|aqeel.walker||-- 28-05-2003 @ 12:17 AM|
Shaikh Ahmad Baazmool responds to some of Adly's foolishnees: A taped conversation between Aqeel Walker and Shaikh Ahmad Baazmool on 5/27/03 at Masjid us-Salaf is-Saalih
Question: The questioner is asking about a man here in America, his name is Muhammad Adly, and he's an Egyptian, and he's the Imaam of a Masjid here in the United States. And previously he used to ascribe himself to the Salafee Manhaj, however lately he has began speaking against the people of knowledge, like Shaikh Rabee', and he rejects the statements of the people of knowledge, and he says that it's not befitting for the Muslims to blind follow the scholars in Saudi Arabia. He also says that this Salafiyyah that we see today with Shaikh Rabee' and those similar to him, of refuting and criticism, he says that this is not from Salafiyyah at all. Rather this is a new Deen that has been introduced by Shaikh Rabee' and those with him. So now the brothers who live in his city have abandoned him, meaning the Salafee brothers, they have left this man, and they have started a new masjid, and they have left him. So now this man speaks against them, even in the Jumu'ah khutbahs, and he reviles them and he speaks ill of the scholars in Saudi Arabia. But until now, he still claims that he is Salafee, and that he is upon the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih. But he says that the methodology of the Salaf does not contain Taqleed (blind following) like those with Shaikh Rabee' and Shaikh Faalih and those similar to them from our Imaams and the scholars of the Salafees. So what is your advice regarding the likes of these statements and this man? May Allaah bless you.
Answer: In the name of Allaah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy. This man, that which seems apparent to me regarding what you have conveyed from him regarding his situation, is that he is from the followers of, and those who carry the ideologies of Abul-Hasan Al-Ma'ribi, the misguided one (Dhaall), the corrupt one (Al-Faasid), the wicked one (Al-Faajir), the liar (Al-Kaadhib) - this Abul-Hasan Al-Ma'ribi. So what seems obvious from the speech of this man is that he has been influenced by him. This is the first issue. The second issue is that Ash-Shaikh Rabee', as is well-known to the Salafees, after Allaah's favor and bounty upon him, his situation has become such that whoever speaks well of him, and whoever takes his methodology and his way, which is the way of the Salaf, then that person ends up being upon the correct path and he ends up being upon the Sunnah. And whoever reviles him and speaks against him, or he speaks negatively about his way, then that person ends up being misguided and corrupt. So Ash-Shaikh Rabee', may Allaah preserve him, whoever speaks against him, and reviles him, then he himself is rebuked and people will speak against him. We do not say this out of exaggerated love or just as some nice words for Ash-Shaikh Rabee', may Allaah preserve him. No, by Allaah. We, the Salafees, we believe that what Ash-Shaikh Rabee' is upon, it is the same thing that the Salaf As-Saalih were upon. It is that which the Salaf As-Saalih were upon - may Allaah be pleased with them all. So whoever speaks evil of Ash-Shaikh Rabee', then actually he has spoken ill regarding the Salaf As-Saalih. Unless he comes with a proof, in which he clarifies and explains that Shaikh Rabee' has opposed the Manhaj of the Salaf As-Saalih. But this is a futile undertaking, for he will never be able to do that, unless Allaah wills. With that we are not claiming that the man (Ash-Shaikh Rabee') is infallible, but we do not accept the statement of everyone who makes a claim. Ash-Shaikh Rabee', the major scholars have recommended and praised him. He was commended by the man who was the top specialist in the Science of Hadeeth, and verily he is Ash-Shaikh Al-Albaanee, may Allaah have mercy upon him. He commended Ash-Shaikh Rabee' and he said I see that his methodology (Manhaj), and his way and his books are correct and aided with the truth. He is not free from mistakes, like any man, but overall the man is known for his knowledge. So if Ash-Shaikh Bin Baaz praised him, and Ash-Shaikh Ibn Al-'Uthaymeen praised him (may Allaah have mercy upon both of them), and likewise Ash-Shaikh Al-Fawzaan praised him, and Ash-Shaikh 'Abdul-'Azeez Aal Ash-Shaikh - so if these Imaams of guidance, and these Imaams of the Deen, and they are the inheritors of the Prophets, if they said the likes of this speech (praising Ash-Shaikh Rabee') and then this man comes, who's shady and unknown, and he speaks against Shaikh Rabee' and his likes, then there is no doubt that he is the one who is to be spoken against.
