جناية التميع على المنهج السلفي

Transcription

1 جناية التميع على المنهج السلفي THE CRIME OF TAMAYYUʿ UPON THE SALAFĪ MANHAJ v Shaykh ʿUbayd al-jābirī Translated by Abū ʿIyāḍ Amjad Rafīq Shaʿbān / Ramaḍān 1423H (October 2002)

2 1st Edition (1.0) Safar 1435H / December 2013CE. Original Translation Safar 1423H / October 2002 www This is a free electronic publication originally published on salafiebooks.com ( If you did not download this ebook from salafiebooks.com it may not be original, genuine or safe and may have been modified without permission. To ensure authenticity and security download the original from salafiebooks.com and discard all other copies. You may print this ebook for your personal use. Commercial use is prohibited. If you wish to spread this ebook you can publicize its unique URL at salafiebooks.com. Third-party hosting is prohibited and is a copyright violation. Salafī Publications 472 Coventry Road Small Heath Birmingham B10 0UG United Kingdom t t f admin@spubs.com web:

3 Contents v Translator's Introduction 2 1. On the Meaning of Tamyīʿ 5 2. Sitting With the Innovated Sects and Groups 8 3. Knowing Truth Exclusive to Falsehood Referring Back to Major Scholars Asking About the Condition of Men Quoting From the Books of the Innovators Between a Person of Innovation and an Innovator Mingling With and Giving Advice to the Innovators Clarifying the Truth by Explaining Errors Collective Work, Unity and Salafī Daʿwah Leaving the Salafī Manhaj

4 Translator's Introduction v All praise is due to Allāh, the Lord of the Worlds, and may the ṣalāt and salām be upon His Final Messenger. To proceed: The 14th century hijrah (20th century CE) witnessed the birth of "Islamic" political movements heavily influenced by the socialist and communist movements of Europe and Russia. The most prominent of these movements were al-ikhwān al-muslimūn of Hassan al-banna and Sayyid Qutb, Ḥizb al-taḥrīr of Taqī al-dīn al-nabahānī and Jamāte Islāmī of Abū Aʿlā Mawdūdī. These individuals and their groups sought to involve the common masses in political activity and envisaged the re-establishment of the khilāfah either through revolutions or political processes. A necessary requirement of this political objective was to undermine the foundations of the Sunnah that require separation from and warning against the deviant groups, sects and parties. These foundations were replaced with innovated principles such as the alleged golden principle of Ḥassan al- Bannā, "Let us cooperate in that which we agree and let us excuse each other in that which we disagree." The aim behind this and similar principles was to amass followers, unify them and direct them into activities to help attain those political objectives. In the late 1980s and early 1990s numerous individuals with an apparent attachment to Salafīyyah - having been nurtured upon the books and ideas of those innovators - began to preach these deceptive principles to Salafī audiences. These principles were used to undermine the Salafī scholars, to erode the trust and 2

5 confidence the masses had in those Scholars and to entice unsuspecting Salafīs into their innovated methodologies. From the main callers of this orientation were ʿAbd al-raḥmān ʿAbd al- Khāliq, Salmān al-awdah, Safar al-ḥawālī, ʿAdnān ʿArʿūr, Abū al- Ḥasan al-maʾribī amongst others. Their agenda was to bring the teachings of Ḥassan al-bannā, Abū Aʿlā Mawdūdī and Sayyid Quṭb to Salafi audiences. In implementing this agenda, they attempted to invalidate the clear and decisive verdicts of the Major Scholars (such as Shaykh Ibn Bāz and Shaykh al-albānī) regarding the innovated groups and parties present in the field of daʿwah. This would help justify their own cooperation with these groups and also provide a justification for inviting Salafīs to cooperate with these groups as well. When the clear lines of distinction between the people of Sunnah and people of Bidʿah had been obscured by these false methodologies, much confusion and controversy was spread. Many of these false principles 1 were refuted when taken to the Major Scholars such as Shaykh al-albānī, Shaykh Ibn Bāz and Shaykh Ibn al-ʿuthaymīn. After these Shaykhs passed away many of the remaining Scholars of Ahl al-sunnah continued to expose and refute these principles. From those scholars is the noble Shaykh, ʿUbayd bin ʿAbdillāh al-jābirī, from the shaykhs of al- Madīnah al-nabawiyyah, who, in 1423H, delivered a very beneficial lecture entitled "The Crime of Tamayyuʿ upon the Salafī Methodology." This was during the tribulation of Abu al- Ḥasan al-ma'ribī who attempted to compromise the Salafī methodology with his innovated Ikhwānī principles. 2 1 Such as the principle of al-muwāzanah (obligating the mention of the good as well as the bad when refuting and criticising) and that of "we correct and do not disparage" and what is similar to them. 2 Since that time a number of others have followed in the same path such as ʿAlī Ḥasan al-ḥalabī and to a lesser degree, Ibrāhīm al-ruḥailī, who in trying 3

