Who are the Muslim Moderates (Neo-Mods) ?

NGONGE · October 10, 2004

^^^^ With all due respect, thatâ€™s your interpretation of it, sister. My point was if he was going to criticise the scholars he had to make sure that his words were not left open to interpretation. He had to be clear with such a serious subject. Frankly, he would have been better off talking about the politicians and their followers instead. The same point would have been made and we would all wholeheartedly agree with it. With Scholars though, I donâ€™t easily agree with every nobody who decides to have a go at them.

Salafi_Online · October 10, 2004

wheter Bin Laden was behind 9/11 or not is irrelevant, i would never take the words of A kafir over a muslim even if he is a takfir kharaji, however, this does not diminish the misguidance of Osama! he is more harmful to me then Bush ! while bush can kill me and hurt me physically, Osama can corrupt my heart and distort my Aqeeda!

and the choice is Usama vs the kuffaar (that is a clear cut situation). There was no reason for all of this, I donâ€™t believe anyone was discussing the Islam of Usama (apart from yourself), but nonetheless, jzk.

I was certain you were going to say that, so â€œwe are either with the Usama or with with the Kufarâ€ , and what if I said im with neither, I fine both of their actions repulsive. I clearly showed that Osamaâ€™s actions are not in line with the Kitab and Sunnah understood by the Salaf, but politically driving !So what good is his actions when, when the salaf use to say,

Al-Hasan al-Basree (Rahimuhullaah) said: ." "From the person of innovation Allah does

not accept Prayer, nor Fasting, nor Hajj, nor 'Umra, nor Jihaad, nor repentance, nor

charity."

and you in spite of all this you still support him! Cajib wallah!

my sister fil Minhaj; The reason why we are discussion Osama status is simple, the author of that piece, called Osama a â€œShaaykhâ€ someone to be followed and looked up to, this is when I and another nomad interjected!

To say for example that the Saudi Royal family needs to be overthrown (constitutes a deviation for them) or to speak well of Shaykh Safar and Shaykh Salman is a big NO NO.

According to SPUBS, I am in the wrong for praising these two shuyuukh and if I were to do so in public (assuming I was a speaker who did so at a lecture), I would be shunned and my name tarnished in their forums.

Sister with all to respect, as a salafi wallah I expect much more from you, its not Spubs who says itâ€™s a big no no! Overthrowing the muslim Government according to our minhaj is a â€œno noâ€, unless you see clear Kufar, yet this is still a " â€œno no" untill you have the power to overthrow them,

The Prophet sallaahu alaihi wa sallam said, ." "There will come leaders who will not

follow my guidance and will not follow my sunnah. There will be amongst them men

who will have the hearts of devil and bodies of humans." Hudhaifah asked, "What shall

I do, o Messenger of Allaah if I reach that?" He replied, "you should hear and obey

the ruler even if he flogs your backs and takes your wealth, then still hear and obey."

[Reported by Muslim (Eng. trans Vol 3/1029/34554)]

The Prophet sallaahu alaihi wa sallam said, â€œ Whosoever sees something from his leader

of sin, then let him hate whatever occurs from sin. And let him not remove his hand

from obedience, since whoever removes his hand from disobedience and splits off from

the Jamaaâ€™ah (united body), then he dies the death of Jaahiliyyah (pre-Islaamic times

of ignorance).â€™â€™ [al-Bukhaaree (13/5) and Muslim (no. 1849)]

Imam al Barbahaaree (d. 329H Rahimahullaah) said, "Whoever rebels against a Muslim

ruler is one of the Khawaarij, has caused dissent within the Muslims, has contradicted

the narrations and has died the death of the days of ignorance." [sharhus-Sunnah

(p.42)]

Imaam Ahmed (Rahimahullaah) said concerning the rulers, â€œAnd the killing of the one

in power is not lawful, and nor is it permissible for anyone amongst the people to revolt against him. Whoever does that is an innovator, (and is) upon other than the Sunnah

and the (correct) path.â€ [usool us-Sunnah]

The messenger of Allah(saw) and the salaf's position is clear! so what would you say if a person blatantly contradicted these narration? Is he still a salafi? My Beloved sister My Allah gives us Tawfiq

According to SPUBS, I am in the wrong for praising these two shuyuukh and if I were to do so in public (assuming I was a speaker who did so at a lecture), I would be shunned and my name tarnished in their forums.

likewise Praising Ahlul Biâ€™dah is a" no no," unless you believe takfir is not biâ€™ah BUT sunnah! and revolting against the muslim rulers is not Bida'ah but Sunnah!

Shaikh Ibn Baaz (Rahimahullaah) was asked, "The one who praises Ahl ul-Bidâ€™ah, is he

to be counted amongst them?"

