Archive for the ‘In Defense of the Scholars’ Category

Shaikh Rabee on Saudi’s war against the Houthi Raafidhah

September 3, 2015

The following was translated from:

The Noble Scholar Rabee bin Umair al Madkhalee said:

All the praise is for Allaah alone and may the salaah and the salaam be upon the Messenger of Allaah, his family, his Companions, and whoever follows his guidance.  As for what follows:

Indeed I, and every Muslim who is truthful in his religion, we direct abundant thanks to the Custodian of the two Noble Holy Masjids (in Makkah and Medinah): the King Salmaan bin Abdul ‘Azeez Aal as-Sa’ood – (we ask that) Allaah preserves him and guides his steps – due to what he has begun from directing precise military strikes against the Raafidah (Shia) who hate Islaam and the Muslims.  They (the Raafidah) are those who surpass the Jews and the Christians in warring against Islaam and the Muslims.  This is a war which they have inherited from their predecessors – the enemies of the noble Companions and (the enemies of) all who follow them (the Companions) in beliefs, statements, and actions.

And in doing this, O Custodian of the two Noble Sanctuaries, this is helping Islaam.  The Muslims will never forget this (action), nor will history.  I ask that Allaah helps you against your enemies, that He suppresses them, and that He cuts off their roots.  Indeed my Lord is The One Who hears and answers the supplication.

Likewise I ask that He, The Most High, grants success to the rulers of the Muslims who share in this honorable war that is for the purpose of safeguarding the beliefs, legislation, and rulings of Islaam – and as an obligation to their people to raise and educate them upon these tremendous fundamental principles.


The Scholars discuss Shaikh Uthaymeen’s stances and statements on various important issues

October 21, 2013



The following two links were used in the preparation of this brief article:

(from which the audio can be listened to and downloaded)



This is a meeting of the following Scholars:


Khaalid bin AbdurRahmaan bin Zakee (al Misree)


Ahmad bin Husain as-Subayee


Ahmad bin Umar Bazmool


Abul Abbaas Aadil Mansoor


Muhammad bin Uthmaan al Anjaree


To discuss and answer questions about Shaikh Uthaymeen’s stances and statements regarding certain statements and doubts that the people of innovations and desires bring for example:


What did he say about Shaikh Albaanee (and the accusation of Irjaa against him)?


What did he say about Shaikh Rabee?


Is Jarh and Ta’deel dead?


And they discuss his statements about the conditions of jihaad…


And much more.


The audio is almost two hours long, but very clear and extremely beneficial.











Shaikh Rabee: “I am not pleased that anyone has blind partisanship towards me, ever”.

July 5, 2013

Arabic text of full question and answer (as well as audio links) can be found here:


نصيحتي لكم أن تدرسوا ، إذا تُكُلم في شخص ،

أن تدرسوا عنه ، وتأخذوا أقوال الناقدين

وتفهمونها ،

وتتأكدون من ثبوتها ، فإذا تبين لكم ذلك

فليحكم الإنسان من منطلق الوعي والقناعة

لا تقليدا لهذا أو ذاك ولا تعصبا لهذا أو ذاك ،

ودعوا الأشخاص فلان وفلان ،

هذه خذوها قاعدة وانقلوها لهؤلاء المخالفين

ليفهموا الحقيقة فقط ويعرفوا الحق

ويخرجوا أنفسهم من زمرةالمتعصبين بالباطل ،

وأنا لا أرضى لأحد أن يتعصب لي أبدا

إذا أخطأت فليقل لي من

وقف لي على خطأ أخطأت .

بارك الله فيكم

ولا يتعصب لأحد هذا أو ذاك ،

لا يتعصب لخطأ ابن تيمية ولا ابن عبد الوهاب

ولا لأحمد بن حنبل ولا للشافعي ولا لأحد

إنما حماسه للحق واحترامه للحق

ويجب أن يكره الخطأ ويكره الباطل

My advice to you is that you study.  When a person is spoken about, that you learn about him.  And that you take the statements of those who examine critically and understand them (those statements).  And that you are certain about their (the statements) reliability.

So when that becomes clear to you, then let a person judge from the starting point of carefulness and conviction, not from blind following this one or that one, nor from blind  partisanship to this one or that one.  And leave the personalities of So-and-so and So-and-so. 

Take this as a fundamental principle and spread it to these opposers only so that they can understand the reality and know the truth and so they can extract themselves from the group of blind partisanship to falsehood.

And I am not pleased that anyone has blind partisanship towards me, ever.

If I make a mistake then let someone say something to me who will stop me from the mistake in which I have erred – baarakallahu feekum.

