Archive for June, 2013

Boycotting the People of Innovation is Obligatory – Shaikh Uthaymeen

June 18, 2013

From:

http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/books/article_16865.shtml

هجران أهل البدع

الهجران مصدر هجر وهو لغة: الترك.

والمراد بهجران أهل البدع: الابتعاد عنهم، وترك محبتهم، وموالاتهم، والسلام عليهم، وزيارتهم، وعيادتهم، ونحو ذلك.

وهجران أهل البدع واجب؛ لقوله تعالى: (لا تَجِدُ قَوْماً يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِيُوَادُّونَ مَنْ حَادَّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَه)(266). ولأن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم هجر كعب بن مالك وصاحبيه حين تخلفوا عن غزوة تبوك.

لكن إن كان في مجالستهم مصلحة لتبيين الحق لهم وتحذيرهم من البدعة فلا بأس بذلك، وربما يكون ذلك مطلوباً؛ لقوله تعالى: (ادْعُ إِلَى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِوَجَادِلْهُمْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ)(267). وهذا قد يكون بالمجالسة، والمشافهة، وقد يكون بالمراسلة، والمكاتبة، ومن هجر أهل البدع: ترك النظر في كتبهم خوفاً من الفتنة بها، أو ترويجها بين الناس، فالابتعاد عن مواطن الضلال واجب لقوله صلى الله عليه وسلم في الدجال: “من سمع به فلينأ عنه، فو الله إن الرجل ليأتيه وهو يحسب أنه مؤمن فيتبعه مما يبعث به من الشبهات“. رواه أبو داود(268). قال الألباني: وإسناده صحيح.

لكن إن كان الغرض من النظر في كتبهم معرفة بدعتهم للرد عليها فلا بأس بذلك لمن كان عنده من العقيدة الصحيحة ما يتحصن به وكان قادراً على الرد عليهم، بل ربما كان واجباً؛ لأن رد البدعة واجب، وما لا يتم الواجب إلا به فهو واجب.

Boycotting the People of Innovation

 

الهِجْرَانُ al-Hijraan is the masdar (verbal noun) for هَجَرَ (to abandon, keep away from).  In the language it (al-Hijraan) means التَّرْكُ (leaving).

 

What is intended by boycotting the People of Innovation is: distancing yourselves from them, not having love for them, not having allegiance to them, not giving them salaam, not visiting them, etc.

 

Boycotting the People of Innovation is obligatory due to the saying of Allah, The Most High (translated):

 

You won’t find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day making friends with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger” (58:22)

 

And the Prophet – sallallahu alayhe wa sallam boycotted Ka’b bin Malik and his two companions (for a brief time) when they remained behind from the battle of Tabouk (though they were Noble Companions, not upon innovation, and Allah accepted their repentance)

 

However, if there is a benefit in sitting with them – in that you clarify the truth to them and warn them from innovation – then there is no problem with that.

 

Perhaps that is required (clarifying the truth to them and warning them from bid’ah) due to the saying of Allah, The Most High (translated):

 

Call to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and good admonition and debate with them with that which is better.” (16:125)

 

This (da’wah) may be (in the form of) gatherings and speeches, or (in the form of) correspondence and writing.1

 

From boycotting the People of Innovation is: not looking into their books for fear of fitnah, and not circulating them among the people.

 

Staying away from the places of misguidance is obligatory due to his statement – sallallahu alayhe wa sallam – regarding the Dajjaal:

 

Whoever hears of him, let him stay far away from him, for by Allah, indeed a man will go to him considering that he himself is a Believer, but will then follow him because of what he will bring of doubts” Recorded by Abu Dawood and Shaikh Albaanee said that its chain of narrators was saheeh

 

However, if the goal in looking through their books is to refute their innovation, then there is no problem with that for the one who has the correct aqeedah to protect himself and is able to refute them. Rather it may be obligatory (to do so).

 

Because refuting innovation is obligatory and whatever is needed to complete the obligation is itself  obligatory.

 

 

 

Footnote

 

 

 

1 Shaikh Ahmad an-Najmee was asked: “O Noble Shaykh, a person claims that he is Salafi, but he keeps company with the hizbis, and he was advised concerning this and responded, ‘Indeed, I am doing so for their advisement and guidance.’ So how do we judge this person?”

