaykh Ibn Jibreen was asked about Shaykh Rabee’ as to whether he was the lead scholar of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel and he said no, yet he was still just enough to say that he is from the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah. However, Shaykh Rabee’ said that Shaykh Ibn Jibreen lost his Islam and Imaan. Where’s the justice? The shaykh lost his Islam and Imaan?! When asked about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, Shaykh ‘Abdul-Kareem al-Khudhayr of Hay’at al-Kibaar al-’Ulama responded very harshly to those who attack him.

    Likewise, Shaykh Rabee’ accused Shaykh Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Mukhtaar ash-Shanqiti, teacher in al-Masjid an-Nabawi and member of Hay’at al-Kibaar al-’Ulama, of being a Sufi and that he is careless of hadeeth gradings – all with absolutely no proof whatsoever.

    Ask yourself that if it is easy for you to say Imaam Maalik or Imaam Ahmad made a mistake, why is it so difficult to say that Shaykh Rabee’ made a mistake? I don’t enjoy mentioning these errors of Shaykh Rabee’, or any other scholar, but the record must be set straight because of all of these years of harm done from selective translating done by SP and TROID, whom Shaykh Waseeullah ‘Abbaas said are closer to the way of the Khawaarij in how they are occupied with the faults of the Muslims at the expense of calling the millions of non-Muslims around them to Islam.

    As far as Shaykh al-Hajoori then perhaps you are unaware but there is a whole conflict between him and Shaykh ‘Ubayd (who said he has a loose tongue, which is another proof from the many proofs that scholars fall into sins), between him and Shaykh al-’Adani, as well as now between him and Shaykh al-Wasaabi.

    I advise myself and you to fear Allah dear brothers and be sincere.. this is a serious matter. By Allah, on that day do you really think that “the major scholars” (who aren’t even a part of al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah nor Hay’at al-Kibaar al-’Ulamaa) will be a proof for you to rescue you from the punishment awaiting such oppression?

    I conclude with the saying of al-Ma’soom (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam): “Beware of committing oppression for on the Day of Resurrection oppression will be darkness, and beware of avarice for avarice destroyed those who came before you, it led them into shedding blood and into making lawful that which was forbidden for them.” (Muslim)

    May Allah cleanse our hearts of all illnesses and guide us to the Straight Path.

  20. Yusuf says:

    Also, we have Sunnah Publishing who has translated the refutation of az-Za’atri against Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi’s new book. They try to convince us that this book deserves our attention by, of course, stressing that Shaykh Rabee’ praised it and also because Shaykh Hishaam al-’Aarif praised it.

    Sadly, they didn’t mention several points in their translation and on Salafitalk, such as:

    1. the fact that Shaykh al-Halabi’s book is also strongly supported by his peers Shaykh Muhammad Musa Nasr, Shaykh Mashhoor Hasan Salmaan, Shaykh Husayn al-Awaaishah, and others.. and this is just from Jordan. But of course, they will let us know that Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaali is against the book. No doubt this is playing with people’s deen and aakhirah.

    2. They fail to mention that Shaykh al-Halabi and his students at his message board have answered, and continue to answer, all of the different refutations and issues that others have with the book in more detail in a strong, scholarly manner and with more proof than those who are trying to refute it.

    3. Likewise, they will be on standby to give us all the praise out there for Shaykh Hishaam al-’Aarif, yet fail to mention that he has, especially of late, gone to the extreme in issues such as:

    - accusing Shaykh Muhammad b. Ibraahim (rahimahullah), Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi (rahimahullah), Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Humayyid (rahimahullah), Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan (hafidhahullah), Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (hafidhahullah) of being takfeeri and khaariji (audio)

    - saying that the fataawa of Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) are in need of being refuted and that he (rahimahullah) was without tawfeeq in matters of minor fiqh whatsosever (audio)

    So where’s the justice Sunnah Publishing? I advise you brothers from there reading this or supporting them to fear Allah and not play around with the deen and aakhirah of others in the name of Salafiyyah.

    Once again we hear that “all of the major scholars” have refuted Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi’s new work. Really? Name me just one scholar from al-Lajnah or Hay’at.

    Enough with this absurdity and taking advantage of those who are ignorant of the Arabic language.

    By Allah, if these people had any real concern and fear from the new book by Shaykh ‘Ali or anyone else, why don’t they take their refutations to the judges and al-Lajnah and get the book banned? Won’t that be more likely to prevent the book from harming the Ummah, instead of posting all of these ridiculous pdf files all over the Internet, and then accusing our brother Rasheed of bad deeds for simply translating the other side?

    I advise me and you to fear Allah.

  21. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, “talib-ilm”.

    There are a number of reasons I wouldn’t want to study in Dammaj. Some of these reasons have briefly been mentioned by brother Yusuf, e.g., the numerous beefs he’s involved in with other shaikhs, like Shaikhs ‘Ubaid, the two Ibn Mar’i al-’Adani brothers (‘Abdullah and ‘Abdur-Rahman), Muhammad bin ‘Abdil-Wahhab al-Wasabi, and others. Anyone who is really familiar with the shaikh will know that what Yusuf mentioned of Shaikh Ubaid’s statement about Shaikh Yahya was putting it very nicely; the shaikh said that he was salit al-lisan (سليط اللسان), the word salit also carries the meaning of “sharp”, “vicious”, and “impudent”. It has also been long said of Shaikh Yahya that his tongue is ten times sharper than Imam Ibn Hazm’s tongue (and it’s been said of Ibn Hazm’s tongue that it was the brother of al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf’s sword!!!). I don’t know about anyone else, but personally, I wouldn’t want to study in a camp with someone like that at its head as one tends to take on some of their teachers’ characteristics and mannerisms.

  22. talib-ilm says:

    subhan allah..i am not aware of whats going on in the internet between the scholars..and not in any way trying to get in either…but can you brother rasheed or yusuf provide audio of what yahya alhajoore said that was vicious. This is so i dont judge a person without proof.

  23. Yusuf says:

    Shaykh ‘Ubayd was asked about the conflict between Shaykh al-Hajoori and Shaykh Muhammad b. ‘Abdul-Wahhaab al-Wasaabi and Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahman al-Mar’i and he said:

    الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب الوصابي رجل عاقل فاضل صاحب سنة عاقل , والأخ يحيى سليط اللسان فاحش القول ما يرعى حرمة أحد لو صاحبته عشر سنين يمكن يهدمها في ساعة ما يبني على الرفق , هو وإن كان عنده علم لكن محروم الحِلم والحكمة

    He was then asked further about the fitnah and said:

    حتى الجرح بارك الله فيك , نفس الجرح , أولاً الجرح ما هو ؟ أهل العلم يقولون من كان ظاهره الإسلام والعدالة فهو – بارك الله فيك – على إسلامه وعدالته حتى يزول عنه ذلك بمقتضى الدليل الشرعي وأخونا الشيخ عبد الرحمن وأخونا الشيخ عبد الله بن عمر الكبير معروفون في اليمن وغيره لكن الشيخ يحيى كما قلت لك, لو ركبت سيارة , مثلاً ما كانت عندك سيارة ثم جاءتك سيارة , أحياناً يقولون من أين أتى بهذه السيارة ؟ الظاهر أن الشيخ يحيى وكثير ما يعرفون ضابط الحزبية ما هو ؟ ما يعرفون ضابط الحزبية ما هو ؟ لو رأوا أنك جعلت بجوار مسجدك مكتبة تمد المسجد قالوا هذه حزبية ما يعرفون الحزبية ما هي , يعني هم بارك الله فيك ضابط الحزبية غير واضح عندهم , فأنا أنصحكم بارك الله فيك بالعلم والسعودية قريبة منكم وإخوانكم كذلك في اليمن الذين عرفتم منهم العقل والأناة والصبر والحلم عليكم بهم بارك الله فيكم

    Then he was asked about how should we deal with this fitnah, and he said:

    هذا ما يلزم بارك الله فيك , وأقول: ما يلزم , والشخص بارك الله فيك سليط اللسان , شعبة رحمه الله العلماء ما يقبلون جرحه لأن الرجل متجاوز مُفْرِط في جرحه , بارك الله فيك فما كل جرح هو جرح , وأحياناً بعض الناس يجرح بما ليس جرحاً

    Clearly from these quotes he is saying to those in Yemen to come to Saudi and not study in Dammaaj.

    The audio for this is here.

    Shaykh al-Hajoori’s reply is here.

    Basically one of the causes for all of this was that Shaykh al-Hajoori cautioned against studying in Madeenah University since it promoted Shaykh Abul-Hasan and other “hizbis” and so a student should be very careful and that most go astray. Another cause though was the conflict between him and Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Mar’i in Shihr, whom Shaykh ‘Ubayd supports and whom Shaykh al-Hajoori and his students are now in a major conflict with to say the least.

  24. This isn’t a link to an audio, but it’s a link to a post on the Kull as-Salafiyyin forum where the person who posted it collected numerous small quotes from several of Shaikh Yahya al-Hajuri’s tapes. I have no desire to translate all of them or listen to all the tapes to verify them and to hear their contexts, but if you’re interested, you can read them (in Arabic) here. Here are some of the ones that had me literally laughing in disbelief:

    “Your words with us are like the dung of donkeys.”

    “You are not equal to dung.”

    “The People of the Sunnah piss on the heads of every prattler.”

    “You are tantamount to gay people.”

    There are literally tons more found in the post, and some of the audios these quotes were taken from can be found on the shaikh’s website.

    Note: I’ve used the word “dung” to tone down the vulgarity of the actual word used by the shaikh (ba’r – بعر), which is closer to the English equivalent of s—, and Allah is more knowledgeable.

  25. Yusuf says:

    Another problem Shaykh al-Hajoori has with Madeenah University is that they assist those from Jamaa’at Ansaar as-Sunnah of Egypt and Sudan. According to him:

    - Their name Ansaar as-Sunnah is a distortion of reality and instead they should be called those who have forsaken or deserted the Sunnah.

    - “By Allah, they have not given victory to the Sunnah.”

    - They are concerned with gathering money and so the dunya has destroyed them.

    Source: Al-Thawaabit al-Manhajiyyah, p. 34.

    Yes, he is claiming all of this about the exact same Ansaar as-Sunnah which:

    - Al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah – and specifically Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah), Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd (rahimahullah), Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullah) and Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh (hafidhahullah) – praised as a Salafi jamaa’at and defended it from whoever tries to speak bad about it or divide it, saying that whoever does such is oppressing their own selves. They specifically said this jamaa’at is distinguished from others as following the Qur’an and Sunnah and not making their wala’ and bara’ based on the group. (Fatwa no. 16872, 2/321-322)

    - The the heads of Salafiyyah in Egypt in the past century – Shaykh Haamid al-Fiqi, Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir, Shaykh Abdur-Rahmaan Wakeel, Shaykh Safwat Nooruddeen (rahimahumullah) –
    all belonged to.

    - Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi (rahimahullah) was once the head.

    - Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullah) visited at their main center in Cairo and gave a lecture to them.

    - Shaykh Hassan b. ‘Abdul-Wahhaab (hafidhahullah) is a member of and is at their main center.

    It is ridiculous to demand others and practically bully them to hold the same view as you and do tabdee’ and tasfeeq of them simply because they don’t agree with you over condemning this prestigious group and along with that you provide absolutely no scholastic evidence whatsoever to establish what you are talking about in the first place.

    Once again, where is the following of the major scholars? Find me one scholar from Al-Lajnah or Hay’at that speaks bad about Ansaar as-Sunnah.

    Where is all of this in comparison to the Salaf, whom said ما اغتبت مسلما منذ علمت أن الله حرّم الغيبة
    .. “I haven’t backbitten a Muslim since I learned that Allah forbade backbiting.”

    I imagine other brothers from SP, TROID, etc. are reading this. I remind you brothers and myself to fear Allah. Fear Allah and repent for these years of wastefulness. Look at how the name Salafiyyah has become rotten to other Muslims in the West. Enough with the swindling and deceiving those who don’t know Arabic with all of these biased one-sided PDF files and lectures. The enemies of Islam are gathering around us and in the West, at least, the Modernists, Liberalists, Sufis, Ash’aris, and so on have practically taken over and we have no idea how to refute their da’wah nor to what degree is it Islamically permissible to work with them. If our children asked us any question related to this we would be clueless. What would we do then? Boycott our children for being innovators?

    Seriously brothers, how would we respond to the Ash’aris? By using SP’s PDF files that have no author attached to them since the real author is Shaykh Safar al-Hawaali and SP doesn’t want others to know that they are benefiting from his works that have good in them, since – as Sunnah Publishing just translated – is one of the points that Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi brought up which they are trying to refute???

    We still remain ignorant, almost as if we enjoy it, walking around thinking that the scholars are against our brothers like QSS and that the whole world has refuted Shaykh Abul-Hasan. We’re walking around thinking that he’s worse than Fir’awn and that he’s the greatest liar on the face of earth. By Allah brothers enough with this foolishness. It is almost as if we have become a mockery of Salafiyyah instead with these type of stances, and I’m not even getting into all of the marriages that ended because one spouse thought the other was an innovator.

    Fear Allah and do muhaasibah – ask yourself who is really harming this da’wah?

    As ‘Umar (radiyallahu ‘anhu) said: “Take account of yourselves before your are brought to account.”

    May Allah forgive us for our shortcomings and guide us to the Straight Path.

  26. Yusuf says:

    By the way, a new book was just released defending Jamaa’at Ansaar as-Sunnah:

    Al-Haakmiyyah wal-Siyaasah al-Shar’iyyah ‘inda Shuyookh Jamaa’at Ansaar as-Sunnah al-Muhammadiyyah by Shaykh ‘Aadil as-Sayyid (link)

    The book has with it the praise of both Shaykh Hassan b. ‘Abdul-Wahhaab al-Bannaa (link) and Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaali (link).

    My thoughts are what will those who blindly follow Shaykh Yahyaa’s previous statements concerning Ansaar as-Sunnah say??! And to add to their confusion, Shaykh Saleem just recently wrote a letter to Shaykh Yahyaa praising him… see how one with a weak understanding of the usool of Ahl as-Sunnah would be very confused now about what to believe?

    To remind you, Shaykh ‘Aadil as-Sayyid is on that famous list floating around on the net saying which handful of scholars are Salafi in Egypt that it is safe to study with… so now what? Is he not Salafi or is the Jamaa’at now legit?

    In any case, compare all of this what the ridiculous post on SalafiTalk.net claiming that Shaykh Safwat Nooruddeen, the head of the Jamaa’at after Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, didn’t die as a Salafi, may Allah have mercy on him. We seek refuge from Allah with uttering such nonsense, let alone holding it in our hearts.

    If any of you brothers are in Yemen then please send this book to Shaykh Yahyaa and tell us what his response is to it.

  27. talib-ilm says:

    jazakum allah khair…

  28. Abu Nu'aym says:

    as salamu alaikumu wa rahmatullah. I just had a question to brother Rasheed. Which scholars of the sunnah hold your same opinion about studying in dammaj. Since questions about Dammaj have been brought to Shaikh Rabee hafidhullah, Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab al Banna hafidhullah and Shaikh Muhammad al Imam hafidhullah whom recommended students to study there.

  29. Yusuf says:

    I’ll let Br Rasheed answer the question since it was addressed to him.

    However just to mention… at least twice, the most recent time being less than a month ago, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan was asked about studying under a person who makes such-and-such mistakes and then they mentioned mistakes made by Shaykh Yahyaa. To summarize, Shaykh Saalih said it is not permissible to study under the person that has made these mistakes.

    The audio is here and here.

  30. Yusuf says:

    A couple of more points… and forgive me Rasheed for me spamming your comments.

    Regarding the whole world refuting Shaykh Abul-Hasan, one should look no further than the fact that the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, directed by Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh (hafidhahullah), requested permission from Shaykh Abul-Hasan to publish, distribute and translate his masterpiece refutation against terrorism (Fitnah at-Tafjeeraat wal-Ightiyaalat). Alhamdulillah this work caused a lot of people to question the beliefs they were holding and was a major assistance to ending the attacks in Saudi Arabia.

    Obviously all of this begs two questions for these brothers:

    [1] If Shaykh Abul-Hasan supports the dangerous, erroneous beliefs of Sayyid Qutb concerning fighting Muslim rulers, then why did he author one of the most powerful books against it answering all of the doubts and proofs used by those from that movement?!

    [2] Can these brothers please explain to me why the Ministry of Islamic Affairs in Saudi Arabia is publishing and mass distributing the work of someone who is more harmful than Fir’awn and that the whole world has refuted?? Apparently, Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh must be out of this world then. Then again, this may explain why Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajoori attacked Shaykh Saalih, saying that he trims his beard and helps Ikhwaan over the Salafis. The worst part was that when he was attacking Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh, he referred to him as Shaykh Husayn Aal ash-Shaykh (Imaam of al-Masjid an-Nabawi) until he realized he got the name wrong and that it is Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh, yet we’re supposed to believe he is from the most trustworthy scholars to listen to in regards to al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel? This is not to attack Shaykh Yahyaa, but be serious and be just.

    As far as Shaykh al-Maghraawi.. if you want to see the ill result of waging a war against him on supposed mistakes that he already has clarified in Ahl al-Ifk wal-Buhtaan and all over his website. Last year, there was a whole campaign against the Shaykh because supposedly he issued a fatwa allowing marriage to nine year old girls. In reality, he was simply teaching a tafseer class and explaining the Qur’an from the same classical sources that we all believe in. The result? The modernists were able to have all of his Qur’an schools, where only Qur’an is memorized, shut down throughout Morocco. Meanwhile we didn’t hear one peep about this from SP. Why? Don’t they realize that this is something they agree with him about and it will come back around to harm them as well? Don’t they realize that the Shaykh was illegitimately attacked by a common enemy who will sooner or later attack them as well? Can’t they see that the enemy of these people is our beliefs found in classical texts, not the Shaykh himself? Or do they not realize and understand any of this due to their blind hatred of him?

    This event reminds me of what happened in UK when the documentary was made against the brothers there and SP rejoiced, as if the British Govt was fighting Ahl al-Bid’ah. Because, remember, SP is fighting against terrorism and extremism with their booklets and website IslamAgainstExtremism.com.

    I suppose that explains why the failed to ever translate and publish the following fatwa of Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajoori found on the tape Al-Ajwibah al-Hajooriyyah ‘alal-As’ilah al-Hadeethiyyah and also his book Al-Iftaa’ ‘alal-As’ilah al-Waaridah min Duwal Shata (p. 138):

    سئل الشيخ يحيى الحجوري ـ حفظه الله ـ ما حكم الجهاد في أفغانستان ؟ وما حال حركة طالبان ؟ وهل تنصحون طلاب العلم بالذهاب إليه ؟

    فأجاب الشيخ :

    أما ما يتعلق بجهاد الأفغانيين للأمريكيين فلا مزيد عليه ، لا مزيد عليه من ناحية وضوح قتال الكفار ، فإن لم يكن قتال الكفار هو الجهاد فما هو الجهاد ؟!

    يقول ربنا سبحانه وتعالى : ( يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قَاتِلُوا الَّذِينَ يَلُونَكُمْ مِنَ الْكُفَّارِ وَلْيَجِدُوا فِيكُمْ غِلْظَة)

    ( أُذِنَ لِلَّذِينَ يُقَاتَلُونَ بِأَنَّهُمْ ظُلِمُوا وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى نَصْرِهِمْ لَقَدِيرٌ)

    والله عز وجل أمر بجهاد الكفار بالأموال والأنفس ، فحصل ذلك على أنه جهاد بين الأفغان لا مريه ، ولا أظن عالماً يعرف الأدلة من كتاب الله وسنة رسوله التي تدل على الجهاد وتعرف الجهاد وتبين الجهاد أنه يقول هذا ما هو جهاد !
    ما أظن هذا ، إلا إذا كان طمست بصيرته !

    أما ما يتعلق بالذهاب إليهم ، فإلى أين يذهبون ؟

    فإنهم محصورون محجور عليهم وأولئك الناس نسأل الله أن ينصرهم على الكافرين ـ أعني المجاهدين الأفغان ـ أولئك الناس والله يا إخوان أن الله سبحانه وتعالى رفع بهم في هذه الأزمنة راية الإسلام ، في هذه الأيام بالذات ، ورفع بهم رؤوس العرب فلولا الله سبحانه وتعالى ثم هؤلاء الأبطال وقفوا ضد أمريكا لربما تدوس أمريكا على العرب بتلك الجزمات إلا أن يشاء الله سبحانه وتعالى ويقيض غيرهم فربك على كل شيء قدير ، فهذا حاصله أنهم مجاهدون بلا شك وأنه ينبغي للمسلمين أن يدعوا الله عز وجل أن ينصرهم على الكافرين .

    وقد قال ربنا سبحانه في آخر سورة البقرة : ( فَانْصُرْنَا عَلَى الْقَوْمِ الْكَافِرِينَ) يعني في سياق دعاء المؤمنين ، فينبغي للمسلم أن يكون داعياً بهزيمة الكفار ونصر الإسلام والمسلمين ، هذا حاصله .

    ولو علمنا أن هناك طريق يمكن أن يصل إليها من أراد الجهاد ومن عنده محبة لذلك وعنده فتور عن طلب العلم الشرعي وما عنده عمل واجب يقوم به في دين الله عز وجل بحيث إذا ذهب تختل تلك الثغرة وما إلى ذلك ؛ نعم نقول له إن شئت ذهبت ، وهو ليس عليك واجباً عينياً بل هو كفائياً كما تقدم بيانه في أسئلة أهل حضرموت .

    فهذا حاصلة الذي تقدم ذكره نسأل الله العظيم أن يذل أمريكا ومن تعاون معها ، وأن يدمر عليها ونسأله سبحانه وتعالى أن ينصر المجاهدين الأفغان وينصر الإسلام والمسلمين .

