| |
As-Salaamu 'alaykum,
I received this from a brother in Kuwait, a follower and supporter of Philips and Jibaalee. It is from within the last two weeks, but the brother didn't provide me with the exact date he received it, though I requested it twice. I received it from him on the 24th of September, 2003.
Bilaal Philips said:
 | quote: |
"Did anyone hear or read translations of Shaykh Abul-Hasan's response to Shaykh Rabee'? Then how can judgments be made without hearing both sides? Is that just? Abul Hasan is living and able to respond, while Sayyid Qutb is dead and unable - shall we treat them the same? Abul Hasan's a scholar and Sayyid was a journalist and islamic activist - shall we treat them the same?"
|
|
Aboo Sufyaan 'Uthmaan Beecher
Kuwait
This message was edited by aboo.sufyaan on 10-6-03 @ 7:36 AM
|
| |
This statement is actually more of an example of the tathabbut principle of Abul-Hasan rather than the muwaazinah of Salmaan al-'Awdah. The idea of muwaazanah is that, when discussing and warning against the innovations and misguidance of individuals and groups, one must "be fair" and mention his good points as well. And this is baatil.
As for Abul-Hasan's principle of tathabbut, which is exemplified by the statement of this individual, then it is that "one must verify and ascertain the correctness of the jarh himself" and that "we must hear both sides of the story before we make a judgment." And this is falsehood as well.
Finally, contrary to what this man alleged, Abul-Hasan has yet to supply anything resembling a knowledge-based response to the hundreds (yes, hundreds) of refutations on him by the 'Ulamaa'. Rather, he, like a person sinking in quicksand, only became more aggressive and indulged in name-calling and slandering, thus accelerating the sinking process. |
|
------------------------------------------
Abu 'Abdil-'Azeez al-Misree
أبو عبد العزيز المصري
|