Skip to main content

Some Ancient Vices Reborn in Our Time

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Sin.

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

Allah, The Most High. said:

قَوۡلٌ۬ مَّعۡرُوفٌ۬ وَمَغۡفِرَةٌ خَيۡرٌ۬ مِّن صَدَقَةٍ۬ يَتۡبَعُهَآ أَذً۬ى‌ۗ وَٱللَّهُ غَنِىٌّ حَلِيمٌ۬

Kind words and forgiving of faults are better than Sadaqah (charity) followed by injury. And Allah is Rich (Free of all wants) and He is Most-Forbearing]. [Al-Baqarah. 263]

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

Allah informed us that kind speech- which all hearts recognise and do not reject; and forgiveness- to pardon the one who treated you badly, are better than charity that is followed by harm. Kind speech is good treatment and charity through speech; and forgiveness is good treatment by way of refraining from retaliation and holding someone responsible. These are two types of good treatments. As for charity followed by harm, it is a good deed that is followed by its nullifier, and there is no doubt that two good deeds are better than a good dead that is nullified. This also includes the forgiveness shown by the person when he encounters some harm and harsh behaviour from the one who he could not fulfil his request; therefore, showing forgiveness to him would be better than giving him charity and then harming him. Speaking kindly to him, refraining (from retaliation) and forgiving him is better for you than giving him charity and then harming him.

Then Allah ended this verse with the mention of two of His Attributes which are suitable for mention in this affair, saying: [وَٱللَّهُ غَنِىٌّ حَلِيمٌ۬- and He is Most-Forbearing].

Indeed, Allah is not in need of you and nothing (from the benefits of) your charity reaches him, rather all the abundant good in this charity and its benefits returns to you and not to Allah. Therefore, how can one flaunt through his spending and causes harm while Allah is completely not in need of it and everything else besides it. In addition to this, Allah is forbearing because He does not hasten punishment against the one who flaunts. Allah is completely free from need in every way and He is the One described as One with forbearance, the one who overlooks and forgives, alongside the fact that He bestows His vast favours and ample gifts; then how can one of you harm another person by flaunting and offending, even though what you give is little, and you are weak and poor (in the sight of Allah). Then Allah said:

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لَا تُبۡطِلُواْ صَدَقَـٰتِكُم بِٱلۡمَنِّ وَٱلۡأَذَىٰ كَٱلَّذِى يُنفِقُ مَالَهُ ۥ رِئَآءَ ٱلنَّاسِ وَلَا يُؤۡمِنُ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلۡيَوۡمِ ٱلۡأَخِرِ‌ۖ فَمَثَلُهُ ۥ كَمَثَلِ صَفۡوَانٍ عَلَيۡهِ تُرَابٌ۬ فَأَصَابَهُ ۥ وَابِلٌ۬ فَتَرَڪَهُ ۥ صَلۡدً۬ا‌ۖ لَّا يَقۡدِرُونَ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ مِّمَّا ڪَسَبُواْ‌ۗ وَٱللَّهُ لَا يَهۡدِى ٱلۡقَوۡمَ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرِينَ

O you who believe! Do not render in vain your Sadaqah (charity) by reminders of your generosity or by injury, like him who spends his wealth to be seen of men, and he does not believe in Allah, nor in the Last Day. His likeness is the likeness of a smooth rock on which is a little dust; on it falls heavy rain which leaves it bare. They are not able to do anything with what they have earned. And Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. [Al-Baqarah 264]

This spender, whose spending has been nullified, is likened to a Safwaan – a rock with a smooth, flat, and slippery surface and with dust on it. Then heavy rain falls on it, washing away the dust and leaving it bare, devoid of any vegetation or growth. This is one of the finest and most profound parables because it draws a parallel between the heart of such a spender, who flaunts and his spending is devoid of belief in Allah and the Last Day, to the rock itself, symbolising hardness, rigidity, and lack of benefit. It demonstrates the impact of charity represented by the fine dust on the rock, and the heavy rain that washes it away, mirroring the nullification and removal of the spender’s charity. Consequently, the spender is unable to reap any rewards from his charity, as it has been nullified and removed.

Another perspective on this is that (even though) someone spends for something other than the sake of Allah, it may seem like they have performed a deed that will be rewarded. So, it seems as if it is made to grow like the grain that is sown in fertile soil and it grows seven ears, and each era has a hundred grains. However, hidden behind this spending there is something that prevents it from gaining anything, just like a rock hidden beneath the soil that stops seeds from sprouting and growing. [1] [end of quote]

Human kindness is universally recognised across nations, and caring for the less fortunate is a value upheld by all societies, even if it doesn’t always translate into real-world actions. However, the challenge of equitable wealth distribution, treating others fairly, and avoiding the exploitation of the vulnerable—whether among individuals or nations—remains critical. The pursuit of global dominance at the cost of fairness and integrity often results in conflict, wars and various forms of oppression.

Firstly, wars, for many, serve primarily as instruments of control over both human lives and financial assets. The Qur’an recounts the stories of ancient tyrants like the people of Aad, Thamud and Fir’awn, illustrating their extreme arrogance and disbelief as they flaunted their might.

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

Every sin is a legacy inherited from a nation that was destroyed by Allah Almighty. Taking more than one is entitled to is a legacy from the people of Shu’ayb, peace be upon him. The corruption and arrogance displayed on earth are inherited from the people of Pharaoh, and the pride and tyranny are legacies from the people of Prophet Hud, peace be upon him. Thus, the sinner is adorned in the garments of these nations, which are enemies of Allah. [2]

Some of our elders of our tribes and clans who had some military experience often emphasised that the dropping of the first two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a crucial turning point in the struggle for power and supremacy. This devastating event revealed the horrifying capacity for destruction that can annihilate lives and infrastructure, instilling a lasting fear among nations even to this day. Furthermore, it marked a transition towards conflicts that aim to circumvent direct engagement, instead employing threats and extreme violence as means to achieve absolute control and domination. Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi al-Mad’khali, may Allah safeguard him, illuminated this reality in his remarks regarding those who showed disrespect towards the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him:

The creation of bombs, destructive weapons, warplanes, tanks, and long-range missiles lies squarely on your shoulders. It is your twisted intellect that has brought forth these instruments of chaos, driven by a relentless desire for transgression, hostility, and domination. You seek to conquer entire populations, enslaving them, shedding their blood, and plundering their resources. Your sole focus is on eradicating those who dare to oppose your insatiable greed and your oppressive agenda, all while cloaking your actions in the guise of civilization, human rights, freedom, and justice.

It is well understood among discerning individuals that your past is marred by a series of uncivil and terrorist actions, a legacy that has been documented by both your adversaries and your supposed allies. Those who remain unaware of this troubling history should take the time to explore the accounts of your invasions of various nations, or at the very least, examine the devastating consequences of the two World Wars. To illustrate, the First World War alone claimed over 10 million lives in Europe, predominantly among the finest youth of those nations. Furthermore, more than double that number suffered severe injuries, leaving them permanently disabled. [Refer to: At-Taareekh al-Mu’aasir: Uruubbaa minath-Thawratil-Fransiyyah ilal-Harbil-‘Aalamiyyaith-Thaaniyah, p.505. (Lit: Recent History, Europe from the French Revolution to the Second World War)]

The Second World War resulted in a staggering loss of life, with approximately 17 million soldiers and an additional 18 million civilians perishing in just five and a half years. Financially, the military expenditures soared to an estimated $1.1 trillion, while the overall economic impact of the war is valued at around $2.1 trillion. This devastation extends beyond human casualties; entire cities were obliterated, vast areas of land were rendered uninhabitable, agricultural lands were inundated, and countless factories and farms ceased operations. The toll also includes the significant loss of livestock, compounding the tragedy of this global conflict. [(Al-Harb al-‘Aalamiyyah ath-Thaaniyah by Ramadhaan Land, p.448-449) (Lit: The Second World War)]

The Hiroshima Bomb:

The author of “al-Harb al-‘Aalamiyyah ath-Thaaniyah” (p.446-447) discusses the harrowing event of the first atomic bomb. In an interview with Marcel Junod, a Red Cross representative, a Japanese survivor recounted the terrifying moment of the explosion. He described how, out of nowhere, blinding, muddy pink lights erupted, accompanied by an unsettling tremor. This was swiftly followed by a suffocating surge of heat and fierce winds that devastated everything in their wake.

In mere seconds, countless individuals traversing the streets or gathered in the heart of the city faced a horrific fate, consumed by flames. Many succumbed to the overwhelming heat that radiated throughout the area. Others lay on the ground, writhing in agony from severe burns that covered their bodies. Everything at the epicenter of the disaster—walls, homes, factories, and other structures—was utterly obliterated, with remnants violently propelled into the sky in a terrifying whirlwind. Trams were uprooted from their steel tracks, tossed aside as if they were weightless. Trains, along with their tracks, were lifted effortlessly, resembling mere playthings. Animals, including horses, dogs, and livestock, suffered the same tragic fate as the people. Every living creature was snuffed out in a single, harrowing moment that defies description. Trees were consumed by fierce flames, rice fields turned to ash, and farms crackled and disintegrated like brittle straw.

The areas that narrowly escaped immediate devastation were left in ruins: homes lay in ruins, reduced to mere heaps of wooden debris scattered among the remnants of bricks and stone foundations. It was as if these structures had been made of cardboard, obliterated in a vast zone of destruction spanning 10 kilometers. Those who survived found themselves engulfed by fierce, raging fires. The few fortunate enough to reach any form of shelter in time faced agonizing deaths from gamma radiation within a mere 20 to 30 days. By nightfall on the day of the explosion, the inferno began to subside, eventually extinguishing itself as it ran out of fuel. Hiroshima had been reduced to nothingness. These are the very symbols of your civilization that you celebrate and boast about, while showing disdain towards Islam and its Prophet. Yet, you persist in amplifying every form of oppression and corruption, continuously creating more weapons of destruction and devastation. This, by Allah, represents the pinnacle of barbarism and inhumanity. Adorn yourselves with your own bombs, including the Hiroshima bomb and its counterparts, and let your leaders wear them as crowns. [end of quote] [3]

Similarly, our fathers often discussed the Cold War, highlighting how it illustrated the delicate balance of power between nuclear-armed countries. This equilibrium fostered a sense of mutual restraint, as all parties recognised that any military confrontation, especially involving nuclear weapons, would result in catastrophic destruction for everyone involved. They highlighted that these nations, despite their conflicts, shared a common civilizational heritage. However, this sense of restraint for the greater good did not apply to societies they deemed inferior, as such restraint would hinder the exploiters from taking advantage of the conflicts among weaker nations for their own gain.