So he replied, "Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who

actually calls to them". [Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb]

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullaah) said, "It is obligatory to punish

everyone who ascribes himself to them â€“ the people of innovation â€“ or who defends

them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should

be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of

their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of

the greatest of obligations." [Majmooâ€™ ul-Fataawaa (2/132]

So like I said, Spubs and their sisters only follow the salaf and the salafi scholars, as I mentioned before, if you know of any articles where they perform unnecessary attack on other Muslims, I would be the first to advice them, and if they do not recant their articles I would abandon them for the sake of my religion! Furthermore, it is no business of mine whether you browse Spubs or not, however when you speak about their orginatization with a negative tone, then itâ€™s my duty as a muslim to clarify the situation!

For He subhanahu wa taâ€™ala said, â€œYou are the best of the nations raised up for (the

benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allahâ€¦â€

[3.110]

i have already showned the stands of the salafi Scholars concerning Salman and Safar

Xoogsade · October 10, 2004

I find this Notion of subservience to be disgusting. I am not Obeying anyone. So is my islam valid or Not?

Just wonder

AYOUB · October 10, 2004

Salafi

Did Abdul Wahhab not fight against 'corrupt' rulers?

Salafi_Online · October 10, 2004

^^ Im not sure i know what you mean BRother, i know of NO khawarij who was a leader!

AYOUB · October 10, 2004

Sorry brother, i've edited to make myself even clearer, didn't know you're around.

I meant the people Abdul Wahhab fought against.

NGONGE · October 10, 2004

Originally posted by Xoogsade:

I find this Notion of subservience to be disgusting. I am not Obeying anyone. So is my islam valid or Not?

Just wonder

This is a trick question, right? Lucky that Salafi didnâ€™t fall for that meagre bait youâ€™ve dangled in front of him, saaxib.

Rahima · October 11, 2004

wheter Bin Laden was behind 9/11 or not is irrelevant

What is more irrelevant was for you to begin posting in this thread with points regarding the Islam of Usama- as if this was the point.

Allow me to quote the article once more:

As an example they claimed that, the Mujahideen led by Shaikh Usamah Bin Laden are not entitled to declare Jihad in the absence of the Islamic State (Khilafah). The subject of Khilafah has been conveniently avoided and now, it has suddenly becomes important! Since, when does anyone need permission to declare or fight a defensive war (Jihad)? When the slaughter of the defenceless Muslims is rampant, even common sense dictates that permission is not required, not even from the Khalif.

The point was the legitimacy of Usamas struggle, not the Islam of Usama or whether he is that or this- this my brother was irrelevant to this discussion.

Whether or not this struggle will be accepted by Allah, is not for you or any other human being to decide akhi (unless of course you pronounce kufr on him). Iâ€™m sure you know of the story of the bani Israel, the one about the learned man and the sinner. We are not to believe completely nor deny completely the stories of the bani Israel, but in quoting it, the scholars are making the fundamental point that you do not know what Allah will accept and what He will reject.

my sister fil Minhaj; The reason why we are discussion Osama status is simple, the author of that piece, called Osama a â€œShaaykhâ€ someone to be followed and looked up to, this is when I and another nomad interjected!

My brother fil minhaj, as for the author, it is called an opinion; donâ€™t assume that all scholars are totally against Usama on all points. Sure enough like Iâ€™ve said, he may have faults, but not all scholars are as harsh against him as the Saudi scholars.

As far as politics is concerned, I lean more towards scholars that are not necessarily in support of their government (i.e. the scholars of the hijaaz)- I prefer the stances of Shaykh Al-Bani. He objected also, but in my opinion was more objective and kept things more in perspective. Now, donâ€™t jump down my throat, I am in no way defaming any scholar.

BTW, Did you know that shaykh ibn baz rahimuallah, stated in a fatwa before he died that the greatest jihad on earth at that time was to fight against Saddam, mind you the Israelis and the Americans were in full force.

and you in spite of all this you still support him!

Of course. To support someone does not necessarily mean you have to agree with them on each and every point. We support by default. Overall I believe he can make mistakes, but inshallah I hope his efforts will be accepted by Allah. Like Iâ€™ve said brother, this is the stance of the scholars on many similar issues(such as suicide bombings).

its not Spubs who says itâ€™s a big no no! Overthrowing the muslim Government according to our minhaj is a â€œno noâ€, unless you see clear Kufar, yet this is still a " â€œno no" untill you have the power to overthrow them,

Are you sure about that? Brother, I suggest you do a tad more reading. The Muslims, can overthrow any unjust leaders, so long as the benefit will be greater than the harm that may come of it. The conditions are very stringent brother, but I guarantee you that Islam makes way to replace a leader if he does not serve the interests of Islam.

In the case of Saudi Arabia, I agree with the scholars in that it is not of benefit at this point in time, but at the same time, simply because I disagree with Safar and Salman on this, it does not make me look upon them any different.

i have already showned the stands of the salafi Scholars concerning Salman and Safar

Do you realize that there are salafi scholars outside of the Hijaaz? Do you think that salafism is only within the borders of Saudi Arabia?

Anyway, have a read brother.