Thirdly, there is a difference between saying this man is not Salafee because of this and this and this, and you bring the proofs, and between you saying this man is not upon the way of the Salaf, and he has opposed the way of the Salaf, and some other general statements. General statements are to be rejected back to the one who said them. However, the speech that is detailed, by the person bringing the proofs, explaining in them that this man errored in this and that (specifically), then in this case the matter is looked into, did the person bring proof that is truthful or false. And if this is not the approach, then a door of great evil will be opened, just as the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said, "If people were to be given according to their claims, then some men would claim the wealth of other people and their lives, however the burden of proof is upon the one who has a claim, and the swearing of an oath is upon the one who refuses (what is claimed)." There must be proof. So saying that Shaikh Rabee' is a man who has in him this and that, then (we say), "Bring your proof." Do you have the Shaikh's tape with you with his voice, and his books are numerous, and all praise is due to Allaah. So bring out for us something from his tapes or his books, or bring some witnesses that the Shaikh has made some speech in which he opposes the methodology of the Salaf. But nay, they can't do that. Rather this is simply a claim and barking like the barking of dogs, and such claims have no effect upon the reality, by the leave of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. This is as some people say, "The moon is not harmed by the barking of the dogs." So Ash-Shaikh Rabee' is a moon with us, and those who speak against him are dogs with us. Yes.
Question: The questioner is now asking a question that relates to the previous question and he says, "Along with this, this man he claims that the Salafees here in America and other places they follow the scholars in Saudi Arabia, but even there in Saudi Arabia those scholars don't teach a purely Salafee methodology, because he says that he used to study in the Haram, the Makkan Haram, and he says that he used to live there, and that he sat there and studied with the scholars there in the Haram, and that the scholars there (in the Haram) used to teach them from books that weren't even Salafee books. For example he says that he studied a book there in the topic of Tafseer and the author of the book was an Ash'aree, and this was in the Haram of Makkah. So he says that this was from justice and being balanced, and it is as if he is alluding to Al-Muwaazanah in this. In other words he says it is not correct for us to reject every person if he makes a mistake in something. He (this Adly) says that this is not from As-Salafiyyah. Rather, he said that As-Salafiyyah is being balanced and just in regards to individuals. Even in the books in which there is something of errors or deviance, he says that we are able to benefit from these books. He even says that he benefitted from such books when studying with the scholars of Saudi Arabia. So he says that even in Saudi Arabia that the scholars do not teach from the Salafee books only, rather they use books that are not Salafee books and they benefit the people like this they (the people) get benefit from these non-Salafee books. So he says that this is a proof that the methodology of Shaikh Rabee' or those like him, is not correct. That is that we only take from the person, or the man, or the scholar, or the book that is purely Salafee only and free of any mistakes. He says, no this is not right. Rather, we should benefit from this and that. So what is the reply to this claim?"
Answer: He says he studied in the Haram - where did he study in the Haram. Did he say?
Question: He didn't mention it, and the questioner didn't specify in the question. But even I heard the tape with my own two ears myself, and he (Adly) didn't specify where he studied in the Haram. He even said that he used to teach the people in the Haram and he claims that he had a chair there in the Haram and that he used to teach there in the Haram, meaning this Egyptian (Adly). So he said that he used to study in the Haram, and along with that he used to teach as well in the Haram. However, he didn't specify in what place or spot did he teach.
