Pure Islaam

On July 14, 2018 our brother Abu Yusuf Khaleefah -under Masjid Nur Allah’s official twitter account- tweeted the following: This was a direct response to a portion of a tweet from Anwar Wright, wherein the mixing of truth with falsehood by twisting the reality of certain occurrences was utilized, in order to substantiate false accusations against several (unnamed) Salafi callers. The portion of his tweet addressed here is as follows:

“I’m Amazed at a people that have the likes of Muftari Munir causing confusion in their own backyard (NYC) and we’ve yet to see one ilmi  refutation from them on him. Add to that no refutation from their زعيم who claims to “know Tahir better and longer than everyone else”. And the amazement doesn’t stop here…!”

Although it is widely believed that Anwar’s speech was directed at Abu Yusuf Khaleefah, this conclusion -at this point- is speculative due to the absence of any name being mentioned. Likewise due to the presence of several salafi callers within New York i.e. our two elders Dawud Adib and Abdur Ra’uf Shakir along with our brother Abu Yusuf. Thus keeping in accordance with the principle لا ينسب إلى ساكت قول والسكوت في وفت الحاجة بيان There’s no attributing to one who remains silent (in an affair) a statement (clarifying his view and or position), and silence in the time of need is a declaration (i.e. of one’s view/position) we will leave it to Anwar to make clear who it is he criticized in his speech.

Regardless if the criticism is directed at all three or one among the three, one thing is made explicitly clear, that being that the basis of Anwar’s criticism is incorrect, false, and blatantly misplaced. This is made clear when contemplating on the following points extracted from this conversation.

1: Anwar’s criticism is a non issue

Khaleefah clearly illustrates this by mentioning the ruling to enjoining good and prohibiting evil. It is a communal obligation and not an obligation made binding upon every individual. Thus Anwar’s amazement and criticism is not due to any violation of Islamic principles and guidelines, on the contrary it’s based solely on his own preference, and his preference bears no weight when compared to truth and guidance. Thus his criticism -in reality- is a non issue.

Sheikh Rabee ibn Haadi said: “Criticism is for the purpose of purifying the people, often times it is a criticism of them (specifically) and other times it is a notification with regards to their mistakes or their misguidance. These affairs Islam has brought forth consequently prohibiting the wealth, blood, and honor (of a Muslim). However the blood is permissible if -the one whose blood is spilled- is a taker of life (i.e. murderer, killer), or an adulterer, or one who has abandoned his religion (an apostate) and separated from the Muslim body/community. These things make permissible his blood.

Coinciding with that is he who errs and or goes astray, he losses his honor. Thus that is made clear with the condition that the clarification is advice for Allah’s sake and that the one giving advice intents to clarify the truth and warn the Islamic Nation against falling into the mistakes and misguidance. Hence the presence of these conditions are imperative.” [النقد منهج شرعي]

In light of this, Anwar’s amazement is deemed to be baseless, and nothing more than his imagination getting the better of him by way of whispers from the Shaitan. As Anwar has done nothing here but give precedence to his preference and nothing more. Furthermore, if preference was a yardstick in this matter, wouldn’t it be more preferred that Anwar puts out something knowledge based against Mufti Muneer? After all Mufti did do a 3 part series against Anwar that-to my knowledge- he has not responded to til this very day. Thus one of three conclusions can be drawn concerning Anwar and his awareness of the rulings pertaining to enjoining good and prohibiting evil.

1. One who is ignorant with regards to its rulings and as a result should remain quiet with regards to affairs that are beyond his knowledge.
2. One who is fully aware of its rulings yet strives to deceive his audience into believing there’s an actual issue with whoever the intended criticism is directed towards, while knowing that his criticism -in light of the principles- is one big fat nothing burger.
3. One who is aware of its rulings but has not been given success by Allah in how to properly apply what he knows, resulting in the overt blunder he has fallen into with his baseless criticism.

What is evident from Anwar’s own writing is that the first possibility is the least probable. As Anwar said, in a document titled “Meeting the people where they are, or meeting the people where they need to be“: “I would like to conclude by mentioning some important Fatwa by the Imam, Shaykh Abdul Aziz bin Baz. The Shaykh was asked about the ruling on commanding the good and forbidding by those charged with authority or those who are from the general people. Here is a portion of what he said in his lengthy reply:

...And in summary, commanding the good and forbidding the evil is a great affair and a holy obligation and a duty upon the Muslims; if those who are sufficient from (the people of) a land or town performs it, its obligation falls from the rest (of the Muslims). but if it’s not performed by those sufficient to do so, it becomes a duty upon the rest (of the Muslims) and they are sinful for leaving it off. Also, if you are in a locality, a town, a country, a masjid or a neighborhood where there is a manifest evil and it is not prohibited, it is upon you to prohibit it and not to be negligent in that, because perhaps there is no one other than you who can prohibit it and take your place… to the end of the speech he quoted.