_______________________________________________ Sheikh Ibn Baz's Defence of Scholars

Ibn Baz

Article ID: 8 | 123 Reads

Date: 10/4/1414 AH

From Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baaz to the honourable brother...............may Allah guide him to what pleases Him, Ameen.

Assalaamualaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu:

I received your letter in which you are asking me about listening to the tapes, speeches, lectures and books of the preachers and scholars, such as Sheikh Ayedh al-Qarni, Sheikh Salman al-Awdah, Sheikh Nasser al-Umar, Sheikh Safar al-Hawaali, and Sheikh Abdul Wahhab at-Tareeree, and whether they are innovators, and [saying] that they were from certain deviated groups, and that they are not Salafis but are Kharijis, and asking about the rule concerning backbiting them, may Allah provide you with His guidance.

Answer: Their tapes are beneficial and they are NOT innovators NOR are they Kharijis, and BACKBITING THEM IS NOT PERMISSIBLE. On the contrary, ONE SHOULD DEFEND THEM, like any person of knowledge among Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah, although no one of them is infallible, and such are others among the scholars, everyone can make mistakes or can be right, and thus one takes what is right from his talk, and leaves what is contrary to the truth. And one should maintain that they meant good as much as he can, and maintain a good opinion of his brothers. A sound hadeeth of the Prophet, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, says: "Every son of Adam commits errors, and the best of those who commit errors are those who repent". And it was related in a sound hadeeth that he said, "Surely, when the judge makes ijtihaad and arrives at a correct judgment then he has a double reward, and when he makes ijtihaad and misses the correct judgement, then he has a single reward." And such is the case of the REST OF THE SCHOLARS, whoever arrives at the correct opinion has a double reward, and whoever misses the correct opinion has a single reward, if he is among the people of knowledge and is honest to Allah in his work.

I ask Allah to guide all of us to what pleases Allah and benefits His servants, along with a protection from deviating turmoil, He is All-Hearing, All-Near. Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahe wa barakaatuhu.

Mufti General of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

And President of the Council of Leading Scholars

And the Departments of Scholarly Research and Legal Verdicts Abdul Aziz ibn Abdallah ibn Baaz

_________________________________________________ Ibn 'Uthaymeen warns the Muslims from the Salafi Group

Ibn 'Uthaymeen

Article ID: 9 | 303 Reads

From his [the Prophet](SAW) statement,

"Whoever lives amongst you will see much differing, so adhere to my Sunnah",

It can be learnt that if parties (ahzaab) within the ummah emerge in increasing numbers then one should not affiliate himself to a party (hizb). In the past, many groups have appeared; Khwaarij, Mu'tazilah, Jahmiyyah, Shee'ah, even Raafidah. Then there appeared, later on Ikhwanis, Salafis, Tablighis, and all those like them. Put all of them to one side and take [the path] ahead. Which is what the Prophet SAW guided to. "Adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided caliphs." No doubt, it is obligatory for all Muslims to adopt the way of the salaf as their madhhab, not affiliation to a specific party (hizb) named, "The Salafis". It is obligatory for the Islamic Ummah to adopt the way of the salaf as-salih as their madhhab, not bigotry to those called "the salafis". Pay attention to the difference: There is the way of the salaf, and there is a party (hizb) called "the salafis".

What is the objective? Following the Salaf. Why? The salafi brothers are the closest sect to that which is right, no doubt, but their problem is the same as others, that some of these sects declare others as being misguided, they declare them to be innovators and as being sinners. We don't censure this, if they deserve it, but we censure handling this bid'ah in this way. It is obligatory for the leaders of these sects to get together and say, â€œBetween us is the book of Allah, and the Sunnah of His messenger, so lets us judge by them and not according to desires, opinions and not according to personalities. Everyone makes mistakes and achieves correctness no matter what he has reached with regards to knowledge and worship. Infallibility is [only] in the religion of Islam."

In this hadeeth the Prophet SAW guided to the way in which a person secures himself. He doesn't affiliate him to any sect, only the way of the salaf as-salih, to the Sunnah of our Prophet SAW and the rightly guided caliphs.

The following is his speech on Shaykh Safar al-Hawali's book "Manhaj al-Ashaa'irah fil-'Aqeedah" from the same tape:

And how good is that which our brother Safar al-Hawali has written concerning what they say, or what he knows about their madhhab (i.e. the Ashaa'irah)

___________________________________________

And I thought this might be an interesting point:

Legal Verdict Regarding Sayyid Qutb

Article ID: 23 | 192 Reads

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Office of the Presidency of Islamic Research and Legal

Verdicts

Question:

Some youth call Shaykh Sayyid Qutb a heretic and prohibit the reading of his books, and they say a similar statement regarding Hasan al-Banna, as they also say regarding some of the scholars that they are Khawarij. Their argument is that [they do this] in order to 'expose the errors [of these men] to the people,'. even though [these youth] are until now [only] students [of knowledge]. I hope for a response so that doubt may be removed from us and others, [and] so that this [phenomenon] will not spread.

