Category Archives: Contemporary Issues

When Warning Against The Innovator Is Harmful: Sheikh Ubayd Al Jaabiri

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Some have determined that it is not befitting to warn the common folk from specific innovators (by name), because they will not accept the criticism of them. They say that we should progress gradually with them as it relates to teaching the Sunnah and innovation, and when they understand, then we mention their (the innovators) names. Is this correct?

A: Yes, this is correct and we are upon this, if Allah wills. This is because our call, the call of Ahlus Sunnah and the Jamaa’ah is wisdom. Like Allah said to His Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, and the speech is general encompassing him and every caller to Allah upon wisdom.

ادْعُ إلى سبيل ربك بالحكمة و الموعظةِ الحسنةِ و جادِلْهم بالتي هي أَحْسن

“Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom, good admonishment, and argue with them in a better way.” [An-Nahl: 125]

Ali -radi Allahu anhu- said: “Call the people to that with which they are familiar.” Thus it is incumbent that the insightful caller looks at the benefits and harms. So if the people of a country’s love for a man becomes strong and deep rooted, due to him being their imam, and them not knowing religiousness except from him, yet the caller deems him to be an astray innovator, then he should not say a thing against him (the innovator). Instill in them a love for the Sunnah and its people and warn from innovation in a general sense. (Say) this is innovation, that is innovation, like this, until it enters their souls and their hearts are at ease concerning it. ِAs for starting with it, this is wrong.

Furthermore, from the heads of innovation are men who are quite often in positions of authority within the country. For example, the minister of Islamic affairs, or the head of the judiciary, or the head judge of the country etc. This (type of individual) it would not be right to warn against him, due to it harming our call and not benefiting it. In Al Bukhari’s authentic collection, upon the authority Ayesha she said:

“Indeed a man sought permission to enter upon Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, so he said, “Grant him permission. O what an evil brother of his tribe.” When he entered, he -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- was friendly and cheerful, and spoke softly to him. Thus when the man exited, it was said to him, “O Messenger of Allah, you said what you said yet we noticed you were soft spoken in speech, friendly and cheerful towards him.” He said, “Indeed the most evil of people on the Day of Resurrection are those whom the people abandon being cautioned from his evil.”(1)

Therefore some people are neither boycotted nor warned against, because its evil will harm the people of Islam. As for the mistaken one, that which is within himself, it is not correct, yet he is not boycotted, nor is he held in high esteem.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: مجموعة الرسائل الجابرية في مسائل علمية وفق الكتاب و السنة النبوية: المجموعة الثانية

 


1: The hadith is translated in the manner in which Sheikh Ubayd mentioned it, however I’m not familiar with the wording the Sheikh quoted.

         

Leave a Comment

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Definition Of Country (Land) Of Disbelief And Land Of Islam: Sheikh Salih Alish-Sheikh

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

A polytheistic land is a country in which polytheism is manifest and predominant. This definition is what sheikh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim mentioned when questioned about a disbelieving country and what it is. He said a land of disbelief is that which disbelief is apparent and prominent. In light of this, whenever polytheism becomes distinct in a country and its distinction is predominant (it becomes widespread, visible, clearly evident, and prominent) this country is (deemed and) dubbed to be a polytheistic land (or country). This relates to what (normally) transpires therein which is polytheism.

As it relates to the people of the country, this topic is disputed among the people of knowledge. Is consideration in naming a country to be an Islamic country or a country of disbelief (directed to) its people? Ibn Taimiyyah was asked about a country in which rulings of disbelief and Islamic legislation are both visible therein, so he said that this type of country is not deemed (judged) to be neither a land of disbelief nor an Islamic land. On the contrary the Muslim conducts himself therein in accordance with Islam, whereas the disbeliever conducts himself according to disbelief.

Some scholars stated a country in which the call to prayer is evident and heard during the times of prayer is an Islamic country because the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- would say to whoever was with him, while out on a war expedition before invading a town in the morning hours,  wait! If the summons to prayer was made he would not attack, and if it was not heard they would attack.  This is debatable because the Arabs whenever they called to prayer this meant they affirmed and bore witness to the testimony of truth because they knew its intent. They fulfilled the rights of tawheed that comprises the call to prayer. So if they bore witness that there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and established the call to prayer, this indicated that they had abandoned and distanced themselves from polytheism.

Allah says:

فإن تابوا و أقاموا الصلاة وءاتَوُا الزكاة فإخوانكم في الدين

“If they repent, perform the prayer, and pay the annual charity, then they are consequently your brothers in faith.”  [At-Taubah: 11]

“If they repent” from polytheism “perform the prayer, and pay the annual charity, then they are consequently your brothers in faith.” This is on account that the Arabs knew the meaning of tawheed, thus if they entered into Islam and bore witness to the two testimonies, this implied that they acted in accordance with it. As for in this day and time there are an abundant of Muslims that say there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, however they do not truly know its intent, nor act in accordance to it. On the contrary you find polytheism being commonly practiced among them.

For this reason we say that this definition -a Muslim land or country is that wherein the adhan is manifest- in this day and time is not correct, and the evidence is its original affair, that being that the Arab would abandon and distance themselves from polytheism and its people. They would (willingly) uphold and implement monotheism, in contradiction to the people of this time period.

Therefore, the first definition concerning the titling of a country is more correct. It does not necessitate, regardless if it’s dubbed a polytheistic or Islamic country, that the ruling is based on the individuals residing therein. In contrast, we say that the ruling is based on what is predominate, and or by the manifestation of polytheism and disbelief, and whoever is therein is interacted with accordingly, especially in this era. This is due to the fact that the appearance of polytheism and disbelief in many countries does not occur by choice of the people of that land. Perhaps it is due to being overwhelmed, either by way of the Sufi paths or by way of the government, just as is well known and witnessed.

Hence we say that dubbing a country is restricted to what I clarified previously, as for its citizens then there conditions may differ.

Translated by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.

Source: شرح ثلاثة الأصول 

 

Comments Off on Definition Of Country (Land) Of Disbelief And Land Of Islam: Sheikh Salih Alish-Sheikh

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Bombarding The Critic Possessing Blameworthy Egotism, With An Analysis On What He Directed Of Vicious Criticism

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allah the Sublime and Exalted says:

و الذِينَ يُؤذُون المؤمنين و المؤمناتِ بغيرِ ما اكتسبوا فقدِ احْتَمَلُوا بهتاناً و إثمًا مبينًا

And those who harm believing men and women undeservedly, they surely bear (the crime of) slander and a clear sin.” [Al-Ahzab: 58]

Ibn Kathir said: “Meaning; attributing to them that which they are free of, they neither enact nor do such. “..they surely bear (the crime of) slander and a clear sin” and this is a tremendous slander to report or convey something about a believing man and woman that which they do not do, from the perspective of fault and disparagement. And who is more plentiful  in entering this threat than the disbelievers in Allah and His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, then the Shiite those who disparage the companions and find fault in them with that which Allah has freed them of, likewise they describe them with that which is opposite to what Allah has informed us of concerning them.”

This despicable characteristic is that which one does not expect to find in a salafi, let alone a student of knowledge who is known to frequent the circles of knowledge. As the scholars constantly warn against repugnant behavior, blameworthy statements and actions, and going beyond bounds with respect to the honor of another. As this is something firmly established in the prophetic traditions, as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day let him speak good or keep quiet.”

In light of this, it is very unfortunate to find that a student has criticized me with statements that one would expect to be uttered by an ignoramus or brazen enemy of the dawah. As my critic said about me “he’s all over youtube” referring to the audio and video lectures and sermons uploaded to youtube. My critic used this as his bases to substantiate 3 vicious accusations.