 

The Shaykh answered, “Advice does not necessitate that you keep company with them, and the advice is to be given at fixed times.  As for your keeping company with them with the argument that you are advising them, then if you  were advising them, there would be seen a change in their actions, and a difference in that which they were upon.  So if you say, for example, that you advise them, but they don’t listen to you or accept from you, then why do you keep company with them and come and go with them?  If they do not listen to you, then do not come and go with them or sit with them.  Rather, when we see that you come and go with them and keep company with them, we are aware that you are one of them.” For the reference, see this brief article: http://www.sunnahpublishing.net/modules/Manhaj/company.pdf

Advertisements

The Difference Between Naseehah (Advice) and Ta’yeer (Degradation)

June 17, 2013

These are just a couple of sentences from Shaikh Rabee and Shaikh Saalih Suhaymee from their commentaries on Imam Ibn Rajab’s book – The Difference Between an-Naseehah and at-Ta’yeer

 

 

Shaikh Rabee – hafithahullah – said:

 

This book is: The difference between Naseehah (advice) and Ta’yeer (degradation/belittlement) (by Ibn Rajab)

 

When you criticize an individual, it is obligatory upon you to stick to the truth, honesty, and sincerity (ikhlaas).  And that your intention is to clarify the truth and point out the error which contradicts the truth.

 

When this is your intention, then this is a noble intention and a tremendous affair which the entire ummah should be grateful for.  And it is not permissible for anyone to accuse you of (doing) evil.

But if you have evil intentions and it becomes clear after study and examination that you are Saahibu Hawaa (a person of desires), then the people have the right to speak about you.

 

Al-Haafith Ibn Rajab – rahimahullah – said:

 

“All praises and thanks are only for the Lord of the Universe (Allah).  His Salaah and Salaam be upon the Imaam of those who have taqwa – the Seal of the Prophets – and upon his family, Companions, and those who follow them perfectly (in belief, statements, and actions) until the Day of Recompense (Day of Judgement).  As for what follows:

These are some brief words gathered together  regarding the difference between an-Naseehah and at-Ta’yeer. Because these two are similar in that both of them are: mentioning about a person what he dislikes to be mentioned.  There is no difference between them with most of the people.  And Allah is the one who grants success (in being guided) to what is correct.”

 

Meaning: an-Naseehah is mentioning about a person something he dislikes and at-Ta’yeer is also mentioning about a person what he dislikes.  So there can be some similarity between an-Naseehah and at-Ta’yeer.

 

At-Ta’yeer is that you mention a fault (or flaw)  and an-Naseehah is that you mention a fault also – so that the people can be warned from him if he has an innovation or an error – when your intention is seeking the Face of Allah – He is the Blessed and Most High – then this is an-Naseehah.

 

And if you mentioned his flaw to satisfy your own desire, you never had a legislated goal, your goal was only to satisfy your desire, then this is ta’yeer and is degradation and a sin….

 

 

http://rabee.net/show_book.aspx?id=884&pid=5&bid=154

 

 

 

 

And Shaikh Saalih Suhaymee – hafithahullah – said:

 

التعيير هو تنقص عيَّره أي تنقصه بنسبه أو بصَنْعَتِه

أو بشكله أو بلونه أو نحو ذلك وكل هذا محرم

At-ta’yeer is belittlement, he reviles him – meaning – he belittles him because of his lineage, or his job, or his appearance, or his color, or what is similar to that – all of this is haraam….

والشاهد أن التَعْيِيْر من عَيَّرَ الشخصَ

أي تنقَّصَه سواءً طعن في حسبه أو نسبه

أو قبلَ ذلك في دينهِ

أو في بلده أو في لونه أو في شكله أو في خلقه

وكل ذلك محَرَّمٌ ولا يجوز الوصف بقصد التعيير وتنقص

…The point of benefit is that at-ta’yeer is when someone reviles another person – meaning he belittles him – the same whether he reviles him due to his status, his lineage, or before that in his deen, or his country, his color, his appearance, or in his body – all of that is haraam.  It is not permissible to describe a person with the intention of revilement or degradation (belittlement)…

 

From: http://www.alharamain.gov.sa/index.cfm?do=cms.scholarsubject&schid=5755&subjid=6020&audiotype=lectures&browseby=speaker

 

الفرق بين النصيحة و التعيير/ قول المؤلف أفامة الحجج الشرعية والأدلة

The Definition of Taqwaa

June 17, 2013

 