Response:

All praise belongs to Allah alone. To proceed: It is impermissible to [unjustly] call the Muslims heretics or wicked as is evidenced by the statement of the Prophet SAW "Whoever says to his brother 'O enemy of Allah,' and he is not such but that it returns back to him." While in [another] hadith 'Whoever calls a Muslim an infidel it returns back to one of them.' While in another hadith: "A man passed by another while he was doing a sin and he said to him, 'By Allah, Allah will not forgive you.' So [Allah] said: 'Who is he who can pass judgment on my behalf that I will not forgive so and so, I have forgiven him and have nullified your deeds.'"

With this I say, Sayyid Qutb and Hasan al-Banna are among the scholars of the Muslims and among the people of da'wa. Allah has brought benefit by them and through them He has guided many people. They both have efforts [for Islam] which should not be denied. For this reason Shaikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Baz interceded on behalf of Sayyid Qutb when the order for his execution was given. [ibn Baz] was gentle in his intercession, but President Gamal [Abdel Nasser] did not accept [ibn Baz's] intercession, may Allah send upon him [i.e. Abdel Nasser] what he deserves. When both men [i.e Hasan al-Banna & Sayyid Qutb] were killed, each was referred

to as a martyr, as each was killed unjustly. This is borne witness to by those close [to them] as well as by the general public. As it was widely spread in the papers and books without anyone ever objecting. Moreover, the scholars have received their books [with acceptance]. No one has attacked them for more than the [last] twenty years. If some [heresy proceeded] from them, then [these mistakes] are

similar to an-Nawawi, as-Suyuti, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn 'Atiyah, al-Khatabi, al-Qastalani and the likes of many of them. I have read what Shaikh Rabi al-Madkhali has written in his refutation of Sayyid Qutb and I found that he has placed statements where they do not exist. For this reason Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid, may Allah perserve him, refuted him. Likewise, [al-Madkhali's] unjust attacks of Shaikh 'Abdur-Rahman ['Abdul-Khaaliq] and his [twisting 'Abdur-Rahman 'Abdul-Khaaliq's words] in order to find errors which would make ['Abdur-Rahman 'Abdul-Khaaliq appear] misguided, even though [shaikh Rabi] befriended him for a lengthy period of time and he never found any such errors [in the past].

And the eye of pleasure sees every fault insignificant,

But the eye of hatred always finds fault.

Dictated by

Abdullah ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Jibreen

26/2/1417 AH

__________________________________________________

Did Abdul Wahhab not fight against 'corrupt' rulers?

Indeed he did Brother Ayoub. JZK for highlighting this. This is a perfect example of the need to at times fight and get rid of the leadership. Ibn Taymiyyah was also in the same position.

NGONGE · October 11, 2004

^^^^ Notice how what the scholars in these fatwas say about all the accused men and Culama differs from the style of the person in your first post, sister? Did you see the language used? See the clear way they articulated their words?

Even in the short â€œdiscussionâ€ between Salafi and his â€œteacherâ€ (if the words he wrote are as the conversation went) did you see the style of the reply? See how he left room for doubt and didnâ€™t outright convict the man but rather what is reported of the man?

Was I asking for too much when I expected the gentleman who attacked the credentials of the scholars to do the same and follow the same method rather than mislead people with words that leave no room for uncertainty at all?

sahal · October 11, 2004

I was busy these days, but b4 i contribute i'm waiting the reply from Salafi-on-line for the above Fatwas ! (from Rahima).

Would he say this Fatwas were stolen from the Sheikh's office or something else? :confused: .

However, we have to wait his reponse !

NGONGE · October 11, 2004

^^^^ Turning this into a personal competition of whoâ€™s right and whoâ€™s wrong does neither of you any favours, saaxib. If you think the brother is â€œwrongâ€ try gentle persuasion, ignore him or refute his claims without making it look like youâ€™re conducting some kind of vendetta against him. Anyway, I thought you already had a whole thread dedicated to this issue!

Rahima · October 11, 2004

^As i thought, how i hate these debates. They sure as hell don't serve me any purpose.

The previous topic here i ended for it was of no real value. I have posed all the questions of disagreement to the scholars for we will never agree.

As for the differences between the two akhi, one is speaking generally (therefore harshness can be utilized for it is speaking to Muslims in general), whilst the other is speaking about certain individuals and hence gentleness is a requirement. That is how i see it .

Changed · October 11, 2004

Are they trying to Secularize Islam...Yeah!!

Did bin laden do it: if he didnâ€™t why not come out and say he didnâ€™t do it? Islam doesnâ€™t encourage people to take vaults (or dance around) for something they didnâ€™t do? Does it? :confused: since when is killing of innocent people justified in Islam, since when is slaughtering of civilians justified in Islam.

