Translation by (naasir.ud-deen) May Allaah reward him.
The seventh question: Do you support the Bayaan of the Mashaayikh of Jordan?
Shaikh: Which bayaan?
Questioner: This latest bayaan which was in the month of Ramadaan in which they said that making tabdee' of Abul-Hasan is not binding upon them.
Shaikh: I do not support the way taken by Shaikh Alee (hafidhahullaah) and Shaikh Saleem, meaning that I have an observation, and there is nothing to stop me from explaining it.
Firstly: I will summarise my observation for you, I say that Shaikh Alee and Shaikh Saleem are from the people of excellence and they excel over me, and they are in a tabaqah (level) greater than me, and I could almost be from their students, from amongst those who studied by way of their books and and benefited from their directions and their knowledge.
Secondly: I say that the truth is more worthy of being followed, such as what that man said, "So and so is my Shaikh, he is beloved to my heart, but the truth is more beloved to my heart, so when my Shaikh opposes the truth, then I follow the truth", and so I say, even if I belittle my true worth in speech in front of Shaikh Alee and Shaikh Saleem - I say that the path that these brothers are taking is not the path that is befitting for them, and this was not what we expected from them. Meaning that I was hoping that they teach the youth that they are only students of knowledge, and that they do not place themselves amongst the ranks of the Scholars, but that they themselves follow the Scholars, and that they and the Scholars do not stand on the same level. Shaikh Rabee is older than Shaikh Alee and older than Shaikh Saleem by 30 years, he is of very high tabaqah (rank) over them, Shaikh Rabee. He is a man who is unique in his speech in these affairs. It is almost the case that no one can be found in this subject, I do not know any man, meaning a man whose speech and time is unique for these affairs. He is the one who removed the fard kifaayah from the rest of the scholars (i.e. he performed what was obligatory, so the rest of the Scholars are absolved from this task). If it had not been for Shaikh Rabee and his likes from the people of knowledge standing to perform these affairs, then Ahl us-Sunnah would have remained quiet about Ahl ul-Bida' and from Ahl ul-Baatil and from explaining the errors which those people fall into.
I say that it was obligatory upon Shaikh Saleem and Shaikh Alee that they do not manifest anything (from themselves) that is in opposition to the Scholars, especially in the likes of these affairs. It was obligatory upon them that they themselves follow the Scholars so that they nurture the youth and teach them how to follow the Scholars, and that they are eager for them, and for their word (to be at the forefront) and to raise the status of (their) knowledge. And I, in reality, am not pleased with this bayaan and nor any other bayaans which were issued from over there (meaning Jordan). And it is as if they desire to set up another front (i.e. another direction) that faces (i.e. competes with) the Hai'ah Kibaar al-Ulamaa that is with us, or competes with the speech of the People of Knowledge with us. This is not something desireable and we do not deem it good.
The third affair: I say to you that in the gathering with us that took place in Makkah with Shaikh Rabee (hafidhahullaah) they acknowledged the mistakes that Abul-Hasan fell into and that they oppose him in those mistakes regarding them, and they say that we are not bound to make tabdee' of Abul-Hasan.
If they intend by this speech "tabdee' of Abul-Hasan" that they do not ascribe him to being from Ahl ul-Ahwaa, those who persist (upon their desires) and who stubbornly oppose (al-mu'aanideen), those to whom the truth has become clear but they have not returned, if this is what they intend, then in this situation the difference (with them) would be much lighter than if they intended the second matter, which is that it should not be judged that he is a person of innovation (i.e. if they mean this second matter, then the difference is more severe). This is because we say that their acknowledgement of the errors of Abul-Hasan in these matters makes binding upon them to describe him as "Saahibu Bid'ah" and this requires some explanation. The later scholars differentiate between a person being described as being a "Saahibu Bid'ah" (person of innovation), and between him being a "Mubtadi'" (innovator), so they say, "Everyone from whom an invention into the deen occurs, then he is a "Saahibu Bid'ah", and he is not to be described as a Mubtadi' until the proof is established upon him, and he stubbornly opposes and persists upon falsehood, and there is nothing to prevent him from accepting the truth, so if he persists and shows stubborn opposition, then he is described as a "Mubtadi' Saahibu Hawaa" (innovator, person of desires).
So they differentiate between a person being a person of desires and being an innvator. So if the brothers Alee and Saleem intend (by their statement) that it they will not describe Abul Hasan as a "Mubtadi'" (innovator) with this meaning, then the matter in relation to them is open and vast until it becomes clear to them that he is an stubborn opposer, and they should excuse Shaikh Rabee and others from the Scholars and students of knowledge to whom the condition of Abul Hasan has become clear that he is a stubborn opposer, who follows his desires, so they describe him with Ibtidaa' (inventing, innovating). However, if it is the case that they do not describe Abul Hasan with "Mubtadi'" (innovator) or with "Saahibu Bid'ah" (person of innovation), then this is in opposition to the bayaan which they signed in Makkah, and in which they made the opposition and error of Abul Hasan explicitly clear in those matters that were written down, because those matters that were textually written as errors of Abul Hasan, they are matters of innovation. So whoever opposes the likes of these matters is to be described as a "Saahibu Bid'ah", and thereafter, if his stubborn opposition is made clear, he is described as an Innovator.
And we say that Abul-Hasan, as Shaikh Rabee and others from the Mashaayikh have described him, is a "Saahibu Bid'ah", and amongst the Mashaayikh are those to whom his Ibtidaa' (innovating, inventing) has become clear, and that he shows arrogance, and stubbornly opposes in accepting the truth, so he is described as a "Mubtadi'" according to the usage that I established a short while earlier.
So if the contention of the brothers in Jordan was that he is not to be described as a "Mubtadi'" then the matter is clear, so therefore they should excuse those to whom the matter has become clear and who described him as a Mubtadi', and if it is the case that their intent behind this is to negate that he has any innovation with him to being with, then this is in opposition to the bayaan (they signed) as I have established a short while ago. And Allaah knows best."
Men are known by the truth, the truth is not known by way of men.
This message was edited by sayfullaah on 1-6-03 @ 10:19 PM