6 I originally translated this lecture in Shaʿbān and Ramaḍān of 1423H 3 and its valuable clarifications and advices continue to be appropriate right until this day of ours. Especially when many organizations and callers in the West implement these principles in their daʿwah and hinder people from understanding the reality of the Salafī methodology. Hence, for wider benefit this beneficial lecture is being republished in an easier to read E- book format. The first chapter on the meaning of tamyīʿ is from a separate recording and has been included for the sake of completeness. The main lecture starts from the second chapter onwards. I have added brief footnotes where appropriate to aid understanding. May Allāh, the Mighty and Exalted, reward Shaykh ʿUbayd al- Jābirī for his efforts in clarifying the Sunnah, āmīn. Abū ʿIyāḍ Amjad Rafīq 4th Safar 1435H / 7th December 2013CE to write about contentious issues without being grounded like the firmlyrooted Scholars, fell into mistakes, ambiguities and generalisations that were of tactical benefit to the opposers of the Salafī manhaj. 3 Serialized on 4

7 1. On the Meaning of Tamyīʿ v Shaykh ʿUbayd al-jābirī (ḥafidhahullāh) stated 4 : At-Tamyīʿ, its meaning is from its name. It is the opposite of proclaiming and standing up openly for the truth. It is the complete opposite of this. The mumayyiʿ therefore, is the one who does not proclaim and stand up openly for the truth and does not speak with it. Rather he comes with approaches that waste the opportunity for those who speak the truth and openly proclaim it. And it is a manhaj that is traversed by two types of people: The first of them is the one who does not have any furqān (criterion) about those methodologies that are contradictory to Ahl al-sunnah wal-jamāʿah. And the other (second of them) are a group from the Harakiyyīn 5 who outwardly portray Salafīyyah but are (in reality) opposed to Salafīyyah. Their aim is to win the love of both those (the Salafīs) and those (the Opposers, Hizbīs). So 4 Taken from an audio recording in my possession. 5 Referring to those who consider removal of the rulers and political work in its various forms to be the primary means of rectification of the Ummah. After having misdiagnosed the true causes of the ills of the ummah, they oppose the methodology of the Prophets in rectifying the servant and the land. 5

8 their face(s) and their cordiality are towards the Hizbīs 6 and the Harakiyyīn whereas their outward appearance is towards the Salafīs. But they are not really with the Salafīs. Rather, they are those who waver, swing (in opposing directions). And in reality, they have a resemblance to the Hypocrites, they have a resemblance to the Hypocrites. I have a cassette whose title is "The Crime of Tamayyuʿ upon the Salafī Manhaj", and I hope that the one to whom this audio reaches listens to it. For we have included within it, and all praise and favour belongs to Allāh, many of the issues that relate to this matter. I advise the youth to not be hasty in judgement, that they do not become hasty and that they occupy themselves with beneficial knowledge and striving in righteous actions. That they are not hasty in passing judgement upon those who are brothers to them, but who have adopted mudārāt 7 with some amongst Ahl al-bidʿah. And mudārāt is from the Sunnah and mujāmalah 8 is 6 A Ḥizbī is a person who makes his love, hate, loyalty and allegiance not upon the foundations (usūl) of the Sunnah but upon innovated principles and methodologies, misguided callers and jamāʿāt. 7 Mudārāt is a type of behavioural engagement by which one intends daʿwah to one from the Ahl al-bidʿah with a justifiable belief that he can change and rectify such a person. Hence, he interacts with them in a determined and limited way. Dealing with them in this way is not from the blameworthy mixing but is a restricted way of correcting them and inviting them to the truth. 8 Mujāmalah is flattery and compromise, it involves blameworthy mixing with Ahl al-bidʿah where the good is not enjoined and evil not prohibited but company is kept with them leading to harm and confusion for onlookers who may consider that those people of innovation are sound in their beliefs and methodologies because Ahl al-sunnah mix with them and keep company with them. 6

