Skip to main content

I have met the Mashayikh

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

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

I have met the Mashayikh; their circumstances were different and their stations of knowledge varied. The most beneficial of them for me in companionship was the scholar who acted upon his knowledge, even though there were others more knowledgeable than him.

I met Abdul Wahhab Al-Anmaatee, who adhered to the principles of the pious predecessors. Backbiting was not heard in his gatherings (a) nor did he seek any reward for sharing hadith. Whenever I read to him the hadiths related to Raqaa’iq, he would weep and his tears would flow continuously. As a young person at that time, his weeping profoundly affected my heart. He embodied the characteristics of the scholars whose descriptions we had heard in the reports.

I met Abu Mansur Al-Jawaaleeqee, who was notably quiet and very meticulous in his speech. Even when asked about a clear matter, which some of his young students would quickly answer, he paused to ensure accuracy. He fasted and kept quiet a lot. I benefited from these two men more than I benefitted from others. I understood from this situation that guidance through action is more effective than verbal instruction. The truly impoverished one is the person who spends their life acquiring knowledge without applying it, missing out on the pleasures of this world and the goodness of the hereafter, ultimately proceeding as one bankrupt in deeds with strong proofs against him. [1]

Some Other Important Matters In This Path to Salvation

Imam Ash-Shatibi, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:

Know that Allah has established this Shariah as proof against the creation (humankind and jinn) – the old and young alike, the obedient and the disobedient, the righteous and the wicked. He did not specify the proof against anyone in exclusion of another one. Also, all the other revealed laws were established as proof against all the nations to whom they were revealed. The Shariah is the judge- in general, and specifically- the judge on all those who have reached the age of responsibility. It is the path attached to (what Allah has ordained) and it is the Greatest Guide. Have you not heard the statement of Allah, The Most High:

وَكَذَٲلِكَ أَوۡحَيۡنَآ إِلَيۡكَ رُوحً۬ا مِّنۡ أَمۡرِنَاۚ مَا كُنتَ تَدۡرِى مَا ٱلۡكِتَـٰبُ وَلَا ٱلۡإِيمَـٰنُ وَلَـٰكِن جَعَلۡنَـٰهُ نُورً۬ا نَّہۡدِى بِهِۦ مَن نَّشَآءُ مِنۡ عِبَادِنَاۚ وَإِنَّكَ لَتَہۡدِىٓ إِلَىٰ صِرَٲطٍ۬ مُّسۡتَقِيمٍ۬

And thus We have sent to you (O Muhammad) Ruhan (an Inspiration, and a Mercy) of Our Command. You knew not what is the Book, nor what is Faith? But We have made it (this Qur’an) a light wherewith We guide whosoever of Our slaves We will. And verily, you (O Muhammad) are indeed guiding (mankind) to the Straight Path (i.e. Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism). [Ash-Shura 52]

He (the Prophet) – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- was the first to be guided to the Book and Iman, and then those who followed him. The Book is the Guide and also the Sunnah that was revealed to him explains that guidance (i.e. the Sunnah and the Qur’an explain each other). All the creation (mankind and Jinn) are guided through it.  Therefore, when this is the case that the Shariah is worthy of being a decisive proof against them and a beacon by way of which they are guided to the truth, their nobility is determined by the extent to which they embrace its rulings- through acting upon them in speech, belief, and deeds– and not merely due to the level of their intellects or their nobility amongst their people. That is because Allah, The Most High, has determined nobility through Taqwa and no other than it. Allah, The Most High, says: [إِنَّ أَڪۡرَمَكُمۡ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَتۡقَٮٰكُمۡۚ- Verily, the most honourable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa] [49:13] [2]

Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “O you! Eloquence in speech is not what is desired; rather, it is eloquence in actions that truly matter. If eloquence in speech were more commendable than in actions, then Harun, peace be upon him, would have been more deserving of the message than Musa, peace be upon him” [4]

Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: It is befitting for a novice seeking understanding (in the religion) to ensure that he is well-grounded in what he acquires and should not take too much. He should take bit by bit, taking into account what he can memorise and understand, as indeed Allah, The Most High, said:

وَقَالَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لَوۡلَا نُزِّلَ عَلَيۡهِ ٱلۡقُرۡءَانُ جُمۡلَةً۬ وَٲحِدَةً۬‌ۚ ڪَذَٲلِكَ لِنُثَبِّتَ بِهِۦ فُؤَادَكَ‌ۖ وَرَتَّلۡنَـٰهُ تَرۡتِيلاً۬

And those who disbelieve say: “Why is not the Qur’an revealed to him all at once?” Thus (it is sent down in parts), that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages] [25: 32] [5]

Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, “And know, may Allah have mercy upon you that knowledge is not in being able to narrate much and in having many books, rather the scholar is the one who follows the knowledge and the Sunnah, even if his knowledge and his books are limited, and whoever opposes the Book and the Sunnah, he is a proponent of Bidah, even if he narrates much and has many books”.

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

He [Al-Barbahaaree] sees that the abundance of books and knowledge is not a criterion for the required knowledge of Shariah. Knowledge is what benefits; even if this scholar has little knowledge and few books, he will benefit from his knowledge and it is benefited from in belief, methodology, and application. This is the knowledge that counts in the Sight of Allah- the knowledge He loves, loves, and praises its possessors. Allah said: [إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى ٱللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ ٱلْعُلَمَٰٓؤُا۟ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ غَفُورٌ – It is only those who have knowledge among His slaves that fear Allah]. [35:28]

Hence they [the scholars] said, “Knowledge is to fear Allah”. If one with a lot of knowledge does not fear Allah, he is not a scholar and his knowledge has no value because it is a source of evil to him. The Qur’an is proof for or against you, so evil is the state of that scholar- I seek refuge in Allah – who is under the threat of punishment. The Quran is proof against you, the Sunnah is proof against you and knowledge is proof against you, and Allah’s refuge is sought. He may have many books, but he is misguided. He may have a lot of knowledge of the Arabic language, Tafseer, Hadith, and so on, but he is misguided. This is the knowledge that harms and does not benefit, and it is from this that we seek Allah’s protection, and Allah’s Messenger taught us to seek (Allah’s) protection against it. However, knowledge (in and of itself) is beneficial, so if there is a lot of knowledge and books, it is very good, and there are Imams who have abundant knowledge and many books. If the two are combined: a lot of knowledge and many books, it is desirable; and if devoid of benefitting from this knowledge (i.e. due to misguidance or not acting upon it), then neither an abundance of books or knowledge is beneficial, for it is a source of evil on the person. This is why (Allah stated that) some Prophets said: [وَمَآ أُرِيدُ أَنْ أُخَالِفَكُمْ إِلَىٰ مَآ أَنْهَىٰكُمْ عَنْهُ – I wish not, in contradiction to you, to do that which I forbid you]. [11:88]

Allah said:

أَتَأْمُرُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ بِٱلْبِرِّ وَتَنسَوْنَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَتْلُونَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ

Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason? [2:44]

Allah said:

يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لِمَ تَقُولُونَ مَا لَا تَفۡعَلُونَ
ڪَبُرَ مَقۡتًا عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَن تَقُولُواْ مَا لَا تَفۡعَلُونَ

O you who believe! Why do you say that which you do not do? Most hateful it is with Allah that you say that which you do not do. [As-Saff. 2-3]

Some people are merely speakers and they do not act, therefore, a Muslim must combine statements and deeds so that his actions confirm his statements. He calls to belief and believes, and calls to action and acts. This is beneficial knowledge, calling to the Sunnah and adhering to it, fighting Bidah and being serious about fighting it, and being one of the people who are most distant from it. [6]

Imam Adh-Dhahabi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

The focus of the Muhadditheen at present is on the six (major) collections of hadith- the “Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal” and “Sunan al-Bayhaqi”, precise memorisation of its texts and chains of transmission. However, one cannot (truly) benefit from this unless he fears his Lord and adheres to (the teachings) of the hadith. So, for the knowledge of Hadith and its scholars let one weep if he is to weep because Islam has returned to being strange as it was at its inception. Therefore, every person should save himself from the fire of Hell, and there is no power or strength except through Allah. knowledge is not (merely) an abundance of narrations; rather, it is a light that Allah places in Allah upon the heart, and its prerequisite (for seeking after it) is to adhere to it, fleeing from (vain) desires and innovation in religious matters. May Allah grant us and you success in His obedience. [7]

