Sallaam Ibn Abee Mutee (rahimahullaah) said:
”A man from the people of desires said to Ayyoub As-Sakhtiyaanee: ”O Abaa-Bakr, I want to ask you about some statement”, so Ayyoub walked away and started gesturing with his finger, saying: ”Not even half a statement.” [Reported by Imaam Al-Aajuree in Ash-Sharee-ah 1/440]
Ibn Abbaas (radiyallaahu-anhu) said:
”Do not sit with the people of desires; for indeed it causes sickness of the heart.” [Reported by: Imaam Al-Aajuree in Ash-Sharee-ah: 1/453].
In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy
Ali Halabi’s False Utilisation of Al-Allaamah Abdul-Muhsin’s (may Allaah preserve him) Treatise Titled: Rifqan Ahlus Sunnah Bi-Ahlis Sunnah
On page 38 onwards [in the Arabic PDF in this link: http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=122127 ] the discussion about the book Rifqan Ahlus Sunnah Bi-Ahlis Sunnah begins.
Shaikh Abdul Muhsin (may Allaah preserve him) wrote Rifqan Ahlus Sunnah Bi-Ahlis Sunnah to warn against the fitnah of unjustified boycotting and declaring others innovators without a valid reason. The book was a refutation against the Haddaadees-the followers of Faaleh Al-Harbi-because Faaleh pre-occupied himself with the fitnah of unjustified boycotting and declared some people from Ahlus Sunnah innovators without a valid reason.
Shaikh Abdul Muhsin clearly stated that from the innovations in this era, is putting people to the test by way of personalities, and that this fitnah occurred amongst a very small group of people, who disparaged their brothers from Ahlus Sunnah and declared them innovators. This resulted in unjustified boycotting, disassociation and prevented Ahlus Sunnah from benefitting from those who have been boycotted and declared innovators without a valid reason. The Shaikh stated that the head of this fitnah of unjustified boycotting was a student of his at the Islamic University and that he graduated between the year 1395AH—1396AH. The Shaikh also mentioned that this former student of his is not known to be pre-occupied with knowledge, such as giving lessons and writing books etc. [For further details see: Kitaab Wa-Rasaa-il Abdul-Muhsin Bin Hamad Al-Abbaad Al-Badr (Daar At-Tawheed: Vol: 6 page: 320-325)]
The Deceit of the Innovators [Maribi and Halabi]
However, Maribi, his followers and those affected by him utilised this treatise of Shaikh Abdul Muhsin as a protection through which they sought to cover up the affair of everyone that claimed to be from Ahlus Sunnah. They utilised this treatise to cover up the affairs of such false claimants, even if such people either held principles that were in opposition to the Methodology of the Salafus Saaleh or they had a number of deviations in Manhaj. They also utilised the Shaikh’s treatise as a cover up to reject every disparagement, warning and boycotting, even if there were sound evidences showing that the person upon whom those judgements were passed against was deserving of it. Therefore, what Maribi, Halabi and others intended from this treatise of Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin is not what Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin intended. Reader, consider the following:
If Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin intended what Maribi, Halabi and others intended from this treatise, then Shaikh Abdul Muhsin would not have taken a stern stance against Adnaan Ar’oor; because the Shaikh did warn against Adnaan, and advised that one is neither to sit with him nor attend his gatherings; whereas Maribi and Halabi consider Adnaan to be from Ahlus Sunnah. So if this treatise of the Shaikh was written for the reason that Halabi and Maribi made it to be, then why did the Shaikh not employ leniency towards Adnaan Ar’oor. Therefore, Halabi, Maribi and their likes are forced to affirm one of these two affairs:
[1]Either they say that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin opposed his own appealed for leniency towards Ahlus Sunnah, because he commanded that Adnaan be boycotted; [2] ”Or that the Shaikh’s treatise was a warning against unjustified boycotting and declaring others innovators without a valid reason.” Reader, there is no doubt that the treatise of the Shaikh was a warning against the second point, because if that were not the case he would not have issued that severe warning against Adnaan Ar’oor and advised that he is to be boycotted.
Question:
I am a woman with hair on my two hands and some on my face, and I am unable to remove all of it; so I colour it with a colour that is of the same colour of (my) skin; is this impermissible?
Answer:
There is no harm in this. It is neither impermissible nor something (one) is withheld from. The likes of these affairs do not cause (something blameworthy). It is permissible regardless whether you colour it with what matches the colour of skin.
[Al-Fataawaa Wad-duroos Fil-Masjidil Haraam of shaikh Abdullaah bin Muhammad Bin Humaid: page: 159-160]
The Muslim scholars hold a consensus that it is not permissible to shave (one’s) beard, and likewise it is (not permissible) to shorten it; except what has been narrated from Ibn Umar (radiyallaahu-anhu) that when he used to perform hajj or umrah, he would take hold of his beard (i.e. a fist) and cut the excess. As for the moustache, it is obligatory to trim it. Indeed, the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wsallam) said:
”Trim the moustache and leave the beard, and be different from the fire worshippers.” [Reported by Bukhaari: No: 5892]
[Al-Fataawa-Wad-duroos Fil-Masjid al-Haraam: Page:157 of Shaikh Abdullaah Bin Muhammad Bin Humaid (rahimahullaah)]
There is no harm in that. There is no prohibition for you to make wudhu with zamzam water; rather the difference of opinion amongst the scholars is whether it is allowed to make istinjaa with Zamzam water? The majority of the scholars say that it is allowed, but the hanbalees say that it is something hated. However, there is no harm in it even if one did so–Inshaa-Allaah–if one did not find other than zamzam water whilst being in need of water. As for making wudhu (with zamzam water) and likewise ghusul, there is no prohibition or harm in that.