    وإن شاء الله يكفي ما تقدم في ذلك ، والأفغان يعتبرون الآن مجاهدين وهذا يكفي في هذه المسألة .

    أما من حيث صفاء المعتقد ؛ فأنا أعرف عنهم أنهم ماترودية ، وهكذا من حيث أسامة أعرف أنه جهادي وعنده تكفير ، تكفيري متسرع في التكفير ، لكن يا إخوان سبق القول أنه ينبغي الدعاء لهم فهم مسلمون وقد نصر الله بهم الإسلام ، سبق القول بأن شيخ الإسلام قاتل مع من هو أردى من هؤلاء كما تعرفون ، فلا ينبغي للإنسان أن ينظر إلى المسألة ولا يدعوا ، وأنظر إلى معتقدهم وبين للناس ما هم عليه وألا يغتروا بهم وبمعتقدهم وما هم عليه ، أما من حيث المسلم مع الكافر ؛ فالمسلم أعز عند الله من الكافر وأكرم من الكافر بملء الدنيا ، المسلم خير من ملء الدنيا من الكافرين الأنجاس الأرجاس

    Strangely, they don’t forget to mention to us and remind us that this same Shaykh praises them.

    Sadly, all of this foolishness continues to read as if it is an excerpt from Akhbaar al-Hamqaa wal-Mughafilleen by Ibn al-Jawzi (rahimahullah).

  31. Yusuf says:

    Br talib-ilm, here is an audio compilation if you want to hear for yourself the recordings of Shaykh al-Hajoori. I’m not aware of Shaykh al-Hajoori replying to any of this but they now are accusing Shaykh al-Wasaabi, who is on this compilation telling him to fear Allah and repent, of promoting al-Tawheed al-Haakmiyyah so perhaps that is the reply.

    If the audio compilation isn’t sufficient to convince you to avoid Dammaaj for now, then review the refutations written by ‘Abdur-Rahmaan b. Ahmad al-Barmaki. He cites mistakes, such as:

    1. Pharoah, Iblees and the disbelievers called people to al-Tawheed ar-Ruboobiyyah.

    2. Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) made mistakes and Allah sent down revelation to him correcting him.

    3. Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) made mistakes in the method of giving da’wah.

    4. Hypocrites were among the students of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam).

    5. The Khawaarij were from the students of the Sahaabah (radiyallahu ‘anhum).

    6. Irjaa’ first appeared amongst the Sahaabah (radiyallahu ‘anhum) and was first uttered by Qudaamah b. Madh’oon (radiyallahu ‘anhu).

    7. Ahl as-Sunnah is the closest group to the truth it is not the group on the truth.

    8. Salaat al-Janaazah on an innovator has no reward.

    9. Moving the finger in tashahhud is considered dancing.

    10. The madhhab that allows continuous shortening of prayer during travelling without any specified time is a Madhhab of Iblees.

    11. The Khawaarij only had with them the bid’ah of takfeer, otherwise they were worshippers.

    12. The Khawaarij and Mu’tazilah are better than al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen.

    13. The Ashaa’irah are better than the Surooris.

    14. Jam’iyyah Ihyaa’ al-Turaath have done with the Salafi da’wah in Yemen that which the Jews, Christians, Shi’ah, Sufis, al-Ikhwaan, nor anyone else has done.

    15. Some of the Sahaabah (radiyallahu ‘anhum) participated in the murder of ‘Uthmaan (radiyallahu ‘anhu).

    16. The adulterer and thief are not from Ahl as-Sunnah.

    He’s written additional refutations concerning ‘aqeedah mistakes of Shaykh al-Hajoori which reflect the belief of al-Qadariyyah and al-Ashaa’irah.

    I will be direct with you, I haven’t gone through all of this personally because it isn’t worth the time. Better than all of this is to simply busy one’s self with seeking knowledge and avoiding becoming busy with this, that is what our scholars advise us to do. The difficult part is that while the ‘ulama advise this, all we keep seeing in forums in Arabic and English is this exact stuff, so to not respond to it is difficult. Likewise, I am simply mentioning this because of some objection to Br Rasheed advising not to go to Dammaaj.

    I pray Allah guides us all to the Straight Path because no doubt this fitnah helps no one except the enemies of Islam.

  32. Yusuf says:

    By the way, SP should just finally put Shaykh Safar’s name on those PDF files refuting Asharis that they’ve translated instead of allowing them to remain anonymous, as Shaykh Rabee’ himself has praised the book and advised students of knowledge to read it. (audio)

    I suppose the problem with that though is that this would then contradict one of the “nonsensical principles” of Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi as they claim (p. 24):

    And he praised Safar al-Hawaalee [34] when he said about him, “And Shaykh Safar al-Hawaalee has good books through which Allaah has brought about great benefit. And we hope to Allaah the Blessed and Exalted to grant him relief and to return him to his activity in defence of the Salafee ‘aqeedah.” [35]

    Why didn’t Sunnah Publishing mention in the footnotes of the translation that Shaykh Rabee’ said the same thing as found in the audio above??

    يا أيها الذين آمنوا كونوا قوامين لله شهداء بالقسط ولا يجرمنكم شنآن قوم على ألا تعدلوا اعدلوا هو أقرب للتقوى واتقوا الله إن الله خبير بما تعملون
    O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do. (5:8)

  33. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh, Abu Nu’aym.

    First, and I hope this isn’t taken the wrong way by anyone, but I seriously don’t understand why it’s so necessary for one to have a shaikh back his opinion about studying in any particular place, whether it be Dammaj or any other place for religious study, or even any secular educational institution. Several shaikhs have given verdicts stating that it’s not permissible to study in non-Muslim Western secular universities (Shaikh Salim al-Hilali gave such a verdict years ago when asked about it during one of his visits here to Toronto), yet I’ve noticed that several of those who have posted comments to my blog here have either posted using York University email addresses or have posted from the university itself (WordPress gives me the IP address of the computer you’re posting from). What I stated about Dammaj was my personal opinion about going there to study. I’ve already stated one of my reasons for not wanting to learn there. I don’t need a scholar to tell me that I don’t like the shaikh’s mannerisms or the way he deals with those who disagree with him. Would I impose this opinion on anyone else? No. You people can make up your own minds and decide whether the shaikh is someone you’d want to learn from or not. To be clear, I’m not trying to discourage anyone from going to Dammaj or from studying under any particular shaikh, be it Shaikh Yahya al-Hajuri or anyone else. If you want to go there to study, be my guest.

    Aside from this, as brother Yusuf and I have made brief mention of already, Shaikh Yahya is currently embroilled in a number of disputes against other shaikhs (including Shaikhs ‘Ubaid, the Ibn Mar’i brothers (‘Abdullah and ‘Abdur-Rahman), and Muhammad al-Wasabi (author of al-Qawl al-Mufid fi Adillah at-Tawhid)). I’m sure if you ask them about studying in Dammaj right now, they probably wouldn’t be too enthusiastic about encouraging people to go there to study. Also to add to what Yusuf mentioned about Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan saying you shouldn’t study under someone with the types of mistakes mentioned to him, although I wouldn’t take such statements as the shaikh’s actual opinion of al-Hajuri (as the method of questioning is the typical method employed by the exaggerators (ghulah) where they only mention the person’s statements but do not mention his name), the first time I came across a statement from al-Fawzan about al-Hajuri was back in 2003. Shaikh al-Fawzan was asked about “a teacher who made [various] statements to his students,” in several of his tapes and recanted from them. The shaikh replied saying, “This [one] is a doubter, he causes doubt for the people in the affairs of their creed. It is not permissible to study with him, nor to take knowledge from him, because this [one] is from the people of misguidance … .” The rest of the statement from the shaikh can be heard here (download from this post if the direct link doesn’t work).

    To brother Yusuf, may Allah reward and bless you for your love and ardent concern for the religion, knowledge and its people. And quit spamming my blog! (J/k).

  34. Yusuf says:

    Regarding Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, according to SalafiTalk (link), both him and Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd (rahimahullah) are with the Takfiriyyeen and Qutbiyyeen, aiding them and supporting them. Then after Shaykh Bakr (rahimahullah) passed away, they post on their message board as if they respected him, and Allah alone knows their real affair. (link)

    Also, we have other posts such as:

    - ‘Abdullaah Bin Jibreen Reaches a New Low – the Legacy of Defending the Innovators Continues…

    - ’Abdullaah Bin Jibreen Once Again Outdoes Himself – Will His Defense of the Innovators Never End?!??

    Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (hafidhahullah) is mentioned in these posts as:

    - “a man who has made it his goal to defend the people of innovation at all costs”
    - “having no shame or fear of Allaah”
    - “it was not expected that he would plummet to such a shamefully low level”
    - “perennial defender of Innovators and betrayer of the Salafee ‘aqeedah”
    - “has outdone himself in the latest and most shameless entry in his long line of disgraceful and self-degrading fataawa”

    Perhaps more ridiculous is that the first post is trying to defend Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah). Yet when Shaykh Rabee’ said Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) harmed Salafiyyah greatly (audio) and then later denied it (audio), we didn’t see any post??

    “Legacy of defending innovators” … la hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.

    SalafiTalk wants to try to convince us that this is one of the most evil men in the world, yet when one takes a look in Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhali’s book al-Irhab, what do we find him say about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen??

    “Al-’Aalim al-Kabeer and al-Zaahid al-Wara’ Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abdur-Rahmaan b. Jibreen” (p. 84)

    “Our beloved Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Jibreen” (p. 85)

    “Shaykh ‘Abdullah is from the Salafi scholars as is well-known” (p. 91)

    “This is a light clarification and I don’t intend by it for it to end up in countless refutations, however as a reminder to our Shaykh (Ibn Jibreen) and our brothers who love the truth, and the reminder benefits the believers.” (p. 93)

    What about other scholars? Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajihi (hafidhahullah), whom they claim they respect as a Salafi scholar, said about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen:

    - “Our shaykh” (link)
    - “Noble shaykh” (link)
    - Mentions him, Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Baraak (hafidhahullah) and Shaykh Ibn Qu’ood (rahimahullah) as from the Major scholars – about all whom SalafiTalk despise.

    And there are other sayings of Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) and Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) praising the shaykh, and the love between them was well-known so much so that their names would be mentioned together and even SP sells these fatwa books. (example)

    So my question is that since these brothers claim they believe Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state, about which I agree and don’t dispute, and that the King (hafidhahullah) supports the Salafi da’wah, then why don’t they set foot in the courts in Riyaadh and mention this speech about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (hafidhahullah)?? Maybe because it will end in them being lashed for slander.

    Also, explain to us why the King visited the Shaykh in the hospital (link).
    Why is the King visiting a Khaariji, Takfeeri, who has no shame or fear of Allah and has dedicated his life to supporting people of innovation??!

    أليس منكم رجل رشيد
    “Is there not among you a man of reason?” (11:78)

    The reality is that this is all deception just so that we support their stances. Rather, what you would find is that Shaykh Ibn Jibreen gives lectures alongside the Mufti (who defends him), Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (who they are trying to get to be against him) and Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan. You find Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan defending scholars they hate such as Shaykh al-Baraak who was a student of Shaykh Ibn Baaz for 50+ years (link), yet because none of this is translated then masses are left in the dark.

    Brothers from SP, etc. reading this fear Allah. The Shaykh is “Khaariji, Takfeeri, who has no shame or fear of Allah and has dedicated his life to supporting people of innovation” .. are you seriously prepared to meet Allah with that on your record? “Abu ‘Abdil-’Azeez al-Misree” from SalafiTalk won’t be there for you on Yawm al-Qiyaamah to help you. Fear Allah and sincerely repent openly for this filth you’ve helped spread all over the world.

    This deen and this knowledge is an amaanah. End the deceit brothers and fear Allah as Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “He who deceives us is not one of us,” or, “He is not one of us who deceives us.”

    And he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “There is no person whom Allah has put in a position of authority and he dies on the day he dies cheating those under his authority, but Allah will forbid Paradise for him.” And in another version: “There is no Muslim whom Allah places in a position of authority over people and he is not sincere towards them, but he will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.”

    May Allah guide us all to that which pleases Him.

  35. Yusuf says:

    As an illustration of how SP has confused the masses over a simple issue that led to World War 3 for some people and I imagine families broke apart over… the issue of calling oneself “Salafi” or “Athari.” This issue is simply an issue that has difference of opinion about it and it’s not for any Muslim to cause harm to another Muslim in any sense regardless if they see it praiseworthy or not. We respect all of our scholars regardless, and we respect one another and maintain love regardless of the position that is chosen. This is a core principle of Islamic brotherhood. But when they failed to establish this core principle in the hearts of people, that Ahl as-Sunnah does not develop hatred for one another over these types of issues, and rushed into the issue in a reckless manner, then it reached such an absurd level which most of us who’ve been around for a awhile are aware of.. but unfortunately we still find this issue alive as of Feb 2009 on SalafiTalk (link) and that is why I’d like to share the following for the sincere seeker of the truth.

    So let’s take for example “A Reply to the Doubts of the Qutubiyyah Concerning Ascription to Sunnah and Salafiyyah,” a 97 page document which serves as the main purpose to prove that it is acceptable and encouraged to call yourself “Salafi,” i.e. I should go around calling myself Yusuf as-Salafi.

    Ironically, it begins with the statement of Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullah) as a proof, yet we find on the shaykh’s website a fatwa which states that naming one’s self with “as-Salafi” or “al-Athari” has no basis in the deen and that we look at the reality of a person not at their claims and titles. The shaykh says we should have manners with Allah and mentions how the desert Arabs said that they were believers and how it was not proper for them to assign to themselves imaan and he draws a similarity to this and calling one’s self these titles as purifying one’s self. He says we have no need to calling ourselves these titles, but rather we should seek the truth and purify our intentions. (Fatwa)

    Other scholars which hold similar views are Shaykh ‘Abdul-Kareem al-Khudhayr of Hay’at Kibaar al-’Ulama (link) and Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajihi (link). Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh opposes it when it leads to ta’aasub which no doubt it has. (link) If this isn’t sufficient to show that there are Salafi scholars that oppose calling yourself Salafi, then let me add a name: Shaykh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaami (rahimahullah), whom SP says they respect so much. He himself was against naming yourself “Salafi” and “Athari” and said it is done from love of wanting to be famous and it is a form of showing off. (link)

    Therefore the very first lines of this document are wrong, yet we find on page 47-49:

    A Reply to Some Doubts

    There are numerous doubts often spread about naming with Salafiyyah and the word “Salafi,” some of them coming from sincere people, based upon what they have experience and other times coming from devils amongst men, who wish to pass judgement upon the da’wah of truth, see it fall, and have it replaced with their own innovatory ejaculations and hallucinations of the mind. [...]

    3) Calling Oneself a Salafi is a Blameworthy ‘Tazkiyah’ of Oneself

    And this doubt has been answered by our Mashaayikh: Allaamah, ‘Abdul-’Azeez Ibn Baz – the [former] mufti of Saudi Arabia was asked: What do you say about the one who calls himself ‘Salafi’ or ‘Athari’? Is this a tazkiyah (purification) of his own self? So he replied – may Allah have mercy upon him – “When he is being truthful [in his claim] that he is Salafi or Athari then there is not harm in that, [this is] similar to what the Salaf used to say, ‘So and so is a Salafi,’ ‘So and so is Athari.’ This is a tazkiyah (commendation) which is necessary, a tazkiyah that is obligatory.” (Cassette: Haqq ul-Muslim 16/1/1413 Ta’if)

    Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan was asked “Is the one who gives himself the title of ‘as-Salafi’ considered to have set up a ‘hizb’?”. To which he replied, “There is no harm in labelling oneself with Salafiyyah when it is in truth. However, if it is merely a claim then it is not permissible to label oneself with Salafiyyah, whilst one is upon a manhaj other than that of the Salaf.” (Al-Ajwibah al-Mufidah p. 16)

    As for those who wish to discourage others from ascribing themselves to the Salaf and claim that it is a tazkiyah (self-praise) then their machinations are not hidden from us. Rather, Shaikh ul-Islam refuted this claim centuries ago and made it obligatory to accept the ascription of a person to the Salaf – and held it to be by unanimous agreement – since the aqidah and manhaj of the Salaf is nothing but the truth. But when it is the case that the manhaj of these people (the false claimants) is adulterated and their ascriptions are to the figureheads of Ikhwaan or the biased partisans who have been poisoned by the methodologies that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, then it should come as no surprise that they wish for the people to detach themselves from the Salaf – since that is the only way that their falsehood can remain undetected.”

    Three points about this:

    [1] Clearly they forgot to include what else Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan and other scholars have said concerning the issue before ranting about it being from the machinations of poisoned Qutubis, etc, as I just showed that Shaykh Saalih does in fact believe it falls under self-praise.

    [2] If that is what Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) intended, then why have we never seen a book by him with his name on it as, “Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez b. Baaz as-Salafi” ..? Likewise, we’ve never see a book or tape with, “Shaykh Muhammad b. Saalih al-’Uthaymeen al-Athari,” “Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan as-Salafee” or “Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh al-Atharee” …? Yet, SP in this document are trying to use all of these scholars as evidence for this practice. If this is the case, then why aren’t they practicing it themselves?

    [3] Does this mean if we take the stance of scholars who disagree with naming yourself Salafi mentioned above, with maintaining absolute respect for those who have encouraged it, then we have detached ourselvs from the Salaf??! Clearly this is nonsense.

    The majority of the rest of the document consists of:

    [1] A sad effort to prove that all of the speech of ‘ulama against those who make a group called “the Salafis” is not actually related to them when it is obvious as the sun on a clear day that it is, and,

    [2] Outdated recycled rants against Shaykhs Safar and Salmaan. They want us to believe these two are from the Khawaarij even though they gave some of the biggest assistance to the government of Saudi Arabia to get people to stop blowing stuff up and turn themselves in. Why didn’t they support them if they really supports the erroneous beliefs of Qutb against the Muslim ruler? On top of all of that, we are supposed to believe scholars like Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh agree with them. If that was the case, then why did Shaykh Saalih visit and cooperate with Shaykh Salmaan and even take photos with him? (link) Nothing prevents the government from putting these two back in prison if they are a serious threat as SP says, but they simply aren’t. This is similar to the situation in Egypt which is tied in to a degree to the new book of Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi as far as his relationship with Shaykh Muhammad Hassan. SalafiTalk, etc. would like for us to believe Shaykh Muhammad Hassan and others such as Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni and Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Ya’qoob, as well as those in Alexandria like Shaykh Muhammad Ismaa’eel al-Muqaddam and Shaykh Yaasir al-Burhaami are all from the Takfeeris and Khawaarij. All of these scholars actually have been fighting that for 20+ years and trust me, if that was the case they would not be free to give lectures all over the Islamic TV Channels and no one who understands the fitnah in Egypt in the past 50 years would disagree with this point. Maybe they can get away with that in UK but it doesn’t fly in Muslim countries. Likewise, if Shaykh ‘Ali is guilty for cooperating with Shaykh Muhammad Hassan and going on the TV channel he oversees then what about Shaykh Hassan b. ‘Abdul-Wahhaab al-Bannaa.. why is he not guilty, when he has gone on the TV channel Ar-Rahmah that even a farmer in Egypt knows is overseen by Shaykh Muhammad Hassan (video episode)?

    Another observation is that Shaykh Fawzee al-Atharee’s speech is used as a proof, with a footnote reading (p. 87): “Shaikh Fawzee al-Atharee is one of the students of Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen from Bahrain and he studied with the Shaikh for 10 years or so, and continues to maintain his ties and links with the Shaikh. Shaikh Fawzee exposed many of the biased partisans and revealed their innermost secrets, especially those amongst the Turaathi sect of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq.” We also find him still promoted on SalafiTalk. (link) Allahu Akbar! The same Shaykh Fawzee who has now authored so many books against Shaykh Rabee’ that I lost count. Likewise, many others were with Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen for 10 years and more, such as his major students Shaykh Khaalid al-Muslih and Shaykh Saami as-Suqayr who are both actually the sons-in-law of the Shaykh as they are married to his daughters. But unfortunately, don’t be surprised to hear that the sons-in-law of Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen who are responsible for the publishing of his books and charity organization are innovators according to these people.

    In any case, this is just another example of an issue that is clearly not black-and-white or yes-or-no when one reads about it in Arabic, made into an issue that is Salafi-or-Innovator and do-or-die in the English language due to biased translations made to convince others of the opinions that the translators themselves hold. And what are the fruits? As I said in a previous comment, the name Salafi and Salafiyyah is practically ruined in the West and honestly the fact that these brothers are able to behave as if they’ve had absolutely no responsiblity in that is very sad.

    “Among the words people obtained from the previous prophets are: if you feel no shame, then do as you wish.”

    I ask Allah to forgive us for our shortcomings and unite us on truth.

    P.S. Rasheed please don’t ban my IP address.. lol

  36. talib-ilm says:

    as salamu aleykum

    i just wanted to say to brother yusuf jazak allah khair for your informative writings and holding to the mannerism of a muslim in proving a point without ghulu…you made good points and showed the proof for it…and for that may allah reward you and bless you.

  37. Haha, I think someone pissed Yusuf off. He normally doesn’t write this much unless he’s been agitated.

    Yusuf, uhibbuka fillah! Zadakallah khairan wa ‘ilman wa fahman wa ikhlasan.

  38. Abu Shu'aib says:

    as-Salaam `Alaykum

    Yusuf – Do you have any audios/ e-Books for the comments against Abul Hassan al-Ma’ribi & his ‘followers’ by Rabi’?

    “- “The filthiest and the greatest liar of those on the face of the earth,”
    - “more of a liar than the Christians, for the Christians have dignity (sharaf) and if the Chritian knew that he lied, he would commit suicide, because they have dignity, contrary to Abil-Hasan and his followers,”
    - “Abul-Hasan’s followers are more astary than Pharaoh’s soldiers,”
    - “if the anti-christ emerged they would truly rush behind him,” and “if a man emerged claiming divinity (uluhiyyah) and lordship (rububiyyah) with the exclusion of Allah, they would truly rush behind him,”
    - “Abul-Hasan is more harmful than Pharaoh,”
    - “more astray than al-Jahm bin Safwan, ‘Amr bin ‘Ubaid, Bishr al-Marisi, Saddam Husain, and Ataturk.””