I am not the most religious person on the world but doesnâ€™t it bother y'all when someone used our religions name to falsely kill and slaughter victims.

sahal · October 11, 2004

Ngone and Rahima don't misunderstand me, I asked as amny as tens of questions to Salafi-on-line and whenever he can't answer my question he change the subject.

The strange is i never saw any Bros/Sis (except one) asking him to answer my questions, rather everybody accusing me to be harsh.

Would you believe that i asked his ideas about the same Ftawas that Rahima asked and he failed to answer.

Therefore i was waiting his response at this time.

Regarding this word "Stolen from the Sheikhs OFFICE" he replied me when i showed him one noble Sheikh defending some scholars, he claimed that the sheikh said that this Fatwa was stolen from his office, so there is no wonder that he will say again.

Finally, it's not obligatory to defend our Noble ULUMA weather they're Saudis, Egypts Pakistans, Somalis without saying that they're infallible?

Salafi_Online · October 12, 2004

Brother Ayub my response is at the bottom of this! sorry for the long reply, but most of it is evidence that i could not neglect!

What is more irrelevant was for you to begin posting in this thread with points regarding the Islam of Usama- as if this was the point.

Look this is getting ridiculous, for the sake of Allah sister listen, the author called Osama a "Shaykh", (a form of praising) By Allah he is not a shaykh, if you read my initial post this was my point of reference! i couldnâ€™t careless about what that guy wrote, as far as Im concerned his opinions carry no weight! for Allah's sake anyone can join the vulture culture(pin pointing the faults unlearned muslims, cause they are infinite),But when he said Osama is a shaykh, then it was upon me to shed some light on his conditions, you and I are not the only people reading these articles! Plus Ngonge wanted to know who the author was, and as far as the salaf are concerned they use to say a person his like his companions,( or judge a person by his companion) my first post had nothing to do with 9/11 or the political(not islam) war between Osama and the Kufaar!

Whether or not this struggle will be accepted by Allah, is not for you or any other human being to decide akhi (unless of course you pronounce kufr on him). Iâ€™m sure you know of the story of the bani Israel, the one about the learned man and the sinner. We are not to believe completely nor deny completely the stories of the bani Israel, but in quoting it, the scholars are making the fundamental point that you do not know what Allah will accept and what He will

Sister there is certain fundamentals of the deen, Allah does not accept the deeds of a Kafir and nor does he accept the deeds of Innovator until he relinquishes that innovation and his innovation earnes him a ticket straight to the fire if he does not relinquishes before death! These are basic principals!

My brother fil minhaj, as for the author, it is called an opinion; donâ€™t assume that all scholars are totally against Usama on all points. Sure enough like Iâ€™ve said, he may have faults, but not all scholars are as harsh against him as the Saudi scholars.

Then its upon you to state your man!(instead of writing all this, you could have just copied and pasted the names of these scholars and their fatwahs)

As far as politics is concerned, I lean more towards scholars that are not necessarily in support of their government (i.e. the scholars of the hijaaz)- I prefer the stances of Shaykh Al-Bani. He objected also, but in my opinion was more objective and kept things more in perspective. Now, donâ€™t jump down my throat, I am in no way defaming any scholar.

He was more objective to what? Sister please be more precise! I am not the only person reading your post! What do u mean? does Albani support the overthrowing of governments?!? We as Muslims are restricted from having opinions when it comes to Islam ! We act and speak upon proves! And when its an issue of Ikhatilaf(difference of opinion provided that they both have proves) we take from the most learned!

BTW, Did you know that shaykh ibn baz rahimuallah, stated in a fatwa before he died that the greatest jihad on earth at that time was to fight against Saddam, mind you the Israelis and the Americans were in full force.

He did? Then its upon you to show us this statement! also what is the Point of this?im sure he had his reason!

Of course. To support someone does not necessarily mean you have to agree with them on each and every point. We support by default. Overall I believe he can make mistakes, but inshallah I hope his efforts will be accepted by Allah. Like Iâ€™ve said brother, this is the stance of the scholars on many similar issues(such as suicide bombings).

i can stress this effort, just give us scholars name and their fatwah, I know of no Salafi scholar who support suicide bombing and this includes Bin Baaz, Uthaymin and Albani, and u can find all these speak audio, courtesy of fatwaonline.com

Are you sure about that? Brother, I suggest you do a tad more reading. The Muslims, can overthrow any unjust leaders, so long as the benefit will be greater than the harm that may come of it. The conditions are very stringent brother, but I guarantee you that Islam makes way to replace a leader if he does not serve the interests of Islam.

The fact that you sidestepped the hadith is one thing, but not showing a clear and concrete evidence is seriously damaging your posts! Why waste you time sister, if you have any evident that we can overthrow an unjust muslim( not a kafir) an unjust muslim ruler, I shall â€œhear and obeyâ€ ! the burden of prove is on you, this â€œhe said she saidâ€ rethoric is really becoming a nuisance!