[Source: Al-Fataawaa Wad-duroos Fil-Masjidil haraam of Shaikh Abdullaah Bin Muhammad Bin Humaid (rahimahullaah) page: 148]
Abu Mu-aawiyyah (Abdullaah al-Gambi)
Question:
Many people write the salutation to the Prophet with (Saad) or with (Saad, Laam, Ain and Meem) as an abridgement. What is the ruling on this?
Answer:
Some of the scholars have cautioned against this. It is not befitting, and it is falling short in fulfilling the rights of the Prophet, as pointed out by a group of those amongst the scholars—those who author (books) on the subject matter of the science of hadeeth. It is not befitting to limit the (salutation to the Prophet in writing) with Saad, Laam, Aim or with Saad alone; rather it should be written completely [i.e. صلى الله عليه وسلم ]
Al-Markaz As-Salafi
[Source:Al-Fataawaa Wad-Duroos Fil Masjid Al-Haraam of Shaikh Abdullaah Bin Muhammad Bin Humaid: page:140-141]
Questioner:
Saaleh Ibn Awwaab al Mughaamesee; the Imaam of Masjid Quba, and he has lessons in Tafseer (explanation of the Qur’aan)?
Shaikh Ubaid:
This man is ignorant. I do not advice that knowledge be acquired from him, because he is from those who are not specialized in the knowledge of the Islamic Legislation, with regards to what has reached me (about him). This is the first (affair).
Secondly: The man is a caller to Tasawwuf (i.e. the way of the soofees), and what is indicative of that is (his transmission of that weak and false) story of the deceased and buried (people). And I have refuted it in Sahab (i.e.sahab.net) with the title: At-Taqreeraat Al-Mastoorah. This story’s chain of transmission is perilous. It was obtained from one of the scholars of Tasawwuf—the extremists, and there are loathsome (things) in this story. So whoever wishes can refer to it.
And it has reached me that he says that it is permissible to cease the call to Tawheed and the warning against shirk for the sake of unity. He was preceded in this (view) by Qaradaawee, and Qaradaawee is a leader in the furthest depths of misguidance, and he is not upon guidance. He has (affairs, views) of disbelief. And had he (i.e. Al-Mughaamisee) stated this statement of Qaradaawee, he would have committed disbelief. Na’am.
Therefore, it is obligatory to exercise caution against Mughaamisee—Saaleh Ibn Awwaab—the Imaam of Masjid Quba, just as it is obligatory to exercise caution against Qaradaawee, and to warn against the two men.
Questioner:
Jazaakallaahu Khayran Wabaaraka Feekum Yaa Shaikh As-salaamu alaykum warahmatullaahi wabarakaatuhu
Shaikh Ubaid:
Wa alaykas salaam warahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Al-Markaz As-Salafi
See Arabic Answer of Shaikh Ubaid here:
This is among the innovations that has no basis. We have been commanded to follow the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam), (so) follow and do not innovate. ”Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow.” [Ahzaab: ayah: 21]. We neither know of the Messenger touching the kabah’s cloth nor his companions, and had it been a good thing, they would have preceded us in it. Therefore, touching the kabah’s cloth or the two walls of the Messenger’s compartment or the netting on it, then all of this is an innovation that has no basis in the Islamic legislation. [Al-Fataawaa Wad-duroos Fil Masjidil Haraam: Shaikh Abdullaah Bin Muhammad Bin Humaid (rahimahullaah): Page 130]
Al-Markaz As-Salafi
Let us take a moment to be clear on the legislated ranks of wilaayah in a marriage contract. The following are the order of ranks, each of them being sound-minded adult men of the same religion:
1. Father
2. Grandfather (from the father’s side)
3. Great Grandfather (from the father’s side)
4. Son
5. Grandson
6. Great Grandson
7. Oldest Full Brother
8. Next Oldest Full Brother (and so on…)
9. Oldest Half-Brother (from the Father’s side)
10. Next Oldest Half-Brother (from the Father’s side, and so on…) [1]
11. Oldest son of a Full Brother (Nephew)
12. Next Oldest Son of Full Brother (Nephew)
13. Oldest Son of a Half-Brother from the Father’s side (Nephew)
14. Next Oldest Son of a Half Brother from the Father’s side (Nephew)
15. Grandson of Full Brother (oldest first)
16. Grandson of Half-Brother from the Father’s side (oldest first)
17. Oldest Paternal Uncle
18. Next Oldest Paternal Uncle (and so on…)
19. Oldest Son of Paternal Uncle (Cousin) [2]
20. Next Oldest Son of Paternal Uncle (Cousin, and so on…)
21. Oldest Great (Paternal) Uncle
22. Next Oldest Great (Paternal) Uncle (and so on…) [3]
Important: Each of the above mentioned walees has the right to appoint someone on his behalf to act on his behalf. So in this case, if the father appoints the brother to act as the walee, then he is the official and accepted walee, even in the presence of the grandfather, since the brother is the father’s chosen trustee and takes his place.
After these relatives have been exhausted, then a woman may seek to appoint a walee from outside her family through the Muslim authorities.
From the benefits of this short article is an important review of the rankings of walees for marriage, as quoted below (read the article at the URL above for more benefit): http://www.bakkah.net/en/dont-play-games-with-wilaayah-the-right-of-being-the-walee-for-a-marriage.htm