Skip to main content

Tag: tamyee’

[Part B: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli’s Deficient and Defective Advice To Ahlus Sunnah- Dr Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari Establishes a Second Goal, Aim and Intent Behind Boycotting]

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Uncategorized.

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

Reader: In this discourse, Dr Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari (may Allaah preserve him) will indicate to another goal behind boycotting through the texts of the Qur’aan, the Sunnah and the statements of the scholars, which Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli (may Allaah rectify his affair or protect us from his false views) failed to mention in his defective and deficient advice to Ahlus Sunnah.

Likewise, not only will the texts of the Sharee’ah and the statements of the scholars utilised by the Shaikh (Dr Abdullah Al-Bukhaari) manifest the fact that the Hizbiyyoon propagate a corrupt Walaa Wal Baraa related to the affair of some of the Mubtadi’ah, but they will also unveil the deception of some of those hizbiyyoon of Luton (sponsees of Ihyaa Turaath) who have recently attempted to deceive the people through the statement [Whatever leads to hatred and enmity between the people, then verily the legislation categorically prohibits it]. However, this has to be understood in the light of what you will discover from the detailed texts of the Sharee’ah and the understanding of the Imaams of the Sunnah.

Finally, the reader should not be oblivious of the fact that Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli claimed that the aims (or goals) behind boycotting are for the purposed of achieving three affairs only and that his claim is supported by the A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon, even though he did not quote except Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah). As for Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari, not only did he nullify this above unsubstantiated claim-by the Tawfeeq of Allaah- but he also pointed out that Dr Ibraaheem did not provide statements from those A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon, whom he claims backed his views. In Part A of this series [see here https://t.co/fW6kmUrpSi ] we saw that Dr Shaikh Abdullah fulfilled the trust in this affair of knowledge by quoting the Imaams and in Part B to follow-InShaa’Allaah- he quoted the scholars, such as Sufyaan Ath-Thawri, Ash-Shawkaani, Abu Daawud, Al-Baghawiy, Al-Mundhiriy, Al-Bayhaqqi, An-Nawawi, As-Saabooniy, Ibn Aqeel, Sulaymaan Ibn Sahmaan and Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahumullaah). Likewise, the reader should not forget that Dr Shaikh Abdullaah’s observations on Dr Ibraaheem’s defective and deficient advice to Ahlus Sunnah was examined by a number of scholars in our era, such as Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh Zayd (rahimahullaah), Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi, Shaikh Ubaid, Shaikh Ali Naasir, Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool and others.

To proceed:

Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari (may Allaah preserve him) began this discussion, saying that a second goal (or aim) behind boycotting is to fulfil the belief in Loyalty and disassociation; love for the sake of Allaah and hatred for the sake of Allaah because a believer is commanded with it. The actualization of this great principle necessitates disassociating oneself from bidah and the innovators because the strongest bond of Imaan is to love for the sake of Allaah and hate for the sake of Allaah.

The texts of the Qur’aan and (authentic) Sunnah indicate to the fact that it is obligatory to establish this creed (concerning love and hatred for the sake of Allaah) and this is what the Salafus Saaleh (pious predecessors) of this Ummah understood; so they determined its texts and applied it through actions. And that which indicates to this aim (or goal) is as follows:

Allaah (The Most High) said:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا دِينَكُمْ هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ وَالْكُفَّارَ أَوْلِيَاءَ ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

O you who believe! Take not for Auliya’ (protectors and helpers) those who take your religion for a mockery and fun from among those who received the Scripture before you, nor from among the disbelievers; and fear Allah if you indeed are true believers. [5:57]

Then Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari quoted Imaam Ash-Shawkaani (rahimahullaah) who stated in Fat’hul Qadeer 2/54 that the above ayah prohibits one from taking as helpers (or protectors) those who take the religion for mockery and fun. This includes everyone who does this, be it the polytheists, the people of the Book, and the people of bidah who ascribe themselves to Islaam. The part of the ayah [مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ -among those who received the Scripture] does not negate the inclusion of other people besides them (i.e. those were given the scripture), if the stated cause (i.e. taking religion for mockery and fun) in the ayah is present, which is the very reason behind the prohibition. [End]

The scholars have given attention to the establishment of this aim (or goal behind boycotting) by placing chapter headings (in their books) and stated what indicates to it. Imaam Abu Daawud placed a chapter in his Sunan (i.e. Sunan Abu Daawud) titled, ‘’Chapter: keeping away from the people of desires and having hatred for them.’’ [Vol 5, page 6]

Al-Haafidh Al-Baghawi placed a chapter titled, ‘’Keeping away from the people of desires’’ [1/221]

Al-Haafidh Al-Mundhiriy placed a chapter in [At-Targheeb Wat-Tarheeb 4/8] which he called: [At-Targheeb Fil Hubbi Fil-laahi Ta’aalaa – An urge (i,e. through texts of the sharee’ah about having love for the sake of Allaah (The Most High); Wat-Tarheeb Min Hubbil Ash’raar Wa Alil Bidah (i.e. made to fear by way of warning through the sharee’ah texts that) the evil ones and ahlul bidah should not be loved; Li-annal Mar’a Ma’a Man Ahabba (i.e. because a person will be with the one he loves] [End]

Al-Bayhaqqi placed a chapter in Al-I’tiqaad’ page 236 titled: [’Prohibition against sitting with Ahlul Bidah] [End]

An-Nawawi placed a titled in Riyaadus Saaliheen’ page 551, Chapter: [The Prohibition against boycotting between two Muslims beyond three days, except in case of boycotting (a person) due to Bidah, or (one) who openly commits wicked deeds or what is similar] [End]

Imaam As-Saabooniy stated in Aqeedatus Salaf Ashaab Al-Hadeeth’ page 292: And they hate Ahul-Bid’ah (the People of Innovation) who innovate into the religion that which is not from it. They neither love them nor keep company with them; they neither listen to their speech nor sit with them; they neither argue with them about the religion nor debate with them. Rather, they guard their ears from hearing their falsehood, which if they pass through the ears and settle in the hearts, will cause harm (to the hearts); bring about devilish whisperings and corrupt ideas. And regarding this, Allaah [The Mighty and Majestic] sent down:

 وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ الَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ

And when you (Muhammad) see those who engage in a false conversation about Our Verses (of the Qur’an), stay away from them till they turn to another topic. [6:68] [End]

Imaam Adh-Dhahabi stated in the biography of Thawr Bin Yazeed Al-Himsiy (died 153) that Abu Tawbah Al-Halabiy said: ‘’Our companions related to us that Thawr met Al-Awzaa’ee, so he (Thawr) extended his hand (i.e. to shake Al-Awzaa’ee’s hand), but Al-Awzaa’ee refused to give his hand to him and said: O Thawr! If this was to due to an (affair of) the Dunyah, then there would have been closeness, but it is an (affair) of the religion.’’ The reason behind Imaam Al-Awzaa’ee turning away from Thawr was because Thawr used to subscribe to the Qadari views. [See Siyar A’laam Nubulaa 6/344 and Meezaan Al-I’tidaal’ 1/374] [End]

