SalafiTalk.Net
SalafiTalk.Net » The Fitnah of Al-Ma'ribee, Tamyee', those who Accommodate the Astray Sects
» Decisive Proof that Usaamah al-Qoosee's Manhaj Changed And That He is Upon Baatil and Tanaaqud
Search ===>




Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 6Part 7Part 8Part 9 • Part 10 • Part 11 • Part 12


   Reply to this Discussion Start new discussion << previous || next >> 
Posted By Topic: Decisive Proof that Usaamah al-Qoosee's Manhaj Changed And That He is Upon Baatil and Tanaaqud

book mark this topic Printer-friendly Version  send this discussion to a friend  new posts last

spubs.com
10-09-2003 @ 11:19 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Usaamah al-Qoosee Contradicts the Salafee `Usool He Used to Be Upon and Clearly Manifests That He is the One Who Deviated and Departed From Them - Proof As Clear as the Daylight Sun

Alhmadulillaah was-Salaat was-Salaam `alaa Rasoolillaah

One of the noble Salafee brothers has sent us a transcript of a talk given by Usaamah al-Qoosee over four years ago in Philadelphia, USA, which establishes the hujjah upon Usaamah al-Qoosee, indicating that he is the one who left the Salafee `usool and tended towards the manhaj of Abul-Hasan. We present this so that those who used to be with us upon the Salafee manhaj, and who have the excuse of being confused, can be removed from their confusion and realise that the false `usool came from Abul-Hasan as-Sulaymaanee al-Misree, and that the manhaj of Usaamah al-Qoosee and those with him has changed, not the manhaj of Shaykh Rabee` bin Haadee. However, Usaamah al-Qoosee (and those with him) got affected by the siyaasah of Abul-Hasan, and thus, contradictions or changes in `usool over time have become clearly apparent (such as what will be presented below). We will take excerpts of it here and make relevant comments where necessary.

We ask Allaah that this becomes another milestone in bringing back those who have been caught up in this Ikhwaanee fitnah from directions they have not perceived, and in further establishing the hujjah upon those who choose to remain up ahwaa and taqleed, whilst thinking they are upon sunan and daleel. We also ask the followers of Usaamah al-Qoosee to take this to him and read it out to him, as a reminder for him.

Part 1 to follow below inshaa'Allaah.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-11-03 @ 2:19 PM

spubs.com
10-09-2003 @ 11:35 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 1: The Question

This is the text of the question put to Usaamah al-Qoosee:
quote:
Usamah al-Qoosee (Jan 12 1999) after Salaatul-Fajr, Recorded in Masjid as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (Philadelphia, USA). (Brackets are by the one who transcribed)

Question: The brother, he said that the Shaykh talked about Aboo Muslimah and he sees it as being necessary for the Shaykh to talk about one of the people there in Egypt by the name of Muhammad Abdul-Maqsood who is invited to participate there in East Orange; and Aboo Muslimah, they praise him and they're with him and they support him. So can you explain the condition of Muhammad Abdul-Maqsood? And the second part of the question is, there are those people who defend Aboo Muslimah, so those people who defended him in the past, what should they do right now? What should be their position right now and what are they responsible to do right now?
POINTS

ONE: The question is about a person in Egypt, Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood. It is stated that despite al-Qoosee criticising him, he has been praised by others and others have defended him.

TWO:Al-Qoosee is from the people of Egypt, and he is being asked about one who is also from Egypt, one whom he had already criticised previously. This justifies the assumption that al-Qoosee is more aware of the condition of the people of his own land than others.

THREE: The answer that the questioner is seeking contains three requests: a) those who defended him in the past, what should they do now? b) those who defended him what should their position be now? c) those who defended him what is their responsibility now?

So take note of the question, and take a very careful and reflective note upon the answer, from as many angles as you can in your mind, for surely the baatil that al-Qoosee has chosen for himself, due to the siyaasah of Abul-Hasan, will become as clear as daylight.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-11-03 @ 2:19 PM

spubs.com
10-09-2003 @ 1:49 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2A: The Answer
Shubhah `Adheemah (A Mighty Misconception)

Al-Qoosee begins his answer:
quote:
Answer:

Ok Ikhwaan, the Shaykh in talking about this last Shubhaa, and he said this is a Shubhaa that is Adheema. This Shubhaa or this thing that gives doubt and misunderstanding is the statement of people when they say, ?You know these people that you are criticizing, Muhammad Abdul-Maqsood, Fawzee Saeed; all these people who are being criticized, there are those from amongst the people who say that Scholars and Students of Knowledge have described them in the opposite of what you are describing them; they have praised them and they say good things about them. So what are you talking about and who are you? If we have Scholars who are even better than you (i.e. Usamah al-Qoosee) or like you, or students who are better than you or like you, they?re saying positive things about him (the ones being criticized).? So, in essence what they are saying, ?We?re not going to take that (the criticism) we are going to take their kalaam (the praise).?
POINTS

ONE:Al-Qoosee describes what occurs in the question (i.e. of taking praises and comments of one group of people from the Scholars and rejecting or discarding what is said by just one person, which is al-Qoosee) - so he describes it as a shubhah (doubt, misconception) and he says it is `adheemah (great, mighty).

TWO:Al-Qoosee describes this as a shubhah that relates to his own self and his criticisms of Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood and Fawzee Sa`eed.

