The Last Will & Testament of Muqbil bin Hadi al-Wadi’i

There’s been quite a few times where Shaikh Muqbil bin Hâdî’s last will and testament has been mentioned here on my blog (usually in the comments sections to posts), especially with respect to Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribî. Because of this I thought it might be a good idea to post it here for whoever wants to read it and see for themselves, since the brothers at Salafi Publications (as well others who are upon their exaggerationist mentality) love to make it seem like Shaikh Muqbil was wary of some sort of potential evil Shaikh Abul-Hasan was bound to inflict upon the world. It never made any sense to me (and to many others) how someone who Shaikh Muqbil supposedly believed posed such a great danger to Islam and Salafism would be someone that he advised others to refer matters to in his last will and testament.

In any case, I had a really hard time finding that old translation online, so I decided to retranslate it myself. You guys can read it  here, if you’re interested: The Last Will & Testament of Muqbil bin Hâdî al-Wâdi’î (PDF).

In the middle of translating the will, I was finally able to find it posted on some random blog post regarding the last will and testament (al-wasiyyah) itself, quoted as an example of what one looks like (Shaikh al-Albânî’s last will and testament was another example shown in the post). The post’s author referenced Shaikh Muqbil’s Salafi Publications’s website, but searching their site, I was unable to find it at all. For whoever wants to read their translation of the will (which differs from mine in some parts), you can do so by visiting this blog. You’ll find Shaikh Muqbil’s will about two thirds down the page, followed by Shaikh al-Albânî’s last will and testament.

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.

7 Responses to The Last Will & Testament of Muqbil bin Hadi al-Wadi’i

  1. Abu Sakinah says:

    Assalamu alaykum,

    I’ve been reading here and there about how scholars view Abul Hasan al Ma’ribi. I understand some make tabdee of him and some don’t. For example Shaykh as-Suhaymee said : « Do not boycott the one who believes that (i.e., that he’s not an innovator). Do not boycott him. If that was the case, we would boycott some of our major scholars because they didn’t boycott him ! »

    One thing that bothers me though, is that we always insist that the truth is based on Dalil rather than opinions, and we are irritated by people who blindly follow certain shouyoukh in all their opinions.

    Yet I have the feeling that in the case of Abul Hasan al Ma’ribi, people defend their right to viewing as Salafi more by pointing to opinions than to the Dalil.

    I just read this article : http://www.themadkhalis.com/md/articles/nvskb-why-shaykh-rabee-was-correct-and-shaykh-abdul-muhsin-al-abbaad-was-wrong-yet-both-are-rewarded.cfm

    Don’t these statements of him perfectly match the manhaj of the Khawarijj ? (the obligation of revolting against a tyranical Muslim ruler especially)

    (Shaykh as-Suhaymee quote : http://www.madeenah.com/article.cfm?id=1353)

    RG’s edit: Combined two posts into one.

  2. Wa ‘alaikum as-salam wa rahmatullah, Abu Sakinah.

    From what I recall, and I could be mistaken because I haven’t read everything against Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribi, but this specific issue of revolting against the rulers was not one of the original issues he was criticized for having “deviated” in.

    From among the issues I do recall he was critized for are:

    – insulting the Companions (I’ve already posted what Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbad said about this);

    – singular narrations (khabar al-ahad) and whether the information conveyed within them amounts to certain knowledge (yaqini) or speculative knowledge (dhanni) (I’ve also posted what al-Abbad says about this as well);

    – his stances on certain individuals and groups, like Sayyid Qutb, al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, ‘Adnan ‘Ar’ur, Muhammad Abdur-Rahman al-Maghrawi, and others;

    – various principles he’s accused of innovating, such as “we correct and do not destroy” (i.e., we correct an individual’s mistakes, but do not destroy him on account of it such that we warn against him absolutely and denounce him completely) and “correlating the probable (mujmal) to the elaborated (mufassal)” (i.e., if an ambiguous statement comes from someone that could be in conformity or in contradiction to the truth, and he has other explicit statements that are clearly in conformity to the truth, his ambiguous statements are to be understood in light of his explicit statements) (I’ve also posted about these two specific principles here as well);

    – and his supposed attacks and insults against “the Salafis and Salafiyyah”.

