Skip to main content

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [46 of 80]

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Al Allaamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali, may Allah preserve him, said:

Loyalty to and enmity against specific individuals, similar to the manner in which the Rawafid (Shiites) exhibit false loyalty to specific members of the Prophet’s family: Shaikh Al-Islam, may Allah have mercy on him, stated in “Minhaj al-Sunnah” (133/5):

“The Rāfidah have adopted a divisive approach regarding the companions of the Messenger, showing loyalty to some while excessively praising them, and harbouring animosity towards others while being extreme in their animosity”.

Many individuals adopt a similar stance towards their leaders, kings, scholars, and elders, resulting in rejecting one another for others besides the companions. You find a proponent of illegal partisanship showing loyalty to so and so, and to those who love him, while showing enmity to so and so, and to those who love him based on other than truth (or without a justified Shariah reason). This is entirely from that splitting and affiliation that Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, as He, the Exalted, stated:

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا لَسْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِي شَيْء

Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects (all kinds of religious sects), you (O Muhammad) have no concern in them in the least.
(Al-An’am: 159)

Al-Majmu Al-Wadih. 488

Listen to clarification by Shaikh Abu Khadeejah, may Allah preserve him.

Bid’ee Daniel Haqiqatjou – The Inevitable transition from lying to wicked behaviour!

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah [The Exalted] said:

فَٱجۡتَنِبُواْ ٱلرِّجۡسَ مِنَ ٱلۡأَوۡثَـٰنِ وَٱجۡتَنِبُواْ قَوۡلَ ٱلزُّورِ

So shun the abomination (worshipping) of idols, and shun lying speech (false statements). [Al-Hajj. 30]

Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi al-Madkhali, may Allah preserve him, stated:

“Allah forbade lying and mentioned it alongside shirk”.

The Shaikh also stated, “Numerous are liars today against the callers and carriers of the Salafi Dawah. They (i.e. the liars) are able to disseminate cruel rumours till it reaches the world using various means made available to them in this era. They divert people from Allah’s path and seek to make it crooked in order to further their falsehoods, twaddle, and dangerous innovations in religion that destroy sound belief, sound Islamic approaches to various subjects, and virtuous manners”. [1]

Bid’ee Haqiqatjou once attempted to create a division within Salafiyyah referred to as the Madkhalis. The label of Madkhalism is, in fact, a deceptive tactic employed by the adversaries of Salafiyyah. Lacking solid evidence to challenge the authentic Salafi methodology and its upright scholars, they resort to fabrications, illusions, and defamation. This term was invented by those people of bidah, such as the Qutbiyyah and Ikhwaanees, in an effort to undermine one of the great scholars in our era, Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhali, may Allah preserve him. He (Al-Allamah Rabee) said: “Do you take revenge against these Salafiyyoon and nickname them with these nicknames only because they hold onto the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him]? What is the bidah that the Salafiyyoon have in order for them (i.e. the false accusers) to say Mad’khaliyyah, Jaamiyyah?” [2] There is no such thing as Mad’khalism nor a quietist train in Salafiyyah. For more information about this distinguished scholar, refer to the articles written by Shaikh Abu Khadeejah and Shaikh Abu Iyaad, may Allah preserve them.

https://abukhadeejah.com/biography-of-ash-shaykh-al-allamah-rabi-ibn-hadi-al-madkhali-and-the-praise-of-the-scholars-for-him/

https://www.themadkhalis.com/md/

https://abukhadeejah.com/a-response-to-western-academics-who-categorise-salafis-into-quietists-politicos-and-jihadists-and-why-this-is-a-false-categorisation/

This was among the earliest of Mr. Haqiqatjou’s outrageous and nonsensical falsehoods. Consequently, once it became clear that no group known as the Madkhalis exists, it is evident that the misguided Daniel is merely a liar and a slanderer. Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim [may Allah have mercy upon him] stated:

Beware of (lying or lies) because it corrupts one’s ability to illustrate information based on what it should be in reality. It corrupts one’s ability to illustrate information and his ability to teach the people. The liar portrays what is non-existent as something present and what is present as something non-existent. He portrays truth as something false and falsehood as something true; he portrays good as evil and evil as good, so this corrupts his conception and knowledge, which then becomes a punishment upon him. Then he portrays what is not true to the one deceived by him – the one who is inclined towards him- so he corrupts his conception and knowledge. The soul of the liar turns away from the existing reality -inclined towards what is non-existent and gives preference to falsehood. And when his conception and knowledge is corrupted, which is the basis of every willfully chosen deed, his deeds become corrupt and marked by lies, so those deeds would emanate from him just as lies emanate from the tongue- he neither benefits from his tongue nor his deeds. This is why lying is the basis of immorality, just as the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Indeed lies lead to immorality [or wickedness] and indeed immorality [or wickedness] leads to the fire. [Bukhaari 2606/2607]

Firstly lies emerge from the heart and then on the tongue, so it corrupts it; then it transfers to the limbs and corrupts its actions, just as it corrupts the statements of the tongue. Therefore, lying prevails over his statements, deeds and state of affairs; corruption becomes deeply rooted in him and its disease leads to destruction if Allah does not grant him cure him with the medication of truthfulness, which uproots it (i.e. lying) from its original source. This is why the basis [or foundation] of all the deeds of the hearts is based on truthfulness; and the basis of their opposites – such as showing off, self-amazement, pride, being glad (with ungratefulness to Allah’s Favours), conceitedness, boastfulness, insolence, weakness, laziness, cowardice, disgrace and other than them- is lies. The origin of every righteous deed- whether carried out in private or public- is based on truthfulness. And the origin of every corrupt deed – whether carried out in private or public- is lies. [3]

Following the conflict between the Rawafid and the Zionists, Mr. Haqiqatjou could no longer conceal his affection for the Rafidah and his disdain for the Sunnah and its followers. His repugnant behaviour first began with lies and slander against the people of Sunnah, and culminated in Fujoor (wicked behaviour) by manifesting affection for the Rawafid. The Messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, said: “Truthfulness leads to righteousness, and righteousness leads to Paradise. And a man keeps on telling the truth until he becomes a truthful person. Falsehood leads to Al-Fajur (i.e. wickedness, evil-doing), and Al-Fajur (wickedness) leads to the (Hell) Fire, and a man may keep on telling lies till he is written before Allah, a liar.”  [Al-Bukhari 6094]

Fitan ultimately exposed the imposter to reveal the deep affection he harbours for the Rafidah, despite all attempts to conceal it. Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said, “And Imaan is known about a man, just as all the states of his heart are known by way of his (outward) allegiances, enmities, his rejoicing, anger, hunger, thirst, and other such affairs. For these matters have certain outward binding necessities (lawaazim dhaahirah) and the outward matters necessitate inward matters. And this is a matter known, the people know this concerning the one that they have experienced and tested (jarraboohu wamtahinoohu)…”. (Minhaaj us-Sunnah 8/475) (translation by Salafipublications.com)

https://abuiyaad.com/a/daniel-haqiqatjou-madkhali-bootlickers
https://abuiyaad.com/s/daniel-haqiqatjou
https://abuiyaad.com/a/haqiqatjou-mental-retardation
https://abuiyaad.com/a/daniel-haqiqatjou-taqiyyah/print
https://abuiyaad.com/a/daniel-haqiqatjou-medication
https://abukhadeejah.com/concise-adequate-response-to-the-scorn-lies-deceit-of-daniel-haqiqatjou-against-ahlus-sunnah-wal-jamaah/

Also, following his inability to hide his affection and loyalty towards his cherished ones within Ahlul Bidah, he began to undermine the contributions of earlier scholars, including Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab, may Allah have mercy upon him, who came before Al-Allamah Rabee. Consequently, Haqiqatjou embraced a trait reminiscent of the people of Al-Jahiliyyah and those among Ahlul Kitab who strayed from the correct path.

Bid’ee Haqiqatjou, mocking upright scholars is a trait of Jahiliyyah!

Al-Allamah Zaid Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

They insult the followers of the Messengers saying that they neither possess understanding of affairs nor are they far-sighted, in order to make people flee from their illuminated call that has a praiseworthy outcome. This is a false statement because the people of Nifaaq are the ones without understanding. Had they understood and were truthful – outwardly and inwardly, they would have followed the Prophets and Messengers and those people of sound understanding who followed their path. This [i.e. insulting the followers of the Prophets] is what the people of Prophet Nuh reiterated to him. [ وَمَا نَرَٮٰكَ ٱتَّبَعَكَ إِلَّا ٱلَّذِينَ هُمۡ أَرَاذِلُنَا بَادِىَ ٱلرَّأۡىِ – Nor do we see any follow you but the meanest among us and they (too) followed you without thinking].

To accuse the followers of the noble Messengers and great Prophets that they are people of weak understanding is a false accusation against the religion and belittlement of it. Whoever follows this path that was followed by the people of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance, not honouring the Messengers and what they brought, and not following their pious followers, he resembles the Yahud [i.e. those Yahud who disbelieved and rebelled against the Prophets], the disbelievers, the people of pre-Islamic era of ignorance and the wicked sinners. Therefore, the sensible Muslims should be cautious of resembling them because whoever imitates a people is from them. [4]

Indeed, this is why the senior Salafi teachers challenged this liar and imposter because they could tell from his speech that he is someone who desires trials, temptations and discord. Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “Know that leaving the correct path occurs in two ways. Firstly, a man strays from the correct path intending nothing but good, so his error is not to be followed since it leads to destruction. Secondly, a man who deliberately opposes the truth and acts contrary to the Pious ones who came before him, he is astray, leading others astray, a rebellious devil within the Ummah. It is a duty upon those who know of him to warn the people against him and to explain his condition to them so that no one falls into his innovation and is destroyed”.

Al-Allaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan [may Allah preserve him] commented on the above statement of Imam Barbahaaree [may Allah have mercy upon him] saying: The first man is one who leaves the (correct path) without the intention (to do so), rather he intended good but followed other than the path of good. Striving [alone] is not sufficient, and even if the person has a righteous intention and a good aim, then that must be upon the correct path. Therefore, this (person) is considered mistaken and whoever agrees with him and follows his error will be destroyed because this is a path of destruction even though the (person) did not intend to leave (the correct path); rather his quest was (to reach something) good. This is the state of many of those who initiate newly invented matters in the knowledge of Aqeedah (Creed). This affair is not permissible, and they should not adhere to it. The person is not upon correctness. Allah [The Mighty and Majestic] said: [ وَأَنَّ هَٰذَا صِرَاطِي مُسْتَقِيمًا فَاتَّبِعُوهُ ۖ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا السُّبُلَ فَتَفَرَّقَ بِكُمْ عَنْ سَبِيلِهِ – And verily, this is my Straight Path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His Path]. [Al-An’am. 153]

Therefore, we reject any path that exits us from the Straight Path even if the one who (calls) to it aims for good and has a good intention. We do not follow him in that while he continues upon his error, eventually leading to destruction because whoever abandons the correct path in his journey and takes a path of ruin will be destroyed.