And do not have blind partisanship for this one nor that one – do not have blind partisanship for a mistake of Ibn Taymiyyah, nor Ibn Abdul Wahhaab, nor for (the mistake of) Ahmad ibn Hanbal, nor Ash-Shaafi’ee, nor anyone.

One’s enthusiasm is for the ttuth, and one’s reverence is for the truth. And it is obligatory for a person to dislike error and falsehood.

Shaikh Rabee on Shaikh Ahmad Bazmool – May 2013

July 4, 2013

The following is part of an conversation between Shaikh Rabee and Sameer bin Sa’eed from the 12th of Rajab 1434H (approximately the last third of May 2013 CE)

Arabic text from:


Download the Arabic text as a file:

Shaikh Rabee’s Praise for Shaikh Ahmad Bazmool – Arabic

Questioner: (we ask that) Allah treat you well, O Noble Shaikh

Shaikh Rabee: And you as well, Habeeby

Questioner: There is a question, O Shaikh, (we ask that) Allah treat you well – and I hope that you’ll give me permission to spread it after (you’ve answered) – (we ask that) Allah reward you

Shaikh Rabee: Ok, go ahead, what’s the question?

Questioner: There is a group from the youth which has appeared recently, speaking evil about Shaikh Ahmad bin Umar Baazmool

Shaikh Rabee: ok

Questioner: How do you comment on this matter – the defamation of Shaikh Ahmad bin Umar Bazmool – (we ask that) Allah preserve him – and what is your advice to these youths – (we ask that) Allah treats you well?

Shaikh Rabee: Firstly, it is sufficient for Shaikh Ahmad Bazmool the tazkiyyah he received from the Imaam who was from the major scholars of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah.  He was the Imaam, the Scholar of Hadeeth, the Scholar of Fiqh, the Lofty Allaamah, Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee. He (Shaikh an-Najmee) called him “Fadeelatush-Shaikh Dr.Ahmad bin Umar Bazmool”.  He (Shaikh an-Najmee) called him “Allaamah”. So what are these pitiful people doing criticizing a man whom an Imaam from the Imaams of Jarh and Ta’deel (i.e. Shaikh an-Najmee) praised?!  On top of that he was from the major scholars of the Imaams of Jarh and Ta’deel!  And he said (about Shaikh Bazmool) that he was an “Allaamah”

My advice to these (youths) is that they have good manners with the scholars.  (That they have good manners) regarding the one giving the tazkiyyah and the one receiving it. The one who gave the tazkiyyah was the Allaamah, the Imaam, Ahmad bin Yahya an-Najmee.  And the one receiving the tazkiyyah (from him) is the lofty scholar, the Mujaahid in spreading the Sunnah – Abu Umar Ahmad bin Umar bin Bazmool.  He is a pious servant from what I have seen and what I know, a Mujaahid for the Sunnah, one who openly brings the truth.  I ask that Allah increases him in tawfeeq.

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

June 13, 2013

Taken From:


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]

The Excuse of Ignorance

June 6, 2013

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


Secondly, Shaikh Uthaymeen’s excellent explanation:


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

It is Not a Proof That He Studied Under a Salafee Shaikh – Shaikh Ahmad Bazmool

May 12, 2013

Arabic Audio and Written English:



Does Jarh and Ta’deel Divide the Muslims in the West? – Shaikh Ubaid al Jaabiree

May 8, 2013



Benefits in manhaj from our Sitting with Shaikh Ahmad Baazmool Nov. 2012

November 22, 2012






Some excerpts:


Do Refutations Harden the Heart?

November 13, 2012

The following translation taken from:

Question to Sheikh Fawzan

Q: What is your view on the one who says the books of refutations harden the heart?

A: No, leaving off refutations is what hardens the heart, because the people will live upon error and misguidance so their hearts will become harden; but if the truth is clarified and falsehood is refuted then this is what softens the heart without doubt.

(Arabic text below)

السؤال – ما رأيكم في من يقول إن كتب الردود يقسي القلوب

لا! ترك الردود يقسي القلوب

لإن الناس يعيشون على الخطاء وعلى الضلال وتقسو القلوب

أما إذا بين الحق ورد الباطل فهذا مما يلين القلوب بلا شك

Listen to the audio

Question to Sheikh Rabee

Q: What do you say oh Sheikh to the one who says too much talk about minhaj hardens the heart?