Yes many sister i know of many salafi scholars out side saudiyah such as Egypt, Jordan, Yeman, Somalia, and elsewhere

Ibn Baz

Article ID: 8 | 123 Reads

Date: 10/4/1414 AH

From Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baaz

Legal Verdict Regarding Sayyid Qutb

Article ID: 23 | 192 Reads

Dictated by

Abdullah ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Jibreen

26/2/1417 AH

I thank you sister I knew of these fatwah, and these Qutubies have not cease( not saying u are one, but im sure u got it from there websites) attacking the salafi brothers, and they quote and old fatwaâ€™s of the noble MayShaykh and purposely hind the truth! what's is more evil is that they promote and praise the people of innovations under the name of Salafi, I know this because my beloved Sister I was a devoted followers of these Qutubies Harakiyyeen, until Allah guided me from their deception! For example u posted three fatwahs by the scholars, these fatwahs are the trophy of the Qutubies! the innocent and new salafi who love these scholars usually fall for these deceptions, much like myself, however Alhamdulillah there is always people out there who allah uses to rebut their faleshood, (again ukti FilLah is this is directed towards you) just an observation i made when I was an avid adheer to their so called Salafi Manhaj and webpages!

As far as your quotes are concerned, you have neglected some vital fatwas following these old ones! Perhaps u were not aware of them! And if this was between you and I Sister, I wouldnâ€™t bother repling to any of this, but Allah knows best how many people are reading this, and if I left without clarifying any of these errors I would be held accountable!

Ibn Baz

Article ID: 8 | 123 Reads

Date: 10/4/1414 AH

From Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baaz

Not the date of your fatwah, and then note this

in reply:

In the month of Rajab 1415h, a sitting took place in the house of the noble Shaykh Bin Baaz in the presences of a group from the mashaykh and the student of knowledge. One of the of the Qudaat(judges)present asked the noble shaykh, saying,â€Respected Scholar, are there any errors and observation upon safar and salmaan?The shaykh replied,â€Yes Yes (twice for emphases), they have evil orientation towards the rulers, and also and opinion concerning this state. They Also incite the youth and encourage the general people to attack. And this is from the manhaj of the Khawarij, and their cassettes inspire towards thisâ€ The Qadee(judge) said,â€Oh Shaykh does this reach the level of innovation?â€ The shaykh Repliedâ€ there is no doubt that this innovation is something that is unique to the khawarij and the Mutaâ€™zilah. May Allah guide them, May Allah guide themâ€( article Id #s: NDV120006, spubs)

Shaikh Ibn Baz (Rahimahullaah) and the Permanent Committee of Scholars issued an

official request to the King of Saudi Arabia to use his power to stop Safar and Salman

from spreading their Baatil said

â€œSo I inform your highness that the Sitting of the Committee of Major Scholars saw

the aforementioned letter of your highness, along with its addenda: abrigment of some

gatherings and lessons given by the two aforementioned (the King had mentioned

Safar and Salman and this is what Shaikh Bin Baz is refering to), beginning grom the

start of Muharram 1414h, and a copy of the book of Safar al Hawali â€œWaâ€™du

Kissingerâ€; and it discussed the topic from all its angles. It also examined some of the

cassettes of the two of them. So after studying and discussing this, the Committee held

â€“ by total agreement - that: â€œThe two aforementioned are to be faced with their errors

that were presemted before the Committee â€“ along with the errors forwarded by the

government, and in which two of the people of knowledge are to participate- to be

chosen by his excelllency the Minister for Islamic Affairs, Awqaaf, Daawah, and

Irshad.

So if the two of them excuse themselves for their transgressions and agree to comply to

not returning to any of them, nor to the like of them, then all praise to Allaah, and that

is sufficient.

But if they will not comply, then they are to be prevented from giving lectures,

seminars, khutbahs, public lessons, and from making cassettesm â€“ in order to protect

the society from their errors: may Allaah guide them both and direct them both to the

right conduct.â€ [Courtesy of Salafipublications.com]

and to this day we have not witness any repentence! instead they perform takfiri on the issue muslims, and label Albani with Irja(an trait of the Murji'ah, a deviated group)

Safar al-Hawali stated, "Rather, one who fights partisanship for madhabs has himself

fallen into it (Irjaa'), such as Shaikh al-Albani" [Dhaahirat ul-Irjaa' pg.658]

Shaikh Uthaimeen (Rahimahullaah) was asked, "...some people say that Shaikh al-

Albani (Rahimahullaah) his position on the issues of Imaan is that of the Murji'ah.

What is your veiw on this?"