  1. I’m seeking leadership.
  2. I have a lack of ikhlaas.
  3. I’m putting myself forward. As it was conveyed to me that he said “why is he putting himself forward?”

Unfortunately my critic, by way of his reason and the conclusion he has drawn, has consequently opposed truth and guidance from that which has been learned and taught by our scholars. Thus it is not befitting for any salafi to fall into such, let alone a student of knowledge. As a result I intend, by Allah’s permission, to clarify in detail the opposition that my critic has fallen into, hoping that it be a source of benefit for all that it reaches. May Allah bless us with steadfastness upon the Sunnah, and protect us from transgressing His set boundaries.

الحكم على النَّاسِ بما ظَهَرَ لنا من أعمالهم و نَدَعُ السرائر إلى الله 

The ruling upon the people is based on what is made apparent to us from their actions, and we leave what they conceal inwardly to Allah

Umar Ibn Al Khattaab said, “Verily people were taken to account based on revelation during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, but revelation is now cut off, so now we hold you all to account based on what is apparent to us of your actions. So whoever displays good then we trust him and allow him to come close, and there is nothing upon us, as it relates to what he conceals inwardly. Allah will bring him to account regarding that. And whoever displays evil (outwardly) we do not trust nor believe him, even if he says that his intent is good.” Collected by Al Bukhari. 

The meaning of the second khaleefah’s statement is very explicit and self explanatory. It teaches us that the apparent actions of an individual, whether they be praiseworthy or blameworthy, is what is judged and purity or corruption of intent is not for us to determine. For this reason when Abdullah Jibreen attempted to defend Hasan Al Banna (founder of the Ikhwaanul Muslimeen movement) by alleging that he was one with pure intentions in pleasing Allah (a mukhlis); sheikh Ahmad An Najmi responded by saying “as for him being a mukhlis no one knows this except Allah, as ikhlaas is a hidden matter that no one knows except Allah.”(1) The sheikh was not concerned with Al Banna’s intent, on the contrary he judged him based on the apparent blameworthiness of his actions.

This understanding of Umar and the scholars of Sunnah after him is firmly established and supported by the text of the Quran and Sunnah, and with Allah’s aid I’d like to present some of these textual evidence.

Allah says: 

ثُمَّ قفَّينا على ءاثارهم برُسُلنا و قفَّينا بعيسى ابنِ مريمَ و ءاتيناه الإنجيلَ و جعلنا في قلوب الذين اتَّبعوه رأفةً و رحمةً و رهبانية ابتدعوها ما كتبناها عليهم إلا ابْتغاءَ رضوان الله فما رعوها حقَّ رعايتها

Then We sent after them our messengers, and We sent Esa son of Maryam, and We gave him the Injeel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy. (However) the monasticism which they invented, We did not prescribe for them, they (implemented it) seeking Allah’s pleasure but did not observe it with proper observance…” [Al Hadeed: 27]

Ibn Kathir said: “And His statement -they (implemented it) seeking Allah’s pleasure- has two interpretations. The first is that they intended by way of it obtaining Allah’s pleasure. Saeed ibn Jubair and Qataadah both stated this. The other interpretation is We did not prescribe this for them We only prescribed seeking Allah’s pleasure.”

Based on the first interpretation we see clearly their intent, however the actions they put forth were not legislated by Allah, on the contrary it was that which they obliged upon themselves, thus the criticism is based on the apparent of what they did. And this is the condition of the people of innovation. As they labor hard by putting forth acts of worship that they devote to Allah, however the actions they put forth, despite their intent, are judged to be misguidance. This reality is illustrated in Allah’s Book.

قُلْ هل ننبّئُكم بالأخسرين أعمالاً – الذين ضلّ سعيهم في الحياة الدنيا و هم يَحسبون أنَّهم يُحسنون صنعًا

Say: Shall We not inform you about the greatest losers with respect to actions? Those whose efforts are wasted in this worldly life while they thought that they were achieving good by their actions.” [Al-Kahf: 103-104]

For this reason Imaam Sufyaan Ath-Thawri said: “Innovation is more beloved to iblees than sins, due to innovation not being repented from, in contradiction to sins wherein repentance is sought.” [التحفة العراقية في الأعمال القلبية]

In addition there are examples of this tremendous principle found in the Sunnah.

1: The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they bear witness that there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, establish the prayer, and pay the zakah. If they do this, their blood and wealth are protected except with regards to the right of Islam, and their reckoning is with Allah.” Collected by both Al Bukhari and Muslim upon the authority of Ibn Umar.

Ibn Rajab said while explaining the statement –and their reckoning is with Allah-: “This was used as a proof by those who hold the opinion concerning accepting the repentance of the zindeeq, who is the hypocrite, when he outwardly displays the returning to Islam. They do not view the killing of him by merely the appearance of his hypocrisy, just as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- interacted with the hypocrites and conducted himself with them according to the rulings applied publicly to Muslims, even though he knew about the hypocrisy of some of them inwardly.” [جامع العلوم و الحكم]

Sheikh Saalih Alish-Sheikh said: “That is due to what came first from whoever publicly utters the testimony, performs the prayer, and pays the zakah. Thus we say that we accept the apparent of him and entrust his intentions to Allah, similar to the hypocrites’ circumstance. Indeed we know the hypocrites are disbelievers, however their blood and wealth are protected on account of what they make visible (of obedience to Allah and submission to His legislation), yet their reckoning is with Allah.” [شرح الأربعين النووية]  

2: Usamah Ibn Zaid said: “Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- sent us to Al Huraqah of Juhainah. We attacked them in the morning hours and defeated them. Meanwhile me and a man from the Ansar (pursued and) caught a man among them, when we approached him he said ‘there is no deity in truth except Allah’. (At that point) the Ansari spared him, whereas I struck him with my spear consequently killing him. When we returned news of this incident had already reached the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam. So he said to me, “O Usamah! Did you kill him after he said: There is no deity in truth except Allah?” I replied, “O Messenger of Allah! He only did that as a means of shelter.” He said, “Did you kill him after he said: There is no deity in truth except Allah? He did not cease repeating this to me until I wished that I had not accepted Islam before that day.”

Imam An Nawawi said, while explaining an addition to this narration in another chain of transmission: The Prophet’s -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement –Did you not break through (his chest) to (reach) his heart in order to know if it said it or not!?– The doer in his statement –it said it or not– is the heart. The meaning is that you are only burdened with the apparent action and whatever the tongue utters. As for the heart there is no path for ascertaining awareness of what is in it.” [شرح صحيح مسلم]

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin said: “Whoever displays good publicly, then we embrace him based on what he displayed publicly, even if he hides evil (intent). Whoever displays evil, we adopt a position with him based on his evil even if he conceals a pure intent, due to us not being burdened with anything except the apparent. This is Allah’s favor upon us that we do not judge except with what is apparent, because judging what is hidden is from the most difficult matters, and Allah does not burden a soul except with that which it can bear. 

Therefore whoever manifests good we interact with him based on the good he manifests to us. Likewise whoever manifests evil we interact with him based on the evil he manifests to us, and we have no responsibility concerning his intent. As the intent is entrusted to the Lord of all that exist, He who knows what the souls of men whisper.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]  

Hence the evidence concerning this subject, and the statements of the scholars are in abundance. In light of this, I find it baffling that a student would make statements of this nature that totally contradict this principle and its multitude of proofs. Especially since the apparent of my actions are considered to be praiseworthy in our religion. Dawah is a praiseworthy action that necessitates supporting the one who undertakes this task, it does not necessitate the type of foolishness emanated from my critic. Allah says:

و من أحسن قولاً ممن دعا إلى الله و عمل صالحًا و قال إنني من المسلمين

“And who is better in speech than he who calls (invites people) to Allah, does righteous deeds, and says: “Indeed I am from the Muslims!” [Al-Fussilat: 33]

Imam Ash-Shawkani said: “Meaning, he calls them to the tawheed of Allah and His obedience. Al-Hasan said: He is a believer who responded to Allah’s invitation, and he calls the people to that with which he responded to Allah as it pertains to obeying Him.” [فتح القدير]

Thus the question posed to my critic is; is this standard of yours applied to all involved in dawah, or is it specific to me?