9 from Tamayyuʿ, and this is from innovation (in the religion), and it is obligatory to distinguish between this and that 9. So the one who is with you upon the Sunnah, who supports you, who strengthens your resolve, and who defends you in both the hidden and in the open 10, but has certain positions of mudārāt with some amongst Ahl al-bidʿah, then in reality he is with us and we are with him. This is what I am able to say now in this matter. 9 Mudārāt is permitted, as it is from the Sunnah, and Mujāmalah is prohibited as it is from Bidʿah. 10 So this is in relation to (1) the one who is with you, (2) and supports you, (3) and strengthens your determination and resolve (4) and defends you in your absence, in secret and in open, but he has mudārāt with some of the Hizbīs, (with the clear intent of calling them back to the truth and to make them leave what they are upon). However, many of those who are in reality inclined towards the people of desires and innovations, they use this claim of intending correction to justify their prolonged and sustained company and cooperation with the people of desires and innovations. 7

10 2. Sitting With the Innovated Sects and Groups v Question: When one amongst those who soften the Salafī Manhaj is advised not to sit with the various groups such as al- Ikhwān al-muslimūn and at-tablīgh, he says that this manhaj (of his) is the manhaj of the respected Shaykh Ibn Bāz, which is to sit with all of the people. So was this is the manhaj of the respected Shaykh Ibn Bāz (raḥimahullāh)? Shaykh ʿUbayd: All praise is due to Allāh, the Lord of all the Worlds, and the final end is for the pious ones. I testify that none has the right to be worshipped except Allāh alone, without any partners, the protector of the righteous. And I testify that Muḥammad is His servant and His Messenger, the chief of the all the sons of ʾĀdam, may Allāh send prayers and peace upon him, his family and his pure and good companions. To proceed: The answer to this question requires and explanation of numerous matters: The first: The respected father, the Imām the ʾAtharī, Shaykh ʿAbdul-Azīz bin Bāz (raḥimahullāh) is a skilled, erudite ʾImām, and a strong Scholar, deeply-rooted in manhaj in a mighty way. Because of his being deeply-rooted in the manhaj and being deeply-rooted in sharīʿah knowledge and his firmness in the truth everyone had awe of him. Ahl al-sunnah revere him, and Ahl al-bidʿah hold him in awe. 8

11 The second: We know from his respected self (raḥimahullāh) that he openly proclaims the truth. He does not fear the reproach of the one who reproaches concerning the truth. Rather, he speaks with the truth and openly proclaims it with wisdom and good admonition with whatever is best. The third: Whoever sat with the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) and gained benefit from his gatherings and is aware of his nature will know that he would reprimand some of the opposers by mentioning their names, and in front of all of the people. For his saying to one of them has reached us, "O so and so, be quiet, for you are a fattān (one who puts people to trial)". And he said to some of the people of knowledge, "This is not correct. What is correct is such and such." And from this it becomes clear to the just person that the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) would not sit with those (opposers) without advice given to them that comprises force and (some degree of) severity. Even if he sat with some of the people then making distinction, making the Sunnah apparent and calling to it was very clear in his way and his politics (of dealing with affairs). So from this you will come to know that this statement that "the manhaj of Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿazīz was to sit with all the people", that it is not to be taken unrestrictedly, or we say that we do not submit to the idea that he used to sit with the people unrestrictedly. The Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) was an ʾImām who was sought by all of the people, not just inside of Saʿūdiyyah which is his country, but rather from all the corners of the Earth. The Muslims used to seek him and would seek to find his gatherings. Thus, (in light of this) it was necessary that he have a particular policy (siyāsah) in dealing with the situations of the people. This is from one angle. 9