Thus the first option is the least probable, and only Allah is well acquainted with his reality as it relates to the last two options. 

2. Anwar’s usage of sensationalism

Sensationalism is the use of shocking or exciting stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement. This is exactly what Anwar utilizes in a cheap attempt to legitimizes his non issue. In reality it is a twisting of truth, a fallacy, and an unsubstantiated claim that resembles a characteristic of hypocrisy related to action. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “There are four If combine in a person is (by way of these four characteristics) a pure hypocrite, and if there is a characteristic from these four -within him- then he has within him a characteristic of hypocrisy until he abandons it..” From the four he -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- mentioned was: “When he disputes he is immoral.”

Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaani said about this characteristic: “It is a turning away from truth and trickery/dupery as pertains to disproving it. It is quite often classified under the first characteristic (of hypocrisy as relates to action) that being lying in speech/conversation.” This was done quite often in his declaration of amazement, especially in the portion pertaining to Shadeed (which will be addressed sooner than expected inshaa’llah), and likewise in the focal part of his speech being addressed now. 

Anwar dishonestly said: “Add to that no refutation from their زعيم…” which he translated as ringleader suggesting that the previously mentioned brothers or one among them are flunkies, yes men, and lackeys to some personality. But none of the aforementioned brothers are known to be stooges to anyone, nor is anyone at Masjid Ahlul Hadith, or the contributors to Salafy Ink. On the contrary this is an accusation that has been hurled at Anwar and his cohorts for years. As some honestly wonder if he were to disagree with Abu Khadeejah on a matter, what would his status in the crew be? This is pure sensationalism and nothing more, it’s a repulsive slander expected from a lowlife degenerate, not from a Islamic University graduate. Now that’s truly amazing.  

3. Anwar’s double standards

A double standard is the application of different principles for the exact same circumstance or in laymens’ terms having a different rule for the same thing or circumstance. It’s two identical things and or circumstances being measured with different standards or rules. Thus it is, in reality, a bias or prejudice for something (i.e. a person, group, organization, etc) that leads to unfair conduct in judgement. Thus whoever there is a bias held for, an excuse is always made and judgement concerning him/her is favorable. However he who is not looked at with that same sentiment, conduct and judgement of him is always negative.  Allah says:

يأيّها الذين آمنوا كونوا قوّامين لله شهداء بالقسط ولا يجرمنكم شنئان قوم على ألا تعدلوا اعدلوا هو أقرب للتقوى

“O you who believe! Stand firm for Allah as just witnesses, and do not let enmity and hatred ofa people prevent you from justice. Be just as that is nearer to piety…” [Al-Ma’idah: 8] 

Unfortunately Anwar and his cohorts are drowning in double standards and have been accused of such for years. Within his brief statement above is yet another example of such. Anwar said: “Add to that no refutation from their زعيم who claims to ‘know Tahir better and longer than everyone else.’ “ In this statement he mentions Tahir Wyatt and the absence of a refutation against him. Tahir is accused of speaking against salafis yet keeping quiet against the people of innovation. As a result Anwar and his cohorts have criticized, warned against, and ostracized him from their communities yet this same exact characteristic that Tahir is described with, fits Abu Muhammad Al Maghribi to the letter. Al Maghribi is not known to have -in the past- warned against or refuted any person from the people of innovation, on the contrary the only known warning he has ever made against anyone is Abu Abdis Salaam Al Juyaanee, a well known salafi caller. 

So why question your imaginary best friend O Anwar whom you referred to as a ringleader about a refutation against Tahir yet you don’t ask Al Maghribi that? Where is his refutation against the people of innovation in his locality or in any locality of which he has been a resident? Why, while Maghribi was in Newark, was his dawah referred to, by some salafis, as the love boat dawah? Anyone who is able to answer these questions truthfully will see that there’s a clear double standard. Once again he prefers that someone he does not think of favorably refute Tahir while he who he does think of favorably doesn’t refute anybody whatsoever except salafis, which is the very claim levied against Tahir that justifies refutations against him. Now that’s the real joke Anwar. 

In conclusion, when looking at the previously highlighted points we see the childish nature of Anwar and the reality of his elementary scribbling found in the pitiful tweet. As Anwar has done nothing more than expose the fact that he holds animosity for salafis over non issues and encourages others with the same by utilization of deception. The remainder of his tweet will face the same scrutiny to illustrate the reality of this individual and his lowly conduct by Allah’s permission, and with Him is success.

