SalafiTalk.Net
SalafiTalk.Net » Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon, Qutbiyyah, Takfiris, Extremists, Terrorists
» Should We Go to the Rahma Conference (Toronto, Canada)?
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: Should We Go to the Rahma Conference (Toronto, Canada)?

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

Troid.Org
05-16-2010 @ 8:35 AM    Notify Admin about this post
TROID - Toronto, Canada (Toronto,Canada)
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Jan 2010
          
Should We Go to the Rahma Conference?


Bismillah was-Salaatu was-Salaam 'alaa Rasoolilaahi wa 'alaa aaliyhi wa Sahbihi wa manitabahu ilaa yawmid-deen. Wa nashhadu an laa ilaaha ilal Allaahu Wahduhu Laa Shareeka lahu Ama Ba'ad:

Allaah The Most High said:

"Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islaam), enjoining Al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islaamic Monotheism and all that Islaam orders one to do) and forbidding Al-Munkar (polytheism and disbelief and all that Islaam has forbidden). And it is they who are the successful.

[Soorah Aali-'Imraan, 3:104]


Allaah the Most High also said:

"You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islaamic Monotheism and all that Islaam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islaam has forbidden), and you believe in Allaah"

[Soorah Aali-'Imraan, 3:110]


Also Imaam Ahmad narrates in his Musnad on the authority of Abu Sa'eed al-Khudree that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Do not let the fear of the people stop any of you in saying the truth if they see it or hear it or witness it" and this hadeeth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Saheeh al-Musnad.

And the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said, as narrated by Imaam Muslim on the authority of Abu Sa'eed al-Kudhree who said the Messenger of Allaah said:

"Whoever of you sees an evil let him change it with his hand. And if he is not able then let him change it with his tongue. And if he is not able then let him hate it in his heart, and this is the lowest of eemaan"

In light of these divine verses and prophetic narrations it becomes obligatory upon us to perform that which Allaah has made waajib on us by enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. Were it not out of fear of Allaah's statement the Most High:

"Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Daawood (David) and 'Eeesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allaah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evil-doing, sins, polytheism, disbelief, etc.) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do"

[Sooratul-Maa'idah, 5:78-79]



And Allaah's statement:

"Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allaah and cursed by the cursers"

[Sooratul-Baqarah, 2:159]



And the hadeeth narrated by Imaam Ahmad on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the Messeneger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Whoever conceals knowledge then Allaah will bridle him on the day of judgment with a bridle of fire" this hadeeth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Saheeh al-Musnad.

Were it not out of fear of these texts than we would not have written that which we are about to state. However because Allaah has made it obligatory on every Muslim that he enjoin the good and forbid the evil it becomes incumbent on us to address an issue which is known to many in the city. This discussion is regarding the Rahma Conference taking place on May 22-23 2010 organized by Khalid Ibn al-Walid Mosque and Abu Hurairah Mosque (of Toronto, Canada) and those attendees invited to speak.

Before we present this article there are a few things I would like to address. Firstly, some might be wondering what concern is it to investigate who is coming - they're all Muslims? Although this is correct, I remind the reader about the statement of the illustrious companion Abu Hurayrah in which he said:

"Verily knowledge is (part) of the religion, so be careful whom you take you religion from"

Also this statement was authentically reported on the authority of the noble taab'iee Muhammad Ibn Sireen (d110) who is the student of the Abu Hurayrah. It is authentically reported on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Sireen that he also said:

"The people did not used to ask about the (situation) of men, then when the fitnah (trial i.e. innovation) happened Ahlus-Sunnah said to the people of innovation 'name us your men (whom you take knowledge from)' so if they were from Ahlus-Sunnah we took from them and if they were from the people of innovation we left them."

Likewise Imaam Sufyaan ath-Thawree, when he intended to seek knowledge of hadeeth from an individual he used to enquire about his situation, and if he was told that he was a man of innovation he would not take knowledge from him. This is the way that our pious predecessors used to view the affair of seeking knowledge. They would not learn from an individual except after making sure that he was a man of Sunnah, and they were diligent in taking precaution that they did not learn from the people of misguidance.