THREE:Al-Qoosee summarises this shubhah that occurs in the question and says that the people of this shubhah say (concerning al-Qoosee), "So what are you talking about and who are you? If we have Scholars who are even better than you (i.e. Usamah al-Qoosee) or like you, or students who are better than you or like you, they?re saying positive things about him (the ones being criticized)...". So it is apparent from this introduction, that al-Qoosee in whatever he will outline of the `usool of the Salafee manhaj in what is to follow in his answer, that it is all in relation to himself as one individual and his particular criticism of the two people he has mentioned.

FOUR:Al-Qoosee summarises the stance and behaviour of the people referred to in the question (who use the praises) as follows, "So, in essence what they are saying, ?We?re not going to take that (the criticism) we are going to take their kalaam (the praise).

FIVE:Al-Qoosee is one individual who narrates this to the audience, hence, the underlying assumption is that whatever he narrates of evidences concerning the individuals he was asked about, then it is that the narration of the trustworthy is to be accepted. Whether, you want to call it a "hukm" or merely a "khabar" of the condition of the individuals concerned, then although we can enter into this discussion and show the falsehood of what is now being done by these people of differentiating between the two, in order to repel the refutations upon Abul-Hasan, then there is no need at this stage, as it will only confuse things even more. We will address it inshaa'Allaah, after we have gone through parts of the answer of al-Qoosee. However, what is important at this stage is that the underlying assumption is that the audience will accept, and al-Qoosee expects the audience make "qubool of the khabar of the thiqah", which is one person (al-Qoosee), speaking about those from his own land, Egypt, whom he has either interacted with directly, or about whom he has received reports from others, or whom he has heard on cassette.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. The people of Yemen, the vast majority of them, including Shaykh Yahyaa al-Hajurree, Shaykh Muhammad al-Wasaabee, Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam, Shaykh `Abdul-`Azeez al-Bura`ee, Shaykh Saalih al-Bakree and others initially criticised Abul-Hasan al-Ikhwaanee, with proofs and evidences, knowing his condition due to mixing and interacting with him, and due to what has come to them, either first hand, or through reports of reliable people.

2. They are the people of the land in which Abul-Hasan resided. Even if some of them realised the condition of Abul-Hasan later then others, a consensus emerged amongst all of them, and in addition to many of the other students of knowledge in Yemen. This was even before Shaykh Rabee` was asked to deal with the matter, and before the Mashaayikh of Madinah were entered into the matter, and before a total of thirty or more from the people of knowledge were upon consensus regarding the Ikhwaaniyyah and Inhiraaf of Abul-Hasan.

3. Thus the least parallel that can be used side by side with what al-Qoosee will explain in his answer, is that of the Shaykhs of Yemen alone (leaving aside Shaykh Rabee`, Shaykh Faalih, Shaykh `Ubayd and twenty or thirty others).

___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-14-03 @ 4:31 PM

spubs.com
10-09-2003 @ 3:35 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2B: The Answer (continued)
The Principle of al-Jarh al-Mufassar

Al-Qoosee then continues and now begins to answer this doubt:
quote:
The Shaykh said that this is a Shubaa and a great Shubhaa. He went on to explain that every single time that we warn about these people or someone, if we warn about anybody you're going to find someone saying to you, 'Well, so and so said such and such a thing about him which is good and is in opposition to what you say.' Therefore I want to explain to you a very important principle; a very important principle in the knowledge of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel - The knowledge of criticizing and grading people, saying that they are good, bad, acceptable, unacceptable.
POINTS

ONE:So al-Qoosee mentions this behaviour as something unbefitting, and he finds fault with it.

TWO:Then he explains that he must explain "a very important principle" in the knowledge of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, the knowledge of criticising people, saying they are good, bad etc. And he will explain this in some detail in what is to follow.

Al-Qoosee continues to outline this principle:
quote:
He said, and that is the principle that implies and says that the criticism that is explained and defined, the criticism or the Jarh that is explained and is defined, it does not get pushed out of the way by a statement of good that is just a general statement. So if a person is criticizing someone and he brings the proofs of why he is criticizing them, the fact that someone else praises that person or says something good about that person but it's just a general statement; that general statement does not take precedence over that defined, explained criticism. As long as the person that is criticizing is Mu'tabbir or Mutakhassus - he specializes in what he is saying and he knows what he is talking about like he is a Scholar. So let me repeat that again, if you have a Scholar who criticizes someone and he has the ability and the utensils and the wherewithal to criticize him, and he defines and explains why he is criticizing that person, the fact that another person says what is opposite to his criticism; it doesn't take precedence and it shouldn't be given any consideration when the person who is speaking good just says a general statement. 'Oh, he's a nice person, Oh, he's a good brother.' Instead what should happen is, the one who is criticizing (his) statement should get precedence because he's bringing details
POINTS

THREE:Al-Qoosee affirms that the Jarh Mufassar (explained, defined disparagement) does not get pushed away by a statement of praise or goodness that is general.

FOUR:A person who brings proofs for the criticism, then whatever anyone else says of goodness for the one being criticised, it does not take precedence, but the Jarh takes precedence. So long as the one making Jarh is a) mu`tabar (meaning one whose saying is considered, and worthy, and who is capable) or b) mutakhassis (one who specialises in that matter, that field, and is qualified to speak in it).

FIVE:Don't forget that al-Qoosee is laying down the foundations for an answer that relates to his own previous Jarh upon one or two individuals from his own land. Thus when he says, "as long as the person criticising is mu`tabar or mutakhassis", and "if you have a scholar... he has the ability and the utensils and the wherewithal to criticise him, and he defines and explains why he is criticising that person..." then he is saying this as it relates to himself, as this is the context of the question. And no doubt, this is a correct general principle also, but be aware of this point.