    Plz. JazakAllah khayr

  39. Yusuf says:

    @talib-ilm – Aameen, and may Allah bless you and your family, and reward you for your kind words.

    @Rasheed – Aameen, and you as well. Did you see this? New series of lectures from Shaykh Abul-Hasan, “How to Be Balanced” link)

  40. Yusuf says:

    I’ll be brief today. Another example of an issue they made a matter of innovation is boycotting the products of disbelievers. They quote Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (hafidhahullah), again in a manner attempting to humiliate him, encouraging Muslims to boycott products of the disbelievers.

    Then they add to it a note, “refer to the tape of Shaykh ‘Ubayd حفظه الله on http://www.Salafiaudio.com to hear him explain how boycotting is from the ways of the Shee’ah and not from the ways of Ahlus-Sunnah!”

    All of this is to try to convince people that Jam’iyah Ihyaa’ at-Turaath is an evil organization. (link)

    May Allah forgive these brothers, open their hearts and allow them to repent. Sadly this is more recklessness and irresponsibility as the following scholars spoke favorably on boycotting products of disbelievers who are fighting Muslims:

    - Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan as-Sa’adi (rahimahullah) – From his writings is Bayaan fi Fadhl al-Jihaad fi Sabeelillah wa Anna al-Muqaata’ah al-Iqtisaadiyyah Rukn min Arkaan al-Jihaad (A Clarification Concerning the Virtues of Struggling in the Path of Allah and That Economic Boycotting is a Pillar From the Pillars of Jihaad).

    - Shaykh Muhammad b. Saalih al-’Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) – He admonished the Muslim rulers and called them to immediately boycott Yugoslavia (audio) and Chechnya (audio).

    - Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullah) – “As long as they are at war with us then it is not permissible to deal with them whatsoever.” (audio) Also on the tape Silsilah al-Huda wal-Noor (no. 190), the shaykh expressess amazement at those who keep asking him if they can buy meat from Bulgaria which was at that time butchering their brothers and sisters. (audio)

    - Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan (hafidhahullah) – “Without doubt, boycotting American, British and Australian products is from the struggling of a Muslim against those who have come with utmost oppression and mockery (against us).” (audio)

    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez al-Raajihi (hafidhahullah) – “Yes, boycotting them is appropriate. If we right now make du’a against them, we do qunoot and pray against them, so from that which is of more deserving is for us to boycott their products because this (buying from them) strengthens their economy, so boycotting them should be done.” (audio) Also on his website are two fatwas (link, link) not only stating that boycotting is a good thing, but then he even recommends the writing by Shaykh Ibn Jibreen which SP opposes which have now been gathered in the form of a small booklet Ahkaam al-Muqaata’ah! (link)

    And there are others but I think this is sufficient.

    Yet, according to SP boycotting is from the ways of the Shee’ah and not the ways of Ahlus-Sunnah??!!

    I respect scholars who disagree with boycotting, but that doesn’t mean I need to trick others by not giving them a true understanding of the issue as it is with the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah. The strength of the proof for my decision to choose either of the opinions should be with evidence, not simply because Shaykh ‘Ubayd said so. And even with Shaykh ‘Ubayd they’re picking and choosing his stances according to what suites them, otherwise what do they think about him speaking against the Sahab forum which is basically an Arabic version of SalafiTalk? (audio) Why didn’t we see a post about that??

    What these brothers, may Allah forgive them, don’t seem to understand is that there is absolutely no goodness in deceiving and duping people to agree to your opinions.

    Actually what ends up happening often is that others discover this and develop a distrust for anything else they read and end up stop practicing the deen or they end up falling into the extremism that SP claims to be fighting, and I’m sure we all have our share of stories we’ve heard of related to this.

  41. Yusuf says:

    @Abu Shu’aib –

    Wa ‘Alaykum as-Salaam wa-Rahmatullah,

    One of the main tapes where he says most of that is, ironically titled, As-Sidq (Tape 2, Side B). I looked online for this tape but can’t find it and Shaykh Rabee’s site isn’t working for me so I’m not sure if it is there.

    Shaykh Abul-Hasan cites with detail in his writing التنكيل بما في خطاب الشيخ ربيع من الأباطيل where all the insults are at but I don’t have this with me. I can’t remember right now but I think he may play the excerpts on some of the audio refutations of him.

    If you can read Arabic then read الدفاع عن أهل الإتباع or at least check out تحذير الجميع من أخطاء الشيخ ربيع وأسلوبه الشنيع and إعلان النكير على منهج الشيخ ربيع في التكفير … and Allah knows best.

  42. Yusuf says:

    @Abu Shu’aib – I just realized that At-Tankeel is in volume 2 of Ad-Difaa’ah ‘an Ahl al-Ittibaa’ and I see him mention the sayings but no citation for those specific ones only a response to them. This makes me inclined to think they’re mostly from the tape As-Sidq.

    In any case, of much more concern are the quotes found which he cites in the two books Tahdheer al-Jamee’ and I’laan an-Nakeer which aren’t related to him personally but many other matters that Shaykh Rabee’ has erred in, and Allah knows best.

  43. Here, folks, is the tape titled as-Sidq, by Shaikh Rabi’ bin Hadi al-Madkhali (downloadable from the shaikh’s website).

  44. Yusuf says:

    Two other issues SP uses against Jam’iyah Ihyaa’ at-Turath from the same page (link) are:

    [1] Praised of “the deviant innovator Ahmad Yaseen,” and,

    [2] Calling those who have died in Palestine as shaheeds.

    So they will meet Allah with this as proof on the Day of Judgement to accuse this Muslim organization of being evil.

    However, many scholars praised Yaseen, except SP chose not to share that with any of our brothers and sisters who don’t know Arabic.

    Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan (hafidhahullah) was asked what he thought about those who belittled Shaykh Ahmad Yaseen and his struggle and that his efforts were upon falsehood. The shaykh sought refuge with Allah from such horrible statements. He then defended Yaseen’s efforts and made du’a for him. (audio)

    Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh (hafidhahullah), the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, also made du’a for him and even referred to him as a shaheed, which is another point they try to make an issue of one’s Salafiyyah over even though there’s difference of opinion on referring to someone as shaheed from classical and contemporary scholars. (link)

    So Jam’iyah Ihyaa’ at-Turath is simply saying the same thing as these two scholars.

    Regarding the issue of calling one a shaheed, this is an issue of difference of opinion and both sides has evidence.

    Those who allow calling someone a shaheed include:

    - Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) – Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (24/293)

    - Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) – Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat (18/422) (link) and Fatwa (link

    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh (as seen in the link above, he himself calls Shaykh Ahmad Yaseen a shaheed)

    - Al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah – Fataawa al-Lajnah (12/23, no. 9248), signed by Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh Abdullah b. Qu’ood (rahimahumullah), Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Ghudayaan

    And with the exception of Ibn Taymiyyah, this is not even delving into classical scholars who said likewise.

    What is the reply of SP to this? Will their supporters at least admit their misleading others to support their opinions?

    My goal is not to even defend this Jam’iyah as I haven’t taken time to study the issue, but my point is to show that they are making issues which ‘ulama differ over as criteria as to prove one being a Salafi.

    Yes, SP has come a long way.. but in what direction?

    Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) was asked: “Can a believer be a coward?” He said: “Yes.” He was then asked: “Can a believer be a miser?” He replied: “Yes.” And finally, he was asked: ‘Can a believer be a liar?” He (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “No.” (Al-Muwatta)

    And he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “Beware of lying for lying guides to transgression and transgression leads to the fire.” (Saheehayn)

    Enough with deceiving the Ummah of Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam).

    I remind you brothers from SP reading this and myself to fear Allah. This da’wah and this knowledge is an amaanah.

    Allah ‘azza wa jall said:

    إِنَّ اللّهَ يَأْمُرُكُمْ أَن تُؤدُّواْ الأَمَانَاتِ إِلَى أَهْلِهَا وَإِذَا حَكَمْتُم بَيْنَ النَّاسِ أَن تَحْكُمُواْ بِالْعَدْلِ إِنَّ اللّهَ نِعِمَّا يَعِظُكُم بِهِ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ سَمِيعاً بَصِيراً
    “Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing.” (4:58)

    Be serious and sincere, make tawbah and don’t allow this verse to be a proof against you rather than a proof for you on Yawm al-Qiyaamah.

  45. Yusuf says:

    Allah says: “Woe to every slanderer and backbiter.” (104:1)

    Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “Allah, the Exalted said: “Whoever takes a Wali (loyal slave) of Mine as an enemy, I will wage war on him.” (al-Bukhaari)

    Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “During the Mi’raaj, I saw a group of people who were scratching their chests and faces with their copper nails. I asked, ‘Who are these people, O Jibreel?’ Jibreel replied: ‘These are the people who ate the flesh of others and trampled upon people’s honour.’” (Abu Dawood)

    And he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “The gossip-monger will not enter Paradise.” (al-Bukhaari)

    Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) passed by two graves and said: “They are being punished. As regards one of them then he used to go around gossip-mongering and as regards the other then he was not careful while urinating.” (al-Bukhaari and Muslim)

    And he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “A person utters a word thoughtlessly (i.e., without thinking about its being good or not) and, as a result of this, he will fall down into the fire of Hell deeper than the distance between the east and the west.” (al-Bukhaari and Muslim)

    Here are some fataawa of Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Jibreen – may Allah protect him and cure him – for SP to reconsider their slandering of him being Khaariji, Takfeeri, and so on before they meet Allah.

    - The corruption caused by rebelling against the Muslim ruler (audio)
    - Hearing and obeying the Muslim ruler (audio)
    - Should we rebel against a Muslim ruler whom we are capable of removing? (audio)
    - The lack of a Muslim ruler accepting advice (audio)
    - How do we advise the Muslim ruler? (audio)
    - There is still good in the Ummah (audio)
    - The ruling on those who do takfeer based on sins and allow rebelling against the Muslim ruler (link)

    Has there ever been a Khaariji in the history of mankind that gives these fataawa and along with that when he is sick he is visited by the ruler of the country he lives in that he wants to overthrow??!!!

    Has not the time come to repent dear brothers?

  46. Yusuf says:

    And for those who slander and accuse scholars of Egypt of being Khaariji and Takfeeri as is found all over SalafiTalk, etc….

    Shaykh Muhammad Hassan (hafidhahullah):

    - Who are the Khawaarij? (video)
    - Concerning the Explosions in Cairo a few weeks ago (video)
    - Principles of Takfeer according to Ahl as-Sunnah (video 1, video 2, video 3)
    - Warning against being hasty in doing takfeer (video)

    Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni (hafidhahullah):

    - Refuting the Khawaarij (video)
    - Refuting Accusations of Being Takfeeri (video)
    - Refuting Jama’at Takfeer wal-Hijrah (video 1, video 2)

    Shaykh Ahmad an-Naqeeb (hafidhahullah):

    - Refuting the Khawaarij (video)

    Shaykh Yaasir al-Burhaami (hafidhahullah):

    - On the explosions in Cairo (video)

    Shaykh Muhammad Ismaa’eel al-Muqaddam (hafidhahullah):

    - Addressing those who are harming Salafiyyah (video)

    All of this is just on YouTube, if necessary I can give more links of longer videos, but I pray you brothers get serious and make tawbah. Those who blindly follow SP, etc. should know that no SP and no “da’ee” and no shaykh will be there for you on a day which lasts 50,000 years to help you from blindly following slander and lies against others.

    The strange thing is that no sane person would listen to another if they accused another person, let alone a scholar of Islam, of sins related to the dunya such as zina, murder, or theft without any solid evidence that has been analyzed rigorously. Yet they willingly and quickly accept the accusation that these scholars are committing sin related to the deen by misleading others and promoting innovation and no doubt the latter is more severe than the other as stated by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah).

    Fear Allah brothers. At least step down from the position of da’wah and spare us from your harm if you are not capable of correcting your speech and admitting that you were gravely mistaken in all of these false accusations.

  47. Yusuf says:

    If Shaykh Salmaan is Khaariji and Takfeeri, then why is the following on his website?

    - حكم مرتكب الكبيرة (link)
    - خروج السلفيين على الدولة (link)
    - الكفر البواح المجيز للخروج على السلطان (link)
    - التشرذم والتكفير (link)
    - حديث: “ستكون أمراء…” وحكام اليوم (link)
    - هل يعد من خرج على الإمام من الخوارج؟ (link)
    - الخروج على ولاة الأمر (link)

    No doubt he was mistaken in the past, but how can you possibly refuse to admit that he has changed?

    Shaykh Rabee’ said on Wujoob al-‘Itisaam bil-Kitaab was-Sunnah (Tape 2, Side A) about Shaykhs Safar and Salmaan:

    ” والله أنا طلب مني الحدادية ، تبديع سفر وسلمان،ومن على نهجهم ، فقلت : أنا أناقش سفر وسلمان في أخطائهما ، وخاصة سلمان ناقشته ، وأما الحكم ؛ فهذا أتركه للعلماء ، فكانت هذه الفيصل بيني وبين الحدادية ، هم أرادوا خدمة الحزبيين ، أن نعلن التبديع والتكفير ، حتى ينفر الناس عنا ، ويستغلها الحزبيون ، والإخوان المسلمين : شوفوا يبدِّعون ، شوفوا يكفِّرون ، فعرفت أن هذه حيلة من الحدادية أنفسهم ، وأنهم مدفوعون من القطبيين والحزبيين ، أنّا نعلن التشهير والتبديع والتكفير ، حتى يفرح الحزبيون ، ويجعلوها مثل قميص عثمان ، يتباكَوْن على أنفسهم ، فأنا قلت : لا ، أنا أكتب ، هاه ، هات لي أخطاءهم ، أخطاء سفر وسلمان وغيره ، هاه ، وأنا أبين وأشرح ، ثم أذهب للعلماء ، وأعطيهم ، فهذا يرجع إليهم ، إن شاءوا بدَّعوهم ، وإن شاءوا تركوهم ، طبعاً سفر وسلمان لهم أخطاء كثيرة ، لا شك ، لكن هذا يحتاج إلى تأني ، وإلى قولة العلماء في ذلك بعد الدراسة الآن تقول : فلان مبتدع ، فلان مبتدع ، قالوا لك : لا ، فتدخل في فتن ومشاكل ”

    And on the tape Min al-Qalb ilal-Qalb about Shaykhs Salmaan, Safar, Naasir al-‘Umar and ‘Aa’idh al-Qarni:

    اللهم اجمع شمل علماءناووفقهم لكل خير وفك اسر كلمة الشيخ سلمان والشيخ سفر والشيخ ناصر والشيخ عائض واحفظهم جميعا من كل سوء

    Shaykh Rabee’ even admonished Shaykh Muhammad b. Haadi al-Madkhali for attacking Shaykh Safar, and said that he is his brother. He also said to quit using these labels Suroori and Ikhwaani on one another and that we are all brothers and should unite. (audio)

    And regarding Shaykh al-Maghraawi (hafidhahullah), if he is Takfeeri as you claim then why is the following on his website?

    - Danger of Takfeeris (audio)
    - Takfeer, Bombings and the Correct Way to Reform (audio 1, audio 2)
    - Principles of Takfeer and Misguidance of the Khawaarij (audio 1, audio 2, audio 3)
    - The Danger of Takfeer and Ruling on Bombings and Assassinations (link)
    - Concerning Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb (link)

    Also, the following books are on his site:

    - نواقض الإيمان الاعتقادية وضوابط التكفير عند السلف link
    - فتنة التكفير (link)
    - بذل النصح والتذكير لبقايا المفتونين بالتكفير والتفجير (link)
    - تبديد كواشف العنيد في تكفيره لدولة التوحيد (link)

    With all of this do you brothers continue to hold on to an old statement of his that was misunderstood or not intended? How can you read all of this and listen to all of this and think that the situation is black-and-white and as simple as a person being a Salafi or innovator and also portray it to others that way?? Where is the wara’ and where is the tarbiyyah of the Muslims? Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullah) repeatedly says to leave this fitnah alone and quit speaking about people… “Fulan is salafi” and “Fulan is hizbi” … he said to focus on uniting the Muslims and benefiting them and that all of this is not naseehah but fadheehah. (audio) so where do you brothers fit in with that? Why don’t we see you translate that? Why only translate his praise of Shaykh Rabee’? Can’t you see that advice is just as Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi is illustrating in his recent book that you are persistent on giving a bad name just as you did with Shaykh Abul-Hasan?

    Allah said:

    ادع إلى سبيل ربك بالحكمة والموعظة الحسنة وجادلهم بالتي هي أحسن إن ربك هو أعلم بمن ضل عن سبيله وهو أعلم بالمهتدين
    “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction (baseerah), and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.” (16:125)

    May Allah guide us all to the Straight Path and to that which pleases Him.

  48. Yusuf says:

    On SalafiTalk we also find them accuse Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan, teacher in al-Masjid an-Nabawi (link) and former director of ‘Aqeedah section higher studies at Madeenah University,of saying that the Ashaa’irah and Maaturidiyyah are from Ahl as-Sunnah and not from the 72 astray sects. (link to accusation)

    By Allah, this is a lie against the shaykh that they will meet Allah with on their records if they don’t repent. The shaykh himself clarified this widespread accusation in a writing last year. (link)

    How can you brothers boldly carry a lie against a scholar who has defended the ‘aqeedah of Ahl as-Sunnah so strongly without first confirming it at least? Look at some of the books he’s authored:

    شرح كتاب التوحيد من صحيح البخاري
    مختصر منهاج السنة لشيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية
    ثبات العقيدة الإسلامية أمام التحديات المعاصرة
    تحقيق وتعليق على كتاب الصفات للإمام الدارقطني
    لا يصلح هذه الأمة إلا ما أصلح أولها

    And his audio lectures:

    شرح الفتوى الحموية
    الأصول الثلاثة
    شرح كتاب فتح المجيد
    شرح كتاب لعقيدة الواسطية

    How likely is it that a scholar who has delivered these works ever say what you are accusing him of so swiftly?! Also, why does the government have a person guilty of all of what you’re claiming teaching in al-Masjid an-Nabawi? And what does that say about the government then? In addition to that, you accuse him of speaking on Afghanistan yet I showed in a previous post Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajoori also spoke similarly – so where’s the justice?

    All of this because Shaykh Ahmad as-Subay’ee said so and he’s been praised? I can likewise show elaborate praise of Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan… so what will your position be then? Fear Allah and abandon this blind taqleed dear brothers. Be balanced and investigate on your own before taking positions about which your feet won’t move until you answer for them on Yawm al-Qiyaamah.

    Return to the principles of this da’wah of being balanced and just, level-headed and cautious with regards to speaking about the deen.

    The sixth companion to enter into Islam and one of four people that Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said to learn Qur’an from, ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ood (radiyallahu ‘anhu), said:

    - “None of you should make Taqleed (blindly follow) another man in regards to his religion, if he [one being followed] believes then he believes and if he disbelieves then he disbelieves. If you had to blindly follow someone, then take those who have passed away as examples, for indeed those who are alive are not safe from Fitnah.”

    - One day he left his house and people followed him, so he said to them: “Is there anything that you need?” They said: “No, but we want to walk with you.” He said: “Go back, because it is lowly, dishonorable for the follower and a Fitnah for the one being followed.”

    - “Knowledge is not in narrating a lot, but knowledge is fear [of Allah].”

    - “There is nothing on the face of the earth that is more in need of being imprisoned for a lengthy period of time than the tongue”

    - “There will be a people at the end of times called al-nataan, constantly blaming one another will be the best of their actions.”

    This is Ibn Mas’ood (radiyallah ‘anhu) for you to take as an example dear brothers whom we all agree is better than any scholar alive today. This is Ibn Mas’ood (radiyallah ‘anhu), the first companion to recite the Qur’an in public at the Ka’bah, who said, “By Allah, besides whom there is none worthy of worship but Him, there is not a surah from the Book of Allah that has been revealed but I know where it was revealed. Likewise, no surah from the Book of Allah has been revealed, but I know about whom it was revealed. And if I knew of any person more knowledgeable about the Book of Allah than myself I would have traveled to him if it was possible.”

    May Allah guide us all, open our hearts to the truth and forgive us for our shortcomings.

  49. Yusuf says:

    Here are current members of Ha’yat Kibaar al-’Ulamaa’ – the board of Major Scholars in Saudi Arabia – may Allah protect them all.

    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh
    - Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan
    - Shaykh Saalih al-Husayyin
    - Shaykh Saalih Humayyid
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah at-Turki
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah Manee’
    - Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan
    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-Wahhaab Abu Sulaymaan
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah Aal ash-Shaykh
    - Shaykh Ahmad Mubaaraki
    - Shaykh Abdullah al-Mutlaq
    - Shaykh Ya’qoob al-Baahiseen
    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-Kareem al-Khudhayr
    - Shaykh ‘Ali Hakami
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Khunayn
    - Shaykh Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Mukhtaar ash-Shanqiti
    - Shaykh Muhammad Aal ash-Shaykh
    - Shaykh Sa’ad ash-Shithri
    - Shaykh Qays b. Muhammad Aal ash-Shaykh Mubaarak
    - Shaykh Muhammad b. ‘Abdul-Kareem al-’Eesaa

    We always hear from these brothers about how important the major scholars are and how we should know them and have close ties to them and that is true without a doubt. Yet I’d say most likely at least half of these scholars are absolutely unknown to our brothers and sisters who do not know Arabic, which is truly a disaster and a calamity. But why aren’t they known? The reality is that you cannot find from any of these scholars, including the names that are familiar, that support the sad series of events that have occurred over the past 10+ years in the name of Salafiyyah. Rather you would find all of these scholars warning against this fitnah and all that leads to it, but we never see that material made into any PDF files with extensive footnotes. In fact, from this list is a scholar – ash-Shanqiti – that they slander and have extreme hatred for.. just ask the students who support SP that attend Madeenah University how much they hate him and the fact he has one of the largest circles in Madeenah, may Allah protect him from their hasad and plots. They can’t grasp the reason why Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbaad doesn’t have dars on Thursday night so that his students are able to attend the dars of Shaykh Muhammad. They can’t understand why he defended him in Rifqan, rather “it must be that Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin doesn’t understand his affair!”