Al-Hafidh Ibn Rajab, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

It must be recognised (based on conviction) that not everyone who is verbose in their discourse and speech regarding knowledge is (necessarily) more knowledgeable than those who are not. We have been afflicted with the ignorance of people who believe that some people who are expansive in their speech possess greater knowledge than their predecessors. [8]

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

Many of those who came (after the early generation) have been captivated (or put to trial) by this, (mistakenly) believing that the one whose speech, debate, and contention is much more in the issues of religion possess greater knowledge than those who do not. This is sheer ignorance. Consider the seniors and scholars of the Sahabah, such as Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Muadh, Ibn Mas’ud, and Zayd Ibn Thabit; what was their affair? Their speech is lesser than that of Ibn Abbas despite being more knowledgeable than him. Similarly, the statements of the Tabi’in are more than those of the Sahabah although the Sahabah possess more knowledge. Similarly, the speech of followers of the Tabi’in are more than those of the Tabi’in, while the Tabi’in are more knowledgeable than them. Knowledge is not (measured) through the abundance of narration or speech; rather, it is a light that Allāh places in the heart through which a servant (of Allah) comprehends the truth and distinguishes it from falsehood, and expresses concise statements – through it – that leads to the intended goals. [9]

Question: Who narrated more hadith – Abu Bakr or Abu Hurairah?

Imam Muhammad Ibn Salih Al-Uthaymin, may Allah have mercy upon him, responded: Indeed, Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, narrated more Hadith than Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, but that does not mean that Abu Hurairah heard more Hadith than Abu Bakr?! Abu Bakr was a companion of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, in the summers, winters, nights, days, (during) journeys, and whilst at home, thus he heard (more) and had more knowledge regarding the circumstances of Allah’s Messenger. However, he did not spend a lot of time sitting and narrating to the people what was heard from the Prophet. [10]

Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, said: Had it not been for two Ayaat in the Book of Allah, The Mighty and Majestic, I would not have narrated anything to you. Allah said:

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ ۙ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ

Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, 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 [2:159] and the Ayah after it.  Then he said: “(However), the people say, ”Indeed Abu Hurayrah (narrates) a lot.” [11]

The questioner asked Shaikh Salih Aala Ash-Shaikh, may Allah preserve him, “I have been seeking knowledge for some years, but despite this, neither have I consolidated the knowledge-based information nor am I aware of the benefit (acquired from that). What do you advise me? May Allah reward you”.

Response: Do not say that you are not aware of a benefit because a student of knowledge is (considered to be engaged) in worship. The aim behind seeking knowledge is that the person receives Allah’s Pleasure. You all know about the man who went away to repent, so the angel of death came to him (i.e. took his soul); then the angels of mercy and the angels of punishment disputed his affair. The angels of mercy said, “He came along being repentant and remorseful in his heart in the presence of Allah” but the angels of punishment said, “He has done no good at all”. Then another angel came in the form of a human being to decide between them and said, “Measure between the two lands” (i.e. to find out which of them he was closer to). They measured it and found him nearer to the land where he intended to go (i.e. the land of the pious people), so the angels of mercy took him. This repentant man was forgiven because his steps (towards repentance) were recorded for him; therefore the steps of a student of knowledge towards knowledge are an act of worship similar to the steps of the repentant migrator towards the land of goodness. Seeking knowledge is better for you than supererogatory prayer or some of the supererogatory acts of worship. Therefore, there has to be a truthful intention (behind it), and then the benefit will (be acquired) bit by bit. The aim is not to become a scholar or a student of knowledge initially; rather the aim behind your seeking knowledge is to remove ignorance from yourself-worshiping Allah, The Mighty and Majestic, with correct acts of worship and that your Aqeedah is sound, become submissive to Allah, safeguarded from doubtful matters that are made to resemble the truth and from seeking fame. Allah (The Most High) said:

يَوۡمَ لَا يَنفَعُ مَالٌ۬ وَلَا بَنُونَ
إِلَّا مَنۡ أَتَى ٱللَّهَ بِقَلۡبٍ۬ سَلِيمٍ۬

The Day whereon neither wealth nor sons will avail; except him who brings to Allah a clean heart [clean from Shirk (polytheism) and Nifaq (hypocrisy)].