Answer: Yes. Ok, this man he is concealing the truth with the falsehood, and he is covering up the truth. And likewise, with him are the following matters. Firstly, yes, there are those here in Makkah, or Madinah, or Jeddah, some people who teach the corrupt books, like the Ash'aree books, or books that contain some superstitious things. However, they teach these books in secret and not openly in public. Because the Saudi government with us here they reject this type of thing. And if such a person's matter is reported to the Senior Committee of Scholars, that the person teaches corrupt books, or a corrupt Manhaj (methodology), or anything like this, then verily there will be a ban implemented from this country against these people. Secondly, it could be present in the University, or in the Institute of the Haram of Makkah, some books that carry something from the corrupt methodologies, or the corrupt paths. However, indeed the scholars have written against this, and they have debated its matter, and they have clarified that such books must be removed. And if they are not removed, then at least they should be taught along with explaining the mistakes of these books. So the matter is not just left unrestricted like this. So for example, you may find the book Tafseer An-Nasafee being taught, so it is explained by the instructor what it contains of beliefs that are from the Maatureediyyah, and Ash'ariyyah, and etc. And that is refuted (by the Shaikh who's teaching from it). The matter is not that the teacher will just teach it and approve of the deviance in it and then just leave the matter like that. So if he says that we teach the books of falsehood and we refute the falsehood in them, then that's something that there's no difference about, if what is intended is that the truth is made clear from the falsehood in them, and if the likes of such books is important in its field of study. But regarding of the matter of a person simply going to the books of falsehood, and teaching them even though there is present Salafee books that are sufficient in that study without the need of such books, then this is something that no one would claim except for one who is an idiot, like this person (Adly).
Thirdly, in reference to his claim that he had a chair in the Haram, if he means beneath the Haram (in the basement) where no one could see him, then yes, there could have been a chair for him beneath the Haram where no one could see him except the Jinns and devils like him. In reference to him claiming that he had a chair that he would sit on and teach in front of the people, then this is a lie and a fabrication. We do not know of any man who taught in the Haram who's name was Muhammad Adly, ever. Then also, the system here has been for tens of years or more is that they don't allow non-Saudis to teach in the Haram. So if he is Egyptian, and he didn't have a Saudi citizenship (nationality), then how could he have been teaching in the Haram of Makkah? Even some Saudis who have Doctorate degrees (in Islaamic studies), they are not even allowed to sit and teach in the chairs, not until after they get approval from the authorities. So how could it be that the likes of this man could come and teach in the Haram, Subhaanallaah. This is something rediculous, as they say, "the liar will eventually come with something in his speech that will expose him." So if he claims that he taught in secret or that he taught sitting next to one of the chairs, then maybe he could be believed. But Allaah wished to expose him, so he claimed he was on a chair, so from this he fell down from the chair, alhamdulillaah.
Fourthly, what Ash-Shaikh Rabee' claims that one should not take from the books of the people of innovation and the people of innovation, who openly calls to his innovation, then this is not from the speech of Ash-Shaikh Rabee' himself. Ash-Shaikh Rabee' did not come up with this speech from himself. Rather, this is the consensus (Ijmaa') of the Salaf. The Ijmaa' of the Salaf. Even Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Al-Qayyim both reported like this from Al-Imaam Ahmad, that the books of the people of innovation are to be burned. So this is an Ijmaa' (consensus) from the Salaf, that the person who is a practioner of or caller to innovation, or he has some confusion with him, then he is to be abandoned and boycotted. Concerning the statement of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) to 'Umar, the one whom the Shaytaan feared and the Shaytaan would flee from him, when the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) saw him holding a paper from the books of the People of the Scripture, didn't the Messegner of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) become upset with him and say, "are you all in doubt O 'Umar?" And didn't the Salaf, from the companions and other besides them from their students, forbid sitting with the people of innovation and