Furthermore, some researchers have observed a profound transformation in conflicts since World War II, largely influenced by the effects of the industrial revolution in the West. That era marked a significant shift in the dynamics of power, particularly with the rise of machinery in the workforce, the supremacy of capital as a key economic driver, and the growing influence of media—especially print journalism, followed by visual and audio technologies, as well as information networks—that shape public opinion. As these elements of power gained prominence, they also deepened social patterns that were once novel and unfamiliar. The surge in machinery fueled a demand for luxury and comfort, fostering a culture centered around pleasure and hedonism. Sound beliefs and good behaviour ordained by the Creator waned. Moreover, the integration of women into the workforce and their emancipation from domestic roles led to increased social interaction, moral decline, and the fragmentation of the family unit, which is the cornerstone of society. As a result, the dominant ethics were largely dictated by machinery and market forces.

Despite the significant resources and technological progress achieved by some nations since the industrial revolution, it was crucial for them to also recognise the importance of weaker and poorer countries. These poorer nations are vital as they supply affordable raw materials and represent expansive consumer markets. Additionally, the challenges posed by these nations could not be overlooked by the more powerful countries. For example, historical events, such as the oil crises of 1973-1974 and 1979-1980, highlighted how the global landscape could threaten the economic, political, and social stability of wealthier nations if not addressed. However, even with considerable military strength, some of the more powerful nations have at times shown reluctance to sacrifice lives unless absolutely necessary for survival, reflecting a shift in societal values. Some researchers attributed this to decline in the sway of political and ideological movements in Western society after World War II, giving way to a more pragmatic approach, particularly in the United States.

In addition, a new phenomenon also emerged in the realm of conflict management, where each party seeks to pull the other into its own sphere of influence and expertise. The more dominant party often lure the other into this territory or traps them within it, reminiscent of the strategies used by drug dealers and traffickers. If they discover that their target lacks the necessary life circumstances to exploit, they initially offer free samples of drugs, followed by subsequent doses at a low price. This cycle continues until the individual becomes addicted and dependent on the substances, at which point they are manipulated into meeting demands and face coercion that leaves them with no option to refuse. As some authors have noted, this reflects a key aspect of unregulated capitalist economics, encapsulated in the adage: “Those who wield money as a weapon will always come out on top.”

Within these circumstances, there is a significant opportunity to shape how the public perceives various issues. Public opinion can be molded to not only embrace but also insist on the preferences of those in control of the narrative. This transformation hinges on influential media channels, which necessitate considerable financial backing. These platforms can effectively champion a particular economic framework and cultivate public readiness to embrace a new economic paradigm alongside modern social values. By promoting this economic model, they disseminate targeted cultural and ideological beliefs, ultimately eroding national, regional, or religious resistance to the acceptance of the new system. However, when a targeted nation or group resists the cultural agenda of a cultural crusader intent on seizing resources or asserting geopolitical power, the crusader often resorts to imposing economic sanctions that can escalate into partial or full economic blockades. This tactic is further supported by a range of political, diplomatic, and even sporting measures, all underpinned by a strategic media campaign designed to sway global public opinion in favour of these sanctions and actions. The ultimate goal of this alternative to outright warfare can be tailored according to the severity and type of sanctions imposed, leading to varying levels of disruption within the targeted society—ranging from mere annoyance to significant incapacitation or even total destruction—until compliance is secured and dominance is achieved. This strategy remains in play against some nations.

Furthermore, if the targeted country is self-sufficient, they may be forced to deal with international entities and organizations that align with nations possessing greater military power. This dynamic can trap them in a cycle where they cannot easily disengage or free themselves, rather than fostering genuine reciprocal and integrative relationships with others. In this scenario, various concepts can be advanced, including the freedom of international trade, open markets, unrestricted air travel, information networks, international transportation routes, electrical interconnectivity among nations, satellite-based communication systems, and collaborative industries. While these initiatives may offer immediate advantages to individuals and groups within the targeted society, without astute government oversight, the cultural influencer is likely to prevail. This is particularly true when backed by international organizations with substantial financial resources. Consequently, the privatisation of essential services and major corporations may gradually be introduced into the global supply and demand market, all while national capital is constrained during this process. In this regard, the influence of multinational corporations, multi-branch NGOs, environmental advocacy groups, human rights organizations, and the shared fabric of human culture cannot be overstated. As these entities build a solid foundation and become essential players, the influence of the state in economic and social affairs diminishes, allowing multinational companies and large NGOs to take center stage.

The aim is to establish a global channel, facilitating a form of governance that operates free from the constraints of state authority. This channel may serve as a convenient rationale for intervention, cloaked in the noble pursuit of safeguarding foreign investments, alongside an array of adaptable justifications such as the protection of minority groups, the promotion of human rights, [Footnote a] the advancement of democracy, the preservation of the environment, and concerns regarding the possession of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism, and drug trafficking. Yet, it remains unspoken that these actions are undertaken in the name of maintaining the prosperity and welfare of the cultural advocate, despite the presence of some justifications that may hint at such motives, albeit insufficient to warrant intervention.

Food and other Essentials:

A nation that declines to engage in cooperation and resists the exploiter may find itself subjected to blockades and sanctions, potentially jeopardising its food supply, especially if reliant on imports. [Footnote b] The vitality of local food production stands at risk when seeds, fertilizers, or machinery are procured from foreign sources. This concern extends to the pharmaceutical sector, where industrial operations may face disruption if raw materials or equipment are imported, or if certain components are produced by the exploiter. For nations that depend on the export of raw, agricultural, or industrial goods for their economic sustenance, a halt in exports could drastically reduce their financial inflow. Moreover, should the government or, in particular instances, private individuals possess investments and assets abroad, the freezing of these holdings could render them inaccessible, even if only for a limited time. Such circumstances could profoundly impair the state’s operational capacity, potentially reversing societal advancements by decades or even centuries. Furthermore, the presence of open media and champions of cultural integrity is likely to stir public unrest over this situation, prompting fervent demands for reform.

In most cases, it is the dominant entity that reaps the advantages of prevailing circumstances, wielding the power to impose its ideologies upon others. This influential party, often represented by the strongest nation —typically the United States—sets the benchmarks that steer organisations and nations towards its own aspirations, all while selectively advancing its interests. With a military presence that can be swiftly mobilised across the world, it safeguards its prerogatives and vigilantly monitors any potential disruptions at the expense of the welfare of others. Moreover, it seeks to establish financial supremacy by positioning the dollar as the cornerstone of international currency. This entity excels in defining boundaries, whether through direct intervention or via institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, regional trade bodies, or continental military coalitions.

The so-called developing world is frequently seen as little more than a backdrop in the international landscape. While it can be leveraged for various purposes, it is often regarded as unfit to actively engage in the global arena. Rather than being a competitor, it is treated like a mere pawn. This reality becomes clear when we look at the stark economic inequalities among those vying for a place on the world stage. Multinational corporations, armed with significant financial resources, typically acquire smaller firms at bargain prices or emerge from the remnants of larger companies that have succumbed to competition, often relying on their subsidiaries. These corporations are the true contenders in the marketplace, capable of generating substantial profits. In addition, some stronger nations seek to obscure their influence in global matters by presenting themselves as supportive leaders who advocate charitable projects and arenas for development, however, they entrust the execution of various initiatives to specific organisations through international and regional gatherings, along with numerous global organisations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Economic and Social Council, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Labour Organization, the World Health Organization, and UNESCO. Consequently, a wide range of human activities—ranging from individual births and their social contexts to issues of legitimacy, education, employment, legal frameworks, political and economic systems, and the media shaping public perception—have become focal points of international scrutiny or global media coverage. When possible, they will suppress alternative viewpoints and stifle dissenting voices without hesitation. The exploiter only gains the upperhand in the absence of authentic beliefs and Muslim identity as outlined in the Qur’an and Sunnah, as interpreted by the Sahaabah. Nevertheless, economic warfare, rather than traditional military conflict, can serve as a more effective strategy, often accompanied by various initiatives aimed at controlling the population and influencing the targeted community.

Destabilising Some of The Crucial Foundations For Social Unity

In Muslim societies, the family is viewed as one of the crucial foundations for social unity and resilience. Consequently, there is a concerted effort to weaken this essential structure in some countries by undermining the distinctive and vital roles of women in childbirth and child-rearing. Shaikh Abu Iyaad, may Allah preserve him, remarked:

“We are living in a time in which the League of Iblees have a frightening grip and amazing amount of resources and means through which waves and waves of assaults are maintained against faith (eemaan), and against tawhid (monotheism), and against the morality that is based upon revelation (as opposed to the “do what thou wilt” of secular humanism), and against the family unit and its bonds (husband-wife, child-parent). And so it is necessary for the Muslims to beware and take extreme caution against the waves upon waves of such assaults that are being made from all directions, the aim of which is to desecrate the foundations of faith, and to desecrate the Prophets of Allah, in particular Jesus, the Son of Mary (peace be upon them both) and to replace the foundations of faith with a “new age spirituality” which is nothing “new” at all, but comes from none other than Iblees himself and is but the same deception that Iblees used to make Adam err, which is the promise of immortality and eternity, and this is the core, underlying principle of the “new age spirituality” in all of its flavours and manifestations. Further, the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) warned that there would be many dajjaals (liars) in the later times. Such liars and imposters claim divinity or prophethood, and preach a religion other than that preached by the Prophets and Messengers, such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad (peace be upon all of them). For this reason, given the huge amount of propaganda disseminated through the great many forms of media in the modern age, it is necessary for Muslims to be well-informed about the plots of Iblees his deception and misguiding of the people through their army of devils amongst Jinn and men, all of whom refer to Iblees, spuriously, as “the light bearer”. [4]

Nonetheless, it is not solely the West that has participated in such injustices; rather, one can observe that, apart from the Prophets and their upright followers, throughout various eras or particular periods, prevailing civilisations have perpetrated atrocities against others. Therefore, while this article focuses on certain events, it does not imply that the oppression and exploitation by a particular generation in the West is unparalleled or that other instances are disregarded. What matters is that every assertion concerning other groups must be examined with integrity, and the facts must be verified. The one interested in history will find plenty of resources regarding oppression throughout human history.

The solution for The Ummah In Particular

The State of the Ummah: Causes that led to its Weakness and the Means of Rectification (eBook)

——————————————–

Footnote a:

https://salaficentre.com/2024/10/31/an-overview-and-general-examination-of-certain-implications-of-human-rights/

Footnote b:

https://salaficentre.com/2024/11/24/the-weaponisation-of-necessities/

[1] An Excerpt from ‘Tareequl Hijratayn pages 452-454

[2] Ad-Da’u Wad Dawa’u. page 142

[3] Written by: Shaykh Rabee’ ibn Haadee ‘Umayr al-Madkhalee 1426/12/28 (corresponding to 2006/1/28)

[4] https://www.salafitalk.net/st/printthread.cfm?Forum=8&Topic=10682

 

A safeguard against hastiness in punishment

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Pearls of Wisdom, Purification of The Soul, Qur'aan, Scholars of Islam, Sin, Worship - 'Ibaadah', Zuhd (Abstinence).