Allah, The Mighty and Exalted, says: [إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ وَعَمِلُواْ ٱلصَّـٰلِحَـٰتِ إِنَّا لَا نُضِيعُ أَجۡرَ مَنۡ أَحۡسَنَ عَمَلاً – Verily! As for those who believe and do righteous deeds, certainly! We shall not suffer to be lost the reward of anyone who does his (righteous) deeds in the most perfect manner].

If you never benefited except yourself and your family, then there is great good in this. [12]

——————————

[a] Backbiting: When is speaking about someone behind his back not considered backbiting? It is not considered backbiting when a person makes a complaint about an oppressor to a person who has the ability to stop the oppression; when seeking help to stop an evil- by making that known to the person who has the ability to stop the evil; when seeking for a fatwa; when warning the Muslims so that they are not deceived; when mentioning a person who commits his evil openly or one who calls to bidah and when identifying someone with a physical defect, whilst not intending defamation. [Subul As-Salaam- 4/553-554]

We ask Allah:

اللَّهُمَّ بِعِلْمِكَ الْغَيْبَ وَقُدْرَتِكَ عَلَى الْخَلْقِ أَحْيِنِي مَا عَلِمْتَ الْحَيَاةَ خَيْراً لِي وَتَوَفَّنِي إِذَا عَلِمْتَ الْوَفَاةَ خَيْراً لِي، اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْأَلُكَ خَشْيَتَكَ فِي الْغَيْبِ وَالشَّهَادَةِ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ كَلِمَةَ الْحَقِّ فِي الرِّضَا وَالْغَضَبِ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ الْقَصْدَ فِي الْغِنَى وَالْفَقْرِ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ نَعِيماً لَا يَنْفَذُ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ قُرَّةَ عَيْنٍ لَا تَنْقَطِعُ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ الرِّضِا بَعْدَ الْقَضَاءِ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ بَرْدَ الْعَيْشِ بَعْدَ الْمَوْتِ، وَأَسْأَلُكَ لَذَّةَ النَّظَرِ إِلَى وَجْهِكَ وَالشَّوْقَ إِلَى لِقَائِكَ فِي غَيْرِ ضَرَّاءَ مُضِرَّةٍ وَلَا فِتْنَةٍ مُضِلَّةٍ، اللَّهُمَّ زَيِّنَّا بِزِينَةِ الْإِيمَانِ
وَاجْعَلْنَا هُدَاةً مُهْتَدِينَ

O Allah! By Your Knowledge of the unseen and by Your Power over creation, let me live if life is good for me, and let me die if death is good for me; O Allah! I ask You to grant me (the blessing of having) fear of You in private and public, and I ask You (to make me utter) a statement of truth in times of contentment and anger, and I ask You for moderation when in a state of wealth and poverty, and I ask you for blessings that never ceases, and I ask You for the coolness of my eye that never ends, and I ask You (to make me pleased) after (Your) decree; and I ask You for a life of (ease, comfort, tranquillity, etc) after death; I ask You for the delight of looking at Your Face (i.e. in the Hereafter) and yearning to meet You without any harm and misleading trials (coming upon me). O Allah! Adorn us with the adornment of Iman, and make us (from those who are) guided and guiding (others). [13]

اللَّهُمَّ أَصْلِحْ لِي دِينِي الَّذِي هُوَ عِصْمَةُ أَمْرِي

وَأَصْلِحْ لِي دُنْيَايَ الَّتِي فِيهَا مَعَاشِي

وَأَصْلِحْ لِي آخِرَتِي الَّتِي فِيهَا مَعَادِي

وَاجْعَلِ الْحَيَاةَ زِيَادَةً لِي فِي كُلِّ خَيْرٍ

وَاجْعَلِ الْمَوْتَ رَاحَةً لِي مِنْ كُلِّ شَرٍّ

O Allah! Rectify my religion for me, which is the safeguard of my affairs; rectify my worldly [affairs], wherein is my livelihood; and rectify my Afterlife to which is my return; and make life for me [as a means of] increase in every good and make death for me as a rest from every evil. [Saheeh Muslim Number: 2720] [14]

اللهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ عِلْمٍ لَا يَنْفَعُ، وَمِنْ قَلْبٍ لَا يَخْشَعُ، وَمِنْ نَفْسٍ لَا تَشْبَعُ، وَمِنْ دَعْوَةٍ لَا يُسْتَجَابُ لَهَا

O Allah! I seek refuge in Your from knowledge that does not benefit, from the heart that is not fearful, from the soul that is not contented and the supplication that is not answered. [15


[1] Saydul Khaatir. page 138

[2] Al-I’tisam 3/434

[4] Bahr Ad-Damoo 171

[5] Al-Faqee Wal-Mutafaqqih 2/100

[6] Awnul Baaree Bi-bayaan Maa Tadammanahu Sharh As-Sunnah Lil-Imaam Al-Barbahaaree 2/688-689.

[7] Siyar A’laam An-Nubulaa 13/313

[8] Bayan Fadl Ilm As-Salaf page 40

[9] Bayan Fadl Ilm As-Salah 57-58

[10] Sharh Hilyati Talib Al-Ilm. page 49. 1st Edition. Rabi’ul Awwal 1434AH

[11] Jami Bayan Al-Ilm 1/22

[12] Source: الوصايا الجليّة للاستفادة من الدروس العلميّة للشيخ العلامة صالح آل الشيخ- Question 3. Page 24.

[13] https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2021/01/01/o-allaah-let-me-live-if-life-is-good-for-me-and-let-me-die-if-death-is-good-for-me/

[14] https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2020/12/29/o-allaah-rectify-my-religion-for-me-which-the-safeguard-of-my-affairs-a-tremendous-supplication/

[15] Sahih Abi Dawud 1548

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali [51 of 80]

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

When you speak about a Muslim, whether an individual who is a Mubtadi [Footnote a] or a Sunni, [Footnote b] firstly, examine yourself (reflect on your intentions). What do you want through this speech? “Whoever believes in Allah and the last day should either speak good or remain silent”. [Footnote c] If in this speech of yours there is good for the Muslims by warning them about this man, and your intention is to seek Allah’s Face, you intend to sincerely advice the ummah, then speak while being cautious of entering into personal desires and personal goals for revenge against this or that person. If the speech stem from an intention for revenge, this would be detrimental to the person (i.e the speaker) and would exceed the permissible allowance in this matter, whose initial basis is fundamentally prohibited. This is because Allah has forbidden backbiting and tale carrying, as these matters corrupt the lives of Muslims. A Muslim should resort to (such speech) only in cases of dire necessity. He does not unleash his tongue to speak freely. [Footnote d] Instead, he only speaks out of necessity and when he knows completely that this matter is incumbent upon him and the people will benefit from it. May Allah bless you, be conscious (mindful) regarding this subject matter. [1]

—————————————————————-
Footnote a:

https://abukhadeejah.com/shaikh-rabee-establishment-of-proof-in-declaring-a-person-to-be-an-innovator/

Footnote b:

Imam Barbahaaree [329AH], may Allah have mercy upon him said: It is not permitted for a man to say, “So and so is a person of the sunnah” until he knows that he combines the characteristics of the Sunnah, so it is not said of him, “a person of the Sunnah” until he combines all the Sunnah.

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah preserve him, commented on the above statement as follows: Do not give recommended to a person and a praise of him, except based on knowledge, lest the people become deceived by your praise of him, while he is not what (you have stated about him). So, when his real affair and path is clear to you, his knowledge and steadfastness, you can give him recommendation. As for giving out praise and recommendation whilst not knowing of anything about him, this is a dangerous recommendation through which the people will be deceived by this person. Had only those who give commendations to the people stopped at that (i.e. put it in its proper place), they would not give recommendation, except for one who fulfils the conditions of (receiving) recommendation because recommendation is a witness, thus, if the recommendation is not correct it will be a false witness. And regarding the statement of Imaam Al-Barbahaaree: “until he knows that he combines the characteristics of the Sunnah”. The characteristics of the Sunnah are to be in creed, knowledge and adherence to the (path) of the pious predecessors. But if there is not in him except a single characteristic of the (sunnah), he is not judged to be from Ahlus Sunnah on the basis of a single characteristic or one thing, then what about the one who does not have anything from that? [2]

Al-Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali, may Allah preserve him, was asked: The questioner says: We request a comment from you on this statement: “Indeed both Sunnah and Bidah may be gathered in a man, thus, if the Sunnah is predominant in him, he is a Sunni Salafi. And if bidah is predominant in him, he is an innovator, a misguided one”. Benefit us (i.e. with a comment) and may Allah reward you.