Ibn Aqeel said: If you want to know the state of Islaam in the midst of the people of the era, then neither look at their crowding at the doors of the grand mosques nor the raising of their voices with the (statement) Labbaik (i.e. the Talbiyah); rather look at their interaction with the enemies of the Sharee’ah. [Al-Aadaab Ash-Sharee’ah’ of Ibn Muflih 1/268] [End]

Then in the second paragraph on page 65, Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari quoted a statement of Al-Allaamah Ash-Shaikh Sulaymaan Ibn Sahmaan regarding the affair that to refrain from giving Salaam to a person or replying to Salaam does not necessitate that such a person is outside the fold of Islaam, as some people claim that one can neither refrain from giving Salaam nor refrain from replying to the salaam, except if such a person has no Islaam! So are those who hold this view not aware that refraining from giving Salaam or replying to it is from the Sunnah of the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam)- the one whose Sunnah is a source of guidance for those who are guided and those who abandon it are misguided; for indeed the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) boycotted Ka’ab Ibn Maalik and his two companions when they failed to participate in the battle of Tabuk, even though they were amongst those who participated in the Battle of Badr.

Therefore, do those ones (i.e. the ones who claim that refraining from giving Salaam or replying to salaam is not to be applied except to one who has no Islaam) think that it was ascertained that Ka’ab and his two companions had no Islaam when the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) boycotted them by neither giving them salaam nor speaking to them? If that is not the case- even though they were virtuous people- then indeed he (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) boycotted them, neither gave them salaam nor spoke to them when they committed (that blameworthy affair) which obligated that they were to be reprimanded and disciplined until Allaah showed them mercy, after they repented, turned in repentance and in obedience with true Faith.

So when this becomes clear to you, then you will know the ignorance of these ones (i.e. those who say that there is neither refraining from giving salaam to a Muslim nor replying to his salaam, except if he has no Islaam) regarding the Sunnah and the statements of the scholars. You should know that we do not refrain from giving them Salaam (i.e. to some of the people who deserve such treatment) except due to what they have innovated in the religion; speaking ill of the scholars and allying with the enemies of the sharee’ah, such as the Raafidah and those similar to them, and due to the evil deeds and statements they have brought about. [End]

Then Dr Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari stated on page 69 that there are those who claim that there should be softness and leniency (i.e. a claim to softness in its wrong place) which leads to negligence regarding this great fundamental and upright principle; so you find him showing a display of softness and leniency, and making claims of love for the sake of Allaah. It maybe that this person and his ilk are truthful in their claims of loving for the sake of Allaah, but when the affair is examined in reality, they do not hate for the sake of Allaah- meaning that he has love for the sake of Allaah but not hatred for the sake of Allaah (in this affair). So in that regard, he has not actualised this great principle in the manner it deserves to be actualised, for indeed love and hate for the sake of Allaah are two affairs that necessitate each another and are binded to one another- one cannot be separated from the other. Abu Nu’aym stated in Al-Hilya 7/24 that Yoosuf Ibn Asbaat said: I heard Sufyaan Ath-Thawriy saying: ‘‘If you love a man for the sake of Allaah, but then he innovated an innovation in Islaam and you do not hate him due to it, then indeed you did not love him for the sake of Allaah.’’ [End]

Then on page 71, Shaikh Abdullaah al-Bukhaari stated that a person should be careful of the games of shaytaan-be it a shaytaan amongst humans or the Jinn- with regards to these claims; so a person should cling to the texts of the sharee’ah and the understanding of the Salafus Saaleh because the entire Sharee’ah is goodness, mercy, compassion, justice and equity (i.e. within the boundaries legislated by the All-Wise Creator).  And it is from justice, equity, compassion and mercy for the slave (i.e. for everyone) that he actualises Allaah’s Sharee’ah. [End]

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: All the legislated punishments of the Sharee’ah are a beneficial remedy by way of which Allaah rectifies the disease of the hearts, and they are from Allaah’s Mercy to His slaves and compassion for them- all of which enters into the statement of Allaah (The Blessed and Most High):

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا رَحْمَةً لِّلْعَالَمِينَ

And We have sent you (O Muhammad) not but as a mercy for the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists). [21:107]

So whoever abandons this beneficial mercy due to compassion for a sick person, then he has helped such a person to be subjected to punishment and destruction, even though he does not desire except good. (And in doing so) he is an ignoramus and an idiot, just as some ignorant women and men behave with their sick ones; those whom they nurture; their slaves and other than them by not disciplining and punishing them for the shirk they commit and preventing them from good due to compassion; so that leads them to corruption, transgression and destruction. [End] [Majmoo 15/290] [Ref 1]

To be continued In-Shaa-Allaah

———————————————————————————————————————-

[Ref 1] Question to Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (Rahimahullaah): Is enjoining Ma’ruf and forbidding Munkar, namely correcting the wrong by the hand, a right for all Muslims or is it just confined to those in authority and their deputies?

A: Correcting the wrong is a right for all Muslims according to their ability, because the Messenger (peace be upon him) said, “Anyone of you who sees Munkar (that which is unacceptable or disapproved of by Islamic law and Muslims of sound intellect), let them change it with their hand (by taking action); if they cannot, then with their tongue (by speaking out); and if they cannot, then with their heart (by hating it and feeling that it is wrong); and that is the weakest of Iman (faith).”(Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi & others)

However, changing by the hand must be based on ability that will not result in greater corruption or evil. Man has the right to rectify matters with his hand (by taking action) in his home, with his children, wife, and servants; and a manager has the authority to make changes with the hand within the organization they are responsible for, in accordance with the instructions that were given to them. Otherwise, people should not change with their hand anything they are not authorized to change.  If they do make changes in matters that they have no authority over, this will result in more evil and great corruption between them and the people and between the people and the state.

In this case they should make the change with their tongue (by speaking out). They may say: “O so-and-so! Fear Allah! That is not permissible,” “This is Haram (prohibited),” or: “That is Wajib (obligatory) on you,” and clarify it with Shar’iy (Islamic legal) evidence. This is what can be done by the tongue. As for changing matters with the hand, this should be done where one has authority, such as one’s home, with those under one’s responsibility, or those authorized by the ruler, such as organizations given permission and authority to enjoin Ma’ruf (that which is judged as good, beneficial, or fitting by Islamic law and Muslims of sound intellect). They should make changes in accordance to the degree of authority that has been given to them, in the way prescribed by the Shari’ah (Islamic law), without exceeding their jurisdiction. The same applies to the governor of a city; he should make changes with his hand, in accordance with the instructions he has.