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

Allah, The Most High, said:

وَتَفَقَّدَ الطَّيْرَ فَقَالَ مَا لِيَ لَا أَرَى الْهُدْهُدَ أَمْ كَانَ مِنَ الْغَائِبِينَ

لَأُعَذِّبَنَّهُ عَذَابًا شَدِيدًا أَوْ لَأَذْبَحَنَّهُ أَوْ لَيَأْتِيَنِّي بِسُلْطَانٍ مُّبِينٍ

He inspected the birds, and said: “What is the matter that I see not the hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees? “I will surely punish him with a severe torment, or slaughter him, unless he brings me a clear reason.” (An-Naml 20-21)

“What is the matter that I see not the hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees?”

Meaning: “Is it that I cannot see him because of me being unaware of his presence due to it being hidden among these numerous different groups, or because – with neither my permission nor command – it is absent?”

Thus, he got angry and issued a threat of punishment, and said:

لَأُعَذِّبَنَّهُ ۥ عَذَابً۬ا شَدِيدًا

“I will surely punish him with a severe punishment” without killing it.

أَوۡ لَأَاْذۡبَحَنَّهُ ۥۤ أَوۡ لَيَأۡتِيَنِّى بِسُلۡطَـٰنٍ۬ مُّبِينٍ۬

“or slaughter it, unless it brings me a clear reason”– Meaning, “(brings) a clear proof for being absent”.

This is from the perfection of his Wara [1] and equity because he did not merely make an oath to punish or kill it, as that can only be done if a sin or wrong doing was committed. It may be that there was a clear excuse for its absence, therefore he made this exception because of his Wara and sound perception. [An Excerpt from “Tafseer As-Sadi]

[1] What is (الوَرَعِ)? Al-Manaawee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said about (الوَرَعِ – Al-Wara): “It said that it is to abandon what causes you to doubt, negate what brings you blame (disgrace), and adhere to what is most reliable (certified).”

Source: at-Tawqeef Alaa Muhimmaat at-Ta’aareef. p. 336

A brief assessment of Julian Wood’s signpost of ethical superiority

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Aqeedah, Articles, Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Monotheism - Tawheed, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Prophets, Purification of The Soul, Refutations, Shirk, Sin, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

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

Allah, The Most High, said:

يَٰٓأَهْلَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ قَدْ جَآءَكُمْ رَسُولُنَا يُبَيِّنُ لَكُمْ كَثِيرًا مِّمَّا كُنتُمْ تُخْفُونَ مِنَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَيَعْفُوا۟ عَن كَثِيرٍ قَدْ جَآءَكُم مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ نُورٌ وَكِتَٰبٌ مُّبِينٌ

يَهْدِى بِهِ ٱللَّهُ مَنِ ٱتَّبَعَ رِضْوَٰنَهُۥ سُبُلَ ٱلسَّلَٰمِ وَيُخْرِجُهُم مِّنَ ٱلظُّلُمَٰتِ إِلَى ٱلنُّورِ بِإِذْنِهِۦ وَيَهْدِيهِمْ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ

O people of the Scripture! Now has come to you Our Messenger (Muhammad ) explaining to you much of that which you used to hide from the Scripture and passing over (i.e. leaving out without explaining) much. Indeed, there has come to you from Allah a light (Prophet Muhammad) and a plain Book (this Quran). Wherewith Allah guides all those who seek His Good Pleasure to ways of peace, and He brings them out of darkness by His Will unto light and guides them to a Straight Way (Islamic Monotheism). [Al-Ma’idah 15-16]

In this short response, we are not looking to debate democracy and the numerous writings surrounding it – both in favour and against. Instead, our goal is to simply remind Julian Wood that the noble prophets Musa and Harun, along with all the prophets of Bani Israel, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them, did not govern by what Julian appears to take pride in, that the Zionist State is the sole democracy in the region they’ve named as the Middle East. Once again, the matter at hand is not about discussing democracy, as there is plenty of literature on both sides of the argument. Rather, what is being presented as a sign of moral superiority was not the path followed by Bani Israel. Thus, our only inquiry is whether Julian truly follows the Prophets of Bani Israel, as this would require adherence to the noble prophet Isa, peace be upon him, first, and finally submission to the path of the final prophet, Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. However, before we delve into that, we will briefly outline what all the prophets of Bani Israel adhered to prior to the arrival of Muhammad. https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/06/21/they-were-not-governed-by-netanyahus-ideas/

Secondly, let’s find out if Julian is a true follower of the prophets of Bani Israel, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them. Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:

When it is case that the true followers of the Prophets, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them, are people of knowledge and justice, therefore the speech of the people of Islam and the true adherents to the Prophetic Sunnah regarding the unbelievers and the proponents of religious innovations has to be based on knowledge and justice, and not conjecture and what the soul desires. And due to this the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “The judges are three: one will go to Paradise and two to Hell. A man who knows the truth and judges with it will enter paradise; a man who knows the truth but judges with the opposite of it will enter the fire, and a man who judges for the people based on ignorance will enter the fire’’. [Reported by Imaam Abu Dawud 3573]

And when it is the case that the one who judges between the people in matters related to wealth, blood [i.e. murder cases, physical violence etc] and honour will enter the hell fire if he is not a just scholar, then how about the one who passes judgements – without knowledge and justice – on creeds, religions, the fundamentals of belief,  divine knowledge and the general fundamental principles related to different subject matters, as is the case with the people of Bidah and vain desires – those who follow the ambiguous doubtful matters, abandon those explicitly clear texts that have transmitted by the Prophets, cling to matters that share an ambiguous similarity through mere analogy and opinions, and then present matters whose differences can neither be reconciled nor equated, just as is the case with the unbelievers and all the people of bidah and vain desires, who liken the creation to the Creator [i.e. they give the creation the Perfect Attributes that only belong to the Creator], and liken the Creator to the creation [i.e. by describing the Creator with the imperfect attributes of the Creation], and then they put forward an evil similitude for Allah by way of thoughtless and confusing speech. This is because the false religion of the Christians is an innovated religion- innovated after the departure of the Messiah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and altered the religion of the Messiah through it, thus, they deviated from the Messiah’s path and remained upon that which they innovated.

Then when  Allah, The Most High,  sent Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, they disbelieved in him, thus, their disbelief and misguidance occurred in two ways: substitution of the religion of the first Messenger [i.e. the Messiah] and belied the second Messenger [i.e. Muhammad], just as the Jews substituted the rulings of the Torah before the Messiah was sent and then belied him. The Christians’ denial of Muhammad’s Messengership is a well-known belief of theirs to every Muslim, which is similar to the Jews’ disbelief  in the Messiah. The Christians emphasise the disbelief of the Jews greater than what the Jews deserve, because the Jews (i.e. those who disbelieved in the Messiah) claimed that he was a magician and a liar; rather they said that he is an illegitimate child, as Allah informed us about them: [وَقَوۡلِهِمۡ عَلَىٰ مَرۡيَمَ بُہۡتَـٰنًا عَظِيمً۬ا – And their speech against Maryam (Mary)- a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse]. [Surah An-Nisaa. Aayah 156]

However, the Christians claimed that the Messiah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is Allah, therefore the strife between them and the Jews regarding the Messiah involved a lot of contradictions, misguidance at similar levels and confrontation, and this is why both nations rebuked one another with something more than what each of them deserved, as Allah said:

وَقَالَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ وَقَالَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ وَهُمۡ يَتۡلُونَ ٱلۡكِتَـٰبَ‌ۗ كَذَٲلِكَ قَالَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَعۡلَمُونَ مِثۡلَ قَوۡلِهِمۡ‌ۚ فَٱللَّهُ يَحۡكُمُ بَيۡنَهُمۡ يَوۡمَ ٱلۡقِيَـٰمَةِ فِيمَا كَانُواْ فِيهِ يَخۡتَلِفُونَ

The Jews said that the Christians follow nothing; and the Christians said that the Jews follow nothing; though they both recite the Scripture. Like unto their word, said (the pagans) who know not. Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection about that wherein they have been differing. [Al-Baqarah. 113]

Muhammad Bin Abee Muhammad, the protege of Zaid Bin Thabit, may Allah be pleased with him, reported from Ikrimah or Saeed Bi  Jubayr, who reported from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him and his father,  that when the Christian delegation of Najran came to Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, the Rabbis came and argued with them in the presence of the Messenger; so Rabee bin Hurmilah said, “You are upon nothing”, thus, he disbelieved in Isa and all the Injeel”. Then a man from the people of Najran said to the Jews, “You are upon nothing”, thus, he wilfully denied Musa’s Prophethood and disbelieved in the Torah, so Allah revealed:

وَقَالَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ وَقَالَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ وَهُمۡ يَتۡلُونَ ٱلۡكِتَـٰبَ‌ۗ

The Jews said that the Christians follow nothing; and the Christians said that the Jews follow nothing; though they both recite the Scripture. [Al-Baqarah. 113]

So each of them recited the affirmation of what they reject in their book- meaning, the Jews disbelieved in Isa whilst they had the Torah in which Allah established the evidence against them through Musa that they should believe in Isa and in the Injeel. [Ibn Abee Haatim. 1/339]

[وَقَالَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬  – The Jews said that the Christians follow nothing];  Qatadah said regarding this verse: “Certainly, the early Christians were upon something, but they innovated and split”.  [وَقَالَتِ ٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ لَيۡسَتِ ٱلۡيَهُودُ عَلَىٰ شَىۡءٍ۬ – and the Christians said that the Jews follow nothing]; Qatadah said regarding this verse, “Certainly, the early Jews were upon something, but they innovated and split”.