Response: This (statement) is from the [مغالطات-i.e. those misleading statements or affairs that are brought forth for the purpose of deception or sophistry]. There is no doubt that the one in whom Bidah is predominant is an innovator in religious matters, but it is not a condition, for example, that he has thirty (matters) of bidah with him and twenty (matters) of Sunnah, because he may have one bidah with him and thus declared an innovator in religioys matters. Rather the verdict of disbelief may be passed against him. [Footnote c] Because if he adheres to all the Sunnah, but then he says, “Indeed the Qur’an is created”, do we say that the Sunnah is predominant in this (person)? The Salaf (pious predecessors) declared (people) disbelievers due this because the Qur’an is the Speech of Allah and not created. The Salaf held a consensus regarding this. If he says, “I am a Sunni and the Qur’an is created”, we say: ”You are an innovator in religion, a misguided one, rather this innovation of yours is tantamount to disbelief. Either you recant or else you are a disbeliever.” We clarify the truth for him and unless he recants, otherwise he is a disbeliever. He rejects the Ruyah (i.e. he rejects the fact that the believers will see Allah on the day of judgement) and says: “I am a Sunni in everything except in this, for I do not believe that Allah will be seen in the Afterlife.” This one (i.e. the person who says this) has belied the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

This principle (i.e. that a person is a Sunni Salafi or an innovator depending whether the Sunnah or Bidah is predominant in him) is false; and how many with a single bidah – among the major bidah- were declared innovators by the Salaf?! Jad Ibn Dirham had two innovations- negation of the attributes of Allah and the statement (i.e. the belief) that the Qur’an is created, whilst he used to pray, observe fasting and worshipped Allah. And how many of Ahlul bidah and the Ubbaad (those dedicated to worship) have numerous (practices) of Sunnah, but alongside this he is an innovator!

Therefore, it is obligated to the Sunni to be solely dedicated to the truth and that his religion (Creed, Methodology and acts of worship) are pure and not stained by anything from the (matters) of bidah. However, if he falls into a Bidah khafiyyah (i.e. an innovation that is obscure or hard to detect), whilst he is desirous of the truth and seeking after it, then if the people were to inform him about it he would recant. So we do not pass the judgement of Tabdee against this person. If he had passed away we ask Allaah to forgive him and we do not pass the verdict of Tabdee against him. If he is alive, we advice him, and unless he accepts (the truth), we pass the verdict of Tabdee against him. [3]

The Shaikh also stated: All sects of Ahlul Bidah gather truth and falsehood, deny the truth that is with the other sect of Bidah and believes in that which they possess of falsehood. Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Allah sad:

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمۡ ءَامِنُواْ بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ قَالُواْ نُؤۡمِنُ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيۡنَا وَيَكۡفُرُونَ بِمَا وَرَآءَهُ ۥ وَهُوَ ٱلۡحَقُّ مُصَدِّقً۬ا لِّمَا مَعَهُمۡ

And when it is said to them (the Jews), “Believe in what Allah has sent down,” they say, “We believe in what was sent down to us.” And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them]. [Al-Baqarah 91]

The Shaikh also stated: As for the one who falls into an innovation, then he is of categories. he first category: Ahlul-Bid’ah such as the Rawāfid, the Khawārij, the Jahmiyyah, the Qadariyyah, the Mu’tazilah, the Grave-worshipping Sūfīs, the Murji’ah, and whoever is connected to them [in our times] such as al-Ikhwān, at-Tablīgh and those similar to them. For these innovations the Salaf did not make it a condition that the proof be established due to the fact that the ruling upon them is [in accordance to] the innovation. So regarding the Rāfidī, it is said about him, “Innovator (mubtadi’)”. As for the Khārijī, it is said about him, “Innovator”, and so on, regardless of whether the proof is established upon him or not. [4]

Footnote c: Sahih Muslim Number 47

Footnote d: https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2023/08/27/riba-usury-of-the-tongue/


[1] Fadl Al-Hajj Wat Talbiyah 43]

[2] It’haf Al-Qaaree Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharhis Sunnah Lil Imaam Barbahaaree. 2/275-276]

[3] Source: بهجة القاري بفوائد منهجية ودروس تربوية من كتاب الإعتصام بالكتاب والسنة من صحيح البخاريPages 92-93 Question number 13.