SIX:Then al-Qoosee explains again that saying "he is a nice person" and "a good brother" and so on is irrelevant, and is not given consideration, because the one disparaging has brought details.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. What al-Qoosee is saying here in essence (by laying these foundations) is: "I am mu`tabar and I am qualified to speak, and I spoke about them and I gave proofs for what I said and claimed, thus if anyone comes and says, "he is a good Salafee", "we only know khayr from him" and "so and so praised him" and so on, that this not accepted, rather my speech (i.e. al-Qoosee's) is given precedence, and this is from the angle of taking the khabar of the trustworthy person who knows the people of his land, therefore act by these principles and take this from me and leave aside the praises and commendations of others as they are irrelevant"


___________________________________________________________________________


spubs.com
10-09-2003 @ 11:23 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2C: The Answer (continued)
Arguing That So and So Shaykh is Greater Than You And More Knowledgeable In Order To Reject the Jarh Mufassar (Updated)

From here we begin to see the clear nature of al-Qoosee's inhiraaf from what he used to be upon. He continues as follows, and remember this is all in the context of his Jarh upon Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood:
quote:
The Shaykh went on to say, even if the one who is criticizing this person is less in knowledge than the one who gave the general praise, because the one who is criticizing is bringing the proof to support what he is saying, his statement takes precedence; where the one who is bigger than him in his level and in his knowledge, he is better than him (the one criticizing); his statement takes the backseat because he?s not giving any details. He is just making a general statement. The Shaykh said that?s very, very important as we talk and warn about people like Muhammad Abdul-Maqsood because a person may say, ?Well, Shaykh, your very Shaykh (Imaam Muqbil) who?s bigger than you and better than you, he praised this particular person.? For an example, so that person who says that to Shaykh Aboo Haatim (Usamah al-Qoosee), he is saying, ?So therefore since your Shaykh is bigger than you or better than you and he praised him; you should stop criticizing him because your Shaykh is bigger than you and better than you.? He says, no even though the Shaykh may be bigger than someone or more knowledgeable than someone, his praising is just general, whereas the one who is criticizing; it is specific, so he?s bringing what is called ?Ziyaadtul-?Ilm? or and addition of knowledge. He is bringing knowledge that the other person didn?t know.
POINTS

ONE:Al-Qoosee then goes on to repel another doubt which is that the saying of one who is greater in knowledge, should be taken instead of the Jarh, merely because he is greater in knowledge in general. Al-Qoosee says that this statement "takes the backseat" (maybe this is just Abu Usaamah's language) because he does not give any details.

TWO:Al-Qoosee then exemplifies this with the example of himself, when he says, "...because a person may say, ?Well, Shaykh, your very Shaykh (Imaam Muqbil) who?s bigger than you and better than you, he praised this particular person.? For an example, so that person who says that to Shaykh Aboo Haatim (Usamah al-Qoosee), he is saying, ?So therefore since your Shaykh is bigger than you or better than you and he praised him; you should stop criticizing him because your Shaykh is bigger than you and better than you?.... Thus, the meaning here is that merely because Shaykh Muqbil is greater than al-Qoosee and bigger than him in rank and knowledge, then it does not necessitate that al-Qoosee's Jarh is rejected.

THREE:He then explains that even if a Shaykh is bigger or more knowledgeable, then the one who brings the "additional knowledge", then his saying is accepted. Thus, the age, and amount of knowledge is not the overriding factor.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. Four years later, al-Qoosee has turned into the very one whom he is describing in the course of his response above. This is because in his most recent cassettes at Masjid Ibn Taymiyyah, Brixton London, he has argued exactly like the same people he was refuting four years ago, when he defended his own Jarh against Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood. He tried his utmost to use every devious method to make people flee away from the Jarh Mufassar brought by Shaykh Rabee`, and focusing on the greatness of the other Scholars over Shaykh Rabee`. Here he totally forgot about the `usool he used to be upon.