 

 

Shaikh Uthaymeen said about the definition of taqwaa:

 

http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/books/article_18016.shtml

(From his Explanation of Riyadhus Saaliheen, The Chapter of Taqwaa)

 

 

وهو أن يتخذ الإنسان ما يَقِيه من عذاب الله. والذي يقيك من عذاب الله هو فعل أوامر الله ،واجتناب نواهيه

 

 

And it (taqwaa) is that a person takes what will protect him from the punishment of Allah. And what protects you from the punishment of Allah is doing what He has commanded and avoiding His prohibitions”

 

 

 

 

Shaikh Fawzaan said in his lecture about attaining a happy life:

 

يتقون يعني  يتخذون وقاية من غضب الله  وعذابه

وما هي الوقاية؟

هل هي الدروع الحصون والجنود؟ لا

أو الثياب؟ لا

الوقاية العمل الصالح

الوقاية العمل الصالح

وتقوى الله أن تعمل  بطاعة الله على نور من الله ترجو ثواب الله

وأن تترك معصية الله على نور من الله تخاف من عقاب الله

ها هى التقوى

سُمِّيَ تقوى لأنها تقيك من غضب الله وتقيك من العذاب

هذه التقوى

 

 

 

They have taqwaa – meaning – they take something to protect them from Allah’s Anger and Punishment

What is the protection?

Is it armor, fortresses, and armies? No.

Is it clothing? No.

The protection is righteous deeds

The protection is righteous deeds

Having taqwaa of Allah is that you act in Allah’s obedience upon a light from Him, seeking the Reward of Allah

And that you leave off disobedience to Allah, upon a light from Him, fearing Allah’s punishment

This is taqwaa

It is called taqwaa because it protects you from the Anger of Allah and it protects you from the punishment. 

This is taqwaa

 

 

 

The root of تَقْوَى is from the verbوَقَى, يَقِيْ which means “to protect”. 

It’s masdar (verbal noun) is وِقَايَةٌ (protection) and its amr ( command ) form is:

قِ (m.sg), قِيْ (f.sg), قُوا (m.pl, see verse 66:6), and قِيْنَ (f.pl)

 

تَقِيٌّ is “having taqwaa”

 

For example:

 

وَكَانَ تَقِيًّا

 

And he (Yahyaa) was one having taqwaa” (19:13)

 

(taqee is mansoob in the verse due to kaana)

 

The verb meaning “to have taqwaa” is اِتَّقَى   يَتَّقِي   اِتَّقِ  

(53:32, 92:5, 33:1, )

 

The comparative/superlative form (اسْمُ التَفْضِيْل ) is أَتْقَىwhich is having more or having the most taqwaa (depending on the context) (49:13).  Other words that follow this pattern:

 

خَفِيٌّ hidden (19:3)  أَخْفَى more/most hidden1

Like in the saying of the Prophet – sallallahu alayhe was sallam – that shirk is:

أَخْفَى من دبيب النمل

more hidden than the crawling of the ant…”2

شَقِيٌّ wretched (11:105)  أَشْقَى more/most wretched (91:12, 92:15)

 

 

 

Footnotes

 

 

 

1أَخْفَى is also a verb meaning “to hide (something)”

2 Recorded by many of the hadeeth scholars, authenticated by Shaikh Albanee in Saheeh al Adab al Mufrad, narrated by Ma’qal bin Yasaar

How To Obtain A Happy Life-Sheikh Fawzaan

June 17, 2013

Arabic Audio:

http://k002.kiwi6.com/hotlink/k1cb34b7qu/mp3

Arabic Text:

http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=123887

 

Audio Explanations of the Works of the Scholars – Shaikh Muhammad Amaan al Jaamee

June 13, 2013

Arabic:

Shaikh Muhammad Amaan al Jaamee’s Audio Shurooh

As well as other lectures

(from www.alwaraqat.net )

Below are the links for his explanation of Shaikh Uthaymeen’s:

Exemplary Principles Concerning the Names and Attributes of Allah

الشريط الأول

الشريط الثاني


الشريط الثالث

الشريط الرابع


الشريط الخامس

الشريط السادس


الشريط السابع


الشريط الثامن


الشريط التاسع


الشريط العاشر


الشريط الحادي عشر


الشريط الثاني عشر


الشريط الثالث عشر


الشريط الرابع عشر


الشريط الخامس عشر

Regarding the Claimed Contradictions of Shaykh Rabee’ in Jarh and Ta’deel

June 13, 2013

Taken From:

http://www.bakkah.net/en/regarding-claimed-contradictions-shaykh-rabee-al-madkhalee-jarh-tadeel.htm