The Jews belied the religion of the Christians and said that the Christians were upon nothing; and the Christians denied everything through which the Jews were distinguished with, even the laws of the Torah which the Messiah did not abrogate; rather he commanded them to act upon it. As for the Jews, they denied many of the things through which others were distinguished from them, until they denied the truth brought by Isa. So, even though the Christians – due to that which they innovated of exaggeration and misguidance – went into extremes in declaring the Jews as unbelievers and showed them enmity beyond what is obligated, however there is no doubt that the Jews disbelieved when they belied the Messiah, as Allah said to the Messiah:

إِنِّى مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَىَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ ڪَفَرُواْ وَجَاعِلُ ٱلَّذِينَ ٱتَّبَعُوكَ فَوۡقَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوٓاْ

I will take you and raise you to Myself and clear you [of the forged statement that ‘Iesa (Jesus) is Allah’s son] of those who disbelieve, and I will make those who follow you (Monotheists, who worship none but Allah) superior to those who disbelieve [in the Oneness of Allah, or disbelieve in some of His Messengers, e.g. Muhammad, ‘Iesa (Jesus), Musa (Moses), etc., or in His Holy Books, e.g. the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), the Qur’an] till the Day of Resurrection. [Aal Imraan. 55]

Allah said:

قَالَ عِيسَى ٱبۡنُ مَرۡيَمَ لِلۡحَوَارِيِّـۧنَ مَنۡ أَنصَارِىٓ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ‌ۖ قَالَ ٱلۡحَوَارِيُّونَ نَحۡنُ أَنصَارُ ٱللَّهِ‌ۖ فَـَٔامَنَت طَّآٮِٕفَةٌ۬ مِّنۢ بَنِىٓ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلَ وَكَفَرَت طَّآٮِٕفَةٌ۬‌ۖ فَأَيَّدۡنَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ عَلَىٰ عَدُوِّهِمۡ فَأَصۡبَحُواْ ظَـٰهِرِينَ

Eesaa the son of Maryam said to Al-Hawariun (the disciples): “Who are my helpers (in the Cause) of Allah?” Al-Hawarieen (the disciples) said: “We are Allah’s helpers” (i.e. we will strive in His Cause!). Then a group of the Children of Israel believed and a group disbelieved. So We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the uppermost. [Surah As-Saff. Aayah 14]

The disbelief of the Christians – due to their denial of Muhammad’s Messengership – is greater than the disbelief of the Jews due to their denial of the Messiah’s Messengership. This is because the Messiah only abrogated a little from the Torah and all the laws and acts of worship ordained for him could be traced back to the Torah; however the majority of the beliefs and practices of the Christians were innovated after the departure of the Messiah. That which is found in the Jews’ denial of the Messiah by opposing Allah’s Shariah is not the same as the Christians’ denial of Muhammad, who brought an independent book from Allah, because nothing in the laws of the Qur’an was ordained based on the law of another Messenger. Allah said: [أَوَلَمۡ يَكۡفِهِمۡ أَنَّآ أَنزَلۡنَا عَلَيۡكَ ٱلۡڪِتَـٰبَ يُتۡلَىٰ عَلَيۡهِمۡ‌ۚ إِنَّ فِى ذَٲلِكَ لَرَحۡمَةً۬ وَذِڪۡرَىٰ لِقَوۡمٍ۬ يُؤۡمِنُونَ – Is it not sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book (the Qur’an) which is recited to them? Verily, herein is mercy and a reminder (or an admonition) for a people who believe]. [Al-Ankabut. 51]

The Qur’an is an independent book like the Torah of Musa, even though the Qur’an is greater than it. And this is why the  Christian scholars made a connection between Musa and Muhammad, just as when An-Najaashee – the (Ethiopian) king of the Christians- heard the Qur’an, he said, “Indeed, this and what Musa brought came from the same source”.

Also, when Waqarah bin Nawfil – who was one of Christian Arab scholars- heard the statement of the Prophet, he said, “Indeed, the Naamoos [i.e. Jibreel] came to you, who was sent to Musa. I wish I were young till when your people expel you [i.e. from Makkah]”. Allah’s Messenger asked, “Will these people drive me out?” Waraqah said, “Yes, for nobody brought the like of what you have brought, but was treated with hostility. If I were to remain alive till your day [when you start calling to Islam], then I would support you strongly”. [Al-Bukhari]

And this is why Allah mentioned the Torah and the Qur’an together in His statement:

فَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمُ ٱلۡحَقُّ مِنۡ عِندِنَا قَالُواْ لَوۡلَآ أُوتِىَ مِثۡلَ مَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰٓ‌ۚ أَوَلَمۡ يَڪۡفُرُواْ بِمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ مِن قَبۡلُ‌ۖ قَالُواْ سِحۡرَانِ تَظَـٰهَرَا وَقَالُوٓاْ إِنَّا بِكُلٍّ۬ كَـٰفِرُونَ

قُلۡ فَأۡتُواْ بِكِتَـٰبٍ۬ مِّنۡ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ هُوَ أَهۡدَىٰ مِنۡہُمَآ أَتَّبِعۡهُ إِن ڪُنتُمۡ صَـٰدِقِينَ

But when the truth (i.e. Muhammad with his Message) has come to them from Us, they say: “Why is he not given the like of what was given to Musa (Moses)? Did they not disbelieve in that which was given to Musa (Moses) of old? They say: “Two kinds of magic [the Taurat (Torah) and the Qur’an] each helping the other!” And they say: “Verily! In both we are disbelievers.” Say (to them, O Muhammad): “Then bring a Book from Allah, which is a better guide than these two [the Taurat (Torah) and the Qur’an], that I may follow it, if you are truthful.” [Al-Qasas.  48-49]

Allah did not revealed books that were a better guide than the Torah and the Qur’an. Then Allah said:

فَإِن لَّمۡ يَسۡتَجِيبُواْ لَكَ فَٱعۡلَمۡ أَنَّمَا يَتَّبِعُونَ أَهۡوَآءَهُمۡ‌ۚ وَمَنۡ أَضَلُّ مِمَّنِ ٱتَّبَعَ هَوَٮٰهُ بِغَيۡرِ هُدً۬ى مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَہۡدِى ٱلۡقَوۡمَ ٱلظَّـٰلِمِينَ

But if they answer you not (i.e. do not believe in your doctrine of Islamic Monotheism, nor follow you), then know that they only follow their own lusts. And who is more astray than one who follows his own lusts, without guidance from Allah? Verily! Allah guides not the people who are Zalimun (wrong-doers, disobedient to Allah, and polytheists). [Surah Al-Qasas. Aayah 50] [End of quote: An Excerpt from Al-Jawab As-Sahih Liman Baddala Deen Al-Masih 1/26-30]

In the brief discussion above, the main goal is to remind Julian that all of them- Netanyahu’s gang, the Evangelists, the Christian Rightists and Neocons are not true followers of the Prophets. Therefore, our conversation is entirely religious, based on the infallible texts we have shared earlier. Thus, Julian is claiming a moral superiority that no prophet of Bani Israel ever used as a basis for moral authority. By stating all of this, we aim to bring Julian back to common sense and reality.

Finally, we are instructed to treat Jews, Christians, and others with justice, and to coexist with them in a respectful manner, even though many in Palestine support the genocidal maniac Netanyahu and his IDF. We also denounce antisemitism just as we denounce over seventy years of Zionist brutality. May Allah guide Julian Amin.

Must Read:

https://www.abukhadeejah.com/living-with-non-muslims-in-the-west-with-fine-conduct/ 

https://abuiyaad.com/sn/muslims-antisemitism

https://abuiyaad.com/w/antisemitism-ernest-renan

https://abuiyaad.com/a/muhammad-semitic-prophet

Rotten Myth of a Religious Right-Wing Extremist and a Christian Zionist

[4] Notification to Ahlul Bidah and The Mumayyi’ah: These Clarifications Are Coming Back!

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Contemporary Issues, Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Deviated Callers & Individuals, Fitnah, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Pearls of Wisdom, Refutations, Scholars of Islam, Sin.

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

It is necessary to bring together the disparager and the disparaged, the refuter and the refuted, and to seek judgment in the (presence) of the scholars. It is not permissible to pass judgement on the refuted and disparaged person in absentia:

This is one of the Shubuhaat (1) of Adnan Ar’ur, when he used to demand (or request) from Shaikh Rabee, may Allāh have mercy upon him, to seek judgement (together with him) in the (presence) of Al-Allamah Al-Uthaymin, may Allāh have mercy upon him, concerning the Mukhaalafaat and Dalaalaat (2) for which he was criticised. He used to falsely accuse the scholars – who denounced him due to the observations they made regarding his falsehoods – that they pass judgment on him in absentia, meaning  before Al-Muhakamah (i.e. that in order to make a judgement against him, both him and his opponent must be present in the presence of a scholar), and according to him, this is not permissible.

Al-Allamah Rabee Al-Mad’khali, may Allāh have mercy upon him, was asked, as found in his treatise “Dar Baghi Adnan” about this Shubha (3): “What is your opinion regarding Adnan’s speech as follows: ‘Among the matters that are universally agreed upon by the nations- Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians – is that during judicial rulings and judgement, it is incumbent to hear from both parties. It maybe that he did not intend this, maybe he did not desire it, maybe it is a slip of the tongue, maybe it is a Shami expression which is different from a Saudi, maybe it is a Maghribi expression which is different from a Mashriqi. (4) When a man rejects Niyyah [i.e. intention which is a requirement in acts of worship] in Islam, then a judgment is issued without hearing the other side, (leading to accusations of) disbelief; how is (this) disbelief? Meaning, what is its ruling (i.e. the ruling on rejecting Niyyah in islam)? A disbeliever! So how can one judge, be pleased with and accept that a person has rejected Niyyah in Islam merely based on a phone call from an unknown person. Masha-Allah, masha-Allah, (is this) based on knowledge and piety; masha Allah, based on understanding?! Someone on the phone from Europe is talking about a well-known person who is a pioneer in Dawah and lives among them, so what prevented them from verifying this issue?

Al-Allamah Rabee, may Allāh have mercy upon him, replied:

Indeed, we are profoundly flabbergasted by this man’s hotchpotch in his speech about the scholars, his belittling of them and his self-aggrandizement in this instance. We are profoundly flabbergasted that he conflates judicial rulings with fatwas, so, at times considering their responses as fatwas and at other times as judicial decisions. This is a strange hotchpotch and an atrociously flawed argument on his part. Sadly, he has placed himself in the position of mentoring senior scholars- members of the Council of Senior Scholars- who have devoted their lives to knowledge, fatwas, and judiciary rulings. They know what is required of them when a questioner asks them questions and when they issue rulings. In any case, it can be understood from his speech (i.e. Adnan) regarding judicial rulings that it is not permissible to issue rulings on someone who is absent under any circumstances.