Written by Najeeb Al Anjelesi 

7/28/2018

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allah says:

ولا تقف ما ليس لك به علمٌ إن السمع والبصر والفؤاد كل أولئك كان عنه مسئولاً 

“And do not pursue that which therein you have no knowledge. Undoubtedly the hearing, the sight, and the heart, he (the possessor of these things) concerning all of those, will be questioned.” [Al-Israa: 36]

Ibn Kathir said -in explanation to this verse-: Ali ibn Abi Talha said, narrating from Ibn Abbas, “Do not say.” Al Awfi said -interpreting the statement of Allah as- “Do not accuse anyone with that which therein you have no knowledge.” Muhammad ibn Al Hanafiyyah said, “It -the verse- means false testimony.” Qataadah said, “Do not say ‘I saw’ yet you did not see, or ‘I heard’ yet you did not hear, or ‘I know’ yet you do not know, for indeed Allah will question you about all of that.” The implied meaning of what they have mentioned is that Allah has prohibited speech not aided by knowledge, on the contrary it’s aided by assumption that is -in reality- conjecture and (whimsical) speculation. [تفسير القرآن العظيم]

Sheikh Bin Baaz said: The obligation upon him is to not say “I heard this” unless it is backed by sure knowledge, do not say “I saw this” unless backed by sure knowledge, do not believe a thing by way of the heart unless backed by sure knowledge. This is incumbent as he -will be- questioned. Thus the obligation upon him is that he verify and be heedful, in order that he does not speak except upon knowledge, he does not do (an action) except upon knowledge, and he does not believe except upon knowledge.(1)

Sheikh Saalih Alish-Sheikh said: When tribulations become manifest and the circumstances change, do not pass judgment on anything pertaining to neither the tribulations nor the changed circumstance except after proper (and or accurate) perception as it relates to it, keeping in consideration the principle:

الحكم على الشيء فرعٌ عن تصوره “The Ruling On A Thing Emanates From Its Perception (i.e. how it is understood).” 

All of the intellectuals, before and after Islam, took heed of this principle. Its evidence is in the book of Allah, as He says:

“So do not pursue that which therein you have no knowledge.”

Meaning; the affair in which you have no knowledge thereof, you do not accurately perceive it, nor are you upon clarity with regards to it, then beware of speaking about it…[الضوابط الشرعية لموقف المسلم من الفتن]

Recently our brother Abu Iyaad wrote a 28 page article entitled, “A Refutation Of The Doubts And Diversions Of The Musa’fiqah In Denying The Role Of Wisdom, Justice, And Foresight In Criticism And Refutation” in which therein he highlighted some of the principles pertaining to criticism and praise found within the methodology of the salaf, likewise he reminded the reader of the fraudulent actions of innovators that led to there current and lowly ranking with Ahlus Sunnah today. However also contained therein was speech that illustrates Abu Iyaad’s inaccurate and false perception of the stance of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Haadi, Dr. Abdur Rahman Omaysan, and Salafy Ink. As Abu Iyaad constantly regurgitated the incorrect notion and false allegation that sheikh Muhammad made unwarranted tabdi, and that everyone on his position likewise is making unwarranted tabdi of a number of individuals. Abu Iyaad said:

• Recently Shaykh Rabi bin Hadi made open his rejection of the harm caused by premature tabdi (declaring someone an innovator)…
• This is the affect of premature tabdi and tadlil, before its proper time and without sufficient evidence…
• They have made taqlid in the tabdi of others and do not have a shred of evidence to justify it.
• So the point here is the Musa’fiqah have zero evidence for the tabdi…
• The aim of this doubt is to divert away from the factual realities on the ground which are: Transgressions in judgments of tabdi and tadlil upon salafi students and shaykhs…

   The conclusion drawn from Abu Iyaad’s own statements is; certain salafi students and mashaayikh fell into some mistakes, as a result Sheikh Muhammad bin Haadi made a premature tabdi of them, and this premature tabdi was blindfollowed by whomsoever supports the Sheikh in this affair. But there’s a problem, with the exception of Haani Burayk, Sheikh Muhammad DID NOT make tabdi of anyone, nor is it understood that he did by anyone at Salafy Ink. Those whom the Sheikh labeled as Sa’aafiqah (i.e. Arafaat Al Muhammadi, Abdullah Ath-Thufayri, Abbas Al Jawnah, Nizaar Haashim, Abdul Wahid Al Madkhali, and others) are not considered to be, with the Sheikh or anyone else, innovators. On the contrary, the Sheikh highlighted the fact that some are liars, mischief makers, sowers of dissension between some of the scholars and students, and people that have caused splits throughout the ranks of Ahlus Sunnah. These are the matters that drove Sheikh Muhammad to warn against them. But there must be an emphasis on the fact that a warning does not necessitate tabdi, as is well known to Abu Iyaad.