There are numerous brothers involved in dawah by way of classes and lecture series whose lectures are recorded and circulated through various forums on social media. I witnessed, while in Los Angeles, our brother Fareed Abdullah allow his lectures to be recorded. I witnessed, while visiting Pittsburgh, our brother Moosa Richardson carrying a recorder shaped like a microphone which he used to record his khutbah and classes. I witnessed our brother Abu Abdis Salaam Al Juyaani record not only himself but our brother Abu Yususf Khaleefah at a lecture series that took place in Atlanta a few years back. And there are numerous brothers that do or allow this to be done. In fact our scholars conduct classes, lectures, and participate in seminars and allow their talks to be recorded.

So are we to draw the same conclusion as my critic and say none of the aforementioned are sincere? Or are we to say that all of them, in reality, are seeking leadership? Or are we to judge the action based on the apparent, that being the giving of dawah and the utilization of whatever means available to spread that dawah in an attempt to guide as many people as possible? Anyone with a sound intellect knows the correct answers to these questions, as the standard of my critic wouldn’t deem anyone involved in dawah to be a mukhlis, regardless if it’s a scholar or student of knowledge.  

Another question; what traits have you seen in me to validate the claim of seeking leadership?

Ibn Abdil Barr transmits a statement of Fudayl ibn Iyyaad where he said: “There is no one that loves leadership except that he envies (others), maltreats (others), trails after the faults of people, and he hates that anyone is mentioned with good.” [جامع بيان العلم و فضله]

In addition the people of knowledge have mentioned a number of characteristics that indicate love of leadership, status, and fame from them are:

Compromising the truth to the extent that one calls to falsehood while being fully aware that it is falsehood.
Sheikh Rabee stated: “Indeed some people desire superiority (elevated status) and corruption, but Allah has made paradise for he who does not desire superiority throughout the land nor corruption and the good end is for the pious. Loving fame and superiority is a rampant disease present today in an abundance of groups and parties due to the fact that these groups, and their direction (in which they steer themselves), if the proofs were established against their misguidance and deviance, they would not retract from their falsehood. They are the most similar of people to whom Allah addresses:

و لو أنَّنَا نزّلْنا إليهم الملائكة و كلَّمهم الموتى و حشرنا عليهم كلَّ شيءٍ قبلاً ما كانوا ليُؤمنوا
“And if We had sent down to them angels, and the dead spoke to them, and if We had gathered all things in front of them they would not have believed…” [Al-An’am: 111]

و لئن أتَيتَ الذين أُوتوا الكتابَ بكلِّ آيةٍ ما تبعوا قِبْلتك

“And if you had come to those that received the scripture with every sign they would not follow your prayer direction…” [Al Baqarah: 145]
The people of the book with them was rebelliousness, pride, envy, self aggrandizement, and the loving of corruption throughout the earth, they placed these things between themselves and Allah’s invitation.

فائن لم يستجيبوا لك فاعْلم أنَّما يتَّبعون أهواءهم و من أضل ممنِ اتَّبع هواه بغير هُدى من الله

“If they do not respond to you, then know that they only follow their desires. And who is more astray than he who follows his desires without guidance from Allah…” [Al-Qasas: 50]
By Allah we have written to plenty who we thought would accept the truth. We established the proofs and evidence, us and others besides us, but we did not see anything except fallacy, obstinacy, haughtiness, self aggrandizement, perseverance in extolling the most astray of Allah’s creation, and perseverance in the belittling of the people of truth along with oppression and transgression against them.” [فتاوى فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي عمير المدخلي]

Interacts with people arrogantly, displaying repugnant and snobbish behavior with them due to looking down upon them.
Sheikh Muhammad ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin said: “Arrogance (الكِبْر) is haughtiness and a person believing about himself that he is magnificent. Also (he believes) that he is above the people, and that he possesses some virtue over them.
Self amazement (الإعجاب) is a person looking at his own works and being amazed by them, he regards it as great and abundant.
Self amazement is in action while arrogance pertains to the self both are blameworthy creations. Arrogance has two types; arrogance with respect to the truth, and arrogance with respect to the creation. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- made this clear in his statement “arrogance is being discontent with the truth and looking down at people.” So being discontent with the truth is to reject and shun it, and to not accept it. Looking down at the people is to have a low opinion of and disrespect for them. Also to not view the people as anything, but views himself above them.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]

Literally requesting or asking to be put in a position of leadership.
Abu Musa said: I enter upon the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- along with two men from my people. One of them said, “O Messenger of Allah, give us governorship.” The second said the exact thing, so the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “We do not give authority to whomever asks for it, nor to he who aspires after it.” Collected by Al Bukhari and Muslim.

Belittling the accomplishments of others.

Sheikh-ul-Islaam Ibn Taimiyyah said: “The blameworthy differing of two parties, its cause, at times results from corruption of intent, due to what is within the soul from transgression, envy, desiring superiority throughout the land and similar to that. Hence he loves, as a result of what is within, to censure the speech of others, their actions (and whatsoever is accomplished by their actions), and gaining prominence in order to be distinguished from him. In another manner, he loves the statement of whoever agrees with him pertaining to lineage, thought (ideology), country, friendship, and whatever is similar to that due to its outcome of obtaining distinction and leadership. And how abundant this is within the descendants of Adam, this is (without doubt) oppression.” [اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم]  

Seeking nearness to people of status, virtue, and authority and avoiding those with lesser class and or status.

 In light of this no criticism of this sort should be accepted from anyone, regardless of their status, unless it is backed by factual observations to support the conclusion drawn. No one is free from following the guidelines and protocols found in our dawah, I emphasize ‘no one’ thus when a criticism against another comes (from a student) devoid of any proof it should be dismissed and the critic should be reminded to fear Allah. As Ibn Abbas said: “There is no one except that some of his speech is taken and some are abandoned except the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam.” Collected by At-Tabaraani [المعجم الكبير]. This was also stated by Mujaahid and most notably by Imam Malik.

Furthermore, what is it that would lead a person to criticize another in this manner for merely being involved in dawah? What causes him to have discontent for the caller for merely conducting classes, being consistent therein, and seeing the people accept his dawah? What causes him to view the actions of the caller as insignificant to the point he gives no support to the caller even if it be by speaking good of him based on the apparent of his actions? How is it that one that calls to Tawheed and the Sunnah, and warns against what contradicts it (in his specific locality) be maltreated in this manner?

What is feared for such an individual (the critic) is that he may have fallen into that of which he accuses his brother. Thus I advise my critic and those like him to fear Allah, the only reason why a Muslim puts forth a criticism against another is for Allah’s sake, being in accordance with His command, and seeking His reward. Whatever contradicts that is a source of failure and a means of separation between two brothers. Anas Ibn Malik narrated the statement of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-: “No two individuals love each other for Allah’s sake, then (suddenly) there’s a split between them except that it’s due to a sin one committed (against the other).” [الأداب المفرد] 

  My critic’s statement: “Why is he putting himself forward?”