This speech is false. There are numerous situations where a judgment can be made on a person who is absent and it is not a condition that he should be present, nor is a judge obliged to hear from both parties. This matter is well-established and its proof is that Hind bint Utbah said to the prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, “Indeed, Abu Sufyan is a stingy man and he does not give us what suffices me and my children, can I take from his wealth?” He (i.e. the prophet) said: “Take from his wealth that which suffices you and your children”. [Al-Bukhari 5364 and Muslim 1714]

He did not say: “Where is Abu Sufyan? Where is he, bring him to me so that he hears this speech?” Allāh’s messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, passed a judgement on him while he was absent. He allowed this woman – the wife of Abu Sufyah – to take from his wealth even without his consent. This is a ruling on an absent person. In the Mad’habs of Ahmad, Shafi’i, and Malik, and other than them among the scholars of the Ummah, is that in matters regarding the rights of the people and mutual dealings, it is permissible to make a judgement on the one who is absent.

Here, I reference what Al-Bukhari has stated. He said: “Chapter: Judgment on the one who is absent” with his chain of narration to Urwah, from Aisha that Hind said to the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, “Indeed, Abu Sufyan is a stingy man and I am in need from his wealth”, so he said: “Take what suffices you and your children in a reasonable manner”. Al-Hafidh (i.e. Ibn Hajr) said about the statement “(Judgement) on the one who is absent”, meaning, (concerning) the rights of the children of Adam, but not Allāh’s rights, based on the consensus (of the scholars that this applies) even if evidence is established against an absent person regarding theft, for instance, financial judgments that is other than the judgment of cutting the hand. Ibn Battal said: “Malik, Al-Layth, Al-Shafi’i, Abu Ubaid, and others have permitted judgments on the absent person”.

Ibn Abd al-Barr said: “the comprehensive nature of judicial rulings in lawsuits”. Judgment can be made against an absentee with regards to rights, mutual dealings, debts, and all rights, with the exception of real estate because no judgement is made about it, except if the person’s absence is prolonged and it harms his opponent. If this becomes the case, a judgement is made. This is the Mad’hab of Malik. When it is the case that it is permissible to pass a judgment on a dead person, judgement on an absent person is even more permissible. Also, in the Mad’hab of Imam Ahmad, judgement on an absent person is permissible”. The author of “Al-Mughni” reported a difference of opinion on this matter, then he (concluded that what) carries more weight is the permissibility (of passing judgement on an absent person) and he used as evidence the hadith of Aa’isha in the story of Hind, while also pointing out contradictions in Abu Hanifa’s stance.

Adnan neither knows the value of the scholars nor the value of knowledge, nor does he know the conditions of Fatwa. Despite this, he behaves arrogantly towards the scholars and makes them the most ignorant people. So, all the nations make it a condition with regards to judicial rulings and lawsuits that the judge should hear from both parties; all the nations, in Adnan’s view, are acquainted with this, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, while these scholars are ignorant of these matters that are known to the nations of disbelief.

Then the questioner said: May Allāh protect you. What is your view on his earlier statement where he said that perhaps it wasn’t intended that way, it could have been a slip of the tongue, or that the expression might differ between Syrian and Saudi dialects, or even between Moroccan and Eastern expressions, thus, one passes a judgement without hearing the other side in the matter of disbelief. How can that be considered disbelief, meaning, when a man rejects the Niyyah in Islam?

Shaikh Rabee- may Allāh have mercy upon him – responded: This man has elevated himself and his speech to a status unprecedented by anyone else. Scholars listen to the speech of a scholar or someone other than him, clarifies for him that it is a mistake, and then criticises. (For instance), one narrates a hadith and makes a mistake, he (another person) says: “So and so has made a mistake, so and so has misperceived, so and so makes a lot of mistakes, so and so narrates munkar hadith”. He does not summon this narrator and say: “Maybe you intended such and such; inform me of what you intended, perhaps you intended such”. (Rather), he passes judgement on his speech that it is an error. He reads a book, then finds an error in it, he authors volumes to debate this scholar regarding what he considers as mistakes, and none says that (one uses) this method mentioned by Adnan.

Ash-Shafi’i engaged in discussions with Malik and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, the companion of Abu Hanifa, regarding statements they made and rulings they issued. No one said to him: “Why did you approach Muhammad ibn al-Hasan or why did you not engage in discussion with Malik during his lifetime. Why? Why? Why?” No one says this, except the ignorant and the dull-witted who utter the likes of this speech, and put forward such objections. The Salaf used to critique people regarding their beliefs, their statements, and their actions, and they considered this as part of enjoining good and forbidding evil. They would issue fatwas based on the statements they received, and no one says they did not summon the speaker and say, “What did you intend, this or do you intended such and such”.

An Excerpt from Juhud Al-Allamah Rabee Al-Mad’khali Fee Naqd Shubuhat Al-Hizbiyeen An Manhaj An-Naqd Inda Ahli As-Sunnah As-Salafiyyeen 165-170. Compiled by Shaikh Ahmad Az-Zahrani, may Allah preserve him.

[1] Shubuhaat: doubts or ambiguities that are made to resemble truth but are falsehood in reality

[2] Mukhalafaat: deeds, beliefs, or methodologies that are opposition to what is right in the divine legislation. Dalaalaat: deeds, beliefs or methodologies that are tantamount to misguidance in religious practice.

[3] Shubhah: the singular of Shubuhaat

[4] Shaam: includes countries like Syria, Lebanon, Palestine etc. Maghrib: includes Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia etc. Mashriqh: includes Egypt, Sudan, etc

[2] Notification to Ahlul Bidah and Mumayyi’ah: These Clarifications Are Coming Back!

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Basics, Bid'ah (Innovation), Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Innovations In Islam (Bidah), Khawaarij, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Purification of The Soul, Refutations, Scholars of Islam, Shi'a, Sin.

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

Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhalee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

By Allah! Islam and the Muslims are not ruined except by these categories of (people) amongst the people of bidah and misguidance- the khawarij and those similar to them, and those who are worse, such as the rawaafid. The rawaafid are worse than the khawarij, and Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon (i.e. the sect -the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere) ally with them and they say: “They (rawaafid) are our brothers; the differing between us and them is like the differing between (Imaam) Maalik and (Imaam) Shaafi’ee” meaning: “The differing between us (i.e. Ikhwaan Muslimoon) and them (i.e. rawaafid shiites) is based on ijtihad, and if Imaam (Maalik) and (Imaam) Shafee’ee differ in (some) affairs, they are all rewarded; and if we (ikhwaan al-muslimoon) differ with the rawaafid shiites, then us and them are rewarded”.

O deceivers! The rawaafid (shiites) revile the Sahaabah and declare them disbelievers; they revile the wives of the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him; they say that the Qur’an is distorted; they have shir’kiyyaat (beliefs and acts of major polytheism) and they deify the leaders of the Prophet’s family. So does all of this not harm them (i.e. harm their claim to Islam)? Is this not irjaa?! (i.e. O Ikhwaanis! Is this alliance of yours with the rawaafid and that the differing between you and them is like the differing between Imaams Maalik and Shaafi’ee not Ir’jaa?!) [Adh-Dhari’ah 1/162]

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzaan, may Allah preserve him, stated:

The wars that take place between the Muslims and the splitting are only brought about by the people of desires, such as the Khawaarij, the Mutazilah and other than them! The people of desires are the ones who cause the fitnah—the Mutazilah, the khawaarij, the Rawaafid (Shiites) and other than them. Fitnah does not occur except from them and as a result of them. Who murdered Uthmaan (radiyallaahu-anhu)? Who murdered Ali (radiyallaahu-anahu)? Who were the ones that ignited the fitnah between the Muslims thereafter? It was no one else other than those people of desires. Who misled Al-Mamoon and those rulers who came after him to put Ahlus Sunnah to trial, until their Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (rahimahullaah) was beaten and imprisoned? It was no one else other than the people of desires. Who brought about the imprisonment of Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) until he died in prison? It was no one else other than those people of desires! It is upon us to be cautious of these people because the end result of their fitnah leads to the splitting of the unity of the Muslims, rebellion against the Muslim rulers and splitting the Jamaa-ah of the Muslims, so that they become divergent groups and parties, which is the opposite of being one united Ummah. Paraphrased… listen to audio on this link: https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2016/02/reminder-ahlul-ahwaa-i-e-the-people-of-bidah-are-the-ones-who-start-the-wars/

Also read on this link at by Shaikh Abu Iyaad, may Allah preserve him

http://www.ikhwanis.com/index.cfm

The Sab’iyyah, Raafidah and Khaarijiyyah: Historical and Contemporary Interplay Between Rafd and Khaarijiyyah: http://www.ikhwanis.com/articles/fqfejnx-the-sabiyyah-raafidah-and-khaarijiyyah.cfm

Shaikh Shamsuddeen Al-Afghaanee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Ahlul Bidah are the ones who kindle trials and disorder.  They are a chaotic people and are deprived of safety and security.  They are a people of trials and disturbance as opposed to Ahlul Hadeeth Was-Sunan (i.e. those who steadfastly follow the ahaadeeth of the Prophet and his Sunnah). Have they (i.e. the people of Sunnah) committed what the people of bidah and trials have committed?! The people of bidah trespass- alongside enmity and innovation- whilst Ahlus Sunnah respond and defend (the religion).

عداء الماتريدية للعقيدة السلفية
1/26-27

Reflections from some statements of Al Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali [101]

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Basics, Brotherhood, Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Sin, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

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

The Shaikh, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

If your brother makes a mistake, advise him gently and present proof and evidence for Allah to benefit him through that. But as for sitting and waiting for so and so to make a mistake, then smearing here and there that so-and-so did such-and-such, these are the ways of the devils, not the ways of the Salafis.

Bahjah Al-Qari 107

The Sunni–Shia Divide Revisited: A Rebuttal to David Ben Basat at Jerusalem Post

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Aqeedah, Articles, Basics, Bid'ah (Innovation), Contemporary Issues, Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Fitnah, Innovations In Islam (Bidah), Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Refutations, Shi'a, Shirk, Sin.

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

Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

As the (true) followers of the Prophets are characterised by their knowledge and commitment to justice, therefore, the discourse of the adherents of Islam and the Sunnah regarding disbelievers and those who engage in bidah must be grounded in knowledge and justice, rather than conjecture and desires. Due to this, the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, stated, “There are three types of judges; one will enter Paradise, while two will enter the fire. A man who knows the truth and judges accordingly will enter Paradise; a man who knows the truth yet judges contrary to it will enter the fire, and a man who judges for the people based on ignorance will enter the fire”. When it is case that one who adjudicates matters of wealth, life, and honour is (threatened with) entry into the fire for failing to be a just scholar, then, what about the one who renders judgments without knowledge, particularly ahlul bidah, who address issues of faith, the core tenets of Iman, and knowledge regarding Allah, His Names, Attributes, and Actions, as well as other profound matters of knowledge. [1]

This article serves as a brief response to the assertions made by David Ben-Basat, who sought to articulate his understanding of the distinctions between Sunni and Shia, at least as reflected in this above post of his at the Jerusalem Post. However, it is imperative to emphasise that a more fitting title would be “the Distinction Between Islam and the Beliefs of the Rafidah”. This distinction arises from the fact that the tenets and practices of the Rafidah religion diverge significantly from those of Islam.