12 From another angle, the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) was amongst those who signed the resolution of the Hayʾah Kibār al-ʿulamāʾ which comprised the admission of the fact that the well known ones amongst the Harakiyyīn had excesses and mistakes. 11 The same resolution which granted permission to the walī ul-amr (the ruler) to restrain and imprison them or to restrain some of them and imprison others. And for this reason it becomes clear to us that the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) was stern and severe in those situations in which only sternness and severity bring about benefit and he was soft when he would consider that softness and gentleness is beneficial. And another angle 12 is that when a Scholar makes ijtihād and errs, his error is not actually a manhaj that is to be traversed upon by all of the people. Rather, he is rewarded for his error, and this is his responsibility (to make itjihād and pursue the truth), Allāh does not burden a soul except what it can bear. However, that his error should be taken as a manhaj and that (his error) is taken as a way, then this is not upright, nor is it correct, nor (is it) the truth. An error is an error. And another angle is that those deviants, the people of excess, monopolised upon this spaciousness of heart of the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh), his good heart and his love of giving advice with gentleness, wisdom, and good admonition. They set up a gathering to refer judgement to him (in an affair) intending to 11 This is a reference to Safar al-ḥawālī and Salmān al-ʿawdah who were subsequently detained and imprisoned for calling to the ideas and methodologies of the Khārijites and undermining the Major Scholars. 12 Meaning, in answering this doubt, which is that even if we accept the claim in the question at face value, that the Shaykh would sit with the oppposers, then this can also be answered, which is that an errant ijtihād of a scholar cannot be taken as a general methodology that is followed by others. 10

13 make him fall (in the eyes of the people). So look at what they did with him, they desired to repay him (in this manner). Then it can also be said that if this was the manner of the Shaykh (raḥimahullāh) and that which we worship Allāh with is that he was a Scholar, a muḥaqqiq (verifier), a mujtahid he never took a path of softness and gentleness with those (opposers), except while he hoped they would accept the truth, and that they would respond to it. [The Shaykh took this approach] until they transgressed upon him and deliberately tried to make him fall. However, Allāh caused their striving to be lost and wasted. I say that the Noble Scholars and the Erudite ʾImāms from the time of the Ṣahābah until today warned from inclining towards the people of desires and excessiveness, from mixing with them, and mingling with them with a mingling that entails tamyīʿ, remaining silent and showing slackness. I will mention some examples to you. Al-Lālikāʾī narrates from IbnʿAbbās (raḍiallāhu ʿanhumā) that he said, "By Allāh, I do not think that the destruction of anyone today is more beloved to Shaytaan than my destruction." So it was said, "How come?" He said, "An innovation is introduced in the East or the West and a man carries it to me, so when it comes to me, I destroy it (restrain it) with the Sunnah". And Musʿab bin Saʿīd (raḥimahullāh) said, "Do not sit with one who is put to trial, for you will not gain from him except one of two things: Either he will put you to trial and you will follow him. Or he will harm you before you depart from him". And more emphatic than this is his (sallāllāhu ʿalaihi wasallam's) saying, "A man is upon the dīn (way, religion) of his friend. Then let him look at whom he befriends". So when this has been firmly established then know that those who sit with the people of excessiveness and the people of 11

14 desires are of various groups and it is not possible for us to equate the ruling upon all of them. Since, every group differs from the other in ruling: 1. One who is a strong Imām, erudite, skilled, openly proclaiming the truth, who is held in awe and fear by them on account of what he is distinguished by of strength in the manhaj and being deeply-rooted in knowledge. And for such a person, a tangible benefit is foreseeable in him in sitting with them, such as breaking the power that they have or reducing their evil or affecting them (significantly through advice). Like what Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿazīz used to do. For he was a pure Salafī Quh (a hardcore Salafī), free, if Allāh wills, of any traces of ḥizbiyyah. 2. One who is a sound Salafī however he does not have the criterion or the perceptive knowledge about the [astray] methodologies. He outwardly manifests Salafīyyah, calls to it, and proclaims the Sunnah and fights against bidʿah, but he does not have this criterion. So he sits with whomever he gets the opportunity to sit with. Regarding the likes of this one, it is his right upon us that we explain and uncover the condition of those (people) using gentleness and wisdom and that we do not withdraw from him and nor leave him alone to the company of those (opposers). 3. The one who is a softener (mumayyiʿ), a waster, one who sees that everyone is correct, both this person and that person. So there is no doubt about the likes of this one, that he is a danger upon the manhaj. Hence, it is obligatory to remind him with the right of the manhaj upon him, to advise him and to explain his opposition to 12