He replies,â€ Do not listen to those who accuse Shaykh Albani of being Murjâ€™I or have irja (which includes Safar and Salmaan) for they are takfiris who desire to make Takfir(calling other muslims disbelievers) of the people in falsehood and this is a slander and a lie upon Shyakh ALbani"[Dhaahirat ul-Irjaa' pg.658]

Imaam al-Albani was asked concerning the book, "Dhahiratul-Irjaa fil-Fikr al-Islami" of Safar al-Hawali, and in this book takfir is performed on account of certain sins! He replied:

"I gave my viewpoint on a matter about thirty or so years ago when I used to be in the [isamic] University (of Madinah) and I was asked in a gathering about my opinion on Jamaaâ€™at ut-Tabligh. So I said on that day, â€˜They are the Sufis of this eraâ€™. And now it has occurred to me that I should say about this Jamaaâ€™ah who have emerged in the present times and who have opposed the Salaf, I say here, in accordance with the statement of al-Hafidh adh-Dhahabi: They have opposed the Salaf in much of the issues of manhaj, and it is befitting that I label them the Khawarij of the era. And this resembles their emergence at the current time â€“ in which we read their statements â€“ because they, in reality, their words take the direction and objective of that of the Khawarij in performing takfir of the one who commits major sins. And perhaps I should say, this is either due to ignorance on their behalf or due to devised plot!! And I say this in light of [the statement of Allaah], "Let not the hatred of a people make you depart from justice. Be just and fair and that is closer to taqaa". I do not know whether they say that every major sin takes one outside the fold of Islaam! However, they always revolve around certain major sins but remain silent or just pass by other major sins! And for this reason I do not see that we should make this label absolute, and that we should say, â€˜They are Khawarijâ€™, except from certain aspects. And this is the justice that we have been ordered to abide byâ€¦" [The Cassette:The Surooriyyah are the Khawarij of the Era, end of the first side]. Dated 17th Dhul-Hijjah 1417H

Then Albani says

Shaikh al-Albani (Rahimahullaah) stated, after explaining with proof that his belief in

Imaam is that of Ahlus Sunnah and not that of the Murjiâ€™ah and that his stements

regarding Imaan are the same as the explanation by Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah,

â€œand then there come - in the present times - reckless ignoramuses, who are but young

newcomers accusing us of Irjaa!! To Allaah is the complaint of the evil that they are

upon, of ignorance, misguidance and scum..." [Adh-Dhabb al-Ahmad an Musnad al-

Imaam Ahmad, p.33 (1999, 1420H)]

Uthaymin was asked about Albani's irja

Al-Albani is a man from Ahlus Sunaah (Rahimahullah), a defender of it, an Imaam in

Hadith. We do not know of anyone who has surpassed him in our time. However, some

people - and we ask Allaah's pardon - have jealousy in their hearts. For when (one of

them_ sees that a person has been met with acceptance (by the people), he begins to

find fault with him on the account of something, just like the hypocrites, those who

used to defame those believers who would gove freely in charity - and those

(hypocrites) who would find nothing but the striving of (the beleivers). So they would

defame the one who gave charity in abundance, and also the poor person who would

give charity!

We know this man from his books (Rahimahullaah) and i know him from sitting with

him on occassions. He is Salafi in Aqeedah, of sound manhaj.

However some people

desire to perform Takfir of the servants of Alaah on account of something that Allaah

did not pewrform Takfir of them. Then they claim that whoever opposes them in this

Takfir is a Murji' - a lie, slander, and mighty fabrication.

Therefore, do not listen to this saying regardless of whomever it comes from [Taken

from the cassette series, "Makaalamaat Ma'a Mashaayikh ad-Da'wah as-Salafiyyah" (part

4), 12/6/2000CE.]

Shaikh Uthaimeen was asked about Safar and Salman:

"May Allaah bless you. The good that is in their cassettes is also found in other than

their cassettes, and their cassettes have some observations against them, some of their

cassettes, not all of them. And I am not able to distinguish between them for you - I

(am not able) - between this and that!!

Then he was asked: In that case you advise us not to listen to them?

Shaikh Uthaimeen: "No (do not listen to them). I advise you to listen to the cassettes of

Shaikh ibn Baaz, the cassettes of Shaikh al-Albaani, the cassettes of the scholars who

are known for uprightness and integrity (i'tidaal), AND WHO ARE NOT KNOWN

FOR REVOLUTIONARY IDEOLOGY (THAWRAH FIKRIYYAH)"!!

[Cassette: Ismael Omari]

then the shaykh was asked whether the difference between Salman and the rest of the scholars is from aqeeda or not

The questioner asked,â€Oh Shaykh,even in this matter, for example there is a difference (ikhtilaf) so they make takfir of the rulers and they say that this jihad for, example in Algeria these Youth listen to the cassette of Salman and safar. So is this khilaf(difference) or is it a difference of aqeeda(creed) oh shaykh!

He replies: â€œ NO this is a difference of Aqeeda because it is from the Usool of Ahlul Sunnah that we do not make takfir of anyone on account of sinâ€[Cassette: Ismael Omari]

Ibn 'Uthaymeen warns the Muslims from the Salafi Group

Ibn 'Uthaymeen

Article ID: 9 | 303 Reads

what was the point of you posting this?!? Sister did I ever call anyone misguided, without a scholar preceding me, wallah sister I cant believe you would use a Shaykh I love dearly to attack me! And if that was not the intend then what were your puporse? And Allah honours his servants! I call on all the nomads on this forum, to be my witness I have never never ever ever called anyone misguided without, the kibar Ulama preceding me!(unless you saying Uthamin is warning against the Albani and Fawzan and the rest of Ulama) im astonished you did this!