[4] https://abukhadeejah.com/shaikh-rabee-establishment-of-proof-in-declaring-a-person-to-be-an-innovator/

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [50 of 80]

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

It is obligated to a Muslim to uphold justice and to bear witness against himself that he has fallen into falsehood when he falls into falsehood, that he is upon error when he errs, or that he has committed injustice when he commits injustice. He bears witness against himself that he has erred, opposed the truth, and announces that without shame. Otherwise, he may be from those who betray Allah, those distanced from upholding justice for Allah, Lord of the Aalameen. Similarly, if his son, brother, or father is in the wrong, he must clarify their mistakes, for this is religion ordained by Allah, not based on personal whims.

Majmu 14/476

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [49 of 80]

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

It is important to note that some overexcited youth may study the books of the Predecessors, but not proficient in applying what is sound from the narrations, thus, they apply them in other than their appropriate place. Therefore, it is essential to consult scholars on how to implement them because if one embarks upon applying some things incorrectly, he may harm himself, harm Islam and the Muslims.

This issue occured in the past, as some overexcited youth among the new and old Haddadiyyah focused on narrations (of the predecessors), while not memorising (and understanding) the Quran. They focused on the narrations of the predecessors, while among the narrations of predecessors, there are those that are authentic and those that are unauthentic.

When they (predecessors) hold a consensus on a matter, it is obligatory to accept it; however, in cases of disagreement, their statements must be referred back to the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet. If a particular statement is not reliably attributed to so and so, it should not be accepted, and if it is reliably attributed to him, (but) contradicts (what is sound), it should be rejected. This is how these matters should be. They require Fiqh (sound understanding). The Haddadiyyah used to memorise the narrations of the predecessors, and Ahlus Sunnah were the first people they wage a war against, attacking them through their hysterical reading (of those narrations), turned against the scholars and sought to topple them one after the other until targeting (Shaikh Al-Islam) Ibn Taymiyyah. This trend has resurfaced through attacks against scholars and attempting to topple them while clinging to various narrations, some of which are authentic and others not, without grasping their intended meanings (or goals).

Marhaban Yaa Talib Al-Ilm 459-460

Read:

http://www.alhajuri.com/articles/aklbxkm-the-hajawirah-the-haddaadiyyah-and-the-terrorist-kharijites-of-isis.cfm

Distinguished Characteristics Of The HadaadiyyahAuthor: Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadi al-Madkhalee

https://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV14&articleID=GRV140001&articlePages=1

https://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?secID=GRV&subsecID=GRV14&loadpage=displaysubsection.cfm

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [48 of 80]

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

The books of the pious predecessors are present, from the early period up to this present day of yours. There exists numerous books. By Allah, your time is insufficient to thoroughly engage with all these works and these paths to the different sciences.

O my brothers! Do not squander your time on the books of misguidance, neither defend falsehood nor the proponents of Bidah.

Marhaban Yaa Talib Al-Ilm 406

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [47 of 80]

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

Our religion is comprehensive and complete, leaving no aspect of life without Allah’s ruling on it and a stance. Whoever abandons something from it after the truth has been made clear to him, then indeed his destination is towards destruction.

Also, if he turns away from the truth while being capable of distinguishing between right and wrong, and chooses to reject the truth or neglect the pursuit of it, then indeed, by Allah, he is on a path towards ruin. Many people pretend to be oblivious and feign ignorance, while the truth is readily accessible to him.

However, various obstacles prevents them, such as personal desires, arrogance, blind following, (Footnote a) and numerous other factors. The truth is readily accessible and in front of his eyes, yet he may choose to  prevent himself, close his eyes, and turns away from the truth. This is also one who deviates from the truth, and his destination is towards destruction; and Allah’s refuge is sought. [Al-Makh’raj Min Al-Fitan 23-24]


Footnote a:

THE PERMISSIBLE FORM OF TAQLEED

https://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=MNJ06&articleID=MNJ060005&articlePages=1

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.

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

[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