listening to their speech. And those people's innovations were lighter in severity than the innovations of some of the people today. So how can this man come and try to cover the truth up with falsehood and say, "verily this methodology is something new (i.e. criticism and warning against people and books)" like what Ash-Shaikh Rabee' is upon? Never. Rather, there is a brother by the name of Khaalid Adh-Dhafeeree, and he is from our Salafee brothers, and he is originally from Kuwayt, he wrote a book in which he brought reports from tens, or rather more than that from the scholars in which he shows their consensus (Ijmaa') regarding boycotting the innovator, and boycotting their books, and boycotting what they are upon. And we exclude from this a scholar who is sound (in his methodology and knowledge), and he's a scholar of Hadeeth, who made a mistake in an issue or two and he didn't persist in that. Like, for example, Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy upon him). Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar fell into some of the sayings of the Ash'arees. But he was not a caller to that and he was not one who persisted in that. So our scholars like Shaikh Bin Baaz and Shaikh Al-Uthaymeen, and others besides them, may Allaah have mercy upon them, they teach the likes of these books, along with explaining the mistakes of such men. They do not remain silent and just teach the books with the mistakes. They do not give any preferential treatment when it comes to errors, like these people do. So there is a difference between this and that. And the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam), when he recited the statement of Allaah, the Most High, "He is the One, Who sent down upon you the Book, in it are verses that are clear verses and they are the mother of the Book, and other verses that are not entirely clear, So as for those who have deviance in their hearts, then they follow that which is not entirely clear of it; seeking Fitnah (evil trial) and seeking its interpretation. And none knows its interpretation except Allaah." So the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said, "If you all see the one who follows that which is unclear, then these are the ones whom Allaah named them (in this verse), so beware of them." So someone will come like this Khateeb (Muhammad Adly), who is not known for knowledge, and he is not known for having any firm footing upon Salafiyyah, then he attacks Salafiyyah, and he attacks its scholars and its most senior people of knowledge??? Nay by Allaah, indeed he has fallen with this speech of his. And Allaah is the One Who is sought for Help.
Translated by Aqeel Walker from a taped session at Masjid us-Salaf is-Saalih, 5/27/03, at 3:00 pm after receiving a taped interview with Adly in South Carolina in which he openly and arrogantly professed his evil position against the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah, and against the science of Al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, and his labelling the Salafees as Muqallidoon (blind followers) of the Ulamaa', and labelling himself as being upon the "true" Salafiyyah of being balanced because he doesn't accept the Jarh (criticism) and Rudood (refutations) of the scholars.
قال الشيخ ابن باز الطائفة المنصورة هي الفرقة الناجية هما واحدة هم أهل السنة و الجماعة و هم السلفيون
This message was edited by aqeel.walker on 5-28-03 @ 12:38 AM
|Moosaa||-- 28-05-2003 @ 12:41 AM|
As-Salaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullaahi -
Jazaak Allaahu khayran akhee Aqeel for this post!
I will add my narration about Adly saying that he had a chair at the haram and used to teach there.
During a two-week intensive course for imaams and du'aat at the IIASA in Virginia that took place about 6 years ago, I was an enrolled student as was Muhammad Adly. Jamal Zarabozo and Fareed Abdullah were teaching there, subhaan Allaah!
Anyway, during this time, they allowed some students to give talks at night time, and Adly was one of those allowed to speak. So he gave his whole story, that he was a teacher at the Haram, the Ka'bah in Makkah, and he used to sit and watch the Ka'bah like television every day. He said that he had a chair and was a teacher there. He said, one day a woman came to his class asking for someone who could come to America and teach the Sunnah. So he searched for her but could not find anyone. Then he thought it over and decided to ask his parents if he could go and do it. They granted him permission for only 6 months. He went for six months to New York (Brooklyn I believe) and taught the people. He said that they needed someone to teach them so bad that he could not possibly return... and the story goes on.
Anyway, I heard him say very clearly that he was a teacher at the Ka'bah and he had a chair there. He said this in front of a group of 100+. Aboo Abdil-Fattaah was there and might remember his claim as well.