    And as far as other scholars such as Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abdul-’Azeez al-’Aqeel (hafidhahullah) – who is the shaykh of Hanbalis in our time and one of the oldest surviving students of Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan as-Sa’adi (rahimahullah) and other major scholars of the past century – then all we hear about him is that he praises Shaykh Rabee’ (link). What about the fact that SP considers many of his students to be Qutubis, Takfeeris, etc.? Such as the Muhaddith Shaykh ‘Abdullah as-Sa’ad (hafidhahullah), whom he has co-written introduction to Shaykh Muhammad al-Habdaan’s explanation of Kashf ash-Shubuhaat – who they also consider to be a Qutubi and Takfeeri.

    By Allah, what a disaster brothers. I have not written all of these comments out of anger or anything, but out of a desire to finally see some seriousness and maturity expressed from you brothers who support SP. Look at the fruits of this fitnah from the past 10+ years.. the da’wah is practically mocked and ridiculed, and while it is true that this occured to the da’wah of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam), don’t dare pretend that this is the same at all. Rather no doubt this is the result of the harm spread and experienced during these previous years.

    I challenged you brothers to find a scholar from the above list of major scholars that supports what you have done. I’ll make it easy for you and give you the words of a scholar from the exact same list – Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Mutlaq (hafidhahullah) – who condemns the precisely exact thing you have done to the da’wah these past years. (audio) Purify your intention and listen to him describe the exact thing you have been guilty of doing all of these years, and pray Allah opens your heart and grants you the ability to repent.

    PS Brother Rasheed in shaa’ Allah I’ll stop spamming your blog now at least maybe until your next post! lol

  50. Yusuf says:

    Brothers from Sunnah Publishing reading this since you’ve recently translated other material from Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullah), here is some more recent speech of his worthy of translating and distributing.

    سماحة الشيخ: ما رأي سماحتكم فيمن أشغلوا أنفسهم بتصنيف الناس وتتبع زلاّت العلماء والدعاة وطلبة العلم أحياءً وأمواتًا، ونشر أخطاءهم بين عامة الناس، والتحذير من علماء ودعاة بأسمائهم، ونبذ إخوانهم ممن لا يوافقونهم على هذا الاجتهاد بالمبتدعة وهجرهم والتحذير منهم، وربما اختلاق الأكاذيب عليهم حتى تركوا الصلاة خلف بعضهم، وامتحان الناس بالأشخاص ولاءً وبراءً وهم في كل هذا يزعمون أنهم المستحقون لاسم السلفية دون غيرهم، ويشيعون بأنكم يا سماحة الشيخ مؤيد لهم فيما يذهبون إليه، وقد حصل من جرَّاء هذا فُرْقة عظيمة بين طلبة العلم المعظمين للكتاب والسنة ولسلف هذه الأمة، فما هو توجيه سماحتكم؟

    - هذا السؤال أطول من المحاضرة، يا إخوان سمعتم قوله تعالى: [وَلَا يَغْتَبْ بَعْضُكُمْ بَعْضًا أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَنْ يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا فَكَرِهْتُمُوهُ وَاتَّقُوا اللهَ إِنَّ اللهَ تَوَّابٌ رَحِيمٌ] عليك أيها المتكلم في الناس أن ترجع إلى نفسك وتعدد عيوبك أنت، غَطِّ عيوبك أنت قبل الناس، وتب إلى الله عز وجل، الله لم يجعلك رقيبًا على الناس تُعَدِّد عيوبهم، وإنما أمرك أن تحاسب نفسك، أنت إذا رأيت على أخيك خطأ فإنك توجّهه بالموعظة الحسنة بينك وبينه، أما أن تتكلم عنه في المجالس فهذا أمر محرم وهذا هو الغيبة المنهي عنها، أيضًا أوصيكم يا من تشتغلون بهذه الأمور أن تطلبوا العلم أولاً، هذا ما حصل إلا من الجهل، حصل من الجهل، فهم جُهّال يظنون أنهم علماء أو طلبة علم، ثم يتنقصون الناس ويلتمسون لهم العيوب ويعدلون ويُجَرِّحون، وهذا شغلهم الشاغل، عليهم أن يطلبوا العلم أولاً، حتى يعرفوا الحق من الباطل والصواب من الخطأ، وحتى يعرفوا كيف يقابلون الخطأ من الغير هذه أمورٌ تحتاج إلى فقه، تحتاج إلى علم، ثم تُعالج بالستر، تعالج بالتي هي أحسن، تعالج بالنصيحة والموعظة الحسنة، لا تعالج بمثل هذه الأمور التي تؤجج الخلاف بين المجتمع، وتكرِّه المسلم لأخيه المسلم، وطالب العلم لأخيه طالب العلم، حتى كما قال في السؤال: لا يصلي بعضهم خلف بعض!! لماذا؟ ألستم مسلمين؟ ألستم إخوة في الله عز وجل؟ فلماذا لا يصلي بعضهم خلف بعض؟ إنما الذي لا يُصلّى خلفه هو الفاسق، هو الفاسق في عقيدته، أو الفاسق في أعماله الذي يظهر عليه الفسق، المجاهر بالفسق، هذا لا يُصلى خلفه، أما إنسان مستور، وإنسان ليس عليه شيء ظاهر وإنما أنت تتهمه أو هو لم يوافقك على ما تريد، فتتخذ من هذا هجرًا له، تتخذ من هذا قطيعة، فُرْقة، خلاف، كل هذا لا يجوز، نعم. اهـ

    (audio)

  51. talib-ilm says:

    as salamu aleykum

    the previous q/a with sheikh fawzan is what i been hearing for years from the scholars..yet others propagate whats against that…someone or some group is twisting the truth..just like the western media does with current world issues.

    anyway brothers..do you guys have info on daar al hadith in ma’rib under sheikh abul hassan..do they for example accept foreign students, teach arabic to beginners etc..

    wa jazakum allah khair

  52. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, “talib-ilm”.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have any information on Dar al-Hadith in Ma’rib. They used to have a website up, but it’s been down for the last little while. They also have some pictures of the academy on the shaikh’s website (which can be seen here). Perhaps Yusuf might know more about the academy in Ma’rib.

  53. Yusuf says:

    @talib-ilm

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

    The conditions are on the message board of the Shaykh at this post.

    Basically here’s a quick summary:

    - Tazkiyyah from a scholar or daa’ee known to be moderate and balanced
    - Age must be 20+ years old
    - Must have a good background and good manners
    - Must abide by the program and student regulations
    - If you are from outside of Yemen you must have a valid visa

    The program of studies is mentioned on the post.

    As far as basic Arabic classes I’m not sure but I think it could be possible that they offer them because they do have a beginners level available.

    I think the best thing to do is contact the Shaykh and ask him. His email address is dar-alhadeth at hotmail or you could try to call him directly at 00967777753350.

    Some more photos are here.

  54. talib-ilm says:

    jazakum allah khair..those conditions are do-able al hamdulilah…one more question..do they have a section for sisters or is the school only for brothers

  55. Judging by the pictures in the link I provided, it does look like they have room for sisters.

  56. Yusuf says:

    There is space for sisters in shaa’ Allah.

    The women’s section has more than 100 students and they study all branches of knowledge in it, such as ‘aqeedah, fiqh, hadeeth, seerah, etc. It is divided into levels like the men’s section with women teachers. Some of the mashaayikh give lectures to the women over speaker.

    There are 17 circles for memorizing Qur’an for women and they increase in number during school-break in Yemen.

    There is also a separate library for women to refer to for research and so on.

    This info used to be here but not sure where it went.

    I searched and found it posted on another message board though here.

    WaAllahu ‘alam.

  57. unlizzted says:

    These are some nice counter arguments unfortunately if someone was to really argue these points in most salafee communties…the person would be tar and feathered and put on display…..May Allah bless you brothers…yusuf and rasheed… Has anyone heard from mutawakeel from conneticut..I wish he would of fought those devils who oppressed him…unlizzted2009

  58. Yusuf says:

    Latest news..

    Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-’Aqeel (hafidhahullah) – the leading faqeeh of the Hanbali madhhab alive mentioned in previous comment – has given ijaazah to Shaykh Mashhoor (hafidhahullah), who supports Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi’s latest book that has been “refuted” (link) …

    Where’s the news of this on SalafiTalk.net, as when Shaykh al-’Aqeel praised Shaykh Rabee’? Why is one of the head scholars of the entire world praising someone whom SP, TROID, etc. deserves to be refuted and disgraced?

    Let me guess, their affair isn’t clear to the shaykh??!

    ‘Ajeeb.

  59. As-salâm ‘alaykum wa raḥmatullâh wa barakâtuhu,

    How would you guys respond to someone who says that the principles of Jarḥ and Ta’dîl require us to accept the jarḥ of a qualified critic, and it is not upon us to investigate; otherwise we would call into question the criticisms of the books or rijâl of aforetimes.

  60. Yusuf says:

    @Abû Mûsâ

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

    There are several responses, but firstly is the implied argument that Shaykh Rabee’ is a qualified critic and therefore we should not investigate his criticism of others to see the accuracy of it?

    A point is that these brothers continue to present the issue of al-jarh wal-ta’deel from one angle only, when clearly scholars differ and a portion have said that it is only limited to chains of narration as I’ve mentioned above. This is scholastic dishonesty.

    Just look at the most recent translation of Sunnah Publishing, part 4 of the “refutation” pages 13-15 under the Tenth Section there is a whole slaughter of those who say that it is limited to narrations, saying it is from ruination and lack of understanding Islam, and a lot of other colorful language.

    Yet, they didn’t mention that this is what Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan, Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajhi, and Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan have stated – that the knowledge of al-jarh wal-ta’deel was restricted to narrations and its scholars are in the graveyards now.

    Why didn’t they mention it? Allah knows best.

    One answer could be is that it allows the situation to remain black-and-white and they can continue to convince others that these scholars believe Shaykh Rabee’ to be the flag-bearer of al-jarh wal-ta’deel and so on, when clearly they don’t believe any scholar alive on the planet to be that in our times.

    Also, what category do these scholars fall now since they don’t believe (1) al-jarh wal-ta’deel to be related to other than narrations and (2) they don’t believe any scholar of this science is alive, let alone one that is the head of it?

    The double standards are absolutely absurd and I’m convinced these brothers have no response to this because they’ve dug a deep hole with it.

  61. Thanks for the response brother, but I don’t think you answered the question. Let us assume that those scholars who hold that al-jarḥ wat-ta’dîl will remain a viable field until the Day of Judgment are correct; how would you respond to what I mentioned? Or are you saying that what I mentioned is correct only if you believe that al-jarḥ wat-ta’dîl still remains?

  62. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh, brother Abu Musa.

    The response to this can be from various aspects. The first aspect it can be answered from is that the principles of accreditation and disparagement have their place and purpose. As brother Yusuf mentioned, many scholars have mentioned that this branch of knowledge is restricted to narrators of narrations (i.e., hadith, athar, early books, etc.) and does not apply to appraisals or criticisms of contemporary scholars.

    If we assume that these scholars’ opinions are wrong and that accreditation and disparagement is not restricted to narrators of narrations and does encompass the appraisal and criticism of contemporary scholars, there is the fact that many scholars have said that many scholars’ statements regarding their contemporaries are not given much consideration. In my reply to brother Raashid above, I mentioned Imam Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr’s Jami’ Bayan al-’Ilm wa Fadlih as one of my precedents for saying that the scholars fall into personal differences with one another, sometimes due to jealousy, anger, or other reasons. Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr dedicated an entire chapter in this book of his on the ruling of the scholars’ statements regarding each other (chapter 72, pgs. 291-313 of volume 2 of Shaikh Fawwaz Ahmad Zumarli’s verification of the book). This chapter has dozens of narrations regarding these matters including stories of various incidents that occurred between our scholars, as well as various accusations they made against each other (some of these coming from the Companions and great imams such as Malik bin Anas, Yahya bin Ma’in, and others). All of this is to illustrate the fact that many of the statements coming from scholars about their contemporaries are not given much weight or consideration. The brothers at SalafiManhaj have published an article that you can refer to on the fact that accreditation and disparagement is a matter of ijtihad (link); it contains some statements regarding this matter (i.e., contemporaries speaking about each other).

    Another aspect it can be answered from is that we are required to investigate and verify things when there is doubt or reason to question what we are being told. In his exegesis of verse 4:94 of the Qur’an, Shaikh Ibn Nasir as-Sa’dî states,

    He, exalted is He, commands His believing servants when they go out for jihad in His path and for seeking His pleasure that they clarify and verify all their doubtful affairs, for surely, the affairs are two types: obvious and unobvious. So the clearly obvious, there is no need for clarifying and verifying, because that is redundant. As for the unobvious problematic affairs, then surely the person needs to verify and clarify them, does he proceed or not? Surely, many benefits occur from verifying in these affairs, as well as the hindering of tremendous evils. Through it, the servant’s religion, intellect, and composure are recognized, contrary to [one who] hurries the affairs from their outset before their ruling is clarified for him, for surely that leads to what is not befitting.

    As for calling the criticisms found in the books of the past concerning narrators into question, this isn’t necessitated by any of this. And even if it was, I personally don’t see it as big a deal as one might think. If you study the books of scholars who specialize in the field of hadith, especially their more detailed and extensive verifications and extractions of narrations, you will find that often they don’t rely on one book of biographies to judge the narrators they come across. Instead, you will find them referring to various books about narrators comparing statements from several sources to come to conclusions about the reliability or weakness of a particular narrator. An example of this is found in an article I translated and published here on my blog. In Shaikh Salim al-Hilali’s authentication of the narration of ‘Amr bin Salamah regarding circles of remembrance, he investigates the statements about the narrators in the chain of narration and comes to his conclusion based on what he’s found. So you will find that those who are able to do so, will investigate. They will verify and seek clarification.

    As for those who aren’t able or choose not to do so, they’re free to do that. As I said at the end of my blog post above, those who choose to rely on the words of a particular scholar for whatever reason instead of investigating further should not fool themselves into thinking they are doing more than blindly adopting his stance or position on the matter.

  63. Muhsin Ali says:

    Salaam alaikum, firstly I would like to say jazakhAllah khair to brothers Yusuf and Rasheed for the detailed information they have provided. I used to associate with SP and their likes but after seeing some ghuloo in them I decided to leave association but I still encouraged people to benefit from them. However after reading what you brothers have posted above with evidences wallahi I feel sick. Sick because it is hitting home how much damage SP and their likes have done to the dawah over the years and still continue to do. I do believe that as each day passes they are getting more and more exposed and that websites such as yours, madeenah and salafimanhaj are giving the side that we never hear from them. Keep up the good work, may Allah reward you both for your efforts

  64. talib-ilm says:

    as salamu aleykum

    brothers i have a question..maybe rasheed or yusuf has an answer for it.

    how do you respond to the person who says:

    Taking ahlul-bid’ah as friends and companions makes a person from them and supporting them and defense of them. For indeed Ahmad bin Hanbal it was said to him: “Indeed some of the people sit with ahlulbid’ah”, so he said: “Advise him!” He said: “I already advised him, but he refused (to leave sitting with them).” He (Ahmad) said: “Consider him with them”.

    So the one who sits with the people of innovation and mixes with them, it is proven and established against him that he is ill, and that he agrees with those people, and regarding this there are proofs;

    wa jazakum allah khair..

  65. Yusuf says:

    @talib-ilm

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

    I’m very short on time right now, but the issue of boycotting an innovator is not black and white. There are several factors, such as:

    1. Bid’ah – just as shirk, kufr, fisq, and nifaaq – is of different levels and degrees. For example, there is the bid’ah that takes one out of the fold of Islam and there is the bid’ah which is minor and doesn’t take one even out of the fold of Ahl as-Sunnah, such as kissing the mus-haf (although some scholars have allowed this, which is another factor).

    2. As I just said, not all innovations take one out of the fold of Ahl as-Sunnah. Likewise, a person can have a bid’ah with them but they may be excused due to ignorance or perhaps they believe they have a legit proof. If a person is excused by ignorance in some cases for kufr, so then what about bid’ah?

    3. An issue may be declared as an innovation by one scholar, and a sunnah by another scholar, such as placing the hands on the chest after rising from rukoo’ – Sh. al-Albaani (rahimahullah) said it is an innovation whereas many other scholars say it is a sunnah. Without acknowledging this issue, one may be calling to boycott someone else for having a bid’ah, wheras with that person it may in fact be a sunnah.

    4. Boycotting an innovator still must be looked at in terms of the maslahah and mafsadah. This is based on the innovation, the situation, and many other aspects.

    There are four brief points, and there are more but I’m short on time. My intention is to show that the matter is not as black and white as applying only one narration of Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullah). The Salaf have many narrations which must be taken as a whole and applied properly to any situation you are dealing with. It isn’t that we disagree with the narration you quoted, rather we disagree about the application of it.

    This is basically what the entire book by Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi is about… any why certain people are very upset that he has expounded on this. But what is there to fear out of having dialogue with one another and speaking about the issue from a knowledge-based perspective instead of throwing around a bunch of empty slogans?

    Look at SunnahPublishing – may Allah forgive them and us – still promoting the issue of refuting Sh. al-Maghrawi, yet they refuse to read one letter from his responses to accusations against him, such as his book Ahl al-Ifk wal-Buhtaan. Why? They’ll claim you can’t read the books of innovators. Well, that’s an extremely convenient manner of keeping yourself in a bubble refusing to investigate the issue. If you’re going to speak about something then at least honestly be aware of it instead of just reading the angle of Sh. Rabee’. They refuse to admit to errors of Sh. Rabee’ and some extreme statements he has said, basically saying that their eyes and ears are lying to them. In reality, this is just a more sophisticated form of taqleed.

    So they accuse Sh. al-Maghrawi of doing mass takfeer on the Ummah by twisting what he said and he has already clarified this issue and what he intended. At the same time, they refuse to acknowledge that Sh. Ahmad an-Najmi (rahimahullah) said almost the exact same thing, if not more harsher, in his sharh of ‘Umdat al-Ahkaam about the Ummah being astray. However, we know that Sh. an-Najmi didn’t intend that, just as we know that Sh. al-Maghrawi didn’t – because they are scholars from Ahl as-Sunnah who have refuted the Khawaarij and Takfeeris so it makes no sense for us to leave all of these writings and tapes of theirs for a few sentences that may be excused.

    Injustice, oppression, deceit – we seek refuge with Allah from this being our legacy.

    Be patient brothers and sisters, look at Ameer al-Mu’mineen of Ahl al-Hadeeth al-Imaam al-Bukhaari (rahimahullah)… he died a lonely man on the night of ‘Eid, abandoned, boycotted, accused of believing and promoting one of the greatest innovations ever by another scholar who was considered one of the heads of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel. But Allah tests those whom He loves and He gives victory to His slaves who are sincere and patient for His sake, and today Imaam al-Bukhaari (rahimahullah) is known by the entire Ummah as authoring the most authentic book after the Book of Allah, may Allah have mercy on him.

  66. talib-ilm says:

    Jazak allah khair akhi yusuf for you response.

    However i should have clarified my question. I recently listen to sheikh abul hassan al sulaymani’s lecture series on i3tidal and the third tape basically focused on who to consider from ahl al sunnah and whom not.

    So sitting with people of slight bid3a but still upon ahl sunna is permissible according to him and that imam ibn baz regularly sat with the heads of bid3i groups and invited them for lunch or dinner.

    So the confusion is the statement if imam ahmad and if this quote is mutlaq, or is it according to maslaha and mafsada.

  67. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, “talib-ilm”.

    Earlier in these comments I mentioned a nice article by Shaikh Ahmad bin Salih az-Zahrani titled Manhaj as-Salaf bain at-Ta’sil wat-Tatbiq concerning the difference between founding principles and their application. This article is very nice because it illustrates the fact that while we believe many of these principles founded upon textual evidences, whether they be from the Qur’an or the Sunnah, are true and correct, their practical application will be dependent on the circumstances one finds himself in and thus, these priniples are not always applied and sometimes ignored. The shaikh gives several examples of where this occurs using texts from the Qur’an and Sunnah. The article can be read here.

    Now when you look at how these principles are presented to common folk like us, the contrast is quite stark. You will usually find people who suffer from an exaggerated understanding of Salafism brandishing this principle as a pretext to criticize or threaten others. They present it as a principle that applies 100% of the time without any alternative way of dealing with heretics, whether actual or perceived. And this is where much of the confusion results from, because when you look at reality, you will find many perceived contradictions with (acknowledged) Salafi scholars sharing platforms with deviants (actual or perceived) during symposiums and conferences, sometimes even sharing seats on the same councils. If we were to go by the narrow understanding promoted by these brothers and sisters, shaikhs ‘Abdul-’Aziz Al ash-Shaikh, Salih Al ash-Shaikh, Husain Al ash-Shaikh, ‘Abdur-Razzaq al-’Abbad, and many others would be “off it” and declared people of heresy due to their frequent participation in events along side “deviants” and “heretics”.