Here my critic sarcastically criticized my conducting classes. The question has negative connotations that illustration the shamelessness of the critic by putting forth this criticism while he knows nothing of the condition of the people to whom I teach. The people in this community are plagued with ignorance, to the extent that the community would give juice as zakat-ul- fitr. There are errors in the etiquette and dress code concerning the prayer with both men and women that, in some cases, can affect the validity of the act, and other errors of this nature. So if this is the case with these issues, one can imagine the errors with respect to the fundamentals of the religion.

The rampant ignorance in this community has been witnessed by our brothers Abdur Rahman Al Afriki, Abu Yusuf Khaleefah, and Abu Muhammad Al Jamaiki, as all three have visited in order to help the situation here. So despite my critic’s preference in having me do nothing, I would ask how I correlate his feelings with the following guidance found in the Quran and Sunnah?

إنّ الذين يُكْتمون ما أنْزلْنا من البيِّناتِ و الهدى من بعد ما بينّاه للناس في الكتاب أُولائك يَلْعنهم الله و يلعنهم اللاعنون

“Indeed those that conceal what We have sent down from clarity and guidance, after We made it clear for the people, they are those whom Allah curse and are cursed by those who curse.” [Al Baqarah: 159]

In addition, we have the statement of Abu Huraira who said: “If it were not for two verses in Allah’s book I would not have narrated from him (the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam) anything ever.” He then quoted verses 174 and 175 of Al Baqarah.

He also narrated the statement of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam: “There is no man that memorizes knowledge then conceals it except that he will be brought on the Day of Resurrection bridled by reins from the fire.” Collected by Ibn Maajah.

Imam Ash-Shawkani said: His statement -“Indeed those that conceal”– to the end of the verse, therein is notification that whoever conceals such is cursed. The scholars differed as it relates to its intent. Thus it is said that it refers to the Jewish rabbis and the Christian priests who concealed the affair of Muhammad -sallahu alayhi wa sallam. Likewise it is said that it refers to all who conceal the truth and abandon clarifying whatsoever Allah has made binding to be clarified. And that is the more sound position, because the consideration is in the generality of the speech and not the specific reason (for which it was revealed), as is established in the fundamental principles (of tafsir).

So assuming that the descending of the verse was due to what occurred from the Jews and Christians with regards to concealing the truth, that does not negate the including within this verse of everyone that conceals the truth.” [فتح القدير]

Furthermore we have our Messenger’s -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement: “Convey from me even if it be one verse, narrate from the descendants of Israel as there is no harm (in doing such), and whoever lies on me intentionally let him be settled in his seat from the fire.” Collected by Al Bukhari.

Sheikh Al Uthaymin said: “Convey to the people what I say and do. Moreover (convey) all of his sunnah. “Convey from me even if it be one verse” from Allah’s book, and the “even if” here is for minimization. It means that no one should say that I can’t convey unless I am a major scholar, no! A person only conveys, even if it’s a verse, with the condition that he has knowledge of it, and that (he knows) it is the speech of the Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]   

In summary, there is no relevant correlation between my critic’s speech and these prophetic directives, in fact the previously mentioned evidence illustrates the fact that my critic’s speech is wallowed in ignorance, stupidity, and narrow mindedness to say the least.

My Advice

I advise my critic (and whomsoever falls into the same foolishness as him) to have taqwa of Allah, and to be conscious of Allah before uttering statements of this nature against anyone. Consultation and direction was sought from sheikh Rabee concerning differing that occurs among the salafis, in order to do away with these types of conflicts, the sheikh started his response by saying: “This emanates from a weakness in taqwa, steadfastness, and being upright. If there was steadfastness and uprightness upon the true command of Allah you would not find these sorts of things. This is nothing more than personal issues..” [من الشريط: النصائح و التوجيهات تعين على الثبات]  

So fear Allah, and seek refuge with Him from being overtaken by the whispers of shaytan, for indeed it is the shaytan that loves discord between brothers. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Surely the shaytan has fallen into despair, regarding those devoted to prayer, worshiping him in the Arabian Peninsula, however (he strives for) discord between you.” Collected by Muslim.

Fear oppressing your brothers, Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Fear oppression for indeed oppression is darkness on the day of resurrection.(2) Likewise he said: “Fear the invocation of the oppressed, for indeed there is no veil between it and Allah.(3) He also said “The bankrupt person from my nation will come on the day of resurrection with prayers, fasting, and charity, along with that he shall come with having insulted this person, accusing this person, misappropriating the wealth of this person, spilling the blood of this person, and striking this person. Thus this one and that one will be given from his good deeds. If his good deeds become depleted before the completion of what is upon him, then their (those oppressed by him) sins will be taken and hurled upon him, then he will be flung into the fire.” Collected by Muslim.

I remind my critic about the sanctity of the Muslim, as Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Prohibited upon the Muslim is the blood, wealth, and honor of another Muslim.(4) He also said during the Hajj: “Indeed your blood and honor are forbidden, like this day of yours, in this month of yours, in this land of yours…” Collected by Al Bukhari and Muslim.

Ahlus Sunnah are the foremost among the Muslims in implementation of these prophetic directives, thus it is hoped that my critic (and whomsoever falls into the same foolishness as him) strongly reflect and ponder on these statements of our Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- in order to protect themselves from falling into opposition to his guidance in this regard, and with Allah is success.

Written by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.


 

1: رد الجواب على من طلب مني عدم طبع الكتاب

2: Sahih Muslim 2578 and 2579

3: Sahih Al Bukhari 1395 and 1458. Sahih Muslim 19

4: Sahih Muslim 2564

  

Leave a Comment

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Cautioning Those With Virtuous Intellect Pertaining To What Is In The Pact Of Muhammad Al Imaam From Opposition And Recklessness: Sheikh Abdullah Ath-Thufairi

The Forward Of Sheikh Salih Al Fawzan

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

:الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على نبينا محمد و آله و صحبه و بعد

I have looked over this treatise entitled "Cautioning those with pure intellect.." by sheikh Abdullah ibn Salfeeq Ath-Thufairi and I consider it to be complete in its subject matter, may Allah reward him with good and benefit via his knowledge.

Introduction

Indeed Allah taught us, in His Book, to refer back to the scholars during (times of) tribulation due to them being people of truth and guidance. They are possessors of insight and intellect who enliven the dead via Allah's Book and give sight to the blind via Allah's light. They remove from His Book the distortions of extremists, the unfounded notions of falsifiers, and the (corrupted) interpretations of the ignorant; they who take up the banner of innovation and let loose the reins of discord. In light of this our Lord has made the returning back to them binding upon us. As He says

و إذا جاءهم أمرٌ من الأمن أو الخوف أذاعوا به و لو ردوه إلى الرسول و إلى أُولى الأمر منهم لعلمه الذين يستنبطونه منهم و لولا فضل الله عليكم و رحمته لاتَّبعتم الشيطان إلّا قليلًا

"Whenever there comes an affair pertaining to safety or fear (of the community), they spread it; if they had only referred it back to the Messenger and those in authority among them, those who are skilled in deduction would have comprehended it from them." [An-Nisaa: 83]

Thus no trial has befallen a people who were burned by its flame except that the scholars were nonexistent (among them) or they abandon referring (their affairs) to them. Al Bukhari said (in the chapter of his sahih entitled: How knowledge will be taken) Umar ibn Abdul Aziz wrote to Abu Bakr ibn Hazm (saying to him): Examine whatsoever is from the narrations of Allah's Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- and write them, as surely I fear for you the knowledge based lessons (as if he means the lessons taught by the ignorant) and the departing of the scholars, so do not accept anything except the narrations of Allah's Messenger, spread knowledge, and sit until the one who does not know is taught. Indeed knowledge will not be ruined until it becomes secretive."    