 

In the Name of Allaah, the All Compassionate, the Ever Merciful…

[Read the complete PDF version of this article]

We’ve seen for years people criticizing the likes of Shaykh Rabee’ ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee (may Allaah preserve him), regarding the claim that he is not upon the way of the early critics of the Salaf – the likes of Imaams Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. And what they say: “His ‘foolishness’ of lavishly praising people and then abandoning them has excluded him from resembling the critics of old, and it shows that he is ‘unstable’ and his statements in criticism of people are ‘not reliable’.”

Let us begin with understanding something in this issue so that we don’t pass on and parrot things without understanding them.

True Academic Criticism in Islaam

In academic criticism in Islaam – as understood by the scholars of Jarh wa Ta’deel throughout history (النقد العلمي) [Academic criticism] – No one is beyond criticism, no one is immune from criticism, other than those who have gained immunity from Allah, i.e. they have been praised in the Qur’aan and they have been sanctified by the Book of Allah or by the revelation given to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم), i.e. his Sunnah. Aside from that, the narrators, the teachers, the callers, the scholars themselves – all of them are subject to criticism. As one of the greatest of the scholars, al-Imaam Maalik, is so commonly quoted as saying:

مَا مِنَّا إِلاَّ رَادٌّ وَمَرْدُودٌ عَلَيْهِ

Meaning: Every single one of us (every scholar) is either criticizing / refuting, or being criticized / refuted.

That is the case of the scholars, and, of course, every writer and every caller is subject to criticism. The criticism of the scholars of Islaam is ongoing, it is mutajaddid [continuously updated], it is renewed, and it is revisited, at every possible occasion. No one from the critics of Islaam had ever agreed to the principle that – I think is understood from this questioner/complainer or others that have speech resembling this – that a person who has been praised (lavishly especially), that he is now immune from criticism, and to say that he should be abandoned or that he is weak (in his reliability) and should not be taken from, to say that after lavishly praising him is a kind of self-contradiction and it is proof of instability and lack of firmness, or lack of reliability, in the area of academic criticism. No one ever understood that.

There’s the whole issue of narrators in Islaam who went astray, narrators in Islaam that became unreliable and poor in their memory in their old age, narrators whose conditions changed, and the imaams of criticism who called them thiqah (reliable, trustworthy) before their situation changed had no problem ever and had nothing preventing them from saying either “dha’eef” (not reliable), or he’s abandoned, or he’s nothing (لا شيء) or he’s a liar (كذاب), if the situation dictated those words. No one believed that would be self-contradictory, no one believed that was tanaaqudh (contradiction). No one believed that it would be a proof of the instability of the critic. On the opposite understanding, rather, they understood that as an indication of the sincerity of the critic and that the critic is upon the right way of criticism – that he renews his criticism and that he modifies it based on the current situation or the path taken by the one being criticized.

Criticism Revisited – Example #1

So, for example, the imam, ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ibn Hammaam as-Sa’aanee – the imaam of Yemen in his time that Imaams Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahyaa ibn Ma’een would travel to, as well as other great scholars of hadeeth – they would travel to him to get his hadeeth. Then, somewhere around the year 200 (after Hijrah), he became blind and he became very weak in his narrations (i.e. unreliable). He would have his books that he wrote down before he was blind read to him, and he would allow mistakes to be read to him (without objecting), he would allow ahaadeeth that were not from his book to be read to him, and he would yulaqqan (he would agree and pass on everything as if it were correct). He was no longer able to distinguish his hadeeth from other people’s hadeeth. He was no longer able to distinguish the correct narrations of his own hadeeth versus the mistakes added to his books, and so on.

So, after that, the same scholars who would travel – with very little provisions and even run out of provisions on the way as you’ve heard these stories of Yahyaa ibn Ma’een and Ahmed ibn Hanbal on the way running out of provisions and encountering near-death situations to reach this imaam – they would then say about him: “laa shay’” (He’s nothing). Imaam Ahmad said about him after the year 200, “His narrations are لا شيء” (worthless, lit. nothing). And Imaam Ahmad never thought that his saying “nothing” after saying “thiqah” and “imaam,” that it would be some sign of instability. No one ever blamed him for that in the history of Islaam.