15 the people of truth by way of this approach (of his). So if he accepts the advice, then fine, otherwise he is amongst them. 4. The one who mixes with them whilst defending them and increasing their rank and number and showing severity upon the Salafīs. So this one is a blazing hizbī (partisan). 5. The one who is a hardcore Salafī however he considers that mixing with those in order to explain the truth to them and to establish the proof upon them, such as what is done by some of the Mashāyikh may Allāh grant them success and grant us, them and you uprightness in statements and actions such as visiting some of the deviated jamāʿahs of daʿwah, with the argument of proclaiming the truth against them in their own places and establishing the proof upon them from their own pulpits as they say then in my view, this opposes what is better and more appropriate. We show a degree of severity to them (those amongst us who do this), however we do not withdraw from them, so long as they are with us adding to our strength, and mutually cooperating with us, backing us up, and they do not increase the numbers of those (hizbiyyeen, deviants), and do not add to their strength. 13 Only in specific circumstances for specific reasons (do these Shaykhs) respond to the invitation (of the opposers) and give lectures or seminars of knowledge in their midst. From the likes of these, we know there to be some good Shaykhs (who do this), they have their share of firmness 13 These are important qualifications and many of those who who harbour enmity and opposition to the Salafī manhaj and its people use these types of allowances without fulfilling the conditions attached to them. 13

16 in the Salafī manhaj. However in my view, they have opposed that which is more befitting and appropriate, and the Hizbiyyūn are the ones who have actually gained something by the visit paid to them by the likes of these (Shaykhs) This occurred frequently during the 1990s and 2000s (and still happens today) whereby organizations, centres and mosques of ḥizbiyyah (in the Arab lands and in the West) seek to legimitize their standing through the invitation of bona fide Salafī scholars in person or through tele-links. The effect of this is to make the average person think that if this organization, centre or mosque had issues, the Shaykh would not have attended, hence they must be upon truth and clarity. This is a deliberate tactic used by many of the jamāʿāt with scholars who are not fully aware of their realities. These Scholars simply wish to spread goodness to benefit the people whilst the organizers gain a tactical benefit to spread their own ideology and methodology in daʿwah. 14

17 3. Knowing Truth Exclusive to Falsehood v Question: Some of them encourage the youth to seek knowledge and to leave [having] knowledge of the opposers from amongst the (various) groups. They say that when the youth seek knowledge, they will come to know the opposing methodologies (by way of this knowledge on its own). So is (way) sufficient for the youth to know the opponents of the Salafī methodology? Shaykh ʿUbayd: The affair in my view is not taken absolutely (in this way). Rather, included within the understanding of the religion of Allāh is to know the Sunnah, to call others to act upon it, and likewise, to warn from innovations and the Innovators. This is because based upon this unrestricted statement (mentioned in the question) a generation of youth and other than them will be produced who do not have any criterion with respect to the methodology or the methodologies. 15 And the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam), ever since Allāh sent him up until He took him away used to establish Tawḥīd, and call others to it. He would encourage others upon it just as he would also establish all the other action-based obligations of the religion, such as prayer, zakāh, ḥajj and others from the legislated dealings. Just as he (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) also 15 Similar in meaning is what is related from ʿUmar bin al-khaṭṭāb, "Verily, the handholds of Islām will be nullified, one by one, when a people are raised in Islām without knowing Jāhiliyyah" as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmūʿ al-fatāwā 10/301). 15

18 used to warn from Shirk and all the sins and innovations and newly invented matters. And there is a good model (of behaviour) in this and this is the true manhaj. And amongst what has been preserved from him (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) by way of sound reports is the ḥadīth of ʿAbd al-raḥmān bin ʿAbd Rabb il-kaʿbah, from ʿAbd Allāh bin ʿAmr (raḍiallāhu ʿanhumā), that the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) said, "There was never any Prophet before me except that it was a duty upon him to direct his Ummah to all the good that he knew and to warn them from all the evil that he knew." And also in the ḥadīth of splitting, which is authentic and is fit to be used as evidence in the view of Ahl al-sunnah. He (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) said, "This Ummah will split into seventy-three sects, all of them are in the Fire except for one." They said, "Which one O Messenger of Allāh", and he replied, "The Jamāʿah", and Ibn Masʿūd explained this, "The Jamāʿah is whatever agrees with the truth, even if you are alone". And in another weak narration, but some of the people of knowledge have authenticated it by way of other supporting witnesses, is when they said, "Which one O Messenger of Allāh", and he replied, "Whoever is upon what I and my companions are upon." And his warning from the Dajjāl is also authentically related from him (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam), [his warning reaching] such an extent that one of them would say, "We used to certainly think that he was amongst the date-palm trees (meaning in Madinah)". He also warned from the Khawārij and ordered that they be fought and killed. He also promised a reward for this and he did not make any promise except that it originated from Allāh, the Blessed and Exalted. And the Messenger (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) also warned from the Qadariyyah, and named them the "Majūs (Magians) of this Ummah", and also warned against the Rāfiḍah, when he said, "A people will arise who have 16