2. From what he said ( http://www.salafitalk.net/st/uploads/QooseeBrixton2.rm )  is:
  • "...because who is the one who said about Shaykh Rabee` that he is the carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel?...Shaykh al-Albaanee, therefore who is the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel then? It is Shaykh al-Albaanee, it is not Shaykh Rabee`. Shaykh Rabee` is from the students of Shaykh al-Albaanee. Shaykh al-Albaanee did not make Shaykh Rabee` an Imaam of himself..." (7 mins 45 seconds) and
  • "...hence, describing a person that he is a carrier of the flag does not mean that he is the highset, and that he is the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel..." (10 mins 35 seconds), and
  • "...Does Shaykh al-Albaanee intend, when Shaykh al-Albaanee, Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymeen were present in that time, and they are the Imaams of this da`wah and Shaykh Rabee` is one of the scholars of this da`wah, can it be comprehended that Shaykh al-Albaanee intends that Shaykh Rabee` is superior to those three? What is the answer, the answer is no..." (10 mins 50 seconds), and
  • "...Does he intend that Shaykh Rabee` is more knowledgeable of those three? The answer is also no..." and
  • "...and it is not a description that Shaykh Rabee` is an Imaam to Shaykh Ibn Baaz in al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel, and he is not an Imaam to Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymeen in al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel, and he is not an Imaam to Shaykh al-Albaanee in al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel in any situation. Rather, those three Imaams, with the acknowledge of all of us together, including Shaykh Rabee` (hafidhahullaah) they are the Imaams of this da`wah in our times..." (17mins 10 seconds) and
  • "... and we say that in our time, the Shaykh `Abul-Muhsin ibn Hamad al-`Abbaad al-Badr (hafidhahullaahu ta`aalaa), who lives in al-Madinah al-Munawwarah, he is an Imaam of the Imaams of the Da`wah Salafiyyah in this time, rather, perhaps he is the Imaam of the `Ulamaa in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia currently, the Salafee `Ulamaa, the Ahl ul-Hadeeth... and he is the greatest of them, in rank and in knowledge, and he is without doubt he is more knowledgeable than Shaykh Rabee (hafidhahullaah). Shaykh Rabee` is not to be compared with Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin, ever. `Abdul-Muhsin is the teacher of Shaykh Rabee`, he taught and educated him. Shaykh Rabee` was a student and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin was a teacher, instructor, educator to him. Therefore, we have to put every Shaykh in his place..." and
  • "...It is from justice that we say that Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin is an Imaam from the Imaams...and he is the most knowledgeable of the people of his time of al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel... and he is more knowledgeable on this subject and others, than Shaykh Rabee` al-Madkhalee (hafidhahullaahu ta`aalaa), even if Shaykh Rabee` has dedicated his time to refuting the Qutbiyyeen and the Hizbiyeen, so he was the carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel, as said by Shaykh al-Albaanee..." (19 mins 15 seconds)
And also ( http://www.salafitalk.net/st/uploads/QooseeBrixton3.rm ):
  • "... and  for this reason, when our Shaykh was asked, Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin about the issue of Abul-Hasan and Shaykh Rabee`, he said, "these are things in the souls"..." (5 mins 30 seconds) and
  • al-Qoosee goes on to say that when Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin was asked as to why he made this statement, about it being something in the soul, he replied that it is because when you look at how many refutations Shaykh Rabee` has written, eight or nine in number, that this is way too much...
3. Further, in ( http://www.salafitalk.net/st/uploads/QooseeBrixton2.rm  ), al-Qoosee speaks of Shaykh Faalih al-Harbee for a few minutes and amongst his statements is that "...When Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin al-`Abbaad was asked, is Shaykh Faalih from the Major Scholars, he said, "No, he is from the small students of knowledge"...". Al-Qoosee also goes on to explain other affairs concerning Shaykh Faalih, the overall intent of which is to belittle him and to make him out to be inferior. Refer to the above recording from 19 mins onwards. The reason behind all of this speech (concerning Rabee` and Faalih) is to belittle these Shaykhs, so that people do not take their criticisms upon Ahl ul-Bid`ah, such as Abul-Hasan and al-Maghraawee, with whom al-Qoosee has allied.

Now compare what al-Qoosee says in this tape, to what has been quoted from him above, from the year 1999, when he is trying to put across that even though he himself might be lesser in knowledge than Shaykh Muqbil, the `usool necessitate that his jarh upon Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood must be accepted, al-Qoosee says, "The Shaykh went on to say, even if the one who is criticizing this person is less in knowledge than the one who gave the general praise, because the one who is criticizing is bringing the proof to support what he is saying, his statement takes precedence; where the one who is bigger than him in his level and in his knowledge, he is better than him (the one criticizing); his statement takes the backseat because he?s not giving any details. He is just making a general statement. The Shaykh said that?s very, very important as we talk and warn about people like Muhammad Abdul-Maqsood because a person may say, ?Well, Shaykh, your very Shaykh (Imaam Muqbil) who?s bigger than you and better than you, he praised this particular person.? For an example, so that person who says that to Shaykh Aboo Haatim (Usamah al-Qoosee), he is saying, ?So therefore since your Shaykh is bigger than you or better than you and he praised him; you should stop criticizing him because your Shaykh is bigger than you and better than you.?.

So with this, the talbees, and tadlees, and tamyee`, and tashweesh and tamweeh of al-Qoosee becomes clear. For his own speech is a hujjah against him and his own speech.

4. From what has preceded in the sample of statements above, one can see that Usaamah al-Qoosee has totally abandoned the Salafee `Usool in this regard, the very ones he used to defend his own Jarh of Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood (and in which he only narrated three or four issues about this individual, transmitting some of the affairs from others). One can see clearly his great attempt to make the point that Shaykhs al-Albaanee, Ibn `Uthaymeen and Ibn Baaz (rahimahumullaah) and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin particularly are greater in knowledge than Shaykh Rabee`, and he tried to use the generalised statements of Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin to reject Shaykh Rabee`s Jarh and to declare it an error. The falsehood of al-Qoosee here will become more apparent as we read more from his speech, and we will realise that his abandonment of the Salafee `Usool is actually worse than what is appears. And again, we ask the `Atbaa al-Qoosee to take this to him and to remind him.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-12-03 @ 12:44 PM

spubs.com
11-09-2003 @ 2:15 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2D: The Answer (continued)
The Ta`deel Mujmal Does Not Override the Jarh Mufassar