Criticism Revisited – Example #2

‘Abdul-Maalik ibn Abee Sulaymaan al-’Arnazee – Shu’bah considered him reliable. Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaaj – one of the most skilled critics of narrators ever – was amazed at his precision. And then when a narration – one narration! – came from him (the hadeeth of ash-Shuf’ah) – when he heard this hadeeth, he understood this hadeeth to be a mistake, and he said, “If ‘Abdul-Malik narrates another hadeeth like this, I’ll drop him,” meaning: I’ll abandon him, I’ll not narrate anything from him anymore, he doesn’t deserve to be narrated from if he makes another mistake like this. And, in the end, he ended up actually abandoning him.

And that was Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaaj who considered him reliable yesterday; today: abandoned. Why? Because he felt the situation dictated that. His evaluation of that narrator – should he be taken from or not – was mutajaddid (continuously revisited). It was renewed, it was updated. It was something that was looked at and revisited. And he had no problem giving the opposite verdict that he used to give since the situation necessitated that. And no one blamed Shu’bah for that.

Criticism Revisited – Example #3

Similarly, the books of narrators’ biographies and criticism are full of these kinds of cases. Where Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een who, because of his precision in his criticism, the extent of his criticism – every letter would be under the microscope if you were reading a hadeeth to Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. People knew that, and they were afraid of him, so when they narrated to him, they were on their P’s and Q’s. They would narrate to him in the best possible way they could. This led to a situation where – because of his reputation of being such a precise critic – you would find narrators who were not normally reliable, they would only narrate the very best and most accurate narrations in his presence, and, thus, based on this, Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een would call them “thiqah”. And then later he would sometimes find out – either through his peers or from visiting that same narrator years later – that in fact he is dha’eef and he would say: “dha’eef” (unreliable). And he did not understand the idea that he was unstable in his criticism, nor did anyone else from the history of the scholars of Islaam. No one ever understood that he was contradicting himself or that he was unstable as a critic. Rather, they understood that his criticism was ongoing.

An example of this would be Aboo Hudbah Ibraaheem ibn Hudbah. Yahyaa ibn Ma’een called him “thiqah” (reliable), until he found out later that he was not honest, so he changed his stance based on what he learned about him, having no problem calling him thereafter kath-thaab khabeeth (a filthy liar)!

Criticism Revisited – Example #4

Similarly, look at this case – this is an example that might be shocking to some: Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. And what did Ahmad ibn Hanbal say about Yahyaa ibn Ma’een after he took the excuse during the trials of those people who were forcing the ummah to say the Qur’aan is created, may Allah grant us refuge?

When it came down to the last ‘ulamaa’ holding to the correct ‘aqeedah, Imaam Ahmad did not view it to be permissible for that last group of scholars to give in to the excuse of coercion. They had to remain firm and face whatever they face for the sake of upholding the proper ‘aqeedah. It could not be that the whole ummah just loses the ‘aqeedah because of individuals accepting the excuse of coercion, until there remained no ‘aqeedah. Rather, as a fardh kifaa’ee (a “community obligation”), some people must have upheld the correct ‘aqeedah and that is what he [Imaam Ahmad] held to and he never gave in. But Yahyaa ibn Ma’een gave in and took the excuse, and he has his excuse from the Book of Allaah, and no one blames him, and everyone makes tarahhum – O Allah! Have mercy on Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. And no one blames him or criticizes him for taking the excuse of coercion.

Ahmad ibn Hanbal was frustrated and expected better from him, being that he was from the best of the ummah. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said about him after that “لا يكتب حديثه” (his hadeeth are not to be written) meaning: he is now to be abandoned in hadeeth. After having recorded a million hadeeth – one million hadeeth! After Imaam Ahmad had said: “هذا رجل خلق الله لهذا شأن” (This is a man whom Allah has created for this field). And he said about him: “السماع منه شفاء لما في الصدور” (To hear hadeeth from Yahyaa ibn Ma’een is a cure for what ails the chests). These were his lavish praises for Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. His chosen companion for his journeys – the one he would say when he traveled without him, “I wish Yahyaa was here – he knows the hidden mistakes in the narrations. He would long for his companionship.