Afterwards Al Bukhari said (narrating a complete chain that leads back to Abdullah ibn Amr Ibnil Aas): Allah's Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam said, "Surely Allah will not take knowledge by snatching it from the servant, however He will take knowledge by taking the scholars until there remains no scholar. (At this point) the people will take knowledge from the heads of the ignorant. They will be asked and will issue verdicts devoid of knowledge. They are astray and they lead others astray."

This is what has occurred with regards to Muhammad ibn Abdullah Ar-Raymi who's better known as Muhammad Al Imam the head teacher at An-Nur center in Mabar, Yemen. As he had the audacity to conclude a pact with the Shiite without returning back to the firmly grounded scholars nor seeking their counsel. Consequently, with regards to this agreement, he made himself a representative of the salafis, as if salafiyyah is nothing more than a party like the varying parties that draw up agreements without referring back to the people of authority or the firmly grounded scholars in which we, without doubt, have been ordered to return to legislatively.

Due to this the scholars and students of knowledge our dignitaries and brothers from Ahlus Sunnah in Saudi and Yemen have disapproval for this haphazard pact which contains therein major wrongs. So whoever desires the truth from those who have been given (the gift) of hearing and is a witness (to what is occurring) is sufficed by them (the scholars criticizing Al Imam's actions), they are:

  • The virtuous scholar and doctor, Rabee ibn Hadee Al Madkhali
  • The virtuous scholar Ubayd ibn Abdullah Al Jaabiri
  • The virtuous scholar and doctor Abdullah ibn Abdur Rahman Al Bukhari
  • The virtuous scholar and doctor Arafaat ibn Hasan Al Muhammadi
  • The virtuous scholar and soldier (mujahid, as he has literally fought in battles against the Houthi) Hani ibn Ali Al Burayk

Nonetheless, I will write (in addition to their criticism) some remarks and will add (to the discussion) that which they did not cover, and this is for two reasons.

First: Muhammad Al Imam's persistence in defending this document and acting in accordance with its clauses til this very day, even though the Saudi and Yemeni governments along with the Gulf States are at war with the Houthi. They have broken agreements, killed Ahlus Sunnah, and have been plentiful in acting treacherously with them, and they loyally support Iran by way of weaponry and ordnance.

Second: Muhammad Al Imam's followers passing judgement on people to be misguided by alleging that sheikh Salih Al Fawzan agrees with this document.

Below is a picture of the document, and subsequent to that is a refutation of it.

Translator: Below is a translation of its meaning.  

The Treaty Of Mutual Coexistence And Brotherhood

All Praise is for Allah who said: 

إنما المؤمنين إخوة

"The believers are brothers" 

Allah, Al Atheem has spoken the truth, and may peace and commendations be upon our leader Muhammad, his purified family, and his outstanding companions among the immigrants and helpers and whomsoever follows them exactly in faith.

We are Muslims all of us. Our Lord, Book, prophet, and enemies are one (and the same), even though we may differ in detailed matters pertaining to subsidiaries issues. Al Islam has made prohibited our blood, honor, and wealth among us. Based on this a pact has been concluded between Allah's helpers who are represent by Abdul Malik Badruddin Al Houthi and the salafis of An-Nur center in Mabar, and the other centers adjoined to it, represented by sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdullah Al Imam on the following:

  1. Peaceful coexistence between the two groups devoid of negative influences (that pull them into conflict), clashes, fighting, and trials regardless of whatever the reason and circumstances may be. Also (agreed upon) freedom of thought and culture is guaranteed for all of them.
  2. The ceasing of all hostile and inflammatory speech from both sides that is directed to each other from multiply avenues and (done by taking advantage of) every opportunity. (Also agreed upon is) the laboring to harvest the spirit of brotherhood and assistance between all.
  3.   The continuance of direct activity between both sides to combat any incident, problem, or (negative) behavior of an individual or any attempt  from another aspect inserted (among us) in order to flare up the situation and determine a stance from this.

Completed on the 28th of Shaban 1435 after hijra which coincides with June 26, 2014.

Translator: Signed by Muhammad Al Imam and Abdul Malik Al Houthi.

Rebutting The Pact

I (the sheikh) profess this while seeking Allah's success and assistance, and in Him is my reliance.

FIRST: The document is entitled "The Treaty Of Mutual Coexistence And Brotherhood" and because of this there are objections.

  1. The concluding of this pact by Muhammad Al Imam with a Shiite group that is separate from the government and its rule; wages war against it; takes its direction from another antagonistic country (Iran) in order to extend its influence by way of weaponry, all of this in itself is transgression against the country (Yemen), its leader, and the scholars to whom which there is obligation in returning to, as was previously stated.

    This is besides it being in opposition to the religion and the instructions of the firmly grounded scholars. It is foolish, incomprehensible, and deficient in wisdom. It is both amazing and deceptive. Muhammad Al Imam is deceived by his center (his position and status therein) and the students that surround him. He believes he is their leader and that he has a right to speak on their behalf and on behalf of the other centers (and or institutes) connected to his without referring matters back to the people of authority and or counsel from the scholars.                                                                                                                                            

  2. The term "brotherhood" contradicts the creed and foundation of love and association (for Allah's sake), and hate along with disassociation with respect to the Muslims and idol worshipers. Although it maybe correct as it relates to mutual coexistence, with regards to brotherhood it (usage of this term) is not permissible. Faith based brotherhood is not applied to anyone except the Muslims, as for the idol worshipers there is absolutely no brotherhood with them whatsoever. Allah says:
    إنما المؤمنون إخوة
    "Only the believers are brothers..."[Al-Hujurat: 10]

    فإن تابوا و أقاموا الصلاة و ءاتوا الزكاة فإخوانكم في الدين
    "So if they repent, establish the prayer, and pay the zakat, then they are your brothers in religion..."[At-Taubah: 11]

    لا تجد قوماً يُؤمنون بالله و اليوم الأخرِ يُوادّون من حادّ الله و رسولَه و لو كانوا ءَاباءَهم أو أبناءَهم أو إخوانهم أو عشيرتهم أُولئك كتب في قلوبهم الإيمان و أَيَّدهم بروحٍ منه
    "You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day befriending those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they be their fathers, or their sons, their brothers, or their kinfolk. For such He has written faith in their hearts and has strengthened them a Ruh from Himself..."[Al-Mujaadilah: 22]
     
    The Houthi are Shiite from the twelver sect who are the most wicked sect of Shiite as it relates to polytheism and disbelief. So how is it that a pact be concluded with them on basis of brotherhood? Indeed this is a serious matter and a grave evil.

SECOND: The Statement " ...his purified family, and his outstanding companions among the immigrants and helpers..."

Surely the one reading this speech at first glance will not suspect any wrong, however when reflecting on the wickedness of the Shiite and their creed as it relates to the reviling of Ayesha and their judgement of disbelief towards the mothers of the believers (wives of the Prophet) and the noble companions; at that time the reader will recognize that comprised therein is wickedness. Thus it is obligatory upon a sunni Muslim whenever he deals with the people of innovation and with the Shiite to be astute (using full faculties of intellect) during their utilization of generalized statements and expressions that have multiple implications. And also with their utilization of their religious technical terminology (one must be astute comprehending its meanings).

In light of this, it's obvious that this expression in meaning excludes Ayesha -the mother of the believers- from the Prophet's -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- family because they do not deem Ayesha to be pure. It excludes Allah's pleasure for a multitude of companions as they are not deemed from the outstanding with the Shiite. The word "among" indicates their referral to some (and not all). Within their tenets the majority of companions are disbelievers, and they only mean by those to whom which Allah is pleased the following: Ali, Ammar and a small number of companions that are not counted (in full) by (all) the fingers. This is an example of the slander and evil of the Shiite pertaining to the mother of the believers and the companions may Allah be pleased with all of them. Thus it is compulsory for Muhammad Al Imam to comprehend this and to neither be satisfied with general expressions that are comprised of evil and slyness nor their religious terminologies that are the starting points to their mishaps, as the intent is crystal clear.