David stated: The conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims remains one of the central features shaping the political and religious dynamics of the Middle East.

Rooted in Islamic history since the 7th century, this divide has evolved into a broad political and ideological battle, exploited by regional powers such as Iran and Turkey to extend their influence, fueling clashes between the two sects. Islam is divided into two main branches: Sunni Muslims, who make up about 85% of the Islamic world, and Shia Muslims, who represent around 15%. [end of quote]

Response: The conflict between Islam and the religion of the Rafidah was first initiated by Abdullah Bin Sabah, a Jew from Yemen. Shaikh Shamsuddeen Al-Afghani, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:

The enemies of Islam, recognising their inability to eradicate this religion (Islam), strategically infiltrated it with disbelieving agents- individuals who masqueraded as Muslims, aiming to sow confusion, trials, and tribulations, while promoting polytheism by elevating the status of the righteous and venerating their graves (through beliefs and practices) not sanctioned by Allah. Consequently, the Ummah faced trials stemming from the schemes of Abdullah Bin Saba, who asserted that Ali Ibn Abee Talib, (the Prophet’s cousin), deserved worship alongside Allah. The followers of Abdullah Bin Saba became known as the Saba’iyyah, and later as the Rawaafid (Shiites), Ismaaliyyah (Shiites), Nusayriyah (Shiites), among others within the Baatiniyyah sect. [Footnote a] They engaged in the veneration of graves and their occupants, constructing places of worship and shrines at these sites. Through such actions, they revived the corrupt practices of those (particular) Jews, Christians, and idol worshippers who strayed from the true path of the Prophets of Allah. This illustrates how the worship of graves emerged within this Ummah through the practices introduced by the Rawaafid (Shiites). [2] Read: http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/articles/bmfjr-a-brief-overview-of-the-doctrines-innovated-by-abdullah-bin-saba-al-yahudi-which-became-the-foundational-beliefs-of-the-sects-of-the-shia.cfm

Al-Allamah Muqbil Bin Hadi Al-Wadi’i, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

The Saba’iyyun are the companions of Abdullah Bin Saba, who said to Ali, “You are.. you are”- meaning, “You are the deity”. Hafidh Adh-Dhahabi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, “Abdullah bin Saba was from the extremists amongst the heretics- misguided and misguiding others”. Ibn Asakir, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, “He was originally from Yemen- a Jew who manifested Islam, travelled around the Muslim lands to turn them away from obedience to their leaders and to bring about evil between them, and he entered into Damascus for that reason”. Abu Ya’laa, may Allah have mercy upon him, reported in his Musnad from Al-Jalaas who said, “I heard Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, saying to Abdullah Bin Saba, “Indeed, there will be thirty liars at the approach of the hour and you are one of them”. Abdullah bin Saba had followers and they were called the Saba’iyyun. They believe that Godhead is with Ali. Indeed Ali burnt them with fire during his Khilaafah. And do not think that the followers of Abdullah Bin Saba have perished, (rather) there is that leader of misguidance -khumeini, who displays (so called) jealousy for Islam, yet he destroys its pillars. Some of the ignorant ones among the Ikhwan al-Muslimoon were deceived by Khumeini, and they used to mention him on the pulpits; but when the Book titled: Jaa’a Dawrul Majoos appeared, they were shaken. They kept quiet and did not praise Khumeini. Perhaps the Muslims will take a lesson from the story of Abdullah Bin Saba and be warned against the machinations and filth of the Rafidah because their call is based on deception.[3]

Furthermore, the assertion that Islam is bifurcated into two primary branches is fundamentally erroneous. The essence of the religion remains unified; guidance stands apart from misguidance, and truth is clearly delineated from falsehood. Therefore, any notion of division within the faith is unfounded. It is, in fact, those who have strayed from the righteous path who have caused fragmentation. Conversely, those who faithfully adhere to the authentic teachings of Islam remain united in their belief and methodology. It is imperative for those who have deviated from the true teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah to renounce their misguidance and return to the path of truth. Thus, anyone who innovates into the religion is rebutted and he is guilty of splitting. Al-Allamah Zaid Bin Hadi Al-Madkhali [may Allah preserve him) said:

The innovator in religious matters is the cause for the splitting, because splitting is connected to innovation in religion and unity is connected to the Sunnah. The obligation of refuting an opposer of the truth is not lifted from the scholar due to anticipation of harm, unless it is harm he is not able to bear, so (in this case) Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. The earth is not devoid of people of knowledge who will carry out refutation against an innovator in religious affairs and one who opposes the truth”. [4] For further insights on the various sects, please read below:

https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2024/12/28/all-in-the-fire-except-one/ [Footnote b]

David said: Conservative Sunni rhetoric often regards Shias as heretics and even infidels, citing accusations like those against Aisha, the wife of the prophet Mohammed, of betrayal and attributing superhuman qualities to Shia imams, elevating them to a status comparable to that of the prophet himself. [end of quote]

Response: It is essential to recognise that dismissing the judgments against the Rafidah as mere rhetoric is a grave error, rooted in either misguidance or ignorance. These judgments are not mere expressions of persuasive language or the artful manipulation of words; they do not stem from the superficial techniques employed by rabble-rousers, demagogues, ideologues, or Zionists, nor do they represent eloquent discourse devoid of substance. Such a characterisation is more fitting for those who have introduced innovations into the sacred teachings of the Prophets, subsequently deriving their conclusions from these alterations. This path is reminiscent of those who strayed from the righteous ways of the noble Prophets Musa and Isa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them, as well as those who have introduced erroneous beliefs and practices, including the Rafidah and the Khawarij. Rhetoric, therefore, is more aptly associated with these groups than with the judgments rendered by the upright scholars of Islam, which are firmly anchored in the infallible verses of the Qur’an and the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Furthermore, David’s stance raises questions about his honesty; he is either misrepresenting Ahlus Sunnah as those who unjustly accuse the Rafidah or he is exercising unnecessary caution due to his lack of understanding of Rafidah beliefs, leading him to label valid refutations as rhetoric and accusations. Regardless of David’s intentions, if the Rafidah come across his statements, they might either appreciate his assistance in their Taqiyyah or regard him as poorly informed. The Rafidah are well known for disparaging Aa’Isha, may Allah be pleased with her, and their contempt for most of the Prophet’s companions, all while deifying the Prophet’s family—a belief innovated for them by the Yemeni Jew Abdullah Bin Saba. [Footnote c]

David stated: Sunni conservatives base their views on classical fatwas, such as those by 13th-century theologian Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, who declared Shias/Shi’ites to be more heretical than Jews, Christians, and idolaters, likening them to the Crusaders and Mongols of his era. These ideological differences have spiraled into political struggles, with each side vying to dominate the region’s key states. [end of quote]

Response: David’s statement clearly highlights his ignorance of the topic at hand. Indeed, scholars who lived centuries before Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him and all of them, denounced the Rafidah and labeled them as heretics. Some even went so far as to declare the Rafidah as disbelievers, asserting that their beliefs are deemed apostasy, polytheism, and disbelief according to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Since Abdullah Ibn Saba concocted the beliefs and methodology of the Rafidah, the erudite scholars from each generation prior to Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah have confronted the Rafidah. Here are some significant examples.

Alqamah Ibn Qays An-Nakha’i [62AH], may Allah have mercy on him, a student of the Sahabi Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said:

Indeed, this Shia sect has exaggerated in their veneration of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, just as the Christians have exaggerated in their veneration of Jesus, son of Mary, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.” [5]

Talhah Ibn Musarraf [112 AH], may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“The women of the Rawaafid are not to be married, nor are their sacrifices permissible to eat, for they are people of apostasy.” [6]

Imam Malik Ibn Anas [179AH], may Allah have mercy on him, stated:

“Those who insult the companions of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, do not have a share or portion in Islam.” [7]

Imam Malik also said:

“Whoever insults the companions of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has no right to the spoils of war. Allah, the Exalted, said:

[للفقراء المهاجرين الذين أخرجوا من ديارهم وأموالهم يبتغون فضلاً من الله ورضواناً – (And there is also a share in the booty) for the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their properties, seeking the bounty of Allah and His pleasure]. These are the companions of Allah’s Messenger who emigrated with him. Then Allah said: [والذين تبؤوا الدار والإيمان- And those who, before them, had homes (in Al-Madinah) and had adopted the faith]. These are the Ansar. Then Allah further stated:

[والذين جاءوا من بعدهم يقولون ربنا اغفرلنا ولأخواننا الذين سبقونا بالإيمان – And those who came after them, say, “Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethen who have preceded us in Faith].

The spoils of war are for these three groups. Therefore, whoever insults the companions of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, does not belong to any of these three groups and has no right to the spoils. [8]

Imam Abu Yusuf, may Allah have mercy upon him, the student of Imam Abu Hanifah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “I will not pray behind a Jahmi, nor a Rafidi, nor a Qadari.” [9]

Imam Ash-Shafi’i, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

“I have not seen anyone among the people of vain desires more deceitful in their claims or more prone to false testimony than the Rāfidah.” [10]

Imam Muhammad Ibn Yusuf Al-Firyabi [212AH], may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“I see the Rāfidah and the Jahmiyyah as nothing but heretics.” [11]

Imam Al-Qasim Ibn Sallam [224AH], may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“I have interacted with people and engaged with the scholars of theological rhetoric, yet I have never encountered a group more repugnant, more despicable, weaker in argument, or more foolish than the Rawaafid. During my tenure as a judge in the border regions, I expelled three individuals from among them: two Rawaafid and one Jahmi, asserting that individuals like you should not reside among the inhabitants of the borders.” [12]

Imam Ahmad Ibn Yunus [227AH], may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“We do not consume the sacrifice of a man who is a Rafidi, for in my view, he is an apostate.” [13]

Imam Abu Zur’ah Ar-Razi [264 AH], may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“If you see a man disparaging any of the companions of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, know that he is a heretic. This is because for us the Messenger is truth and the Qur’an is the truth. The Qur’an and the Sunnah have been conveyed to us by the companions of Allah’s Messenger. Those who seek to undermine our witnesses aim to invalidate the Book and the Sunnah, and it is more appropriate to disparage them; they are indeed heretics.” [14]

Abdur Rahman Ibn Abi Hatim, said that he inquired of his father, Abu Zur’ah, regarding the path of the Sunnah and the beliefs which the scholars have encountered in all regions. Among their remarks was: “Indeed, the Jahmiyyah are disbelievers, and the Rafidah have rejected Islam.” [15]

Imam Al-Barbahari [329AH], may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

“Be aware that all deviant beliefs are reprehensible, leading to violence. The most despicable and heretical among them are the Rāfidah, the Mu’tazilah, and the Jahmiyyah, for they seek to lead people towards negation (of Allah’s Attributes) and heresy.” [16]

Imam Ibn al-Jawzi [597], may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

“The excessive veneration of the Rāfidah for Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, led them to fabricate numerous hadiths extolling his virtues, many of which are detrimental and offensive to him. They have also introduced various jurisprudential opinions that are innovations in religion that contradict consensus. In numerous issues, which would require extensive elaboration, they have violated the consensus, and Satan has deceived them into fabricating these claims without relying on authentic sources or sound analogical reasoning. The repugnant (beliefs and practices) of the Rāfidah are too numerous to count.” [17]

The above are very few verdicts of the scholars, including the students of the Sahabah, throughout various generations that oppose the heretical Rafidah before the time of Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. Therefore, David ought to have conducted his research with integrity or chosen to avoid revealing his ignorance, as the adage states: “Silence beautifies the scholar and hides the ignorance of the ignoramus.”