  68. talib-ilm says:

    i will look into the article…jazakum allah khair

  69. sheriff aderibigbe says:

    i was engrossed in these trend of arguments and counterarguments some years ago when i was feeding myself fat on Spubs, salafitalk and their likes.
    Now, I believe that it is a great mistake.
    Please, brothers, we have soooooo much to do in this Ummah – we have problems with the Ummahs Yaqeeen in Allaah, with the Ummahs Aqeedah, with the Ummahs Fiqh, with the Ummahs piety, with the Ummah societal ills, with the Ummahs political miseries, …….. If we committed ourselves to these, we would be doing ourselves some good.
    This kind of hairsplitting has destroyed the tamaasuk of the Salafees here in Nigeria, and here, kull hizbin bimaa ladayhim farihoon.
    The TMC (an ikhwaan-like organization here) are having a hearty laughter at our expense. The people are flocking to them and the Tableegh in streams while we are at each others throats for issues you have to look very hard to understand. Can we not understand?

  70. ahmad says:

    akh yoosuf, baarakAllaahu feekum for your daleel and responses. Though I disagree with you on few points and maybe regarding one or two individuals mentioned, I appreciate your striving to being just and refuting the ghuloo of some of our brothers.

    Usually those who try to refute SP or salafitalk and their associates, fall into ghuloo themselves, and Allaah’s refuge is sought. I have found your approach different, that you have refrained from name-callings and personal insults and being overly harsh in your posts against the brothers in SP, Troid, etc, may Allaah guide them and us.

    Would it be possible to contact you by email akh or some other means? I needed to discuss few things with you akh for the benefit of the laymen from Ahlus Sunnah. Please let me know. Also, a lot of things you pasted is in Arabic, as in the links and speeches, and it would be better if they are translated in a just manner. Khair inshaaAllaah.

    was salaamu ‘alaykum.

  71. Yusuf says:

    A few months later and still no reply from Salafi Publications, TROID, Sunnah Publishing, etc. about any of these points and now one of the head scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah has passed away – Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Jibreen, may Allah have mercy on him and grant him al-Firdaws.

    We see on SalafiTalk the announcement: THE SUMMER CONFERENCE BY THE MAJOR SCHOLARS FOR THE YEAR 1430 (TAIF, KSA) (link). Interesting that no one has posted updates from the conference about important questions that have been asked, such as:

    - Regarding the group of our times focused on al-jarh wal-ta’deel, answered by Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan (link)

    - The ruling on speaking about scholars without right, answered by Sh. Sa’ad al-Shithri (link)

    And along with those two questions:

    - The ruling on traveling to Riyadh to pray the janaazah over Al-’Allaamah Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah), answered by Sh. Sa’ad al-Shithri (link)

    Brief summary: Sh. Sa’ad begins his answer with asking Allah to forgive Sh. Ibn Jibreen and grant him Jannah. He asks Allah to grant this Ummah scholars and that the death of Sh. Ibn Jibreen is a tribulation because of his knowledge being taken. He then encourages us to seek knowledge to fill this gap left by Sh. Ibn Jibreen. He then goes into the ahkaam on traveling and the summary is that it is permissible. He ends his answer by saying that no doubt to pray for Allah to forgive Sh. Ibn Jibreen, raise his rank and reward him is from the deeds which draws one closer to Allah. I left out details on salaatul-ghaa’ibah the Shaykh mentioned cause I’m short on time.

    So why didn’t we see this on SalafiTalk?

    الذين ضل سعيهم في الحياة الدنيا و هم يحسبون أنهم يحسنون صنعا
    “[The losers are] those whose effort is lost in worldly life, while they think that they are doing well in work.” (18:104)

    Sadly the only thing we still see on SalafiTalk with regards to Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) is from the two posts ‘Abdullaah Bin Jibreen Reaches a New Low – the Legacy of Defending the Innovators Continues… and ’Abdullaah Bin Jibreen Once Again Outdoes Himself – Will His Defense of the Innovators Never End?!??:

    - “a man who has made it his goal to defend the people of innovation at all costs”
    - “having no shame or fear of Allaah”
    - “it was not expected that he would plummet to such a shamefully low level”
    - “perennial defender of Innovators and betrayer of the Salafee ‘aqeedah”
    - “has outdone himself in the latest and most shameless entry in his long line of disgraceful and self-degrading fataawa”

    لا يرقبون في مؤمن إلا ولا ذمة وأولئك هم المعتدون
    “They do not observe toward a believer any pact of kinship or covenant of protection. And it is they who are the transgressors.” (9:10)

    They are saying this about a scholar of ours, an imaam of Ahl as-Sunnah in our times, whom the entire Ummah is mourning. Many scholars were at his funeral, including scholars whom SP claims to love and respect such as Sh. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Aqeel and Sh. ‘Abdul-’Azeez al-Raajihi. Both of these scholars held Sh. Ibn Jibreen in high regard. Also at his funeral was the governor of Riyadh and other members of the Saudi family. The King has also announced his sorrow for the loss of the Shaykh.

    Seriously, I’d like to see these brothers go to Riyadh with this language about the Shaykh (rahimahullah). Like I said, they won’t do it because it will probably end up with them being banned from KSA forever if not worse than that.

    Indeed, Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “A person utters a word thoughtlessly (i.e., without thinking about its being good or not) and, as a result of this, he will fall down into the fire of Hell deeper than the distance between the east and the west.” (al-Bukhaari and Muslim)

    So why aren’t there any replies to these points? Allah knows best. I’m beginning to think because it is all a game in the first place. There is no real concern about Salafiyyah, Shaykh so-and-so, the manhaj, and so on… it appears to just all be about controlling people and being in charge. Where is any sign of them really truly caring about these points? They are lying about scholars in broad daylight but because the brothers who follow them don’t know Arabic, or limit themselves to what they read, they are clueless to the reality everyone else is living in.

    May Allah have mercy upon Sh. Ibn Jibreen. He was almost 80 years old and would have around 70 classes going on in just one week alone. This is a man who dedicated his whole life to knowledge and teaching it, and we have these brothers making it as if one becomes closer to Allah by hating him and “warning” against him – and we seek refuge with Allah from this clear misguidance.

    Indeed, Allah said:

    وكذلك جعلنا لكل نبي عدوا من المجرمين وكفى بربك هاديا ونصيرا
    “And thus have We made for every prophet an enemy from among the criminals. But sufficient is your Lord as a guide and a helper.” (25:31)

    SP, TROID, etc.: enough is enough..

    وأنيبوا إلى ربكم وأسلموا له من قبل أن يأتيكم العذاب ثم لا تنصرون
    “And return [in repentance] to your Lord and submit to Him before the punishment comes upon you; then you will not be helped.” (39:54)

  72. Yusuf says:

    I forgot to mention that the son of the mufti, Sh. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abdul-’Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh, is the one who led the janaazah over Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) because the Mufti himself is in Taa’if at the moment.

    By the way, at the conference in Taa’if, Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan has also said that no doubt the death of Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) is a great tragedy and asked for Allah to forgive him, have mercy on him and reward him. The Mufti himself has said similarly and has praised the Shaykh in a documentary about him just released yesterday. (link)

    “From the words of the previous prophets that the people still find are: If you feel no shame, then do as you wish.” [Al-Bukhari]

    So, either Sh. Rabee’ is wrong in his “jarh” of Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah), by saying that he is not a scholar and that he lost his deen and Islam (and how does one lose their Islam without being a kaafir?), or all of these ‘ulamaa have fallen into tamyee’… ?!

    ‘Ajeeb… even though all of these scholars are saying the same thing – that the death of the shaykh is a great loss and an enormous tragedy for the Ummah – perhaps they are waiting for permission from Sh. Rabee’ to speak.

    What’s interesting is that a scholar who they believe to be the imaam of al-jarh wal-ta’deel has yet to say anything after the Shaykh passed away. Isn’t it strange that a scholar considered to be the key individual to guide the Muslims regarding the status of individuals is listening to the entire Ummah, including it’s scholars and laymen, praising Sh. Ibn Jibreen and praying for him yet he remains silent? Isn’t this now one of the key moments for the flagbearer of al-jarh wal-ta’deel to step forward and not fear the blame of the blamers and clarify for the Muslims the status of Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah)??

    Forget about traveling to Riyadh with your ridiculous claims against Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah)… let’s just hear a recorded phone call with Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan whom you say they respect and love so much, wherein you say to him that Sh. Ibn Jibreen was “a man who has made it his goal to defend the people of innovation at all costs,” “having no shame or fear of Allaah,” and a “perennial defender of Innovators and betrayer of the Salafee ‘aqeedah.” How about asking Sh. Saalih why he said such an individual was a great loss and tragedy for the Ummah?

    I guess it really all just boils down to me not being able to comprehend how your brothers can sleep at night feeling secure from Allah’s punishment and torment for all of these crimes committed in the name of serving the deen.

    Just remember that, by Allah, no scholar, including Sh. Rabee’, will be there to help you on Yawm al-Qiyaamah when Allah asks you regarding your slander and taking from the honor of His slave ‘Abdullah b. Jibreen, may Allah have mercy on him and grant him Paradise.

  73. Yusuf says:

    A gift for Salafi Publications, TROID, Sunnah Publishing, etc.

    Sh. ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajihi on the death of Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) (link)

  74. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Akh Yoosuf, just to mention a few things regarding your post about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen rahimahullaah.

    It was not just Shaykh Rabee’ who made tabdee’ on Ibn Jibreen, by making that statement; Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee rahimahullaah also spoke in a similar manner. And I consider both Shaykh Ahmad and Shaykh Rabee’ wrong in their position on Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, but the detailed refutation of Shaykh an-Najmee and others on the erroneous positions of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen still holds.

    al-ibaanah.com has the translated refutation of an-Najmee over the erroneous position of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen with regards to Hasan al-Banna, and there is also similar refutations on Shaykh ‘Abdul ‘Azeez ar-Rayyis’ website on some of the errors of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen.

    That being said, no Scholar is perfect, and everyone is bound to make mistakes. We should clarify the errors in a manner without tarnishing the honour of the ‘Ulamaa. And with Allaah lies all success.

  75. as-Salam ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah brother Ahmad (Aboo Yoosuf).

    It was not just Shaykh Rabee’ who made tabdee’ on Ibn Jibreen, by making that statement; Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee rahimahullaah also spoke in a similar manner. And I consider both Shaykh Ahmad and Shaykh Rabee’ wrong in their position on Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, but the detailed refutation of Shaykh an-Najmee and others on the erroneous positions of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen still holds.

    No one is saying Shaikh Rabî’ was the only scholar to speak ill of Shaikh Ibn Jibrîn, may Allah have mercy on him, nor is anyone trying to suggest that Shaikh Ibn Jibrîn was spotless and free from errors. Not only is everyone bound to make mistakes, as you mention in your comment, but it’s a fact of life that everyone has mistakes. None of us are safe from this.

    The question then becomes: how do we deal with and view these mistakes in light of everything else? Even if we are to say that Shaikh Ibn Jibrîn’s positions with regards to Hasan al-Bannâ, may Allah have mercy on him, were wrong, how detrimental are these to his salafism? How do these mistakes influence the way we view the shaikh and the immense amount of good the shaikh was known for?

    Both Shaikhs Rabî and Ahmad an-Najmî have been criticized by Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbâd as scholars who have opposed the methodologies of Shaikhs Ibn Baz and Ibn ‘Uthaimîn, may Allah have mercy on them. He’s criticized them for being overly critical of their brothers from the People of the Sunnah, of wholesale heretication, of being characterized by severity, alienation, and unjustly cautioning against others. Although as people of the Sunnah we take the truth from wherever it comes, anything about other scholars from these scholars should be viewed and examined in this light.

    The brothers at SalafiTalk portray Shaikh Ibn Jibrîn as an evil man, a devil among men. Many Salafî scholars, on the other hand, give you a very different picture of the shaikh, may Allah have mercy on him.

  76. Yusuf says:

    Read or at least skim Al-Irhaab by Sh. Zayd al-Madkhali (link)). You will see how he goes into the issue from his perspective, constantly asking Allah to have mercy on al-Banna and Qutb throughout the book. He addresses the issue and still calls Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) (1) al-’aalim al-kabeer wal-zaahid al-wara’ al-shaykh (p. 99), (2) shaykuna al-habeeb (p. 99) and (3) min al-’ulamaa al-salafiyyeen kamaa huwa ma’loom (p. 108) – that’s because the Shaykh (rahimahullah) was a huge scholar, which they can confirm with him at their conference tomorrow (July 18th) at Markaz as-Salafi of Manchester. (link) Or they can ask Sh. ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan at their annual conference in Birmingham next month.

    The position of Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) regarding Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb was that we correct their mistakes without defaming them as they are dead. He simply finds that there is room to make excuse for them due to their service and dedication towards Islam and the widespread ignorance of Islam in their times where they were living. He doesn’t say that they have no mistakes, rather he acknowledges their mistakes and says that we should focus on addressing these mistakes not the people that made them. This is his perspective on how to deal with the issue, and if any scholar wants to disagree with him then that is fine but that doesn’t give the one who disagrees with him room to now say the Shaykh (rahimahullah) lost his religion and isn’t a scholar. This is not the behavior of a scholar, and unfortunately that is a mistake that they aren’t willing to admit themselves.

    In truth, you will find many other scholars, such as the Mufti, who address the issue of Qutb just as Sh. Ibn Jibreen. Where is the justice?

    All of these scholars who are praising Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) now – the Mufti, al-Fawzaan, al-Raajihi, and many others – they “know the affair” of the Shaykh. They knew the Shaykh (rahimahullah) before we were born and perhaps before our parents were born. If only these brothers could humble themselves and admit that they have made a mistake on this issue as they have with many other issues mentioned above.

    May Allah guide us all to that which pleases Him.

  77. Abu Amnah says:

    As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu ya Rasheed & Yusuf. I sincerely pray to Allah that he raises you brothers in rank on the day when one’s deeds is THE ONLY benefit he may gain from. And not a soul will be dealt with unjustly….ameen. Now to proceed inshallah. This is a question more so directed at brother Yusuf because he is the one who spammed the names & dalil on the brothers’ blog page lol! Ya akhi, I will be leaving for Egypt in a few days inshallah. And, there are three Mashaykh that you named that I will be very close to inshallah. Those Shayookh are: Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni, Shaykh Muhammad Ismaa’eel al-Muqaddam, and Shaykh Yaasir al-Burhaami. As for Shaykh Abu Ishaaq, then alhamdulillah I’m pleased with my position on status. I plan on gaining as much as I can from him inshallah. But, as for Shaykh’s Muhammad Ismaa’eel al-Muqaddam and Yaasir al-Burhaami. I’ve heard very little about them. I have no knowledge of them other than them being based in Alexandria. Being that I will be in Alexandria for a few weeks inshallah. I would like to get some info. about them if possible inshallah. I want to benefit as much as possible inshallah. And if I’m in the area where there is some benefit to be gained then alhamdulillah lead me to it inshallah. Also, as a side note but relvent to the two Shayookh, what are the sciences that are their strong points(i.e. fiqh, usul al fiqh, hadith etc.) Once again, may Allah raise the rank of both of you brothers….As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu.

  78. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah brother Abu Amnah,

    I sincerely pray to Allah that he raises you brothers in rank on the day when one’s deeds is THE ONLY benefit he may gain from. And not a soul will be dealt with unjustly….ameen.

    Amîn, and may Allah do the same for you. May He reward and bless you and make your trip to Egypt an easy and beneficial one.

  79. Yusuf says:

    wa ‘alaykum as-salaam wa-rahmatullahi wa-barakatuhu,

    May Allah reward you for your kind words and grant you tawfeeq.

    When you arrive in Egypt, place in front of your eyes the hadeeth of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam): “You will soon conquer Egypt where al-qiraat (a currency) is frequently mentioned. So when you conquer it, treat its inhabitants kindly. For there lies upon you the responsibility because of blood ties or relationship (with them).”

    An-Nawawi and al-Manaawi explain in their commentary that the reason he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) urged us to treat the Egyptians kindly was to maintain the ties of kinship as he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is connected to the people of Egypt through both Umm Ismaa’eel Haajar the wife of Ibraaheem (‘alayhis-salaam) and they are also his in-laws through his wife Maariyah (radhiyallahu ‘anhaa). So be gentle with them and bear their harm.

    I can’t stress this point enough, especially if you have not been to Egypt before.

    Regarding Sh. Abu Ishaaq (hafidhahullah), he has been very sick for some time. I’ve heard he prays sitting down at the moment. I’m not sure but I think he’s still doing Sharh Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth on Mondays at Masjid Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. He’s also still doing the classes which air on the different TV channels.

    As far as Sh. Muhammad Ismaa’eel al-Muqaddam (hafidhahullah), he is doing a class refuting doubts against Islam and also Sharh al-Fiqh al-Muyassir. I think he might also be doing a class refuting the Rawaafidh.

    Sh. Yaasir Burhaami (hafidhahullah) has classes everyday of the week after Maghrib, including Sharh Kitaab Masaa’il al-Jaahiliyyah, Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Al-Risaalah of ash-Shaafi’i, Al-Targheeb wal-Tarheeb, Sharh as-Sunnah of al-Baghawi, Madaarij al-Saalikeen and Qasas al-Anbiyaa’. His website is Sawt al-Salaf.

    You can see the classes of both of them and other ‘ulamaa of Alexandria such as Shaykh Ahmad Fareed and Shaykh Sa’eed ‘Abdul-’Adheem at the site anasalafy.com.

  80. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Na’am, khair inshaaAllaah.

    The errors of someone regarding Hasan al-Banna, Sayyid Qutb, Usaamah ibn Laden, etc can be quite severe in today’s times. You’ll see how the hizbees run around rejoicing over the fatawaa of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen rahimahullaah regarding Sayyid Qutb, etc. to condemn the Salafees. As one mentioned after the Shaykh’s death rahimahullaah, that he used to listen and like Ibn Jibreen for his verdicts on political matters and defense of Sayyid Qutb! Allaahu musta’aan. It’s like a Barelwee liking Imaam ‘Abdul Qader al-Jeelaanee rahimahullaah for his erroneous writings on Sufism! Or the Asharis liking Imaam Ibn Hajr rahimahullaah for some of his mistakes; or the Murji’ah liking Imaam Aboo Haneefah for some of his erroneous statements regarding Eemaan.

    The point is, at today’s time, the methodologies and beliefs of SQ, HB and OBL cause severe harm, and hence you’ll find Scholars all refuting them, most making tabdee’ on them, recognising that they are plain juhaal, and warning from their books and actions. Brothers other than from SP, have also spent considerable time and effort translating speeches and treatise of many different Scholars over these affairs, BECAUSE OF THE FITNAH it has made in recent times, may Allaah protect us from such fitaan.

    As for the last question, then yes despite his errors, Shaykh Ibn Jibreen rahimahullaah served the Ummah with his naseehah and ‘ilm for so many years and he remains virtuous amongst the vast number of Salafiyyeen. That is why I mentioned earlier that the jarh of the Scholars against Ibn Jibreen are very justified, but not necessarily the tabdee’ as a result of these jarh. And brother Rasheed has already mentioned earlier about Scholars making statements against each other; part of which is correct and part of which is exaggerated or simple false. That does not demean the status of either of the parties. Indeed some of the statements of the Imaams against each other were more severe and more vile than what we hear, may Allaah have mercy on all.

  81. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    The brothers at SalafiTalk portray Shaikh Ibn Jibrîn as an evil man, a devil among men. Many Salafî scholars, on the other hand, give you a very different picture of the shaikh, may Allah have mercy on him.

    Salafitalk portrays many individuals as evil men, describing them with enemies of sunnah, friends of ahlul bid’ah, etc while using some of the statements of the Salaf to serve their purpose. This is plain wrong and many of the Scholars specifically mentioned about not indulging in open forums, internet gossips, etc etc. This person called “Musab Qureshi”, may Allaah guide him and forgive him, likewise commented in a vile manner against Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, and you can read the comments of major Scholars in Saudia praising and lamenting the loss of Shaykh Ibn Jibreen for his service to the Ummah.

    Both Shaikhs Rabî and Ahmad an-Najmî have been criticized by Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbâd as scholars who have opposed the methodologies of Shaikhs Ibn Baz and Ibn ‘Uthaimîn, may Allah have mercy on them. He’s criticized them for being overly critical of their brothers from the People of the Sunnah, of wholesale heretication, of being characterized by severity, alienation, and unjustly cautioning against others. Although as people of the Sunnah we take the truth from wherever it comes, anything about other scholars from these scholars should be viewed and examined in this light.

    Where is the hard evidence for this akh? You can mention rifqan ahlus sunnah bi ahlus sunnah, yet I have not seen or heard Shaykh ‘Abdul Muhsin specifically mentioning anything that you said, regarding the two Shaykhs. The fact is that, some people ASSUME that he is referring to them but unless there is a proof for it, it is only an assumption and deduction. It could well be for that miskeen Faalih al-Harbee or the arguments going on between the Shaykhs of Yemen back and forth, etc. It was a general advice, not a specific. Some specific names were mentioned at some places, but that does not include what you claimed here.

    Rather you can find the many different statements of Scholars praising Shaykh Rabee’ even when they are apparently speaking against the errors of salafitalk members. One such recent speech can be found here:
    http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_OnThoseWhoSpread

    Here Shaykh Saalih as-Suhaymee is criticising those who spread evil about Scholars and Tullaabul ‘Ilm, and salafimanhaj team translated it so that the general Salafiyyeen do not become preoccupied with salafitalk type people. The interesting thing to notice in this speech is that Shaykh as-Suhaymee mentions traversing the way of the Salaf and sticking to the major ‘Ulamaa of our times, and mentions Shaykh Rabee’ hafidhahullaah alongside ‘Abdul Muhsin, al-Ghudyaan, etc. I can give similar statements from albaseerah.org, where a Scholar warns not to be preoccupied with errors and hajr, yet asks the Salafiyyeen to stick to Scholars mentioning Shaykh Rabee’ specifically.

