Al Allaamah Zayd bin Haadi Al Madkhalee (rahimahullah) said:
“Knowledge is priceless, and its seeker has undoubtedly known its value, and he has given his utmost effort for him to become a patient and forbearing teacher, because he is an inheritor (of knowledge) from the inheritors of the Noble Prophet (upon him be the salaah and salaam).”
كلمة توجيهية لطلاب العلم في البرنامج الدعوي للعلوم الشرعية ٢٩ ربيع الأول ١٤٣٥
Kaldah Bin Hanbal. He is (also) called Ibn Abdillaah Bin Mulayl Al-Ghassaaniy (or) Aslamiy
Mughaffal Bin Ghanam. He is (also) called Abdul Naham Bin Afeef Bin As’ham Al-Muzaniy.
Yaasir Bin Aamir Bin Maalik Bin Kinaanah Abu Ammaar.
Abu Sab’rah Bin Abee Raham
To be continued…InshaaAllaah
———————————————————————————————-
[Source: Makkah Fee Hayaatil Ilm Wal Ulamaa’ page 24]
Abu At-Tufayl Aamir Bin Waathilah and he was from those known by his kunyah. Among the Sahaabah he was the last one to pass away.
Sa’eed Bin Yar’boo. It is said that he died in Makkah. And it is said that he died in Madeenah and this (report) is more well-known.
Abdullaah Bin Amr Ibn Al-Aas. There is a difference of opinion about where he died [i.e. whether Makkah or elsewhere [Source: Al-Quraa Li-Qaasid Ummul Quraa’ page 662-663)]
Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him) said: I say, he (Abdullaah Bin Amr’s) death took place alongside the death of a group of Sahaabah. Al-Fairooz Aabaadiy [rahimahullaah (817AH)] mentioned this in his treatise titled: I’thaaratul Hujoon Li-ziyaaratil Hujoon.
Ham’nan Bin Awf, brother of Abdur-Rahmaan and Abdullaah -the two sons of Awf Bin Abdil Awf.
Khaalid Bin Asad Ibn Abee Ubay Al-Ayyas Bin Umayyah
Zayd Bin Ad-Dath’na
As-Sukraan Bin Amr Bin Abdi Shams Bin Abdi Wad
Shaybah Bin Uthmaan Bin Talhah and he was (also) called Ibn Abee Talhah
Safwaan Bin Umayyah bin Khalaf Bin Wahb Bin Hu’dhaa’fah Bin Jamh al-Jamhiy al-Qurashiy
Abdullah Bin Shihaab Bin Abdil Haarith Bin Zahra- the grandfather of Ibn Shihaab Az-Zuhriy
Abdullah Bin Amr Ibn Al-Aas
Abdullaah Bin Yasir al-Unsiy
Al-Ars Bin Qais Bin Saeed Ibn Al-Ar’qam Al-Kindiy
To be continued InShaaAllaah
——————————————————————————-
[Source: Makkah Fee Hayaatil Ilm Wal Ulamaa’ Pages 23-24]
Abdur Rahmaan Bin Abee Bakr. He died suddenly at a mountain called Al-Hub’shiy close to Makkah. This was mentioned by Ibnul Atheer. Al-Haafidh Abu Umar said: It (i.e. the Al-Hub’shiy Mountain) was ten miles from Makkah. Our Shaikh As-Saaghaaniy said: He [i.e Abdur-Rahmaan Bin Abee Bakr (radiyallaahu-anhu)] was carried to Makkah by men and buried there.
Abdullah Ibn Az-Zubayr Ibn Al-Awwaam was killed in Makkah and was buried there. His head was taken to Makkah and then to khurasaan.
Abdullah Bin Kurayz died in Makkah and was buried at Arafah.
Abdullaah Bin Umar was buried at Fakh. It is said that (he was buried) at the wall of Umm Hurmaan. It may be that he was buried between Fakh and the wall of Umm Hurmaan.
Abdullah Bin Qais- Abu Moosaa Al-Ash’ariy -died at a place two miles from kufah.
Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool said that in Al-Isaabah (2/360)- in the biography of Abu Moosaa Al-Ash’ari -a difference of opinion is mentioned about whether he died at Koofah or Makkah. The place that is two miles from Koofah is (called) Ath-Thawiyyah. Al-Fayrooz Aabaadiy stated in I’thaarah Al-Hujoon’ page 12 that he (i.e. Abu Moosaa) died in Makkah and it was (also) said that he died at Ath-Thawiyyah, two miles from Koofah. The first statement is correct (i.e. he died in Makkah) [Footnote 1.page 23]
I’taab Bin Usaid: The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) appointed him a ruler in Makkah after the conquest. He died in Makkah on the same day that AbuBakr Siddeeq died.
Uthmaan Bin Talhah Bin Abee Talhah
Uthmaan Bin Aamir Abu Quhaafah. He died in Makkah, six months and six days after the death of Abu Bakr (As-Siddeeq).