As for the second person, it is the one who intends to leave (the correct path). He knows the truth and that what he embarks upon is falsehood, but he intends to leave the truth with the intention of misguiding the people. So, the intention of the first (person) is to bring about benefit for the people, but he did not follow the correct path. The second (person) intended to misguide the people and turn them away from the correct path. Therefore, this one is a devil because the devils take the people away from the Straight Path. (Allah informs us that) Iblees said:

[لَأَقْعُدَنَّ لَهُمْ صِرَاطَكَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَ -Surely, I will sit in wait against them (human beings) on Your Straight Path]. [7:16] So he intends to turn them away from it [i.e. the straight path] and [direct them] towards the deviated paths. The Prophet [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] gave us an example when he drew a straight line and drew other lines on its sides, he then said about the straight line, “This is the path of Allah” and he said about the other lines, “These are the other paths, and on each path is a devil calling to it”. This is a clear example that agrees with that which the Shaikh (i.e. Imaam Barbahaaree) has stated here. So, the one who takes the people away from the Straight Path (and directs them) to the innovated paths of the innovators (in religious matters) is not one who intends good for them; rather he intends destruction for them. He is a devil, be it that he is a devil from amongst the Jinn or the people. It is obligated to us to be more careful of this (second person) than the first one because this one (i.e. the second) intends to misguide the people.

And regarding the statement of Imaam Barbahaaree: “He is astray, leading others astray, a rebellious devil”, Al-Allaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan stated: He is misguided and misguiding others- a rebellious devil, a rebel intending to turn the people from the Straight Path.

And regarding the statement of Imaam Barbahaaree, “It is a duty upon those who know of him to warn the people against him and to explain his condition to them so that no one falls into his innovation and is destroyed”, Al-Allaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan commented on the above statement, saying: It is not permissible to keep quiet about this one who leaves the truth intentionally; rather it is obligatory to unveil his affair and uncover his vileness until the people are warned about him. And it is not to be said that the people are free to hold views, freedom of speech and respecting the views of others, as say present with regards to [having] respect for the views of others. The affair is not about views; [rather] the affair is about Ittibaa [i.e. following the authentic proofs narrated from the Messenger accompanied with the understanding of the pious predecessors]. Allah has outlined a clear path for us, and He told us to adhere to it, when He [Glorified be He] stated: [وَأَنَّ هَٰذَا صِرَاطِي مُسْتَقِيمًا فَاتَّبِعُوهُ] ‘And verily, this is my Straight Path, so follow it’ [6:153]

If any person comes to us and wants us to leave this straight path, firstly we reject his statement. Secondly, we clarify and warn the people against him and we do not keep quiet about him; because if we keep quiet about him, the people will be deceived by him, especially if he is an eloquent person with (skillful) writing and education because the people will be deceived by him and will say, “This one is competent, this one is from the thinkers” as is taking place today. Therefore, the affair is very dangerous, and regarding this is a reason to refute the one in opposition, as opposed to what those who say, “Abandon the refutations, leave the people, everyone has his views and have respect for him”. By way of this (so-called) respect for the views and freedom of speech, the Ummah will be destroyed. The Salaf (pious predecessors) did not keep quiet about the likes of these people; rather they exposed and refuted them due to their knowledge of the danger upon Ummah. We do not keep quiet about their evil; rather that which Allah has revealed must be clarified, otherwise, we will be from those who conceal the truth-those whom Allah spoke of (saying): [إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنْزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ ۙ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ – Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allaah and cursed by the cursers].'[2:159]

The affair is not limited to the innovator, rather it is extended to the one who keeps quiet about him (i.e. the one who deliberately keeps quiet whilst being aware about him). Rebuke and punishment (i.e. warning) are extended to him because it is obligatory to clarify. [5

Al-Allamah Ibn Aqeel, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, “If the truthful ones were to keep silent and the falsifiers speak, then the creation would have relinquished what they have witnessed (of truth) and reject what they have not witnessed. So, when the devout ones desire to revive the Prophetic path, the people would reject it and think that it is Bidah”. [6]


[1] https://youtu.be/IeQQB8vX8bk?si=tut7_IyFe0gKEBR8

[2]https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2015/01/01/those-who-nickname-the-salafis-with-the-terms-madkhaliyyah-jaamiyyah-shaikh-rabee-responds-2/

[3] Fawaa’id’ pages 202-203]

[4] An Excerpt from Sharh Masa’il Al-Jaahiliyyah Page: 78-79. slightly paraphrased

[5] An Excerpt from It-haaful Qaaree Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharhis Sunnah Lil Imaam Barbahaaree, Vol 1, page: 110-115. slightly paraphrased

[6] Shifaa As-Sudoor Fee Ziyaaratil Mashaahid Wal-Quboor page: 148

A harmful behaviour observed in numerous nations across history

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah [The Exalted] said:

وَلَقَدۡ صَرَّفۡنَا فِى هَـٰذَا ٱلۡقُرۡءَانِ لِلنَّاسِ مِن ڪُلِّ مَثَلٍ۬‌ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلۡإِنسَـٰنُ أَڪۡثَرَ شَىۡءٍ۬ جَدَلاً۬

And indeed We have put forth every kind of example in this Quran, for mankind. But, man is ever more quarrelsome than anything]. [Al-Kahf. 54]

Allah informed us about the greatness of the Qur’an, its majesty and (perfect) inclusiveness, and that He has placed every kind of example in it – every path that leads to beneficial sciences and eternal happiness; every path that protects against evil and destruction. In it is clarification of halal and haram, recompense for one’s deeds, exhortation (towards good) and warning (against evil), true (information, stories) that are beneficial for the hearts regarding creed, a source of tranquillity and light (i.e. guidance). This necessitates that one should submit to this Qur’an, receive it with submission and obedience, and not to argue against it in any matter. Despite this, many people argue against truth – based on falsehood – after it has become clear.

لِيُدۡحِضُواْ بِهِ ٱلۡحَقَّ‌ۖ

“to dispute with false argument, in order to refute the truth thereby”.

This is why Allah stated:

وَكَانَ ٱلۡإِنسَـٰنُ أَڪۡثَرَ شَىۡءٍ۬ جَدَلاً۬

“But, man is ever more quarrelsome than anything”.

Meaning, arguing and disputing against it, despite the fact that this is neither befitting (permissible) nor just, and what inevitably led him to this and make him not accept Iman is wrongdoing and obstinacy; but not due to any flaw in its explanation, Hujjah [clear and overwhelming proof that defeats all the obstinate and stubborn ones] and Burhaan [proof that clarify and distinguish between truth and falsehood in affair], rather, if the punishment and what happened to the previous nations came to them, this would have have been their state of affairs (i.e. disbelief). This is why Allah said:

وَمَا مَنَعَ ٱلنَّاسَ أَن يُؤۡمِنُوٓاْ إِذۡ جَآءَهُمُ ٱلۡهُدَىٰ وَيَسۡتَغۡفِرُواْ رَبَّهُمۡ إِلَّآ أَن تَأۡتِيَہُمۡ سُنَّةُ ٱلۡأَوَّلِينَ أَوۡ يَأۡتِيَہُمُ ٱلۡعَذَابُ قُبُلاً۬

And nothing prevents men from believing, now when the guidance (the Quran) has come to them, and from asking Forgiveness of their Lord, except that the ways of the ancients be repeated with them (i.e. their destruction decreed by Allah), or the torment be brought to them face to face? [Al-Kahf. 55]

An Excerpt from Tafseer As-Sadi

Never prolong argumentation, time is precious

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

The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said:

“The most hated of men in the sight  of Allah is the one who is most quarrelsome”.

Al-Allamah Zayd Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

A warning against argumentation, falling into evil behaviour and its severe (consequences), especially if the argumentation is based on falsehood. As for when it is based on truth, there is nothing wrong with that for the one who has a right to do so;  but he should be just in his argument so that he does not enter into oppression or error, and Allah knows best.

The hadith is a warning against lying during argumentation, falsehood and adorned speech until one changes falsehood into truth and truth into falsehood – not bothered about making an oath, lying or giving false witness. All this takes place from a person who is extremely quarrelsome, goes into excess in the matter and does not feel shy in the presence of Allah- neither fears punishment in this life nor in the next life. When it is the case that the extremely quarrelsome person is blameworthy, the person who has good conduct – if entitled to something – during an argument and other matters, will not utter except truth, and will not seek after anything except the truth- neither lies nor deceives the Shariah judge. This is from the characteristics of the people of Iman – those whom Allah praised in the Qur’an and the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, praised them in the pure Sunnah. (1)

Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Al-Hasan (al-Basree) said, “The wise man does not argue or seek to overcome with stratagem rather he propagates his wisdom. If it is accepted, he praises Allah and if it is rejected he praises Allah”. [Sharh As-Sunnah]

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Quotes:

The wise man is the one who posses wisdom, and wisdom is to place something in its place. Similarly, the wise one means the one with understanding.

He does not debate (with) a fruitless debate that is devoid of benefit.

He propagates his knowledge and if accepted he praises Allah. This is what is sought after.  If it is not accepted, he is absolved of his responsibility and the proof is conveyed.

“He praises Allah” because he established and conveyed the proof, and fulfilled what is required of him, and the guiding of the hearts is in the hands of Allah. (2)

Imam Muhammad Ibn Salih, may Allah have mercy upon them, said:

O student of knowledge! It is obligated to you to abandon (blameworthy) debate and argumentation because debate and argumentation is a means to cutting off the path to what is correct, makes a person speak to give the upper hand to himself. Even if the truth is made clear to him, you will find him either rejecting it or misconstruing the truth -out of disliking it- to give himself the upper hand and compel his opponent to accept his statement.