Anyways as far as I know this fatwah is concerning those kids, and youth who call people "misguided" upon whims, without dalil or a scholar preceding them!

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said:

"And in the face of those who perform takfir in

falsehood are a people who do not know the aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaaâ€™ah

as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet

whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it.

And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, nor do

they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them. In fact, they

may even criticise absolutely any talk of the Sunnah and the fundamental principles of

the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their

varying madhhabsâ€¦ This approach has overcome many of the Murjiâ€™ah, some of the

Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the

Takfiris and the Murjiâ€™ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines

of the] Book and the Sunnah." [Majmooâ€™ ul-Fatawa (16/427)]

And I thought this might be an interesting point:

Legal Verdict Regarding Sayyid Qutb

Article ID: 23 | 192 Reads

Dictated by

Abdullah ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Jibreen

26/2/1417 AH

MOst people think its an interesting point, and I too thought it was an interesting point, until I read The scholars reply and refutation of Ibn Jibreen to such extend that they used harsh words!As far as I know to this day he has not responded to one single of these refutation from the kibar Ulama!

"Refutation of Shaikh Ibn Jibreen by the People of Knowledge on the Issue of Qutb and Bannaaâ€

As for the refutation of Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee, then it is the longer of the two, and is the most powerful, and uses some harsh language (bearing in mind that the Shaikh is senior to Ibn Jibreen) in outlining the great injustice of Ibn Jibreen in his accusations. The book is called "Radd ul-Jawaab 'alaa Man Talaba Minnee 'Adam Tab' al-Kitaab" (The Return of the Reply To The One Who Requested Me Not To Print the Book). This is 40 pages long, in A4. Shaikh Ibn Jibreen had requested from the Shaikh that he does not print his most excellent work entitled "Al-Mawrid al-Adhb az-Zulaal Feemantuqida Alaa Ba'd al-Manaahij ad-Da'awiyyah Min al-'Aqaa'id wal-A'maal" (The Cold Sweet [Flowing] Spring Water [That Quenches (the Thirst)] Concerning What Can Be Criticised Of Beliefs and Actions Of Some of the Methodologies of Da'wah). This book is a detailed, reference-filled, authoritative refutation of the overall methodologies of Jamaa'at ut-Tabligh, and Ikhwaan ul-Muflisoon, with details of their history, founders, developments, deviations and many other issues. It also contains an excellent and detailed refutation of Hassan al-Bannaa and Muhammad Ilyaas, and their great deviations and heresies, and who were far astray from the aqeedah of the Salaf. The book is 340 pages in total.

And everyone can read it, Ibn Jibreen has yet to respond!

http://www.al-ibaanah.com/ebooks.php?EID=15

(2)

As for the second, the reply by Shaikh Zaid al-Madkhalee, it is around 6 pages in length, and follows the same type of reply given by Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee. Shaikh Zaid makes mention at the very beginning that he was saddened to see a Shaikh like Ibn Jibreen being associated with the CDLR of al-Mis'ary, being taken unawares, and then he was made to think that the likes of Qutb was just like the great scholars of the past, who had great knowledge, but who erred in some areas. And that this false perception led the Shaikh to transgress against his brothers, the Shaikhs in Madeenah, such as Shaikh Rabee', Shaikh Salih as-Suhaymee, Shaikh Muhammad Naasir bin al-Faqeehee and others. Then the Shaikh goes on to remind Ibn Jibreen of some of the calamities of Sayyid Qutb. Likewise he addresses the issue of Hassan al-Bannaa, and some of his calamities. The Shaikh then refutes some of the claims made by Ibn Jibreen in his statements in defence of Bannaa and Qutb, and Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq. The Shaikh finally mentions the four pages of Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid and that Shaikh Rabee' has replied and refuted them with what is sufficient.

(3)

Then ALbani refutes Ibn Jibreen indirectly!

"Leave Sayyid Qutb, because he is a regular individual. We praise him for his efforts, his jihaad, but this does not in any way change the fact that he was really only a writer. He had literary skills, but he was not a scholar. So there is no surprise that a number of things would come from him which contradict the correct methodology. As for those who were mentioned along with him, like an-Nawawee and ibn Hajar, it is wrong and oppressive to refer to them as being â€œamong the people of innovationâ€. I know that they were amongst the Ashâ€˜arites, but they did not intend to contradict the Qurâ€™aan and the Sunnah. It is only that they mistakenly thought two things regarding the â€˜aqeedah which they had inherited from the Ashâ€˜arites!

(source ttp://www.bilalphilips.com/qa/fatwaa03.htm)

And Ibn jibreen does not even come close to the status of Albani!

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said:

"And in the face of those who perform takfir in