A: Meaning that a lot of talk about the minhaj and correcting it and studying it hardens the heart, but calling to myths, and innovations, and misguidance and to the ideas of the khawarij softens the heart—Masha ALLAH!!! The dawa to the minhaj; calling to the book of ALLAH and to the sunna of the Messenger peace and blessings are upon him, and what is contained in the book of ALLAH and the sunna of the Messenger peace and blessing are upon him, from the belief system (aqeedah), and the acts of worship, and the actions, and correcting the minhaj is a great affair that must be done and there is a lot of misguidance concerning this minhaj. And no matter how much the person was to speak about it, his efforts would be minuscule in relation to what is required in this affair. Now when we speak about the minhaj does it reach every Muslim?!!

But speech upon the methodology of Tabligh (Jamaat) or upon the methodology of the Muslim brotherhood, or the methodology of the people who are astray or the methodology of the people of bida, or myths, or deviated creeds and politics and socialism and ideological beliefs, this Masha ALLAH softens the heart!!!! Is this a correct statement? This foolish statement is not able to stand up to the true Islamic minhaj, may ALLAH bless you.

The following summary translation by a student taken from:

Question to the Mufti Shaykh Abdul Aziz Ali Shaykh:

Question: What do you say concerning the one who says: Verily refutations against the people of innovations and misguidance, was not from the practice of the Salaf, and the books of refutations are not befitting to be distributed except between the students of knowledge and they should not be distributed to other than them?

Answer: Refutations upon the people of innovations is from jihad in the cause of Allah, and protection for the legislation of Islam from having something attached to it that is not from it. Thus authoring the books, printing them, and distributing them is correct, and it is calling to the truth, and jihad in the cause of Allah.

Thus whoever presumes that printing the books and spreading the books that refute the innovators is an innovation, then he is in error; because Allah the Exalted said: Oh Prophet strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be severe against them. (Chapter 66 verse 9)
Therefore jihad is with the hand, the tongue, and wealth. From jihad with the tongue is to defend the legislation of Islam and to protect it from every fabrication from the doubts and falsehood; included in this is warning from innovation and calling to the truth.

For this reason Imam Ahmad and other than him produced books warning from the innovators. Imam Ahmad authored a treatise entitled “The refutation upon the hypocrites.” So he clarified their doubts and answered every doubt they came with. Al Bukari-may Allah have mercy upon him-authored his book “The actions of the servants are created”. And other than them from the Imams of Islam have authore
d refutations upon the innovators and rebutted their falsehood and established the arguments against them.

Also Shaykh of Islam (ibn Taymiyyah) authored refutations upon the rafidah in his well known book, “The methodology of the Prophetic Sunnah in demolishing the statements of the shia and the qadariya”, and he clarified the falsehood and misguided they are upon.

(The following is the Arabic text from here: )

السؤال :ما تقولون في قول القائل : إن الردود على أهل البدع والزيغ لم تكن ديدن السلف، وإن كتب الردود لا ينبغي أن تنشر إلا بين طلبة العلم، ولا تنشر بين غيرهم ؟

الجواب :الردود على أهل البدع من الجهاد في سبيل الله، ومن حماية الشريعة من أن يلصق بها ما ليس منها، فتأليف الكتب وطبعها ونشرها هنا حق ودعوة للحق وجهاد في سبيل الله، فمن زعم أن طبع الكتب ونشرها في الرد على المبتدعين أمر مبتدع فإنه على خطأ، لأن الله جلا وعلا قال { يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ جَاهِدِ الْكُفَّارَ وَالْمُنَافِقِينَ وَاغْلُظْ عَلَيْهِمْ }.
والجهاد يكون باليد، ويكون باللسان، ويكون بالمال ومن الجهاد باللسان الذب عن هذه الشريعة وحمايتها من كل ما لفق بها من شبه وأباطيل، ومن ذلك التحذير من البدع والدعوة إلى الحق ولهذا صنف الإمام أحمد وغيره كتبًا حذروا فيها من المبتدعين فالإمام أحمد ألف رسالة الرد على الزنادقة وبين شبههم وأجاب عن كل شبهة، والبخاري رحمه الله ألف كتابه خلق أفعال العبادوغيرهم من أئمة الإسلام ألفوا في الرد على المبتدعة ودمغ باطلهم وإقامة الحجج عليهم، وكذلك ألف شيخ الإسلام في الرد على الرافضة كتابه المعروف منهاج السنة النبوية في نقض كلام الشيعة والقدريةوبين ما هم عليه من باطل وضلال .

 جريدة الرياض السعودية : الجمعة 4 المحرم 1424 هـ العدد 12674 – السنة الأربعون بواسطة

الفتاوى المهمة في تبصير الأمة

  فضيلة الشيخ عبد العزيز آل الشيخ