Is it possible he did have a chair at the Haram before they implemented the rules about non-Saudis? Or is it possible that his father got citizenship? Since this was 20+ years ago, maybe Shaykh Ahmad was not thinking in that time frame. Maybe it can be checked here in Makkah through official records...
Not to go too far into the "Did he really have a chair" issue - He is still Muhammad Adly in 1424 whether he had a chair or whether he lead the salaah five times a day at the Ka'bah! But if this is a false claim, then it should be confirmed and used against him.
سبحانك اللهم وبحمدك
أشهد أن لا إله إلا أنت
أستغفرك وأتوب إليك
|abooabdilfattaah||-- 28-05-2003 @ 7:08 AM|
Wa 'Alaikum Salaam wa Rahmatu Allaahi wa Barakaatuhu ...
Na'am, I remember hearing this claim akhee Moosaa. It was one of those stories that would mesmorize Americans like myself such that a sense of unquestionable legitimacy was obtained, wa Allaahul Musta'aan. Al-Hamdulillaah for the light of As-Salafiyyah. Al-Hamdulillaah for the 'Ulamaa!
أبو عبد الفتـــاح
|aqeel.walker||-- 29-05-2003 @ 7:10 AM|
Salaamun 'alaykum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh,
Here are some excerpts from Adly's "self-destruction" tape:
Muhammad Adly was asked: "Ahh My second Question; what is your position on Ali Tameemee, Abu Muslimah and Abu Usaamah Ath-Thahabi being as though they have all been refuted by the Ulamaa of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah the Da'watus-Salafiyyah, and you appear on a website with these people with the name Shaikh quoted beside them along with you?"
>Adly: "We dont know any man including the scholars that you calling them scholars to be perfect otherwise we say that they are Prophets, everybody make mistakes intentionally or unintentionally Ok. And as Imaam Maalik Rahmatulahi alayhi said, "Every human being you can take from what he says or you can reject except this man and he pointed to the grave of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi was-salaam)'. Everybody make mistakes and a mistake does not mean make the person dirt and a crumb, student of knowledge, or a scholar or a shaykh to a dirt, this is no balance. This is nobody say this. So we do not go to Extremes in anything."
Here Adly is clearly saying that the refutations of the scholars against the aforementioned people are all unbalanced and extreme. His initial statements about everyone making mistakes is true, but he intends falsehood with it. And what he intends becomes evident in him making the accusation of the scholars refutions being extreme and not balanced.
>Adly further said: "And is not because a man refuted somebody or say so and so is bad, that he is bad. This is not the way of the Salaf as Saalih. This is not the way of the Salaf as Saalih, and I'm not worried about any shaykh or any Imaam or anybody. Who's he? Because I don't get to know Islam because so and so say it is. We know what is Islam."
Once again, Adly putting down the Jarh of the Ulamaa against the aforementioned individuals. Who refuted and exposed Abu Muslimah first? It was Shaikh Rabee' us-Sunnah (hafidhahullaah) and Adly knows that just as well as any of us. Adly also apparently doesn't know that accepting the Jarh of the reliable scholars IS from the way of the Salaf, as he claims it is not. If we can't accept when a man says that "so and so is bad", then how does Adly know a weak or forged Hadeeth from a Saheeh or Hasan one? Adly didn't know any of those people in those Asaaneed personally to go ask them, "Is what Imaam Ahmad said about you being a Kadhdhaab true?" We have to accept the Jarh of those Imaams because they knew the situation of those people they criticized better than anyone else, and they were trust worthy in what they were conveying and reporting, as was testified to by the Ummah. If Adly won't accept the Jarh of Shaikh Rabee' and others of the esteemed scholars of today, then he might as well throw out all of the criticisms of the Imaams of the Salaf, and accept everything that anyone claims to be a hadeeth.