19 name, they will be called "Raafidah", so when you meet them, then fight them, for they are Mushriks." 16 So he (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) warned from these sects, yet they had not arisen during this time. The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) did not see them, and he warned from sins, and he did not even see those who committed them, so he (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) said, "There are two groups of the inhabitants of the Fire, that I have not yet seen: A people who have whips like the tails of cows, and women who have clothes but appear naked and will twist their shoulders delicately and walk with waving motions, their heads will appear like the humps of wedling she-camels ", to the end of the ḥadīth. So from all of this you will become certain that this statement (mentioned in the question) is not correct. Rather, the teacher teaches his student the Sunnah, he teaches him Tawḥīd, and all of the action-based obligations of the religion and the rulings of the Sharīʿah in worship and in dealings. Just as he also warns from all forms of disobedience, and the greatest of them is Shirk. Likewise he warns from innovations and newly-invented matters. However, sometimes the Scholar might have an expectation from his student when he is just a beginner. He might desire to make him memorise some of the texts and make him establish certain affairs (as a priority). So he should not say this [statement] (on the one hand) and nor (on the other) should he wait (before warning the student from the opposers). Rather, in accordance with what the prevailing benefit requires, in accordance with what the affair requires (he should speak with what is appropriate). And the field today resounds thunderously 16 It is the opinion of the Shaykh that this ḥadīth reaches the level of acceptance. 17

20 with innovations, newly-invented matters, excesses and desires, and the people of deviation enter into every house. So it is obligatory for those who are sincere advisers to the Ummah that they explain the truth to the people along with its evidence, and that they incite and encourage them upon it. They should also explain the innovations, the newly-invented matters and warn from them. 17 This is because the field today is decayed, rotten. Despite this there is to be found in its midst much of the truth, and to Allāh belongs praise. The people of the truth do not cease (to exist), and they are held in awe (respect). They also have onslaughts and excursions (made against them) yet they also have their authority and strength. But alongside all of this, the field is resounding with the rotten statements and actions. So if the people were left like this, which is what is apparent from this statement (mentioned in the question), then the matter will become confusing upon them and the Sunnah will end by the side of Bidʿah and there will be no criterion. So with this, it 17 Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-fawzān when asked, "Is it obligatory upon the Scholars to make clear to the Muslim youth and the general folk about the dangers of sectarianism, splitting and separate groups" replied, "Yes. It is obligatory to explain the danger of sectarianism, the danger of separating and splitting into groups in order that the people have clear insight (into these affairs). This is because even the common folk are deceived. How many of them now have been deceived by these groups, thinking that they are upon the truth? Hence, it is necessary for us to explain to the people, the students and the general folk, about the danger of groups and sects. The reason for this is that when they (the scholars) remain silent, the people begin to say, "The scholars used to know about this but they remained quite" and from this avenue, misguidance appears. Therefore, it is vital to clarify matters when issues such as these arise. The danger to the general folk is more abundant than the danger that would be caused to the students because the general folk consider the silence of the scholars to mean that it is correct and that it is the truth." (al-ajwibah al-mufīdah ʿan Asʾilat al-manāhij al-jadīdah). 18

21 becomes clear that this absolution (in this statement) is falsehood. And I say in relation to this, that from the way and methodology of Ahl ul-bidʿah is to make generalisations in statements. So beware of the likes of this statement. You must adhere to the way of the Righteous Salaf, those who took the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) and his Companions after him as a model to be followed. I will mention here what is reported by Abū ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-barr in his Tamhīd with his chain of narration to Asbagh bin al-faraj, from Mālik (raḥimahullāh) who said, "Wahb bin Kaysān used to sit with us or he said he used to sit by us and would not stand until he would say, "Know that the latter part of this affair, will not be rectified except what rectified its first part". Asbagh said to Mālik, "What does he intend?" He said, "He means the (very foundational) beginning of the religion, or taqwā (piety)"." 19