Unfortunately it comes as no surprise that Muhammad Al Imam remains quiet about these generalizations, as he has remained quiet concerning  clear and detailed disbelief found in this document.

THIRD: "We are Muslims all of us. Our Lord, Book, prophet, and enemies are one (and the same), even though we may differ in detailed matters pertaining to subsidiaries issues." This is objectionable.

  1. The statement "We are Muslims all of us."

    Is this generalization applied to the Shiite, they who commit major polytheism and many of that which nullifies Islam, permissible? Isn't this nothing more than a misrepresentation given to the masses depicting the soundness of the Shiite's creed? Are the judgments of the scholars past and present concerning the Shiite hidden to Muhammad Al Imam, from them declaring the Shiite creed and their learned people (those whose arguments have been debunked) to be disbelief?   

  2. "(Our) Book (is one)..."

    How can it be that our book is one and the same when they believe and affirm in their relied upon books that the noble Quran is distorted?

  3. "(Our) enemies are one..."

    And this is a lie as the annals of history establish the fact that they throughout Islamic history have aligned themselves with the Jews against Ahlus Sunnah. Furthermore they were with the crusaders against the Muslims and today the Houthi align themselves with the enemies of Ahlus Sunnah with hearts and minds (Iran). So why use such trickery and deception with the Muslims?

  4.  "even though we may differ in detailed matters pertaining to subsidiaries issues."

    This is the most perilous of what is found in the treaty. In this is Muhammad Al Imam's acknowledgement that our differing with the Shiite is only in subsidiary issues similar to the differing among the companions and the four schools of jurisprudence. As for the creed, there is no differing between us and them. As a result no evidence is needed to disprove the falsehood of this statement as the common person is well acquainted with the deviant creed and fundamentals of the Shiite that expel one from the religion. So I asked Muhammad Al Imam, what happened to your authored works concerning this subject? Books like:
    "The Yemeni Shiite's attacks against the entrusted companions of the Messenger" and "The Yemeni Shiite throughout the annals of history."
    So why have you changed? Why do you (stubbornly) defend your change (for the worse)? And what is the root cause of such?

  5. "..a pact has been concluded between Allah's helpers who are represent by Abdul Malik Badruddin Al Houthi."

    Are the Shiite Allah's helpers? Is it permissible for a Muslim to affirm for them this description? Or are they in reality helpers of the devil, polytheism, grave worship, and Iran? Thus I am shocked by you, Muhammad Al Imam, due to this affirmation and I seek refuge with Allah from flip flopping and cowardice.

FOURTH: "Peaceful coexistence between the two groups devoid of negative influences (that pull them into conflict), clashes, fighting, and strife regardless of whatever the reason and circumstances may be. Also (agreed upon) freedom of thought and culture is guaranteed for all of them." This is also a great debacle in which there are objections.

  1. The unrestricted nature of their statement, "devoid of negative influences (that pull them into conflict), clashes, fighting, and strife regardless of whatever the reason and circumstances may be." This nonrestrictive statement indicates foolishness, weakness, and cowardice as it necessitates the absences of fighting the Houthi no matter what emanates from them. Even if they fight and kill Ahlus Sunnah in other regions within Yemen, or if the Muslims from Ahlus Sunnah publicly announce a general call to arms against them. Muhammad Al Imam would be obliged to follow the pact and could not fight alongside his brothers from Ahlus Sunnah even if the fighting and battling was an individual obligation (upon every able body male).

    Moreover it requires Muhammad Al Imam and whomever is under his authority to adhere to this pact, as its agreements are nonrestrictive, (making it binding) even if deception and betrayal occur. Accordingly they have rejected the Muslims agreed upon parameters and scope of obedience to whomever the Muslims have gathered under the authority of in Yemen. This is what is required of Muhammad Al Imam based on this pact til this very day. In fact, the first Jumuah after the initiation of Decisive Storm (Saudi's war campaign against the Houthi) Muhammad Al Imam stood (during the sermon) in disapproval of the operation that was only implemented subsequent to the Houthi's treachery and violation of international accords. Thus he referred to the operation as persecution and has not ceased calling it such.

    Furthermore a sermon conducted on the 15th of Shawwal in 1436 confirms this. Therein he depicted the current fighting against the Houthi as civil strife. He also claimed whoever does not participate in such is a person of intellect and understanding, as he intends by that himself and those with him. He also cited text and narrations applying it to that, and this is what points to the fact that he is merely one who memorizes and conveys without comprehension thereof. He does not distinguish between fighting deemed jihad against those causing corruption and fighting deemed to be civil strife. From what he mentioned in the sermon:

    A: Subsequent to citing narrations on fighting and killing he said: "This is a prophetic clarification with regards to the circumstance of those who deem permissible, find pleasurable, accept, and are at ease with turmoil. The entering therein and being drawn into this (current) major strife." To his statement: "Just as you see the propelling towards civil strife and killing, even though yesterday it was strictly unrest among certain groups and in certain regions, but today it is fighting and killing between countries and citizens."

    B: He stated: " I say, standing in this place of mine, I call the Muslims generally and Ahlus Sunnah specifically to reconsider this matter and to recognize what Allah has endowed upon whomever He wills from His servants from understanding turmoil, being distant from it, its end results, and its harms in this life and the next." Afterwards he mentioned some narrations perverting its intent to substantiate (the claim) that this fighting is civil strife. He also mentioned narrations using them as evidence to state that the person of comprehension is he who shuns this civil strife. By it he points to his position as he has stated loudly.

    C: He said while referring indirectly to Decisive Storm: "Surely people of faith do not fight anyone except whomever Allah has commanded to fight. They do not fight anyone on account of a independent principle based opinion in these issues (that necessitate returning back to scholars of jurisprudence). These issues there is no independent (knowledge and principle based) opinion therein, nor is there contentment with it therein. Whoever firmly takes these affairs will neither kill a Muslim nor fight him. In this regard it will be an evidence for him like the sun in the middle of the day."

    I say: Glorified is Allah! Where is he from the statement of the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam: "When a judge gives a decision while striving (in deducing what is right), and is correct, for him is two rewards. When a judge gives a decision while striving (in deducing what is right), and is incorrect, for him is one reward."
    And his -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- statement: "When you besiege a fort and the besiege want you to lessen their affliction according to Allah's judgment, do not lessen it for them (attributing it to Allah), on the contrary lessen it according to your discretion (you represent yourself), as you do not know if you will be correct concerning them or not according to Allah's judgment.
    D: His statement: "Is this not enormous where, at this point, the Muslim is killed now (supposedly) out of honor and nobility, and supposedly as assistance and granting victory (to him)? Whoever, from the Muslims, that kills (now) goes about professing victory, and displaying pride. Indeed he is in a drunken state of triumph. Which victory? Triumphant towards (entering) Hell? Be cautious o poor one and do not be deceived by chaos. The Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- said, "Whoever kills a believer and rejoices as a result of his killing his obligatory and voluntary actions will not be accepted on the Day Of Resurrection." Meaning neither the compulsory or non compulsory acts."

    E: Until he got to the point where he said, while warning from entering into the civil strife occurring in Yemen: "So I warn the Yemeni people specifically and the Muslims generally, and even more specific Ahlus Sunnah from remaining, being drawn towards, and accepting the entering into this chaos, so do not be delighted...and the scholars differ pertaining to their awareness of chaos, its harms, and outcome." Subsequent to that he mentioned some narrations applying them to what he said, then he said, "Pay attention. This is a great tribulation, a great tribulation, a great tribulation, the mild mannered individual doesn't deem it easy, nor does he hasten to accept it. For this reason I advise the community to reconsider these affairs..."  