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=16&Topic=9751

[Ref 2: At-Ta’aqqubaat As-Sareehah Alaa Risaalah An-Naseehah Lid-Duktoor Ibraaheem Bin Aamir Ar’Rihayli’ pages …61-72 Abridged and paraphrased]

[Part One- Unveiling The Deceit of The Hizbiyyoon of Luton (Sponsees of the deviants of Ihyaa Turaath) Against The Correct Stances Regarding Ihyaa Turaath and Their Utilising Scholars Without Proofs In order To Hide Their Misguidance

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Scholars of Islam, Tamyee'.

http://salaficentre.com/2014/12/shaikh-muhammad-bin-haadi-conferences-organized-by-hizbiyyoon-and-attended-by-those-mashaayikh-considered-to-be-upon-the-sunnah/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/1-unveiling-the-deceit-of-the-hizbiyyoon-luton-and-other-sponsees-of-ihyaa-turaath-through-some-very-beneficial-and-precise-principles-concerning-the-differing-of-the-scholars-on-jarh-wat-tadeel-t/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/2-unveiling-the-deceit-of-the-hizbiyyoon-luton-and-other-sponsees-of-ihyaa-turaath-through-some-very-beneficial-and-precise-principles-concerning-the-differing-of-the-scholars-on-jarh-wat-tadeel-t/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/3-unveiling-the-deceit-of-the-hizbiyyoon-luton-and-other-sponsees-of-ihyaa-turaath-through-some-very-beneficial-and-precise-principles-concerning-the-differing-of-the-scholars-on-jarh-wat-tadeel-t/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/4-unveiling-the-deceit-of-the-hizbiyyoon-luton-and-other-sponsees-of-ihyaa-turaath-through-some-very-beneficial-and-precise-principles-concerning-the-differing-of-the-scholars-on-jarh-wat-tadeel-t/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/5-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-now-let-us-see-whether-we-can-blindly-follow-anyone-who-has-a-good-opinion-of-ihyaa-turaath/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/6-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-now-let-us-see-whether-we-can-blindly-follow-anyone-who-has-a-good-opinion-of-ihyaa-turaath-based-on-what-he-kn/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/7-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-let-us-listen-to-the-muhaddith-of-yemen-muqbil-bin-haadi-rahimahullaah/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/8-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-let-us-listen-to-shaikh-ubaid/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/9-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-let-us-listen-to-shaikh-muhammad-baazmools-reply-regarding-the-false-accusation-that-shaikh-rabee-comp/

http://salaficentre.com/2016/01/10-after-acquainting-oneself-with-the-principles-mentioned-by-shaikh-ubaid-posts-1-4-let-us-listen-to-shaikh-rabees-speech-regarding-those-who-turn-away-from-the-clear-proofs-and-utilise/

In-Shaa-Allaah Part 2 of this series will be based on acquainting ourselves with deviant individuals of Ihyaa Turaath and their statements of misguidance in affairs of Manhaj and Aqeedah, so that it may become very clear that Shaikh Abdur Razzaaq Al-Badr’s unawareness of the true reality of Ihya Turaath cannot be taken into consideration as an excuse to promote Ihya Turaath or to turn a blind eye to the reality, rather a seeker of truth seeks after the clear proofs, as Shaikh Ubaid stated: The one who knows of a mistake and it is clear to him, then it is not permissible for him to blindly follow a scholar to whom an affair is hidden. And indeed you already heard yesterday that the scholars are not infallible in their Ijtihaadaat. Therefore, it is not permissible to adopt them (i.e. the mistakes of the scholars) as a methodology (to follow).

http://salaficentre.com/2015/05/a-misunderstanding-regarding-the-statement-laa-inkaar-fee-masaail-al-khilaaf-there-should-be-no-repudiation-in-the-affairs-of-khilaaf-i-e-differing/

 

 

[Part A: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli’s Deficient and Defective Advice To Ahlus Sunnah- Dr Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari Lays The First Foundation, Goal, Aim and Intent Behind Boycotting]

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Uncategorized.

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

Reader: Take note that Dr Shaikh Rabee’s responses to Dr Ibraaheem will carry on from Parts 9, 10 etc and Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari’s Radd will begin with Parts A, B, C etc

To proceed:

Dr Ibraaheem stated that boycotting is legislated for the purpose of achieving three Maqaasid (goals or aims). Then he stated that these three Maqaasid are based on evidence and have been confirmed by the A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon of Ahlus (A) [i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc]

The Three Goals or Aims behind Boycotting According To Dr Ibraaheem    

[1] The first (goal or aim) according to Dr Ibraaheem is that a person boycotts everyone who is harmful to him from the Mukhaalifeen, such as Ahlul Bidah Wal-Ma’aasee (the people of bidah and sin) – those who are harmful to a person in the affairs of his religion if he sits with them.

[2] The second goal (or aim) behind boycotting is to benefit the Ummah. So by boycotting an individual, the benefit of that will also be received by the Ummah, such as boycotting some of those who have Mukhaalafaat (i.e. those upon affairs that are in opposition to the Sharee’ah), so that by boycotting them, others will take heed and not fall into their errors.  On this point, Dr Ibraaheem quoted the Hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) abstained from praying the Janaanah Salaah of a man who died without paying his debts. Then Dr Ibraaheem quoted a statement of Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in this regard.

[3] The third goal (or aim) behind boycotting is to bring about benefit for the one who is boycotted (i.e. the one upon an error that is in opposition to the sharee’ah). So boycotting is legislated against those people of bidah with Mukhaalafaat (errors that are in opposition to the Sharee’ah) and the sinful people, if there is a benefit for them in that boycotting, in order that they may recant from those errors and repent. Then Dr Ibraaheem utilised as evidence that the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) boycotted Ka’ab Ibn Maalik and his two other companions until they repented.

In the above section, Dr Ibraaheem did not present the great goals or aims behind boycotting, rather his statement: ‘’Boycotting is legislated for the (purpose of achieving) three goals or aims’’ is understood to be that those are the only goals or aims behind boycotting, but the affair is not what Dr Ibraaheem has stated. The goals, aims or intent behind Hajr (boycotting) in the Islamic Legislation are also due to affairs as follows:

Firstly: To actualize servitude to Allaah (The Mighty and Majestic)

Boycotting is an act of worship and a Right of Allaah (i.e. legislated by Allaah and to be carried out for the sake of Allaah). Its fulfilment is a fulfilment of a legislated affair, so the conditions to be fulfilled in other acts of worship is also required in boycotting- that is, it should be carried out purely for the sake of Allaah and in accordance with the (Sunnah) of the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam). What indicates to this goal (aim or intent) is the statement of Allaah (The Most High):

وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ الَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ ۚ وَإِمَّا يُنسِيَنَّكَ الشَّيْطَانُ فَلَا تَقْعُدْ بَعْدَ الذِّكْرَىٰ مَعَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ

And when you (Muhammad) see those who engage in a false conversation about Our Verses (of the Qur’an) by mocking at them, stay away from them till they turn to another topic. And if Shaitan (Satan) causes you to forget, then after the remembrance sit not you in the company of those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.) [An-aam, Ayah 68]

Imaam At-Tabariy (rahimahullaah) stated in his explanation of this Ayah [5/330] that in this ayah there is a clear indication that it is prohibited to sit with all types of people of falsehood amongst the innovators and the sinners, whilst they are engage in their falsehood. [End]

And the statement of Allaah:

وَقَدْ نَزَّلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الْكِتَابِ أَنْ إِذَا سَمِعْتُمْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ يُكْفَرُ بِهَا وَيُسْتَهْزَأُ بِهَا فَلَا تَقْعُدُوا مَعَهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ ۚ إِنَّكُمْ إِذًا مِّثْلُهُمْ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ جَامِعُ الْمُنَافِقِينَ وَالْكَافِرِينَ فِي جَهَنَّمَ جَمِيعًا

And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Qur’an) that when you hear the Verses of Allah being denied and mocked at, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allah will collect the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell. [Nisaa 140]

Al-Allaamah al-Qurtubi (rahimahullaah) stated in [Al-Jaami Li-Ahkaam Al-Qur’aan 5/418] that when it is established that the people of sins are to be kept away from- as it has been made clear- then there is a greater reason to keep away from Ahlul Bidah Wal Ahwaa (the people of bidah and desires). [End]

Allaah (The Most High) said:

وَلَا تُطِعْ مَنْ أَغْفَلْنَا قَلْبَهُ عَن ذِكْرِنَا وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ وَكَانَ أَمْرُهُ فُرُطًا

And obey not him whose heart We have made heedless of Our Remembrance, one who follows his own lusts and whose affair (deeds) has been lost. [18:28]

Al-Allaamah Al-Ameen Ash-Shanqeeti (rahimahullaah) stated in Adwaa Wal-Bayaan 4/98-99] that in this noble ayah, Allaah (The Mighty and Majestic) forbade His Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) from obeying the one whose heart Allaah has made heedless of Allaah’s Remembrance, one who follows his own lusts and whose affair has been lost. And indeed Allaah established in the Qur’aan that He forbade His Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) from obeying the likes of this heedless one, who is heedless of Allaah’s Remembrance and a follower of his desires. And the meaning of ‘follower of his desires’ is that he inclines to his evil soul and its desire for evil, such as disbelief and disobedience. [End]

Imaam Al-Bukhaari reported that Aa’isha (radiyallaahu-anhaa) said: The Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) recited this Ayah:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’an). In it are Verses that are (entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkam (commandments, etc.), Al-Fara’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers, etc.)]; and others are Mutashaabihaat (i.e. not entirely clear in what they indicate, so they are to be referred back to the Muhkamaat to be explained]. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials, etc.), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).

She said: Then Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: If you see those who follow thereof that is not entirely clear, then they are those whom Allah has named [as having deviation (from the truth)] so beware of them. [Bukhaari Number 4547 with Fat-hul Baari 209; Saheeh Muslim with Sharh of Nawawi 17/ page 216]

The angle from which evidence is derived regarding this affair is what has been stated by Al-Haafidh An-Nawawi in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim [17/218] that this hadeeth is a warning against mixing with the people of deviation, the people of bidah and those who seek after dubious affairs in order to cause trials. [End]

Imaam Abu Daawud stated in Kitaab Al-Adab (i.e. in Sunan abu Daawud 5/213-216): Chapter: The one who boycotts his Muslim brother’; then he narrated some ahaadeeth to show that it is prohibited to boycott (a Muslim) for more than three days. Then he said: The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) boycotted some of his wives for forty days, Ibn Umar boycotted a son of his until he died and Umar Bin Abdul Azeez turned his face away from a man. [End]

Imaam Al-Baghawi stated in Sharhus Sunnah regarding the hadeeth (i.e. the hadeeth about the Prophet boycotting some of his wives for forty days): The prohibition of boycotting between two men for more than three days is (related to what takes place between them concerning) one’s falling short in fulfilling the rights of companionship and friendship (i.e. personal disputes); but not what is related to affairs of the religion, for indeed boycotting Ahlul Ahwaa Wal-Bidah (The People of Desires and Bidah) is permanent until they repent.   [Sharhus Sunnah 1/224]

Then Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari quoted a statement of Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah who stated that the Legislated Islamic Boycotting is from the deeds (or acts of worship) commanded by Allaah and His Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam). It has to be carried out sincerely for the sake of Allaah and in accordance with His command. It has to be Khaalisan (done purely for the sake of Allaah) and Sawaaban (in accordance with the Sunnah of Messenger); so whoever boycotts for the sake of his soul’s desire or boycotts (based on) other than what is commanded, he has exited from this (i.e. his act and goal behind boycotting is devoid of sincerity and adherence to the path of the Messenger), and many people do what their souls desire, whilst thinking that it is done in obedience to Allaah. So it is obligatory to differentiate between boycotting for the sake of fulfilling a right of Allaah and for the sake of one’s self because the first one is something commanded and the second one is forbidden. [Majmoo Al-Fataawaa28/206-207] [B]

[Ref A: Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari pointed out in his Radd that Dr Ibraaheem gave a picture (i.e. the impression) that Boycotting is legislated to achieve three Maqaasid (goals or aims) only and that these three Maqaasid have been confirmed by the A’immah al-Muhaqqiqoon (i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc.).  The use of the phrase A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon indicates to a group of people, whom Dr Ibraaheem claims have confirmed his view that boycotting is legislated to achieve three goals or aims only; yet Dr Ibraaheem only quoted Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah. There is no doubt that Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah is one of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah, but is it befitting that we only quote Shaikhul Islaam and then say that this statement have been confirmed (or affirmed) by the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah! It obligatory from the angle of fulfilling trusts in affairs of knowledge that Dr Ibraaheem presents at least a small number of people (i.e. Imaams) to back up his own claims or a small number of Imaams to back up the three goals or aims which he claims are the only reasons for boycotting. So take note of this O reader! In Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari’s Radd, as you can see in this first section, he quoted a number of Imaams [Imaam At-Tabari, Imaam Al-Qurtubi, Imaam Ash-Shanqeeti, Imaam Abu Daawud, Imaam Al-Baghawi and Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah] to show that one of the first great aims, goals or intent behind boycotting is to actualise servitude to Allaah (The Mighty and Majestic). Therefore, not only is Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari going to invalidate Dr Ibraaheem’s claim that boycotting is limited to three goals (or aims), rather he is also going to quote the Imaams of the Sunnah to back up his statements. Some of those other goals and aims behind boycotting that will be mentioned by Shaikh Abdullaah al-Bukhaari include: [Actualisation of Walaa Wal-Baraa (Loyalty and Disassociation for the sake of Allaah); Actualisation of the command to enjoin good and forbid evil; actualisation of giving sincere advice to the Ummah about the danger of an innovator]. It should also be noted that this criticism written by Shaikh Dr Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari was read by a number of scholars including Shaikh Zayd Bin Haadi (rahimahullaah), Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh  Ubaid, Shaikh Ali Naasir, Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi and Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool. All of them agreed with the correctness of Dr Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari’s observations on Dr Ibraaheem’s unsubstantiated claims, deficient and defective statements on this subject matter.  Once again we refer you to the following links, whilst we –by the Tawfeeq of Allaah- prepare the next post.  


http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MNJ150015.pdf

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/you-boycott-deviant-muslims-but-do-not-boycott-doing-business-with-the-jews-christians/

