can anybody explain me how I have to understand a wording from Shaykh Abul-Muhsin al-Abbad: Answers from al'Allamah Shaikh Abdul Muhsin al-'Abbaad: Regarding the QSS Canada Convention and other relevant issues.And the other wording: Advice from Shaikh Abdul Muhsin Al-Abaad to Shaikh Rabee.!
For me are these wordings from Shaykh Abul ?Muhsin in contrast to a Article from spubs.com (On Warning from the Deviant Callers and Those Salafees Who Fall into Innovations in Aqeedah or Manhaj or Walaa and Baraa and Persist upon them) Article ID: MNJ150013).
So please, can anybody who have knowledge about this, give me a explanation about this issue?
Barakallahu fiqhum.
As selam aleykum wa rahmetullah
This message was edited by Al-Fudayl on 5-26-03 @ 1:36 AM
All praise is due to Allaah, and salaat and salaam upon our Prophet Muhammad, to proceed:
Akhee, this matter is very simple indeed and can be explained in the following points:
1) This situation is similar to the situation of the Qutbiyyeen such as Safar and Salman who had been exposed, refuted and warned against in the early 90s by some of the Shaykhs of Madinah, foremost amongst them Shaykh Faalih al-Harbee and Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee and also Shaykh Muhammad bin Haadee and others. However, some of the major scholars were not really aware of the true nature of their misguidance, and thus for a number of reasons, (and amongst them due to these Qutbiyyeen and their followers embarking upon shuttle diplomacy missions to the major scholars), these major scholars issued a variety of statements at different times which consisted of a mixture of the following affairs: a) not to follow up the people's faults (due to their belief obviously that these mistakes did not oppose the usool, but only minor mistakes), b) aspects of defence of some of these Qutbiyyeen, such as what occurred from Shaykh al-Albaanee around 1995, and also Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen on a couple of occasions, c) downplaying some of the refutations that had been made upon them...and so on, these are just some examples.
So the Qutbiyyoon, Hizbiyyoon, fleeing from the Jarh Mufassar, used many of these statements in order to defend their leaders and guides who were really upon the manhaj of Qutb, Banna and Mawdudi and were teaching it to the youth.
However, in later times these same scholars came to realise the true realities and thus made statements, when they were asked, about the reality of these people, Shaykh al-Albaani calling them "Khaarijiyyah Asriyyah", and Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen warning from their cassettes, and Shaykh al-Albaani stating, "Our brothers in Madinah were more knowledgeable of them than us..."
2) The situation we have with Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad is exactly the same. Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee embarked upon his shuttle diplomacy missions, just like those before him such as Salman al-Awdah and Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq who tried to use some of the major scholars in order to save their own skins and to deceive the people, and so they managed to achieve a part of what they desired.
Regarding the tazkiyyah that was given to Jam?iyyah Ihyaa at-Turaath in a live telephone link up with Shaikh Bin Baaz, then Shaikh Muhammad al-Madkhalee, said concerning it (on 4th January 1997, tape is with Spubs):
quote:
: ?And as for Shaikh Bin Baaz, then by Allaah, their behaviour with him is but the behaviour of all the people of hizbiyyah, such as Safar and Salmaan - the day when they used to receive tazkiyyah?s from the Shaikh. But when the Shaikh knew their condition, he gave verdicts regarding them after he heard their cassettes or some of their cassettes - he and the Committee of the Senior Scholars in the Kingdom. And there will soon come a day, by the permission of Allaah, when the Jam?iyyah will be exposed upon its true nature - to those great and senior scholars? and they at the present moment are excused because they do not see except what they know - and we excuse them for that. They are great scholars but - by Allaah - we will not abandon that which we have seen and heard [ourselves] for the lies that they [i.e. Jam?iyyah Ihyaa at-Turaath] tell to our scholars and their adornment of themselves and making the Jam?iyyah to appear in other than its true picture. For the Jam?iyyah Ihyaa at-Turaath has no other concern at the moment except to hunt the various Salafi gatherings in every place and to tear them to pieces.?
And exactly the same situation as this, read this section on the discussions that Shaykh Ahmad bin Umar bin Sufayl had with the noble Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad short of a month or two ago, concerning this affair (don't have the time to translate):
quote:
ثم بعد ذلك حصل خير كبير لكثير من العلماء والدعاة وطلاب العلم ومن المحبين للسنة، عندما طالبوا بالأدلة والبراهين، وظهروا على حقيقة الأمر، قالوا الحق بعد ذلك ووقفوا مع أهل الحق، لأنه ما هناك بعد الحق إلا الضلال، لكن للأسف إن بعض إخواننا وهم قليل ليسوا بكثير ولله الحمد، ما زال الأمر ملتبس عليهم، والسبب في ذلك أنهم لم يطالبوا بإثبات ما نقلنا لهم عن أبي الحسن فلم يقبلوا أي كلام حتى تظهر لهم حقيقة الأمر، فما يسعنا ولا نملك لنا ولهم إلا أن نقول: إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون، ولا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله العلي العظيم، ونسأل الله العظيم رب العرش الكريم أن يرزقنا وإياهم البصيرة النافذة، وأن يرينا الحق حقًا ويرزقنا اتباعه، وأن يرينا الباطل باطلاً ويرزقنا اجتنابه.
وقد حصل شيء من ذلك عندما جلست مع بعض الأفاضل من العلماء الكبار وهو الشيخ عبدالمحسن العباد حفظه الله تعالى ورعاه وعافاه من كل سوء ومكروه، فبدأت أعرض عليه بعض ما يدور في اليمن من فتنة أبي الحسن فاستغرب بعض الأمور وأنكرها وقال: ما سمعت غيرك يقولها، والأشياء التي عند أبي الحسن قد تراجع عنها، وعندي رسالة منه أنه متراجع، وأخبرني في رسالته أن الذي أثار الفتنة عليه الشيخ ربيع، فقلت: يا شيخ أحسن الله إليك ليس الأمر كذلك، رأس الفتنة أبو الحسن في اليمن، بحزبيته التي فرق الدعوة السلفية بها،وقد سجلت شريطًا عنوانه «رأس الفتنة باليمن دار البر وأبو الحسن» فكرر الشيخ هذه الكلمة: أن ما سمعت غيرك يقول هذا، وأبو الحسن قد تراجع فكيف لا تقبلون تراجعه؟ فقلت: يا شيخ أحسن الله إليك
أبو الحسن جرب مرارًا وتكرارًا أنه يظهر الخير بلسانه ويضمر الشر بقلبه، ونحن نحكم على ما يظهر من أقواله وأفعاله في أشرطته ورسائله، أحيانًا يقول قولاً وتكذبه أفعاله، وأحيانًا يتراجع عن أمر من الأمور فيكون كاذبًا، وأكبر شاهد تراجعه عن دار البر أمام الملأ العظيم من الناس في اجتماع أُعلن لأهل السنة بمسجد الخير بصنعاء، وأعلن تراجعه أمام الألوف من الناس، ووعد بتسكيرها وسحب مكتبها من الوزارة، والشريط موجود بصوته، وأصبح كاذبًا في ذلك كله، وتراجع عن أشياء أمام مشايخ من علماء المدينة، وأصبح كاذبًا، وبعد ذلك كذبوه وبدعوه وحذروا منه، وقد فصل ذلك الشيخ عبدالله البخاري تفصيلاً جيدًا في ردوده عن أبي الحسن، فجزاه الله خير الجزاء على صدعه بالحق، ثم قلت للشيخ: أما قول أبي الحسن لك: أن الذي أثار الفتنة عليه الشيخ ربيع، هذه من كذبات أبي الحسن التي تبلغ الآفاق، الشيخ ربيع ما تدخل في هذه الفتنة إلا بعد مرور سنة تقريبًا، ونحن في أخذ ورد في اليمن في فتنة أبي الحسن، الذي فرق بها الدعوة السلفية حقًا، وفعلاً قمنا عليه، وقلنا: إما أن تتراجع عن هذه الحزبية أو نبذناك مع حزبيتك، فتراجع عنها ولكن لم يصدق في تراجعه.