The words of Sheikh Muhammad are sufficient in disproving Abu Iyaad’s flawed understanding, the sheikh said: “There is another category who are close/akin to the people of desire (in the sense of being similar to but not the same, like pink and red are similar but are not the same color) even though they portray the sunnah in this time, in this time of ours, in these days of ours, and they are the Sa’aafiqah. They are made subsequent to the people of desire.” (2)(3)

The previously mentioned statement makes clear the intent of the Sheikh, when looking at it in totality and not by cutting and pasting that consequently obfuscates the intent. As Abu Iyaad quoted the last portion of the above statement (leaving it in Arabic) but excluded what came before it, thus rendering it to being understood multiple ways, due to the word the Sheikh used having multiple meanings. Thus we remind Abu Iyaad of the principle:

 لا عبرة بالدلالة في مقابلة التصريح “There is no consideration to the inferred -if/when- in contrast to the clear/indisputable (expression).”

In light of the Sheikh’s speech we see he is talking about a different category of people and not the people of desires. Had Sheikh Muhammad actually did what Abu Iyaad inaccurately perceived, I -myself personally- would agree with him, however this is not the case and so the foundation of his argument becomes totally irrelevant causing the salafi whom Allah has blessed with sincerity of heart and soundness of intellect to place it where it belongs, that being the trash bin.

Furthermore, Sheikh Muhammad’s warning and criticism of these individuals is very similar to Abu Iyaad’s public criticism of those brothers at Salafi Events -May Allah guide them. Although these brothers are salafi, nonetheless he publicly criticized them for attempting to sow dissension between  SPUBS and Sheikh Rabee. Abu Iyaad said, “Do not use the name of Maktabah Salafiyyah for self-marketing purposes and for deceptively facilitating your evil activities of splintering and weakening salafi communities.” This is very similar to those whom Sheikh Muhammad has criticized, however what Sheikh Muhammad is dealing with is on a global level (affecting salafis in varying countries) while his was a problem specific to his locality.

Mulitudes of salafi scholars and callers have been criticized and warned against without a detailed criticism or without reasons behind a criticism being hurl against some who are not known to be what they are alleged of. From them:

• Sheikh Ahmad Bazmool
• Sheikh Usamah Al Utaybi
• Sheikh Adil Mansur
• Sheikh Muhammad Al Anjari
• Sheikh Ahmad As Subayee
• Sheikh Khalid ibn Abdur Rahman, and others. 

All of the aforementioned were at one time highly recommended and from them benefit was sought, now -as a result of the actions of the Sa’aafiqah- they are shunned, spoken ill about, and accused without proof. This is the circumstance -that took place for years- which caused Sheikh Muhammad to finally refrain from being silent. This is what caused the Sheikh to criticize them with that which Abu Iyaad has inaccurately understood to be tabdi.  

This incorrect perception of the affair, by Abu Iyaad, caused him to hurl despicable accusations against his brothers upon al minhaj as salafi. He said:

• This dampened the commotion and harm caused by the people of trials and tribulations…
• The people of personal interests and those with scores to settle…
• This proves their ignorance and their lack of nurturing upon Salafiyyah.
• They are not people of evidence, but people of taqlid.
• …as implied by Abd al-Rahman al-Umaysan who is one of the main leaders of this fitnah in the West.   

These false allegations were built upon a false perception of the affair, thus I remind Abu Iyaad firstly to fear Allah, and to not speak about a matter until you first comprehend the matter accurately, as silence would have been better than to launch this attack based on a flimsy, distorted, and poorly analyzed perception of the reality. I remind you of the statement of our Lord:

وإن عليكم لحافظين * كراماً كاتبين * يعلمون ما تفعلون

“Indeed appointed over you are guardians. Honorable recorders. They know whatsoever you do.” [Al-Infitar: 10-12]
Imam Ibn Jarir At-Tabari said: “These guardians know whatsoever you do from good and evil, they record that on account of you.”
[جامع البيان في تفسير القرآن]

So be mindful of this Yaa Abaa Iyaad! There will be a day one’s actions -recorded in a scribe- will be laid in front of him, even the intent behind those actions. So be mindful, and be truthful with Allah in whatever you do, as being truthful with Allah will cause an individual to be focused on being in good standing with Him -by saying and doing only that which is pleasing to Him, despite the opinions of a man or group of men- on the day he stands before Him. Allah says:

و أما من خاف مقام ربه و نهى النفس عن الهوى (40) فإنّ الجنة هي المأوى

“And as for he who fears the standing with his Lord and prohibits the nafs from desires (40) Then undoubtedly his abode is paradise (41).”[An-Naaziat: 40-41]

I ask Allah to unite the hearts of Ahlus Sunnah here in the states and throughout the world, and to bless us to be firm upon the truth regardless of who it displeases from His creation. May Allah pardon Abu Iyaad for the horrendous and utterly false accusations hurled at his brothers that are only known to traverse upon al-minhaj as-salafi. And may Allah preserve Sheikh Muhammad ibn Haadi and grant him victory over those who are truly sowing dissension among us, and with Allah is success.

Written by Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.
3/25/18 

1. Source: https://www.binbaz.org.sa/noor/251
2. Only two possible meanings are understood, none of which constitute tabdi. The first; following in succession after -similar to a line one after another in alignment- but not apart or among. The second; that they are aligned with the people of desires concerning interaction or treatment of them. None of these two possibilities suggest tabdi.
3. Source: http://www.alsideeq.org/the-narration-of-the-imam-mufadhal-ibn-muhalhal-regarding-the-clarification-of-the-ways-of-the-people-of-innovation-by-al-sheikh-dr-muhammad-ibn-hadi-al-madkhali-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%84/

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
In a recent speech, wherein Sheikh Muhammad ibn Haadi addressed some of the antics of the Sa’aafiqah, -and criticized some in detail- he also addressed the recent retraction of Sheikh Ubayd concerning his warnings against Haani ibn Burayk (the khaariji). This is the correction of a scholar to another so that the people understand clearly the position in accordance with the prophetic methodology.

Sheikh Muhammad said: “As for the retraction of Sheikh Ubayd (concerning his speech against the innovator Haani ibn Burayk) we say; all praise is for Allah, the Islamic legislative sciences are preserved, recorded, and present (til this very day). The foundations of Salafiyyah are preserved -and to Allah belongs all praise- and are recorded. Whoever is mistaken his mistake is manifest (not something obscure when weighed against the principles). The speech of Sheikh Ubayd i.e. his retraction is a mistake. The correct (stance/position) is his first speech (clear warnings against Haani the Khaariji).

As for his second speech (recanting from his warnings against Haani the innovator) it is false, and it opposes the consensus of Ahlus Sunnah and their foundations. Indeed the brother i.e. the questioner, I don’t know him however he read to the sheikh and it was as if he tried to find an exit for him (from the mistake he heard from the sheikh’s speech), yet the sheikh this was his speech. At any rate we say concerning the sheikh that his speech is false, and the truth within our hearts is greater (that Haani clearly opposed a foundation of Ahlus Sunnah and Salafiyyah).”

Thus it becomes incumbent upon the Salafi to apply the principles in this regard and not be deceived by the status of an individual, especially the status of one such as Sheikh Ubayd. Although the sheikh is a senior scholar, a defender of the sunnah, and beloved to all those who traverse upon the Salafi Methodology, the sheikh in this issue is clearly mistaken, as is stated by another scholar of lofty standing Sheikh Muhammad ibn Haadi and firmly supported by the principles of the religion. I ask Allah to bless us with firmness during these times of trials, and I ask Allah to bless the people of Yemen by ridding them of trouble makers and kharijites like Haani Burayk.

Translated by Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Al-Bukhari and Muslim collected a narration upon the authority of Abdullah ibn Amr wherein the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “The Muslim is he who the Muslims are safe (from the harm) of his tongue and hand.”

Imam An-Nawawi said, “Its meaning is whoever does not harm the Muslim with speech nor action.” [شرح صحيح مسلم]
Ibn Rajab said, “So whoever the Muslims are safe from the harms of his tongue and hand his Islam is better than the Islam of another who is not like that due to both sharing in enactment of Allah’s rights as it pertains to Islam from the two testimonies, performance of the prayers, paying zakat, etc. In addition one of them distinguishes himself (from comparison to the other) by establishing the rights of the Muslims, hence this one’s Islam is better than the others.” [شرح صحيح البخاري]

Recently, statements of our brother Abbas Abu Yahya -May Allah pardon him- were circulated on Facebook in a page titled “Da’waatus Salafiyyah Brisbane” on October 26 of this year (2017), therein we find that Salafy Ink and its contributors have been harmed by the statements of Abbas which unfortunately include a lie, academic fraudulence, and double standards that is not expected from one who attributes himself to Al-Minhaj As-Salafi, let alone someone who is busied with clarifying it to others. The following are his statements found on that page:

Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu
Dear brothers, from my own dealings with these brothers, I advise you not to involve yourselves with them.
Firstly, stick to those who our scholars give tazkeeyah to.
Secondly, these brothers have not -as far as I am aware- study correctly or have studied only for a short period and put themselves forward.
Thirdly, I have found that they lack in manners and wisdom.
So stick to the brothers at Spubs UK and those affiliated with them.
May Allah guide those brothers.
And Allah knows best.