Al-Qoosee now outlines this matter:
quote:
Likewise Ikhwaan, I want to explain what is meaning of the Ta'deel that is Mujmal - the general statement that is good. The praise that is good. He said it is like the person who says, 'So and so is, his manhaj is Saleem, he's Okay', 'So and so, he has some knowledge of Fiqh', 'So and so, he has knowledge of hadeeth', 'So and so is Salafee.' He said that this is a general praise, it's not detailed, it's just general and this Ta'deel or this general praise is not accepted in the place of a Jarh that is Mufassir, or it is explained, and the Jarh has some Bayyinaat connected to it, it has Dhaleel proving its point. I give you an example the Shaykh said, let's take Aboo Muslimah, it has been said and someone said, 'Aboo Muslimah is Salafee and Aboo Muslimah is good and he's Tayyib, he has Khayr and he is Tayyib.' Some of the Students of Knowledge have said that in the past and some of the Scholars have said that in the past. But there is a criticism that has been explained that is attached to Aboo Muslimah and that is the criticism of the tape that I told you about; when he was accused of saying that the Mashayikh, they were not salafee and he was accused of criticizing his teachers and some of the Mashayikh. When they brought that, what he was supposed to do was, he was supposed to defend this criticism by saying, 'That tape is forged, that tape is not proof, that tape - someone made it up.' If he was able to prove that, then the people who were criticizing him, their criticism could have been repelled, because the praising of Aboo Muslimah had a Dhaleel to repel the accusation or the criticism that was being made against him. So the general statements, 'Aboo Muslimah - his Manhaj is okay, he's Salafee, he's good', that's just a general statement. Now someone who comes and criticizes him and he says, 'Aboo Muslimah made a tape in which he said this,' that tape is defining and it's bringing the Dhaleel for the person who says that he has a problem. So in this case, the Jarh is Mufassir, so it takes precedence over the Ta'deel that is Mujmal, (For example)'He's Salafee, he's Khayr and he is Tayyib.'
POINTS

ONE:Al-Qoosee now explains that when a person says "so and so is Salafee", or "so and so's manhaj is sound" and other such words which affirm Salafiyyah and the Salafi Manhaj for a particular person, that this is only a Ta`deel Mujmal, and is not detailed. This, as al-Qoosee states, " is not accepted in the place of a Jarh that is Mufassir, or it is explained, and the Jarh has some Bayyinaat connected to it, it has Dhaleel proving its point...".

TWO:Then al-Qoosee gives an example of this, that of Abu Muslimah. He says that a tape was brought containing Abu Muslimah's criticism of the Scholars, and this is decisive in the sense it constitutes evidence of his opposition. This then cannot be overturned merely by the general statements "so and so Shaykh said he is Salafee", "so and so Shaykh praised him", "so and so Shaykh says he has benefitted the da`wah" and so on. Thus the Jarh Mufassar cannot be overturned by a Ta`deel Mujmal.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. When one listens to the speech of al-Qoosee over the past few months, in his attempts to defend Abul-Hasan you will notice that al-Qoosee never ventures into the Jarh Mufassar of around thirty from the people of knowledge. Rather it is all general speech, the likes of "he is Salafee", "his manhaj is sound". And likewise the followers of Abul-Hasan in general, they brought the statements of Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin al-`Abbaad indicating that Abul-Hasan is from Ahl us-Sunnah. And they rejoiced with these statements, exposing their jahl without realising. And here the words of al-Qoosee from 1999, expose the behaviour of these people who used these statements of Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin.

Thus, according to the above principle that al-Qoosee has correctly explained, this current behaviour of al-Qoosee and his followers is rejected from them and thrown back at them. This is because the statements coming from these Shaykhs were Ta`deel Mujmal. So neither al-Qoosee nor the followers of Abul-Hasan have been faithful and honest to the very `usool al-Qoosee used to abide by years ago. When it came to explaining why people must take his Jarh of Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood, al-Qoosee correctly explained the `usool and also abided by them, and asked others to abide by them. And now in the situation in which thirty or so from the people of knowledge are upon consensus regarding the inhiraaf of Abul-Hasan and that his manhaj is Ikhwaanee, al-Qoosee and others, have thrown these `usool behind their backs, and this has been done in broad daylight, for all to see, who can see. Al-Qoosee, as one individual, explained the above `usool so that the people could accept his Jarh of Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood, and he called it a "very important principle", and he explained that those who do not abide by this are upon a "shubhah `adheemah". And now, accepting the consensus Jarh of thirty people of knowledge, renders those who take it and who leave the Ta`deel Mujmal as "Muqallidah", "those who cannot distinguish between the alif and the stick", "Ghulaat", "Haddaadiyyah". The `aaqil knows that al-Qoosee deviated and changed his manhaj, due to the siyaasah of Abul-Hasan and Jam`iyyah Daar ul-Birr, the arm of Jam`iyyah Ihyaa at-Turaath.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-13-03 @ 6:17 PM

spubs.com
13-09-2003 @ 6:17 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2E: The Answer (continued)
The One Who Knows is a Hujjah Over the One Who Does Not Know

Al-Qoosee continues:
quote:
And there is another principle that says, ?Your lack of knowledge of something is not knowledge that that thing doesn?t exist.? So the fact that you don?t know about something, that?s not a Dhaleel that that thing doesn?t exist. Do you understand? (For example) You don?t know who is upstairs, but that doesn?t mean that no one is upstairs because you don?t know who is upstairs. So, that?s basically what he is saying.

So Ikhwaan, this is basically the Kalaam of those people, that they say, ?Well we don?t know about those things.? We say, ?Your lack of knowledge is not knowledge that that thing does not exist.?
POINTS

ONE:Al-Qoosee goes on to explain another correct principle, which is that "the one who knows is a hujjah over the one who does not know", and this itself has been explained in recent times by Shaykh `Ubayd al-Jaabiree, and Shaykh Rabee` and Shaykh Faalih and others.