  2. Their statement "freedom of thought and culture is guaranteed for all of them." Wow! Does Islam acknowledge falsehood? Does it condone polytheism? Does it condone reviling the companions if the one differing with such sees that this is an individuals thoughts and opinions?

    Furthermore, does Islam guarantee for anyone continuance upon his innovation and creed to the point that it disapproves of anyone reprimanding him as a result of it, or declaring him to be astray and warning against him? Where is the Islamic rite of enjoining good and forbidding evil? That which some scholars considered to be from Islam's pillars. Allah says:

    ولْتكن منكم أُمة يدعون إلى الخير و يأْمرون بالمعروف و ينهَون عن المنكر و أولئك هم المفلحون
    "Let there arise from you a nation inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is correct and forbidding what is wrong, and they are those who are successful." [Ali-Imran: 104]

    كنْتم خير أمّةٍ أُخرجت للناس تأْمرون بالمعروف و تبهون عن المنكر و تؤمنون بالله
    "You are the best nation extracted from mankind, you enjoin the good and forbid the wrong, and you believe in Allah." [Ali-Imran: 110]

    And the Messenger's -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- statement, "Whoever among you that sees a wrong let him change it with his hand. If he is unable then with is tongue. If he is unable then with his heart, and that is the weakest of faith."

    His -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- statement, "Beware of newly invented matters (in the religion), indeed every novelty (in religion) is an (accursed) innovation, and every innovation is misguidance, and every (act of) misguidance is in the fire."

    So how is it that Muhammad Al Imam abolishes these textual evidence, and accepts what the Houthi Objectors dictate to him and that which is within it of a corrupt theology that is allowed to bypass and spread, especially since there is no justification by way of fear or coercion with regards to this pact? And even if we were to say, for argument's sake, that there was coercion, why has he not stopped acknowledging this pact nor freed himself from it? On the contrary he works in accordance with its stipulations til this very day. The strange thing is that he implored King Abdullah to repent as a result of organizing interfaith dialogue, when he said in his book entitled -The Disaster Of Calling To Interfaith Dialogue-: "Surely we have made explicitly clear in this treatise of ours that King Abdullah and those alongside him, their inviting to interfaith dialogue consists of misfortunes and calamities that necessitate from them repentance to Allah from such propaganda." Yet King Abdullah never called to freedom of religion; nor is freedom of thought, corrupt theology, and deviant doctrines recognized in the school curriculum of Saudi Arabia. On the contrary the creed of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa'ah and the Salaf in every grade is taught. Likewise tawheed is learned in every region of the kingdom even in the province where there is therein Ismaeli Shiite and others. Within the kingdom's curriculum is the warning against every misguided sect and distorted doctrine. For this reason I'm surprised at this man.  

FIFTH: "The ceasing of all hostile and inflammatory speech from both sides that is directed to each other from multiply avenues and (done by taking advantage of) every opportunity. (Also agreed upon is) the laboring to harvest the spirit of brotherhood and assistance between all." Regarding this, there are objections.

  1. Contain therein is the termination of the foundation of love for Allah's sake. Also termination of the foundations of the creed in actualization of association and disassociation for His sake.
  2. Abandonment of inciting towards fighting the Houthi if the head of state in Yemen announces mobilization (against them).
  3. Working towards fostering brotherhood with the pagan Shiite.
  4. Enacting the principle of the Ikwaanul Muslimeen: We gather upon that which we agree, and excuse one another in whatsoever we differ.
  5. Therein is the appeal to assist the shiite idol worshipers, who are people of treachery and deception.

Allah says:
و المؤمنون و المؤمنات بعضُهم أولياءُ بعضٍ
"The believers, male and female, are allies and supporters of one another..." [At-Taubah: 71]
المنافقون و المنافقات بعضهم من بعض
"The Hypocrites, male and female, are one from another..." [At-Taubah: 67]

SIXTH: "The continuance of direct activity between both sides to combat any incident, problem, or (negative) behavior of an individual or any attempt  from another aspect inserted (among us) in order to flare up the situation and determine a stance from this."

Accordingly, this is what Muhammad Al Imaam has carried out from the first day after initiation of operation Decisive Storm til this very hour. He disapproved of the war initiated by Saudi Arabia and its brothers from the international allegiance against the Houthi, as he stated in his sermon that followed the start of Decisive Storm.

  • "Yemen has become an arena for fighting and killing. I yearn for Yemen to be free of these calamities, and that will be by Allah's permission (a duty) upon the hands of the intelligent, the trustworthy, and those who put forward the general benefit (affecting the entire community), over the individual benefit."
  • "The harms are major, the mistakes are immense and destructive."
  • "As for the increase of turmoil, fighting, and killing, it is what has led the people to this circumstance. It is what has been brought upon the people from evil and turmoil."

Likewise from that which alludes to his persistence upon this, is what I conveyed earlier from his sermon conducted two weeks ago on the 15th of Shawwal, 1,436 yrs after the migration.

SEVENTH: In addition to that which is very dangerous, is that which Muhammad Al Imam's followers have embarked upon from declaring people to be astray by use of a lie invented against sheikh Salih Al Fawzan, it being him supporting this pact. An example of this is that which is mentioned on the website salfi.net from what was conveyed by Uthman As Saalimi and Jameel Al Haamili; both presented some of the articles of this pact to Al Fawzan, and as a result he supported Muhammad Al Imam. So he said "The affair has concluded concerning what was signed" and he said, "Sheikh Muhammad Al Imam is more aware of his circumstance and the circumstance of his country." He also said, "What Sheikh Muhammad Al Imam has done by signing this pact, it is required in order to preserve the dawah, the peoples' blood, and their honor."

I say: Although they speak the truth concerning the conveyed statement, they did not present the entire agreement to Sheikh Salih Al Fawzan. Had they presented to Sheikh Al Fawzan the pact in its entirety along with what was illustrated previously from Muhammad Al Imam's stance against operation Decisive Storm, the sheikh would have rejected this pact. How could the sheikh be in conformity with its clauses while there is contained therein mutilation of the creed?

This method of deception is conducted by the people of desire. They attribute false statements to the scholars that which they are free from, like those who attempt to make Al Fawzan's recognition of their retraction from a mistake to be a recommendation and praise of them. Or like those who would misrepresent Al Fawzan's speech about taking the truth from whomever speaks it, that being an unrestricted recommendation for whoever puts forth a word of truth. The Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- said to Abu Huraira when the shaitan informed him about the virtue of ayat-ul-kursi:

"He spoke the truth, although he is a liar."

So taking the truth from he who speaks it is not a recommendation for him, nor a call to travel to him in order to learn from him. And this is the last rebuttal of this pact, and we asked Allah to guide misguided Muslims, to shelter us from the shades of turmoil (and or tribulations), and Allah knows best. May Allah's prayers, commendations, and blessing be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all his companions.

Written by Abdullah Ibn Salfeeq Ath-Thufairi,

in the morning of the 3rd day of the week, on the 26th day of the month of Shawwal, 1,436 yrs after the migration (this corresponds with Tuesday, August 11, 2015).

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi 

Source: Article entitled: تنبيه ذوي العقول الزاكيات إلى ما في وثيقة محمد الإمام من مخالفات و مجازفات 

  

 

Comments Off on Cautioning Those With Virtuous Intellect Pertaining To What Is In The Pact Of Muhammad Al Imaam From Opposition And Recklessness: Sheikh Abdullah Ath-Thufairi

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Syrians Fleeing To Europe And America: Sheikh Abdullah Al Bukhari

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Syrians traveling to Europe and America is now common, so is traveling there under these current circumstances (civil strife taking place in Syria) permissible? Also there are some people who issue religious verdicts to them stating it to be permissible, so what are the prerequisites and guidelines for traveling to these countries?