Before continuing it is important to make mention of who exactly is Salafy Ink and associates. Salafy Ink is under the direct supervision of our brother Abu Abdis Salaam Siddeeq Al-Juyaanee, it consist of several platforms on social media (website, sound cloud page, twitter account etc) and has several students of knowledge -all based in the US- assisting and supporting the effort in spreading As-Salafiyyah whether it be from translations, articles, classes, seminars, etc, their approach in this regard is multifaceted. Those that currently contribute to this effort are as follows:

• Abu Yusuf Khaleefah (Imam of Masjid Nurullah NY)
• Abu Muhammad Al-Jamaiki (imam of Masjid Ahlil Hadith in Philly PA)
• Amin Manning (Teacher at Masjid Ahlil Hadith in Philly PA)
• Abu Zaynab Tawfeeq Hosley (teacher at Masjid Ahlil Hadith and former imam of Masjid Bin Baz)
• Mujahid Al-Jamaiki (teacher at Masjid Ahlil Hadith)
• Khalil Davis (former imam of Masjid Ahlil Quran Wal Hadith from 2003 to 2009 in DC)
• Hisham Abouzaid (Ulama Audio)
• Naasir Al-Hanbali
• And myself -Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al-Anjelesi

There are also former contributors like Dawud Adib and Muslim Abu Yasmean whose works are also present.

The reason for clarifying this is because of Abbas Abu Yahya’s statement, “Dear brothers, from my own dealings with these brothers” which did lead readers to believe that Abbas has or has had a relationship with the aforementioned that has caused him to have multiple dealings with them. Unfortunately this is a lie. He has had no dealings with anyone from Salafy Ink. The brothers mentioned don’t know him. Siddeeq mentioned to me that he met him one time in a meeting while in Saudi, however his exchange with him was brief. Abu Yusuf mentioned that he corresponded with him once when he made an erroneous statement about another salafi organization to which he was left silenced and unable to answer Abu Yusuf’s questions. The remainder of the aforementioned don’t know him. So how is it that Abbas Abu Yahya would consider two separate encounters as “my own dealings” a phrase that was perceived by most to be multiple interactions with the aforementioned.  

This blatant and apparent exaggeration gave readers the impression that Abbas -may Allah bless him to be more accurate in speech- is qualified to speak about the character of those affiliated with Salafy Ink after all he had dealings with them, thus he knows first hand about their character, their strengths and weaknesses in knowledge, etc. However this is a lie.

The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day let him speak good or keep quiet.” Collected by Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

Al-Haafidh ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaani said, “This is from speech that is small in wording yet extensive in meaning due to all speech consisting of either good or bad, or leading to one of the two. Thus what enters into good is everything demanded from statements that are obligatory and recommended and it is permissible (to utter) with regards to its various types. Likewise what enters into it is whatever leads to it. Whatever is contrary to that from what is bad (speech) or what results in that, the command when desiring the indulging in such is to be quiet.” [فتح الباري]

Imam An-Nawawi said, “As for his -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement ‘speak good or keep quiet’ it’s meaning is that whenever one wants to speak, if whatever he says is actual good that is rewarded, whether it be obligatory or recommended (speech) then say it. However if it is not clear to him that it is the good that is rewarded, then refrain from speaking.” [شرح صحيح مسلم]

This lie is utilized in order to legitimize fraudulent criticism against Salafy Ink and even has therein a blatant slander. Abbas -may Allah bless him with success in repenting- said, “I have found that they lack in manners and wisdom.” How could he have ascertained that when he has no relationship with any of us, he does not know one of us neither intimately nor casually. Had he said that it was reported to him such and such, then that would be a different scenario, however he said, “I have found…” Thus any salafi striving to be upon this dawah based on proofs and principles, and judging affairs with fairness and balance will immediately reject this fraudulent claim and outright slander of their brothers upon Al-Minhaj As-Salafi. Allah says:

ولا تقف ما ليس لك به علمٌ إنّ السمع و البصر والفؤاد كل أُولئك كان عنه مسئولاً 

And do not pursue that which you have no knowledge therein. Indeed the hearing, sight, and heart of each of them will be questioned. [Al-Israa: 36]