>Adly then went on to say: "The same scholars who defeated-refuted or what you call put down so and so and so --noise-- they did this to Abu Usaamah, what you call this other guy from Jordan. So they doing this to each other. I dont have for this stuff to be running behind. They put this man on the pulpit tomorrow they take him down, i dont have time for this. I could not be following people's desires right. I will look to see what this person teaching, i will get his tapes, get his books and look;"
Once again Adly showing his disgust with the Jarh of the scholars. Notice he's referring to the situation with Shaikh Rabee' and the Jordanians. And then he wants to act as though the scholars in Saudi did something of injustice to Abu Usaamah. Wallaah, the 'Ulamaa' did nothing to these people. The matter is what they did to themselves by not sticking closely to the people of knowledge and considering themselves more than what they were.
>Adly further said: But it's not because Shaykh so and so say that Abu Muslimah is not good now I say Ok (we hear and we obey) I only say (we hear and we obey) to Allah and his Messenger. This my positon, and if they talk about it , I dont care who's going to say I am Here or There. I dont care alright! I came to be on the Siratul Mustaqeem, the Dawatus Salafiyyah, which knows balance Ok. This is the real true Dawatus Salafiyyah and its not because somebody claim to be Salafee, we make him Salafee. And I will say this on tape, on video and Books and EVERYWHERE; 'I am NOT scared of ANYBODY'! Because I know what I am talking about. If somebody wants to say anything about Ali Tameemee, Abu Muslimah anybody; bring something that they say it to be against the teaching of Allah or the teaching of Rasoolullah(salallahu alaihi wasalam).
>We alllll know who this Shaykh so and so is that he's referring to who dealt with Abu Muslimah. Clearly Adly sounds like his Egyptian, Ikhwaanee brother, Abul-Fitnah Al-Ma'ribi. Here we see Adly showing his arrogance and refusal to accept the report of a Thiqah (Shaikh Rabee' in this case). Imagine if everyone of the common people were to think like this. They would be far removed from their scholars, and as Shaikh Faalih and many of our 'Ulamaa' have already clarified, the common people are in dire need of their scholars, and they must listen to and follow their scholars. If the people implement Adly's manhaj what would be spread other than confusion. So now every Zayd and 'Amr is supposed to go to the books of Khomeini and the Ash'arees and those even worse than them to try to sort out the truth from the falsehood. The people would be lost like this and confused. Haayhaat yaa 'Adly, you have shown your ignorance.
>Adly further clarifies his position about Al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel: "And Muslims, they need to stop defaming each other. These people who they talking about are the people who established the Salafiyyah in America before any of those people-- they speak the tongue, they been tought by these scholars in Medina, and these people have to give them credit.
Here we see 'Adly is suggesting that Abu Muslimah, Ali Tameemi, and Abu Usaamah (and others like them) were the one's who established the Salafiyyah in America!!!! A'oodhu billaah! These people established deception, Hizbiyyah, and confusion. These people propped themselves up in front of the people as scholars and kept the people ignorant and isolated away from the real 'Ulamaa' of this Ummah. These people established Tashweesh (confusion) and shubuhaat (doubts) in the hearts of the people. Wallaahi people were so attached to them, that if you mentioned what the 'Ulamaa had said, they would say, "But Abu Muslimah told us...", "But Ali Tameemee said...", "But when we asked Abu Usaamah..." as if these people and others were on their level. Nay, rather it was incombent upon them to connect the people to their scholars, and that's a trust that these callers never carried out faithfully. Rather, they allowed themselves to give Fataawaa and be blowed up in the minds in the hearts of the people, until Hizbiyyah was firmly established in the hearts of the people towards them. Wallaahul'Musta'aan. Then Adly wants to say that the Scholars "have to give THEM credit"????????? What foolishness is this???
>Adly further says: "we love the deen of Allah. The true deen of Allah, is what the Prophet (salallahu alaihi wasalam) we are not going to be worshipers the shuyookh, we worship the Haqq--the truth--with the Good."