    And I encourage all of you brothers and whoever else is reading it, to read the speech of Shaykh Rabee’ here: http://www.salafimanhaj.com/ebook.php?ebook=21
    (Encouraging Harmony and Wisdom in Dawah by Shaykh Rabee’) This will inshaaAllaah shed some light of the misrepresentation of SP and others with regards to Shaykh Rabee’. Sadly the laymen of SP and the blind followers refuse to pay heed to the advice of Shaykh Rabee’ himself.
    He is not always right about people, but more often he is right, and this is attested by the Scholars themselves.

    RG’s Edit: I included the portions of my post I assume you were replying to as they weren’t included in your comment for some reason. If these are the wrong portions, let me know via email or something and I’ll fix it.

  82. Where is the hard evidence for this akh? You can mention rifqan ahlus sunnah bi ahlus sunnah, yet I have not seen or heard Shaykh ‘Abdul Muhsin specifically mentioning anything that you said, regarding the two Shaykhs. The fact is that, some people ASSUME that he is referring to them but unless there is a proof for it, it is only an assumption and deduction. It could well be for that miskeen Faalih al-Harbee or the arguments going on between the Shaykhs of Yemen back and forth, etc. It was a general advice, not a specific. Some specific names were mentioned at some places, but that does not include what you claimed here.

    You can call it assumptions if you like, but the fact that Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin included enough information for anyone really familiar with the four shaikhs he criticized to recognize who he was talking about makes those assumptions pretty safe, in my opinion; call it ghalabah adh-dhann, if you wish. Add to this the fact that a number of other shaikhs will either confirm or agree with who the four shaikhs criticized in Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah were, and I personally don’t feel any doubt whatsoever about who they are.

    The interesting thing to notice in this speech is that Shaykh as-Suhaymee mentions traversing the way of the Salaf and sticking to the major ‘Ulamaa of our times, and mentions Shaykh Rabee’ hafidhahullaah alongside ‘Abdul Muhsin, al-Ghudyaan, etc. I can give similar statements from albaseerah.org, where a Scholar warns not to be preoccupied with errors and hajr, yet asks the Salafiyyeen to stick to Scholars mentioning Shaykh Rabee’ specifically.

    I personally don’t really see anything too surprising about Shaikh Rabî’ being mentioned along side other salafi shaikhs; he is, after all, a salafi shaikh. I recognize his salafiyyah and I recognize the good he’s done for Salafiyyah. None of what you mention, however, negates the fact that some of the things he’s done and said in the recent past have caused immense harm to Salafiyyah, nor does it negate any of the things Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin said about him. As has been mentioned again and again, we make mention of the mistakes in order to caution others against them. That doesn’t mean that I caution others from taking knowledge from him or encourage others to insult of vilify him. To quote the principle that Shaikh Abul-Hasan was lambasted for, we correct, but we don’t destroy.

  83. Yusuf says:

    Some of what I’m going to say may seem repetitive and I apologize for that.

    I myself don’t agree with Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah) referring to al-Banna and Qutb as scholars, but I make excuse for him that the information he had about them was not complete. Why is that so difficult to do? Regardless if more books came out explaining in detail. Especially when he still committed his time to refuting those exact same mistakes and errors which are attributed to those two. The goal of warning against a person is to prevent people from adopting their errors, and I highly doubt you will find any committed student of his that believed in doing takfeer and khurooj and so on, especially when he has so many fataawa against this himself which I posted a few months ago in a previous comment. Simply because a people use a person or a writing as proof or rejoice over it, doesn’t make that person or writing guilty. A clear example of this is Christians and their claim for ‘Eesaa (‘alayhis-salaam). As far as assigning all of the fitnah of unjust murder and takfeer occuring in the world to the writings of Qutb and al-Banna… Allah knows best. There are many, many factors which have brought us to the current situation and a lot of them are more related to experiences rather than books. No doubt these writings have a role, but many of these personalities involved in fueling this fitnah have gone on to develop their own ideas independent and not needing to rely on the writings of Qutb, such as al-Maqdisi and others. I’m aware some brothers have been translating that material, but it hasn’t been SP, TROID, etc. Where are the refutations against them? Also, where are the refutations against the other extreme – extreme laxity of modernism and secularism – that Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan always warns about when mentioning the extremity of takfeer and khawaarij? Look at how SP just now grasped that Ash’aris are a threat, whereas they have been one for many years. Do these brothers even realize that some Muslims are confused about the basic fundamental rulings, such as if a Muslim woman can marry a disbelieving man? Where are all the PDF files about this? This is a portion of what Sh. Waseeullah ‘Abbaas told them in the past.

    As far as recommendations… additional recommendations can easily be put forward. Shortly before he passed away, Sh. Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) by Sh. Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid specifically who should we ask after he dies, and he (rahimahullah) said Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan and Sh. ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Barraak. The whole proof to call Sh. Rabee’ the flagbearer of al-jarh wal-ta’deel is the praise of Sh. al-Albaani (rahimahullah). Fine, what about his praise of Sh. Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni as well?? Or do we only pick and choose names when it is convenient? Or is it the case that realities of individuals change overnight when it is covenient for us? So, for example, one day Faalih al-Harbi is “amongst the most knowledgeable of people of the Sunan and the Book and amongst the most knowledgeable of people of the Sunnah and the most knowledgeable of people of Ahl ul-Bid’ah in this time” – the next day he’s calling them innovators and so now he’s a jaahil. One day, Sh. Muhammad b. ‘Abdul-Wahhaab al-Wasaabi and Sh. ‘Abdur-Rahmaan Mar’i are gigantic scholars with lustrious titles as found in al-Tabaqaat of Sh. al-Hajoori, next day Sh. al-Hajoori is against them discrediting them along with Sh. ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiri and Sh. Waseeullah. How is it that it is okay for Sh. Muhammad b. Haadi al-Madkhali to give lectures alongside people considered to be from Ahl al-Bid’ah at Madeenah University (watch), yet it is not allowed for anyone else to cooperate upon birr and taqwaa??

    But back to others who have been recommended, no doubt Sh. al-Fawzaan views Sh. Rabee’ as a scholar (Sh. Ibn Jibreen even said him and Sh. al-Najmi were Salafi scholars before and after they attacked him), but he does not recognize him as the flagbearer of al-jarh wal-ta’deel, because as he repeatedly has said this science is restricted to hadeeth narrators and is free from the backbiting and slandering we witness today. He always answers with this answer, even recently as a few days ago.

    Let’s suppose for argument’s sake that he is the Imaam of al-jarh wal-ta’deel… where is he now? Why isn’t he fulfilling his duty of warning the Ummah against such a dangerous individual about whom he said isn’t a scholar and has lost his deen and Islam? (listen) Now is the time to step up and guide us. And when he steps up he can clarify to us about how one can lose their Islam and still be a Muslim, and how is this type of language, along with many other phrases which can be found in ‘Ilaan al-Nakeer ‘ala Manhaj al-Shaykh Rabee’ fil-Takfeer and Tahdheer al-Jamee’ min Akhtaa’ al-Shaykh Rabee’, is any different from what Qutb has been found guilty of in his books. And how when Sh. Ahmad al-Najmi (rahimahullah) spoke similarly about the Ummah in Ta’sees al-Ahkaam Sharh ‘Umdat al-Ahkaam (1/115) addressing the Ummah of Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) saying, “haven’t you been ordered with tawheed and you have done shirk,” “haven’t you been ordered to believe in Allah and disbelieve in al-taaghoot but you have believed in al-taaghoot and disbelieved in Allah except those whom Allah has willed?” and he goes on and on is any different. Could Qutb get away with this? If not, why can anyone else? No doubt we make excuse for him (rahimahullah), and this highlights the need for this etiquette in and of itself.

    Likewise, can he explain to us how he accused Sh. Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Mukhtaar al-Shanqiti (hafidhahullah) – teacher in al-Masjid al-Nabawi and member of Hay’at Kibaar al-’Ulamaa – of being a Sufi and careless of grading hadeeth, all without any proof whatsoever?

    Regardless of who praises Sh. Rabee’ – and as Sh. Abul-Hasan has stated we respect him and thank him for his knowledge-based contributions – this is not al-jarh wal-ta’deel. Rather this is something that will end up with those who support it in a difficult situation on the Day of Judgment, and scholars such as Imam al-Dhahabi (rahimahullah) always warned against this when making mention of these types of conflicts as you alluded to in your comment.

    By the way SP, head of majlis ash-shura and son of the former mufti, Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. Muhammad b. Ibraaheem (hafidhahullah), also recently issued his praise and prayers for Sh. Ibn Jibreen (rahimahullah).

    ستكتب شهادتهم ويسألون
    “Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned.” (43:19)

    If only these brothers realized what a great scholar they are slandering. It is due to his efforts we have Majmoo’ Fataawa of Shaykh al-Islam in our hands. It is due to his efforts we have many qualified judges in the courts in Saudi Arabia. It is due to his efforts that there are many exceptional students of knowledge and scholars, including some of the imaams of the Haramayn.

  84. Just one note I wanted to mention, as I forgot to in my previous reply.

    Regarding the following statement:

    The point is, at today’s time, the methodologies and beliefs of SQ, HB and OBL cause severe harm, and hence you’ll find Scholars all refuting them, most making tabdee’ on them … .

    I can’t really say much regarding Hasan al-Bannâ and Usamah bin Ladin, but I can say for sure that regarding Sayyid Qutb, very few scholars actually hereticate him in comparison to the number of salafi scholars who don’t (even with Hasan al-Bannâ, may Allah have mercy on him, and Usamah bin Ladin, I can’t really think of any scholar worth mentioning who declares either of them to be heretics outright, misguided and mistaken maybe, heretics, no). Shaikh al-Albânî from what I understand, and Allah is more knowledgeable (maybe someone else can correct me if I’m wrong) never hereticated Sayyid Qutb, and from what I’ve been told Shaikh ‘Abdullah bin Sâlih al-’Ubailân refuses to; this is despite their warning against the mistakes he made and acknowledging his true status with respect to Islamic knowledge and learning.

  85. Abu Amnah says:

    As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah:

    @Rasheed,

    May He reward and bless you and make your trip to Egypt an easy and beneficial one.

    Ameen. Jazakallah Khayr.

    @Yusuf,

    May Allah reward you for your kind words and grant you tawfeeq.

    When you arrive in Egypt, place in front of your eyes the hadeeth of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam): “You will soon conquer Egypt where al-qiraat (a currency) is frequently mentioned. So when you conquer it, treat its inhabitants kindly. For there lies upon you the responsibility because of blood ties or relationship (with them).”

    An-Nawawi and al-Manaawi explain in their commentary that the reason he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) urged us to treat the Egyptians kindly was to maintain the ties of kinship as he (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is connected to the people of Egypt through both Umm Ismaa’eel Haajar the wife of Ibraaheem (’alayhis-salaam) and they are also his in-laws through his wife Maariyah (radhiyallahu ‘anhaa). So be gentle with them and bear their harm.

    Ameen. And Jazakallah Khayr for the naseeha.

    Regarding Sh. Abu Ishaaq (hafidhahullah), he has been very sick for some time.

    Subhanallah, is this a sickness that has gotten better thru time?

    Sh. Yaasir Burhaami (hafidhahullah) has classes everyday of the week after Maghrib, including Sharh Kitaab Masaa’il al-Jaahiliyyah, Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Al-Risaalah of ash-Shaafi’i, Al-Targheeb wal-Tarheeb, Sharh as-Sunnah of al-Baghawi, Madaarij al-Saalikeen and Qasas al-Anbiyaa’.

    Mashallah, he sounds strong indeed.

    Jazakallah Khayr once again and may Allah strengthen us all in Iman and Taqwa. As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah.

  86. Abu Amnah says:

    Subhanallah…Ahk Rasheed. Can you please edit my post? Man that looks horrible lol!

  87. Yusuf says:

    Here is a fatwa I found on a brother’s blog from Sh. Yahya al-Hajoori:

    Question: In our city there is an Ikhwani who deceives the laypeople and those who are fooled by him in that when they ask about Jam’eeyaat he says: If Jam’eeyaat were innovations then the microphone and cars are (also) innovations, because they were not present in the time of the Messenger ?

    Answer: Yes he is one who deceives (covers the truth with falsehood), and otherwise, verily this expression about means consistent with Islamic law (to give da’wah) have foundations, as for Jam’eeyaaat that are present in this time the Prophet never did such a thing (have organizations for da’wah).

    Al Kanz Uth Thameen. Vol 5.

    http://www.sh-yahia.net/show_books_40.html

    From this fatwa, we understand: whoever uses cars as an example of modern permissible means of transportation and compares it to jam’iyyaat as modern permissible means of doing good deeds including da’wah, then he is one who covers truth with falsehood.

    However, this is one of the exact proofs that Sh. al-Albaani (rahimahullah) gave to allow jam’iyyaat as can be heard on the beginning of tape 590 (listen) from Silsilah al-Hudaa wal-Noor! Listen also to tape 358 and see al-As’ilah al-Shaamiyyah (p. 29-30).

    Sh. Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) also allows jamiy’aat in Majmoo’ Fataawaa (5/202-204) and Sh. Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) likewise in his Majmoo’ Fataawaa. In fact, there is even a jam’iyyah for each of them, may Allah have mercy on them both.

    So now what… are these major scholars, may Allah have mercy on them – and we seek refuge from Allah from misguidance – ones who cover the truth with falsehood?!

    In addition to that, Sh. Saalih al-Fawzaan wrote an introduction to Sh. ‘Abdullah al-Sabt’s Hukm al-’Amal al-Jamaa’i fil-Islam, and many scholars such as Imaams of Haramayn cooperate with jami’yaat such as Ihyaa al-Turaath for years.

    So why not share with us this information? Why such conveniently selected fatwa to be translated into English? Conveying this knowledge is an amaanah you will be asked about. These issues are ones of ijtihaad and it is not proper to force one another to adopt a position that you may be taking not even for the correct reason in the first place.

    Look brothers, following the major scholars of our times is an action to be implemented, not a slogan to be thrown around on posters, books and websites.

  88. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Na’am akh Rasheed, you’ve quoted your portions correctly. I included them in my reply using but they didn’t come up for some reason.

    Add to this the fact that a number of other shaikhs will either confirm or agree with who the four shaikhs criticized in Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah were, and I personally don’t feel any doubt whatsoever about who they are.

    Then let them confirm first and speak to the Ummah clarifying this issue, otherwise this is speculation as you mentioned. From what is apparent is that it was general advice, and the Shaykhs may have fallen into some of the issues that was written in the treatise, but it is enough to quote the Scholars and not twist or interpolate things from their speeches.

    As an example, Shaykh Rabee’ in his speech that I gave the link to: http://www.salafimanhaj.com/ebook.php?ebook=21 mentions, “Others are granted success by Allaah in following the correct ‘Aqeedah and Manhaj, but in their conduct and their behaviour, they lose both the Creed and the Methodology.” This is something you should mention generally when refuting ghuloo and shiddah, even though this is suited to brothers in SP and salafitalk. To me, this is closer to being just, Allaahu a’lam.

    Shaikh al-Albânî from what I understand, and Allah is more knowledgeable (maybe someone else can correct me if I’m wrong) never hereticated Sayyid Qutb

    Regarding Imaam al-Albaanee, then this is what is portrayed by his student, Shaykh Mashhoor Hasan Aal Salmaan, regarding Sayyid Qutb: http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_OnShaykhAlbaaneeClaim

    It would be clear here how al-Albaanee thanked Shaykh Rabee’ for his insight and knowledge-based refutation of Sayyid Qutb rahimahullaah. His not knowing about the affair is the reason why he has not “hereticated” Sayyid Qutb as per se. The issue about Sayyid Qutb to the Salafee Scholars and Students of Knowledge, in general, has become as clear as any other deviant.

    And by clear I mean, the errors of Sayyid Qutb and the jahl of the person, as opposed to errors made by a Scholar from Ahlus Sunnah.

    RG’s edit: Fixed another missing quote and formatting.

  89. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    I personally don’t really see anything too surprising about Shaikh Rabî’ being mentioned along side other salafi shaikhs; he is, after all, a salafi shaikh. I recognize his salafiyyah and I recognize the good he’s done for Salafiyyah. None of what you mention, however, negates the fact that some of the things he’s done and said in the recent past have caused immense harm to Salafiyyah, nor does it negate any of the things Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin said about him.

    The context of mentioning his name was crucial there. The Shaykh was criticising those who do fatwaa shopping or are hasty about spreading speeches from Ahlul ‘Ilm on the internet. Here’s another similar speech from Shaykh Saalih as-Suhaymee: http://www.albaseerah.org/forum/showthread.php?p=13912

    “We should suffice ourselves with the sites of the ‘Ulemaa – People of Knowledge. Those are known for not being hasty in giving their fataawa and who are known for their strength and firmness in knowledge – the likes of: the Mufti Shaykh Abdul Azeez aal-Shaykh, and the likes of our Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, and Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghudayaan and Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan and likewise our beloved Minister of Da’wah Shaykh Saalih ibn Abdul Azeez aal-Shaykh and Shaykh Abdul Muhsin al-Abbaad al-Badr and Shaykh Rabee ibn Hadee al-Madkhali and Shaykh Abdul Muhsin al-Ubaykaan and Shaykh Saalih as-Sadlan حفظهم الله and other than them as I did not intend to mention all of them, but rather to give an example of the ones that I was referring to.”

    Again the context is important; the Shaykh was referring to taking knowledge from open forums and majhool individuals.

    And SP have also compiled a comprehensive list of speeches from different major Scholars praising Shaykh Rabee’ specifically for his knowledge-based criticisms and opinions of people. This does not make him the absolute reference point in jarh wat ta’deel or allow anyone to accept his positions on individuals blindly, but what I mentioned previously about his status in making errors known to people still holds.

    Rather the burden of proof for the claims in your quote is upon you. And as long as it is not coming from ahlul ‘ilm specifically, they are just your claims. Here’s what Shaykh ‘Abdul Muhsin recently said, again, it is general:
    http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_AdviceToHastyStudents

  90. Brother Abu Amnah,

    Subhanallah…Ahk Rasheed. Can you please edit my post? Man that looks horrible lol!

    Fixed.

    Brother Aboo Yoosuf,

    For future comments, please be aware that WordPress’s comments allow HTML coding to be used. Thus, when you use “< >”, it thinks you’re using HTML tags and will take what is in between these as commands. I’m not sure if you’re familiar with HTML, but to quote, you need to use the <blockquote> and </blockquote> tags (the first one opens the quote, the second closes it and should look like this: <blockquote>Quoted text goes here</blockquote>).

    Then let them confirm first and speak to the Ummah clarifying this issue, otherwise this is speculation as you mentioned. From what is apparent is that it was general advice, and the Shaykhs may have fallen into some of the issues that was written in the treatise, but it is enough to quote the Scholars and not twist or interpolate things from their speeches.

    Scholars have confirmed and clarified mentioning the names of some of those who Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin criticized (Shaikhs Salîm al-Hilâlî and Muhammad Musa Nasr are just two of those who have mentioned the unnamed shaikhs by name in various writings of theirs). In anycase, brother, no one is saying the advice wasn’t general. Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah bi Ahl as-Sunnah was written as a whole as a general advice to the People of the Sunnah to be easy with each other. That has no bearing on the fact that he mentioned four shaikhs specically who have, at the very least, displayed the negative things we’ve been seeing within Salafiyyah.

    As for Shaikh al-Albani and Sayyid Qutb, may Allah reward and bless you for the link to the SalafiManhaj article. I’ve read it (I actually got a chance to look at it before it got published; the brothers sent me the rough draft to have a look at before they posted it). Thanking Shaikh Rabî’ for clarifying the mistakes Qutb made in his books is one thing, calling him a heretic because of those mistakes is another. To my knowledge, Shaikh al-Albani never hereticated him, evenr after Shaikh Rabî’s criticisms were published. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, Shaikh al-Albani’s recorded on tape as saying he can’t hereticate Qutb because proof wasn’t established upon him. He gives him the excuse of being merely a writer and not a scholar, hence the mistakes based on ignorance.

    Despite these mistakes and deviances, you still find many many salafi shaikhs who not only refrain from hereticating Qutb, but who also will defend him (whether they are right to do so or not) and make excuses for him (e.g., Shaikh ‘Abdul-’Aziz Al ash-Shaikh). My point here is that saying most of the salafi shaikhs call him a heretic is not true, as those who actually do this are few in number in comparison to those who don’t (while acknowledging his mistakes).

  91. Brother Aboo Yoosuf, Allah willing, this will be my last reply to you regarding these matters, as quite frankly, I’m much rather be doing other things than arguing about this or that.

    Again, none of what you mention changes the fact that the shaikh was criticized by Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin. As I said, if you want to say that it’s speculation, that’s fine. I’m certain about who Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin was mentioning and the portions of a letter he sent to him, which he included in his second introduction, confirms my “suspicions”. No one is saying the shaikh is disparaged and thus knowledge should not be taken from him. I merely said that his criticisms of others should be examined in a certain light, nothing more, nothing less.

    You want to beg to differ with any of this, that’s fine. I have no problem with that and you’re entitled to your opinion. May Allah reward and bless you, brother. Thanks for your input.

  92. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    alhamdulillaah, inshaaAllaah khair.

    Brother Rasheed, I agree with you more than I agree with the brothers at SP and Troid, so I do not have problems accepting our differences in these intricate issues.

    I intended to post these comments so that anyone else reading is also aware of two key issues:

    1. Everyone professing love for Shaykh Rabee’ (or any Shaykh in this regard) is not necessarily representing him in the correct manner or adhering to his advice. This was also mentioned by Shaykh Wasee’ullaah during his lectures in UK.

    2. The Scholars’ extensive praise for Shaykh Rabee’ for his defense of Sunnah and its people, and exposing baatil and its people. This is incorrectly portrayed by some people to accept anything and everything from Shaykh Rabee’ without verifying with other Scholars, causing confusion and tension and even disrupting unity (as, for example, with Masjid as-Sunnah and Masjid Ibn Taymiyyah in London).