22 4. Referring Back to Major Scholars v Question: Some of the students of knowledge pose as leaders and put themselves forward in some of the matters that arise, in the affairs of knowing men, and they oppose the (rulings of the) Major Scholars, those who have skill in knowing these affairs, using the argument that "We are not obliged to follow anyone." So what is your advice regarding this matter? 18 Shaykh ʿUbayd: It is vital to mention certain matters so that the answer to this statement, or to this behaviour which the question alludes to, is very clear. The First: Reminding with the saying of the Lofty and Majestic, "When there comes to them some matter touching (public) safety or fear, they make it known (among the people), if only they had referred it to the Messenger or to those charged with authority among them, the proper 18 An historical example of this is the affair of Muḥammad al-maghrawī whom the Major Scholars refuted for his statements of takfīr of the Ummah and inciting revolution upon the methodology of Sayyid Qutb. Despite these clear refutations and the very apparent nature of the errors in question, individuals like Abū al-ḥasan al-maʾribī, Salīm al-hilalī and others refused to take a stance alongside the scholars. All of these people had mutual connections with the deviant Jamʿiyyah Ih yā al-turāth of Kuwait, a cloak organisation showing the face of Salafīyyah whilst pushing the ideologies of al-ikhwan al- Muslimīn. By taking this stance, they hindered many Salafīs who trusted them and were attached to them from the truth. 20

23 investigators would have understood it from them (directly). Had it not been for the grace and mercy of Allāh upon you, you would have followed Shaytān (Satan), save a few of you." (An-Nisa 4:83). This verse teaches and nurtures the Muslims upon a Sharīʿah principle which they are obliged to proceed upon during occurrences, problems and difficult situations (that arise). This principle is to refer the difficulties and the great affairs (that arise and affect the Muslims), those that would even make the gentle, patient person to become bewildered, to those who are worthy (and capable) of speaking about them and treating these matters. And they are two types of people: 1. The Messenger (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) and what is desired now (after him, in our times) is to return to his Sunnah. 2. Those in authority (meaning) the one in authority, those who are around him, such as those from the Shūrā (consultative body) from the Scholars and the wellinformed ones who are in charge over the affairs of the Muslims with respect to the affairs of legislation and the arrangement of (public) affairs. They are the ones who can treat these newly-arising matters. And it is not for the common people. This will be increased in clarity by what has been reported by Muslim in his Ṣaḥīḥ, that it was rumoured and spread that the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) divorced his wives. ʿUmar said, "So I came to the Messenger (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) and said, "O Messenger of Allāh, have you divorced your wives?" He said, "No". ʿUmar (raḍiallāhu ʿanhu) (later) said, when the verse was revealed (4:83), "I am of the proper investigators." 21

24 The Second: His saying, "We are not obliged to follow anyone", or as he said. We say that you are not obliged to follow so and so, yes. However, this saying of yours is general (mujmal), and thus, it may contain that which is error and that which is correct. It comprises both truth and falsehood. It was more befitting for you to explain and be clear. This is because consideration is not given merely to the saying of fulān or ʿallān (so and so person), but consideration is given to the evidence. So when the people contend in an affair amongst the affairs, then it is obligatory to refer whatever they contended in to Allāh and to His Messenger (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam), just as He the Most High, said, "O you who believe! Obey Allāh and obey the Messenger and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allāh and His Messenger, if you believe in Allāh and in the Last Day." (Al-Nisā 4:59). The people of knowledge said, "Returning to Allāh, means referring to His Book and returning to His Messenger means referring to him during his life, and referring to his Sunnah after his death (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam). So this saying of yours is the extremity of corruption and falsehood, and no one understands anything from it except that you want to attach the people to yourself, and with whomever is like you from those who put themselves forward in knowledge or present themselves (to others) in the field of daʿwah. And it was obligatory upon you to attach the people to the ʾImāms of guidance and the Scholars known for a sound belief and an upright, safe manhaj, those known with deep-rooted knowledge, and giving of advice to the Ummah. This is because they are the inheritors of the Prophets so when they make their statement concerning an affair amongst the affairs that has arisen or in 22

25 warning against a man amongst the men and explained the corruption of his manhaj and his evil approach with evidence, then it is obligatory to accept what they say, because it is the truth, so long as it is based upon evidence and upon clear proof. So by this, it becomes clear that this statement is corrupt and false. 23