ثم قلت للشيخ عبدالمحسن حفظه الله تعالى: قد سألوني يا شيخ في اليمن في أكثر من محاضرة ومحاضرة عن قولك: أن هذه الأمور ما تؤدي إلى هجر وإنما شيء في النفوس؟ وكان جوابي: الشيخ عبدالمحسن حفظه الله تعالى معذورًا لأنه ما ظهر على حقيقة ما عند أبي الحسن، وأحيانًا يكون جوابي: صدق الشيخ عبدالمحسن أعني لو أنَّ ما عند أبي الحسن إلا هذه الأمور التي رُفعت للشيخ وأجاب عليها وهي: خبر الآحاد والمجمل والمفصل، أنها لا تؤدي إلى هجر، ولكن أقسم بالله العظيم أن أبا الحسن انحرف عن الصراط المستقيم، ودعا إلى بدعة فرق الناس بها في اليمن، وقال لي الشيخ: اتق الله، اتق الله، ودع عنك هذه الفتنة. فقلت له: نصيحتك مقبولة، ولكن أقول: فستذكرون ما أقول لكم اليوم أو غدًا أو بعد غدًا. وهو يكرر: اتق الله. وأنا أقول أكرر هذه الجملة: فستذكرون ما أقول لكم. انتهى كلامي مع الشيخ عبدالمحسن.
فأقول: الشيخ عبدالمحسن شيخ فاضل، ومقصده حسن، وشيخ مشهور بالعلم والزهد والورع نحسبه كذلك والله حسيبنا وحسيبه ولا نزكي أنفسنا على الله، لكن عندما سمع من أحد الطرفين ولم يسمع من الطرف الثاني قال ما قال على ضوء ما سمع من أبي الحسن ولم يسمع من خصوم أبي الحسن، وكنت أقول ولا أزال أقول: إن الشيخ عبدالمحسن حفظه الله تعالى وهذا ظني به، أنه لو عرف ما عرف إخوانه وزملائه وطلابه من علماء المدينة وهو الشيخ عبيد الجابري والشيخ السحيمي والشيخ محمد بن هادي والشيخ فالح الحربي والشيخ الرحيلي والشيخ عبدالله البخاري وغيرهم من دعاة وطلاب علم في المدينة لا أستحضر أسماءهم.
وكذلك علماء جيزان كالشيخ النجمي والشيخ زيد المدخلي وغيرهما، وكذلك علماء ودعاة وطلاب علم في الرياض والخرج، قد سبق ذكر أسماء بعضهم في هذه الرسالة.
كنت أقول: إذا عرف الشيخ عبدالمحسن حفظه الله تعالى ما عرف هؤلاء لقال بقولهم، ولا يتردد إطلاقًا، لأنه عالم مشهور بالعلم والعقيدة السليمة والنهج القويم، والزهد والورع نحسبه كذلك والله حسيبه، ولا نزكي أنفسنا.
The essence of this is that Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad has not observed and seen what the numerous other people of knowledge have observed and seen.
3) The Usool (foundations) of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad are the same as the Usool of Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee, and they both major scholars to the Salafees and they are brothers to each other, with respect and veneration between them both - however much the Hizbiyyeen may try to use one against the other. The Hizbiyyoon will only end up in humiliation like their predecessors. And an explanation of this point is as follows:
a) Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad warned from the principles of al-Ar'oor and from taking knowledge from him or sitting with him:
quote:
From the book ?Tahdheer ul-Anaam min Akhtaa? Ahmad Sallaam?, also on cassette. Compiled by Abu Noor bin Hasan Muhammad al-Kurdee, with an introduction by Shaykh ?Ubayd al-Jaabiree.
When the Shaykh was asked concerning him he replied, ?My advice to you is not to be busy yourself with the words of Adnaan, and nor with his principles, and do not even turn to whatever is with him, since he has confusion. And I have look at something of his words and I found in his words what is not befitting.?
Question: ?Are his lessons to be attended??
Answer: ?No, by Allaah, it is not desirable for his lessons to be attended?.
Refer to p. 141 of ?Tahdheer ul-Anaam?.
b) Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin warned from the "youth", Safar and Salman and spoke of the evil of their fitnah, and this was in his introduction to the well-known book "Madaarik un-Nadhar Fis-Siyaasah", that Shaykh Faalih al-Harbee was instrumental in bringing about by encouraging, assisting and directing Abdul-Malik ar-Ramadaanee, the author. These two individuals were refuted first and foremost by Shaykh Faalih and Shaykh Rabee many years earlier.
c) Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad commended a refutation written by Alee Ridhaa against Hasan al-Maalikee, who was also refuted by Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee, and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin wrote:
quote:
Introduction of Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad for the book of Shaikh Alee Ridhaa refuting Hasan al-Maalikee
All praise is due to Allaah, and prayers upon the one after whom there is no prophet, and upon his family and companions, to proceed:
Our brother, the noble Shaikh, Alee Ridhaa bin Abdullaah bin Ridhaa has read samples to me from what he has written of the stumblings and confusion of Hasan al-Maalikee and his wife in what they have written concerning the pledge of allegiance of Alee radiallaahu anhu.
And he has unveiled their ignorance and their evil understandings, because they both entered into something to which they are foreigners, so may Allaah reward him with good and give him ample reward...
...And Shaikh Alee is one [known] with due diligence to and concern for the Sunnah and returning to the speech of the people of knowledge, and benefiting from them, especially, Shaikh al-Albaanee (rahmatullaah alaihi). And he also has great efforts in the newspapers in refuting some of the people of innovation and the erroneous views, and he has also made numerous excursions in refuting al-Maalikee in the papers numerous years previously.
And al-Maalikee mentioned in one of his evil books that he was put to trial by a people, the most envious (jealous) of them being Alee Ridhaa, and I do not know for what thing this al-Maalikee should be envied for? Should he be envied for ignorance of the Sunnah and attacking the Sahaabah and those who travel upon their methodology from Ahl us-Sunnah or what?
And may Allaah send prayer, and peace and blessings upon His servant, and His messenger, our Prophet, Muhammad, his family and his companions.
Abdul-Muhsin bin Hamad al-Abbaad al-Badr
8/11/1423H
d) The above facts indicate that Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin only differs with Shaykh Rabee in the most recent issue, particularly the issue of Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee and the Shaykh has expressed his opinion that Shaykh Rabee' has given too much attention to the matter, more than what is necessary, and has busied himself in this at the detriment of other affairs. This is based upon Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin's knowledge and belief that Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee erred (and did make major mistakes in usool), but that he has recanted from them. This belief is held by the Shaykh due to two factors, i) al-Ma'ribee's communications with the Shaykh and the diplomatic efforts of al-Ma'ribee's followers in portraying to the Shaykh what al-Ma'ribee desires to be portrayed (just like the Qutbiyyeen did with Shaykh Ibn Baaz years ago) and ii) the lack of the Shaykh's awareness about the reality of al-Ma'ribee and his fitnah and what has been known from him and about him by all the Shaykhs of Yemen (all of whom have collectively refuted him, disavowed him, declared him a liar, innovator, fitnah-monger and a deviant), and likewise his evil games and his attacks and mockery upon the scholars who revealed his true condition, as is apparent from his various cassette recordings he made.
e) Thus in light of what Shaykh Abdul-Mushin knows and believes he has stated whatever he has stated concerning the efforts of Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee in refuting Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee. Given the circumstances (i.e. of what he has built his statement upon, of what he is aware of, and within the context of how he perceives the situation), then he is correct in his advice, and this too is the same manhaj of Shaykh Rabee' (meaning that if Shaykh Rabee' perceived the situation to be like this with respect to another person refuted by others, he would give the same advice). So the speech of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, then in accordance to what he sees and holds, namely that Abul-Hasan is still within Ahl us-Sunnah, then he holds that the level of warning and occupation with him was not desirable. So in accordance to what he sees and holds, and given that this is the case, this is correct. Namely, if a person made errors but recanted sincerely, that he is not to be subject to warning and excessive refutation, and this is also the manhaj of Shaykh Rabee. The two Shaykhs are united in their usool, and if Shaykh Rabee' had also observed others, refuting and warning and making tabdee', and being occuppied with someone about whose mistakes he did not believe were serious enough to expel him from Ahl us-Sunnah, or who had sincerely repented (and not shown that he was playing games), then he too would have said exactly as Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin has said, as advice. So we treat each situation according to its particular circumstances and factors,and thus there is nothing for the Hizbiyyeen in the statement of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin. Rather this statement explains the manhaj of Ahl us-Sunnah towards those who err genuinely and recant genuinely, it is not correct to be excessively occupied with them and to follow up their mistakes. And this avails al-Ma'ribee and his followers in nothing. And in this principle Shaykh Rabee' is agreed as are all the Salafees in every place. So there is nothing for the Hizbiyyeen in this but further misery and loss, for following their desires in the same way as the Qutbiyyeen before, and in the same way as the Scientific Salaftees of Kuwait.
f) Shaykh Rabee' was not actually the first person to make all this concern with Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee. Rather the Shaykhs of Yemen first began to take issue with al-Ma'ribee on a variety of issues, (this is recorded on a 5 cassette gathering), and they advised him, had patience with him, asked him to recant, and he played his games. Subsequently, in what followed, and when al-Ma'ribee showed his true Ikhwaanee colors, it transpired that over 200 refutations were made upon him by a collection of over 30 people of knowledge, included amongst them the three most senior in age from Ahl us-Sunnah (Shaykh Rabee' , Shaykh an-Najmee and Shaykh Muhammad al-Banna), and also a group of the Kibaar, such as Shaykh Zaid al-Madkhalee, Shaykh Ubayd, Shaykh Faalih, Shaykh Salih as-Suhaymee, and including of course ALL of the well known Shaykhs of Yemen, and also many of the strong students of knowledge.
http://www.sahab.net/aboalhsn.htm
g) All of the above shows that there is perfect agreement between the usool of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin and Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee, and they are upon the same manhaj. They merely have different perspectives of the Ma'ribee issue, with Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin acknowledging that al-Ma'ribee made revilement upon the Sahaabah and fall into opposition of the usool of Ahl us-Sunnah, but believing that he sincerely recanted.
4) From what has preceded a number of conclusions can be made below. Whilst we make a difference between those who are still genuinely confused in this issue and those who are playing games. Even though we say, it is not possible for anyone, or at least difficult for any Salafee to be genuinely confused any more, because if he claims Salafiyyah and has been a Salafee for many long years, and has seen through the fitnahs of the Qutbiyyah, and Turaathiyyah and Ar'ooriyyah, then he should know from his Salafiyyah that taking the Jarh Mufassar is obligatory, and it should not really be an issue of confusion for him, given this knowledge. However it is apparent that many people are using this issue of al-Ma'ribee to vent out previous frustrations and secret grudges that they might have held against others prior to the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee, and this issue is just a tool that they can use to satisfy their souls. Anyway, the conclusions:
a) The tail-ends of al-Ma'ribee who use the speech of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin are no different to the followers of Safar and Salmaan during the period after the Gulf War until the late 1990s. Their method of defence of al-Ma'ribee is the same as that used by the Qutbiyyah for the heads of Qutbiyyah, during the time that their affair was not clear to some of the Scholars.
b) The tail-ends of al-Ma'ribee are no different to the followers of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq from after the Gulf War to just after the mid to late 1990s. Their method of defence of al-Ma'ribee is the same used by the Salaftees for their chief Salaftee, the Ikhwaanee in Manhaj and Shurocrat, Scientific Salaftee, Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, during the time that his affair was not clear to some of the Scholars.
c) The tail-ends of al-Ma'ribee, are the true Muqallidah, and their evil slogan "we do not make taqleed" is just an excuse to reject the truth. This is evidenced by the following: When you inform them that over 35 Scholars have refuted al-Ma'ribee, with decisive proof and evidences, in such a detailed manner, and all of them have convicted him of innovation and misguidance, and that thousands of pages have been written upon him and scores and scores of cassettes made against him, by a large collection from the people of knowledge, and collectively that constitutes an overwhelming Jarh Mufassar which is obligatory to take and accept, even if there are still found those who praise him, then their only reply is "Yes, but Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is a great scholar [and indeed he is], so how come he does not accept this", and "Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan does not make tabdee of Abul-Hasan"...and words to this effect. Then, many of these tail ends spread the likes of these shubuhaat amongst the youth in order to confuse them. So the question here is, who are the true Muqallidah? When all they can resort to in defence of the Ikhwaanee Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee is the likes of this speech? And there is nothing in the words of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, or anyone else, that constitutes a rebuttal of this Jarh Mufassar, that would sufficiently explain it away and make it inoperative. For if the tail-ends acknowledged the manhaj of Ahl us-Sunnah in this regard and were sincere and truthful, they would realise that are only following their desires by vainly believing that they have anything which overturns this Jarh Mufassar.
d) The tail-ends of al-Ma'ribee have been put to trial by a subtle form of the Ikhwaanee manhaj brought to them by Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee. They were not able to refute the refutations of those 30 or so Scholars, they could not stomach the Jarh Mufassar, hence, they had no recourse except the use and the same tactics as those used by their predecessors from those put to trial by those who brought an essentially Ikhwaanee manhaj to them (like Safar and Salman and Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq and Adnaan Ar'oor and others). This is not surprising, because the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee is just an extension of previous Ikhwaanee fitnahs. Al-Ma'ribee took over and decided to succeed where previous Ikhwaanees failed, by being more subtle and deceptive in his approach.
But there is no Innovator on this earth, except that there is a Scholar from Ahl us-Sunnah who will lie in wait for him and expose him and protect Islaam and the Muslims from his evil. In this case, it was Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee (hafidhahullaah)
This is all that can be said for now, and maybe others can add to this inshaa'Allaah.
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-22-03 @ 11:31 PM
here is A Refutation of the Issues of Abul-Fitan al-Ma'ribee From Shaykh 'Abdul-Muhsin al-'Abbaad & Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan and al-'Allaamah Saalih al-Luhaydaan.
http://www.troid.org/articles/manhaj/innovation/groupsandpartisanship/refutationofabulfitan.htm
wa'alaykum salam
abu ayyub farid al bukhari
Jazaakallaahu khayran, that is a nice article from Troid, which brings together the criticisms and refutations of Shaykh Abdul-Mushin and Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan upon the actual statements of al-Ma'ribee. This proves that there was nothing personal between Shaykh Rabee' and this Innovator, rather it was a matter of Sunnah and Bid'ah, and what he was criticised for was correct. However, Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is under the impression that al-Ma'ribee has repented and recanted. The Shaykh does not know that al-Ma'ribee is upon the same Usool as Adnaan Ar'oor that the Shaykh has already warned against. Likewise, al-Ma'ribee wrote a letter to Shaykh Abdul-Mushin claiming repentance and also claiming that Shaykh Rabee' stirred up this fitnah against him (see above, in the Arabic text). So it is clear that al-Ma'ribee is a man playing games. He tried to do this with the other Shaykhs of Madinah, when they gave him a chance and gave him over 10 sittings, but it did not work, and they caught him lying, and secretly desiring splitting between the Salafees. Those who gave him husn udh-dhann (like Abdullaah al-Bukhaaree) who was present in some of those gatherings, then went on to refute and expose his treachery (he wrote a 200 page refutation including a detailed account of what happened in Madinah and those gatherings). Then al-Ma'ribee tried it with Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, and he achieved some of what he desired, unfortunately. However, this is only a test, and these affairs occur to enable the mechanisms by which the Sunni is distinguished from the Mubtadi' and the Muttabi' from the Saahibu Hawaa. And this is one of the reasons why Khilaaf has been decreed to occur.
As for Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan then those refutations and statements made by Shaykh al-Fawzaan (in the article from Troid) cast a lot of doubt by what was spread by the Hizbiyyeen many months earlier that the Shaykh said, "Abul-Hasan is from Ahl us-Sunnah and Shaykh Rabee is from Ahl us-Sunnah and this fitnah will end..." or words with this meaning. The Shaykh said, "So I do not know him and I do not pay any attention to him" (meaning al-Ma'ribee), (from a tape recording 19/9/1423H). As for those other reports (concerning the alleged statement of Shaykh al-Fawzaan), they came by way Abu Zur'ah al-Leebee ash-Sharqaawee, who by his own close and intimate friend, Abdul-Qadir Baksh is held to be one who lies. So these statements are not established, and unfortunately, many people, due to the tail-ends of al-Ma'ribee and the confusion they deliberately spread, are under the impression that Shaykh al-Fawzaan does not accept the refutations and warnings of the Scholars against al-Ma'ribee, which is untrue.
We pray that the sincere ones are guided and that Allaah puts an end to the trickery of tail-ends who do not cease to deceive, just like the Qutbiyyeen and Salaftees of Kuwait before them, used the same tactics.
Also many people do not thoroughly understand the issue of al-mujmal and al-mufassal and also the issue of khabar ul-aahaad, and did not see why al-Ma'ribee was upon falsehood by way of these issues, and what he was really intending by them.
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-23-03 @ 12:25 PM
Barakallahu fiqhum. I´m very happy that spubs.com and the othters give so quick and detailed answer.
As selam aleykum
Barakallahu fiqhum. I´m very happy that spubs.com and the othters give so quick and detailed answer.
As selam aleykum
Baarakallaahu feek akhee, know that from all the sayings of the Scholars, both recorded and written, concerning those involved in the fitnah of Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee, the following should be our position towards the various types of people concerned:
1) Regarding the general person who has not even heard of al-Ma'ribee or this issue, then we do not involve him in it and we encourage him upon learning and studing and understanding and tying him to the Major Salafee Scholars of today. Since, this issue will not afffect him, but we may just inform him that the Scholars help the people to know Sunnah from Bid'ah and the people of the Sunnah from the people of Bid'ah and often they warn from people because of what has become apparent to them from such people, and in recent times the Scholars have warned from a series of people...and you can mention them. However, there is no need to go into detail with the general person who does not know, rather he should be encouraged to learn Tawheed, Aqeedah and the general affairs of manhaj etc.
2) Regarding the person who is confused and is uncertain and says he does not know the truth. This person is one of two people:
a) One who has been introduced into this matter, or has entered himself into this matter, but does not have the knowledge or the understanding or the ability to know the truth, so he is confused, and seeks to leave this confusion and to expel it from his mind and he sincerely seeks the truth. So inform him of the refutations of the Scholars, and the principles of Ahl us-Sunnah in reconciling between the words of the Scholars and how to treat their differences in matters like this where this is jarh and also some form of ta'deel or some form of defence, and address the matters and explain them according to his level. Then either he sees the truth and his confusion is removed, in which case he was sincere in his quest, or he will continue to remain in confusion and to make great this matter (when it need not be), and to continue bringing shubhah after shubhah. Then in this case, either he is taking these shubuhaat from somewhere and desires mishief, or he has a doubting heart that cannot settle upon anything. So have patience with such a one for a short while, and if his condition does not improve, and he does not take the sayings of the scholars, then do not waste time with him, for perhaps he desires something else. Some of the Scholars, like Shaykh Rabee' have said that give such people no more than two weeks, to see how they turn.
b) One who is actually with al-Ma'ribee internally but he wishes to spread confusion and mischief, and he has ties and affectations to the followers of al-Ma'ribee and desires to equate between truth and falsehood. So he approaches this person and that person, and raises this shubhah and that shubhah and his intention really is to pass on his own confusion and to really belittle the whole affair of al-Ma'ribee, and to make light of the matter, to make light the matter of those who still remain with al-Ma'ribee upon falsehood. They employ the issue of the claims of "confusion" and "uncertainty" and "not clear" and "dont understand" just in order to remain attached to some amongst the Salafees, so that they can continue to equate truth with falsehood.
3) Regarding those who actively call to the way of al-Ma'ribee defend him out of walaa and baraa, expound his principles, spread his shubuhaat, or those who revile and attack the Salafees due to this matter, then such a one is a person of desires, warn from him and let the people know his condition. You can see from the likes of these people that this issue is one that they are attached to in their walaa and baraa, and so they call to it, and raise it and revolve around it, and use it to oppose and attack the Salafees and to warn others against them. And then some amongst them will even ally with whomever will support them in this, even if it be one amongst the Qutbiyyah or even if it be amongst those who are known previously for clear opposition to the Salafees. All of these are people of desires, shun them and warn from them. And you will be amazed that these such people, when they have built their walaa and baraa falsely, then you will see that they will be entered upon by some amongst the Qutbiyyeen and Hizbiyyeen without them knowing. This is because this fitnah of al-Ma'ribee has made them share and identify similar underlying sympathies, which naturally draw them together, but without them even conciously desiring that or knowing that. This is evidenced by numerous matters.
4) Those people who made a recantation and repented from the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee, and they are of two types:
a) Those who have sincerely repented and abandoned what they were upon, and they have since united with the Salafees and opened their hearts to the Salafees, and are with them in word and deed, in belief and methodology, in walaa and baraa', and in love and affection. And they show no aversion, or grudges or anything of the sort towards their Salafee brothers. They were genuinely upon error and they sincerely left it when they knew the truth. So these are our brothers and they are our brothers and we love them for the sake of Allaah, and they no longer have any blame because the one who repents from something sincerely, then it is wiped clean for him, inshaa'Allaah.
b) Those who made an outward recantation, perhaps due to the fact that it was not possible for them to remain with al-Ma'ribee and his manhaj, or it was not possible for them to remain upon hatred of the Salafees and nurturing grudges against them, because of the apparentness of the deviation of al-Ma'ribee and because (maybe unexpectedly to them) so many Scholars had refuted and exposed him, in such a way that has never been observed for the Hizbiyyeen before al-Ma'ribee, such as Ar'oor and Safar and Salman and others. So they made this outward recantation, but remained upon corruption in their walaa and baraa internally, and some of them strived to damage their Salafee brothers by a variety of Satanic plots and stratagems. Although this faction itself is composed of a variety of different types of people, each of them being singled out in their own personal and collective agendas, a portion of this category believed that the issue of al-Ma'ribee was the one that would come and pull down the Salafees whom they secretly and inwardly believed were "haddaadees...", "too harsh...", "manhajees..." and numerous other types of things they held inwardly. They were led to believe and hold these things, due to them not building their walaa and baraa upon the actual details of the Salafee manhaj after having spent considerable time learning and studying these details, (in which case they would have truly been with the Salafees all along, because this detailed knowledge would have necessitated that in their hearts, and they would have overlooked any faults and shortcomings of the Salafees who were always clear), but instead they built their walaa and baraa upon isolated events and incidents that they exaggerated beyond proportion and which never had anything to do with aqeedah or manhaj, but personal issues. And this was the sum whole of what their aversion was based upon! So caution is required here and the likes of these people should be given naseehah to abandon what they hold in their hearts, and for them to learn the actual Salafee manhaj in all its detail and depth, such that this situation does not recurr with the next Abul-Hasan or Abul-Husayn.
5) There is also another category that we should be aware of, and they are those who are weak in knowledge and have little understanding of the Salafee manhaj. Their general orientation is that this is a great fitnah, and they only see this matter at the surface level. This category of people do not actually know what they are doing, and they are confused, even if they consider themselves to be upon certainty. They are actually with al-Ma'ribee and those with him like al-Qoosee and those from Jordan, and they are active in raising certain issues, like that of al-mujmal and mufassal and khabar ul-ahaad, and then they attempt to bring sayings of the Scholars to vindicate al-Ma'ribee and so on, and they draw upon the shubuhaat presented by the staunch followers of al-Ma'ribee. These people do not necessarily have evil intentions, and they believe what they are doing is good, and they do not have any aversion towards Shaykh Rabee' either. However, they are truly confused and they don't actually understand what all of this fintah is about. Hence, they enter into knowledge-based matters that they think they understand when they are in perfect ignorance with respect to them. In doing what they are doing they do harm at two levels: a) their own souls by leading them further astray, b) other people to whom they present these issues who also are affected in the same way.
To illustrate the nature of this category of people an example can be given.
A Mufawidh called Abdullah comes along and he says I affirm the attributes of Allaah and I am upon the saying of ash-Shaaf'iee, "I believe in Allaah and what came from Allaah upon the desired intent of Allaah, and I believe in the Messenger (sallallaahu `alayhi wasallam) and what came from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) upon the desired intent of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alayhi wassallam).
However, what Abdullah really means by this, is that I submit the knowledge of these attributes that I affirm to Allaah, upon whatever Allaah intended by them, since He alone knows what He intended. So Abdullah the Mufawwidh, really means by the kalaam of ash-Shaafi'ee, his tafweedh, even if outwardly he portrays that he affirms the Attributes. And believe it or not this is how we have personally experienced some of the Mufawwidah coming across, they say they affirm all the attributes and upon however Allaah intended them, and they impress you by saying I affirm Allaah's laughter and anger, and hand and istiwaa and nuzool and so on including all the rest of the attributes (i.e. they go beyond the seven Attributes of the Ashaa'irah), but what they really mean is tafweedh, and this is the last level of deception they can play after their ta'teel and ta'weel has been refuted.
However, Abdullaah the Mufawwidh is a deceiving and calculating person, who has relied upon Ijmaal (generalisation) and equivocation, and has approached the Salafees in this manner to get close to them in order to spread his shubuhaat. He is able at will, to reel off numerous statements from the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah to claim that he is upon the principles contained in their statements.
So a category of people who are weak in knowledge and understanding, and do not truly know the Salafee aqeedah then start to defend Abdullaah the Mufawwidh by saying that this man is merely upon what ash-Shaafi'ee is upon, and then they may bring other statements to defend Abdullah the Mufawwidh such as the saying of one of the Salaf, about the ahaadeeth of the Attributes, "pass them on as they have come...", and argue by way of that that Abdullaah has not departed from the way of these scholars, and that all of these texts support Abdullaah, so how can rejection be shown to him?! And Abdullaah the Mufawwidh might also have done his fair share of refuting the Mu'tazilah and the Ashaa'irah and the Jahmiyyah and the Philosophers, so that the same category of people are deeply impressed and they hold Abdullaah to be a person of the Sunnah, a caller to it and defender of it, a hardcore Salafee.
This example here is parallel to the example of al-Ma'ribee and this category of people who are confused and think they "know the score" with respect to the issues of al-mujmal and al-mufassal and khabar ul-ahaad that were employed by al-Ma'ribee to lay down the rules by which he would open up the door for the defence of Sayyid Qutb and other Innovators, and the groups of innovation such as Ikhwaan and Jamaa'at ul-Jihaad and the groups of Takfeer (from where he himself came from). So a group of people, weak in knowledge and understanding, entered into this affair without being sufficiently equipped and so now they are in confusion, thinking they are upon certainty, not realising that they don't know. They do not know truly know the Salafee manhaj, and have not studied and understood it as it should be understood, and thus, they remain today, speaking about knowledge based matters, and compiling and gathering the sayings of the various scholars in order to vindicate al-Ma'ribee (just like those who defended Abdullaah the Mufawwidh in our example above), but without them truly understanding what al-Ma'ribee is actually upon and what he really intends by his false principles employing the issues of al-mujmal and al-mufassal and khabar ul-ahaad and not making taqleed of anyone and so on.
So with respect to this category of people we both advise them and also warn others from them, since the mere fact that they are sincere and desire the truth does not prevent us from speaking against them, in order to lessen their evil and their own burdens, because they cannot see that what they are doing is evil. Such is the nature of innovation! If innovation had been pure falsehood no one would have fallen into it. But it is often a large part of truth mixed with falsehood. So we warn from falsehood in whatever form it is, but these individuals need to be advised so whoever is capable of explaining to them, he explains to them, and he also makes others aware of their condition so no one is deceived by them. So either they return back to the truth and leave these affairs and remain silent and instead pursue seeking proper knowledge and tying themselves to the major scholars and benefiting from them and from their advices and warnings with regard to this fitnah, and uniting themselves with their brothers once more, with sincere intentions, in which case alhamdulillaah, and this is what we pray for, or otherwise, if they do not heed this advice, and do not acknowledge their limitations and that they are far beyond their depth and that they are causing fasaad (corruption) and not making islaah (rectification), then they are warned against, and treated just like those mentioned in 2 b) above.
In summary it is important to distinguish between all of these people, for they all exist and are found, often in abundance, so in treating the affair, one must know who he is dealing with and how to advise him or how to tackle him. So the situation will vary between tahdheer (warning) and radd (refuting) and naqd (criticism) and naseehah (advice) and irshaad (directing, guiding, showing), depending upon the nature and condition of the person.
Finally in general terms the issue of al-Ma'ribee is a dead issue. It is more clear than the issue of Safar and Salmaan. It is more clear than the issue of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq and Ihyaa at-Turaath. It is more clear thatn the issue of Adnaan Ar'oor and al-Maghraawee. So the Salafees should move on and continue with learning and studying and not waste time with those who make it clear that they want to remain upon confusion with respect to al-Ma'ribee. As for those who are genuine and sincere and have merely got caught up in this matter, due to their own mistakes or factors outside their own control, then if you can, advise them, be gentle with them and direct them to the truth. If they are sincere, they will respond positively inshaa'Allaah. Otherwise if they do not respond, do not waste your time, just like you would not waste time with the followers of Safar and Salman, or Ar'oor or other than them.
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-24-03 @ 3:51 PM
Those put to trial by the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee - may Allaah rectify them and guide them - do not cease to speak with idleness and vanity, concerning the issue.
Proving that water is wet
When they are presented with statements from the contemporary major scholars, such as Imaam al-Albaani, Imaam Ibn Uthaymeen, Imaam Ibn Baz, Imaam Muqbil, Shaykh an-Najmee, Shaykh Faalih, Shaykh Ubayd, Shaykh Muhammad al-Bannaa, Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhali and many others, and which indicate that Shaykh Rabee bin Haadee is a specialist in the field of Jarh and Ta'deel and he is a sign from Allaah concerning knowledge of the Hizbiyyeen, and that he is spoken against and disliked because he clarifies the methodologies of the Salaf and exposes the figureheads of the Hizbiyyeen and so on, then they respond with a general truth which is that there is no one besides the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) who is infallible, and who is not prone to error. And this is a truth certainly, and using it within this context to address and find fault with those who remained with Shaykh Rabee (and who were with the Yemeni Shaykhs many months before Shaykh Rabee even got involved) in convicting al-Ma'ribee the Innovator of being a hidden Ikhwaanee who came to introduce false principles in order to succeed where previous Innovators (Ar'oor, Safar and Salman etc.) failed, then it is like trying to prove that water is wet. Something that does not even need proving, given the circumstances. Because this is not actually relevant here, and nor is it the point, and it is in fact a decoy.
It is like in the early 90s if you refuted the followers of Safar and Salman with the refutations of Shaykh Rabee', they respond with a general truth, which is that Shaykh Rabee' is not infallible, in order to hide their specific falsehood, and if in the mid 90s you refute the followers of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-khaaliq with the refutations of Shaykh Rabee' filled with knowledge and usool from the manhaj of the Salaf, they respond with a general truth, which is that Shaykh Rabee is not infallible, in order to hide their specific falsehood, and if you refute Adnaan Ar'oor with just one statement of warning from Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad, the followers of Ar'oor will reply that Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is not infallible and so on, in order to hide their specific falsehood...
But they flee away from the specific issue which is that Shaykh Rabee - and all the Shaykhs with him - is (are) actually correct in convicting al-Ma'ribee and he has done so with knowledge and evidence. So the general truth which is that no one is infallible after the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) is used to hide the specific falsehood that they are upon, which is that they are not willing to submit to the truth and to speak with it, and to rally around it, and to proclaim it - which is that al-Ma'ribee was a former takfeeree, who entered into Salafiyyah, then got put to trial by the Jam'iyyaat and the wealth, and he maintained ties with the Hizbiyyeen and Qutbiyyeen of Saudi Arabia, then he began to defend them, and attempted to pull down Shaykh Rabee (who was instrumental in exposing them all beginning with Qutb, and then his followers after that), and he tried to include the Jamaa'at of bid'ah into the Firqat un-Naajiyah and lay down usool to defend them and the figureheads of innovation such as Sayyid Qutb - and that in light of all of this it is clear that Shaykh Rabee has done a great service to Ahl us-Sunnah and to the manhaj of the Salaf and that it is obligatory upon every Salafee who knows this truth to proclaim it and defend it, so that the Salafees are upon a united stance and that innovation and its people can be separated and marginilised so their effect is not harmful. Their failure to do this only arises to one of two reasons, or a mixture of both: a) jahl b) hawaa.
And this has nothing to do with blindly following Rabee' or anyone else for that matter, and nor has it anything to do with claiming infallibility for anyone.
So the specific falsehood that they are upon - which is to resist and oppose what has been established beyond a shadow of doubt - is hidden and brushed aside and the people's attention focused away from it, by replying with a general truth, which of course appears appealing to many people. This approach by the way, is the precise and exact nature of some of the principles introduced by Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee, in order to open up the doors for the groups of innovation and misguidance.
So resorting with this general truth, that Shaykh Rabee' is not infallible, in order to avoid delving into the specific issue is one of the new hallmarks of those put to trial by the fitnah of al-Ma'ribee and overwhelmingly they are those who revolve often around the words of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad. These people neither have the courage nor the manhood to actually admit that Shaykh Rabee' and all those 30 or more scholars with him, many of whom convicted al-Ma'ribee before Shaykh Rabee' even got involved are certainly upon the truth.
More to come inshaa'allaah...
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-30-03 @ 3:20 PM
The Arguments of the Followers and Allies of al-Ma'ribee Are No More Than the Rotten Leftovers Of The Qutbiyyeen Before them, Such as Idris Palmer
This discussion is from around 5-6 years ago.
quote:
[Abu Khadeejah]: As for Shaykh Muqbil and Shaykh Rabee, then Shaykh Al-Albaanee has mentioned that the ones who criticises them is a person following his desires (hawa).
[Idris Palmer]: This shows the ignorance of this person. Are Muqbil and Rabee prophets and hence infallible from error? And does this mean that Bakr Abu Zaid and Ibn Jibrin are people following desires? If so, then this would mean that Al-Albani himself is also following his desires as he criticizes what Rabi has written about Sayyid Qutub when Adnaan Aroor read him a section of that book.
Al-Albaani then goes on to praise Sayyid Qutub?s tafseer and suggests that all Salafis should read a chapter from Milestones. Will the ignorant one follow Sh. al-Albaani?s advice and place that chapter on his website or is this just another example of them claiming to follow the shuyookh but in reality only taking what follows their own perverted desires?
Points to be noted in the above statements:
1. Are Muqbil and Rabee prophets and hence infallible from error?
When presented with the statements of the scholars indicating that Shaykh Rabee' is to be depended upon and referred back to in the matters of refuting the opposers and such meanings that come from many scholars, the Qutubiyyeen, and the Ma'ribiyyeen reply that you have likened him to the Prophet and claimed him infallible (or other phrases and words with this same meaning and import). Their hearts have resembled each other. However, the real issue is with whom is the evidence established. It is actually with Shaykh Rabee' and the 30 or more Shaykhs who convicted al-Ma'ribee of misguidance and innovation. However, they respond (as has been explained above) with a general truth, to hide their specific falsehood. This is the rotten leftover of the Qutbiyyah.
2. And does this mean that Bakr Abu Zaid and Ibn Jibrin are people following desires?
When the proof is established against their figureheads, (such as Sayyid Qutb in the example of the neo-Qutubi Fanatic given above, or in the case of al-Ma'ribee), then they reply with a form of emotional propaganda, "Are Bakr Abu Zaid and Ibn Jibreen following desires", and "Are you saying Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin does not know Jarh and Ta'deel..." etc. while we make a difference between Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin and those others (Ibn Jibreen and Bakr Abu Zaid), both of whom are with the Takfiriyyeen and Qutbiyyeen, aiding them and supporting them, whereas Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is amongst the Major Salafee Scholars of today, but who is mistaken on the issue of al-Ma'ribee, just like Shaykh al-Albaanee was mistaken about Safar and Salmaan for many long years, and similarly, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen and others. However, the way of responding is exactly the same between the two parties, the old-school party of Qutbiyyah and the new school party of Tamyee' (and in reality, they stem from the same source, all of it is Ikhwaanee) - hence, their hearts and statements (and arguments) resemble each other. This technique is from the rotten leftovers of the Qutbiyyah who came before.
3. If so, then this would mean that Al-Albani himself is also following his desires as he criticizes what Rabi has written about Sayyid Qutub when Adnaan Aroor read him a section of that book.
On one of the cassettes, it is correct that Shaykh al-Albaanee made a small critical comment (many years before he subsequently went on to praise Shaykh Rabee's book "al-Awaasim..." after having read it), and we can say this is the same as what the Ma'ribiyyeen have done, that they took some statements of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin in general criticism of Shaykh Rabee's concern with the issue of al-Ma'ribee, and employed it. And notice it was Adnaan Ar'oor who was a covert Qutbi, he was the one in which that discussion took place, and when you listen to that cassette you can tell the way that Ar'oor was talking was very similar to the Tamyee'i manhaj, trying to exonerate Sayyid Qutb, and to divert away from his calamities. Similarly, people like al-Ma'ribee and his tail ends, who have been to Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, and written letters to him etc., have portrayed an image that is declared false by the testimony of 30 or more other Shaykhs. The point being that these individuals (i.e. Ar'oor and Ma'ribee - both intimate friends by the way) had agendas, and thus their behaviour only follows on from what these agendas require to be fulfilled. The way the Ma'ribiyyah behave with Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, and likewise the way the Qutbiyyeen behaved previously with Shaykh al-Albaanee or Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen and others, all of it is the same. This technique is from the rotten leftovers of the Qutbiyyah who came before.
4. Al-Albaani then goes on to praise Sayyid Qutub?s tafseer and suggests that all Salafis should read a chapter from Milestones.
Then, despite the proof being established and the Jarh Mufassar being established, the Qutbiyyah go on to bring tazkiyahs and ta'deels, in order to defend the deviant who is their figurehead. Then it was Qutb, and his followers like Safar and Salman and Ar'oor, and also Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, and today it is al-Ma'ribee (who also defended Sayyid Qutb). The followers of each of these Ikhwaanees resemble each other, and they only inherit the rotten leftovers one from another.
5. Will the ignorant one follow Sh. al-Albaani?s advice and place that chapter on his website or is this just another example of them claiming to follow the shuyookh but in reality only taking what follows their own perverted desires?
Just like the fanatical and almost hooligan Qutbis that came before, the followers of Ma'ribee too took this approach, accusing the Salafees of hiding the words of Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin, accusing them of choosing what suits their desires and so on. Their hearts resemble each other, because they got taken by the same type of people, Ikhwaanees. The only difference is that the later ones were more sophisticated and managed to make greater inroads into the Salafees, before coming out with their innovations. If you were to read what is being spread by the Maribiyyah now on their sites and discussion forums, its as if you are speaking to Idris Palmer. Again, they are only consuming the same rotten leftovers.
Summary
Here are five points of agreement between the Qutbi fanatics and the followers of al-Ma'ribee, they are five methodologies or five principles that they are united upon in attacking the truth and defaming its people. Know, O follower of the Salaf, that there are many Juhhaal using the medium of the Internet to spread their doubts and desires, in order to attack the Salafees and the Salafee manhaj, and there are a few websites that are devoted specifically for this objective, and it pains you when you read some of them speaking without knowledge and without light and without guidance, increasing their own burdens, and you see them with pomp and mutual boasting with what they think they have with them of knowledge, when it is no more than the confused after effects of the previous Ikhwaanee fitnahs, nothing more than the rotten leftovers of Idris Palmer. May Allaah guide them back to the manhaj of the Salaf, and protect them from the shubuhaat that they are drowning in.
More to follow inshaa'Allaah.
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-31-03 @ 3:57 PM
The Followers of al-Ma'ribee: "That's the Way Idris, Our Man, You Show Them Darn Madkhalees!!!"
This discussion is from 5-6 years ago, it is the same discussion that we have today between those put to trial by the Ikhwaanee Innovator al-Ma'ribee (who also defended Sayyid Qutb, and included Ikhwaan within Ahl us-Sunnah)
quote:
[Abu Khadeejah] Shaykh al-Albaanee also described Shaykh Rabee as the Imaam of Jarh and Ta?deel...
[Idris Palmer] So what? What does this have to do with the topic at hand? Rabi asked Sh. Abdur-Rahmaan to write the introduction to the first edition of the book which appeared in the mid-80?s. Also just because al-Albaani views ?Shaykh Rabee as the imaam of jarh and tadeel? this does not mean he is infallible. The true imaams of al-jarh wat-ta?deel like Imaams Ahmad, Ibn Ma?een, an-Nisaa?i, Ibn Hibban and others mutually corrected and refuted each others comments on certain narrators of the Prophet?s hadeeth (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). Where they then followers of their desires? What sheer ignorance...
Points to be noted in the above statements:
1. Also just because al-Albaani views ?Shaykh Rabee as the imaam of jarh and tadeel? this does not mean he is infallible.
Way to go Idris, you show them d*rn Madkhalees, those Muqallids and Muhqibs. Every Salafee knows that this Shaykh, or any Shaykh is not infallible, however this slogan, alongside the accusations of "taqleed" is the way in which they reject the truth which is with Shaykh Rabee' and the ohter scholars, and which is rooted in evidence, from tapes, books, documents, first hand testimonies of the Scholars themselves. So the followers of al-Ma'ribee are no different to the Qutbiyyah who came before them, both of them use general truths (to serve as a decoy away from the real issues) in order to hide the specific falsehood they are upon, which is refusal to accept the truth that is so readily apparent concerning Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee.
2. The true imaams...
This choice of words is just like the expressions of some of the more fanatical followers of al-Ma'ribee such as Abu Usamah ath-Thahabi, "The TRUE Major Scholars..." (etc.). This choice of wording was so that they could emotionally marginilise the Scholars of the Manhaj, such as Shaykh Rabee' by using these cheap wordings of trickery. Way to go Idris, you show them d*rn Madkhalees, those Muqallids and Muhqibs....
3. The true imaams of al-jarh wat-ta?deel like Imaams Ahmad, Ibn Ma?een, an-Nisaa?i, Ibn Hibban and others mutually corrected and refuted each others comments on certain narrators of the Prophet?s hadeeth (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). Where they then followers of their desires? What sheer ignorance...
Amongst the greatest of the deviations of the Ma'ribiyyeen is their confusing between the science and rules pertaining to riwaayah (narrating) and the rules pertaining to radd alal mukhaalif (refuting the opposer) and at-tahdheer minal bida' wa ahlihaa (warning from innovation and its people). Well, the Qutbiyyeen were the first to bring this shubhah as you can see and the followers of al-Ma'ribee including al-Qoosee, the Jordanians and others with them, have just propagated this same shubhah, . They confuse between the two issues and often use examples of differences amongst the scholars of hadeeth concerning affairs of riwaayah and then impose these issues upon the subject of refuting the opposer and warning from the Innovator. Then by confusing these two, they then falsely accuse the Salafees with certain slogans such as their false accusation against the Salafees that they say, "Whoever does not make tabdee' of the Innovator he too is an Innovator...", and other such slogans until they reached the same level as those who came before them, accusing the Salafees of being Khawaarij, amongst the followers of Dhul-Khuwaisarah, accusing them of "inqilaab" (revolution) and irhaab fikree and so on (just like ash-Shayijee said before them, "Khawaarij with the Du'aat") and in all of this they inherited the saying of as-Shaayijee and the Qutbiyyeen, and all of this came to them by way of al-Ma'ribee, who himself resorted to the works of ash-Shayijee to attack Shaykh Rabee. Way to go Idris, you show them d*rn Madkhalees, those Muqallids and Muhqibs....
Summary
Here is an agreement between the fanatical Qutbis of old and the contemporary followers of al-Ma'ribee in one of the major issues that serve as one of their strongest forms of argument against the Salafee manhaj and its adherents. Which is to seek the differences between the Scholars of hadeeth concerning the affairs of narration and judgements upon the narrators based upon the factors of memory and integrity, and use them to justify differing on issues of Sunnah and Bid'ah, and issues of the Salafee methodology, and to deliberately confuse those issues of riwaayah with the issues of ar-radd alal-mukhaalif.
Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee al-Madkhalee,
"So Allaah mobilised Ahl us-Sunnah and granted them success in repelling the falsehoods of these people and exposing their people, all as sincere advice (in calling) to Allaah, His Messenger and the Believers. And amongst the tribulations whose spear has been directed towards Ahl us-Sunnah specifically, the people of the Salafee manhaj, in order to slaughter them, is the tribulation of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, the tribulation of Mahmood al-Haddaad, the tribulation of Adnaan Ar?oor, the tribulation of Hasan al-Maalikee, and the tribulation of Abul-Hasan al-Misree al-Ma?ribee, and this (latter one) is the most severe one of them all, and the greatest one with regards to deception and wide claims. And amongst these wide and false claims is the claim of ?ta?seel? (laying down foundations, principles). And what will tell you exactly what this ?ta?seel? is? It is nothing but throwing destructive, corrupt principles (usool) that destroy the principles of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa?ah and the manhaj of the Salaf us-Saalih. Especially the principles (from the Sunnah) that stand against innovations and the various (types of) misguidance.? (From ?Haqeeqat ul-Manhaj il-Waasi? ?Inda Abil-Hasan ? The Reality of the ?Vast Manhaj? [Intended] In the View of Abul-Hasan?, from Rabee.Net).
______________
www.spubs.com
This message was edited by spubs.com on 5-31-03 @ 9:18 PM
BRILLIANT!!!!
This message was edited by ekbal.hussain on 6-4-03 @ 2:22 PM