Therefore, if you notice (blameworthy) debate and argumentation from your brother when the truth is very clear, but he does not follow it, flee from him like you would flee from a lion, and say, “I do not have anything other than the truth I have mentioned to you”. (3)

People who fully and truly understood the great significance of time
https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/01/04/people-who-fully-and-truly-understood-the-great-significance-of-time/


(1) An Excerpt from at-Taleeqaat Al-Maleehah Alaa Silsilah Al – Ahadith As-Saheehah. 1/26

(2) An Excerpt from It’haf Al-Qari Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharh As- Sunnah Lil Imam Barbahaaree. 2/265-266

(3) An Excerpt from Sharh Hilyah Talib Al-Ilm page 246

Debate regarding number of casualties in Gaza- brief dialogue with Mathilda Heller

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah, The Exalted, said:

يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ كُونُواْ قَوَّٲمِينَ بِٱلۡقِسۡطِ شُہَدَآءَ لِلَّهِ وَلَوۡ عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِكُمۡ أَوِ ٱلۡوَٲلِدَيۡنِ وَٱلۡأَقۡرَبِينَ‌ۚ إِن يَكُنۡ غَنِيًّا أَوۡ فَقِيرً۬ا فَٱللَّهُ أَوۡلَىٰ بِہِمَا‌ۖ فَلَا تَتَّبِعُواْ ٱلۡهَوَىٰٓ أَن تَعۡدِلُواْ‌ۚ وَإِن تَلۡوُ ۥۤاْ أَوۡ تُعۡرِضُواْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُونَ خَبِيرً۬ا

O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah; even though it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, Allah is a Better Protector to both (than you). So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you may avoid justice, and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do. [An-Nisaa. 135]

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Allah, Glorified be He and free is He from all imperfections, commanded His servants to stand out firmly for justice on behalf of everyone – be it an enemy or an ally, and the matter that is most worthy of being established with justice are the statements and methodology related to the commands of Allah as well as everything that Allah has (revealed in the Qur’an and the authentic Sunnah). Therefore, to establish these affairs based on desires and disobedience is contrary to Allah’s command and a negation (i.e. either intentionally or unintentionally) of that which Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was sent with. [1]

Allah, The Exalted, said:

وَيْلٌ لِّلْمُطَفِّفِينَ
الَّذِينَ إِذَا اكْتَالُوا عَلَى النَّاسِ يَسْتَوْفُونَ
وَإِذَا كَالُوهُمْ أَو وَّزَنُوهُمْ يُخْسِرُونَ
أَلَا يَظُنُّ أُولَٰئِكَ أَنَّهُم مَّبْعُوثُونَ
لِيَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍ
يَوْمَ يَقُومُ النَّاسُ لِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

Woe to Al-Mutaffifin [those who give less in measure and weight (decrease the rights of others)], those who, when they have to receive by measure from men, demand full measure, and when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due. Think they not that they will be resurrected (for reckoning), on a Great Day, the Day when (all) mankind will stand before the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists)? [Al-Mutaffifeen. 1-7]

[وَإِذَا كَالُوهُمْ أَو وَّزَنُوهُمْ يُخْسِرُونَ – and when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due].

Imam As-Sadi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

This noble verse shows that just as a person takes from the people what he is entitled to, it is also obligated to him to give them everything they are entitled to – whether related to wealth or mutual dealings; rather included in the generality of this verse are proofs and statements, because what usually takes place between those engaged in argumentation and discussion is that each of them is eager to establish his proofs, thus, it is obligated to a person to also make known the proofs possessed by the other person and examine the proofs of the other person just as he examines his own proofs. In relation to this affair, the justice of a person is known as opposed to whether he is afflicted with bigotry, his humility as opposed to being haughty, his common sense as opposed to foolish behaviour. We ask Allah bestow on us every good. [2]

Allah said:
سَيَقُولُونَ ثَلَٰثَةٌ رَّابِعُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ وَيَقُولُونَ خَمْسَةٌ سَادِسُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ رَجْمًۢا بِٱلْغَيْبِ وَيَقُولُونَ سَبْعَةٌ وَثَامِنُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ قُل رَّبِّىٓ أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِم مَّا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ فَلَا تُمَارِ فِيهِمْ إِلَّا مِرَآءً ظَٰهِرًا وَلَا تَسْتَفْتِ فِيهِم مِّنْهُمْ أَحَدًا

(Some) say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them; (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth, guessing at the unseen; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eighth. Say (O Muhammad): “My Lord knows best their number; none knows them but a few.” So do not debate(about their number, etc.) except with the clear proof. And do not consult any of them about (the affair of) the people of the Cave. [Al-Kahf 22]

“So do not debate”, meaning, (do not) engage in debate and argumentation, “except except with the clear proof”, meaning, grounded in knowledge and certainty. [3]

There is doubt that Zionist injustices stem from a profound disregard for fear of Allah, which has consistently driven them to engage in unfounded speculation and an unwillingness to acknowledge their obligations to the Palestinians. At the same time, they continue to demand more than what is rightfully theirs. This pattern has been evident over the past 70 years of land theft and violence against the Palestinian people. However, it is important to clarify that not all individuals who identify as Jewish share this mindset, nor are those of other faiths entirely free from similar behaviours, including some Muslims. Nonetheless, this discussion focuses on the actions of Zionists, particularly the recent excessive violence and brutality witnessed in Gaza under the guise of retaliation and self-defense. Similarly, this does not absolve us from unequivocally condemning the actions of certain individuals and groups who identify as Muslims, especially when they resort to the murder of unarmed civilians and non-combatants under Netanyahu’s regime. [Footnote a]

In the article by Mathilda Heller, the perspectives of two factions regarding the fatalities among Palestinians in Gaza have been articulated. It is widely recognised that this discourse has persisted for an extended period, during which unlawful killings have been perpetrated by the operatives of Netanyahu under the pretext of retaliation and self-defense, as well as efforts to eliminate Hamas. At times, these operatives have reluctantly acknowledged their recklessness or significant errors, while vowing to conduct investigations and asserting that their military is making every effort to prevent civilian casualties. This ongoing debate serves as a distraction from the more pressing issue that demands urgent attention: the impunity that accompanies the actions of the Zionist forces when an unarmed civilian or non-combatant is murdered. The focus should not solely be on the number of casualties, but rather on the mindset of those within the Zionist military who disregarded the value of innocent Palestinian lives. This issue fundamentally exposes the moral decay and psychological corruption of the perpetrators, regardless of their claims to possess a higher moral standing. Allah said:

مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَٰلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَىٰ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ أَنَّهُۥ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًۢا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَآ أَحْيَا ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَلَقَدْ جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا بِٱلْبَيِّنَٰتِ ثُمَّ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ لَمُسْرِفُونَ

If anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land! [Al-Ma’idah. 32]

Imam As-Sadi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

If a person is bold enough to kill someone who does not deserve to be killed, this implies that he does make a distinction between the one he killed and other than him; rather he would commit this act whenever his evil calls him to that. Therefore, his bold attitude that led him to kill is as if he has killed all humankind. On the other hand, if a person saves a life and does not kill – whilst his soul calls him to do so – due to fear of Allah, this is as if he has saved the lives of all humankind because the fear of Allah he possesses stops him killing one who does not deserve to be killed. [4]

The arguments presented by Zionists in response to accusations regarding their actions in Gaza—both current and historical—concerning the numerous Palestinians they have killed without just cause, serve to implicate them. The murder of even a single innocent individual constitutes a serious crime in the sight of Allah. Consequently, it is irrelevant whether they acknowledge the additional casualties; the principle remains the same. Just as any individual who identifies as Muslim and takes the life of an innocent Zionist or Jew is condemned, so too should the actions of the Zionists be condemned and no room for excuses should be offered. Various organisations have documented evidence suggesting that Zionist forces intentionally target areas populated by civilians in the name of pursuing Hamas, despite the disapproval of certain Zionist figureheads and media outlets towards those who expose their actions. Their typical response to criticism is to label it as biased; however, when the evidence becomes undeniable, they often resort to accusations of antisemitism or invoke the memories of the Holocaust. There is no doubt that Antisemitism [Footnote b] is unlawful in the sight of the Creator when it is clearly identified and substantiated with credible evidence, rather than being used as a shield for Zionist violence or to suppress genuine discourse regarding the expected conduct of Zionists. The visible devastation in Gaza, the heartbreaking loss of thousands of civilian lives, coupled with aggressive Zionist propaganda aimed at silencing those who present evidence, raises legitimate concerns about their behaviour, even as they attempt to portray themselves as a moral force or champions of humanitarianism. Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, stated:

People were (sometimes) judged by the revealing of a Divine Inspiration during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle but now there is no longer any more (new revelation). Now we judge you by the deeds you practice publicly, so we will trust and favour the one who does good deeds in front of us, and we will not call him to account about what he is really doing in secret, for Allah will judge him for that; but we will not trust or believe the one who presents to us with an evil deed even if he claims that his intentions were good. [5]

Imam Abdul-Azeez Bin Baaz, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Whoever manifests good, it will be accepted from him and a good suspicion is held about him. And if he manifests evil, it will held against him and an evil suspicion is held about him. [6]

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

The fact that a statement regarding something is lies and falsehood is sometimes known based on the statement in and of itself, its contradictions, perplexity and the manifestation of those clear indications which shows that it is lies. Lies may manifest due to what it is in reality, what is apparent and what is being concealed. It is sometimes known due to the situation of the utterer of the lie, for indeed the one who is known for lying, wickedness and deception, his statements do not show anything else except a state of conformity with his deeds. He does not utter a statement or perform an action similar to that of a pious and truthful person – the one innocent of every evil, deception, lie and wicked behaviour; rather the heart, intention, statements and deeds of the truthful one have the same image; and the heart, statements, deeds and intentions of the liar have the same image. [7]

The absence of a profound fear of Allah, which affects the actions of a sinful believer, or the total lack of such fear, characteristic of entrenched Zionist opposition to the teachings of the Messengers, suggests that an individual in either state is unlikely to accept the truth, recognise their misdeeds, or strive for correction unless Allah guides them. It is crucial to emphasise that, aside from the Zionists, any individuals who commit acts of violence against non-combatants and defenseless civilians are firmly condemned. Furthermore, it is essential to acknowledge that no group has perpetrated greater cruelty and injustice against the Palestinians than the Zionists since 1948, a time that commenced with the backing of Christian Zionist colonialists who aided their ascendance in Palestine. [Footnote c] May Allah ease the suffering of the Palestinians, which has persisted for 70 years, and grant us all the strength necessary to overcome the weakness in the Ummah Amin. Read:

https://abukhadeejah.com/state-of-ummah-causes-of-weakness-means-of-rectification-ebook/

Footnote a: Just Rules of Fighting in the Sharīʿah of Islām Compared to Genocidal, Ethnic-Cleansing, Tribal-Vengeance Doctrines and Excesses of Trojan-Horse Muslim Extremists: https://abuiyaad.com/a/amalekite-genocide-doctrine-gaza

Footnote b:
https://abuiyaad.com/sn/muslims-antisemitism
https://abuiyaad.com/w/antisemitism-ernest-renan
https://abuiyaad.com/a/muhammad-semitic-prophet

Footnote c:
https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2024/11/13/the-initial-rise-and-gradual-impact-of-christian-zionism-on-some-european-political-decision-makers/

An Overview of Christian Zionism in America Since the Arrival of The Puritans

American Christian Zionists’ Media Initiatives Aimed at Influencing Public Opinion, With a Brief Mention of The Concept of Greater Israel


[1] An Excerpt from “Bada’i at-Tafsir Al-Jami Limaa Fassarahu Al-Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim. 1/300-303

[2] An Excerpt from “Tafsir As-Sadi”

[3] An Excrept from “Tafsir As-Sadi”

[4] An Excerpt from Tafsir As-Sadi]

[5] Al-Bukhari 2641

[6] An Excerpt from Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min At-Taleeqaat Al-Baaziyyah Alaa Saheeh Al-Bukhari 2/397. Footnote 1

[7] An Excerpt from As-Sawa’iq Al-Mursalah 2/469-470

[27] The Ascent and Decline of The Ottoman Empire: [Emergence of The First Saudi State]

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Mahmud II [1223 – 1255 AH /1808 – 1839 CE]

He ascended to the throne at the age of twenty-four and gained valuable insights during his house arrest with Salim III, who acquainted him with various reform initiatives. Initially, he was forced to acquiesce to the demands of the Janissaries, resulting in the annulment of all reforms to placate them until a more favourable time for their execution.. He demonstrated patience, biding his time to free himself from the Janissaries, who represented a considerable threat to the Ottoman state. Regrettably, this opportunity eluded him for several years, particularly as his reign was characterised by wars and significant events that consumed much of his energy and resources.