    These are few things that are left un-mentioned (by some) or mentioned for wrong reasons (by some). Shaykh ‘Abdul Muhsin and some others have spoken about being hasty and severe in criticisms, and some Scholars and Students of Knowledge fall into such issues, due to their nature or weakness in such affairs. There are many examples from the ‘Ulamaa of Ahlus Sunnah being deficient or lax or over strict in some matters of deen, may Allaah forgive them all and have mercy on them.

    And I am also of the opinion that we should not waste our time on such issues at the expense of beneficial matters. The real Students of Knowledge always advise other students and the laymen to be occupied with what is more beneficial than this. Here’s how Shaykh Muhammad al-Maalikee, Taalibul ‘Ilm from Jeddah, replied to those who accuse others as Madkhalees, etc. because of their love and respect for Shaykh Rabee’: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77OEW_C-b8M

    And the same Shaykh al-Maalikee described those who abandon brothers from Masjid ibn Taymiyyah in Brixton as “wolves of da’wah as-Salafiyyah” only in June 2009 CE, for their hastiness and excessiveness. This is the just and balanced nature of Students of Knowledge, that I, as a layman try to achieve, and encourage others to achieve.

    BaarakAllaahu feekum brothers Rasheed and also Yoosuf. I have learned a lot myself from the links provided and inshaaAllaah all these links will help defend haqq and refute baatil when such issues rise.
    May Allaah guide us and keep us firm upon truth and help become more just in dealing with people, especially Ahlul ‘Ilm from Ahlus Sunnah.

  93. Alban says:

    As-salamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakatuhu

    Here are some major scholars who have stated that no scholars of the science of al-Jarh wal-Ta’deel are alive in our time.

    - Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan
    - Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan
    - Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajhi
    - Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayaan

    I just wanted to add to the aforementioned nobles the speech of Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin rahimahullaah:
    http://www.salafishare.com/30KQ6MH6P5GX/O53MAI2.mp3

    I have a question, brother Rasheed, do you know if Shaykh Salim al-Hilaali is refuted by Shaykh al-’Abbad for his deviation? I know that Shaykh Muhammad Musa Nasr wrote an entire book outlining his deviations.

    Wassalaama.

    RG’s edit: Formatting.

  94. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh, Alban.

    May Allah reward and bless you for the recording from Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaimin.

    About your question, I personally don’t know of anything written or recorded by Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbad about Shaikh Salim al-Hilali, so I can’t tell you if he’s spoken about what’s gone on or not. As for Shaikh Muhammad Musa Nasr’s book, I’ve heard of him writing about what’s gone on, but don’t know of what this book’s title is. I doubt he mentions the shaikh by name in it, however.

    I want to point out that from what I’ve heard of the situation, Shaikh Salim’s “deviations” stem from largely worldly and personal matters between him and his Jordanian colleagues; they’re not “deviations” in creed or belief. Because of this, I have refrained from mentioning this turmoil on my blog as it of no real benefit for anyone.

  95. Assalaamu ‘Alaikum,

    After reading the nonsense posted by Raashid al Hindi, I was resolved to respond to it. However after seeing the replies which have followed, Alhamdulillah there is no need for more.

    The harsh, extreme manhaj which is the subject of this discussion has one of its international headquarters in Birmingham, UK where I live.

    Here, the full strength ire is directed towards Jamiat Ahlul Hadith and anyone who disagrees with them about it.

    Jamiat Ahlul Hadith has responded to Spubs’ incessant, unjust attacks and their response is approved by Shaikh WaseeUllaah (hafidhahullaah) and written in conjunction with the Salafi ‘Aalim of the West, Shaikh Dr. Suhaib Hasan (hafidhahullaah).

    It can be downloaded from the following link:

    http://www.masjidtawhid.org/downloads/in_defence_of_mjah_v2.1.pdf

    RG’s edit: Corrected the brother’s name to avoid confusion; it’s Raashid, not Rasheed.

  96. Yusuf says:

    @Abu Abdullah Aqib

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

    Jazakallahu khayran for this response from MJAH.

    The allegations are very embarrassing to say the least, but as the Salaf said: من طلب الرئاسة وقع في الدياسة.

    Allah (subhaanahu wa ta’aala) said:

    أنزل من السماء ماء فسالت أودية بقدرها فاحتمل السيل زبدا رابيا ومما يوقدون عليه في النار ابتغاء حلية أو متاع زبد مثله كذلك يضرب الله الحق والباطل فأما الزبد فيذهب جفاء وأما ما ينفع الناس فيمكث في الأرض كذلك يضرب الله الأمثال

    “He sends down water (rain) from the sky, and the valleys flow according to their measure, but the flood bears away the foam that mounts up to the surface, and (also) from that (ore) which they heat in the fire in order to make ornaments or utensils, rises a foam like unto it, thus does Allah (by parables) show forth truth and falsehood. Then, as for the foam it passes away as scum upon the banks, while that which is for the good of mankind remains in the earth. Thus Allah sets forth parables (for the truth and falsehood, i.e. Belief and disbelief).” (13:17)

  97. Abu Amnah says:

    As salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah,

    @ Rasheed & Yusuf: Alhamdulillah, Egypt is doing just fine by me. May Allah bless you both for the naseeha given inshallah.

    Yusuf: I remember a post by you on this topic dated April 5, 2009 that is of interest. The post is in regards to Salafitalk & Shaykh Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan. Inshallah, please look at this link going to a conversation from Shaykh Rabee that is “said” to have taken place. I don’t know how authentic it is, so maybe you can verify it better than I could inshallah. I find it very interesting that anyone who has the slightest pro Taliban thought is boycotted. You tell me…Allahu Alim. Link, http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/contemporary/0030.htm

  98. Yusuf says:

    The link is a translation is of this post from the Arabic forum Sahab.

    It wouldn’t surprise me at all if it is authentic. In fact, I don’t know of any scholar that really openly says the opposite . The situation isn’t black and white, and that means just that.. it isn’t black and white. It’s not a yes/no scenario or one of absolutes, rather it is a complicated issue that requires maturity and foresight when looking into, not emotional ranting and name calling in the guise of “defending Salafiyyah” as we’ve heard for years.

    But if you want to hear stronger than what’s been translated from Sh. Rabee’, then refer to what I mentioned from April 2nd at the end of this comment quoting Sh. Yahyaa al-Hajoori. His words are pretty to the point, and that was my point in showing that they won’t translate it and spread it.

    But this isn’t the only example of them using the name of a scholar for their own personal gain. For example, let someone inform Sh. Yahyaa that they are selling audio English translations of his free lectures to “support the da’wah”… find out what he has to say about that. I expect the answer may contain the phrase, “thieves of the da’wah.”

  99. Pingback: Salafism, Do You Really Get It? « Rasheed Gonzales

  100. Abdul Hamid says:

    Assalaamu alaikum wa rahmetullah

    Jazakumu-Allahu khayran brothers, you’ve shed light on many things. I have a question, and hopefully brother Yousuf can answer it insha’allah. What should be our stance, or way of dealing with duaa’t/brothers who hold for example, that shaykh al-albani had irja’, and with that also they say the same things about his students, and about some mashaykh in Saudi.

    And also regarding Sh. Ali al-halabi, often I’ve seen things brought up against him regarding some book he wrote, and the lajna refuted him, and sh. Saleh al Fawzan spoke against him.

    Can you please clarify, jazaak allahu khayran kul khayr

    Wassalaam

    abdul hamid

  101. Yusuf says:

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

    People say a lot of things, and Allah says,

    يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِن جَاءكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَأٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوا أَن تُصِيبُوا قَوْماً بِجَهَالَةٍ فَتُصْبِحُوا عَلَى مَا فَعَلْتُمْ نَادِمِينَ
    “O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.” (49:6)

    These days, in general, any “du’aat”/brothers who speak about issues such as these are not deserving of listening to nor worthy of referring to as a source for learning your religion from.

    The issue is detailed, and many scholars when asked about this specific issue refuse to go into detail concerning it with students. They usually will spend a few minutes reminding the students to fear Allah and focus on learning their religion.

    Understand that most of these controversial issues are brought up by brothers not for the issues themselves, but to prove one another wrong over the stance they take. Conflicts that existed among students while studying at an Islamic university are then transfered back home or onto the Internet on various forums to further prove one another wrong. In reality, it’s not about the issue but about fulfilling the desire to be correct. This is an old disease that has existed among students of knowledge and it is warned about in nearly every single book on the etiquette of seeking knowledge, past and present.

    My advice is not to even busy yourself with people who speak about these issues, because as I said, often times it isn’t even about the actual issue. Anyone who seeks to revive a fitnah or put fuel on it is not worthy of being around.

    There are numerous writings and lectures about the issue you are asking about I’d rather suggest you read and listen to if you are in urgent need of understanding the entire issue. But honestly, I sincerely suggest that you don’t invest your time into doing so unless it is absolute necessary. As I said, it isn’t worth your time and effort to involve yourself with debating those who are spreading these things amongst people.

    This is the advice of the scholars that is repeatedly given… to focus on what really matters for yourself and what will help you attain Allah’s pleasure and make it to Jannah. Life is too short, and the aspects of knowledge we are in more need of concerning ourselves with (as opposed to ‘he said’/’she said’) is too much…

    Allah says,

    اقْتَرَبَ لِلنَّاسِ حِسَابُهُمْ وَهُمْ فِي غَفْلَةٍ مَّعْرِضُونَ
    “[The time of] their account has approached for the people, while they are in heedlessness turning away.” (21:1)

    And Allah knows best.

  102. Abul Qayyim says:

    As salaamu alaikum,

    I know I am mad late on this topic, but just reading this stuff about Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, I had a discussion with a brother not too long after the Shaykh passed(rahimahullaah). It just shows the vile attempts that come from this network of defaming people whom they don’t agree with, a trait of hizbiyyah:

    From: Sajid Chauhan
    Subject: [SalafeeMethodology] Are most of the Saudi Scholars Asharis? – Allamah An-Najmi refutes Ibn Jibrin (rahimahumullah)
    To: MAKTABAH-ALFAWAAID@yahoogroups. com, “West London Dawah”
    Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 1:27 AM
    As salaamu ‘alaykum,

    Here is the 1 minute Q&A at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plKyjjt-lto

    Here was my response:

    From: Faheem Lea
    To: SalafeeMethodology@yahoogroups. com
    Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 6:01:05 AM
    Subject: Re: [SalafeeMethodology] Are most of the Saudi Scholars Asharis? – Allamah An-Najmi refutes Ibn Jibrin (rahimahumullah)

    Wa alaikum salaam,

    Where is the refutation? Since when does calling someone a liar constitute a refutation? Why aren’t we posting his bio and his achievements instead of this “refutation” ? Why didn’t you mention that Shaykh Ibn Jibrin was “Allaamah” as well? Is this how we honor our scholars when they die?

    Here is a response from someone else:

    From: Alban Malaj
    Subject: Re: [SalafeeMethodology] Are most of the Saudi Scholars Asharis? – Allamah An-Najmi refutes Ibn Jibrin (rahimahumullah)
    To: SalafeeMethodology@yahoogroups. com
    Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:31 PM

    As-Salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakatuhu, akhee Faheem check this out:

    الردود العلمية على فتوى الشيخ ابن جبرين حول الجامية
    http://www.sahab.net/forums/showthread.php?p=699159

    This video is just a small part of the refutations against Ibn Jibreen rahimahullah. He was a stauch defender of Sayid Qutb, Hasan al-Banna, Usamah Ibn Ladin and the various movements of “Jihad”. Why dont you think about the blood of the Muslims which is still sheding just because of the fatawa launched by Ibn Jibreen in service of the Jihadis? Please, leave aside your emotions and try to be more objective than subjective.

    My response:

    From: Faheem Lea
    To: SalafeeMethodology@yahoogroups. com
    Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 9:10:28 PM
    Subject: Re: [SalafeeMethodology] Are most of the Saudi Scholars Asharis? – Allamah An-Najmi refutes Ibn Jibrin (rahimahumullah)

    Wa alaikum salaam,

    Jazaakallaahu khairan akhee, you have managed to bring up some refutations concerning him, but I don’t think the other questions are subjective or emotional, but legitimate inquiries, and I would like answers for them as well. Why are we taking time to recall refutations about one of the greatest scholars of our time now that he has gone? What scholar has preceded us in this? I would like to know any of the ‘ulamaa who have went out of their way to do this, especially when a scholar from ahlus sunnah dies? Please try to be objective akhee in answering.

    His response:

    From: Alban Malaj
    Subject: Re: [SalafeeMethodology] Are most of the Saudi Scholars Asharis? – Allamah An-Najmi refutes Ibn Jibrin (rahimahumullah)
    To: SalafeeMethodology@yahoogroups.com
    Date: Saturday, July 25, 2009, 10:06 PM

    As-salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakatuhu. The reason why are being circulated this refutations upon Shaykh Ibn Jibreen rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa is because his evil traits upon the Ummah are still present. As i wrote to you earlier, (not to mention his clear errors and deviations because of the lack of time) he is well know for his staunch defence of the great mufsid Ibn Ladin, saying that he is a mujahid still doing Jihad and that he is a mujtahid in his takfeer against the Mamlakah!!! Listen to his words here: http://www.archive.org/details/ShiekhBinJibreenAndOsama
    He denied the refutation of Shaykh Ibn Baaz against Ibn Ladin, while this is not true, because Shaykh Ibn Baz said that Ibn Ladin is a mufsid that has to repent to Allaah for his mischief! Listen the fatwa of Shaykh Ibn Baaz here:

    http://audioselefi.org/audiot/shuhuj/ibn%20bazi/ibn%20baz%20per%20bin%20laden.ram

    Dont forget akhee, this mujtahid, Usamah Ibn Ladin made takfeer of Shaykh Ibn Baaz and the general board of the Senior Scholars of Saudi Arabia on the magazine “Nidaa al-Islaam”, issue n. 15.

    So in conclusion, refuting those who spread this kind of deviations is very crucial for the Muslims.

    May Allaah Ta’aalaa reward for his Jihad in protecting the Deen and gives him the Firdawas! May Allaah Ta’aalaa forgive Shaykh Ibn Jibreen and have mercy upon him and upon all of us! Ameen.

    My response:

    Wa alaikum salaam wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu,

    Yes akhee, you are correct, we must refute the deviations of anyone, no matter who they are. At the same time, someone like Shaykh Ibn Jibreen’s honor should still be preserved. NO scholar has preceded us since his death in reviving his “evil traits” as you have said (was the shaykh evil, or did he err?), so where do we get off as laymen (and I assume you are one) in doing so? That is what I asked originally for the brother who posted the youtube clip.

    Everyone’s statements after the Prophet’s can either be accepted or rejected, so we rejected what is incorrect from WHOEVER. Shaykh Ibn Jibreen will not be remembered by his “clear errors and deviations”, but rather for his contributions (because he was an Imaam of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah, mind you), and every scholar that has spoken of him since his death deemed it important to recall those contributions instead of where he erred.

    If we have time to bring up a clip that does nothing more than call him a liar (as the original youtube sound byte did), then make the time to bring up the clear errors and deviations! That would have been more appropriate.

    As a scholar, right or wrong, Shaykh Ibn Jibreen extracted from the sources to come up with his position, and he defended (whether staunchly or not) his position for which he clung to. So if he was wrong, then it as the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

    “During judging a case, if the judge exerts an effort to reach the right judgment and he reaches it, he gets two rewards; and if he exerts an effort to reach the right judgment but he errs, he gets one reward” (Reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim).

    So even in his error of defending Bin Laadin, or saying that most of the Saudi scholars are Ash’arees, then he based it on something, right or wrong. May Allaah forgive us and him, and grant him jannatul firdaus. Ameen!

    RG’s edit: Edited for formatting for easier reading.

  103. as-Salam ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah,

    I haven’t even read through the entirety of what you posted, Abul Qayyim. I really don’t have the heart to. There are so many expletives I could use to accurately describe how I feel when I read this BS, but to put it mildly, it’s very disheartening. Our most knowledgeable scholars are dying one by one and all these poor souls (I could really use other more fitting words to describe them) can do is talk about their (these scholars’) mistakes and the supposed evils they’ve rained upon the Muslim community; and our complaint is to Allah.

    May Allah guide us all.

  104. Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut says:

    Wa alaikum salaam wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu,

    Yeah I know brother, isn’t it sad? After I posted it and thought about it, I didn’t even think that you would approve of the post, that’s how dishonorable it is!! You may not remember me, but I had contacted you some time ago about some of the important posts that used to be on siraat.org. I am under the email ibntalut@hotmail.com as well. I used to correspond with Ali Sabir a while ago, but it has been some time since I have talked to him. How have you been otherwise? May Allaah bless you and your family, and facilitate it for you to continue to put up beneficial posts. Ameen.

  105. I’ve been ok; and the praise is Allah’s. May Allah bless and reward you for your supplications for me and may He grant you the same. It’s very vague, but I think I remember the thing about siraat.org. Your email addresses do look familiar; I’ve seen them in the recipients list in some emails Ali sent me. I think I’ve also seen some of your posts on various forums; am I mistaken?

  106. Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut says:

    No you are not mistaken bro,

    My most recent forums that I have visited were Salafi Burnout and Umar Lee. Maybe some others as well, I try to get around!!

  107. Oh Lord! That Salafi Burnout blog was one of the worst I’ve visited, ever!

    I thought I’d check to see if it was still alive after you mentioned it and got a WordPress page that said, “This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.” Hahaha, to Allah is all the praise for that!

  108. Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut says:

    Yes indeed brother!

    Initially it was an outlet for me to tell my “burnout” story, but then the moderator was letting atheists and apostates post on there all crazy! I had freed myself from it, and when I went there after some time, I saw that too, and I had the same reaction you had! Al hamdu lillaah!!

  109. Abû Mûsâ Al-Ḥabashî says:

    I thought I’d check to see if it was still alive after you mentioned it and got a WordPress page that said, “This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.” Hahaha, to Allah is all the praise for that!

    Al-Ḥamdu lillâh!

  110. I haven’t checked all of them, but it seems that the links posted to Shaikh Abul-Hasan’s site throughout the comments don’t work (I’ve only checked the links to a couple of the books we’ve linked to).

    The shaikh’s site’s gone through some changes and it seems they’ve changed the way they organize their folders for storing their books and stuff. Anyone interested in finding these books can still do so, but you’re going to have to do a bit of searching on his site: http://www.sulaymani.net. There’s a navagation bar on the right, where you’ll find links to the site’s audio library and it’s e-book library.

  111. أبو من؟ says:

    Assalaamu ‘alaikum,

    yaa ikhwah…do you know if Shaykh ‘Ali Hasan’s Manhaj as-Salaf as-Saalih has been translated or is being translated? I was flabbergasted to find on salafitalk that “the rod” on Shaykh ‘Ali Hasan and this book has been translated while neither the book nor Shaykh ‘Ali Hasan’s speech has (to the best of my knowledge) (أي عقل هذا؟؟).

    Honestly though, even if there wasn’t such a rush to attack the shaykh, (in my opinion…obviously) this book of his was in need of translation for what it contains of detailed speech with evidences, logical arguments and reliance on the speech of well known scholars of ahlis-sunnah…all of that added to it’s beautiful manners…even if the shaykh erred in some masaa’il -(and even if he did, it’s clear to anyone with intellect and justice that it’s merely his ijtihaad extracted with the salafi methodology from reasonable evidences)- then the salafis in general can gain a lot of benefit by seeing the knowledge based (as opposed to the tabloid) approach to these issues, along with tact and reservedness in naming and attacking individuals unnecessarily.

    I don’t want to sound like I’m praising his book too much, but for those who don’t have access to arabic ,the inaccessibility of this work is a big loss, as it treats with the very sicknesses that we’re all affected by…
    while at the same time we have these guys demonizing shaykh al-Albaani’s رحمه الله(arguably) strongest and closest student who just yesterday (and in all justice still today) was from the biggested defenders of the salafi manhaj…

    I guess my point is, I’m hoping someone is translating the other side, so that those who don’t know arabic and want the truth (or at least justice of some sort) can have access to the information…

    At the same time, I’m not for us being distracted from core beneficial knowledge, so I don’t endorse translating all of the back and forths from the forums in arabic…but simply the book, cause I think there’s benefit in that Allahu ‘alam.

    I know Rasheed was translating shaykh al-Ma’ribee’s responses for much the same reason (although I don’t really know much about that situation), but maybe it may be worth suggesting that that be sidelined for the while because it seems to me that that issue has basically quieted down now…

  112. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, brother.

    May Allah reward and bless you for your comments.

    Regarding Shaikh ‘Ali Hasan’s book, Manhaj as-Salaf as-Salih, I know that some of the guys at SalafiManhaj.com were working on at least part of it–I’m not sure if they’re planning on working on the whole book or merely certain selected chapters or sections. I haven’t been in contact with any of them in some time however, so I don’t know what progress they’re making or have made. I myself have yet to read the whole book; I read the first 20-30 pages before putting it down, but haven’t picked it back up since. I figured it was much the same things he’s been saying for years, so I didn’t really have a strong desire to finish it. Much of what’s going on is just a continuation of the attacks against other shaikhs (e.g., Shaikhs Adnan, Abul-Hasan, Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq, etc.) anyhow, so much of this stuff isn’t new.

    Regarding Shaikh Abul-Hasan’s responses to the attacks made against him, along with pretty much all other “projects” I was working on, I’ve put them on indefinite hold for the time being. As I mentioned in my latest article, Salafism, Do You Really Get It?, I’ve kind of stepped away from Islamic propagation in general, which is one of the main reasons behind my blog’s inactivity.