Once again: A statement of truth, but he intends with it falsehood. He's only trying to accuse the Salafiyyoon of worshipping the Shuyookh. Another one of Ma'ribi's tactics. Accusing the Salafees of Taqleed and so forth. So who are we supposed to listen to? Rabee' us-Sunnah, Faalih ibn Naafi' Al-Harbee, Ubayd Al-Jaabiree, or do we listen to Adly? If we follow Adly and Abu Usaamah, they will say, "that's sound thinking brother, that's using the old "noodle". But if we follow the Mashayikh we're making taqleed? What type of sense does that make? The people are supposed to follow the scholars, not those who are less than them. Yet, these people like Adly want us to listen to them, and disregard the 'Ulamaa.
I appologize for the length of this, but this stupidity will be put down, bi-idhnillaah, and people should be clear about what this man is upon. Adly is still running around making his Da'wah. He came here to Atlanta last year with that foolishness. Inshaa' Allaahu ta'aala he will be dealt with.
was-salaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullaah
قال الشيخ ابن باز الطائفة المنصورة هي الفرقة الناجية هما واحدة هم أهل السنة و الجماعة و هم السلفيون
|aqeel.walker||-- 30-05-2003 @ 12:46 AM|
يقول أنـــا سلفي ... ثم يقول اتركونا من الردود ؟
He says, "I'm Salafee..." Then he says, "Leave us from the refutations (i.e. don't bother us with refutations)."
بــــــــــــــــسم الله الرحــــــــمن الرحـــــــــيم
مَا حُكم من يقول : أنا سلفي ، ثم بعد ذلك يجلس مع الحزبــبيين و يترك إخـوانه السلفــيين ، و يقول : علينا بطلب العلم ، اتركونا من الردود لأنها تضيع الوقت ؟
Question: What is the ruling of the person who says, "I am Salafee", then after that he sits with the Hizbees and he abandons his Salafee brothers, and he says, "We must seek the knowledge and don't bother us with refutations because they waste time"?
فـأجَــاب فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي المدخلي ـ متع الله به ـ بما يلي :
So the noble Shaikh, the 'Allaamah, Rabee' bin Haadee Al-Madkhalee - may Allaah give benefit by him - answered with what follows:
و الله أعلم في هذا مرض و انحــراف و إلا كــيف يُخَــالف السلفيين و يُـجالس أهل البدع ، و يَـأث.. [... كلمة غير واضحة...] الــردود .
Allaah knows best about this (person), it's a sickness and a deviation. If not, then how can he oppose the Salafees and then sit with the people of innovation and (the word he says is unclear) the refutations?
و الرد عـلى البدع من بيان الشريعة و حمايتها ، و من الأمر بالمعروف و النهي عن المنــكر و من النصيحة لله و لكــتابه و لــرسوله و لأئمة المُــسلمين و لــعامتهم.
هذا عنده انحراف أو مرض.
And refuting the innovations is from explaining the Sharee'ah and protecting it, and it is from commanding the good and forbidding the evil. And it is from sincerity to Allaah, and His Book, and His Messenger, and the leaders of the Muslims and their common folk.
This person has deviation with him or a sickness.
فيُنصح فــإن أصر على هذه الطــريقة فأرى أن يُـلحق بــأهل البدع. نعم .
كما سئل الإمــام أحمد ـ رحمه الله : فلان يجلس إلى فلان و قد نهيته عن مجالسته
قال : انصحه
قال : أبى
قال ألحـقه بصاحبه.
So he should be advised. And if he persists in this way, then I think that he should be put with (i.e. considered among) the people of innovations. Yes.
This is as Al-Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah) was asked: "So-and-so sits with so-and-so, and indeed you have prohibited sitting with him." He (Al-Imaam Ahmad) said: "Advise him." The person said: "He refused (to listen)." He (Al-Imaam Ahmad) said: "Then join him with his companion (i.e. consider him like him)."
هكذا أهل البدع ، الأرواح جنود مجندة ما تعارف منها ائتلف و ما تناكر منها اختلف.
Thus are the people of innovation. The souls are like gathered troops. Those that recognize each other among them, they come together, and those that do not (they are not alike), then they differ.