David said: IRAN, AS the Shia stronghold, sees itself as the ideological leader of Shia Muslims worldwide. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, it has sought to expand its influence by creating a “Shia crescent” that includes Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen. However, Iran’s heavy investment in supporting Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite regime in Syria has largely gone to waste, undermining its efforts. [end of quote]

Response: The term Shia Muslim remains a myth until the reality is established. Thus, we’ll quote a clarification by Al-Allamah Rabee in that regard. The Shaikh was asked: Our Shaikh, may Allah preserve you. The questioner says: What is the ruling on the common people of the Rawafid and how do we deal with them?

The Shaikh replied: The questioner differentiates between the common people and other than them. This is a good approach. The common people who neither speak ill of the wives of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, nor do they declare the companions to be disbelievers, nor do they believe that the Qur’an is distorted; however, they have some Rafd [i.e. beliefs of the rafidah] and some hatred for the companions without declaring them disbelievers and what is similar to (these deeds), these ones are misguided innovators in religious matters and we do not declare them disbelievers. (But) whoever joins their heretics in declaring the companions of Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, to be disbelievers, speaking ill of the wives of Allah’s Messenger, and the filthy belief that the Qur’an has been distorted, and that there is an addition and deficiency in it, this (person) is a disbeliever similar to the disbelievers of the Yahud and Nasara. There is no distinction between their common people and their scholars (in this affair).

Then the Shaikh was asked: How do we deal with them? He replied: Answer: If dealing with them is with regards to a worldly affair—business transactions and what is similar to that— it is permissible to trade with a Jew, a Christian and a Rafidi. However, as for co-operating with them in issues of religion, no. [وَلَا تَعَاوَنُواْ عَلَى ٱلۡإِثۡمِ وَٱلۡعُدۡوَٲنِ‌ۚ – Do not help one another in sin and transgression. [5:2] Instead, their scholars and callers are boycotted and they are warned against. [18]

It is evident, upon careful consideration of the preceding facts, that the so-called Islamic revival in Iran under Khomeini was, in truth, a mere Rafidah revolution. This upheaval elevated the Rafidah and their beliefs, which diverge significantly from true Islam. Khomeini and his fellow Rafidah leaders can be characterized as disbelievers and heretics. Allow me to elaborate:

Ayat Al-Shaytan Khomeini: Seeking Aid From the Dead (And Stones and Mud) Is Not Shirk

http://www.ikhwanis.com/articles/jmfhm-ayat-al-shaytan-khomeini-seeking-aid-from-the-dead-is-not-shirk.cfm

Reality of The Rafidah – By Al-Allaamah Salih Al-Fawzan and Al-Allamah Rabee

Footnote a:
http://www.shia.bs/series/the-founder-of-the-shia-sect-is-abdullah-bin-saba-al-yahudi.cfm

Footnote b:
https://www.aqidah.com/creed/articles/oeotc-glimpses-into-the-splitting-of-the-muslim-ummah-part-1.cfm
https://www.aqidah.com/creed/articles/vqlrf-the-splitting-of-the-muslim-ummah-part-2.cfm
https://www.aqidah.com/creed/articles/hxnhe-the-splitting-of-the-muslim-ummah-part-3.cfm
https://www.aqidah.com/creed/articles/flqoi-the-splitting-of-the-muslim-ummah-part-4.cfm

Footnote c:

http://www.shia.bs/series/doctrines-of-the-shia-from-their-own-words-and-books.cfm

http://www.shia.bs/articles/tyxepnv-a-glimpse-upon-core-rafidi-doctrines-the-devils-deception-of-the-shia.cfm

The Devil’s Deception Of The Rafidah Shi’ah — Know Their Beliefs From Their Own Source References

http://www.shia.bs/articles/tzwqsen-the-virtues-of-aaishah-al-siddiqah-daughter-of-abu-bakr-part-1.cfm

http://www.shia.bs/articles/bjjffuj-the-virtues-of-aaishah-al-siddiqah-daughter-of-abu-bakr-part-2.cfm

http://www.shia.bs/articles/hofiyav-the-virtues-of-aaishah-al-siddiqah-daughter-of-abu-bakr-part-3.cfm

[1] Al-Jawab As-Sahih 1/107-108]

[2] Juhud Al-Ulama Al-Hanafiyyah Fee Ibtal Aqaa’id Al-Quburiyyeen 1/19-25

[3] An Excerpt from Ilhaadul Khumeini Fee Ardil Haramayn. Pages 125-140

[4] Al Ajwibah Al Mukhtasar Alaa As’la Al-Ashrah. p.43-44

[5] As-Sunnah 2/548 By Abdullah Ibn Imam Ahmad

[6]Al-Ibanah As-Sughra page 161 By Ibn Battah

[7] Al-Ibanah As-Sughra 162 and As-Sunnah 1/493 by Al-Khallal

[8] Sharh Usul Al-Ittiqad 7/1268-1269

[9] Sharh Usul Al-Ittiqad 4/733

[10] Sharh Usul al-Ittiqad 8/1457

[11] Sharh Usul Itiqad 8/1457

[12] As-Sunnah 1/499 by Al-Khallal

[13] Sharh Usul Al-Ittiqad 8/459

[14] Al-Kifayah 49

[15] Sharh Usul Al-Ittiqad 1/178

[16] Sharh al-Sunnah. 54

[17] Talbis Iblis. 136-137

[18] Adh-Dhari’ah ilaa Bayan Maqasid Kitab Ash-Shariah 3/595

Contextual Integrity at Risk

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Refutations, Sin.

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

Allah, The Most High, 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]

[وَإِن تَلۡوُ ۥۤاْ أَوۡ تُعۡرِضُواْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُونَ خَبِيرً۬ا – and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do]- meaning, Allah [Glorified be He and free is He from all imperfections] mentions two reasons that will inevitably lead to concealment of truth then He warned against them and issued a threat: the first of them is distortion and the second is to turn away from giving truthful witness. That is because when a proof that supports the truth is manifested and the one who wants to repel it finds no way of doing so, he refrains from mentioning it and thus becomes a silent devil, and sometimes he distorts it. Distortion is of two types -distorting words and meanings. Distorting words occur when one utters a word in a context in which it does not establish the truth – either adding to the word, omitting something from it, or substituting it with something else to the extent that the listener is made to believe something, whilst something else is intended, just as the Yahood [i.e. those Yahood who disbelieved in the Prophet and hated him in Madeenah] used to distort words when giving Salaam to the Prophet [i.e. saying As-Saamu Alayka (death be upon you), instead of saying Assalaamu alaykum)]. This is one type of distortion. The second type of distortion is related to meanings – distorting the wording, giving it an interpretation that is not intended by the one who uttered it and pretending not to know its unintended meaning; or dropping other meanings intended by it. Allah [The Exalted] said: [وَإِن تَلۡوُ ۥۤاْ أَوۡ تُعۡرِضُواْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُونَ خَبِيرً۬ا – and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do] [1]

Beware of kadhib, as it corrupts one’s ability to teach people as well as one ability to illustrate information based on how it should actually be. The liar presents what is present as something non-existent and what is non-existent as something present; misrepresents the truth as being something false and falsehood as being something true; misrepresents the good and the evil, so he corrupts his conception and knowledge, which subsequently results in his punishment. Then he portrays what is not true to the one who has been duped by him – the one who is drawn to him – and therefore corrupts his conception and knowledge.

The soul of the liar turns away from existing reality, preferring the non-existent, and falsehood. And when his conception and knowledge is corrupted, which is the basis of every wilfully chosen deed, his deeds become corrupt and marked by lies, so those deeds would emanate from him just as lies emanate from the tongue- neither benefits from his tongue nor his deeds (i.e. in relation to the specific affair). Because of this, lying serves as the foundation of immorality, 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]

Lies first emerge from the heart and then on the tongue, corrupting it; then they transfer to the limbs and corrupt their deeds, just as they corrupt statements of the tongue. As a result, lying prevails over his utterances, deeds, and state of affairs; corruption gets deeply ingrained in him, and its disease leads to destruction if Allah does not grant him recovery with the medication of truthfulness, which uproots the source (or basis) of the lies. This is why the basis of all deeds of the heart is truthfulness, and the basis of their opposites is lies, such as boasting, self-amazement, pride, being glad (with ungratefulness to Allah’s Favours), conceitedness, boastfulness, insolence, weakness, laziness, cowardice, disgrace, and others.