The War With Russia

A peace treaty was concluded with England in 1224 AH / 1809 CE, and efforts were made to forge a similar agreement with Russia; however, these attempts were unsuccessful, culminating in a conflict between the two nations. The Ottomans suffered defeat, resulting in the Russians seizing several strategic positions. As a consequence, Grand Vizier Dhiya Yusuf Pasha was dismissed and succeeded by Ahmad Pasha, who successfully repelled the Russians and reclaimed the occupied territories. Concurrently, relations between France and Russia soured, edging them toward war. In light of this, Russia sought to establish peace with the Ottoman Empire, leading to the signing of the Treaty of Bucharest in 1237 AH / 1812 AD. This treaty ensured that Wallachia, Moldavia, and Serbia would remain under Ottoman sovereignty. The resulting peace enabled Sultan Mahmud to pursue various reforms and address the revolts and insurrections occurring within the empire. Upon learning of the Treaty of Bucharest and their reestablished subjugation to the Ottoman Empire, the Serbians launched a rebellion. Nevertheless, the Ottoman military quelled the uprising with considerable force, leading the movement’s leaders to seek refuge in Austria. Among these leaders, Theodore Futch exhibited allegiance to the Ottomans and accepted their dominion, which resulted in him being granted special privileges by the state.

The Abolition of the Janissaries: The Janissaries experienced a decline in their character, their ethical standards shifted, and their original mission was altered, ultimately rendering them a source of disaster for the state and its subjects. They began to meddle in governmental affairs, driven by an insatiable desire for power, engaging in indulgent and illicit behaviours. They were forced to march through the harsh winter, imposed with royal tributes, and gravitated towards looting and pillaging during their military campaigns. They strayed from the foundational purpose of their establishment, succumbing to excessive alcohol consumption. Their actions led to military defeats, as they neglected religious laws, doctrines, and principles, distancing themselves from the true elements of success. They played a pivotal role in the deposition and assassination of sultans, including Uthman II. Throughout the reign of Sultan Murad IV, they persisted for a decade in their misguided ways, deeply entrenched in their oppressive rule. They were instrumental in his ascension to the throne, thereby seizing control over governance. They also suffocated Sultan Ibrahim I when he sought to liberate himself from their dominance. Their conduct plunged the state into disorder, as they eliminated sultans and placed their young heirs, such as Sultan Mehmed IV, on the throne. This chaos enabled foreign powers to seize portions of the territory, prompting the Grand Vizier and scholars to step in and remove him from power.

During the reign of Sultan Salim II, the Janissaries revolted, leading to enemy forces invading and occupying parts of the state. The Janissaries deposed several sultans, including Mustafa II, Ahmed III, and Mustafa IV, until Allah granted Sultan Mahmud II the opportunity to rid the state of their influence in the year 1241 AH. The Sultan summoned a meeting of the state’s dignitaries and high-ranking Janissary officials at the residence of the Grand Mufti. During this gathering, Grand Vizier Salim Ahmad Pasha articulated the diminished and disreputable condition of the Janissaries, while stressing the urgent need for modern military reforms. His persuasive discourse resonated with the attendees, leading the Mufti to issue a fatwa that authorised measures against the insurgents. While the Janissary officers publicly voiced their concurrence, they privately nurtured dissent. Recognising the impending threat to their privileges and the possible restriction of their activities, they began to strategise a rebellion, seeking support from segments of the general populace.

On the 8th of Dhu al-Qi’dah in the year 1241 AH, a faction of the Janissaries initiated harassment against the soldiers during their training sessions, which soon escalated into a full-scale rebellion. In response, the Sultan summoned the scholars to discuss the situation, who urged him to take decisive action against the uprising. Consequently, he ordered the artillery to prepare for engagement, balancing a conciliatory stance with concerns over the potential intensification of the rebels’ hostility. On the morning of the 9th of Dhu al-Qi’dah, the Sultan proceeded with the artillery units in tow, accompanied by scholars and students, towards the At Meydani square, where the insurgents had congregated to foment disorder.

The artillery encircled the battlefield and seized the elevated positions, targeting the Janissaries with their shells. In a desperate attempt to charge the cannons, the Janissaries encountered a relentless barrage that compelled them to take refuge in their barracks to avoid certain death. However, these shelters were set ablaze and ultimately collapsed upon them, including the Bektashi lodges, resulting in their defeat. The following day, a royal edict was issued to eliminate their ranks, uniforms, terminology, and name from the state. Those who survived and fled to the provinces faced either execution or exile. Consequently, Hussain Pasha, who was instrumental in their destruction, was appointed as the Commander-in-Chief (Serasker), signaling the onset of a new military system.

Sultan Mahmud subsequently acquired the autonomy to enhance his military forces, aligning with the principles of Western military. He replaced the traditional fez with the turban and adopted European clothing, mandating this style as the official uniform for all military and civilian state personnel. Additionally, he instituted an order known as the Order of Distinction, becoming the first Ottoman sultan to do so. The measures implemented by Sultan Mahmud, including the replacement of the fez with the turban and the enforcement of European attire among military ranks, signify his deep sense of psychological defeat. We will examine the underlying reasons for this, InShaAllah.

Muhammad Ali Pasha, the Governor of Egypt:

Muhammad Ali was a figure known for his infamous reputation, characterised by his brutality and stern disposition. The Ottoman Empire sent him to enforce discipline in villages that were slow to fulfill their financial responsibilities. He would establish his camp with his punitive troops around the village, partaking in acts of plunder, theft, and instilling terror among the defenseless inhabitants. As a result, the villagers frequently determined that it was more advantageous to pay the required amounts, despite the considerable strain it placed on them. His fixation on opulence approached the realm of insanity. He entered Egypt leading a group of Rumelians with the objective of driving out the French troops. Utilizing his astuteness and strategic thinking, he successfully earned the confidence of the Egyptian scholars. He resorted to underhanded and deceptive tactics to remove his competitors for the governorship of Egypt, ultimately achieving the title of Wali on the 20th of Rabi’ al-Awwal in the year 1220 AH, corresponding to June 18, 1805 CE.

Muhammad Ali showed strong eagerness to act as a devoted servant to the Sultan, frequently articulating sentiments of submission and respect towards both the Sultan and his rulership. Nevertheless, the Sultan began to grasp the potential consequences of these declarations, which raised his concerns about this new governor. As a result, he commanded Muhammad Ali’s transfer from the governorship of Egypt. However, the intervention of scholars prompted the Sultan to issue a subsequent decree reaffirming Muhammad Ali’s authority in Egypt on the 24th of Sha’ban in the year 1221 AH, which corresponds to November 6, 1806 CE. He began to strengthen his personal position and consolidate the authority within his own lineage. This raises numerous questions that require answers, such as: What was the true nature of Mohamad Ali’s role in serving French and British interests? Who was responsible for the downfall of the First Saudi State and the annexation of the Levant to Egypt? These are inquiries we seek to address through a thorough historical study.

The historian Abdur Rahman Al-Jabarti describes Muhammad Ali: Al-Jabarti described Muhammad Ali “as a deceitful individual, characterised by dishonesty and false oaths. He is depicted as unjust, devoid of integrity and accountability, and filled with malice, all while exercising oppression and tyranny under the guise of promising justice. Consequently, some have likened Muhammad Ali to Machiavelli or suggested that he was influenced by Machiavellian principles, which assert that the ends justify the means”. He was intent on enhancing his image in the eyes of the West and followed their lead in modernisation, even claiming to think with a “European mind while wearing the Ottoman cap.” On behalf of France, Britain, Russia, Austria, and other European nations, Muhammad Ali dealt significant blows to the Islamic direction in Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, and the Ottoman Caliphate. These actions contributed to the preparation of the Islamic world for Western ambitions. After consolidating his power, he surrounded himself with a cadre of advisors, including Greek and Armenian Christians, as well as scribes from the Copts and Jews. He also recruited Mamluks to serve as governors of the provinces. Al-Jabarti described this situation by stating, “He opened his doors to the Christians from the Greeks and Armenians, allowing them to take the lead, while the lower classes were elevated. He had a penchant for control and dominance, showing little tolerance for opposition.” He confiscated land from farmers, imposed a tax known as the “shakra,” or an alternative tax. He significantly increased the prices of essential goods, imposed unbearable taxes, and monopolised all economic activities. This led to widespread resentment among the people.