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/mixing-with-a-sinner-or-an-innovator-which-are-worse-ibn-taymiyyah-and-saeed-ibn-jubayr/

[B] [Source: At-Ta’aqqubaat As-Sareehah Alaa Risaalah An-Naseehati Lid-Duktoor Ibraaheem Bin Aamir Ar-Ruhayli’ pages 58-61.Abridged and paraphrased

To be continued….In-Shaa-Allaah

[Part 9: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar’Ruhayli- Shaikh Rabee Begins To Examine and Detail Some of Dr Ibraaheem’s Statements Regarding the Sharee’ah Aims (or Goals) Behind Boycotting]

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations, Scholars of Islam, Tamyee', Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

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

Dr Ibraaheem stated in his defective and deficient advice to Ahlus Sunnah that Hajr (boycotting) is legislated to achieve three legislated goals (Ref 1) based on evidence and affirmed (or confirmed) by the A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon of Ahlus (i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc.) [Ref2]

The first goal (or aim) behind boycotting according to Dr Ibraaheem is carried out by a person for his benefit (or well being), so he boycotts everyone who is harmful to him amongst the Mukhaalifeen, such as Ahlul Bidah Wal-Ma’aasee (the people of bidah and sin)- those who are harmful to a person in the affairs of his religion if he sits with them. The evidence indicating to this (according to Dr Ibraaheem) is found in the Hadeeth narrated by Abu Moosaa Al-Ash’aree in Bukhaari and Muslim that the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi wasallam) said:

The example of a good pious companion and an evil one is that of a person carrying musk and another blowing a pair of bellows. The one who is carrying musk will either give you some perfume as a present, or you will buy some from him, or you will get a good smell from him. But the one who is blowing a pair of bellows will either bum your clothes or you will get a bad smell from him. [Bukhaari 5534 English Translation]

Then Dr Ibraaheem stated that this Hadeeth is a guide from the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) that one should sit with the righteous people due to the benefit that is reached by way of them and a warning against sitting with the evil ones due to the harm received in the affairs of one’s religion by sitting with them.

Response:

Shaikh Rabee responded to this above view f Dr Ibraaheem stating that he will elaborate on the noble Hadeeth (i.e. the above one narrated by Abu Moosaa and quoted by Dr Ibraaheem) and will add the rebuke found in Allaah’s speech against the people of deviation and a clarification of their state of affairs that they (people of deviation) intend to cause trials; and [he will also elaborate on this noble Hadeeth] based on the Messenger’s (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) warning against the people of deviation.

Then Shaikh Rabee said: Allaah (The Most High) said:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’an). In it are Verses that are (entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkam (commandments, etc.), Al-Fara’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers, etc.)]; and others are Mutashaabihaat (i.e. not entirely clear in what they indicate, so they are to be referred back to the Muhkamaat to be explained]. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials, etc.), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).

The Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: If you see those who follow thereof that is not entirely clear, then they are those whom Allah has named [as having deviation (from the truth)] so beware of them. [Bukhaari Number 4547]

After quoting the above ayah and hadeeth, Shaikh Rabee stated that we benefit from this ayah, the hadeeth and other evidences that the intent behind rebuking Ahlul Bidah and warning against them is to benefit (or preserve the well-being of) those who boycott them, even if they are scholars. So this should be understood and it is what the pious predecessors understood and applied by boycotting, clarifying ahlul bidah’s misguidance, passing judgements against them and their acts of misguidance.

Then Shaikh Rabee stated that [ووالله – and by Allaah] we cannot reach the level of the Salaf in their application of this affair. And what an enormous difference between us and others (i.e. in this affair of following the Salaf in warning against ahlul bidah and boycotting them); but despite this, they accuse us of extremism and over-stringency! So what is your (i.e. those people who accuse us) view of the pious predecessors, their methodology, their application of this affair and their rulings?!  [Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem Ar’Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal’ pages 29-30.abridged and paraphrased]

[Ref 1] In the footnotes on page 29, Shaikh Rabee made some observations on Dr Ibraaheem’s above statement, but we’ll suffice with the mention of only one of them in order not to lengthen the discussion. Shaikh Rabee observed that Dr (Ibraaheem) limited Hajr (boycotting) to three Masaaqid Shar’iyyah [i.e. that boycotting is legislated in order to achieve three legislated goals (or aims)]. Shaikh Rabee then stated that an important clarification about this will follow later.

[Ref 2]: Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari pointed out in his Radd that Dr Ibraaheem gave a picture (i.e. the impression) that Boycotting is legislated to achieve three Maqaasid (goals or aims) only and that these three Maqaasid have been confirmed by the A’immah al-Muhaqqiqoon (i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc.).  The use of the phrase A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon indicates to a group of people, whom Dr Ibraaheem claims have confirmed his view that boycotting is legislated to achieve three goals (or aims); yet Dr Ibraaheem only quoted Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah. There is no doubt that Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah is one of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah, but is it befitting that we only quote Shaikhul Islaam and then say that this statement have been confirmed (or affirmed) by the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah! It obligatory from the angle of fulfilling trusts in affairs of knowledge that Dr Ibraaheem presents at least a small number of people (i.e. Imaams) to back up his own claims or a small number of Imaams to back up the three goals (or aims) which he claims are the only reasons for boycotting. [See pages 53 and what follows in At-Ta’aqqubaat As-Sareehah Alaa Risaalah An-Naseehah Lid-Doctoor Ibraaheem Bin Aamir Ar-Ruhayli]

Reader: Refer to the links in order to get a fuller picture on the affair of boycotting until we reach the sections where both Shaikh Rabee and Shaikh Abdullah clearly unveiled the unsubstantiated claims of Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli through the understanding and narrations of the Salaf.

http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MNJ150015.pdf

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/you-boycott-deviant-muslims-but-do-not-boycott-doing-business-with-the-jews-christians/

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/mixing-with-a-sinner-or-an-innovator-which-are-worse-ibn-taymiyyah-and-saeed-ibn-jubayr/

 

 

 

 

https://yootheme.com/support/question/137985

[Part 7.1: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli (accompanied by important footnotes on refs 1 & 3 at the end of this article) – Shaikh Rabee Unveils the Reality behind Dr Ibraaheem’s Statement That Refutation against a Mukhaalif Is Fard Kifaayah]

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations, Tamyee'.

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

Dr Ibraaheem argues that one of the mistakes that are rife is that when a scholar refutes a Mukhaalif, or issues a Fatwa as a warning against a mistake, many of the students of knowledge who ascribe to the Sunnah would seek  from (other) students and the scholars to clarify their stance towards that refutation or fatwa, rather the affair has reached a state in which even the small students of knowledge and the common people are asked to determine their stance towards the refuter and the one refuted; (Ref 1) then based on this, they would determine loyalty, disassociation and boycotting, until maybe some of the students boycott their Shuyookh whom they have benefitted from in knowledge and sound creed for many years; and maybe the trial reaches the houses, so you find a brother boycotting his brother and a son disrespecting his parents; and maybe a wife is divorced and the little children are separated due to this (trial).