Ayyaash Bin Abee Rabee’ah Al-Makh’zoomiy. He died at Makkah.
Muhammad Bin Haatib Ibn Al Haarith.
Al-Musawwar Bin Makh’zamah Bin Nawfil
Wahb Bin Abdillaah Abu Juhayfah and he was from those known by their kunyas
To be continued…InShaaAllaah
——————————————————————————————–
[Source: Makkah Fee Hayaatil Ilm Wal-Ulamaa’ page 22-23. Abridged and slightly paraphrased]
[
Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him) quotes Al-Muhib At-Tabari [rahimahullaah (674AH)] who said that those who died in Makkah among the Sahaabah are:
(a) Al-Haarith Bin Awf, Abu Waqid Al-Laythi. He is considered to be from the people of Madeenah. He stayed in Makkah for a year and died there. He was buried in the graveyard of the Muhaajiroon.
(b) Wahbah Bin Ba’kak Abus Sanaabil.
(c) Khubaib Bin Adiy; he was killed by the kuffaar of Quraish at Makkah and they crucified him on a sage tree.
(d) Sa’d Bin Khawlaa, and he is also known as Ibn Khawlah. Ibn Sa’d said: He (Ibn Khawlah) was martyred at the (battle) of Uhud.
(e) Samrah Bin Mi’yar, Abu Mahdhoorah – a Mu’aadhin of Allaah’s Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam).
To be continued InShaaAllaah
———————————————————————————————
[Source: Makkah Fee Hayaatil Ilm Wal Ulamaa.. page 22]
Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him) quoted Ibnul Jawziy [rahimahullaah (597AH)] who mentioned those Sahaabah [radiyallaahu-anhum] who resided in Makkah:
Al Aswad Bin Khalaf
Eeyaas Bin Abd
Badeel Bin Warqaa
Bishr Bin Sufyaan
Tameem Bin Usayd
Al-Haarith Bin Hishaam
Hujayr Bin Abee I’haab
Al-Hakam Bin Abil Aas
Huwaytib
Khaalid Bin Usayd
Khaalid Ibn Al-Aas
Khuwaylid Bin Khaalid
Khuwaylid Bin Sakhr
Samrah Ibn Al-Mu’addhin
Suhail Bin Amr
Shaybah Bin Uthmaan
Safwaan Bin Umayyah
Diraar Ibn Al-khattaab
Aamir Bin Waathila
Abdullah Bin Hub’shaa
Abdullaah Ibn Az-Zubayr
Abdullaah Ibn As-Saa’ib
Abdullaah Ibn As-Sa’diy
Abdullaah Ibn Abee Rabee’ah
Abdur-Rahmaan Bin Abziy
Abdur-Rahmaan Bin Safwaan
I’taab Bin Usayd
Ut’bah Bin Abee Lahab
Uthmaan Bin Talhah
Uthmaan Bin Aamir
Abu Quhaafah
Uqbah Ibn Al-Haarith
Ikrimah Bin Abee Jahl
Alqamah Ibn Al-Fagh’waa
Amr Bin Ba’kak
Amr Bin Qataadah
Iyyaash Bin Abee Rabee’ah
Qais Ibn As-Saa’ib
Kuraz Bin Alqamah
Kalda bin Hanbal
Kaysaan
Luqayt
Mahrish
Muslim
Mutee
Al-Mutallib Bin Mu’tab
Al-Muhaajir
Naafi Bin Abdil Haarith
An-Nadr Ibn Al-Haarith
Ya’laa Bin Umayyah
Others who lived in makkah but were not known by their names
Abu Jum’ah
Abu Sab’rah
Abu Abdir Rahmaan Fahree
[source: Makkah Fee Hayaatil Ilm Wal Ulamaa ‘ pages20-21]
To be continued InShaaAllaah
Shaikh Firkoos (may Allaah preserve him) was asked about applying the term Shaikh’ to everyone who enters into the field of teaching, dawah etc
The Shaikh stated that a ‘Shaikh’ is everyone who has exceeded the age of 50 –above middle age and under old age….. As for a Shaikh in the affairs of knowledge, it is applied to everyone who is advanced in age and has gained a lot of experience in various sciences and is well acquainted with it. He is able to refute Shubuhaat and establish evidences, which manifests in his ability in affairs of knowledge, and the guidance and cultivation he gives the people. He is far removed from following desires and desiring what the people possess. So it is not allowed for a beginner student to be given this title in affairs of knowledge even if he has acquired some of the sciences or is a graduate from a university, or has memorized some of Sunan of the Prophet, or has certificates, recommendations etc listen to speech here: http://safeshare.tv/v/nypmxZZVDkA
[End of Paraphrased Excerpt]
So where are those foolish Hizbis who refer to some deviated youngster as ‘Shaikh’ when it is the case that neither has that deviant reached the age of 50 nor has any scholar referred to him as such. As for their deviated elders, then they are merely Shuyookh in age and not in knowledge because they are people of deviation and desires. We ask Allaah to protect us from carelessness and foolishness. Aameen
Narrated Aa’isha (radiyallaahu-anhaa): The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) and I used to take a bath from a single pot of water and our hands used to go in the pot after each other in turn. [Bukhari Number 261]
Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr (rahimahullaah) said:
Ad-daawoodiy (used this) as evidence regarding the permissibility for a man to look at the private parts of his wife and vice versa. This is supported by what Ibn Hibbaan narrated from Sulaymaan Ibn Moosaa that indeed he was asked regarding a man who looks at the private parts of his wife, so he (Sulaymaan) said: I asked Ataa, who said: ‘’I asked Aa’isha, so he mentioned this hadeeth and it is a determined text in this subject matter”. [Fat-hul Baari 1/364]
In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy
In his deceptive reply to the Friday incident at Al-Markazus Salafi, the man of bidah mentioned a principle by way of which he sought to establish yet again a trick utilised by ahlul bidah- narrating only what benefits him -(and this time he referred to a principle and refrained from explaining it, whilst passing a verdict against us); whereas the Salafiyyoon narrate what is for them and against. Indeed, it is well known that Abu Usaamah and his allies amongst the Mu’mayyi’ah are famous for utilising general statements, especially regarding some affairs that have been detailed, explained and clarified by the scholars in order to show the falsehood of the Haddaadiyyah and Mu’mayyi’ah, and the sound stance of Ahlus Sunnah.