The implementation of this policy resulted in a profound animosity among the peasants towards him and his associates, leading many to abandon their agricultural lands and flee their villages in response to the oppressive measures. Consequently, there was a notable reluctance to enlist in his army, with reports indicating that in the year 1831 alone, approximately six thousand peasants had escaped. In urban areas, particularly in Cairo, al-Jabarti notes that when Muhammad Ali tasked the populace with the reconstruction of the city, ten vices emerged among the people. These included sorcery, exploitation, labour costs, humiliation, degradation, the tearing of garments, monetary demands, the gloating of enemies, disruption of their livelihoods, and the fees for public baths. Al-Jabarti was a contemporary of the oppressive policies enacted by Muhammad Ali against the Muslim population in Egypt, who suffered the loss of their rights and resources. He opened the doors wide for European traders to enter Egypt and dominate its economy, transforming the country into a farm that supplied European markets with agricultural products. This led to a significant cultural and commercial connection between Egypt and Europe. The emerging merchant class in Egypt became economically and politically dependent on European markets, while proponents of European culture gained control over intellectual life, effectively stifling advocates of Islamic ideals. This shift was further exacerbated by the cessation of religious-based educational curricula, a move aligned with Napoleon’s Masonic policies. This situation was corroborated by the English historian Arnold Toynbee, who stated that Muhammad Ali was a dictator capable of turning Napoleonic ideas into effective realities in Egypt. European colonialism achieved its objective of exploiting the facilities and material reforms instituted by Muhammad Ali. Meanwhile, the Muslim population of Egypt was engulfed in despair, paying a heavy price that far exceeded the extent of any reforms, namely the destruction of its cultural identity shaped by Islam, which had distinguished its role throughout the Islamic eras. The call for nationalism and patriotism was initiated, while simultaneously imposing restrictions on advocates of Islam among scholars. This approach aligned with efforts aimed at achieving independence for Egypt, thereby distancing it from the ties to the Islamic Caliphate. This direction received support from Masonic lodges, which viewed this movement as integral to their objectives.

Salafi Call By (Imam) Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, masy Allah have mercy upon him:

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Ibn Sulayman Ibn Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Rashid al-Tamimi was born in the year 1115 AH / 1703 CE in the town of Al-Uyaynah, located approximately seventy kilometers north of Riyadh, or roughly that distance to the west. He grew up with a passion for knowledge, pursuing it from a young age, and exhibited remarkable talent and distinction. He memorised the Quran and studied Hanbali Fiqh, Tafsir and the science of hadith. He was greatly influenced by the works of (Shaikh Al-Islam) Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, in jurisprudence, creed, and opinions, and he held them in high regard. Additionally, he was inspired by the writings of (Imam) Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Urawah al-Hanbali, and other prominent figures from this Salafi fountain. In his quest for knowledge, he traveled to Makkah, Madina, Basra, and Al-Ahsa, where he faced numerous trials when he openly expressed his views in Iraq, before eventually returning to Najd. Upon his return to Huraymilah in Najd, he commenced his mission by promoting virtue and prohibiting vice, engaging in scholarly pursuits, education, and advocating for the pure creed of Islamic monotheism. He cautioned against polytheism, its dangers, and its various forms. He faced an assassination attempt from certain individuals in Huraymilah. Subsequently, he moved to his hometown of Al-Uyaynah, where the local ruler welcomed him and encouraged his efforts in the call to faith. He established Islamic law, enforced legal penalties, and dismantled shrines. His stay in Huraymilah was brief due to pressure from the Amir of Al-Ahsa on the Amir of Huraymilah to eliminate Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, prompting him to leave on foot to Al-Dariyah.

The alliance with Muhammad Bin Saud: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab successfully formed an alliance with Prince Muhammad bin Saud, who utilised his wealth and resources to support the call for monotheism. This partnership was established on solid foundations, enabling the Shaikh to continue his mission through education, correspondence, and preaching. He diligently taught, wrote letters, and fortified his arguments with evidence and reasoning to substantiate his claims. His efforts included advocating for the eradication of wrongdoing, the dismantling of grave structures, the prevention of idolatry, and the affirmation of servitude to Allah alone. The call remained peaceful and measured, gently reaching out to hearts and inviting people to the path of Allah with wisdom and good counsel. He continued to educate those who attended his lessons, clarifying his beliefs and explaining the principles of his call to all, regardless of their background. However, he recognised that gentleness was often met with harshness, truth with falsehood, and good counsel with conspiracies.

Consequently, it became necessary to enter a phase of Jihad and to confront wrongdoing with strength. The Shaikh, with the assistance of Prince Muhammad bin Saud, began to prepare the necessary resources, including men and weapons, to mobilise the fighters from Diriyah beyond its borders. The aim was to spread the call and solidify its foundations both within the island and beyond. The Shaikh personally oversaw the training of the men, the organisation of the armies, and the dispatch of smaller units, all while continuing his studies, teaching, corresponding with the people, and receiving and bidding farewell to guests. Allah granted him knowledge, prestige, dignity, and authority after a prolonged struggle. He possessed keen political insight and extensive experience in matters of war and governance.

The conflicts between the supporters of the call and their adversaries persisted for many years, with the proponents of the call often emerging victorious. Villages fell one after another. In the year 1178 AH / 1773 CE, Riyadh was captured under the leadership of Prince Abdul Aziz Muhammad bin Saud, while its previous ruler, Dhahham bin Dawwas, fled. Dhahham was a tyrannical ruler who repeatedly oppressed the callers to Tawhid and violated the agreements he had made with those leading the call. Following the conquest of Riyadh, the territory under the influence of the call expanded significantly, and many people willingly accepted the call to Tawhid. The obstacles that had previously hindered their acceptance were removed, leading to a period of relief after hardship, with prosperity following adversity. Wealth increased, conditions improved, and the people found security under the nascent Islamic state, which had deprived them of the blessing of safety during its absence.

Following the death of Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, the call ontinued, receiving strong support from the Al Saud family, who wielded significant authority. They shifted their focus to the Hijaz region, which was under the control of Sharif Ghalib bin Musaid. The Sharif initiated military and religious attacks against the Saudis. This conflict persisted until the year 1803, when the Saudis entered Makkah without facing any resistance from Sharif Ghalib, who chose to flee to Jeddah. Two years later, the Saudis captured Madina. The influence of the Salafi call extended across much of the Arabian Peninsula, prompting Britain to recognise the threat this posed to its interests. The First Saudi State established its dominance over the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea, bringing the Qawasim in the Arabian Gulf under its control. Its influence reached into southern Iraq, affecting the overland route between Europe and the East. Moreover, the religious foundations upon which this state was built made it impossible for Britain to manipulate or negotiate agreements with it, as opposition to foreign influence in the region was one of the primary objectives of this state. The Qawasim, supported by Saudi strength, were able to deliver significant blows to the English fleet in 1806, resulting in their control over the waters of the Gulf. During the reign of Saud bin Abdul Aziz, the state reached its political zenith, extending its influence to Karbala in Iraq and Hauran in the Levant, with the entire Arabian Peninsula coming under its authority, except for Yemen.

Conspiracies Against The Salafi Call: The malevolent minds among the European descendants contemplated the consequences of the continued existence of the First Saudi State. They recognised that its persistence would undermine their interests in the East as a whole. Consequently, they deemed it essential to dismantle this state, employing various insidious methods to eradicate the influence of the Salafi call, including:

First: There was a concerted effort to sway public opinion within the Islamic state against the teachings of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Those who adhered to Bidah and superstitions, mistakenly believing them to be integral to Islam, actively opposed the Shaikh’s call. This resistance was not limited to a single faction or group; rather, it emerged from various quarters and individuals. It was particularly pronounced among scholars who relied on the influence granted to them by the general populace and the uneducated, seeking to preserve their practices rooted in Bidah and superstitions, which they erroneously considered part of the faith. These individuals included caretakers of graves and those who profited from offerings, as well as those who thrived on the food and funds provided during commemorations of the deceased. They also believed that Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab introduced a new religion that contradicted their established customs. This opposition was widespread throughout the Ottoman Empire and across the entire Islamic world, exacerbated by the dissemination of fatwas issued by corrupt scholars, which were propagated by the English and French, adversaries of Islam, to discredit the teachings of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab.

Secondly: There was a campaign of intrigue and discord between the call of Shaikh and the leadership of the Ottoman Empire. The British, French, and others instilled in Sultan Mahmud II the belief that Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s movement aimed for the independence of the Arabian Peninsula, a separation from the Ottoman Caliphate, the unification of the Arab world, the seizure of the banner of the caliphate, and the establishment of an Arab caliphate. Sultan Mahmud II succumbed to the malicious whispers of his adversaries, a course of action that was unwarranted. It would have been more prudent for him to question this deceitful counsel and to dispatch trustworthy officials to investigate the matter. The Sultan of the Muslims failed to recognise the peril of believing this fabricated news regarding a genuine Islamic call and acquiesced to the enemies’ suggestions to eliminate it before it could gain strength, resulting in significant expenditures of both resources and manpower to suppress it.

The Ottoman Empire devised a strategy to combat the First Saudi State, intending to delegate this responsibility to the governors of neighboring regions. This approach aimed to achieve two objectives: first, to eliminate Saudi expansion in the Arab East, and second, to weaken these governors and deplete their resources, ensuring their continued subservience to the Empire. Initially, the focus was on the governor of Baghdad, as he was the closest to Najd. However, this governor was preoccupied with local disturbances in his province, and his military forces were too weak to confront the Saudis effectively. He faced multiple failures in repelling their incursions along the Iraqi borders. Consequently, the Empire turned to the governor of Syria, hoping he would succeed where the governor of Iraq had failed, but his outcome was even more disastrous. After losing faith in the capabilities of the governors in Baghdad and Syria, the Empire directed its attention to Egypt, requesting Governor Muhammad Ali in 1807 to launch a campaign against the Arabian territories to reclaim the holy sites from Saudi control and restore the Empire’s authority, which was waning in the Arabian Peninsula. However, Muhammad Ali did not respond to the Empire’s request until 1811, after he had dealt with the Mamluk beys in the Citadel massacre.

The followers of the Salafi call did not seek the caliphate, nor did they express any objections to its authority. However, the disagreement was confined to two main issues. The first was the Salafis’ insistence on the necessity for pilgrims to adhere to the principles of Islam and to refrain from any actions that would contravene them. The second issue was the Ottoman Empire’s sense of embarrassment and vulnerability in light of the control over the holy cities in Hijaz by the helpers of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, as they recognized that this situation undermined their prestige and political standing. Al-Jabarti indicated that the stance of the helpers of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab regarding the pilgrims from the Levant was that they should only come under the conditions they imposed, which included arriving without the palanquins, drums, flutes, weapons, or any other items that contradicted Islamic law. Upon hearing this, the pilgrims returned without performing the pilgrimage and did not abandon their objectionable practices. He also noted a similar position regarding the Egyptian pilgrimage procession.

The decree issued by the Ottoman Sultan, which called for war against the Saudis at the behest of Muhammad Ali and influenced by the letters from the Sharif of Jeddah, as well as encouragement from the British, was limited to the objectives of reclaiming the sacred cities. This request was reiterated, focusing solely on the liberation of the sacred sites. Following the military’s successful conquest of the Hijaz, after enduring several defeats against the followers of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, Sultan Mahmud II sent a decree to Egypt to be read in mosques, announcing the restoration of the sacred cities. This indicates that the Ottoman Sultan’s primary aim was the reestablishment of Ottoman sovereignty over the Hijaz.