Sheikh Muhammad ibn Saalih Al-Uthaymin said, -do not pursue- “Do not follow that which you have no knowledge about, and this prohibition encompasses everything. Everything that you have no knowledge of do not follow, rather avoid it and do not speak concerning it because you are mistaken. If it is with regards to what is attributed to Allah and His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- the prohibition is from the most severe of sins.” After detailing the issue of falsely attributing lies to Allah and the Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- Sheikh Al-Uthaymin said, “Likewise if you follow that which you have no knowledge with regards to a human being in that you quote a person as saying such and such yet he did not say it, or even if it is said to you -so and so said such and such-, do not rely on this until you know for certain.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]

Thus my advise to Abbas Abu Yahya in this regard is to produce your proof in detail substantiating the claim of lack of manners and wisdom if indeed you are truthful. If you cannot do so, and we know you can’t, then know that you are the one more deserving of this attribute than anyone you have accused. As wisdom is to put things in their proper place, so how have you been wise as it relates to the honor of your brothers upon Al-Minahj As-Salafi by way of lying and slandering them? How have you displayed good manners in this regard? 

Abbas said, “Secondly, these brothers have not -as far as I am aware- study correctly or have studied only for a short period and put themselves forward.” 

First, the recorded lectures and classes of the aforementioned brothers are widely circulated as is their translations and articles, so if Abbas is truthful in his claim of not studying correctly, then the mistakes of our brothers would be easily noticed and readily available in order for him to substantiate this claim. Therefore we ask Abbas once again to produce proof for what we deem as a baseless accusation. 

The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “Indeed Allah is pleased with 3 things and He hates for you all 3 things” til he said, “He hates for you all it is said and he said (commonly expressed in English as he said she said)…”  Imam An-Nawawi, in his explanation to Sahih Muslim where this narration is found, he said, “It is speaking falsely and giving accounts as it pertains to the affairs of the people, and their condition and conduct of that which is of no concern.”

Sheikh Rabee said, “The prohibition on it is said and he said (he said she said) and it is the engaging (by way of discourse) in falsehood, publicizing immorality, spreading rumors and lies, as it is sufficient for a man to be a liar who narrates everything he hears.” [مذكرة الحديث النبوي] 

Abbas Abu Yahya’s statement is just that he said she said and nothing more.

Second, he also said, “Or have studied only for a short period and put themselves forward.” It would be of benefit to understand what Abbas considers to be a short period, due to his advice at the end “So stick to the brothers at Spubs UK and those affiliated with them.” As some of our brothers at Spubs UK and those directed affiliated with them from our brothers here in the states have studied for a short period of time, and in some cases have never sat with the scholars. For instance Kashiff Khan, who has lectured at Masjid As Salafi in Birmingham, did not complete the language program -which is a 2 year program- at the Islamic University in Medinah. Umar Quinn, who participated in the 2016 Medinah conference of Spubs, is not known to have actually studied directly with the scholars. And there are many more examples.

The mentioning of this is not in order to belittle, defame, disrespect, or discourage from benefiting from them, on the contrary this is me only stating a matter of fact. These brothers have praiseworthy efforts in dawah that no one can deny, and when they open their mouths they prove that they are capable of speaking about the issues in which they address. Hence the mentioning of this is to disprove Abbas Abu Yahya’s clear and apparent double standard. If this is actually a point of concern for him as it relates to who one should benefit from, then it would be applicable to all including Spubs UK and those directly affiliated with them. However this is not the case, and we don’t know what actual personal grievance Abbas has with Salafy Ink, but whatever it is it has caused him to forego justice and fairness as it relates to his brothers upon Al-Minhaj As-Salafi. Allah says:

يأيها الذين ءامنوا كونوا قوامين لله شهداء بالقسط و لا يجرمنكم شنئان قومٍ على ألاَّ تعدلوا اعْدِلوا هو أقربوا للتقوى

O you who believe! Stand firm for Allah as just witnesses, and do not let your hatred of a people cause you to avoid justice. Be just that is nearer to taqwa.. [Al-Maa’idah: 8]

Abbas said, “Stick to those who our scholars give tazkeeyah to.” This statement limits the spread of the Sunnah and Islam, likewise it indicates a lack of understanding on Abu Yahya’s part as it relates to who it is that should teach. Compare his speech with that of Sheikh Sulayman Ar-Ruhayli to fully understand the academic fraudulence of his statement. 