And after that fitnah, his stance on him was renewed. He never viewed that Yahyaa ibn Ma’een was immune from criticism because he had lavishly praised him. He never considered that now his criticising and warning against Yahyaa ibn Ma’een would be considered as “instability” or “self-contradiction.” Rather, his criticism of him was ongoing. Even if this case here is an example of a jarh (a criticism) that’s not accepted in reality, all things considered; it is an example of how they did not view anyone as being immune and no one said about Ahmad ibn Hanbal, “Look at this man! Yesterday Yahyaa ibn Ma’een is the imaam of hadeeth,” yesterday, “O! I wish I was with Yahyaa,” yesterday, “If I hear a hadeeth from him it is like a cure for what ails the heart.” And now today, “Abandoned, dropped!” – “What kind of foolishness is this?” No one in the history of Islaam ever said that about Ahmad ibn Hanbal.

Use Your Brain and Stop Parroting Claims Recklessly

Think and reflect. Look at the qawaa’id (the principles), the dhawaabit (the guidelines) understood by the critics of Islaam throughout history. And don’t say things out of your mouth that you just parrot from silly websites that are just people chatting away – students of knowledge who failed themselves, and failed their ummah, doomed to hide behind fake internet identities for the rest of their lives, condemned to writing under screen names on shameless forums of slander, pouring out the rancor and evil that is in their deadened hearts against Ahlus-Sunnah, the imaams of Ahlus-Sunnah, the scholars, the students of the scholars, and the callers to their way. They spend their lives chatting away, slandering, attacking, trying to find any possible avenue to discredit them. If you went to those websites, you would understand for sure that this is some kind of established principle: “Look at this self-contradiction of Shaykh Rabee’, look how he’s unstable,” and so on.

But put everything in its proper place: The critics of Islaam have their guidelines and their principles, and their criticism is ongoing. They know nothing of your invented principle that “Someone who’s been praised lavishly may not be dropped,” or, “Someone who’s been praised may not be criticized or warned against,” and so on. No one ever heard of this principle.

Apply This Innovated Principle to Your Own Selves

So keep this “principle” for yourselves – those of you who used to praise Shaykh Rabee’ and now you follow this gossip and this silly talk that’s from the cyber-kernels of the internet – Apply this to your own selves, that you used to speak well of the ‘ulamaa’ and now you are on those silly websites under screen names chatting away, blaming them for not following the principles that you invented, blaming the likes of Shaykh Rabee’ ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee – may Allah preserve him and grant his safety and security from the foolishness of your likes.

Blame your own selves! And apply your own principle to your own selves! The principle that no one from this ummah wants except you – that once you lavishly praise someone and once you make statements in favor of someone, to contradict that and to warn against him is “instability” and “foolishness”.

Rule upon yourselves with instability! Rule upon yourselves with self-contradiction and foolishness!

And keep your principles to yourself, and do not seek to apply them to people who have never agreed to them, have never heard about them, and have no interest in them!

And Allaah knows best.

From a Live Q&A Session from the Kitaab at-Towheed classes by Moosaa Richardson

Transcribed by Saadiq Owodunni, and amended by Moosaa Richardson

[Read the complete PDF version of this article]

Shaykh Ahmad Bazmool: A Notification to the Salafees about a Dangerous Issue Pertaining to MethodologyShaykh Ahmad Bazmool: A Notification to the Salafees about a Dangerous Issue Pertaining to Methodology

June 13, 2013

From:

http://embodyislam.org/2013/06/05/shaykh-ahmad-bazmool-a-notification-to-the-salafees-about-a-dangerous-issue-pertaining-to-methodology/

 

 

Shaykh Dr. Ahmad Bazmool, may Allah protect him, said:

I would like to alert my salafee brothers in every place about a dangerous issue. The issue is as follows: It’s them being fooled by everyone who begins to teach, and thinking that he is qualified enough to take knowledge from.

So, if they see that he’s a person who writes on salafee websites, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he has books, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he gives sermons, uses complex speech, and uses eloquent phrases, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he gathers the youth and encourages them to memorize at-taweed, al-Usool ath-Thalaathah, and that he teaches them these types of affairs, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he is a teacher at a university, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he teaches in the Prophet’s Masjid or the Haram in Makkah, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see that he’s a judge, they think he’s Salafee;

If they see him delivering lecturers, or appearing in the media, they think he’s Salafee;

All of these things are not sufficient, in reality, to the people of knowledge in order to establish the Salafiyyah of this man and that he is qualified to teach and to benefit his brothers.