The war could have concluded at this point, as Muhammad Ali’s forces had taken control of the cities in Hijaz. Muhammad Ali appointed a new Sharif for the region, who was compelled to travel there and subsequently expelled Sharif Ghalib, who had supported his forces and facilitated their entry into Hijaz. Additionally, the leaders of the Saudi Salafi call proposed a peace agreement; however, Muhammad Ali imposed conditions that were exceedingly difficult to fulfill for the acceptance of peace. In his response to the peace request, he included a threat, as narrated by al-Jabarti, stating: “As for the peace, we do not reject it under conditions that require us to be reimbursed for all expenses incurred for the troops from the beginning of the war until this date, and to return all that was taken and received from the treasures and supplies that were in the sacred chamber, as well as the value of what was consumed. After that, he must come and meet with me, and we will formalise our peace agreement. If he refuses to do so and does not come, we will proceed to him.”

The Reality of Muhammad Ali’s Campaign in Hijaz and Najd: The conflict between Muhammad Ali and the followers of Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was not a war between two forces both adhering to Islam, nor was it an Arab war, as some may describe it. Rather, this conflict represented a struggle between a Saudi Islamic force, which had no political ambitions but demonstrated a fervent commitment to returning to the fundamental principles of Islam, and an opposing force sent by the governor of Egypt. This opposing force was not Egyptian in nature; it primarily consisted of Albanians, some Turks, Christians, and a few French officers. Most of its leaders bore only the name of Islam. The historian al-Jabarti illustrates the nature of this force through the account of a pious and devout observer, who witnessed the initial defeat of these troops at the hands of the followers of the Salafi call: “The question of our victory arises, especially when many of our soldiers do not adhere to our faith. Among them are those who do not practice any religion or follow our creed. They are accompanied by containers of alcohol, and there is no call to prayer in our midst, nor are the obligatory prayers performed. The faithful gather in orderly lines behind a single Imam, demonstrating humility and reverence. When the time for prayer arrives, even amidst the chaos of battle, the Mu’adh-dhin calls for prayer, and they perform the prayer of fear. One group advances to engage in combat while another remains behind to pray. Our troops are astonished by this practice, having neither heard of it nor witnessed it before. They call out in their camp, urging one another to confront the polytheists, those who shave their beards, indulge in fornication and sodomy, and consume alcohol. Upon examining many of the fallen soldiers, they discovered that they were uncircumcised. When they reached Badr and took control of it, along with the surrounding villages and territories inhabited by the best of people and learned individuals, they plundered them, seizing their women, daughters, and children, as well as their books”.

Muhammad Ali did not adhere to the Shariah in his warfare; rather, he acted in opposition to divine commandments, transgressing the boundaries set by the Almighty and showing disregard for Islamic rulings. His army engaged in killing, destruction, plundering, and violating the rights of the monotheistic Muslims. In the Battle of the Camel, Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, instructed his companions: “Do not pursue a commander, nor finish off the wounded, and whoever lays down his weapon is safe.” He also cautioned: “Beware of women, even if they insult your honor and curse your leaders, for a man may strike a woman with a stick or a club, and he will be reproached for it, as will his descendants thereafter.” Abu Umamah Al-Bahili, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: “I witnessed the Battle of Siffin, where they did not finish off the wounded, nor did they kill those who turned to flee, nor did they loot the slain.”

The Ottoman Sultan was primarily concerned with the submission of the Hijaz to his rule, and the attack on Dariyah was not an urgent or necessary demand for the Ottoman state. Muhammad Ali was inflexible in his terms for peace, indicating his desire to prolong the conflict; his objective in this war was to further his expansionist ambitions within the framework permitted by British political goals in the region. The Saudi state had become a significant threat to British interests across the entire area, including the Red Sea, the Arabian Gulf, and the overland route through Iraq. Consequently, Britain felt a genuine threat to its interests in the East, which justifies the characterisation of this campaign as a crusade cloaked in Islamic guise.

When Tosun Pasha, under Muhammad Ali, was defeated by Prince Abdullah bin Saud, resulting in the destruction of half his army, Muhammad Ali personally ventured to the Hejaz in 1813. He apprehended Sharif of Makkah Ghalib bin Musaid, accusing him of conspiring with the Saudis. Muhammad Ali confiscated all of Ghalib’s possessions, including his wealth, furniture, and belongings, effectively making the Sharif an employee of Muhammad Ali in the Hejaz. Subsequently, in January 1815, Muhammad Ali achieved victory over Saudi forces, a conflict regarded by some as one of the most significant events and a crucial battle in the military history of Egypt.

Muhammad Ali did not remain in the Arabian Peninsula to oversee the victory he had achieved; instead, he returned to Egypt, leaving his son Tosun in Hijaz. Soon after, Tosun succeeded in inflicting a new defeat on the Saudis for the first time and quickly advanced into the northern region of Najd, reaching the city of Al-Rass. He then occupied Al-Shabiyah, thereby opening the route to Al-Dariyah. In response, Prince Abdullah hastened to request the initiation of negotiations to prevent bloodshed and protect the towns and villages. Negotiations commenced between the two parties regarding a peace agreement under the following condition

1 – The occupation of the Egyptian forces in Diriyah. 2 – Prince Abdullah is to place himself at the disposal of Tosun Pasha, traveling to the location he deems appropriate. 3 – Prince Abdullah must ensure the safety of the pilgrimage routes and remain subject to the governance of the city by Muhammad Ali until an agreement on the peace terms is reached.

These conditions, if agreed upon, shall not take effect until they are ratified by Muhammad Ali. However, these conditions were not accepted by Prince Abdullah, who decided to send a delegation to Egypt to negotiate directly with Muhammad Ali regarding the terms of peace, but the delegation’s efforts were unsuccessful due to the pasha’s rigidity, and the Saudis prepared for war and combat. Consequently, Muhammad Ali dispatched a new campaign in 1816, led by his son Ibrahim Pasha.

Ibrahim Pasha advanced his forces from Hijaz towards Najd, successfully capturing the cities of Unayzah, Buraydah, and Shuqra, thereby subjugating the entire Qassim region. In his campaign, Ibrahim employed a conciliatory approach towards the tribes, a strategy that endeared him to many in Najd. He frequently convened councils and distributed gifts to the populace, initially adopting a method that appealed to the tribes by prohibiting looting and pillaging. With the assistance of his French military advisors, he continued his advance until he laid siege to Dir’iyyah, which was known for its strong defenses. This siege lasted from April 6 to September 9, 1818, culminating in the surrender of Prince Abdullah bin Saud and Ibrahim’s entry into Dir’iyyah. From there he dispatched the Saudi prince under heavy guard to Egypt, who was subsequently sent from Cairo to Istanbul. In Istanbul, Prince Abdullah was publicly displayed for three full days before being ordered to be executed by hanging. The truth of his execution will be revealed on the Day of Judgment. He had called for peace among the people of the island through a message sent by Shaikh Ahmad al-Hanbali to Tosun, in which they acknowledged the authority of the Ottoman Sultan and affirmed their loyalty to the caliphate. Therefore, why was there a persistent insistence on directing forces to the Arabian Peninsula? Thus, the lives of Muslims were lost at the hands of one another, a consequence of the machinations of their enemies. The inhabitants of the island supported the Muslims of Egypt during the French occupation; therefore, what is the reason for this deliberate aggression? Muhammad Ali was able, through the leaders associated with Islam, to persuade many ordinary people that their actions were in compliance with the orders of the Caliph of the Messenger of Allah to whom they owed their obedience and allegiance. However, the issue of loyalty and disavowal was entirely absent in the actions of Muhammad Ali. This is evidenced by his allegiance to the enemies of Islam, allowing them to lead him and guide the nation towards its demise.

The joy in Britain was immense upon learning of the fall of Dir’iyyah, the capital of the First Saudi State, to the forces of Ibrahim Pasha. This state was a Salafi entity that had supported the Qawasim in their struggle against British interests in the Arabian Gulf, which posed a threat to British interests in India. It is pertinent to consider, particularly in light of the events that unfolded in the Islamic world during its modern history, what might have transpired had the armies of Muhammad Ali and the Ottoman Empire collaborated with the First Saudi State instead of opposing it. Together, they could have stood against European ambitions in general, and British interests in particular. Such a collaboration could have altered the course of history, especially since the Saudi state was a Muslim entity founded on the correct Salafi principles, which the Islamic world desperately needed at that time. Regardless, Britain recognised the potential benefits of this situation and quickly extended congratulations to Ibrahim Pasha, motivated by its own self-interests. Captain George Forster Sadler was dispatched to convey these congratulations to Ibrahim Pasha for his conquest of Dir’iyyah while also seeking to establish a framework for coordination between Pasha’s land forces and the British naval forces for a joint military operation against the Qawasim, followers of the First Saudi State.

The relationship between Britain and Muhammad Ali is longstanding. At the onset of his rule, he engaged in negotiations with them that lasted four months, during which he demonstrated his seriousness and sincere desire to establish a connection with them. He even requested to place himself under their protection. This is corroborated by the report from Fraser, who was responsible for the negotiations. Their eventual acceptance of his proposal led to their abandonment of their alliances with the Mamluks. The report prepared by Fraser, who negotiated with Muhammad Ali’s envoys and sent to General Moore on October 16, 1807, outlined the key aspects of these negotiations. It stated: “I hope you will allow me to clarify for you the essence of a conversation that took place between the Pasha of Egypt, Major General Shryock, and Captain Philows during their mission with His Excellency. I have reason to believe that this conversation, along with many other private communications I had with him, indicates that he is earnest and sincere in his proposals. Muhammad Ali Pasha expressed his desire to place himself under British protection, and we promised to relay his suggestions to the leaders of the British forces, so they could present them to the English government for consideration. In return, Muhammad Ali committed to preventing the French, Turks, or any army from another state from entering Alexandria by sea, and he pledged to maintain Alexandria as an ally.”

The French consul, Drugeti, commented on the information he received regarding the agreement between Muhammad Ali and the British, suggesting that this treaty represented a type of agreement that, if concluded, would fulfill the objectives the British sought by sending their campaign to Egypt. However, its impact might exceed what they anticipated from this military expedition. The British chose not to disclose all the terms of this agreement following its signing, the evacuation of Alexandria, and its handover to the Pasha of Egypt. Britain deemed it necessary to exercise caution in this regard due to the explicit declaration of hostility towards the Ottoman Empire contained within the agreement, as it supported a ruler seeking independence at a time when British diplomacy had significant interests with the empire and aimed to benefit from its new ally to extend its influence in the region, if possible. [An Excerpt from “Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awamil An-Nuhud Wa Asbab As-Suqut 6/375-400]

Read: The State of the Region of Najd, Arabia in the Time of Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb and the First Saudi State- By Shaikh Abu Khadeejah, may Allah preserve him. https://abukhadeejah.com/the-state-of-the-region-of-najd-arabia-in-the-time-of-ibn-%CA%BFabdul-wahhab-and-the-first-saudi-state/

Did Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhāb rebel? The First Saudi State. https://abukhadeejah.com/did-shaikh-muhammad-bin-%CA%BFabdul-wahhab-rebel-the-first-saudi-state/

The boundaries of steady moral qualities

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Moral character has boundaries. Going beyond these boundaries leads to transgression while falling short results in deficiency and humiliation.