As for when you look at the society, you find that they are divided into two parties or more- every party pursues the other with rebuke and making it binding to boycott the other group. All this (fitnah) between those who ascribe to the Sunnah- those amongst whom one group was unable to rebuke the Aqeedah of the other and the soundness of its Manhaj before the occurrence of this differing. The basis of this (problem) is either due to ignorance in exceeding the boundaries of the Sunnah and the principles regarding the manner in Ahlus Sunnah should show disapproval (against a mistake) or due to desires.

 

Response:

Shaikh Rabee responded to the above statement of Dr Ibraaheem, saying that it is (was) obligated on Dr Ibraaheem, those scholars who remained silent and other than them (i.e. those who were knew about the fitnah) to confront this trial or trials and strike at the place it is (was) rooted. The painful situation [which Dr Ibraaheem describes (or described above)] should make him and others them (or should have made him and others) ready to stand up and fulfil this [communal obligation-Fard kifaa’iy) by refuting the initiator of the fitnah]. It is plausible that the cause of this great Fitna and what has come about by way of it resulted from the silence of those who refused to fulfil this communal obligation, whose goal has not been actualised through the refutation issued by one person. (Ref 2)

Then Shaikh Rabee stated that Dr Ibraheem should contemplate on the Fiqh of those Ahlus Sunnah who have preceeded and their togetherness in fulfilling this great obligation! Imam Ibnul Qayyim (rahimahullaah) stated whilst disapproving of Ahlul Bidah in Madaarij As-Saalikeen: And due to this, the Salaf’s and Imaam’s disapproval (or rejection against) it (i.e. bidah) was severe and they spoke out (loudly) against its people from the various regions of the earth. They warned against their fitnah with a more severe warning and did that to an extent that was not the same as their disapproval against lewd acts, oppression and aggression. (That is) because the harm of bidah (on the religion); its destructive (effects on the religion) and negation (of the religion) is more severe.

Then Shaikh Rabee asks Dr Ibraaheem about this Fard Kifaayah in relation to Jihaad; (Ref 3) -that for example Jihaad is from the Furood al-Kifaayaat (Communal obligations), so if one person goes for Jihaad in order to repel a threat faced by Islaam and the Muslims, will the Legislated Islamic goal of this Jihaad be fulfilled by one person; or if hundreds of people went but neither the Legislated Islamic goal is fulfilled nor is the threat repelled, then would it be permissible for the scholars to remain silent in such circumstances; or is it obligated that they exhort the people to go for Jihaad in order to fulfil this communal obligation, for there has to be sufficient numbers of people to fulfil this (Communal) obligation in order to put a stop to the threat face by the rest of the Muslims? And if this sufficient numbers that are required to carry out this obligation is not reached, then indeed all the Muslims are regarded to be sinful in such a case and held responsible for the harm that comes to Islaam and the Muslims. Likewise, this (i.e. the availability of sufficient numbers to fulfil this communal obligation) is the same thing stated regarding the affair of enjoining good and forbidding evil, for there has to be sufficient numbers to prevent the Fitnah, if one, ten or twenty are unable to do so.

Therefore, it becomes clear (from the above example) that many of the students- those who ascribe themselves to the sunnah-who seek from the Scholars to clarify their stances have sought after something appropriate and correct if there is a sound reason for seeking after it. It is not to be regarded a mistake (as Dr Ibraaheem claims) and the mistaken one is the one who declares those students to be mistaken. The silence of the scholars at the time of a need or necessity to clarify the truth is tantamount to concealment of the truth and it is from those grave mistakes that will result in corruption, trials, splitting of the people into two groups, two parties, boycotting one another and so on…..

Then Shaikh Rabee finally stated that it is (was) obligated on Dr Ibraaheem to clarify the affair of the oppressive obstinate one who initiated this dreadful fitnah, which has reached this grave state described by (Dr Ibraaheem), so that the people- especially the common people- would be upon clear-sightedness in their religion, and so that they will hold onto the truth and reject falsehood, and so that their loyalty and disassociation is established upon clear-sightedness. [Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem ar’Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal’ pages 62-63]

To be continued…In-Shaa-Allaah

———————————————————————————————————————

Importinat Footnotes:

[Ref 1] Question to Shaikh Fawzaan: Is it obligatory upon the scholars to clarify to the youth and the common people the danger of partisanship, splitting and groups?

Answer:

Yes it is obligatory to clarify the danger of partisanship and dividing and splitting so that the people can be upon insight and understanding because even the common people are being deceived.  How many of the common people in this time have been fooled by some of the groups because they believe that they are upon the truth? So it is a must that we clarify to the people, the students and the common people, the danger of these parties and sects because if they remained silent [i.e. the scholars] then the people would say, “The scholars were aware of this and they remained silent.” Due to this innovation would enter upon them. So it is necessary to clarify these matters when these things appear. The danger for the common people is greater than the danger [posed] to the students because if the scholars remain silent the common people will think that this is correct and that this is the truth. [Al-Ajwibah Al-Mufeedah (page 131)

Question to Shaikh Rabee: What do you say concerning an individual who advises others to abstain from listening to refutations, and when he was asked about the reason for him adopting this stance he said, “The person who asked me about this was a common person and he is unable to recite the Quran properly”. What are your comments upon this, may Allah bless you?

Answer:

If he is a layman then he is to be taught the Islamic creed and to be warned from the people of innovations. The majority of the common people these days have become supporters of the people of innovation. So it is necessary to warn them against them (i.e. the people of innovation). Say to him, “So and so is upon such and such innovations and you listening to him will harm you”. This is so that they will not read (his works), listen to his tapes and that he is cautious about his speech. Meaning that this layman needs someone to warn him and he is to be reminded of the principle: “This knowledge is religion so look at whom you take your religion from.” During these times the common people are targeted by the people of innovation and will say to you, “do not let them read the books of refutations. No. No.” This (approach) will expose them to ruin. Fataawa Fadeelah Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ Al-Madkhalee (1/273)

Question to Shaikh Rabee: Is it permissible for us as students of knowledge to be silent about the innovators, and to cultivate the youth and the students upon the way of the Salaf without mentioning the names of the innovators?

Answer:

By Allah, the innovators are to be mentioned by their traits and by their names if there is a need for this. If so and so has put himself forward for leadership and leading this nation and the youth and he is leading them towards falsehood, then he is to be mentioned by his name. If there is a need then he is to be mentioned by his name and it is necessary to mention him by his name. As it relates to this, one of the Salafis in Egypt used to teach and he would just mention general (descriptions without specifying names) and the people did not comprehend these generalities.  After this he began to explicitly mention the names of the groups and individuals and they said (i.e. those who attended the lessons), “O Shaykh, why did you not teach us like this in the beginning?” He responded by saying, “I delivered to you many lessons and I would say this and I would say that (i.e. general descriptions without names).” They said, “By Allah, we did not understand.”