    My particular defense of al-Ma’ribi is based on these particular issues, where I’ve found him to be in the right and Shaikh Rabi’ al-Madkhali to be in the wrong.

    As for this issue concerning revolting against the rulers, then this is something that there is a lot of discussion on. I’ve personally heard a couple of other Salafi scholars (one of them being Shaikh Muhammad bin al-Hasan ad-Didu) saying very similar to what SP’s quoted from al-Ma’ribi, if not the very same. And though I haven’t studied this issue too deeply, from the little that I have read, they seem to be correct. Even the statements explicit about the prohibition of revolt/rebellion tie it to the perceived causes of corruption (mafasid) that will come about as a result of it. For example, On pg. 381 of Sharh al-‘Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah (al-Maktab al-Islami) Ibn Abil-‘Izz al-Hanafi states,

    As for the necessity of obedience to them even if they tyrannize, then it is because multiples of the corruptions that occur from their tyrrany will result from revolting against their obedience. Rather, in enduring their tyranny is expiation of misdeeds and multiplication of rewards. For surely, Allah, exalted is He, did not give them authority over us except because of the corruption of our deeds; the reward is according to the type of the deed. So upon us is diligence in seeking forgiveness, repentance, and rectification of deeds.

    It can be understood from this that if rebelling will not cause greater corruption than the ruler’s tyranny, obedience to him is not necessary and that removing the harm he poses takes precedence over leaving it to remain; and Allah is more knowledgeable.

    In I’tiqad Ahl as-Sunnah Sharh As·hab al-Hadith (this book is printed by the Saudi government and distributed for free), Shaikh Muhammad Abdur-Rahman al-Khumayyis states,

    Note: Revolting against the disbelieving/irreligious rulers (al-hukkam al-kafarah) who apply the blasphemous [man-made] laws is not from this matter (i.e., the prohibition of revolting against the imams of the Muslims). Rather, this is from jihad in Allah’s cause, for surely, the intent of not revolting against the people of authority is those who aggrandize the rites of Allah and carry out Allah’s legislations. Then, [even] revolting against the irreligious rulers also needs deliberateness and ascertainment. For revolting against them could contain harms to Islam and the Muslims. So the likes of this is done according to the lesser of the two harms.

    Now, I don’t necessarily agree with one position or the other as like I said, I haven’t studied the issue too deeply. What I’m trying to show here is that there is a lot of discussion amongst the scholars about what is permitted and what is not. There’s also discussion concerning what exactly constitutes rebellion or revolt, which complicates the issue further. My point in quoting these two passages is to highlight the fact that the issue rests on benefits and harms, advantages and causes of corruption, etc. It’s not a black and white topic, and nothing proves this point better than the discussions concerning what occurred with Abdullah bin az-Zubair and Husain bin Ali and their respective “rebellions”.

  3. Abu Sakinah says:

    Hmm I thought rebellion against a ruler is always forbidden if he’s a Muslim based on ahadeeth such as that one :

    “Rulers after me will come who do not follow my guidance and my precedent (sunnah). Some of their men will have the heart of Satan in a human body.” I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what should I do if I live to see that time?” He said, “You should listen and obey them even if the ruler strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey.”

    [Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Number 4554]

  4. That’s definitely what we’re force fed when we first start learning about Salafism. But like I said, there is discussion on the issue. Allah is more knowledgeable about what the truth concerning the matter is, but it’s far from black and white.

    As for comparing his statements to the methodology of the Khawarij, I wouldn’t say that they do either. The Khawarij are named as such, yes, because they rebelled against the authority. But you also have to look at what led them to this, i.e., their beliefs concerning faith and disbelief. These beliefs are what led them to excommunicating those who commit major sins. And al-Ma’ribi definitely does not share these beliefs.

    I’m told the shaikh is working on a rebuttal to those criticizing him for the statements he made in that interview that SPubs based their article on. I, for one, can’t wait to see what he says about it. Should be interesting.

  5. Abu Sakinah says:

    Akhi Rasheed can I contact you in private ? (note that I do not have your email address)

  6. I sent you an email to the address you provided when posting your comments. If this isn’t the email you use most often, then you can find my email address mentioned here.

  7. Adam Abubakar says:

    I apreaciate your efford, May Allah reward you Jannatur Firdausi.

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

%d bloggers like this: