Skip to main content

[PART 3] Observations on some of the inappropriate statements of Okasha Abdallaah

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Ali Hassan Al Halabi, Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Methodology - 'Manhaj'.

All praise be to Allaah, and may His salaah and Salaam be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.  To proceed:

Allaah (The Most High) said:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ”

”O you who believe! Avoid much suspicion, indeed some suspicions are sins’’

Reader: When one refers to the explanation of this ayah, he finds the likes of Imaam as-Saa’di (rahimahullaah) reminding us that Allaah has forbidden much evil suspicion towards the believers, because when evil suspicion settles in the heart, it may lead one to utter that which is unbefitting and impermissible.

 

Brother Okasha makes a claim without providing tangible evidences

He said: The Majority of what we call Salafiyyah is nothing else but Philadelphia, and that is Ainul Hizbiyyah (hizbiyyah in actuality), and you are not accepted if you are not part of it

In the lecture of brother Okasha Abdallaah titled Aqeedah Salafiyyah, he threw this above accusation at his adversaries in Philadelphia; however he provided no tangible proofs to back up his claims.  He stated that the majority of what is called Salafiyyah is nothing else but Philadelphia and that is hizbiyyah in actuality, and you are not accepted if you are not part of it.  He also stated that if you bring a scholar from overseas and he is not from the country that people expect, they reject him; and this Salafiyyah is a kind of hizbiyyah; and that if we do not know this scholar, they are not part of it.

 

Reader: Firstly: The Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: “The burden of proof is upon the claimant’’.  Shaikh Saaleh Al-Fawzaan (hafidha-hullaah) says that if this door of  making claims without proof were left open, then corruption and transgression would have appeared amongst the people, and everyone who desires something from an another person would make a claim.”

Indeed it was incumbent upon him to make a mention of those individuals, groups and organizations guilty of such hizbiyyah in Philadelphia with proofs; because he made a general statement that included everyone who ascribes him/herself to Salafiyyah in Philadelphia.

It is incumbent upon brother Okasha to provide clear proofs to make manifest the affair of those guilty of the grave crime of that Ainul hizbiyyah in Philadelphia; because there are those brothers who are well-known for their clarity upon the Manhajus Salafi.

It is incumbent upon brother Okasha to clarify and detail, as Imaam Ibnul Qayyim (rahimahullaah) stated in An-Nooniyyah that one must detail and distinguish, because unrestricted and general speech devoid of clarification and distinction has caused corruption and led the views and intellects astray in every era.

Shaikh Saaleh Al-Fawzaan (hafidha-hullaah) said that there has to be detailed explanation and the one who is not proficient in detailing (an affair) should keep quiet, because benefit is not acquired from his speech. And every time error occurs its cause is due to an absence of detailed explanation between truth and falsehood. So there has to be detailed explanation and distinction and an absence of mixing up (affairs). Indeed, it may be that there is something of truth and falsehood in an opponent’s statement, so all of it is neither deemed to be false nor truth, rather a distinction is to be made between its truth and falsehood. Therefore, all of it is neither rejected nor accepted; rather a distinction is made between truth and correctness and the falsehood and error in it. And if you are not proficient in detailing (an affair), then you should not enter into this arena. [For further details see: At-Ta’leeqaat Al-Mukhtasar Alaa Al-Qaseedah an-Nooniyyah: Vol: 1 (page: 216)]

Therefore, brother Okasha has to detail, explain and distinguish.  He has to produce tangible evidences to support his claims; otherwise his general and unrestricted statements about Salafiyyah in Philadelphia will be viewed as statements that are tantamount to evil suspicion, false accusation, oppression and slander against all those brothers in Philadelphia who are well-known for their clarity upon the Manhaj—those brothers at Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah that have links with the Salafi Mashaa-yikh, such as the likes of Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh Zaid, Shaikh Ubaid, Shaikh Ramzaan and others—those brothers who are visited by the Salafi students and callers, such as the likes of Ustaadh Abu Khadeejah, Ustaadh Amjad Rafiq, Ustaadh Abu Idrees, Ustaadh Anwar Wright, Ustaadh Kashif Khan, Ustaadh Taalib Abdullaah and others.

Secondly: The Salafi mashaayikh who are known to have a strong connection with the Salafi Masaajid and Centres in the West do not know of any hizbiyyah from those brothers at Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah.

Those brothers are not known to be upon the methodology of the false claimants to salafiyyah, such as the likes of the Qutubiyyah, the Surooriyyah and the Haddaadiyyah.  Likewise, they are not known to be upon the methodology of the Mubtadia such as the likes of Abul Fitan Al-Maribi, Muhammad Al-Maghraawi, Ali Halabi and others.

Those brothers are not known to cooperate with the people who are known for their erroneous views, such as the likes of Bilaal Philips, Abu Muslimah, Abu Usaamah, Shadeed Muhammad, Ali Tameemi, Zaraboozo and others.

Those brothers do not co-operate with ahlul bidah wal-ahwaa.  They do not promote the innovated principles of Hasan al-banna and ikhwaan al muslimeen;

They do not uphold the false Manhaj of Muwaazanah; they do not defend Sayyid Qutb the abuser of the Sahaabah; They do not reject the Jarh Mufassar of the scholars in order to defend figureheads and personalities of bidah.

They do not endorse the false principles: “we do not disparage but we only correct mistakes’’ and “Let’s not make our differing about someone else a reason for differing amongst ourselves.’’

They do not hold onto the mistakes and wrong Ijtihaadaat of the scholars in order to maintain allegiance to a hizb or to reject evidences.

They do not bring doubts in the narrations of the trustworthy narrators; they do not make a differentiation between Aqeedah and Manhaj when the scholars pass judgements against the people of bidah.

They do not call to political parties and they do not hold the evil and false view that the salaf differed in Aqeedah.

They do not revile the scholars of ahlus Sunnah in this time and make the people flee from them; they do not defend those who call the Sahaabah ghuthaa-iyyah.

They do not rush to include the misguided sects, parties and organizations into the arena of ahlus Sunnah; they do not call to the unity of religions, democracy and elections.

 

Yaa Okhasha! It is incumbent upon you to give details, distinguish and clarify, otherwise your general statements about salafiyyah in Philadelphia are nothing else but statements that are tantamount to speculation, oppression, lies, slander, exaggeration and evil suspicion.

 

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said:

“Speech about the people has to be with knowledge and justice, and not by way of ignorance and oppression.’’ [Minhaajus Sunnah: 4/337]

 

Likewise, your speech is very vague and implies the following:

(a)       That all those who ascribe to salafiyyah in Philadelphia are hizbiyyoon

(b)      Those who share the same methodology with those whom you have declared to be upon hizbiyyah are also hizbiyyoon.

So therefore, you should clarify who you intend by your statements so that people are not confused.

 

Indeed, the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: “A person is upon the deen of his friend, so let each of you look at whom he befriends’’ [Al-Ibaanah: 2/439].  Therefore Yaa Okasha! Clarify whether those people visited by the salafi Mashaayikh at Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah are included in your statements or not!

Ibn Mas-ood (radiyallaahu-anhu) said: Indeed a person walks alongside and accompanies the one he loves and who is like him’’ [Al-Ibaanah: 2/476]. Therefore Yaa Okasha! Clarify whether those people visited by the salafi Mashaayikh at Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah are included in your statements or not!

Al-A’mash (rahimahullaah) said: ‘’They (salaf) did not used to ask anything more about a person after having asked about three affairs: Who he walks with, who he enters upon (i.e. visits) and who he associates with amongst the people.’’ [Al-Ibaanah: 2/478].  Therefore Yaa Okasha! Clarify whether those people visited by the salafi Mashaayikh at Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah are included in your statements or not!

 

If you do not clarify, distinguish, detail and provide tangible evidences for your statements and claims with regards to this affair, then know that your statements and claims are tantamount to slander, lies, exaggeration, fabrication, speculation, evil suspicion and defamation!

 

And Allaah knows best

Next topic: Brother Okasha said:

If you bring a scholar from overseas and he is not from the country that people expect they reject him, and this Salafiyyah is a kind of hizbiyyah, and that if we do not know this scholar, they are not part of it

The Historical Influences & Effects of the Methodologies of The Muslim Brotherhood

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Refutations, Seeking Knowledge.

The Historical Influences and Effects of the Methodologies of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon Upon Salafiyyah (6 Articles)

Source:www.salafipublications.com

Article ids: MNJ180001; MNJ180002

MNJ180003; MNJ180004;Article ID : MNJ180005;Article ID : MNJ180008

A Response to the Deceit of Abu Usaamah Khalifah and His Lying Tongue– Salafipublications

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq'.

http://www.salafitalk.com/threads/1216-A-Response-to-the-Deceit-of-Abu-Usaamah-Khalifah-and-His-Lying-Tongue

Tameem Ad-Daari (radiyallaahu-anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: ”Indeed, the religion is Naseehah, the religion is Naseehah, the religion is Naseehah; they said: To who O Messenger of Allaah? He said: ‘’To Allaah, His Messenger, to the leaders of the Muslims and their common people.”[Reported by Muslim]

Al-Allaamah Saaleh Al-Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) said:

The meaning of ‘Naseehah’ is Al-Khuloos (purity). It is said that something is ‘Naasih’ meaning: It is free from deceit. And it is said: ‘A-sa-lun Naasihun’ (Pure Honey), ‘La-ba-nun Naasihun (Pure Milk), meaning: Free from deceit and bad mixtures. This is how it is (with regards) to the religion of Islaam, for indeed it is free from every falsehood and from every deception, cheating and treachery. It is a pure religion (and) an unadulterated religion.

Likewise, the Muslim’s apparent (affairs) are the same as his hidden (affairs), upon purity and safe from evil manners, treachery, betrayal and other than that. As for the one who cheats, deceives and plots, or his apparent (affairs) are in opposition to his hidden (affairs), this trait is not from the Religion. The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) confined the religion within (Naseehah –purity-sincerity), and the confinement of something necessitates that something else cannot enter into it. [For Further details see: Minhatur-Rabbaaniyyah Fee Sharhi Ar-ba’een An-Nawawiyyah: page: 112].

http://www.salafitalk.com/threads/1216-A-Response-to-the-Deceit-of-Abu-Usaamah-Khalifah-and-His-Lying-Tongue

Look At How Abu Usaamah–The Greenlane Khateeb of Desires– Started In 2002

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Methodology - 'Manhaj'.

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah):

The legislated affairs of Islaam are nourishments of the hearts; and when the hearts are nourished with innovation, giving more virtue/excellence to the Sunan does not remain in them, so they come to be in the position of one who nourishes (himself) with filth. [Iqtidaa Siraat Al-Mustaqeem: 1/281]

 

Abdul Azeez Bin Rabee (rahimahullaah) said:

Ataa (rahimahullaah) was asked about something, so he said: ”I don’t know.” He (Abdul Azeez) said, (then) it was said to him (i.e. Ataa), ”Do you not speak about it with your own opinion?” He (Ataa) said: I feel shy of Allaah (The Mighty and Majestic) to be (slave and worshipper) in the earth with my opinion/s. [Reported by Imaam Daarimee in his sunan: 1/108]

===============================================================================

Look at how Abu Usaamah -The Greenlane Khateeb of Desires– Started in 2002 

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=21&Topic=1153

Clarification 

The article in the above link is a detailed clarification of the falsehood of abu usaamah’s stances in the early days and his defence of the innovator Abul Hasan al-Maribi; also in the article Faaleh al Harbi is mentioned as one of the main defenders of the correct salafi positions, but the reader must be informed that Faaleh deviated thereafter and traversed the methodology of the extremist haddaadiyyah, so the scholars refuted him.

See link for a clarification

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=25&Topic=3799

===============================================================================

Abu Mu-aawiyyah (Abdullaah Al-Gambi)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Catastrophe of Logic: Sacrificial Blood

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Innovations In Islam (Bidah), Refutations, Seeking Knowledge.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على اله و صحبه و من والى

We demonstrate our gratitude to Allah subhaanahu wa ta’ala for the blessing he has bestowed upon us in decreeing for us life to witness another blessed month of Ramadan. For indeed it is a time of goodness, and an opportunity to obtain righteous actions; a month in which Allah subhaanahu wa ta’ala bestowed upon the believers blessings in times that have come to pass, and does not cease to bestow upon them in times that are present and to come. For indeed in this blessed month Allah revealed the Qur’an as a guidance and criterion to His slaves, just as Allah honoured Islam and its people and disgraced disbelief and its followers in the Battle of Badr.

In recognition of the blessings of this month, it was from the mannerisms of the Salaf as-Saalih to strive in magnifying the benefit from the time presented to them. Hence, they would reduce their engagement in necessary worldly affairs in order that they may create for themselves abundant periods of times for sitting in the houses of Allah, and so they would gather and study together the Qur’an. Indeed they were devoted and earnest in guarding over the time Ramadan presented, by way of standing in prayer in the nights and fasting and reciting the Qur’an and supplicating to Allah during the days.

We therefore advise ourselves and noble readers to strive in this blessed month with that which will be of benefit in this life and the Hereafter, and to distance ourselves from all forms of futile speech and activity. Undoubtedly, those who have but a miniscule share from knowledge of this religion will continue to engage in pitiful and detestable activities, firstly as a further degradation to their own obtuse and deficient intellects, and secondly as a degradation to the organisations they speak on behalf of, who – for reasons bewildering and unknown, and from what is becoming apparent, deceptive – fail to declare their innocence of such dismal and deplorable individuals despite the request for a public clarification directed to them…it would appear Masjid Sunnah have encountered undue “complications” in being able to free themselves of their infatuated disgraceful defender?

In any case, refusal to free themselves of the fallen “dawaman” and failure to openly clarify that he is a pitiful miskeen who is working alone and falsification of the claim that he is in association with Masjid Sunnah, will indicate Abu Bilal was in fact attempting to deceive us with his apparent declaration of innocence in order to preserve the dignity of Masjid Sunnah. It is materialising that in reality it is an alliance between themselves at Masjid Sunnah and their racist, abusive “dawaman” with an intellectual capacity inferior to that of an average child as we demonstrated, thereupon the disgrace and humiliation of the “dawaman” they so desired to keep a “secret” and separate from themselves to maintain credibility will befall them.

How amazing is the affair of the hizbiyyeen, wandering through an intricate maze incapable of discovering the route to escape, rather at every attempt and turn they find the avenues closed before them; hence upon this despondent and disconsolate state when all hope of liberation has been relinquished, no other escape is presented to their corrupt minds other than to dishonestly and deviously cut though the hedges of the maze in an attempt to create a deceitful and fraudulent avenue to saviour, such is the deception that is witnessed. Whereas Ahlus-Sunnah, the Salafiyyoon walhamdulillah are not in need of deception nor such unscrupulous methods, since the truth is accepted and acknowledged as it is presented; the truth regarding the deviance of Abul-hasan Al-Ma’riby, the truth regarding the deviance of Ali Hasan al-Halaby, the truth regarding the deviance of Al-Maghrawy, the truth regarding the deviance of Abu Osama ad-Dhahaby; hence the route and pathway to success is as clear as the sun in the sky and no need presents itself to create deceptive alternatives.

Perhaps upon realising the reality of the evidences against the methodology they wish to tread upon, no feasible alternative to escape from the maze could be discovered other than the perverted creation of a vile, despicable, ignoble, cowardly racist “secret identity” who would cut the hedges for them; only for them to later claim that the individual who cut the hedges is not from them [!].

It is of no surprise that such disgrace and humiliation has befallen these individuals if they continue upon the defence of such humiliated cowardly “secret identities” and refuse to free themselves of them, although privately backstabbing their racist defender in an act of treachery….or perhaps a failed attempt at deception? The cowardly “secret identity” who abuses others in the most abhorrent manner in associating one of the brothers to the lineage of abdullah ibn ubayy ibn salool and george bush….we seek refuge in Allah from the tongues of such debase and despicable individuals, individuals who have reached levels of disgrace beyond description with such behaviour. The cowardly “secret identity” who racially abuses one of the brothers and then makes a feeble attempt to disguise his shame and humiliation by providing a “lol” response with another racist comment Allahu Akbar. The cowardly “secret identity” that alleges al-Markas as-Salafi are upon the incorrect methodology and yet his own revolting behaviour and tongue deem it necessary for any sane individual who wishes to protect himself and his religion to distance himself and completely disregard the corrupt speech circulated via email under the cowardly “dawaman” secret identity.

We thank Allah that the reality of the humiliated, disgraced, and in reality somewhat sorrowful racist “dawaman” has become apparent to all readers. We still await for Masjid Sunnah to clarify their relationship – is it, as Abu Bilal claimed, that they are innocent of him and he is an isolated miskeen alone with his laptop struggling to find suitable uses for his time other than to disgrace himself, or is he actually an ally? Clearly the question creates a difficult scenario for Masjid Sunnah….perhaps a greater level of thought and intellect was required before the creation of the “dawaman”?

It is for Masjid Sunnah to decide; sacrifice Abu Bilal and declare him a liar in his statement that they are free of the “dawaman” and therefore accept their share of the humiliation that has befallen this “dawaman”, or sacrifice the “dawaman” and save Abu Bilal by affirming what Abu Bilal stated in his declaration of innocence of him, and therefore declare “dawaman” null and void, rendering his emails for direction to the “junk” sections of the recipients.

SubhaanAllah, amazing are the thought processes of those incessant upon aligning themselves with and defending the innovators, whilst waging war against the salafiyyeen and belittling the detailed refutations of scholars, the likes of our noble Shaikh Rabee’, Shaikh Ahmad an-Najmy and many others…..a true catastrophe of logic.

We ask Allah to make us steadfast in this blessed month and keep us firm upon the correct methodology and to distance us from the deceit and deception witnessed by opposers to the pure methodology.

Shaykh Fawzaan: What is meaning of the statement of Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah)…. UPDATED

Written by Amjad Khan on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Articles, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Fatawa-Rulings, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations.

Shaykh Fawzaan was asked:

Question:

What is meaning of the statement of Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah “Whoever opposes the ijmaa (consensus of the scholars) then indeed he has disbelieved”?

Answer:

Yes! Allah said this:

{And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believer’s way, We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell – What an evil destination!}        Surah An-Nisa’ Verse 115

And this is an evidence upon the one who opposes the ijmaa, that indeed he has disbelieved.

 

Source: http://www.alfawzan.af.org.sa/node/2376

Abu Abdir Razzaaq Amjad

 

Note: Please refer to the following link for further explanatory articles regarding the principles of establishing Kufr(disbelief)  upon a person who may have done an act of Kufr but in one situation he HAS disbelieved and in another scenario he HAS NOT disbelieved.

The Principles of Takfir

Beautiful Clarification by Ustaadh Abu Khadeejah on Shaikh Rabee & Shaikh Abdul Muhsin

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Ali Hassan Al Halabi, Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Seeking Knowledge.

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy

On 01/04/2003, Ustaadh Abdul Waahid [Abu Khadeejah (hafidha-hullaah)] wrote:

As for the point concerning Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad, hafidhahullaah, then the following important comments can be made as well as important principles established

1. The Shaykh is scholar of the Sunnah and Salafiyyah. An individual who has strived for many years teaching the Sunnah of our Messenger, ‘alayhi salaatu was-salaam, to the Ummah. We make du’aa for him and speak only good of him as do the rest of the Scholars.

2.That we recognise that that there is no individual in this Ummah, other than the Messenger of Allaah, ‘alayhi salaatu was-salaam, that can encompass every aspect of completion in every field of knowledge that Allaah has revealed. Bearing this in mind, any individual can err. The less knowledge you have of the legislation, the more you err. The more shar’ee knowledge you have, the less you err. The Messenger of Allaah, ‘alayhi salaatu was-salaam, mentioned in a hadeeth, “Idhaa hakama Haakimu, fajtahada, fa asaaba falahu ajraan. Wa idha hakama fa akhta’a, falahu ajrun waahid” – meaning – “When a judge makes a judgement and he makes ijtihaad and he is correct, he gets two rewards. And if he judges and is incorrect, he receives a single reward” (Hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah reported by Bukhaaree and Muslim).And these rewards are for the ‘ulemah of Ahlus-Sunnah

3.As for the statement, “Every Mujtahid is correct” (Kullu mujtahid museeb), then the Qaadi Abu Tayyib At-Tabaree said: “[as for the statement], ‘every mujtahid is correct’, then this is madhhab of the mu’tazilah of Basrah, and they are the root of this bid’ah.” (see Bahrul-Muheet 6/243)

4. The truth is one as Imaam Maalik stated with regard to the Sahaabah, radhi Allaahu ‘anhum: “There is not in the differing of the Sahaabah an allowance/excuse (for others). Indeed there is only that which is wrong or right” (Jaami’ Bayaanil-‘Ilm wal-Fadlihi). And we have been ordered with that which is right and correct. And this is in agreement with the statement of Ibn Abbaas, radhi Allaahu ‘anhu, said: “I say: ‘The Messenger said’ and you say: ‘[But] Abu Bakr and Umar said’!”

5. Differring of the scholars is not a proof. Al-Haafidh Abu ‘Umar Ibn Abdil-Barr said: “Difference of opinion is not a proof with a single one of the fuqahaa of the Ummah, except for the one who has no insight and possesses no knowledge – and he has no proof for his speech.” (Jaami’ Bayaanil-‘Ilm).

6. Clarifying the errors is an obligation. Al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab, rahimahullaah, said: “And from the headings of naseehah to Allaah, the Most High, and His Book and His Messenger – and this is particular to the Scholars – to refute the deviations from the Book and Sunnah… And likewise to refute the weak statements from the slips of the scholars and to make clear the proofs of the Book and Sunnah.” (Jaami’ ul-‘Uloom wal-Hikam, abridged)

7. Excusing Deviation and Bid’ah is not an option if one knows. Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728H) said: “And another group, [then] they do not know the ‘aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as is obligated, or they know a part of it and are ignorant regarding a part of it – and that which they know, they conceal and do not explain it to the people – and they do not forbid the bid’ah and they do not censure Ahlul-Bid’ah nor punish or subdue them. Rather they may even have disparaging remarks with respect to the Sunnah and the foundations of the Deen – not distinguishing between the speech of Ahlus-Sunnah and that of Ahlul-Bid’ah wal-Furqah – Or they accept the different madhhabs of bid’ah just as the ‘ulemah excuse each other in the issues of ijtihaad in which there is [genuine] difference. And this is the condition of many of the murji’ah, and some of the Thinkers, the Soofees and the Philosophers” (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa Vol 12, slightly abridged).

As can be seen, that if a person knows the reality of an issue, then he is not excused thereafter in supporting that which is opposition to the Sunnah after the matter is made clear from the texts of the Book and Sunnah upon the Manhaj of the Salaf. As for the one who does not know, then he is informed so that he takes the correct position against those who oppose Ahlus-Sunnah and its principles and fundamentals.

As for Ash-Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad, hafidhahullaah, then we say that he recognised some of the errors of Abul-Hasan Al-Misree Al-Ma’rabee, the innovator, and this has been mentioned by him and confirmed by Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadee, hafidhahullaah, in his last visit to Madeenah. But the affair is still not completely clear to him so that is why, as it seems he has not taken a stronger open stance against Al-Ma’rabee. It is not upon us now to start questioning the Jarh Mufassar of the other Scholars due to the apparent silence of another on Abul-Hasan Al-Ma’rabee. This is because the principle ‘the detailed jarh takes precedence of the ta’deel’ stands firm throughout time due to the fact that the one who brings this jarh mufassar is more knowledgeable of the affair of an individual (in this case of Al-Ma’rabee) than the one who just brings a general ta’deel. And the one who has knowledge is a proof over the one who does not know.

So one should not feel confused or disillusioned due to not finding ijmaa’ (consensus) in the jarh of an individual. Since ijmaa’ is not a pre-condition for accepting a jarh. Rather the guiding factor is the bringing forth of a detailed refutation, clear and mufassal by one who is capable and this takes precedence over the ta’deel mujmal (general praise). And of-course those scholars who have refuted Abul-Hasan are from the kibaar in the field of Jarh wa Ta’deel – and they have written to-date thousands of pages upon this innovator Abul-Hasan Al-Misree. Yet not one of the scholars, whom the supporters of Abul-Hasan try to rally around has brought a single detailed reply to the many, many refutations upon Abul-Hasan.

So we say, that the Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, hafidhahullaah, is as Shaykh Rabee’ himself stated: That Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is not more knowledgeable about Abul-Hasan than Shaykh Rabee’.

Alongside we know that Al-Allaamah Rabee’ is the Imaam of Jarh wa Ta’deel in our time as stated by Imaam Al-Albaanee, rahimahullaah.  So he is the expert in this field recommended by another expert in the field. (1)

So we do not need to look into nor are we obligated to know why Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, hafidhahullaah, does not make tabdee’ upon Abul-Hasan (i.e. declare him to be an innovator) and take from the other Scholars in this regard. Since we have what is sufficient by way of exposition and refutation from the other scholars upon Abul-Fitan Al-Ma’rabee.

Sufficient is it that the scholar is rewarded a single reward if he is erroneous in a particular matter. So we give him that with which we are obligated, respect and honour – we do not speak ill of him – no more than we would about any of the ‘ulemaa of the Salaf who erred in a particular matter. Rather we make du’aa for them as we have been ordered by the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth.

[end of quote from ustaadh Abdul Waahid]

Editor’s comment see link for further details on this issue so that the followers of the innovators (Maribi, Halabi and maghraawi) do not confuse you about this statement of Imaam Al-Baanee and that of other scholars: http://salaficentre.com/2012/07/jarh-wat-tadeel-continues-and-the-statement-of-imaam-albaanee-about-shaikh-rabee/

Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghudayaan: Leave Halabi!!!

Written by Amjad Khan on . Posted in Ali Hassan Al Halabi, Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Articles, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Fatawa-Rulings, Innovations In Islam (Bidah), Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations.

Questioner:

 

O’ Shaykh, we have preachers here in Algeria who recommended Alee Hasan Abdul-Hameed al-Halabee.

 

Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghudayaan:

 

“By Allah, I do not know. No, you should leave this Abdul-Hameed because he is the leader the madhab of al-Mur’jiaa in the Kingdom.”

 

http://dusunnah.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=364:al-halabee-needs-to-repent-video&catid=45:innovation-and-its-people&Itemid=30