TWO:Al-Qoosee brings this matter as it relates to his Jarh of Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood. This means that al-Qoosee holds himself as one who brings additional knowledge, and that he knows what others do not know, and thus, upon the assertion that his khabar as a thiqah ought to be accepted, he outlines this principle to the audience, adding another factor to what has preceded in arguing that his Jarh must be taken.

THREE:This principle also addresses the issue of the Ta`deel of person upon whom Jarh has been established, and in reality it is from the same angle that the Jarh Mufassar is established upon additional knowledge that the Jaarih has that the Mu`addil (the one giving ta`deel) does not have.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. The thirty or more people of knowledge, amongst whom the most senior of the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah are to be found, all have additional knowledge about the condition of Abul-Hasan al-Ikhwaanee not known by others. This means that they are hujjah over those who do not know what they know, such as Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan and others. Thus, their saying is accepted and adhered to, just like al-Qoosee wishes and argues that his jarh upon Muhammad `Abdul-Maqsood ought to be accepted and adhered to. And al-Qoosee is one person, and those who declared Abul-Hasad to be an Ikhwaanee and Saahib ul-Fitan and Mubtadi` are around thirty people or more, many of whom are superior to al-Qoosee by many ranks. And they have established from the cassettes, writings, lectures and the witnessed behaviour of Abul-Hasan that he is indeed a Saahib ul-Fitnah, Daall, Mudill.

2. So all of this shows that al-Qoosee, from at least a few angles, has departed from the `usool he used to be upon and preach to the people.


___________________________________________________________________________


spubs.com
13-09-2003 @ 7:04 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2F: The Answer (continued)
Al-Qoosee Strikes the Example of Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa To Illustrate the Above Principles

Al-Qoosee continues
quote:
Now I want to give you a working example of what I am talking about from what happened in the past, about how the Jarh that is explained, how it takes precedence over the Ta?deel that is general. I want to give an example with the Scholars of the past of why this principle applies. Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee, Raheemahullaahu Ta?alaa, he had a Shaykh and his Shaykh?s name was Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa. Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa was also known as Ibraheem ibn Muhammad; this was the Shaykh of Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee. What had happened was al-Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee used to praise this man Ibraheem ibn Muhammad or Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa. Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee used to praise his Shaykh and he used to say whenever he wanted to narrate a hadeeth that was told to him by this Shaykh, he said, ?Hadathanee ath-Thiqaah,? he said, ?The one who is trustworthy,? meaning Ibraheem ibn Muhammad, his Shaykh, ?He has told me? and he said that he was Thiqah or he was saying, ?Hadathanee, the one who I don?t accuse him of anything.? So this is a general praise that Al Immam ash-Shaafi?ee was giving to Ibraheem ibn Muhammad his Shaykh, Ibraheem Ibn Abee Yahyaa. It wasn?t defined, it wasn?t explained, he just said that he was thiqah, Okay?

The Shaykh went on to say that Aboo Dawood, Al Imaam Aboo Dawood, who is the one who wrote the book of the Sunnah; the hadeeth book, he came after Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee, some time after al-Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee. When he came and he wanted to give a ruling on the Shaykh of Imaam ash-Shafi?ee, this man Ibraheem ibnul-Muhammad or Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa; al Imaam Aboo Dawood who was less than Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee and he came after Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee, he said about the Shaykh of Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee ? Ibraheem Ibnul-Muhammad, ?He is a Rukun, from the Arkaan of al-Kathib?, ?He is one of the pillars of the pillars of liars?, ?The man is a liar, a tremendous liar.? He went on to say, our Shaykh went on to say that other Scholars also gave the Hukm or the Jarh on this man, Ibraheem Ibn Muhammad, similar to Aboo Dawood, Raheemahullaah Ta?alaa. So you see who does get the ruling, so the ruling of this man Ibraheem Ibn Muhammad was that they considered him to be a liar even though al-Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee was bigger than Aboo Dawood, and Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee was better than Imaam Aboo Dawood. Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee came before Aboo Dawood and Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee was Al Imaam Aboo Dawood; he had his Shaykh, his Shayookh of Imaam Aboo Dawood. Al Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee was on the level of the Shayookh who taught the Shayookh of Aboo Dawood. So no doubt Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee is better than Aboo Dawood and yet the statement of Aboo Dawood takes precedence. Why? Because of this Qaa?idah ? the Jarh that is Mufassir; it takes precedence over the Ta?deel that is general. The criticism that is explained, that he is a Rukun from the Arkaan of al-Kathib is explained, the Ziyaada of the ?Ilm; more knowledge, it takes precedence over just a general praise.          

Our Shaykh, Aboo Haatim, he went on to say that when Aboo Dawood, who is Mutabbir or he is Mutakhassus; he has specialization, he brought the Dhaleel of what he was saying so as a result of that, his statement took precedence. So the Jarh that is Mufassir from the Mutabbir or the person who?s Mutakhassus, it is Muqadim on the Ta?deel that is Mujmal.
POINTS

ONE:Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa was the Shaykh of Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee. This shows that to a Shaykh, his own Shaykh's reality can remain hidden from him, and likewise a Shaykh's student's reality, despite them having closeness, may still be hidden from the Shaykh, as a result of which he only speaks regarding that which the individual has made apparent to him, but there is still what remains hidden from him, which is known, or can be known, or will be known by others. It is precisely for this reason that these `usool are part of the `usool of Ahl us-Sunnah, which is take the Jarh Mufassar, and that one who knows is a hujjah over the one who does not, and that no regard is giving to the Ta`deel in the presence of a Jarh Mufassar, and that the Jaarih being the student and the Mu`addil being the teacher, or one who is greater or superior, this has no significance, rather the Jarh is still accepted.