Fataawa Fadeelah Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ Al-Madkhalee (1/277)

http://www.salafitalk.com/threads/217-Al-Jarh-Wa-At-Tadeel-Clarifying-The-Public-Errors-Of-Our-Brother-Muhammad-Muneer-Mufti

[Ref 2]Amazing indeed is the affair of Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli, for not only did he argue with these ambiguities in order to play down the affair of Al-Halabi and others, but now we see him on stage with the followers of Al-Maribi, Al-Halabi etc So all those ambiguous arguments which he claims was an advice to Ahlus Sunnah is nothing else but a cover to justify his blameworthy stances. Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh Ubaid, Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi, Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari and others established the evidences against the innovators (Al-Halabi and Al-Maribi) based on what this Fard Kifaayah necessitates, but Dr Ibraaheem’s ambiguous utilisation of Fard Kifaayah in relation to warning against deviants has finally manifested, for indeed we find that he has been invited by the staunch followers of Al-Maribi and Al-Halabi at Luton. Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) stated: And Imaan is known about a man, just as all the states of his heart are known by way of his (outward) allegiances, enmities, his rejoicing, anger, hunger, thirst, and other such affairs. For these matters have certain outward binding necessities (lawaazim dhaahirah) and the outward matters necessitate inward matters. And this is a matter known, the people know this concerning the one that they have experienced and tested (jarraboohu wamtahinoohu)… [minhaaj-as-sunnah 8/475] [Translation: Salafipublications.com]

[Ref3]

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/salafi-shaikh-fawzaan-on-jihaad-in-our-times-and-the-guidelines-of-jihaad-according-to-islam/

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/is-there-jihad-in-syria-should-one-go-and-fight-by-salafi-shaikh-abdullaah-al-bukhaaree/

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/are-we-in-a-period-similar-to-the-prophet-in-makkah-as-it-relates-to-fighting-jihad/

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/?s=ruling+on+jihad

http://www.abukhadeejah.com/?s=+jihad

 

 

Asking About Conferences Organized by Hizbiyyoon? (Staunch UK followers of Al-Maribi etc )

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Brotherhood, Da'wah - Calling To Islam, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations, Scholars of Islam, Tamyee'.

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

Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi (may Allaah preserve him) warns against the likes of these conferences, saying that these organizations seek to promote and establish their goals through some of the Mashaa-yikh, so one should not go to them. Some of the Mashaayikh are unaware of the pursuits of these organizations through them, so one should not go to them. http://www.sahab.net/forums/?showtopic=130647

So be attentive O Salafi! Those staunch followers of Al-Maribi and Al-Halabi say to the common people- by way of deceit and concealment- ‘’We have a Shaikh or Mashaayikh!” Yet at the same time they defend the contemporary Senior Mubtadi’ah such as Ali Al-Halabi and Al-Maribi.

Likewise, Masjid Al-Furqan (Rusholme) follows the same deceitful methodology and have already been refuted as a result of that, for they seek to invite some of those Mashaayikh considered to be upon the Sunnah, yet on other days they invite ahlul bidah, such Abu Usama or speakers from deviant organizations, such as Al-Maghrib Institute.

Likewise, Shaikh Rabee (May Allaah preserve him) was asked about the Luton conference-followers of the innovators (Al-Maribi and Al-Halabi), so the Shaikh (may Allaah preserve him) stated that one should not attend. See link: https://twitter.com/salafipubs/status/548038503083556865

Therefore O sensible one! The verdicts above are based on reality, so do not aid those who utilize some Mashaayikh, but at the same time are aiders of Senior Contemporary Mubtadi’ah or allies of ahlul bidah.

Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee on the Defenders of Abul-Hasan al-Misree (Al-Maribi) in Luton, England

http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=NDV18&articleID=NDV180014&articlePages=1

 

Part 3: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli – A Short Evaluation of His Statement Regarding Good Manners And Reminding Him That The Most Evil Mannered Ones Are Those [Al-Halabi, Al-Maribi etc] Who Wear a False Gown of Salafiyyah In Order To Deceive

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Refutations, Tamyee'.

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

Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli stated that it is obligatory to know that Ahlus Sunnah are the people (who) comply with Islaam completely in creed and (good) manners, and that from lack of understanding is to think that indeed a Sunni or Salafi is the one who actualises (establishes) the creed of Ahlus Sunnah without (having) concern for (good) Islamic manners and etiquettes, and not fulfilling the rights of others etc.

Then Dr Ar-Ruhayli quoted the statement of Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) in Al-Aqeedah Al-Waasitiyyah concerning affairs that Ahlus Sunnah call to such as enjoining good and forbidding evil, performance of the Hajj, Jihaad, the Juma’ah (prayer) and the Eed prayer alongside the rulers whether they (i.e. the rulers) are righteous or sinful.

Also that Ahlus Sunnah preserve the congregational (prayers), give sincere advice to the Muslim Ummah and believe in the statement of the [Prophet (sallal laahu alayhi wasallam)]: ‘’A believer is like a structure (or building) for another believer, some parts of which support the other parts.” Then the Prophet clasped his fingers together to explain] and the statement of the [Prophet (sallal laahu alayhi wasallam)]: [The mutual love, mercy and affection between the believers are like one body; if one limb is hurt the whole body becomes restless with fever]

And that Ahlus Sunnah advice (people) to exercise patience during times of calamity and to be grateful in times of ease, and being pleased with what has been pre-decreed. They call to noble manners and good deeds, and they believe in the meaning of the statement of the [Prophet (sallal laahu alayhi wasallam)]: [The most perfect believer is the one with the best manners]

They (Ahlus Sunnah) urge (people) to keep ties with the one who cuts you off and give to the one who denies you (something). They command (people and themselves) to treat parents with kindness and respect, to keep the ties of kinship and treat neighbours with kindness. They forbid boasting and conceit; transgression and attacking others – whether due to right (i.e. in seeking after a right of theirs) or without right. They command (people and themselves) with noble manners and forbid lowly manners. All they say and do in this regard is carried out whilst adhering to the Book and the Sunnah etc. [For further details, refer to an English translation of the explanation of Al-Aqeedah Al-Waasitiyyah’ by Ustaadh  Taqweem Aslam where the above affairs have been mentioned: http://www.learnaboutislam.co.uk/audio/taqweem-aslam/aqeedah-wasitiyah/aqeedah-wasitiyah-78.mp3  http://www.learnaboutislam.co.uk/audio/taqweem-aslam/aqeedah-wasitiyah/aqeedah-wasitiyah-79.mp3

Response:

Concerning Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli’s statement that from lack of understanding is to think that indeed a Sunni or Salafi is the one who actualises (establishes) the creed of Ahlus Sunnah without (having) concern for (good) Islamic manners and etiquettes etc; Shaikh Rabee replied to him, saying that the one who actualises the creed of Ahlus Sunnah and follows their methodology – (and establishes correct) alliance and disassociation (based on this methodology), but falls short in his manners, he does not exit the fold of Ahlus Sunnah and enter into the fold of Bidah. We do not know from Ahlus Sunnah (i.e. their Imaams, Scholars and notables – the Salaf and khalaf) that they declared a person an innovator due to his shortcomings related to good manners. Even if a follower of the Sunnah fell into some sins, he does not exit the fold of the Sunnah.