A: First: we say may Allah bless you, and we ask Allah to relieve our brothers in Syria from their distress and to relieve the people of truth and Islam throughout the rest of the earth from their distress. Those who’re in Yemen, Iraq, Libya and in other places from all the lands of Islam and in whatever place they may be. May Allah relieve them of their troubles and quell their enemies.

Second: If it is necessary for them to leave and they are unable to stay due to some hindrance, then what is most appropriate is for them to go to a Muslim country wherein they can enact Islamic customs, and protect their religion, children’s cultivation, and their families. On the contrary if they are unable to do this and they find for themselves a refuge or place out of necessity, necessity, and I emphasize necessity, for a necessity, then there is no harm, however it should not be for permanent residency. When Allah makes it easy for them to return, they should return immediately, but what is binding upon them is to search for a Muslim country first.

If they can not stay in their country due to some (what Islam deems as) legitimate hindrance, then upon them is to leave (fleeing) to a Muslim country. If they are unable and there is an extreme necessity in their situation then there is no wrong (in fleeing to these two non Muslim countries), of course this is not for permanent residency. This is coupled with being aware and required for a man to preserve his religion while in these countries. Also to strive in adhering to the purified legislation, to protect his children, and to distances himself from mixing with the people of disbelief and being at ease with them, so that he may not be swayed or deceived thus ending up with them. We ask Allah for safety and well being. His traveling there is only out of necessity and a necessity is only assessed in proportion to it(s need), and Allah is most high and most knowledgeable.  

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

http://miraath.net/questions.php?cat=130&id=4014

 

Comments Off on Syrians Fleeing To Europe And America: Sheikh Abdullah Al Bukhari

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Islamic Shura Is Democracy: Shaykh Muhammad Amaan Al Jaami

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In this day and age the educated’s circulated mistakes, that which we desire to deter before its sickness becomes irreparable, is their delusion that the advisory council demanded in Islam is the western style democracy. However they are two different affairs that never meet like light and darkness or the day and night. This is due to the fact that democracy is a foreign expression (unheard of in Islam) which means the majority (of people) rules. In other words the people adopt laws for themselves and enact legislation (they feel) is suitable for them without any consideration for Allah’s legislation to a point where the people are the legislative authority. It (as a result) is the worshiped deity and this is completed by way of representatives of parliament who act on behalf of the people.

As for consultation in Islam Allah made it a characteristic of the believer where He states:

و أمرهم شورى بينهم

“…and who conduct their matters by mutual consultation…” [Ash-Shura: 38]

Allah even ordered the Prophet Muhammad -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- to seek it. He the Exalted says:

فَبِمَا رَحْمَةٍ مِّنَ اللَّهِ لِنتَ لَهُمْ وَلَوْ كُنتَ فَظًّا غَلِيظَ الْقَلْبِ لَانفَضُّوا مِنْ حَوْلِكَ فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ وَشَاوِرْهُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ فَإِذَا عَزَمْتَ فَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَوَكِّلِينَ

“And by Allah’s mercy you behaved with them gently, and had you been severe and harsh hearted they would have turned away from you; so overlook their faults, seek forgiveness for them, and consult them in affairs. Then when you have made a decision put your trust in Allah, certainly Allah loves those who put their trust in Him.” [Ali-Imran: 159]

Thus the shura in reality is the expressing of an opinion to the consulted whether it be requested or not, and it is not compulsory by agreement of the scholars.

And from the more significant mistakes that we are obligated to be cautioned from is our youth falling into incorrect suspicions concerning the established rule in this Islamic land (Saudi Arabia). They believe it to be the rulings of a dictatorship in which it is binding to convert to a democratic rule. This being based on the influence of some Islamic movements -those who designate themselves as such- whose behavior Islam is free of. These movements along with their varying groups are categorized into two.

The First Category: Those who are ignorant concerning the true nature of democracy and dictatorship. This is a quality embedded in most members of these groups due to their lack of studying (and gaining) comprehension of Islam “whoever Allah wants good for He grants with understanding of the religion.” This category perhaps they are excused due to their ignorance, as a result it is said to them “learn first” because knowledge precedes statement and action. Likewise, from what is said to them is have a proper perception before placing a ruling because rulings being placed on a thing stem from the judges perception of that thing. In addition it should be said to him, “do not excessively praise a thing that you are not fully aware of.”

The Second Category: There is with them knowledge and awareness to the point where they differentiate between truth and falsehood, however their lack of advising the people, and their bad thoughts and evil intent causes them to stray, like that which their behavior manifests clearly and Allah’s aid is sought. Hence it is said to these individuals:

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لِمَ تَلْبِسُونَ الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

“O People of the Scripture! Why do you mix truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know?” [Ali-Imran: 71]

(this is quoted) due to them knowing that Saudi Arabia only rules by Islam. There is nothing besides that not democracy, not dictatorship, not partisanship. The Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is distinguished by this fact and to Allah belongs all bounty and praise. Also from the distinct traits of the Saudi society is that they are one community, so which party do you see? Is it the head of states party (faction)? No! It is nothing more than a governed community, a governed body by Allah’s legislation in which he revealed in His Book in which no falsehood comes to from before it or behind it. It is sent down by the All-Wise, The One Worthy of Praise.

It is a community that executes Allah’s legislation and they do not legislate anything for themselves. The king of this country and his supporters, ministers, governors, the scholars, judges, law enforcement officers, and every government official are all one community that only have executive authority they do not have legislative authority. It is not permissible in Islam for them to have such, on the contrary the legislation in which we are governed by is Allah’s legislation. Thus we praise Allah for that He who has guided us to this, and never could we find guidance were it not for Allah guiding us. We ask Allah to increase us in bounty. This community just as it believes in Allah’s legislation and is sufficed by it, in addition to that they disbelieve in other legislature. They disbelieve in democracy, dictatorships, and the partisanship of communism. They don’t believe in anything that alters Islam, and if so faith in Allah and His legislation is invalid until one disbelieves in all legislature besides Allah’s. This is implementation of Allah’s statement:

فَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىٰ لَا انفِصَامَ لَهَا

 

“So whoever disbelieves in all false deities and believes in Allah then he has grasped the most trust worthy of handholds that will never break.” [Al-Baqara: 256]

And His statement:

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللَّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ

 

“Do they seek a judgement of ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm faith.” [Al-Maidah: 50]

Consequently there are only two regulations with no third. Allah’s regulations and judgments of ignorance. So a person must pick and be pleased with one of the two, either the rule of Allah or the judgment of ignorance that which conflicts with Allah’s book. Therefore we must state publicly -regarding Allah’s favor- that this community has raised the banner of tawheed and as a result should not submit to any law that contradicts tawheed. Certainly surrendering to man made statutes nullifies tawheed thus there is no judgment except from Allah. In light of this there is no democracy, dictatorship, nor partisanship. Moreover there is no deity in truth except Allah. There is no Lord besides Him, no legislator other than Him, and no law except His.

This is the religion we have embraced, called to, and stand patient as it relates to harms that befall as a result of adopting it. There is neither deception nor obscurity therein and to Allah belongs all praise and bounty. Thus we ask Allah to increase us in sustenance.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source:  حقيقة الشورى في الإسلام    

 

 

Comments Off on Islamic Shura Is Democracy: Shaykh Muhammad Amaan Al Jaami

Filed under Contemporary Issues