TWO:Al-Qoosee says that ash-Shaafi`ee was much greater than Abu Daawood, however, since Abu Daawood was mutakhassis, and mu`tabar in the matter, and he brought ziyaadat ul-`ilm, then his inferiority to Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee, plays no role in the acceptance or rejection of the jarh he made upon Ibraheem ibn Abee Yahyaa. As al-Qoosee says, "So no doubt Imaam ash-Shaafi?ee is better than Aboo Dawood and yet the statement of Aboo Dawood takes precedence. Why? Because of this Qaa?idah ? the Jarh that is Mufassir; it takes precedence over the Ta?deel that is general. The criticism that is explained, that he is a Rukun from the Arkaan of al-Kathib is explained, the Ziyaada of the ?Ilm; more knowledge, it takes precedence over just a general praise.

THREE:Look at the stark contrast, ash-Shaafi`ee says "thiqah", and Abu Dawood says "a pillar from the pillars of kadhib".

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

1. Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin and others have indicated in what has been transmitted from their speech that Abul-Hasan is from Ahl us-Sunnah. A very great number of other people of knowledge hold him in essence to be "A Pillar from the Pillars of Ikhwaaniyyah, Bannaawiyyah, a Liar, a Plotter, a Tremendous Ikhwaanee" due to his false `usool which trascend the evil of the principles of previous Innovators. This includes those who are mutakhassissoon and mu`tabiroon in the field, such as Shaykh Rabee`, Shaykh Faalih, Shaykh `Ubayd, Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee and others.

2. So it was obligatory upon al-Qoosee to remain upon the beaten track of the pious forefathers, and to take the Jarh Mufassar and not to lower and degrade himself in this manner, and to display wholesale and open abandonment of the `usool he used to preach. Alas, he displayed the feebleness of his intellect, and as we have seen above, he began to indulge in speech about the greatness of Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin al-`Abbaad, that he has Imaamship over and above Shaykh Rabee`, and that Shaykhs al-Albaanee, Bin Baaz and Ibn al-`Uthaymeen were the real Imaams of the Sunnah, and the intent behind all of this was to belittle Shaykh Rabee`, and lower him compared to the others - the overall objective of which was to reject his Jarh, and to play with the minds of the foolish, and to bewilder them and confuse them.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-13-03 @ 7:11 PM

spubs.com
16-09-2003 @ 8:10 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
          

Part 2G: The Answer (continued)
Al-Qoosee Makes His Own Reality By His Very Own Words - A Commentary On the Self

Al-Qoosee (in 1999), in the same tape goes on to explain, the true nature of his own soul in (2003):
quote:
So Ikhwaan, this is why the people, our Shaykh Aboo Haatim said, Jazakallahu Khayrun, this is why the people didn?t understand the Kalaam of Shaykh Rabee al-Madkhalee when he was warning about certain people. Those people who don?t have knowledge, they said when Shaykh Rabee was warning about these particular people, they said, ?Well Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh al-Albaanee, they praised that individual.? Yes, Shaykh Rabee is criticizing them, Shaykh Rabee is giving a Jarh that is Mufassir and Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz are Mutabbir; they?re good, they?re Mutakhassus, but they are giving a Ta?deel that is Mujmal. So based on what the Shaykh was saying before we know the Hukm, who gets what, the statement of Shaykh Rabee (takes) place here. So what Shaykh Rabee said was, ?If Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz; if they knew what I knew about these people, they would have criticized them just like I criticized them.? So the people say, ?What? What? Shaykh Rabee think(s) he more knowledgeable than Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Rabee (He means Ibn Baaz)? Shaykh Rabee, does he think he is more knowledgeable than Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Raheemhumallahu Ta?alaa?? He said, no, but he is more knowledgeable about them concerning that individual or those people, and that?s why when our Shaykh, ash-Shaykh Muhammad Ibnus-Saalih ibnul `Uthaymeen; when he was asked about the books of Saeed Qutb, he said, ?I don?t know a lot about his books, I haven?t read his books, I don?t know what they contain, but go to Shaykh Rabee, ask and read the books of Shaykh Rabee.? Why? Because Shaykh Rabee is Mutabbir, Mutakhassus ? he knows what he is talking about and he has knowledge about that issue Ikhwaan. So this is the Quwaa?id; he?s Mutakhassus and he read the books of the man, that?s why he is Mutakhassus, ?cause he read his books, he know what?s going on. This is Ikhwaan some of the Quwaa?id of al-Jarh wat-Ta?deel.
POINTS

This is highly significant to our purpose here in this series, and thus, we will comment upon this speech piecemeal:

ONE:Al-Qoosee says in 1999 "So Ikhwaan, this is why the people, our Shaykh Aboo Haatim said, Jazakallahu Khayrun, this is why the people didn?t understand the Kalaam of Shaykh Rabee al-Madkhalee when he was warning about certain people...".

And what this really means in 2003 is "So Ikhwaan, this is why our Shaykh Aboo Haatim (Usaamah al-Qoosee) Jazakallahu Khayrun, this is why he didn?t understand the Kalaam of Shaykh Rabee al-Madkhalee when he was warning about certain people (like al-Maghraawee and al-Ikhwaanee as-Sulaymaanee).

TWO:Al-Qoosee says, "Those people who don?t have knowledge, they said when Shaykh Rabee was warning about these particular people, they said, ?Well Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh al-Albaanee, they praised that individual.? Yes, Shaykh Rabee is criticizing them, Shaykh Rabee is giving a Jarh that is Mufassir and Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz are Mutabbir; they?re good, they?re Mutakhassus, but they are giving a Ta?deel that is Mujmal. So based on what the Shaykh was saying before we know the Hukm, who gets what, the statement of Shaykh Rabee (takes) place here. ".

And what this really means in 2003 is "Those people who don?t have knowledge like Usaamah al-Qoosee, they said when Shaykh Rabee was warning about these particular people (like al-Maghraawee and al-Ikhwaanee as-Sulaymaanee), they said, ?Well Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin praised that individual.? Yes, Shaykh Rabee is criticizing them, Shaykh Rabee is giving a Jarh that is Mufassar and Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin, he is good, he is Mutakhassis, but he is giving a Ta?deel that is Mujmal. So based on what the Shaykh was saying before we know the Hukm (that we should accept the Jarh Mufassar of Shaykh Rabee`) but were going to completely ignore it and throw it against the wall and behind our backs, instead, who gets what, the statement of Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin (takes) place here.

Reflect on this one for a bit!

THREE:Al-Qoosee says, "So what Shaykh Rabee said was, ?If Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz; if they knew what I knew about these people, they would have criticized them just like I criticized them.? So the people say, ?What? What? Shaykh Rabee think(s) he more knowledgeable than Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz? Shaykh Rabee, does he think he is more knowledgeable than Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Raheemhumallahu Ta?alaa??.

And what this really means in 2003 is, "So what Shaykh Rabee said was, ?If `Abdul-Muhsin and Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan; if they knew (all of) what I knew about these people (and what many others know about them), they would have criticized them just like I criticized them.? So Usaamah al-Qoosee said ?What? What? Shaykh Rabee think(s) he more knowledgeable than Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin? Shaykh Rabee, does he think he is more knowledgeable than Shaykh `Abdul-Muhsin hafidhahullaah and Shaykh al-Albaanee and Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Raheemhumallahu Ta?alaa??.

Woe be to you O Qoosee!! How you have uncovered yourself with your own speech. You come into the lands of the Kuffaar amongst the a`aajim [and we will not insult them and say they cannot distinguish between an alif and an `asaa, because that would be a lie upon them], but we say the a`aajim to the details of the Salafee manhaj, who in their ignorance of it gave you a platform in Luton and then in London, and they even entered you into Birmingham, being aided by that by their secret allies and operatives in Birmingham, to bring about fasaad in the land through you. But you failed, and they failed...

FOUR:Al-Qoosee says, "He said, no, but he is more knowledgeable about them concerning that individual or those people, and that?s why when our Shaykh, ash-Shaykh Muhammad Ibnus-Saalih ibnul `Uthaymeen; when he was asked about the books of Saeed Qutb, he said, ?I don?t know a lot about his books, I haven?t read his books, I don?t know what they contain, but go to Shaykh Rabee, ask and read the books of Shaykh Rabee.? Why? Because Shaykh Rabee is Mutabbir, Mutakhassus ? he knows what he is talking about and he has knowledge about that issue Ikhwaan. So this is the Quwaa?id; he?s Mutakhassus and he read the books of the man, that?s why he is Mutakhassus, ?cause he read his books, he know what?s going on.

And this was the truth then, and it was also the truth in 2002, when Shaykh Rabee` demolished the falsehood of Abul-Hasan as-Sulaymaanee, by following up his evil principles, knowing full well that they were extended from the principles of `Adnaan `Ar`oor, Salmaan al-`Awdah, `Abdur-Razzaaq ad-Democraatee and others. So Shaykh Rabee` knows what he is talking about, and he has knowledge about those issues...

FIVE:Finally, al-Qoosee says, "This is Ikhwaan some of the Quwaa?id of al-Jarh wat-Ta?deel."

And as for what al-Qoosee says today then it is, "This is Ikhwaan, some of the Qawaa`id of the Ghulaat, Haddaadiyyah, Muqallidah, the Juhhaal, who cannot distinguish between the alif and the `asaa, those who cannot even make i`raab of "Jaa'a Zaydun"..." to the end of al-Qoosee's insults and revilements.

SIGNIFICANCE AND POINTS TO RECALL

Nothing to recall here as it is all so readily apparent. The above is a clear illustration to any intelligent person that al-Qoosee changed, and the manhaj of Shaykh Rabee` did not change. It is a clear illustration of the downfall of al-Qoosee which he brought upon himself, and he was not wronged in the least. It is also a clear illustration of the great corruption in al-walaa and al-baraa and the nifaaq in action of those who claimed tawbah from the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee, but who were secretly in cahoots with `Abdul-Qadir Baksh in bringing Usaamah al-Qoosee into Birmingham to try to do some damage to the da`wah which has been established there for close to a decade.

NOTE: we will be placing audio recordings of each of al-Qoosee's statements quoted above in due course inshaa'Allaah.


___________________________________________________________________________




This message was edited by spubs.com on 9-16-03 @ 8:59 PM






SalafiPublications.Com
TawhidFirst | Aqidah | AboveTheThrone | Asharis
Madkhalis | Takfiris | Maturidis | Dajjaal
Islam Against Extremism | Manhaj
Ibn Taymiyyah | Bidah
Where Can I Learn Arabic Online


main page | contact us
Copyright 2001 - SalafiTalk.Net
Madinah Dates Gold Silver Investments