Abu Usaama stated that we declared him a Mubtadi simply because he does not declare Al-Maribi a Mubtadi, and this, according to Abu Usaamah, is a bidah we are upon – because we declared him a Mubtadi solely due to the fact that he does not declare al-Maribi a Mubtadi.
Firstly: We do not know a single Salafi who preceded any Salafi scholar in declaring Abu Usaama a man of bidah; rather his affair was made known to Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmi (rahimahullaah).
Secondly: Once again, as it is well known of him, he deliberately sought to conceal the knowledge base clarification regarding this affair in order to deceitfully slander Salafiyyoon, just as he attempted to conceal, lie and distort whilst seeking to slander Shaikh Rabee and Ustaadh Abu Khadeejah in the past.
Thirdly: Indeed, what Abu Usaama sought to conceal from his unsuspecting followers will be revealed as follows In-Shaa-Allaah. Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadi (may Allaah preserve him) was asked:
Question: The principle: ‘whoever does not declare an innovator as an innovation, he (himself) is an innovator; some people say that this principle is strange; (or alien to Salafiyyah);
Shaikh Rabee [may Allaah preserve him] stated:
It is not correct to apply this principle unrestrictedly because it maybe that he is unaware of the Bidah committed by that person, therefore he refrains from declaring him an innovator due to Wara [apprehensive fear]. [1] Why should you declare him an innovator? [i.e. why should you declare him an innovator when it is the case that he is unaware of the bidah of that Mubtadi or refrains from making Tabdee out of apprehensive fear].
But if he knows the innovator, [i.e. knows that such a person is upon bidah due to which the evidence was established against him], loves him and allies with him, then he is a Mubtadi. This is the distinction in this affair – he knows that that person is a Mubtadi but he aids him and wages war against Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah, then he is a mubtadi without a doubt. As for a person who does not know that such and such person is a Mubtadi, he is not to be declared an innovator.
[As for] you [i.e. the scholar or student of knowledge who is qualified to make Tabdee] – the one who studied the affair of [that person] and you know that he allies with a Mubtadi, puts him in a favourable position, wages war against Ahlus Sunnah for the sake of that Mubtadi and for the sake of this falsehood, this person is a Mubtadi; misguided.
As for the person who does not know that indeed such and such person is a mubtadi, then advise him and clarify for him [i.e. with clear unambiguous proofs until he understands] that such person is a mubtadi. So unless he ceases [i.e. refrains from defending this mubtadi after understanding the evidences], then put him with his companion – the mubtadi. [Source: Awnul Baari 2/891..slightly paraphrased & abridged]
The Shaikh answered: Finally: This is what Abu Usama sought to conceal in order to deceive his listeners that he was declared a man of Bidah merely based on the fact that he refuses to make Tabdee of Al-Maribi. So his unsuspecting listeners should be made aware of the fact that he deliberately refrained from explaining this principle as well as the fact that we did not precede Shaikh Ahmad (rahimahullaah), nor do we intend to precede the scholars (In-Shaa-Allaah) in declaring him or anyone else a man of bidah and misguidance. However, manipulation, concealment, lies and deception became Abu Usaama’s second skin since when he started defending Mubtadi’ah and cannot argue with the Salafiyyoon based on any evidence; rather deception is what appeals to him but not the truth.
We ask Allaah for Ikhlaas, Thabaat and Husnul Khaatimah. Aameen
To be continued…In-Shaa-Allaah
(1) Wara (apprehensive fear). The translation of this term was taken from one of Ustaadh Amjad Rafiq’s (may Allaah preserve him) translations.