And besides this, Ahlus Sunnah of this era are like their predecessors, for they believe in the sound issues of creed and follow the great paths of the Islamic legislation. They establish these great deeds (i.e. they strive in establishing those affairs mentioned by Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah) and noble manners, which the sects of fitan and misguidance cannot catch up with them in that regard. However, the people of fitan and slander hurl accusations at them- out of oppression and transgression- that they do not possess good manners or that they are deprived of good manners. This criminal act (i.e. the false accusations of the people of fitan and misguidance) carried out to oppose Ahlus Sunnah is not something that has occurred in this era, rather it is a repetition of the fabrications of the people of falsehood-the Mutazilah and other than them- and foremost among them were [الجاحظ ] and [النظَّام].

These fabricators (i.e. Al-Jaahiz and An-Nadh-dhaam) of lies against Ahlus Sunnah of old and Ahlus Sunnah of the present era are the vilest people with regards to their manners -though lies, deceptions and slanders in their statements and actions. These evil manners are possessed by Ahlus Sunnah’s adversaries in this era, but they are merely inheritors (i.e. they inherited these evil manners from the old adversaries of Ahlus Sunnah), especially those who wear a false gown of Salafiyyah in this era- those we have referred to in this research (i.e. Al-Maribi, Al-Halabi, Ar’oor etc)

[Source: Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal’ pages 20-21..paraphrased]

To be continued…In-Shaa-Allaah

Shaikh Rabee said: Unfortunately there are a people who conceal refutations (directed at) the people of falsehood and error

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Scholars of Islam.

Shaikh Rabee (may Allaah preserve him) said:

Unfortunately there are a people who conceal refutations (directed at) the people of falsehood and error.  They are excited to ally with them and defend them, whilst they are harsh and disapproving towards those who refute falsehood and error.  They betray them (i.e. those who refute error) with a severe betrayal and they make people think (by way of delusion) that this (deed of theirs is tantamount to) softness and wisdom, whilst it is from the severest types of calamity and trials-the (very) affair that emboldens the people of falsehood to persist in their falsehood and spread their trials and tribulations worldwide. If only this type of (people) realised the dangerous end results of their stances, (so) we ask Allaah to (grant) them guidance and clear-sightedness and to realise their obligation with regards to aiding the Dawah of Muhammad (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) and not fearing the blame of the blamers. [Source: Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhaylee Minal Khalal Wal-ikhlaal: page 26]

Unveiling the Reality of the Statement of Dr Ruhayli on Tabdee’ – Shaikh Rabee (may Allaah preserve him)

Written by Salafi Dawah Manchester on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Brotherhood, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Refutations, Tamyee'.

Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli (may Allaah rectify his affair) stated:

It is obligatory to preserve the status and acknowledge the position of those scholars of Ahlus Sunnah who are known for their sound creed and Ijtihaad in aiding the Sunnah. It is not permissible to diminish their worth; declaring them innovators; accusing them of (following) desires or bigoted partisanship merely due to their mistakes in Ijtihaad.

Response:

Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadi (may Allaah preserve him) responded to this statement of Dr Ruhayli and unveiled once again the reality behind this affair. He pointed out to Dr Ruhayli that this statement of his is an indisputable affair (in the view) of Ahlus Sunnah regarding those who are known for their sound creed and ijtihaad in aiding the Sunnah- even though errors may occur from them in the intricate affairs of the religion and those affairs whose reality or evidence is not apparent to some people, however their status is preserved and their positions acknowledged. No one speaks ill of them except a person of desires just as is the case with the people of desires.

[1] However, if the deviation is related to the manifestly clear affairs, such as when this claimant to the Sunnah defends the people of bidah and misguidance-those who propagate the falsehood of Wahdatul Wujood; negation of Allaah’s Attributes; revilement of the companions of the Messenger; the eternity of the souls and other than these clear affairs of misguidance; or he defends-by way of lies and treachery-those who hold the view regarding Wahdatul Adyaan etc and other manifest affairs of misguidance, which are even rejected by (other) people of bidah and misguidance;

[2] And in addition to this he wages war against Ahlus Sunnah-seeking to devalue their scholars; considers them to be extremists and that they are from those who utilise odd speech when confronting the people of misguidance and when refuting their innovations;

[3] And in addition to this, he innovates false principles in order to contradict the Usool of Ahlus Sunnah- [such as the false principle “we rectify mistakes but we do not refute.” And some of them say: “we rectify mistakes but we do not destroy.” And the false principle: ‘I am not obliged (or obligated)]- by way of which they seek to reject truth that is clear as the sun;

[4] And he also applies the term ‘Ahlus Sunnah Wal -Ittibaa’ to the people of bidah and the misguided paths that include affairs of Shirk, Bidah and Wahdatul Wujood;

[5] And he describes Ahlus Sunnah with the words scum, vile, extremists, blind followers, bigots and other wicked speech against Ahlus Sunnah;

[6] And in addition, he describes the Sahaabah with the word ‘Ghuthaa-scum’ and does not consider this description to be revilement if it is uttered by the likes of himself…..

Indeed with regards to this category of people whose state of affairs is as such, then it is not permissible for a sane person- who is acquainted with the Sunnah and honours the Sunnah- that he considers such people to be from Ahlus Sunnah; or asking the people to preserve their status and acknowledge their ranks; or forbids the people from declaring them innovators; or forbids the people from accusing them of following desires and bigotry, despite the fact that their evil desires, affairs of misguidance, trials and illegal partisanship to the major people of misguidance are all manifest; whilst on the other hand their war against Ahlus Sunnah is clear and manifest; for indeed Ahlus Sunnah and their Imaams declare (a person) an innovator due to (affairs) that are far lesser than these calamities.

And we find Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah) saying about the one who reviles Ahlul Hadeeth: “(He is a) heretic, a heretic!’’  Ahlus Sunnah stated about this ruling of Imaam Ahmad -and from them Shaikhul Islaam ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) who stated with emphasis: ‘’That is because he (Ahmad) knew its significance.” Imaam Abu Zur’ah (rahimahullaah) stated: ‘’Whoever diminishes the worth of a single one amongst the companions of Muhammad, then he is a heretic.’’ Ahlus Sunnah transmitted this statement and no one opposed it. And here are the books of Aqeedah and the books of Jarh Wat-Tadeel in the presence of the people.

Allaah (The Most High) stated:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَقُولُوا قَوْلًا سَدِيدًا

يُصْلِحْ لَكُمْ أَعْمَالَكُمْ وَيَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ ذُنُوبَكُمْ ۗ وَمَن يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ فَازَ فَوْزًا عَظِيمًا

O you who believe! Keep your duty to Allah and fear Him, and speak (always) the truth. He will direct you to do righteous good deeds and will forgive you your sins. And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger he has indeed achieved a great achievement (i.e. he will be saved from the Hell-fire and made to enter Paradise). [Soorah Al-Ahzaab. Ayah: 70-71]

To be continued……In-Shaa-Allaah

——————————————————————————————————————

[Source: Abridged and Paraphrased. See ‘Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal. Page: 63-64]