  113. Mustafa says:

    Asalaam Alaikum, (didnt know if this is the best place to put this message but 1-2 of the mashaikh i mentioned below have been mentioned above)

    Does anyone know or have a biography (who they studied under, their position etc) of these mashaikh?

    apologies for not having their full names:

    1) Saalih al Sadlaan

    2) Abdul Azeez As Sadhaan

    3) Abdullah bin Salih al-Ubailan (is he the teacher of meraj rabbani?)

    please direct me to their biographies if possible, even if their arabic links

    jazakhAllahu khairun

  114. Ibn_Ahmed says:

    Assalamu alaykum, brother Mustafa.

    Shaikh Dr.Saleh Ibn Ganim Sadlan:(www.alsadlan.net).
    He is a Professor in the Sharia School of the Islamic University of Imam Mohammed Bin Saud and also an Imam & Khateeb in Riyadh, KSA. He has a brief audio outline of his journey to knowledge & general advice to the talibul’ilm can be found here: http://www.islamhouse.com/tp/70682

    Shaikh Dr. Abdul’Aziz Sadhan (www.a-alsadhan.com),
    Is similarly from Imam Mohammed Bin Saud and also an Imam & Khateeb in Riyadh, KSA. His biography can be found in English (www.calltoislam.com) under the(present day)biographies section. He has number of videos on the internet: He describes his journey to seeking knowledge the video’In the library of a scholar’ – http://www.ryadussalihin.org/en/
    In addition he also has a series called ‘Milestones in seeking knowledge’: http://www.islamway.com/?iw_s=Scholar&iw_a=lessons&scholar_id=119

    Shaikh Abdullah bin Salih al-Ubailan (http://www.obailan.net/): I am not to aware of to much works from the Shaykh but I have come across the transcripts of the tapes with Shaykh Al-Albani & some stuff on Rasheed’s blog.

  115. Mustafa says:

    JazakhAllah khair ya ibn Ahmed,

    We have a conference lined up in Birmingham and hence the inquisitive nature of the post.

  116. I just saw the flyer for the Green Lane conference. Masha’allah, nice lineup. If Shaikh Abdullah al-Ubailan comes in person, I’ll be really jealous (the good kind), I pray Allah allows all those shaikhs are able to attend and benefit those who come to listen to them.

  117. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    The Urdu conference that was held earlier this year in Green Lane had two of the Mashaayikh coming, both from Imaam Muhammad ibn Sa’ood University. One was Shaykh Fahad ibn Sulaymaan al-Fuhayd, who visited the brothers in Brixton, London just few weeks back.

  118. Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut says:

    As salaamu alaikum,

    Is the flyer you are talking about available?

  119. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    wa ‘alaykum as salaam brother Abul Qayyim. The flyer can be seen from here:

    http://greaterjihad.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/green-lane-masjid-annual-winter-conference/

    This is a provisional flyer though and not an official one.

  120. Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut says:

    Jazaakallaahu khair akhee kareem! But, according to the “manhaj”, isn’t this the conference that I am supposed to stay away from, because it is being held at Green Lane masjid? Even though senior scholars are there? Tell me something!! lol

  121. Eesa says:

    This is what I don’t understand, which of the major scholars praise the likes of Shaykh Ali al-Halabi, Shaykh Usaamah al-Qoosee, Shaykh Abul Hasan, Shaykh Muhammad Hasan etc… I mean, there are many verdicts against them, i.e they have errors or in the case of some of them, they are innovators (not my words). Anyway, as laymen, it is not more befitting for us to follow the major scholars? Also, I have heard many times, critiscm takes precendence over a recommendation. So is it not better for those who have little knowledge to protect themselves and keep away from certain speakers who have question marks against them, and from those who promote them?

    Shaykh Abdul Muhsins words are used by those who defend QSS and the Scholars, they invite, but other than Shaykh Abdul Muhsin, which other major scholars have praised them recently?

    Jazakh’Allahu Khayran

  122. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    As for Shaykh ‘Ali al-Halabi then praise of various Scholars, from the kibaar and the sighaar, are well-known to those who know the reality. And these praises are fairly recent, in fact you can contact each of the living Shaykhs, hafidhahumullah, and ask them yourself about the noble Shaykh al-Halabi€.

    Some of those who praised or spoke about Shaykh al-Halabi with goodness in recent times:
    1. al-Allamah Abdul Muhsin al-Abbaad
    2. al-Allamah Waseeullah Abbaas
    3. al-Allamah Muhammad ibn Adam al-Ethiopee
    4. ash-Shaykh ‘Abdul Aziz ar-Rayyis
    5. ash-Shaykh Mashhoor ibn Hasan Aal Salmaan
    6. ash-Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ubaylan
    7. ash-Shaykh Sa’ad al-Husayn

    Note that the first three major Scholars are all Scholars of Hadeeth specifically, i.e. they are the kibaar al-Muhadditheen and are well-aware of the principles of ‘al jarh wat tadeel’. In fact, Shaykh al-Ethiopee has probably gone past his 100, may Allaah protect him.

    And previously it was al-Imaam al-Albaanee and al-Imaam al-Muqbil rahimahumullaah and also some of the Shuyookh who are criticising him at present. Also include various other Scholars such as Shaykh Husayn Aal ash-Shaykh of Madeenah, etc.

    And not a single one of them claims Shaykh al-Halabi is free of errors or mistakes in every issue, but that does not take him out of ‘Ahlus Sunnah’ into the 72 sects of ahlul bid’ah that are in hellfire.

    As laymen, it is sufficient for you to read the works of the Salaf and the works of the Imaams of the past times and present and do your obligatory worship and fear Allaah as much as you are able to. Discussing about Shuyookh in a negative light is not from the characteristics of laymen.

    Regarding what you heard about ‘jarh’ taking precedence over ‘tadeel’, thenc riticism does not take precedence over praise in an absolute term, and whether something constitutes as a valid criticism or an exaggerated criticism or worse, a crtiticism out of desire, is itself an issue of Ijtihaad amongst the Scholars. What is criticism to Shaykh A is idle talk to Shaykh B and what is excessive talk to Shaykh C is ‘jihaad against ahlul bid’ah’ to Shaykh D. So what do you, as layman, hold on to?

    Sufficient it is as a layman to read the Quraan and read its tafseer of the Salaf, and read the ahaadeeth and its explanation of the Scholars, and look at the volumes of fiqh books from the Scholars like Ibn Uthaymeen, Ibn Baaz, al Fawzaan, Ibn Jibreen, as Sadlaan, etc etc. Why complicate your case as a layman and burden with issues that you do not have a revelation from Allaah?

    Much of what you said brother Eesa, have already been addressed in the previous 120 comments or so, hence read them carefully or brothers would just have to repeat things over again. Here’s a good read: http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf_page.php?pdf=103

    And akhee, wAllaah, there is a lot of ‘untold’ criticisms out there, that have not been fully translated into English. If they were translated, you’d have to flee from the likes of Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiree saying he’s the father of new hizbiyyah. Just beacuse there is not a website or publication that is relentlessly translating every fitnah work does not mean they do no exist in original Arabic. But these are all fitnah and as laymen, we should not delve into them.

  123. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Akhee ‘Eesaa, you speak about QSS in general? ittaqillaah akh. go to http://www.albaseerah.org and see how many Scholars praise them and cooperate with them. Brothers like Abu Sufyan Zahid Rasheed of QSS is a gem and you can ask tens of Scholars in Saudi who know him for his da’wah as-salafiyyah.

    Bring me a name of an organisationg or individual that you deem to be more upright in Salafiyyah than QSS NY in the West, and I will prove you wrong from the statements of the Scholars. Mind I said, more upright, and not similar in uprightness of their ‘aqeedah and manhaj.

  124. Eesa says:

    Aboo Yusuf.. Barakh’Allahu Feek akhee, I do not speak of the brothers in NY. I was referring to the Toronto brothers. And just out of interest, are they connected or do they ust share the same name?

    And Rasheed, jazakh’Allahu khayr for your naseehah. The reason why I wrote what I did was because it’s very hard to escape discussions with brothers which eventually turn to names i.e. this one has been refuted or that one is unclear. And I know things are not always black & white as some other websites may portray. And if there is benefit to be taken from the books written by Scholars in our times dealing with issues relevant to these times, then surley we should strive to attain some benefit from them.

  125. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Wa feekum baarakAllaah. Rasheed can expand more on QSS affairs in Toronto, as he is acquainted with them. But they are essentially the same, just as Troid in Canada and Sunnah Publishing in US are in effect, one and the same.

    Akh, I personally mix with brothers from both sides and it is true it’s hard to avoid getting into unnecessary disupute over such and such. Ask for help from Allaah ‘azza wa jal in averting disputes and fitnah. As Salafees we say that we are all united while ahlul bid’ah are divided and continue to divide amongst themselves, yet the reality is Salafees in the West are NOT united as a whole. They are united within fractions or groups but not altogether. the Salafees in Yemen are NOT united, the Salafees in Kuwait are NOT united, the Salafees in Jordan are NOT united! WAllaah it’s sad to see so many disputes and idle talks amongst ourselves and the Salafee Mashayikhs in the pretext of refuting falsehood. Dr Tahir al-Qadri has written volumes of works against ‘Wahhabis’ and so are the actual callers of falsehood, like the islamophobic kuffaar and extremist ahlul bid’ah. Yet all our focus and attention seems to be within ourselves. The headlines are all about Shaykh this or Shaykh that, while large part of Ummah have no idea of what the word ‘Salaf’ means or who the Salaf were. Allaahul musta’aan is all I can gather.

  126. First, QSS/QSSC and QSSNY are not one and the same. Although there is an affiliation there (which runs back several years), Zahid captains his own ship and pretty much does his own thing. Personally, I can’t even remember the last time I had contact with him … I know it’s been several years since we last chatted whether over MSN or through email. I’m not sure if he and Abdulmonem still keep contact, but if they do, I don’t think it’s regular.

    Second, Brother Eesa, I hope you don’t take this the wrong way, it’s not meant to be an attack on you or anyone else.

    I’m not a big fan of this term “major scholars”. Although I’ve read many books and heard many scholars use it, what’s meant by it is almost never clearly defined. What does it mean exactly? Who does it refer to? What makes a scholar major or minor? Is it their knowledge? Is it their age? Both?

    Shaikhs Muhammad bin Abdil-Wahhab al-Banna and Ubaid bin Abdillah al-Jabiri are a two whose names are contantly thrown around by some as being from today’s “major scholars”, but I know of a few scholars younger than them who (apparently) have more knowledge; these same younger scholars are sometimes labelled by these people as “mere students of knowledge”.

    This ambiguity and vagueness surrounding the term is one of the main reasons I really dislike it. Not only is it not clearly defined, but you also find people accepting and rejecting opinions and positions, and worse deciding who to take from, purely due to this misguided notion that a scholar’s being “major” or “minor” gives some sort of indication to the correctness of his statements. Truth becomes tied to the people instead of the people being tied to the truth.

    When looking at a scholar and his worth in the grand scheme of things, what’s important is the work he puts forth, the knowledge and wisdom he displays and spreads to others, the benefits he brings about. These things speak a lot louder, at least to me, than the recommendations and praises from their peers. A particular scholar may have heaps of praise from his peers, but if his works are mediocre at best, he’s got the wisdom of a donkey, and he causes more harm then the benefit he brings about, then what good are these praises and recommendations when the fruits produced by this scholar are rotten?

    They say recognize knowledge and you’ll recognize its people. The more you learn–not just being spoonfed, but thinking critically and analytically (i.e., using the brain and the discernment that Allah blessed you with), the clearer things will get, the easier it will be for you to distinguish what’s correct from what’s not.

  127. Aboo Yoosuf says:

    Brother Abul Qayyim Faheem ibn Talut, I just read your email correspondences in that yahoo group regarding Shaykh Ibn Jibreen rahimahullaah just now. May Allaah reward you for your intelligent and balanced response. I don’t understand what those brothers get from promoting what supports their desires and intentions and leave off whatever goes against it. For instance, there are many erroneous statements of Sh Yahya al-Hajuri and others, that when brought to senior Scholars like Sh Abdullah al-Ghudayan, he deemed them to be lies. So where is the spreading of that type of clip on youtube and yahoo groups? Why do you not send email entitled “[SalafeeMethodology] Do Shaykh Saalih Aal ash Shaykh prefer Ikhwanis over Salafees? – Allamah al-Ghudayan refutes Yahya al-Hajoori (hafidhahullah)”???
    I tell you why you shouldn’t. It’s because Shaykh Yahya is a Salafi Scholar and the strong words of Sh al-Ghudayan against the kalaam of Sh Yahya can be portrayed wrongly, making al-Hajuri a Haddadi, a liar, an evil person, which he is not. So where is the same justice for Ibn Jibreen, whose virtue and knowledge is even higher of Sh Yahya al-Hajuri?!

    This is indeed the trait of the people of desires. Whatever goes in accordance with their desires, they run around with it and spread. And whatever doesn’t, they hide it. This is the characteristic of the Sufis and the Takfiris who play around with the statements of the Imams of the past such as an-Nawawi, Ibn Hajr, Ibn Taymiyyah and others. What is the difference in the action between those misguided people and these brothers?!

    How many Salafees are turning against Shaykh Ibn Jibreen due to these brothers’ spreading of personal attacks against the noble ‘Aalim ? I ask Allaah to transfer the good deeds of those who slander the Shaykh to his balance. It’s one thing to refute his errors with knowledge so that the Ummah do not fall into them, just as you’d refute the errors of the Imams who preceded him, even the likes of Imam Ibn Khuzaymah on the issue of Allah’s Image! And Imam as-Suyuti for his erroneous positions and stances. Error is accepted from nobody. Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee’s powerful knowledge based refutation on Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, that was translated and uploaded by brother Abu Maryam Isma’eel in his website and can be seen now in takfiris.com, is something that I wholeheartedly appreciate. And there is no indiscriminate attack on Ibn Jibreen in that refutation but his positions and statements have been refuted by Sh an-Najmee rahimahullah. There is also another powerful knowledge-based refutation on Shaykh Abdul Azeez ar-Rayyis’ Arabic website islamancient.com. And the honour and respect of Ibn Jibreen have been preserved there too, while refuting his erroneous statements.

    But what is this filthy way of addressing Sh Ibn Jibreen? Many laymen Salafis (those who keep up with the likes of those who spread this type of clip) probably hate Ibn Jibreen due to this and hate those who love Ibn Jibreen and promote his lectures and books!

    Also, brother Yusuf previously mentioned other Mashayikh speaking with respect and love when they mention Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (such as Shaykh Zayd al Madkhali and Shaykh Abdul Azeez ar Rajihi). The speeches of various Mashayikh such as Mufti Abdul Aziz and Sh Salih al Fawzan over his death are also available. Ponder O brothers, are these Mashayikh showing love and respect for someone who has “evil traits over the Ummah”?! Allaahul musta’aan.

    Brother “Alban Malaj” mentioned in his response:

    “Why dont you think about the blood of the Muslims which is still sheding just because of the fatawa launched by Ibn Jibreen in service of the Jihadis? Please, leave aside your emotions and try to be more objective than subjective. …
    … because his (Ibn Jibreen’s) evil traits upon the Ummah are still present. …”

    Here is the challenge. Translate these statements of Alban, word-by-word, and take it to the Mufti Abdul Aziz Aal Ash Shaykh, Sh Abdullah al-Ghudayan, Sh al-Fawzan, Sh Abdul Aziz ar-Rajihi, Sh Sa’ud ash-Shuraim and other Scholars from Lajnah and from the Islamic Universities. Tell us what their responses are. wAllah if I had the capability, I’d have asked these Scholars myself and uploaded their responses on youtube, blogs and what-not.

    I really advise everyone to listen to these clips on youtube regarding Ibn Jibreen’s life and works.
    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcM9GiPcTPc
    (ash-Shaykh al-Allamah Abdul Kareem al Khudayr over those who slander Shaykh Ibn Jibreen)
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcPAcdQGDFw
    (4 part video on Ibn Jibreen’s life and the words of various Mashayikh on him)

    And the truth is, Scholars like Allamah Abdul Kareem al-Khudayr already spoke harshly against those who simply question if knowledge should be taken from Shaykh Ibn Jibreen, let alone say “because his (Ibn Jibreen’s) evil traits upon the Ummah are still present”.

    Imam Yahya an-Nawawi’s erroneous/misinterpreted explanation of hadeeth “Where is Allaah?” is well-known to Salafees and so is Imam as-Suyuti’s position on issues like Mawlid, al Khidr, etc. So, tell us, O intelligent one, does anyone from Ahlus Sunnah say with regards to an-Nawawi and as-Suyuti “because their evil traits upon the Ummah are still present”? And how many Sufis have used these erroneous statements of the two Imams to justify their misguidance and innovation? Allaahul musta’aan.

    I really hope the brothers who are active in translating Arabic in English would translate some of the speeches that show the other picture to the non-Arabic speaking world.

  128. Pingback: Apparently, I Have False Info … « Rasheed Gonzales

  129. Abu Man? says:

    I see that our bro justabro has done the favor or collecting some of the best posts from this tread and re-posting starting here:
    http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f15/rabee-al-madkhali-refutation-thread-13878/index71.html

  130. Yup. Noticed it the other day as my blog got a pingback that I didn’t approve linking back to IA. Of course, he’s only used the stuff that suits his purposes.

  131. Abu Shu'aib says:

    As-Salamu ‘Alaykum,

    Some of them links have changed in the posts brother Yusuf made, like the Fatawa from Sh. al-Fawzan’s website.

    - Abu Shu’aib.

  132. Justabro says:

    My purpose is to spread information… the best disinfectant is a little bit of sunshine. Beyond that, everyone is welcome to reach their own conclusions as far as I’m concerned. What I am however dead-set against is the Stalinist approach of SPUBS and their “ilk” (hehe… finally get to use that word) that creates brainwashed cultists, I’m very much against it.

    I’ve known Br. Yusuf for a long time, and always find his input insightful, even if I don’t agree with it.

  133. Ibn Shareef says:

    salaam alaikum Rasheed…. Br.Yusuf earlier in this discussion while discussing the forced position of saying you’re salafi posted some links to a fatwaa from sh.fawzaan, one from sh.raajihee and one from sh.muhammad amaan al jaamee. I’m clicking on the links but I can’t find the actual kalaam Allaahul Musta’aan!!! I don’t know if you or br.Yusuf can help me with this

  134. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, Ibn Shareef.

    I’ll have to go through the comments to see which links you’re referring to, but this tends to happen quite a bit with links to the Arabic sites; links go dead all the time, URL’s change, etc. I don’t know if I’ll be able to find other copies of those statements elsewhere on the internet, however. My search skills aren’t anywhere close to Yusuf’s and I haven’t heard from Yusuf in several months now; I pray Allah keeps him and his family safe and well.

  135. Ibn Shareef says:

    I hope he’s ok inshallaah…..jazaakallaahu khayraa rasheed. Just to offer you some aid inshallah, it’s the post after Yusuf’s post beginning with the words ‘Regarding Shaykh Ibn Jibreen’ (in bold)

  136. I’ve fixed the link to Shaikh al-Fawzan’s statement, so it should take you to the audio now.

    I can’t find the statements from Shaikh ar-Rajihi and al-Jami, but I didn’t exactly exert myself in trying, lol. The statement from al-Jami is a link to Sahab’s site, so you can try using the forum’s search feature to try and find it if you got the time. Not sure where you’d find ar-Rajihi’s though, I tried searching for “الأثري”, “السلفي” and “تسمية” using his site’s search function; no luck.

  137. Ibn Shareef says:

    Thanks anyway bro…Ironically, I think I stumbled upon Sh.Fawzaan’s statement last night….May Allaah reward you for your effort. Btw, I was hoping you’d comment on my other other comment in ‘They mention some, but not the rest’

  138. Abdi says:

    Assalamu aleykum ya ikhwan.so you are the ones called saudi salafis generally? Though i’m not doing jarh from you, surely did Allah say never die accept as salafis or muslimeen. Given the hatred amongst youselves I shudder to think what you have in store for us who believe it is obligatory to work for caliphate to establish Islam and that Jihad means fighting physically to spread islam and defending Islamic lands Do you people believe that you will safe in the lands of kufar? Today they are talking about niqaab, tomorow they will say it is forbidden to believe that kufar will be thrown into hell-fire by the Almighty! open your eyes brothers!.

  139. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, Abdi.

    Firstly, welcome to my blog.

    Secondly, I’m not sure where you get some of these notions, but it’s clear that you have some misconceptions about Salafi beliefs. Perhaps you should read some works by Salafi authors and scholars regarding these topics to verify that these accusations are true. For example, jihad. We believe is an obligation that will remain until the Last Day. We believe that there are many different types and levels of jihad, physically spreading Islam and defending Islamic lands among them. We also believe there are conditions for every type of jihad and that every type of jihad has its time, place, and application as well.

    As for these other things you mention, then may Allah guide us all to what He loves and is pleased with.

  140. Ibn Shareef says:

    As Salaamu ‘Alaikum Rasheed, you mentioned this article waaaay back in 2009 titled Manhaj as-Salaf bain at-Ta’sil wat-Tatbiq concerning the difference between founding principles and their application Shaikh Ahmad bin Salih az-Zahrani. The link is now dead, can you direct me to another link inshaAllah? I desperately want to read it inshaAllaah. Ahsanallaahu ilayk.

  141. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, Ibn Shareef.

    I found this via Google. I’m not sure if it’s the entire article, as I haven’t read through it. But hopefully it’s all there. http://forsanhaq.com/showthread.php?t=255021. I’ll send you the copy I have saved in Word format too just in case. Check your inbox in a few minutes, insha’allah.

  142. Ibn Shareef says:

    Jazaakallaahu khayraa for the quick response Rasheed.

  143. No problem, brother. Wa iyyakum.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96 other followers

%d bloggers like this: