| Posted By |
Topic: Shadeed Muhammad and his Misguidance!
-- page:
1
2
3
|
|
 SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Shadeed Muhammad has not Understood the Issue of Khalwah
Compare His Statement to that of the Scholars
Shadeed Muhammad was asked, "Is it permissible to be alone with the person you are intended to?"
So he answered,
 | quote: |
| "Alone in the same room? No. In the same room, the prophet sallahu alaihi wa sallam said if the two people are alone then the third person is the shaytaan. However in public, if your in public, in a public place and whatever the case may be, then this is not to be considered alone. That hadeeth doesnýt apply to you. However, being aone in the room together by yourselves, just you and the sister is something that you should stay away from..." |
|
Click here for the audio clip
The Permanent Committee for Knowledge-Based Research and Verdicts was asked:
هل الخلوة هي فقط أن يخلو الرجل بامرأة في بيت ما، بعيدا عن أعين الناس، أو هي كل خلوة رجل بامرأة ولو كان أمام أعين الناس؟
| quote: |
| [Q]: Is khalwah (seclusion) only when a man is secluded with a woman in any house, far away from the eyes of the people, or it is every (form of) seclusion of a man with a woman, even if they are in front of the peoples' eyes? |
|
So they replied:
ليس المراد بالخلوة المحرمة شرعا انفراد الرجل بامرأة أجنبية منه في بيت بعيدا عن أعين الناس فقط، بل تشمل انفراده بها في مكان تناجيه ويناجيها، وتدور بينهما الأحاديث، ولو على مرأى من الناس دون سماع حديثهما، سواء كان ذلك في فضاء أم سيارة أو سطح بيت أو نحو ذلك؛ لأن الخلوة منعت لكونها بريد الزنا وذريعة إليه، فكل ما وجد فيه هذا المعنى ولو بأخذ وعد بالتنفيذ بعد فهو في حكم الخلوة الحسية بعيدا عن أعين الناس. وبالله التوفيق، وصلى الله على نبينا محمد وآله وصحبه وسلم.
| quote: |
[A]: The intended meaning of the khalwah that is unlawful in the Sharee'ah is not merely the solitude of a man with a woman who is not a mahram to him inside a house far away from the eyes of the people only. Rather, it comprises his solitude with her in every place where they can carry on a whispered conversation and conversations can go on around them. Even if they are in view of the people, but the people cannot hear their conversation, regardless of whether that takes place in an open space or inside a car or on the roof of a house or the likes of that, because the khalwah has been prohibited since it is a means to zinaa (adultery, fornication) and a pretext to it. So everything that falls into this meaning, even if is promised at in that public setting to do something later, then it takes the ruling of actual seclusion that is far away from the eyes of the people. And the success is with Allaah. And may the peace and salutations of Allaah be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon his Family and His Companions.
President: 'Abdul-'Azeez Ibn 'Abdullaah Ibn Baaz
Vice President: 'Abdur-Razzaaq 'Afeefee
Member: 'Abdullaah Ibn Ghudayyaan
Member: 'Abdullaah Ibn Qu'ood |
|
[url=http://www.alifta.com/Search/ResultDetails.aspx?lang=ar&view=result&fatwaNum=&FatwaNumID=&ID=6354&searchScope=3&SearchScopeLevels1=&SearchScopeLevels2=&highLight=1&SearchType=exact&SearchMoesar=false&bookID=&LeftVal=0&RightVal=0&simple=&SearchCriteria=allwords&PagePath=&siteSection=1&searchkeyword=217132217138216179032216167217132217133216177216167216175032216168216167217132216174217132217136216169032216167217132217133216173216177217133216169032216180216177216185216167032216167217134217129216177216167216175032216167217132216177216172217132032216168216167217133216177216163216169#firstKeyWordFound]Source[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Abu.Dawood.Abdullaah
|
|
|
|
unspecified unspecified
(Essex, UK)
|
|
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Dec 2010
|
Compromising Or Giving Da'wah?
Shaykh Zayd Ibn Haadee Al-Madkhalee (may Allah preserve him) was asked:
If I was invited by [mubtadiýah] innovators to attend their Masjid to deliver a sermon or a piece of admonition should I attend or refuse?
No, do not refuse if the people of innovation invite you to the Masjid to deliver a sermon, admonish them or establish a seminar or a lecture. However, it is upon you to address the innovation that they are falling into. You must address the innovation and clarify its harms, and [do this] by utilising the verses of the Quran and Prophetic Ahadeeth as a proof. Perhaps Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, will guide those of his servants that he chooses to guide through this talk, admonition and sermon; and you will receive the reward. And Allah knows best.
Audio: http://sahab.net/forums/showthread.php?t=384951
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan was asked:
ýAre the groups to be associated with or are they to be abandoned?ý
He replied, ýWhen the intent behind mixing with them is to call them to adhere to the Book and the Sunnah and to leave the error, for the one who has knowledge and insight, then this is something good. And this is from calling to Allaah. As for when this mixing is for the sake of friendliness with them and companionship with them, without calling them, and without clarifying, then this is not permissible.
It is not permissible for a person that he should mix with those who oppose [the truth] except from an angle within which there is a legislated benefit, from calling them to the correct Islaam, and explanation of the truth to them so that they may return. As Ibn Masýood went to the Innovators who were in the mosque and who stood over them and rejected their bidýah. And also Ibn ýAbbaas (may Allah be pleased with them both) who went to the Khawaarij and debated with them and repelled their doubts and then amongst them were those who returned (to the truth). Hence, mixing with them is from this angle, then this is desired. And if they then persist upon their falsehood it is obligatory to leave them and shun them, and to make jihad against them for the sake of Allaahý. (Al-Ajwibah al-Mufeedah p.12).
Let us be honest with the situation at hand and not be blinded by emotions.
Everyone knows that when you accept a salary from an administration there must be a level of friendship and companionship, as they are your bosses and can fire you when they please.
A few questions:
How can Shadeed remain silent about this Masjid advertising for renowned Sufis? How is it that he can share a pulpit with a renowned Ashaýree who is an outspoken critic of the creed of Ahl Us Sunnah without clarifying his errors?
Brothers and sisters, this is the same Shadeed that has written hundreds of pages about the Salafis, and Allahýs aid is sought.
For anyone with two eyes this nothing but flattery!
http://troid.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1100&Itemid=300
Insha Allah I will add the words of the Muhaddith, Al-Imam Albani (may Allah have mercy upon him) shortly.
|
|
| AbuAbdir-Razzaq
|
|
|
|
Abu abdir Razzaaq Amjad ibn Ayub
(United Kingdom)
|
|
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Aug 2008
|
AsSalaamu alaykum the folowing is from the website www.bakkah.net and is a question put to Shaykh Muhammad Bazmool around 8 years ago and how relevant it still is May Allah reward the Shaykh and the translator.
| quote: |
QUESTION
What is your advice for the common Muslims of the West who hear about the scholars criticizing people involved in da'wah, and they do not accept this criticism, saying, "We know these callers, and we have never met those scholars. So how can we leave those we have known for years for the statements of those we never met?"
ANSWER by Shaykh Muhammad 'Umar Baazmool, instructor at Umm Al-Quraa University in Makkah
The principle in this kind of affair is that the report of a trusted person is to be accepted. So if a statement from one of the scholars of the Salaf reaches us, clarifying the situation of a person, that he had some problems, then it is binding on the one who hears such a statement to receive and accept the report of that trustworthy person. This is the case so long as nothing comes to contradict or disprove the criticism or show that the criticism was out of place.
For example, if a scholar's criticism of someone reaches us, then it is binding on us to accept this statement of criticism about such a person from that scholar, and it is to be relied upon. And if you find another scholar praising that individual, then the principle is that the criticism takes precedence over the praise, so long as the one who praised the individual has not come with a clear explanation of the other scholar's criticism, disproving it and nullifying it clearly. In this case, we go by the statement of the scholar who praised the individual.
In any case other than this, then the principle is that we must accept and rely upon the statements of a trustworthy scholar, especially when his criticism is detailed, explaining the reason for such criticism along with the proofs that necessitated the criticism of that individual. And when this kind of report reaches the people, they have no alternative except to take it.
I will give you an example to help clarify this. Imagine if we did not accept the reports of the imaams of Hadeeth with regards to the narrators of hadeeth, their criticism and praise of them. Could the authentic narrations of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhe wa sallam) be distinguished from the unauthentic ones? The answer: No, we would not be able to distinguish, since we would not be relying on the very factor that allows us to distinguish the saheeh from the dha'eef, the statements of the scholars about the narrators that conveyed the narrations to us.
Similarly, in this day and time, the scholars continue to convey what they have witnessed and know about situations of different individuals. This testimony is considered either jarh or ta'deel. Ta'deel means statements that encourage us to take knowledge from them, and jarh means criticism that prevents us from doing so, and obliges us to warn the people against them, and Allaah knows best.
SOURCE
This was translated exclusively for www.bakkah.net from a cassette recording with the knowledge and permission of the shaykh, file no. AAMB002, dated 1423/6/25.
|
|
|
|
| SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Exposing a Lie in Shadeed's Article, "Blowing the Whistle"
Prepared by Anwar Wright
In his feeble attempt to criticize me regarding what I translated from Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree, Shadeed Muhammad stated on page 2 of his article, Blowing the Whistle,
| quote: |
| In essence, what Shaykh Ubayd (may Allah preserve him) offered was scholarly advice. However, it was based on erroneous information that was tactfully presented to him. When Hasan as-Somali called Shaykh Ubayd, he told the Shaykh that I was giving a lecture called ýAl-Fikr al-Salafi fil Gharbý3 which is translated as "Salafi Thought in the West". It was NOT an accurate translation of "The Paradigm Shiftý" as was advertised on the internet! But when Anwar Wright translated the proposed question, coupled with the Shaykh‟s response in English, it read ýSecond Question: Likewise Shaykh, he has advertised a lesson that will take place Saturday 7/31/10 called "Paradigm Shift ofý" and this is not what they said to the Shaykh in their initial question! |
|
Then, in a footnote to the above statement, Shadeed adds,
| quote: |
| 3 Shaykh Ubayd mentioned this in front of Tahir Wyatt and at least three other brothers who were present. |
|
Despite what you say was related to you by Tahir Wyatt, all praises are for Allaah that we conveyed to the Shaykh the correct title, which was not ýAl Fikr As Salafiý as you mentioned and everything we translated from the Shaykh was translated word for word and you can listen to it for yourself on the following link:
Click here to listen to the audio
Here, at the 7 second mark, Hasan as-Somali can clearly be heard mentioning the title of the talk to Shaykh 'Ubayd.
So Shadeed's lie upon us here can be seen clear as day. Rather, it was translated to Shaykh 'Ubayd as, "at-tahawwul fin-namoodhajil-fikree fid-daýwatis-salafiyyah fi-gharb," which no doubt, in English translates to mean: "The Paradigm Shift of the Salafee Da'wah in the West."
More to come inshaa` Allaah...
|
|
|
|
| SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Refutation of Shadeed Muhammad's Belittlement of the Statements of the Scholars, and Inventing False Principles which Encourage the Common Folk to Challenge the Scholars or Doubt their Rulings
Prepared by Anwar Wright
Introduction
So the following is a response a corrupt principle being laid down by Shadeed Muhammad-may Allaah guide him-in his recent article posted under the title "Blowing the Whistle on the Hidden Hizbiyyah Affecting Muslim Communities in America," and his belittlement of the statements of the Scholars, and also inventing false principles which encourage the common folk to challenge the scholars or doubt their rulings. We hope to respond to his claim that the people blindly follow the rulings of the scholars due to a ýfear factor.ý In other words, if the Scholars make a ruling on an individual, the people will not question the Scholars ruling due to fear that it will be said of him that "he has gone against the Scholars." Therefore, we will, inshaa` Allaah, respond to his confusing the affair of taqleed and the acceptance of the narration of the trustworthy.
To open this short rebuttal of Shadeed, I would like to mention the statement of Shaykh Ahmad Baazmool-may Allaah preserve him-in his lecture "Principles that are Obligatory for the Salafee to Know":
| quote: |
"So the person who has been warned against is to be stayed away from especially from the students of knowledge whose feet have not been grounded in knowledge. Why? This is because in this stage, the person being warned against is between one of two things:
The First: that he (i.e. the one being warned against) returns to the truth, and if he does, may Allaah reward him. And the second: that he persists upon his falsehood and does not return. Also during this stage he sends into the hearts and minds of the youth unclear proofs and principles, and establishes for them fundamentals that make them think that he isn't an innovator. And they donýt see him as having left the manhaj. Due to this, if the Scholars eventually declare him an innovator after that, they (i.e. the youth) will not be pleased because he has already planted in their hearts that that which is being said of him is untrue." End of the statement of Shaykh Ahmad Baazmool.
Meaning: That the person calling to his misguidance, due to his diseased heart, who has no intention of returning to the truth, tries to inculcate into the hearts of the listeners and especially the youth that the things being said about him are untrue, and to support his claim of innocence he will utilize false principles and vague statements of the Scholars that do not apply to his situation to pre-empt any refutation that is about to descend upon him from the Scholars and the well-grounded students of knowledge. In essence he is presenting to the listener a choice to choose between the Scholars (and the well-grounded students of knowledge) and himself, hoping that the general folk who do not know the details of the Salafee manhaj will fall for his deception. Think for a moment, O reader! Why has Shadeed put so much effort in pre-emptying any possible rebuttal? Articles and lectures and paltalk sessions, mail-shots all to defend himself before any formal refutation was made upon him? Why? Because he wanted to plant into hearts of the unsuspecting Salafis that he is innocent, a victim, and upon the truth.
|
|
Therefore, dear reader, that which Shaykh Baazmool has mentioned is exactly what Shadeed Muhammad has been doing and continues to do through his lecture 'The Paradigm Shift' and his most recent article that we are now discussing. He seeks to corrupt the hearts of the common folk and establish for them false principles so when and if the Scholars speak against him, they will already think that which is being said of him is untrue. Furthermore, we know that the Imaam of Jarh wat-Ta'deel, the one who is well aware of the traps and snares of the hizbees, ash-Shaykh al-'Allaamah Rabeeý Ibn Haadee has said that he is not fit for giving daýwah while he is in this state. Also ash-Shaykh al-'Allaamah 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree has declared Shadeed to be Daallun Mudill (misguided, misguiding others) and has stated to beware of him and not to give him a platform to speak anywhere in the west! Both of these Scholars know the errors of Shadeed, and it is not as Shadeed and others claim, that it is merely due his watching a movie in the cinema (even though we hold this not to be befitting of any student of knowledge) See the following [url=http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=11794]post on Salafitalk.[/url]
Clarifying a Doubt
A person may ask should we busy ourselves with the refutation of Shadeed? Then we respond by saying that our refutation of Shadeed is for the sake of Allaah and in protection of His Religion from those who corrupt it and call to misguidance. Our answer can be summarized by the following narration: Muhammad bin Yahyaa adh-Dhuhalee who said: I heard Yahyaa Ibn Maýeen saying: "Defense of the Sunnah is more excellent than Jihaad in the path of Allaah." So I said to Yahyaa Ibn Maýeen, "A man spends his wealth, tires himself out and strives, but this one (who defends the Sunnah) is better than him?!" He replied, "Yes, by a great deal." (Siyar A'laam an-Nubalaa, 10/518). Therefore, our response to Shadeed is in the defense of the Sunnah from his corrupted Manhaj.
One may further ask, "But is it not the case that remaining silent is better, because the harm caused by refuting Shadeed will be greater than remaining silent?" We answer with the words of Imaam ash-Shaatibee regarding the refutation of the innovators and the erroneous:
| quote: |
| "So regarding these types of people, then it is must that they be mentioned, driven out and displaced; and this is because whatever returns back to the Muslims of harm if the refutation was left alone would be even greater than what is attained by the mentioning of their names and fleeing from them if the reason for abandoning the refutation is the fear of splitting and enmityý" (al-I'tisaam, 2/229). |
|
| quote: |
| 'Aasim Ibn al-Ahwal said to Qataadah: "I do not think that the people of knowledge should criticize each other." So Qataadah said: "And do you not know that if a man introduces a bidýah, then it is a must that it be mentioned so that it is warned against." (Sharh Usool Ahlis-Sunnah of al-Laalikaaýee, 1/154, no. 256). |
|
Since many of the Salafees may be unaware of this principle and have already read his article, which may have left them in confusion, we seek to clarify that which is contains from falsehood.
Shadeed's Disrespect for Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree
First of all, Shadeed's blatant disrespect of the noble Scholar Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree -may Allaah preserve him- with his statement:
| quote: |
| "It should be noted that I never requested Shaykh 'Ubayd (may Allaah preserve him) to be a judge in my affair, such that the ruling he gives becomes obligatory upon me." |
|
Before we go on to refute this point, I would like to mention briefly some of Scholars who have praised Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree. From them are Shaykh Rabee', Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool just to say a few. And whoever would like to see their praise in detail can view the following links:
[url=http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=19&Topic=2388&CFID=19115520&CFTOKEN=49098684]Biography of Shaykh 'Ubayd[/url]
[url=http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=6&Topic=9301]Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool Praises Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree[/url]
Back to Shadeedýs statement: "it should be noted that I never requested Shaykh 'Ubayd (may Allah preserve him) to be a judge in my affair, such that the ruling he gives becomes obligatory upon me."
This is blatant disrespect and also is hypocritical. First of all whether you requested this from Shaykh 'Ubayd or not, the Shaykh ruled on you in light of the Qur`aan and Sunnah per what was brought to him from your own speech from your lectures, classes and writings. Additionally it is not a condition of refutation that the one being refuted accepts the scholar, or gives permission to the scholar to refute him as Shadeed is implying in his statement! We say to Shadeed: Did al Karaabeesee give Imam Ahmad and others the permission to refute him? Did Abul-Hasan al-Ma'ribee give permission to Shaykh Rabee' to refute him?! Can al-Ma'ribee now claim: "Well I didnýt give Shaykh Rabee' permission to judge in my affair, such that the ruling he gives becomes obligatory upon me."?!! Can 'Adnaan 'Ar'oor claim the same or 'Alee al-Halabee?! Rather, if one looks to the books of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel and refutation upon the people of desires, you are not about to find any of those people labeled as liars or fabricators or innovators asking those Imaams who criticized and refuted them to be judges in their affairs.
We hope the reader can see through this smokescreen set up by Shadeed.
Secondly: When Tahir Wyatt went to Shaykh 'Ubayd regarding your affair and you thought that it would be to your advantage, you quickly posted the words ýalong with the audio- of the Shaykh on your website. And this posting of yours indicates that you were pleased that he rule in your affair at that point! Then if you didnýt want Shaykh Ubayd to judge in your affairs, why did you "immediately go to Medinah" when you landed in Saudia?
Shadeed's Attempt to Have the Common Folk Undermine the Statements of the Scholars Regarding Criticized Individual
Also another point that shows your blatant disrespect to Shaykh 'Ubayd is in your statement:
| quote: |
| "When I reached Medina, it was communicated to me by one of the students of knowledge there by the name of Tahir Wyatt (may Allah preserve him) that Shaykh 'Ubayd said: "Do not bring Shadeed to me until I call!" Up until the writing of these pages, nothing has been communicated to me in relation to resolving the matter. This unsuccessful attempt to bring rectification to the situation prompted me to seek consultation with some of the other people of knowledge so that I could get advice on how to proceed." |
|
Firstly the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:
| quote: |
| "Deliberation is from Allaah and hastiness is from the Shaytaan." Reported by al-Bayhaqee in ash-Shu'ab and Aboo Ya'laa on the authority of Anas and declared Hasan by Shaykh Albaanee. See Silsilatus-Saheehah (1795). |
|
Is it the fact that you see that Shaykh 'Ubayd hasnýt responded to you in which you consider a timely fashion and hasnýt allowed you to go back and continue to teach, therefore prompting you to go to Shaykh al-Luhaydaan to find something in their speech that will give you the justification to continue to speak. Are you so amazed with your own self and your own abilities in the field of da'wah that you believe that the da'wah would enter into turmoil whilst you are awaiting the advice of 'Allaamah 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree? Or is it as 'Allaamah Rabee' al-Madkhalee has stated about you, "He is not fit for da'wah whilst he is in this condition. So if he repents and shows remorse and is upright upon the correct path and the thiqaat from the likes of the brother Aboo Muhammad al-Maghribee and the maintainers of Salafi Publications testify to his recanting, his uprightness and his abstaining from love of fame and this this chair, because his love for fame and this chair has caused the mashaayikh to doubt in him." (See Salafitalk.net). Indeed, Allaah knows your condition and it is upon you to fear Him. Have respect for the Scholars young man!
Now we would like to show how Shadeed goes on to quote some of the Imaams regarding fataawaa and tries to argue that the mustaftee (i.e. one seeking fatwaa) is not obliged to take the statement of the muftee. I say: this is a statement of truth, intended by it falsehood. Rather, what Shadeed intended by it is to have the common folk undermine the statements of the Scholars regarding criticized individuals and to make it seem that even if you were criticized, that you don't have to take the advice of the Scholars, and no doubt this is from the utmost of falsehood, for verily there is a difference between accepting or rejecting fataawaa of the Scholars and accepting the statement of the Scholars when refuting the innovators and people of desires, for rather this is something which is obligatory and from the aspect of accepting the statement of the trustworthy. This is one of the principles that Shadeed is either ignorant of or feigning ignorance. We'll bring the statement of Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him) in his book entitled 'Ibaaraatul-Moohimah translated to mean "Misleading Statements." He says on page 26 in the Dar Imaam Ahmad print:
| quote: |
"And from the misleading statements is the statement of some of them: "I am not obligated to blind follow this or that Shaykh." Some people use this statement claiming that it is the manhaj of the Salaf, and in reality the usage of this statement may not be correct from many aspects:
Firstly: The place where this statement really should be used is in a matter when the proof is apparent and you have to abide by it. So in this case, no one else is regarded in this matter, whoever they may be, if their speech opposes the authentic speech of the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam), for verily everyoneýs statement is accepted or rejected except the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
Secondly: To use this statement in issues of ijtihaad from a student of knowledge to therefore reject the speech of the scholars who are greater than him and older than him and more knowledgeable and posses more piety than him, is opposition to the Sunnah of the Salafus-Saalih, may Allaah be pleased with them. For verily in the likes of these matters, one of them would leave their statement for the statement of another who is more knowledgeable than him, and he didnýt used to say, 'I am not obliged to take the statement of this Shaykh.'
Thirdly: The origin is that the Muslim should accuse his own self, especially if it is in a matter which he is opposing someone who is more knowledgeable than him. In this instance it is upon him not to suffice with just his own opinion, so how about if the matter is a matter of news that it is incumbent for him to follow, and he is not allowed to oppose it? Rather even in the issues of ijithaad, the Sunnah of the Companions, may Allaah be pleased with them, that one of them used to leave his own statement for the statement of those who a more knowledgeable than them.
Fourthly: Having reverence of the Scholars is the Sunnah, and this particular statement opposes showing reverence to the Scholars. Without a doubt, if a proof becomes clear in a matter, you have to take it, for verily there is no regard to any statement if there is proof, whoever it may be, because everyone's statement is accepted or rejected except the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
However the affair here is that some people say this statement in a situation where the proof hasnýt come apparent just to oppose the Scholar. Isnýt it not the truth in this situation to recognize the virtue of the Scholars and that they are more guided and more knowledgeable and have more piety and taqwaa, and that one accuses themselves (of being mistaken) when alongside their statement and to beware of opposing them? May Allaah pardon us!
The Fifth: Making taqleed is not absolutely impermissible: for verily the common person and those like him from the followers [of the imams], if they can not arrive to the proof, and likewise the mujtahid, if making ijtihaad can not be facilitated for him or is unable to decipher the proofs [in a certain matter], upon him is to blind follow, this is what is obligatory regarding him. It has been reported concerning Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, -may Allaah have mercy on him- in a matter which he didnýt know the proof concerning, he used to take the opinion of ash-Shaafi'ee -may Allah have mercy on him.
So just using this statement unrestrictedly misleads the Muslim that it is impermissible for him to make taqleed in all circumstances, and this is in opposition to what the scholars derived concerning this.
Sixthly: There is a difference between al-ittibaa' (following a Scholar) and taqleed. This is because al-ittibaa' is to take a statement which its proof has become clear to you, and taqleed is to take a statement and blind follow it, just like the collar that goes around the neck [of an animal] and they are just directed without having any knowledge.
And that which is prohibited regarding taqleed relates to the one who is qualified and is able to look into the proofs. As for al-ittibaa' which is to take the statement of a scholar along with his proofs which has become clear to you, this is not prohibited, rather it is obligatory for the one who is able to do so and they are not able to do what is greater than that.
Seventhly: It is incumbent to differentiate between the situation of taking the ijtihaad of a mujtahid in a matter of ijthaad, and between following a scholar regarding that which he informed of. For verily following him, if the matter is like this, is from the aspect of accepting the news of the trustworthy, and this is obligatory, except if it becomes apparent that he has erred. In this situation one can not say "I am not obliged to take the statement of this Scholar!ý or ýI am not taking his statement regarding so and so until I hear the error myself".
All of this is using this statement out of context!
So a person who is well known to you and he comes to you with a detailed criticism from a Scholar who is trustworthy, the origin is that you follow the statement of this Scholar. You donýt say: well I know him, so I'm not taking the detailed criticism until I hear it myself. You do not say this, and this is exiting from the way of the Salaf in this matter. Yes, the general criticism regarding the one whose uprightness has been established is not accepted, and the criticism takes precedence over the praise, except if the one who praises him mentions why he was criticized and refutes the reason [he was originally refuted].
End of the words of Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool. |
|
Pay attention firstly, Shadeed, and then readers, to these principles of the Salaf. Where have we gone from them? As Shaykh Baazmool explains here, that firstly taqleed is permissible in certain circumstances, also showing reverence to the scholars is Sunnah and most importantly that the issue here is not merely the issue of taqleed like Shadeed is trying to convince the people, rather this is a matter of al-ittibaa' and accepting the news of the trustworthy. For verily Shaykh 'Ubayd and Shaykh Rabee' are well known Salafee Scholars who based their criticism of Shadeed on proofs and evidences, and the affair is not as Shadeed is trying to instill in the people with his false principle and misleading statement: "I'm not obliged to follow Shaykh 'Ubayd's statement."
If this was the case we could say this about every situation where a person who falls into opposition is spoken against. Like when Shaykh Rabee' -may Allah preserve him- spoke about Aboo Muslimah, one could just say: well we are not obliged to follow the Shaykh's statement and we are still going to take from him. Or the statements of the Scholars concerning Aboo Usaamah and Bilaal Phillips and 'Alee Tameemee and other than them. Also before them are the heads of innovation whom the Scholars have spoken against like Ja'd Ibn Dirham and Ma'bad al-Juhanee and al Karaabeesee and so on and so forth. By Allaah, this principle that you're trying to invent is a door to fitnah. Rather, what the Shaykh said of you was based on proofs and evidences which some people may comprehend and some may not comprehend however we take the information of the Scholar who is trustworthy concerning their detailed criticism that is based on proofs. So the matter is not merely going against the Scholars or disobeying the Scholars, as you try to belittle the affair of those who have trust in our scholars. Rather, it is the aforementioned matters mentioned by Shaykh Baazmool.
Furthermore, I remind you of the beneficial work put together by our brother Abul-Hasan Maalik against the hizbee Aboo Muslimah titled [url=http://www.troid.org/media/pdf/aboomuslimah1.pdf]"Uncovering the Hidden Hizbee"[/url] when he mentioned this same principle espoused by Aboo Muslimah: "How can he make a ruling on me and he donýt know me?" Just like Aboo Muslimah, Shadeed it shows that you are ignorant of the principles of the science of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel. Did you forget the well known narration of what transpired between Daawood adh-Dhaahiree and Imam Ahmad when Daawood adh-Dhaahiree came to visit Ahmad in Baghdaad, he knocked on the door of Imam Ahmad and 'Abdullaah answered the door. So Daawood adh-Dhaahiree said: "Tell your father that a man from Khuraasaan has come to see him." When Imam Ahmad heard this he said:
| quote: |
| "If this man is Daawood adh-Dhaahiree tell him to remove himself from my door, for verily Imam adh-Dhuhalee has written to me that he is from those who has spoken in the creation of the Qur`aan." So upon hearing this Daawood adh-Dhaahiree denied this. Imam Ahmad said: "It is true! For Imaam adh-Dhuhalee is from the trustworthy narrators and is more trusted than Daawood." |
|
Abul-Hasan Maalik goes on to comment:
| quote: |
| "So we see that Imam Ahmad accepted the news about Daawood adh-Dhaahiree because the narration of the trustworthy is accepted, this is a well known principle in the science of hadeeth. Lastly Aboo Muslimah accuses all who accept the ruling of the Shaykh to be blind followers of the Shaykh. Does he accuse Imam Ahmad to be a blind follower of Imaam adh-Dhuhalee. We ask Allaah not to misguide us after guiding us." |
|
More to come - inshaa` Allaah...
|
|
|
|
| jalil.meekins
|
|
|
|
Abu Zaahid Jalil bin James
(Philadelphia, PA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 94
Joined: Oct 2002
|
Al-humdullah this was the text of a email that I recieved from one of our beloved brothers from South Philadelphia,well known to us by the name of Abu Shu'ayb. With his permission we decided to post the reality of the United Muslim Masjid { UMM } and its new imam Shadeed Muhammad. To Proceed:-
In the name of Allah, all praises is for Allah and may His peace and blessing be upon his final messenger Muhammad and his family and companions.
As an introduction, I would briefly like to introduce my self. My name is Abu Shuýayb Shadeed ibn Gerald Simmons. I am a native of South Philadelphia and well-known in the Salafee community of the city. Recently, the individual known as Shadeed Muhammad has taken the position of Imam in the masjid known as United Muslim Masjid, a clearly deviant masjid that is associated with the likes of Hamzah Yusuf, Siraj Wahhaaj, Muhammad Saýid Adley and others from the callers to Hizbiyyah.
Last year, we were witnesses to the Ashýari assault against Salafiyyah and the well-known Salafee callers being waged from this masjidýs minbar and musallah. From those who was at the forefront of this assault and carrier of the Ashýaree creed is the individual known as Khalil Abdullah who claimed that the companions made taýweel in the Names and Attributes of Allah. Since many questions have come up concerning Shadeed Muhammad, I found it obligatory to clarify the reality of the matter from that we have witnessed from his since he has become the Imaam of this masjid.
First, on the 10th of December 2010, we witnessed Shadeedýs cooperating with the likes of this Ashýaree, Khalil Abdullah by rotating the Friday khutbah with him (United Muslim Masjid has two buildings one on 15th Street and the other on Point Breeze Ave. in the South Philadelphia section). So while this Ashýaree addressed the people in the 15th Street masjid, Shadeed went to the other masjid to give the khutbah.
Second, we are witnesses to this masjid propagating a program entitled ýReviving the Islamic Spirit: Rules for the Road of Life: Reviving the 10 Commandments in the Modern World.ý From the speakers mentioned on the flyer, which was hanging in the masjid: Ali al-Jifri (who Sheikh Fawzaan declared to be a innovator), Hamzah Yusuf (a well-known Sufi), Zaid Shakir (Sufi), Amr Khalid (Sheikh Suhaimee called him a Dajjaal) and others from the heads of misguidance (See the following link: http://www.revivingtheislamicspirit.net/program.html) Though we find Shadeed writing lengthy articles against the Salafis, we have not heard one word from him here in South Philadelphia speaking against the likes of this flyer in the masjid nor what those individuals are upon. We also have not heard him refute the likes of Khalil Abdullah who he is presently cooperating with. We hope to make the likes of these issues known to the masses to answer the many questions we continue to hear regarding his affair, may Allah guide us and him to a Way that is Straight. Ameen
Abu Shuayb Shadeed ibn Gerald Simmons
Philadephia P.A.
Love for Ahlus-Sunnah wa Hadeeth Aboo Zaahid
|
|
| SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Shadeed Muhammad Claims the Sahaabah Differed in 'Aqeedah:
Said Shadeed Muhammad,
| quote: |
| "Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah - rahimahullaahu ta'aalaa - he mentions in his Majmooýul-Fataawaa volume 23, page 172, (he then quotes the statement in Arabic then goes on to translate), ýHe said that you found that the Sahaabah, they differed in issues. The Sahaabah they differed in issues, they might have even differed in issues of aqeedah. He said but along with this differing you still found amongst them love and harmony, along with their differing. There was still love, there was still ulfah. There was still love and harmony between them. And he mentioned an example...(quotes the Arabic). He said 'Aa`ishah differed with Ibn 'Abbaas and everyone that agreed with Ibn 'Abbaas in the issue, "Did the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) see Allaah when me made the Israa` wal-Mi'raaj." Ibn Abbaas said that the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) saw Allaah. 'Aa`ishah said that the one who said that the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) saw Allaah has indeed lied lied on Allaahu subhaanahu wa ta'aalaa. He said, "But along with that, they never made tabdee' - they never said that they were innovators, those who agreed with 'Aa`ishah. And those who agreed with 'Aa`ishah never made innovators out of those who agreed with Ibn 'Abbaas. This is one of the many examples that we find from amongst the Sahaabah. And they differed in a major issue. But along with that you still never found amongst them what you find amongst us in affairs that are less than 'aqeedah. Issues of fiqh." |
|
Click here for the audio
Comments:
[1]: Shadeed's claim here is nothing new. Rather, only a few years ago, the Scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah far and wide refuted an innovator by the name of Abul-Hasan al-Ma`ribee and this claim was his! Abul-Hasan said,
| quote: |
| "Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned that the Sahaabah differed in issues of 'aqeedah. They differed in the issue: Did the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) see his Lord on the night of al-Mi'raaj or not???" Refer to the cassette tape Jalsah fee Jeddah, dated: 28/6/1423H |
|
By Allaah, it is as if Shadeed parroted this speech directly from al-Ma`ribee!
[2]: Shadeed is very ambiguous here in what is a direct translation of Ibn Taymiyyah's speech and what is Shadeed's own interjection.
Here is the speech he is quoting from Ibn Taymiyyah:
Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah - rahimahullaah - said - as occurs in Majmoo'ul-Fataawaa (24/172-173),
| quote: |
"When the Scholars from the Sahaabah and the taabi'een and those who came after them disputed in an affair, they would follow the command of Allaahu ta'aalaa in His statement,
 | | An-Nisa (4):59 |
íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇú ÃóØöíÚõæÇú Çááøåó æóÃóØöíÚõæÇú ÇáÑøóÓõæáó æóÃõæúáöí ÇáÃóãúÑö ãöäßõãú ÝóÅöä ÊóäóÇÒóÚúÊõãú Ýöí ÔóíúÁò ÝóÑõÏøõæåõ Åöáóì Çááøåö æóÇáÑøóÓõæáö Åöä ßõäÊõãú ÊõÄúãöäõæäó ÈöÇááøåö æóÇáúíóæúãö ÇáÂÎöÑö Ðóáößó ÎóíúÑñ æóÃóÍúÓóäõ ÊóÃúæöíáÇð O you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger (Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination. |
|
|
And they used to debate an issue with a debate of mutual consultation and mutual advice. And perhaps their statement would differ in an issue of knowledge and deed, but the affection, virtuousness and religious brotherhood would remain." |
|
And here - dear reader - is where Shadeed stops. However, the speech of Shaykhul-Islaam continues. Here is what Ibn Taymiyyah said next,
| quote: |
| "Yes, whosoever opposes the Clear Book and the detailed Sunnah, or whatever the Salaf of the Ummah have a consensus upon - a disagreement for which there is no excuse - then this one must be dealt with as the people of innovation are dealt." |
|
So Shadeed left out the last sentence because doesn't agree with his recurring theme of excusing and accomodating innovation and its people.
[3]: In fact, Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah actually rebutted the same statement Shadeed is ascribing to him here, Ibn Taymiyyah said,
| quote: |
| "However, this dispute only occurred in the detailed affairs from it. As for that which was clear, then they did not differ in it. And the Sahaabah themselves differed in some of that, but they not differ in the 'aqaa`id (beliefs), nor in the path to Allaah, which the man from the close allies of Allaah, the righteous ones must traverse." Majmoo'ul-Fataawaa 10/274) |
|
So here Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah has said the exact opposite of what Shadeed infers upon his words above. If it is still not clear to you - yaa Shadeed - then read the next statement where Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said,
| quote: |
| "And the intended purpose is that the Sahaabah - may Allaah be pleased with them - did not fight ever, over a principle (qaa'idah) from the principles of Islaam originally. And they did not differ in anything from the qawaa'id of Islaam, not about the Attributes, not about the Qadr, not about the issues of al-Asmaa` and al-Ahkaam (rulings), nor in the issues of the Imaamah." Refer to Minhaajus-Sunnah (6/336) of Ibn Taymiyyah. |
|
[4]: What is intended by those who claim the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah - whether they be Abul-Hasan al-Ma`ribee or Shadeed Muhammad - is to put away the differences between Ahlus-Sunnah and Ahlul-Bid'ah. This is what Shaykh 'Abdul-Muhsin al-'Abbaad alluded to when he was asked in his lesson, which took place on Saturday, 20/8/1423H, "Is it permissible to say that the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah?" So the Noble Shaykh replied,
| quote: |
| "There is differing found amongst the Sahaabah in the furoo' (subsidiary affairs). And there is absolutely no differing found in the usool (foundations). And if there was, then what would the difference be between Ahlus-Sunnah and the innovators then?" |
|
This - dear reader - is the goal. To remove the differences between Ahlus-Sunnah and the innovators. Take heed - yaa Shadeed - repent now!
[5]: Shadeed claims the issue of whether the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) saw Allaah during the night of al-Mi'raaj is an issue of the Sahaabah differing in 'aqeedah. A quick explanation of this is as follows:
Imaam Ibnul-Qayyim - rahimahullaah - said,
| quote: |
| "Indeed, 'Uthmaan Ibn Sa'eed ad-Daarimee mentioned in his book, ar-Radd a consensus of the Sahaabah that he (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) did not see his Lord on the night of al-Mi'raaj. And some of them exclude Ibn 'Abbaas from that. And our Shaykh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) says: That is not a disagreement in truth, since Ibn 'Abbaas did not say he saw Allaah with the eyes in his head." Refer to Ijtimaa'ul-Juyooshil-Islaamiyyah (p. 48) of Ibnul-Qayyim. |
|
Notice that Ibnul-Qayyim did not understand the speech of Ibn Taymiyyah as Shadeed understands it - or feigns understanding of it.
Shadeed claims Ibn Taymiyyah said the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah, citing the issue of the Ru`yah of the Prophet as an example. On the other hand, the foremost student of Ibn Taymiyyah - Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah - explains that Ibn Taymiyyah did not hold this to be a disagreement between the Sahaabah. What audacity Shadeed has shown towards the Sahaabah and the Scholars of Islaam!
After a detailed discussion of this topic, Shaykh Rabee' Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee - hafidhahullaah - summed up the issue as follows,
| quote: |
| "Therefore, there was no disagreement between the Sahaabah about it. So the people of desires who spread the disagreements in the usool and the 'aqaa`id say, "The Sahaabah differed in the 'aqaa`id." This is a lie, they did not differ. 'Aa`ishah denied the ru`yah with the eyes and Ibn 'Abbaas did not affirm the ru`yah with the eyes; he affirmed the ru`yah with the heart. Where is the disagreement? There isn't one." Refer to Sharh Usoolus-Sunnah (p. 30) of Rabee' al-Madkhalee. |
|
We leave Shadeed and the readers with some of the statements of the Scholars on those who claim that the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah:
Imaam Ibnul-Qayyim (d.751H) said,
| quote: |
| "Ineed, the Sahaabah differed in many of the issues of ahkaam (rulings) and they were the leaders of the Believers and the most complete of the Ummah in eemaan. However, with the praise of Allaah, they did not differ in a single issue from the issues of al-Asmaa` was-Sifaat and the Actions (of Allaah). Rather, all of them affirmed what the Book and the Sunnah spoke of. It was one word, from the first of them to the last of them." Refer to I'laamul-Muwaqqi'een 19/49) of Ibnul-Qayyim. |
|
Imaam ash-Shaatibee said,
| quote: |
| "And the khilaaf (disagreement) from the time of the Sahaabah up until now occurred in issues of ijtihaad (independent reasoning)." Refer to al-I'tisaam (2/191) of ash-Shaatibee. |
|
Shaykh Hammaad al-Ansaaree - rahimahullaah - said,
| quote: |
| "The Sahaabah did not ever differ in 'aqeedah. The khilaaf only occurred after them." Refer to al-Majmoo' fee Tarjumatil-'Allaamah al-Muhaddith Hammaad al-Ansaaree (2/492), issue no 124. |
|
Shaykh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaamee - rahimahullaah - said,
| quote: |
| "As for the Muslims, then they were united and in agreement, not split concerning the usool of the Religion. Indeed, the time of the Sahaabah passed whilst they were upon that. They did not know any disagreement in 'aqeedah and the usool of the Religion at all. Rather, they were one Ummah." Refer to al-'Aqeedatul-Islaamiyyah wa Taareekhuhaa of Muhammad Amaan. |
|
Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Yahyaa an-Najmee (d.1429H) - rahimahullaah - said,
| quote: |
"Whoever says that the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah, then let him support his statement with proofs. And if he cannot do so, then he is a liar, a slanderer."
He further stated,
"Indeed, it is oligatory that the one who says the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah be silenced. And he must be prevented from speaking about 'aqeedah, because he is ignorant about it."
The Shaykh further statement about such a person,
"And the intended purpose of this slanderer is to accomodate the disagreements of hizbiyyah. And he must affirm for himself that he is a hizbee." Refer to al-Fataawaa al-Jaliyyah (question no. 63). |
|
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan was asked: Is it correct for us to say that the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah?
He replied,
| quote: |
"Who said this? A disagreement in 'aqeedah has never been mentioned for the Sahaabah - may Allaah forbid it! The one who claims that they differed in something from 'aqeedah is a liar."
http://www.alfawzan.ws/node/3041
|
|
Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan was asked about those who say that the Sahaabah differed in 'aqeedah, so he replied,
| quote: |
| "Astaghfirullaah! No one says this, except a misguided innovator. He says that the Sahaabah differed whilst the Sahaabah were the people of 'aqeedah. If there was any disagreement between them, then it was in some of the affirs of ijtihaad related to deeds. As for the affairs of 'aqeedah, that Allaah is One and He Hears and Sees, and that He does whatever He wills, that He is the Creator of everything and aware of everything, then they never differed. And no one stirs up this affair, except for a caller to fitnah. He is either trying to pull wool over the eyes of the people by claiming to be from the people of goodness and uprightness. Or he may have known some good and started to speak with the good he knows to make the people weak and lead them to the falsehood that he follows and leans toward. Also he is eager to spread (what he has learned) if he is from those who are decieved by what he thinks he knows! Therefore it is upon him to seek Allah's forgiveness and repent to Him and to return to the people of knowledge and ask them. And if he is from those who like to conceal his agendas and cover his true objectives he should be exposed so the people can beware of his evil." Refer to the taped lecture, Sifaatul-Firqatin-Naajiyah wat-Taa`ifatil-Mansoorah, dated 6/2/1431H. |
|
|
|
|
|
| zejd.peqin
|
|
|
|
Zayd Abu Ubayd
(Peqin,Albania)
|
|
Member
Posts: 795
Joined: Oct 2008
|
Shaykh Rabee' Compares Shadeed Muhammad to Abul Hasan Al-Maribee
The Shaykh Allaamah Rabee' Ibn Haadi compares some statements of Shadeed Muhammad to Abul Hasan Al-Maribee
Assalamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatahu
The noble brother Abdul-ilah from the UK went to Shaykh Rabee and read to him some of the statements of Shadeed Muhammad, which will soon be made available. Shaykh Usaamah al-'Utaybee was also present. When the Shaykh heard these points he compared what he heard to the positions of Al-Maribee:
"By Allaah, Al-Maribee attempted to ruin the clear call of Salafiyyah spread by Shaykh Muqbil, the Mujaddid of Yemen, and he failed. Alhamdu lillah."
And Shadeed Muhammad is trying to corrupt and water down the Salafee Da'wah taught and spread by the likes of Abu Awais and others in the US. The deceit and treachery of this man will be exposed for the world to see. Shadeed Muhammad has not dedicated a single lecture or article to refute any of the heads of innovation but he writes 100's of pages against Salafis. Why?
This is an example where Shadeed claims that we should have non-Salafis on the Admin of Salafi Masjids if they have secular degrees! In his ignorance he compares the house of Allah to a business. Why does he raise this issue when speaking to women? Harsh with the Salafis and bootlicking the Hizbees.
Muwahhideen Publications
|
|
| AbooTasneem
|
|
|
|
Aboo Dihyah Dawud Adib
(Philadelphia, PA U.S.A.)
|
|
Member
Posts: 265
Joined: Sep 2002
|
About five days ago or less, I was apprised of an email that our brother Mu'aadh (Maaz)Qureishi at Sunnah Publishings received from a sister, Umm Amatullah wherein she asked the question was I not at one time the imaam of the UMM masjid here in Philadelphia where Shadeed Muhammad is the imaam presently.
For the sake of clarification, I have never been the imaam of that masjid, however, I was the imaam of Masjid As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah commonly known as Germantown Masjid, which is one of the few Salafee masaajid in Philadelphia, PA.
Dawud Adib the son of David C.White Sr.
|
|
| Abu.Maryam.T
|
|
Administrator
Posts: 451
Joined: Sep 2002
|
|
| SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Shadeed Muhammad is now the Imaam at the
United Muslim Mission - Philadelphia PA
Who is U.M.M.?
The United Muslim Mission in Philadelphia has been called to the Sunnah by the likes of Dawud Adib and others. Despite that, they hosted the Philadelphian Ash'arees later when the Ash'aree insinuated takfeer upon Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H). They (i.e. the Ash'arees) also ridiculed Imaam al-Albaanee (d.1420H) there as well.
This Attack on Ibn Taymiyyah was in their Masjid
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZA3jN1edPw]The Philadelphian Ash'aree Propounding a Deviant 'Aqeedah at U.M.M.[/url]
All praise is due to Allaah, the Salafee callers such as: Abul-Hasan Maalik, Hasan as-Somali, Aboo Ri'aayah 'Abdur-Razzaaq, Kashiff Khan and others clarified the misguidance of these Ash'arees when they attempted to assault the 'aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah. Even some of the Salafees from the U.K. lent support by refuting the Philadelphian Ash'arees on [url=http://www.asharis.com]www.Asharis.com[/url]. We did not however, see any such defense emanating from Shadeed Muhammad during that time of fitnah.
Please take a moment to look at the following description of their history taken from their site:
So they are currently owned and operated by the "International Muslim Brotherhood"?!?!
Shadeed Muhammad is Now the Imaam of This Masjid:
Since he has become the Imaam, we have not seen Shadeed defend the 'aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah. We have not seen him defend the Salafee manhaj from the numerous attacks against it that have taken place at this masjid. Rather, we ask: Can one recall a time when Shadeed defended Ahlus-Sunnah against the attacks of the people of innovation? Or have his lectures been consistently focused on ridiculing the Salafee communities and callers in the U.S? Did he ever "blow the whistle" until he felt the need to defend himself - whilst leaving alone all of the attacks against Ahlus-Sunnah which took place at the very masjid he is now the Imaam of? So what is Shadeed teaching at U.M.M.? Is he clarifying the sound 'aqeedah? Is he clarifying the manhaj and usool of the Salafee da'wah? Here is a look at a recent flier for one of his lectures at U.M.M.:
Surely the decorum of the Muslim woman is topic that deserves attention in the United States where immodesty is widespread. However, this does not take precedence of teaching the usool of 'aqeedah and manhaj and clarifying the attacks against the Scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah past and present.
Lastly, we remind Shadeed of his own words, in a lecture that was delivered on January 3rd 2010CE:
| quote: |
| "As we know, dealing with the general body of the Muslims, its almost impossible...uh...to...to...you know, to...to...to...unite with them on for...for a general benefit, unless you gotta, you know, condone some of their falsehood." |
|
[url=http://www.sunnahpublishing.net/audio/condonefalsehoodshadeed.mp3]Click here to listen[/url]
So this admission begs the question: Which of U.M.M.'s falsehoods did Shadeed condone to land an Imaam job there? Was it their attacks against the 'aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Albaanee? Was it their leniency in matters of intermingling of the sexes and music? Inshaa' Allaah, once the reality of this particular situation is presented to Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan, we can then have a detailed answer specific to working at the likes of this masjid.
|
|
|
|
| SunnahPublishing.Net
|
|
|
|
Sunnah Publishing
(Grand Rapids MI, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Shaykh Rabee' Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee on Shadeed Muhammad
In a sitting, which took place on the 6th of Sha'baan, 1431H, the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel said,
| quote: |
It is obligatory upon this brother to repent to Allaah the Mighty and Majestic and he must be sincere with Allaah in his repentance and in his return to the truth. And he must rectify his heart and his deeds and whoever he is responsible for.
|
|
And he said,
| quote: |
He is not fit for da'wah whilst he is in this condition. So if he repents and shows remorse and is upright upon the correct path and the thiqaat from the likes of the brother Aboo Muhammad al-Maghribee and the maintainers of Salafi Publications testify to his recanting, his uprightness and his abstaining from love of fame and this this chair, because his love for fame and this chair has caused the mashaayikh to doubt in him.
So if he makes apparent the piety of his tawbah and the thiqaat testify to this, as has preceded, and they see that he is capable of bringing benefit, then only at that point can he be co-operated with in benfitting the people with his knowledge, if he has knowledge. Along with all of that, it is inevitable that he must be restricted to the understanding of the Salaf with proofs from the Book and the Sunnah.
|
|
The original scan of the letter can be seen here:
Please take note that in the statement above, Shaykh Rabee' (hafidhahullaah) acknowledges the trustworthiness of Aboo Muhammad al-Maghribee and the brothers at Salafi Publications. He also acknowledges Shadeed's love for fame and the kursee (chair).
|
|
|
|
| spubs.com
|
|
Administrator
Posts: 846
Joined: Sep 2002
|
|
|
02-01-2011 @ 5:05 PM
03-12-2010 @ 8:19 PM