Q: Salaamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatahu, O our Shaikh may Allah reward you and benefit (you and others) with your knowledge. We have with us (in our lands) students of knowledge whom we only know good about them–may Allah benefit (others) by way of them. They teach us the books of ‘Itiqaad (‘Aqeedah) and Sunnah. Some brothers have come to us and have spread (the following) concerning the students: Firstly, knowledge is only to be taken from the Akaabir.
Secondly, It’s a must that there be a Tazkiyyah from the ‘Ulama for the one who is establishing (the likes of) these classes.So this has led to the abandonment of some of the classes of which there is not present (or available) other (classes) in our area/province. So what should be our stance in this regard? (We hope) you give us direction (in this affair) may Allah bless you.

Sheikh Sulayman Ar-Ruhayli: There’s no doubt, that knowledge indeed should be taken from the Akaabir and a person must have a Tazkiyyah. However, who are the Akaabir? The Akaabir are those whom their knowledge has magnified (their status) and they are known for knowledge, even if they are young in age, even if they are youth.There were Akaabir from the Sahaabah who were young in age; knowledge was taken from them and their knowledge illuminated the world. This affair is from the important affairs in this issue, and it is, that the one who is young could be magnified (in status) by his knowledge; such that he is known by his profound beneficial knowledge. This(scenario) took place in abundance amongst the Salaf, starting with the Sahaabah may Allah be pleased with them (and it took place) after the Imaams. A Tazkiyyah (is also) a must; for verily, this knowledge is Deen. So it is a must that we carefully look at the one we take our Deen from. However, what is a Tazkiyyah (and how is it attained)? A Tazkiyyah is achieved by way of three affairs:

The First Affair: A textual (i.e. written and/or verbal) Tazkiyyah from the reputable ‘Ulama, giving him Tazkiyyah. The ‘Ulama or some of them have given him a textual Tazkiyyah; a Tazkiyyah is not confined to one, two or three scholars. Rather (it would constitute a Tazkiyyah), if a (single) scholar from the reputable scholars (give him a Tazkiyyah) or a group of them (stating) that so and so has Tazkiyyah and he is suitable that knowledge be taken from him.

The Second Affair: It is well-known (by the ‘Ulama) that this student gives classes and no one from the people of knowledge has disapproved (of him doing so). It is well-known that he teaches and none of the reputable people of knowledge have disapproved of his classes. This is a Silent Tazkiyyah. This (is a Tazkiyyah) because it is not suitable that the ‘Ulama with their (lofty) status that they (know) that this person is from those who should be prevented from being studied with and yet they don’t say anything to prevent him.

The Third Affair: And this is the most important affair in this issue and that is, that his knowledge gives him Tazkiyyah. So he doesn’t teach anything except the Sunnah. What I mean by this, is that he only speaks the truth and that he only takes from the ‘Ulama of the Sunnah and that he agrees with the books of the ‘Ulama of the Sunnah. (In addition to this) he does not refute any of the speech of reputable ‘Ulama nor does he contradict the Sunnah, this one, his knowledge gives him Tazkiyyah. The ‘Ulama don’t personally know every student of beneficial knowledge. However,they would look into the knowledge he presents. Does he teach the Sunnah? Does he respect the views of the ‘Ulama of the Sunnah? Does he convey the speech of the ‘Ulama of the Sunnah? If this is the case, his knowledge gives him Tazkiyyah and knowledge is taken from him.

The statement that, “Verily knowledge is not taken except from the one who the ‘Ulama have given a written/verbal Tazkiyyah to;”(verily) this (statement) closes the door on much good. Many places have students of knowledge therein who teach the Sunnah and the explanations of the people of the Sunnah and they teach in accordance to that which they have learned. However, they do not hold a (textual) Tazkiyyah from a specific scholar. However, it is not known about him that which disparages him as relates to his knowledge; so if we say, “Don’t take knowledge from him,” knowledge would not remain in many places, the door of good would be closed, the people of innovation (would take his place) in teaching and the people of the Sunnah would be stopped and halted. The people of the Sunnah would then (have no alternative) except to take knowledge from the people of innovation or take knowledge from the internet or other than it. This is not correct and this does not benefit. [http://www.salafyink.com/tazkiyyahconditionknowledge]

So reflect O salafi to the words of Sheikh Sulayman Ar-Ruhayli and compare them to the statement of Abbas Abu Yahya. The honest seeker of truth would have to acknowledge that Abu Yahya’s speech is limited in terms of what the sheikh presented about a tazkiyah, thus making it clear that his speech has no place except and or restricted to the garbage. If only Abu Yahya had taken the time to refer this matter to a scholar, his speech would been more accurate and in accordance to the truth, and Allah knows best. There are other issues that could have been addressed, but this is sufficient in illustrating the fact that his speech should be rejected.

Written by Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi
Nov 5, 2017