Every righteous deed, whether done privately or publicly, is founded on truthfulness. And the source of every corrupt deed, whether private or public, is lies. Allah punishes the liar by preventing him (i.e. due to his own chosen evil) from those things that will bring him well-being and benefit, while He rewards the truthful one by granting him the ability to attain the beneficial things of the worldly life and Afterlife. There is nothing comparable to truthfulness in terms of how it brings about the affairs of well-being in this life and the next, and there is nothing comparable to lying in terms of how it corrupts and harms one’s worldly and Afterlife affairs.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ

O you who believe! Be afraid of Allah, and be with those who are true (in words and deeds) [9:119]

هَٰذَا يَوْمُ يَنْفَعُ الصَّادِقِينَ صِدْقُهُمْ ۚ

This is a Day on which the truthful will profit from their truth. [5:119]

فَإِذَا عَزَمَ الْأَمْرُ فَلَوْ صَدَقُوا اللَّهَ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَهُمْ

And when the matter (preparation for Jihad) is resolved on, then if they had been true to Allah, it would have been better for them. [47:21] [2]

Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

It is incumbent that the expression conveys the intended meaning through the appropriate terminology. Should the term be explicit or evident, the objective is achieved. However, if the term possesses dual interpretations—one valid and the other erroneous—the intended meaning must be clarified. In instances where the term suggests a flawed interpretation, it should only be employed with an explanation that mitigates any potential misunderstanding. Furthermore, if the term may mislead certain listeners into grasping an incorrect meaning, it should not be used if it is known to carry such implications, as the primary aim of communication is clarity and understanding. Conversely, if the term accurately reflects the intended meaning but some individuals remain unaware of its significance without any negligence on the speaker’s part, the responsibility lies with the listener, not the speaker”. [3]

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

The basis of Banee Adam’s misguidance stems from ‘General Terms’ and ‘Ambiguous Meanings’ (terms, meanings, statements) that can be interpreted as either truth or falsehood when not clearly defined). This issue is exacerbated when they interact with a confused mind, particularly when coupled with misguided desires and enthusiasm. Thus, seek the guidance of the One who stabilises hearts, asking Allah to strengthen your heart in His Religion and protect you from falling into this darkness”. [4]

He, may Allah have mercy upon him, also said:

“If the speaker falls short in his clarification and addresses the listener with vague terms that may encompass various interpretations, and the listener remains uncertain of the intended meaning; if this arises from the speaker’s inability, the listener is given from the speaker’s inability rather than his intent. If the speaker possesses the ability and he does not do so while it is obligated to him to do so, he gives the listener from his evil intent”. [5] [end of quotes]

The violations of the aforementioned clarifications is evidently observable on social media. Certain deceivers on social media have persistently endeavored not only to detach the context of statements but also to isolate the circumstances surrounding incidents, thereby misleading both the inattentive observer and those who have not witnessed prior events that would enable them to identify and compare with current occurrences. Indeed, one must not be oblivious of the fact that context is of paramount importance in our statements and stances, which encompass the necessity of elucidating meanings, defining word connotations, providing specificity, dispelling misconceptions, rectifying erroneous interpretations, and avoiding contrived ambiguities and psychological projections. Rather than adhering to honesty, which is typically characteristic of a believer, some individuals deliberately resort to a form of communication that initially lacks clarity and necessitates further explanation. This approach misleads numerous readers, leaving them to navigate aimlessly in their quest for contextual hints to discern the intended message. Consequently, they deliberately aim to make an individual unable to determine whether the truth resides at the beginning, middle, or end of the discourse. This situation often neglects the essential function of context.

Some of the discussions prevalent on social media, along with the diverse agendas of those disseminating tweets, are so concerning that they necessitate a cautious approach, urging individuals to avoid jargon and only share tweets and retweets that they can comprehensively understand within their context. Due to deceptions and ambiguity prevalent on social media, one must engage with clarity, while consciously avoiding ambiguity and assumptions, as well as ensuring that the person’s words are timely if the topic is very controversial. Therefore, one should not allow themselves to be swayed by the ornate rhetoric of any orator to the point of overlooking the discrepancies between the discourse and its surrounding context, especially when the speaker neglects to offer concrete evidence.

We encounter individuals who tackle contentious matters regarding others, yet intentionally neglect to weave in crucial aspects such as situational nuances or contextual elements, alongside other influences like historical background when appropriate. The orator is aware that his apparent eloquence or compelling rhetoric falls short of effectively communicating the desired message, having omitted the external contexts of the dialogue and all active participants in the communicative exchange; yet, he fixates solely on the favorable assumptions held about him by the audience, even as he deceives them.

Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge that the importance of discourse is intricately tied to the context in which it takes place. Upon encountering individuals who intentionally disregard the etiquettes of honest dialogue, we commit ourselves to disregard the utterances of anyone engaging in a controversial discussion who subsequently attributes statements to others without credible evidence. Thus, one should not permit himself to be misled or influenced by interpretations that lack context, whether through the construction of speech or the arrangement of words, unless they are substantiated by contextual evidence and the assertions or viewpoints of the individual being referenced or critiqued. In the realm of social media, the absence of context renders it impossible to elucidate ambiguities while revealing the intended meaning of statements and claims whose implications remain unclear and can only be understood through context.

Furthermore, neglecting to consider context and isolating an individual’s true circumstances invariably leads to misinterpretations of the entire discourse or its elements. This behavior has led some to deliberately sever the original meaning at the time of its inception from the meaning derived from interpretation. The quantity of retweets, the accompanying comments, or the status of the statement’s author is, in our perspective, a mere illusion when it contravenes the principles of honest discourse. No amount of propaganda, fervent appeals on behalf of their statements, or the most robust support received will blind us to the reality that the speaker has deceived, concealed, misrepresented, lied, and waged war against the accurate context.

Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased with her, reported that Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Indeed, I am only a human being and you people come to me with your disputes. And it may be that one of you can present his case more eloquently than the other and I consider him truthful, and judge in his favour. So if I ever judge and give the right of a brother to his brother, then it is a piece of hellfire and let him not take it”.

Some Benefits Derived From This Hadeeth:

The Ummah [i.e. the scholars and judges] have been commissioned to judge based on what is apparent, but the (mere) judgement of a judge cannot prohibit the lawful and allow the unlawful [i.e. because it cannot be taken if proven erroneous].

This Hadeeth contains a refutation against those who say that the Messengers possess knowledge of the unseen. This hadeeth also shows that speech can be seen to be true based on what is apparent, but it is truly falsehood concerning what is hidden within it.

This hadeeth shows that the one who receives a judgement in his favour is more aware than every other person as to whether he is entitled to it or whether he is a falsifier. So, he takes it if he is entitled to it or leaves it if he is a falsifier because, in reality, a judgement cannot change an affair from what it was in origin [i.e. the original truth in the affair before its distortion or concealment].

This hadeeth shows the sinfulness of the one who argues based on falsehood until he receives what he wants publicly, whilst he is upon falsehood.

In this hadeeth is proof that a scholar can make a mistake and it is a refutation against those who say that every Mujtahid is correct. This hadeeth shows us that the Mujtahid is forgiven (when he makes a mistake).[6]

And Allah knows best.

[1] An Excerpt from ‘Badaa’i At-Tafseer Al-Jaami Limaa Fassarahu Al-Imaam Ibn Al-Qayyim. 1/300-303

[2] Al-Fawaa’id’ pages 202-203

[3] Ar-Radd Alaa Al-Bakri 702-703

[4] As-Sawaa’iq Al-Mursalah 3/927

[5] As-Sawaa’iq Al-Mussalah 2/503

[6] Saheeh Al-Bukhaari -Kitaab Al-Ahkaam (Book of Judgements): Chapter 29: Hadeeth Number: 7181 with Fat’hul Baari]

(2) Whoever harms (others without right), Allah will harm him

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Basics, Contemporary Issues, Fitnah, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Pearls of Wisdom, Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Sin.

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

Allah, The Most High, said:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُغَيِّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّى يُغَيِّرُوا مَا بِأَنْفُسِهِمْ وَإِذَا أَرَادَ اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ سُوءًا فَلَا مَرَدَّ لَهُ وَمَا لَهُمْ مِنْ دُونِهِ مِنْ وَالٍ

Verily! Allah will not change the good condition of a people as long as they do not change their state of goodness themselves. (13:11)

“Indeed, Allah does not change the condition of a people” with regards to well-being, blessing being removed and destroying them, “as long as they do not change their state of goodness themselves” through some of them oppressing others, and some transgressing against others, thus, His punishment and change of their circumstances befalls them”. (1)

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

Indeed, Allah, The Most High, has made the deeds of the righteous and the  wicked to beget their consequences in this world. He has made the withholding of kindness, Zakat and Sadaqah a cause for the withholding of rain from the sky, and for drought and barrenness.

And He has made the oppression of the weak, cheating in measures and weights, and the transgression of the strong against the weak a cause for the tyranny of kings and rulers who neither show mercy when asked to show mercy show nor compassion when asked to show compassion.

In reality, they are the deeds of the subjects manifested in the images of their rulers! For indeed, Allah, Glorified be He, free from all imperfections, by His wisdom and justice, manifests to the people their deeds in the appearances and images that correspond to them; sometimes through drought and barrenness, sometimes through an enemy, sometimes through tyrannical rulers, sometimes through widespread diseases, sometimes through distress, pains, and sorrows that stays in their hearts and not leaving them, sometimes through being deprived of the blessings of the heavens and the earth, and sometimes through being overpowered by the devils who incite them toward the causes of punishment, thus the decree becomes fulfilled and each person ends up to that which he was created to be.

The sensible person allows his insight to travel through the regions of the world, witnessing (or observing), and seeing the manifestations of Allah’s justice and wisdom, thus, it becomes clear to him that the Messengers and their followers in particular are upon the path of salvation, while the rest of creation are upon the path of destruction, heading toward the abode of ruin. Allah is the One who brings His command to completion, none can reverse His judgment, nor repel His decree. And with Allah (alone) is the facilitation of success. (2)

The Imam, may Allah have mercy upon him, also said:

Whoever ponders upon the state of affairs of the world will find that every affair of rectification is due to Tawheed, singling out Allah in worship and obedience to His Messenger (Muhammad). And every evil in the world, trial, affliction, scarcity (in livelihood), being overpowered by an enemy and other than that is due to (our) opposition to the Messenger and the call to other than (the way of) Allaah and His Messenger. Whoever truly ponders upon this and examines the state of affairs of the world- since its beginning and until the time Allaah will take it away and those upon it- he will realise this affair regarding himself and others, in general and specific (circumstances). And there is no Might or Power except with Allaah –The Most High, The Most Great. (3) (End of quotes)

والله المستعان

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). (4)

(1) Tafseer at-Ṭabari 13/471

(2) Zad al-Ma’ad 4/333–334

(3) Badaa’i Al-Fawaa’id 3/525-526

(4)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/

Toxic Scholars and Devout Ignorant Worshippers

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Articles, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Salaf As Saalih (Pious Predecessors), Sin.

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

Imam Sufyan ath-Thawree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “It is said: Seek refuge in Allah from the fitna of the ignorant devout worshipper and the fitna of the sinful (wayward, wicked, corrupt etc) scholar, for their Fitna is a trial for every Maf’toon.” (1)

Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, said: “For indeed the people emulate their scholars and devout worshippers, so, if the scholars are sinful and the devout worshippers are ignorant, then the calamity will become widespread through them (i.e. these two types of people) and severe for both the prominent (influential people) and the commoners.” (2)

(1) Akhlaq al-Ulamaa by p. 63 by Imam Al-Aajurree, may Allah have mercy upon him.

(2) Miftaaḥ Daar As-Sa‘aadah 1/160