Anger:

Anger is commendable when it is within the boundaries of bravery and a dislike for despicable and poor (behaviour). However, crossing those boundaries leads to oppression, while insufficient anger results in cowardice and a lack of aversion towards despicable actions.

Eagerness:

Eagerness should be balanced to achieve what is necessary in life and to work towards those goals. A lack of eagerness leads to humiliation and a waste of (valuable time and missed opportunities), while excessive eagerness leads to vehement greed and unpraiseworthy desire.

Envy:

The boundaries of envy lie in (praiseworthy or healthy) competition for excellence and improvement, without wishing ill upon the other person. Going beyond these limits leads to negative feelings of envy and oppression, where one desires that the envied should be deprived of blessings and is eager to harm him. (However), if one lacks (what is required of this matter), it leads to a lack of self-esteem and ambition. The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “There is no envy except with regards to two (people): a person whom Allah has given wealth and he spends it in the right way, and a person whom Allah has given wisdom (knowledge) and he judges by it and teaches it to others”. This type of envy is competition between people and the one with benign envy seeks to emulate the one he envies whilst not harbouring the despised envy which is to wish that the blessings bestowed on the envied should cease.

Permissible Desires:

They are a means of relaxation for the heart and mind after dedicating oneself to acts of obedience and striving to achieve virtuous deeds. Yet, if one indulges excessively, it results in intense and difficult-to-control emotions and immoral behaviour, causing the individual to sink to the level of animals. On the other hand, if a person lacks desire and does not (use leisure as a means) of pursuing excellence and virtue, it leads to weakness, helplessness, and degradation.

Relaxation:

It provides a renewed strength to the self and enhances one’s cognitive capacity, enabling them to perform acts of obedience and achieve virtuous deeds, and to avoid being weakened by labour and fatigue. Nevertheless, exceeding one’s limits results in apathy, idleness, squandering and the loss of many advantageous opportunities.

Furthermore, insufficient relaxation damages one’s strength and may leads to weakness.

Generosity

Exceeding its boundaries results in excess and wastefulness. Conversely, a lack of generosity leads to stinginess and penny-pinching.

Bravery:

Exceeding one’s boundaries results in recklessness, while a lack of courage leads to cowardice and vulnerability. Knowing when to act and when to abstain is the key to staying within its limits.

Protective Jealousy:

Going beyond one’s limits results in false accusations and (unfounded) suspicion against an innocent person. Similarly, lacking protective jealousy leads to carelessness and a disregard for one’s own reputation.

Humility:

Going beyond one’s boundaries results in disgrace and embarrassment. Conversely, a deficiency in humility leads to pride and boasting.

Honour:

Going beyond one’s boundaries results in pride, whilst a lack of honour leads to humiliation and indignity.

Justice ensures an upright balance in all matters, requiring individuals to follow the balanced path set by the Islamic legislation, which is free from exaggeration and negligence. All beneficial things of the worldly life and the Hereafter depend on this (balance). Physical well-being cannot be attained without it, as any imbalance in the body’s elements – whether through excess or deficiency – will lead to a loss of well-being and strength. Similarly, engaging in natural activities like sleep, eating, and socialising in moderation is considered balanced.

However, veering towards extremes in any of these activities will result in deficiencies and negative outcomes. One of the most noble and advantageous fields of knowledge is the acquaintance with the limits (boundaries in different matters), particularly the divine limits, the commands and prohibitions. The most knowledgeable are those who possess the most knowledge of these divine limits, hence they neither exceed them nor fall short of them. As Allah, The Exalted, states:

ٱلۡأَعۡرَابُ أَشَدُّ ڪُفۡرً۬ا وَنِفَاقً۬ا وَأَجۡدَرُ أَلَّا يَعۡلَمُواْ حُدُودَ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ

The Bedouins are the worst in disbelief and hypocrisy, and more likely to be in ignorance of the limits (Allah’s Commandments and His Legal Laws, etc.) which Allah has revealed to His Messenger. [at-Tawbah 97]

Therefore, the most just, balanced and upright people are those who stay within the limits of moral character, the actions and deeds legislated in the Islamic legislation- in knowledge and practice.

We ask Allah:

اللهم كما حَسَّنْت خَلْقِي فَحَسِّنْ خُلُقِي

O Allah! Just as You made my external form beautiful, make my character beautiful as well.


Source: An Excerpt from ‘Al-Fawaa’id page 207- 209

Admonition when Shariah schools began to emerge in Baghdad

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of mercy.

Al-Allamah Siddeeq Hasan Khan, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:

(You) should know that sound knowledge does not contain any harm. Conversely, ignorance does not hold any benefits. This is because every piece of sound knowledge has a benefit that is connected to matters of the Afterlife, the life (in this world), or human perfection. However, in certain sciences, it may be mistakenly assumed that harm can arise or that the knowledge is not beneficial due to a failure to consider the necessary conditions that must be observed in acquiring knowledge and by the scholars, because every branch of knowledge has its boundaries, and these boundaries should not be exceeded. It is erroneous to believe that knowledge can surpass its intended purpose, just as it is incorrect to assume that mainstream medicine can cure all ailments. In reality, certain diseases cannot be cured through (medical) treatment. [I] Among them (the people) is one who thinks that (some specific) knowledge is above its rank, just as one thinks that jurisprudence is the most honourable of all sciences without exception, but this is not the case, as the knowledge of pure Islamic monotheism is more honourable without exception. [II]

Among them is (one) intending through knowledge other than its purpose, such as the one who learns for the sake of wealth or prestige. The purpose of sciences of the religion in and of themselves is not to earn wealth, but rather acquaintance with facts and refining morals. Therefore, he who pursues knowledge of the religion for the sake of professionalism is not a scholar, but rather he is someone who feigns resemblance to the scholars. [III] The scholars of Transoxiana revealed and stated this when they were informed of the construction of schools in Baghdad; so, they held gatherings of religious knowledge and stated: “The people with lofty aspirations and the pure souls used to preoccupy themselves with it, whose goal behind the pursuit of knowledge was because of its nobility and perfection (attained) through it, thus, they came to the scholars to benefit from them and their knowledge. However, if it becomes a means of earning, the mean (vile) and lazy people will approach it and this will be a reason for its disappearance, thus the sciences of wisdom are abandoned, even though they are noble in and of themselves”. [IV] [1]

—————————————————–

[I]https://abukhadeejah.com/what-are-the-principles-of-medicine-with-the-scholars-of-islam/ https://abukhadeejah.com/why-i-post-health-articles-on-my-site-and-top-12-tips-for-cancer-prevention/

[II]Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Haai Al-Mad’khali, may Allah preserve him, stated: The Muslims have to be acquainted with the knowledge of Tawheed and Shirk. Shirk is the gravest sin that can be committed in disobedience to Allah. The Prophets brought the greatest (aspect) of knowledge, and that is the knowledge of Tawheed, and they warned against the greatest wrong-doing, which is to ascribe partners to Allah. [ إِنَّ ٱلشِّرۡكَ لَظُلۡمٌ عَظِيمٌ۬ – Verily! Associating partners to (Allah in worship) is a great wrong indeed]. [Luqman. 13]

This is an affair that many of the callers to Islam have turned away from at present and do not give importance. The knowledge of Tawheed is the first thing they snub and flee from, (and) Shirk is the first thing they decline (to address) when seeking to guide the Ummah. Neither do they warn the people nor caution them against this greatest danger known to mankind [i.e. Shirk]. Tawheed is the greatest (knowledge) brought by Prophets as glad tidings, but they (i.e. many of the callers) do not convey it; rather the greatest affair to them is modern politics. The knowledge of Tawheed is the affair by way of which this Ummah is distinguished. Neither is there anything more impure (i.e. corrupts the heart, deeds, manners, thoughts, ideas, intentions, goals, aims, etc) nor filthier than shirk, so why do we not purity the Ummah from this impurity and filth? Why do those callers to Islam deliberately feign ignorance of this impurity, in which the people wander blindly and belittle its severity, even though there is nothing equal to its (filthiness and impurity)? It is obligated to the Muslims to free themselves from the filth of shirk and sincerely worship Allah alone so that they become the cleanest people and purest [i.e. in creed, deeds, thoughts, views, intentions, goals, aims, etc]. And through this, they will be distinguished [in every virtuous trait]. If the mosques of the Muslims in the Islamic world are filled with graves- even though the Messenger severely cursed those who turn graves into places of worship- and those callers to Islam have not taken any steps to confront this filthy practice, then there can be no betrayal and deception -against the ummah- greater than this.

إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يَكۡتُمُونَ مَآ أَنزَلۡنَا مِنَ ٱلۡبَيِّنَـٰتِ وَٱلۡهُدَىٰ مِنۢ بَعۡدِ مَا بَيَّنَّـٰهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِى ٱلۡكِتَـٰبِ‌ۙ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ يَلۡعَنُہُمُ ٱللَّهُ وَيَلۡعَنُہُمُ ٱللَّـٰعِنُونَ

Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences, and the guidance, which We have sent down after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by the cursers. [Al-Baqarah. 159]

The greatest clear proof is Tawheed and it is the guidance that will remove the people from shirk. Therefore, O callers to Islam! Fear Allah, safeguard the Muslims from this greatest danger, and raise them to the highest station in this worldly life – the station of Tawheed because there is no station loftier than the station of Tawheed. Tawheed is the greatest station in the entire universe and Shirk is the lowest. [2]

[III] https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/01/04/certificates/

[IV] Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allah have mercy upon him,  said: I saw that solely being preoccupied with studying Fiqh and listening to hadeeth is not enough to rectify the heart, except combined with (the authentic narrations concerning the) softening of the hearts, and looking into the biographies of the pious predecessors. As for knowing Halal and Haram only, it does not have a great strength in softening the heart; rather the softening of the heart is (attained) by mentioning the Ahadith on the subject matter and the stories of the pious predecessors. That is because they (i.e. the pious predecessors) grasped the intent behind narrating, demonstrated the tangible obligated actions by way of them, practical encounter with their meanings, and the goals behind them. And there is nothing that will make you experience this, except after cultivation and experience. That is because I find that the ambition of the majority of the Muhadditheen and the students of hadeeth is (focused on acquiring hadeeth that has the closest chain of transmission from the Prophet and gathering numerous authentic Ahadith on a particular subject matter in the religion. And the majority of the jurists (focus on) the science of debate and that which gives one the upper hand, so how can the heart be softened through these affairs? Indeed, a group of pious predecessors aspired to see that a righteous slave should look to his character and upright guidance and not (merely) the knowledge he has acquired. That is (because) his character and upright guidance are the fruits of his knowledge. So understand this! The students of Hadeeth and Fiqh should combine (seeking after hadeeth and fiqh) with studying the lives of the pious predecessors and the Zuhhaad so that it can be a means to soften the heart. Indeed, books have been compiled regarding the affairs and manners of each one of those well-known outstanding men (of piety). A book has been compiled regarding the affairs of Al-Hasan [Al-Basri], Sufyaan Ath-Thawri, Ibraaheem Bin Ad-ham, Bishr Al-Haafiy, Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Ma’roof and other than them amongst the scholars and the Zuhhaad. [6]

It is necessary that the seekers of Hadeeth should have the most perfect (behaviour, manners, etiquette, etc) amongst the people, be the most humble amongst the people, the greatest in their impartiality and adherence to the religion, the least in (deviating from good conduct) and (being overcome with) anger because they constantly listen to the narrations that gather the excellent manners and etiquettes of Allah’s Messenger [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him], the lives of the virtuous pious predecessors, the path of the scholars of Hadeeth and the virtues of the (pious ones and scholars) who have passed away; so they adhere to the purest and excellent (aspects of those traits, etiquettes, manners, etc) and turn away from the most despised and lowly (traits, behaviour, manners, etiquettes, etc). [7]


[1] An Excerpt from “Abjad Al-Ulum” 1/77-78. slightly paraphrased

[2] An Excerpt from “Marhaban Yaa Taalibal Ilm”. pages 104-106. slightly paraphrased

[3] Sharh Hilya Taalib Al-Ilm..page:22. slightly paraphrased

[4] An Excerpt from ‘Saydul khaatir’ Page 171. Daar Ibn Rajab. 1st edition 2003

[5] Source: An Excerpt from ‘Jaami Bayaan Al-Ilm 1/78. By Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadi

Destructive Self-sufficiency

The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah, The Exalted, said:

كَلَّآ إِنَّ ٱلۡإِنسَـٰنَ لَيَطۡغَىٰٓ
أَن رَّءَاهُ ٱسۡتَغۡنَىٰٓ

Nay! Verily, man does transgress all bounds, because he considers himself self-sufficient.

[كَلَّآ إِنَّ ٱلۡإِنسَـٰنَ لَيَطۡغَىٰٓ – Nay! Verily, man does transgress all bounds]- Meaning, Abu Jahl, who used to be insolent and boastful about his clothing, riding beast and food when he earned more wealth. [1]

[أَن رَّءَاهُ ٱسۡتَغۡنَىٰٓ – because he considers himself self-sufficient]- Meaning, due to the human being’s ignorance and wrongdoing when he considers himself self-sufficient, he transgresses, rebels, haughtily turns away from guidance, forgets that he will be returned to his Lord and does not not fear the recompense; rather, he might reach such a state that he abandons guidance and calls others to abandon it and tell others not to perform the prayer which is the most virtuous deed of Iman. [2]

Allah did not (solely) state that he (this human being) became self-sufficient; rather, He indicated that tyranny arises from the perception of his self-sufficiency. But He did not mentioned this perfection in Surah Al-Layl; instead, He stated:

وَأَمَّا مَنۢ بَخِلَ وَٱسْتَغْنَىٰ

وَكَذَّبَ بِٱلْحُسْنَىٰ

فَسَنُيَسِّرُهُۥ لِلْعُسْرَىٰ

But as for he—( Umayyah bin Khalaf)—who is miserly (with respect to his wealth and Allāh’s right upon him) and considers himself self-sufficient (from his Lord). And rejects al-Ḥusnā (the statement of monotheism) (or: the obligations of prayer, fasting and charity) (or: the promise of Allāh) (or: Paradise and its reward). Then We will make easy for him (the path to) evil (or: Hellfire). https://www.thenoblequran.com/q/#/verse/92/8

This, and Allah knows best, is due to the cause of his arrogance, which stems from his perception of his own self-sufficiency.

Surah Al-Layl elucidates the factors contributing to his downfall and the lack of ease in his affairs, stemming from their belief that they do not need their Lord by abandoning obedience and servitude. Had they genuinely relied on Allah, they would have endeavored to draw nearer to Him through the prescribed acts of worship, akin to a servant who cannot do without his Lord even for a moment and adhering to His orders. For this reason, this is linked to his miserliness, which reflects his failure to fulfill his obligations in speech, actions, and wealth, as well as his rejection of Al-Husna [Footnote a] which is promised those who perform good deeds, as stated by Allah: [لِلَّذِينَ أَحْسَنُوا الْحُسْنَى وَزِيَادَةٌ – For those who have done good is the best (reward, i.e. Paradise) and Ziyadah]. [Footnote b]

The purpose of this discussion is that the perfection of not needing Allah is the cause of the downfall of a servant of Allah and is the root of all difficulties. His perfection of not being in need of his Lord is the cause of his transgression and downfall, both of which stand in stark contrast to the dependence on Allah and servitude (to Him). [3]

The creation find themselves within two types of neediness. The first type of neediness is inevitable. It is a type of neediness which every everyone (cannot do without) – the righteous and the wicked. It neither necessitates praise nor dispraise, and neither reward nor punishment; rather it is solely due to the fact that the creation are created beings [i.e. absolutely in need and completely dependent on their Creator in every way].

The second type of neediness is one based on choice from which emanates two noble aspects of knowledge. The first one is the servant’s knowledge and awareness of his Lord and the second is knowledge and awareness of oneself in reality. As soon as one acquires these two types of knowledge, it brings about a type of neediness that becomes a person’s distinguished and most precious source of wealth, and the means to success and happiness in (this life and the next). The people’s different stations in this type of neediness depends on their different stations in these two affairs of knowledge.

The one who knows that his Lord (Allaah) is the Self-Sufficient One [absolutely free from all wants and to Whom everyone and everything depends, and none can do without Him in the twinkling of an eye], then he will know that he is completely in need.

The one knows that his Lord (Allaah) is alone the Possessor of Perfect Ability [possessor of All-Encompassing Ability and able to do all things], he will know that he is completely unable [cannot do anything in the twinkling of an eye without the help of] his Lord.

The one who knows that his Lord (Allaah) is The All-Mighty, he will know that he is one completely in a state of [complete poverty, weakness and want unless his Lord provides for him etc]. The one who knows that his Lord (Allaah) is the possessor of All- Encompassing knowledge and Wisdom, he will know that he is ignorant.

Allah brought the person out of his mother’s womb while he knew nothing- not able to do anything and owned nothing; neither able to give nor take, and neither able to harm nor benefit. This state of neediness – until he reached a more perfect state – is something witnessed and tangible for everyone (to see), and it is well known that this is the very essence of the human being and he remains upon that state. He does not move from this state and enters into a state of Lordship – a state in which he becomes absolutely self-sufficient and not need of anyone and anything; rather he does not cease being a slave, a needy one to his Rabb [Allah the Creator, All-Provider and the Only One Who Controls and Sustains Everything] and His Fatir [Allah, The Originator and Creator of Everything].

However, after the human being was granted blessings, shown mercy, granted the means to reach a more perfect state, and Allah -out of His Perfect Kindness and Generosity- granted him apparent blessings [i.e. to recognize the Messengers who were sent with Islamic Monotheism, granted him the lawful pleasures of this world, including health, good looks, etc.] and the hidden blessings [i.e. granted him the innate disposition to recognize his Lord when the Messenger calls him to Iman, and granted him knowledge, wisdom, guidance for doing righteous deeds, and also the pleasures and delights of the Hereafter in Paradise, etc.], granted him hearing, sight and a heart, and taught him [i.e. gave him the means to knowledge], granted him ability, subjugated things to him, granted him [the desire and enthusiasm to pursue what is beneficial, and take action], enabled him to receive the service of those of his kind [i.e. gave him authority over other humans], subjugated to him horses and camels, gave him the ability to capture the animals in the sea, drop birds from the sky, subjugate wild animals, dig wells [irrigate water etc.], plant trees, dig the earth, learn how to build, acquire the things that are of benefit to him, guard against and protect himself from that which is harmful to him; then the Miskin [i.e. this absolutely poor, dependent human being] thinks that he has a share of authority and claims – for himself – a kingship [or authority] similar to that of Allah [Glorified be Allah and free is Allah from all imperfections, partners, coequals, similarities etc.], and begins to see himself in a manner other than what he was at first, forgets his (prior) state of non-existence, poverty and neediness, until he becomes as if he was not that poor and needy thing. [4]

——————————————————–

Footnote a: al-Ḥusnā (the statement of monotheism) (or: the obligations of prayer, fasting and charity) (or: the promise of Allāh) (or: Paradise and its reward). Then We will make easy for him (the path to) evil (or: Hellfire). https://www.thenoblequran.com/q/#/verse/92/8

Footnote b:

“‏زيادة‏”‏ وهي النظر إلى وجه الله الكريم، وسماع كلامه، والفوز برضاه والبهجة بقربه، فبهذا حصل لهم أعلى ما يتمناه المتمنون، ويسأله السائلون

The word Ziyadah in this verse means to see Allah’s face, hear His Speech, attain His pleasure etc, (on the Day of Judgement). [Tafsir Sadi]


[1] An Excerpt from Zaadul Maseer Fee Ilm at-Tafseer. By Imam Ibnul Jawzi [may Allaah have mercy upon him]
[2] An Excerpt from Tafsir As-Sadi
[3] An Excerpt from Tariq Al-Hijratayn 13 By Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him.
[4] An Excerpt from Tariq Al-Hijratayn. pages 9-10

Self-destruction

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Imam Ibn Battah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Know, O my brothers! I have pondered over the reason that expelled a people from the Sunnah and the Jama’ah, compelled them to bidah and ignominy, opened up a door of trial to their hearts and prevented them from the light of truth that enables a person to make good judgements; thus, I found that (coming) from two angles: (Unnecessary) research and debate, asking too much concerning that which is of no benefit- (matters that are) neither harmful to an ignoramus nor beneficial to the believer’s understanding. The other (reason) is sitting with (a person) whose Fitnah one is not safe from and (is a cause of) corrupting the heart of the one who accompanies him.

Al-Ibanah Al-Kubra 1/390