All of these affairs don’t benefit him at all. Rather, these affairs are what we find those who stay away from and distance themselves from the sittings of the Salafee scholars using as a means to fool the general people into thinking they are Salafiyoon.

Fine. So what’s the path [we take]?

The way to know if knowledge should or shouldn’t be taken from a person is known by one of two ways:

The first: The scholars recommend and explicitly state: ‘So and So is Salafee and a student of knowledge; benefit from him.’

And I want to bring attention to a situation: If a Shaykh says: ‘So and So is Salafee,’ that doesn’t mean that he is qualified to teach. The Shaykh must mention two things: that he is Salafee and that he is qualified to teach.

We have seen some people fool the general people by saying a Shaykh has said that So and So is Salafee. Fine. Did he say he’s a scholar? Did he say he’s a student of knowledge?

Being Salafee is a level, and being a student of knowledge or a scholar is a higher level coupled with Salafiyyah. So, it is not befitting for us to be fooled by these types of situations.

Likewise [we shouldn’t be fooled] just because a person goes to Shaykh Rabee’s classes, or that he was in Shaykh Rabee’s house, or things similar to this that people are fooled by.

So, the first thing is that a scholar explicitly expresses a recommendation stating that he is upon the Salafee Manhaj and that he has knowledge;

The second way to know is that his state is well known to the scholars and students of knowledge, and that he has well known salafee stances. Likewise, the scholars generally praise him, aid him and help him.

This proves that he is from those who have been teaching and the scholars know about it and have remained silent about him; rather, they have spoken well of him and aided him. This proves, if Allah wills, that he is adhering to the truth.

As for other than these two things that we have mentioned, then beware beware. May Allah bless you. Don’t be fooled, Don’t be fooled by those who have internet forums or by some who possess some of the characteristics that the general people are fooled by.

I say, and I repeat: Those who have internet forums and some of those who have been put to trial may possibly use as a means the mention of Shaykh Rabee’, Shaykh ‘Ubayd,  Shaykh Muqbil al-Waadi’ee, may Allah have mercy on him, Shaykh an-Najmee, Shaykh Bin Baaz and Shaykh al-‘Uthaymeen so that they can lure in the general people; so after they lure them in, they inject the poison into them. (1)

For this reason, I also view that we should ask about these websites, should we visit them or not? Have they been recommended or not? This is because they are spreading a portion of knowledge, so either it is beneficial knowledge or harmful … (2)

__________

(1): [TN]: We find this on platforms such as twitter. A person may follow Bin Baaz, al-‘Uthaymeen, al-Luhaydaan, al-Fawzaan, etc. However, the reality is that their actions contradict their claim to following the methodology of these great scholars.

Examples of contradiction are a lack of giving sincere advice by warning against falsehood they fully recognize, ambiguous stances against those who implement the methodology of the Muslim Brotherhood, their views about Shaykh Rabee’, etc.

You find a clear contrast between them and the major scholars in issues such as these, for example.

(2): Source: http://www.ajurry.com/vb/showthread.php?t=33641

There is no status of the Arab over the non Arab except due to Taqwaa

June 7, 2013

Brief answer by Shaikh Bin Baz to a question

translated by Umm Khuzaimah – baarakallahu feehaa

http://www.wowinspirations.org/?p=2051

(for one of the definitions of taqwaa, see the file at the bottom of the link “taqee”)

 

 

Church Bombings are NOT from Islam

June 6, 2013

The statement of Shaikh Saalih Suhaymee, translated by Rasheed Barbee

Arabic/English audio

http://mtws.posthaven.com/church-bombings-are-not-from-islam

 

 

The Excuse of Ignorance

June 6, 2013

First, the brief statement of Shaikh Abdus Salaam al Burjis:

http://www.fatwaislam.com/fis/index.cfm?scn=fd&ID=168

 

Secondly, Shaikh Uthaymeen’s excellent explanation:

http://www.manhaj.com/manhaj/articles/xwouo-takfir-and-the-excuse-of-ignorance-shaykh-ibn-uthaymeen.cfm

 

Thirdly, Shaikh Rabee explains how the people of fitnah try to use this issue to split the Salafees:

http://www.manhaj.com/manhaj/articles/ecksy-takfir-and-the-excuse-of-ignorance-shaykh-rabee-bin-haadee.cfm