و لهذا قال السلف : " مَن خفيت علينا بدعته ، لم تخف علينا ألفته".
الألفة و المجالسة و المعاشرة يعني تدل على أن هذا منهم لأن الأرواح جنود مجندة ما تعارف منها ائتلف و ما تناكر منها اختلف.
And for this reason, the Salaf said, "Whoever's innovation is hidden from us, his companionship will not be hidden from us."
Companionship, association, affiliation, these things prove that this person is from them, because the souls are like gathered troops. Those that recognize each other, they come together, and those that do not (they are not alike), then they will differ.
و قد سئل الشيخ مقبل ـ رحمه الله ـ فـي هذا المجلس ، كتن عندي : كيف انتشرت الدعوة السلفية عندكم في اليمن، ما السبب؟
And indeed Ash-Shaikh Muqbil was asked (rahimahullaah) in this sitting room, and he was with me, "How did the Da'watus-Salafiyyah spread with you all in Yemen? What was the cause?
قال : السبب التميز ، لأنا تميزنا عن أهل البدع فنشر الله السنة.
He (Ash-Shaikh Muqbil) said, "The cause was At-Tamayyuz (distinction). Because we made ourselves distinct from the people of innovations, Allaah spread the Sunnah.
و ذكر مثلاً: أن واحدا من أهل البدع جـاء إلى مسجد يتكلم فيه ؛ فخرج كل من فيه ـ يعني هُجرانا له و إهانة له ـ .
And he mentioned an example, that one person from the people of innovations came to a masjid to speak in it, so everyone left out of it, meaning their boycotting him, and disgracing him.
يعني تشبعوا بالسنة ، و عرفوا قدرها و عرفوا شـناعة البدع و ما تنطوي عليه من الشرور.
Meaning that they were satisfied with the Sunnah, and they knew its status, and they knew the disgust of the innovations and what results from it of evils.
فـكان ـ يا إخوة ـ تميز أهل السنة عن الأحزاب و أهل البدع كان سببا عظيما لانتـشار السنة ، و الامتزاج و الاختلاط يكون بالعكس سببا لتغلب البدع و أهلها على السنة و أهلها؛ فتنتشر البدع.
So therefore - O brothers - the distinction of the people of Sunnah from the parties (Ahzaab) and the people of innovations, this was a tremendous cause for the spreading of the Sunnah. And blending and mixing, to the contrary, is a cause of the innovations and its people becoming dominant and overcoming the Sunnah and its people. Thus, the innovations will spread.
أسأل الله أن يثبتنا و إيـاكم على السنة و يجعلنا عاملين بها و الموالين فيها المعادون من أجلها. نعم ".
I ask Allaah to make us and you all firm upon the Sunnah and that He makes us those who act according to it, and those who unite and support each other upon it, and those who make enmity for its sake. Yes.
نقلها أخوكم : همام بن محمد
المصدر : شريط [الأجوبة السديدة على أسئلة المناهج الجديدة وجه ـ أ ـ]
Transmitted by your brother Hamaam bin Muhammad
Source: A tape entitled: Al-Ajwibatus-Sadeedah 'alaa As'ilatil-Manaahij il-Jadeedah, side A.
Translated by Aqeel Walker
Compare this to Adly and his positions. Hmmmmmmmmm.
was-salaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullaah
قال الشيخ ابن باز الطائفة المنصورة هي الفرقة الناجية هما واحدة هم أهل السنة و الجماعة و هم السلفيون
This message was edited by aqeel.walker on 5-30-03 @ 1:21 AM
|msaqib1||-- 12-11-2009 @ 2:07 AM|
As-Salaamu AlaiKum waRahmatullah ikhwaan,
I just found this post and wanted to raise it.
The response of Shaykh Bazmool (hafidullah) is beneficial to even those of us in the UK
(note that the Shaykh has made this statement so many years ago - not just yesterday).
Its strange how you still hear this type of speech amongst a certain group in the UK (and im not talking about HT).
May Allah let us speak and accept the truth - Aameen