After answering the question (why investigate who is attending the rahma conf.), we also have to understand the this principle (of being cautious to whom one takes his knowledge from) is a principle which is obligatory for every Muslim to adhere to, this was a the methodology of the Companions and our pious predecessors and we have been commanded to follow them. Allaah the Most High says:

"And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (Muhammad sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers' way. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell - what an evil destination."

[Sooratun-Nisaa, 4:115]


The scholars of tafseer have said that the believers mentioned in the ayah are the Companions, showing that whoever opposes the way of the Companions, that they are threatened with the hellfire.

Imaam Abu Daawood and Imaam at-Tirmidhee mention in their sunans on the authority of 'Irbaadh Ubn Saariyah that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Upon you is (to follow) my Sunnah and the Sunnah of my rightly guided Khaalifahs, hold on to it with your molar teeth," and this hadeeth was authenticated by Shaykh Al-Albaanee and Shaykh Muqbil Ibn Haadee.

Imaam al-Bukhaaree and Muslim also narrated on the authority of 'Imraan Ibn Hussayn that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"The best generation is my generation then those that come after them then those that come after them"

So Allaah and his Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) clearly told us to follow not only the Qur'aan and the Sunnah but also the way of the Companions and the two generations after them and from their manhaj was carefully scrutinising whom one takes his religion from. With this being said, we present to the reader points of criticism regarding the manhaj of some of the speakers attending the Rahma conference as a clarification to the one seeking safety in his religion and desiring to adhere to what the Salaf were upon. This academic presentation is not intended in any way to defame or vilify any of the speakers rather it is based upon authentic texts from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and the statements of the Scholars, hoping that Allaah guides these individuals back to the truth and that Allaah guides those who are sincere in being acquainted with the truth. As for the one who has been blinded by tribal partisanship or blind following and fanaticism - then his affair is with Allaah. We ask Allaah the Most High that he makes this presentation sincerely for his sake and that he may reward us for enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, and that he guides those who are willing to be guided, ameen.


1. Shaykh Bashir Yosuf Shiil:


From his mistakes which are in opposition to the manhaj of the Salaf:

A. From his statements: "The affair of revolting against the oppressive ruler is an a affair widespread and is not an affair that is new and (revolting) has precedence in the Salaf"

See the audio lecture: Points of Criticism Regarding the Manhaj of Bashir Yosuf Shiil by Shaykh Hasan Kafi -
http://www.troid.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1025&Itemid=344

Let us examine what Allaah and his Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said regarding the affair of revolting against the Muslim ruler and is it really an affair which is differed in as Shaykh Bashir claims?

Allaah the Most High says in the Qur'aan:

"'O you who believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination."

[Sooratun-Nisaa', 4:59]


'Abdullahi Ibn 'Abbaas, the commentator of the Qur'aan and the noble companion says regarding those who are in mentioned to be "in authority" in the ayah are "The scholars and the rulers". This narration is found in Tafseer Ibn Jareer.

Imaam al-Bukhaaree and Imaam Muslim narrate in their two saheehs on the authority of Abdullaah Ibn 'Abbaas that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Whoever sees from his ruler that which he dislikes then let him be patient, for verily whoever revolts against his leader a hand span and he dies then his death is a death of pre-Islaamic ignorance"

Imaam al-Bukhaaree and Muslim also narrated on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Whoever obeys me then they have obeyed Allaah and whoever disobeys me than they have disobeyed Allaah and whoever obeys the leader than they have obeyed me and whoever disobeys the ruler than they have disobeyed me"

Imaam al-Bukhaaree and Muslim narrate on the authority of 'Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Hearing and obeying is (obligatory) upon the Muslim in that which he likes and that which he dislikes as long as he is not ordered with disobedience and if he is obeyed with disobedience then there is no hearing and obeying."

Imaaam Muslim narrates in his Saheeh on the authority of Hudhayfa Ibn al-Yamaan that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"There will be leaders who will not be led by my guidance and who will not adopt my ways. There will be among them men who will have the hearts of devils in the bodies of human beings." I said: What should I do 'O Messenger of Allaah, if I (happen) to live in that time? He replied: You will listen to the Ameer (ruler) and carry out his orders; even if your back is flogged and your wealth is snatched, you should listen and obey"

As for the statements of the Salaf in this issue:

Imaam Abu 'Uthmaan as-Saaboonee (born 373) said in his momentous book, "The 'Aqeedah of the Pious Predecessors and the People of Hadeeth" page 94:

"They (the Salaf) also hold that Jihaad against the disbelievers is valid with them even if they are oppressors and tyrants. They agree to make supplication for them, asking to rectify their situation, to be given tawfeeq and to establish amongst their subjects. They do not deem permissible rebeliion against the leaders by the sword even if they are unust and tyrannical. They say that the extremists should be fought until they return to the obedience of the just Imaam."

So this is a consensus amongst the people of hadeeth that it is prohibited to revolt against the unjust Muslim leader. This book written by Imaam as-Saaboonee is a compilation of that which the Companions and the Salaf have agreed upon.

Imaam Ahmad said in "Usoolus-Sunnah" point number 53-54:

"And whoever revolts against the leader of the Muslims after the people have agreed upon him and united themselves behind him, after they have affirmed the khilaafah for him in whatever way this khilaafah may have been, by their pleasure and acceptance or by his force and domination over them then this revolter has disobeyed the Muslims and has contradicted the narrations of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam). And if the one who revolted against the ruler died he would have died a death of ignorance. And the killing of the one in power is not lawful. Nor is it permissible for anyone amongst the people to revolt against them, whoever does that is an innovator and is upon other than the Sunnah and the correct path"

Imaam at-Tahaawee mentions in "al-'Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah":

"This is an explanation of the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah...."

Point 72: "And we do not see (it permissible) to revolt against our leader and those over our affairs even if they are oppressive and we do not make supplication against them nor do we pull a hand away from their obedience. We see that their obedience is obligatory and (it is) from obedience to Allaah. As long as they do not order with disobedience and we make supplication for them with rectification and wellbeing."

It is imperative that one understands that the statements of these past Imaams are the consensus of the Companions and those after them because when these scholars wrote these treatises their intention was to clarify the way of Ahlus-Sunnah and the Salaf. Were it not out of fearing boredom upon the readers we would have mentioned (numerous) statements regarding the impermissibility of revolting against the Muslim leader even if they are oppressive. However we will allude to (some of) them so that the reader may be convinced of the truth. From those pious predecessors that mention likes of the above were: Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee, Imaam Maalik, Imaam Ahmad, Sufyaan at-Thawree, Abdullah Ibnul-Mubaarak, Imaam al-Barbahaaree and other than them and this can be found in 'Usool 'Itiqaad Ahlus-Sunah wal Jamaa'ah by Imaam al-Laalakaa'ee, As-Sunnah by Imaam 'Abdullaah Ibn Imaam Ahmad and "Sharh as-Sunnah" by Imaam al-Barbahaaree - May Allaah have mercy upon them all.

Also from those scholars who explicitly stated a consensus that revolting against the Muslim ruler is impermissible was Imaam an-Nawaawee. He mentions in Sharh Saheeh Muslim:

"As for revolting against the Muslim ruler and fighting them then it is prohibited by the Ijmaa' (consensus) of the Muslims even if they are oppressive sinners."

Likewise Haafidh Ibn Hajr mentions in Fathul-Baaree the statement of Imaam Ibn Battal:

"And the Jurist have come to an Ijmaa' (consensus) that it is obligatory to obey the Muslim leader who gained dominance and that Jihaad is fought alongside him and that obedience to him is better than revolting because of what it entails (from harms)."

Also from those who mention consensus of the Ummah is Imaam 'Abdil-Barr in his explanation of the Muwatta of Imaam Maalik and Imaam Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisee in al-Mughnee. Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said in Minhaaj as-Sunnah 4/531:

"The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) never praised anyone regarding fighting in times of fitnah (between the Muslims) nor revolting against the ruler."

He (Ibn Taymiyyah) also mentions in Majmoo' al-Fataawaa 14/472:

"And revolting against the leaders with the sword is impermissible."

How can it be then that after all these texts from the Qur'aan and Sunnah and the consensus of the Companions and those that followed them in goodness - that 'Shaykh' Bashir can claim that:

"Revolting against the Muslim ruler is something which is widespread and has precedence from the Salaf"?

Is it because he is ignorant of the Qur'aan and Sunnah or is it an attempt to deceive the people by mentioning such statements that no one from the past nor present scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have mentioned. To rub salt in the wound after making this incorrect statement, the least he could have done was clarify to the listeners the correct position of Ahlus-Sunnah; that revolting against the Muslim leader is prohibited. However, he did not and persisted upon this error and began mentioning isolated incidents from the Salaf regarding individuals from them who revolted.

Before we answer this doubt of his we ask the questions:

If a person was sitting in the class when he said this - what do you think his outlook would be on revolting against the leader (or other general issues of takfeer)?

Naturally, he would deem it (revolt) as something of not so great importance since some of the Salaf did it (in his mind)? This misunderstanding and grievous error is caused by Shaykh Bashir's belittlement of the affair. It would have been sufficient and upright to mention the texts of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and what the scholars have said instead of mentioning such a grave issue then leaving it up in the air without clarifying the truth.

As for the issue of some of the actions of the Salaf such Imaam as-Shaa'bee revolting then this was explained in great detail by Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in Minhaaj as-Sunnah and Imaam Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaaya wan-Nihaayah.

Firstly, isolated actions of the Salaf cannot be deemed as a hujjaah (proof) making things permissible or prohibited.

Secondly, these pious predecessors such as Imaam as-Shaa'bee who revolted - it is authentically reported from them that they regretted their actions. Thirdly, Imaam Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaaya wan-Nihaayah clearly rebukes their actions and describes it as being a mistake and those who desire the truth regarding the affair and the statements of the Scholars should return to the audio of Shaykh Hasan Kaafee refuting Shaykh Bashir Shiil - [url=www.troid.org/index.php?option=com_conte...=1025&Itemid=344]www.troid.org/index.php?option=com_conte...=1025&Itemid=344[/url]

Therefore, these examples which Shaykh Bashir presents are an unfortunate attempt to pull the wool over the listeners eyes and if he was sincere in explaining the truth of the affair he would have mentioned the above texts from the Qur'aan and Sunnah and the statements (ijmaa' - consensus) of the Salaf.

So we ask the reader that he/she look at Shaykh Bashir's statement regarding revolting against the Muslim leader in light of the words of Allaah and the hadeeth of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and the consensuses mentioned. With this it will become clear that indeed Shaykh Bashir has opposed one of the foundations from the foundations of the Sunnah and Allaah's aid is sought!

B. From his statements: "Leave alone speaking against the people, teach the people only, it's not from my custom to research about the situation of people"

And: "It doesn't concern you the situation of the people and this is a fitnah, and it's the fitnah of refutations, and it entered upon the Somalis later on."

Then: "I advise my brothers that they beware of refutations and the books of refutations they don't benefit anything books of refutation and you should go back to the books of the Salaf."

Firstly, Allaah says:

"You [true believers in Islaamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islaamic Monotheism and all that Islaam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islaam has forbidden), and you believe in Allaah"

[Soorah Aali-'Imraan, 3:110]


And the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) as narrated by Imaam Muslim on the Authority of Abu Sa'eed al-Kudhree who said the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Whoever of you sees an evil let him change it with his hand. And if he is not able then let him change it with his tongue. And if he is not able then let him hate it in his heart, and this is the lowest of eemaan."

Also Imaam Muslim narrates on the authority of 'Abdillah Ibn Mas'ood that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Never a Prophet had been sent before me by Allaah towards his nation who had not among his people (his) disciples and companions who followed his ways and obeyed his command. Then there came after them their successors who said whatever they did not practise, and practised whatever they were not commanded to do. He who strives against them with his hand is a believer: he who strives against them with his tongue is a believer, and he who strives against them with his heart is a believer and beyond that there is no faith even to the extent of a mustard seed."

By way of these texts from the Qur'aan and Sunnah it becomes clear that enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is from the foundations of Islaam. By leaving it off the Ummah is under the threat of being cursed the same way that the Jews were cursed.

Allaah the Most High says:

"Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Daawood (David) and 'Eeesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allaah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evil-doing, sins, polytheism, disbelief, etc.) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do."

[Sooratul-Maa'idah, 5:78-79]



How is it then that Shaykh Bashir then encourages us to remain silent about individuals who oppose the Qur'aan and Sunnah and commands us to leave off speaking about the people, whilst Allaah tells us that those who do not enjoin the good and forbid the evil were cursed. Likewise, Imaam Ahmad mentions in his Musnad on the authority of Abu Bakr that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"There are not a people that sins are committed within them, and they have the ability to forbid it and they do not forbid it except that they are at risk that Allaah includes all of them in punishment"

This hadeeth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Saheeh al-Musnad

Also Imaam Ahmad narrates in his Musnad on the authority of Abu Sa'eed al-Khudree that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Do not let the fear of the people stop any of you in saying the truth if they see it or hear it or witness it"

This hadeeth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Saheeh al-Musnad

How are we expected to act in light of these divine verses and prophetic narrations in which Allaah commands us to enjoin the good and forbid the evil? Do these aayaat and hadeeth not take precedence over the statements of Shaykh Bashir Shiil? The answer is apparent for those who seek truth in the matter. If we were to remain silent about those who innovate in the religion of Allaah the Most High and deviate from the Sunnah, then this would result in the religion of Allaah being corrupted. Silence about the innovations in the religion and the innovators are in opposition to the commands of Allaah and His Messenger. And part of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is by refuting the innovators and deviants.

"It was mentioned to Imaam Ahmad: 'A man fasts, prays and make 'ittikaaf, meaning he strives hard in worship, is he more beloved to you or the one who refutes the people of innovation?' He said 'if he stands, fasts , and makes 'ittikaaf then this is for himself, and if he refutes the people of innovation then this is for the Muslims and this is better.'"

Shaykhul-Islaam says in Minhaaj as-Sunnah 2/53:

"And commanding the people with the Sunnah and forbidding innovation is from enjoining the good and forbidding the evil and it is from the best of deeds"

Also Shaykh Abdurazaaq Ibn Abdul-Muhsin al-'Abaad (hafidhullaah) mentions in his book "The Sound statement regarding the one who denies the categorization of tawheed" pg. 9 after mentioning words from Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah regarding speaking against the people of innovation, he says:

"Verily there has appeared in our time from some individuals and parties deceptive positions and lowly opinions that call without shyness to remaining silent about the people of innovation and desires and not warning from them, claiming that this is the upright way, and the perfect path. And they say that this (not refuting) is reparation of the cracks (within the Ummah) and an assembly of the masses (of Muslims) and a unification of the rows and a gathering of speech (unifying the voice of the Ummah). Without a doubt this is a manhaj which is false - its harms are many and its dangers are grave upon Islaam and the Sunnah. In it (remaining silent of the people of innovation) is a great establishment for the people of innovation and desires in spreading their misguidance and their falsehood, and it is a manhaj (way) which is deviant from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah."

This statement is over 700 years old, what about the multiplicity of Islamic groups and movements and the innovations they propound today, 'O seeker of the truth?

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan says in his book, "Beneficial Answers to Questions on Innovated Methodologies" - found [url=http://www.troid.org/store/product.php?productid=16219&cat=0&page=1]here[/url]

Question Number 9:

Is there any harm in warning against those sects which are in opposition to the Methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah?

Answer: "We warn against all those who oppose the Salaf in general and say we adhere to the path of Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah while abandoning those who oppose Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah regardless of whether there opposition is major or minor. This is because if we are lenient with the opposition it is possible it will grow and increase. Therefore opposition to the way of the Salaf is not allowed at all. Furthermore it is obligatory to adhere to the path of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah in both major and minor issues."

Shaykh Jamaal Ibn Furayhaan al-Haarithee commented on this question and said:

"This is the custom of the Salaf. Rather they criticize the one who remains silent Mohamed Ibn Bindaar al-Jarjanee once said to Imaam Ahmad, "it has become hard for me to say this person is like this and that person is like that (disparaging them)" So Imaam Ahmad replied "If you remain silent and I remain silent then how will an ignorant person realize the authentic narration from the weak" (Majmoo' al-Fataawaa 28/231).


C. From his statements "It was not from the path of the Salaf to speak against the people."

This ascription of Shaykh Bashir that refuting the innovators was not the path of the Salaf is a grave mistake. This indicates one of two things - either he has no knowledge of the way of the Salaf or he has knowledge but purposely deceives the people. For verily if he was to read the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and the biographies of the Companions and the books of the Salaf he would come to the conclusion that not only was it the way of the Salaf to refute those who oppose the Qur'aan and Sunnah but that it is obligatory to do so.

Imaam Muslim narrates in his Saheeh on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"There will come a people who will speak regarding that which you and your fathers have never heard so be aware (of them) and let them be aware."

Imaam al-Bukharee and Muslim mention in their two Saheehs on the authority of 'Aaishah, may Allaah be pleased with her who said:

"A man asked permission to enter upon Allaahs Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam). The Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said 'admit him, what an evil brother of his 'aasheerah or a son of his 'aasheerah!"(some scholars say 'aasheerah means tribe or group)' But when the man entered, the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) spoke to him in a very polite manner. (And when that person left) I said 'O Messenger of Allaah, you have said what you had said, yet you spoke to him in a a very polite manner?' The Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said, 'O Aa'ishah, the worst people are those whom the people desert or leave in order to save themselves from their dirty language.'"

Imaam Bukharee and Imaam Muslim also narrate on the authority of Abu Sa'eed that the Messenegr of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

"From the progeny of this man (Dhul Khuwasirah At-Tameemee)" or he said, "From the offspring of this man, there will come a people who will recite the Qur'aan but it will not go beyond their throats. They will go through the religion like an arrow going through a target. They will murder the people of Islaam whilst ignoring the people of idol-worship. If I were to reach them (their time), I would destroy them like the people of 'Aad were destroyed."

Imaam Ahmad narrates on the authority of Abu Umaamah that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said regarding the Khawaarij:

"(They are) the worst people killed under the sky, and the best people killed are those whom they kill. They are the dogs of Hellfire." This hadeeth was authenticated by Shaykh Muqbil and Shaykh al-Albaanee.

Also the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said on the authority of Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar:

"The Qadariyyah are the Majoos (fire-worshippers) of this Ummah, if they get sick do not visit them and if they die do not witness their burial" Narrated by Imaam Ibn Maajah and Imaam Abu Daawood and the hadeeth was declared Hasan by Shaykh al-Albaanee.

In these aforementioned statements, the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) spoke against innovations and the people of innovation and cautioned his ummah from them. So how is it that Shaykh Bashir Shiil -may Allaah guide him- says that speaking against the people was not from the path of the Salaf, and that refuting is a fitnah. What the generalization of Shaykh Bashir entails is that the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and his Companions used to say things that cause fitnah, and we seek Allaahs refuge from such an idea.

Does Shaykh Bashir Shiil not know that Imaam Muslim narrates on the authority of 'Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar that he said regarding the people who deny qadr (decree):

"Inform them that I am free from them and they are free from me, and if they were to spend the mountain of Uhud in gold it would not benefit them until they affirm the Qadr."

Is this not a refutation? Does Shaykh Bashir Shiil not know that Imaam Ibn Battah mentions in his book "Al-Ibaanah" on the authority of 'Abdullaah ibn 'Abbaas that he said:

"Do not sit with the people of innovation. For verily sitting with them is a sickness to the heart".

Is this not a refutation?

From the strangeness of this man (Bashir Shiil) is that he says "leave the books of refutation they don't benefit anything go back to the books of the Salaf."

His statement go back to the books of the Salaf is an indication that he thinks the Salaf did not refute and clarify the misguidance of the people of innovation. Does Bashher Shiil not know that Imaam al-Bukhaaree mentions in the beginning of his Saheeh, chapters






SalafiPublications.Com
TawhidFirst | Aqidah | AboveTheThrone | Asharis
Madkhalis | Takfiris | Maturidis | Dajjaal
Islam Against Extremism | Manhaj
Ibn Taymiyyah | Bidah
Definite Article in Arabic


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