26 5. Asking About the Condition of Men v Question: When the condition of a man is unknown or hidden and nothing is known about him, is it permissible to ask about him in order to know his condition or is it not permissible? Shaykh Ubayd: There is no doubt that in every time and in every place [it often occurs that] a person who is not known comes to the people. And this person who is not known, if he is one who remains silent and is reserved, and does not manifest any opposition, then he remains unknown (in terms of his true condition). However, when the people have doubts about this man or they desire anything of the (worldly or religious) affairs from him, then it is their right to investigate his condition. And amongst the evidences for this is what Muslim and others have reported from Muʿāwiyah bin al-ḥakam (raḍiallāhu ʿanhu), that he used to have a female slave who used to tend to the flock of sheep. And then a wolf came and snatched a sheep from the flock. Muʿāwiyah came and slapped her, and this became heavy upon him therefater. So he went to the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) and informed him of the incident. He said, "Bring her to me so I can see if she is a believer or not?" So he brought her, and the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam) said, "Where is Allāh?" She said, "Above the heaven". He said to her, "Who am I?" She said, "You are the Messenger of Allāh". He said, "Free her, for she is a believer." 24

27 And in the long past, they meaning the Scholars used to say, "Test the people of Madīnah with Mālik bin Anas, and the people of Shām with al-awzāʿī, and the people of Miṣr with al-layth bin Ṣaʿd, and the people of Mawṣul with Muʿāfī bin ʿImrān". 19 Hence, when doubts arise about a person, or something of the affairs is desired from him, then he is to be examined. And this is a matter that the people cannot do without, until even in their dealings with each other. If a man was to propose to a woman, then they are required to ask about his condition. Is he a person whose religion and character is pleasing, or not? This is necessary, and it is not to be said that there is nothing known about this person. 19 Ibn al-madīnī said, "I heard ʿAbd al-raḥmān bin Mahdī say: Ibn ʿAwn is a test for the people of Baṣrah. If you see a person from them loving him, then incline and be secure with him. For the people of Kūfah, Mālik bin Mighwal and Zaāʿidah bin Qudāmah are a test. If you see a man loving them then seek his goodness. And for the people of Shām, al-awzāʿī, and Abū Is-hāq al-fazārī are a test. And for the people of Ḥijāz, Mālik bin Anas." (al-lālikāʾī 1/62). Ibn Mahdī said, "When you see a person from Shām loving al-awzāʿī and Abū Ishāq al-fazārī, then he is a person of the Sunnah". (al-jarḥ wat-taʿdīl of Ibn Abī Hātim, 1/217). Aḥmad bin Yūnus narrates from Sufyān al-thawrī who said, "Test the people of Maws ul by Muʿāfī bin ʿImrān." (Tahdhīb al-tahdhīb of Ibn Ḥajar, 10/180). Al-Barbahārī said, "To set up trials in Islām is an Innovation. As for today, people should be tested for the Sunnah, because of his saying, "This is the knowledge of the religion, so look from whom you take your religion " (Sharḥ al-sunnah, no. 152, and the latter part of the narration is that of Muhammad bin Sīrīn, the Tābiʿī). Aḥmad bin Zahīr said, "I heard Ah mad binʿ Abd Allāh bin Yūnus say: Test the people of Maws ul with Muʿāfī bin ʿImrān. If they love him, then they are Ahl al-sunnah, and if they hate him, then they are Ahl al-bidʿah just as the people of Kūfah are to be tested by Yaḥyā." (al-lālikāʾī 1/66). 25

28 So through this (clarification) the falsehood of the statement, "The basis with respect to a person is ʿadālah (uprightness, integrity)" becomes clear. 20 The affair is not like this. This 20 Shaykh al-islām Ibn Taymiyyah said, "As for the saying of the one who says, "The base rule concerning Muslims is al-ʿadālah (uprightness, integrity), then it is bāṭil (false, futile). Rather, the base rule concerning the son of ʾĀdam is dhulm (oppression) and jahl (ignorance), just as the Most High has said, "... But man took it upon himself. Verily, he was unjust (to himself) and ignorant (of its results)." (Al-Aḥzāb 33:70). And the mere utterance of the two testimonies of faith does not necessitate that a person has moved from oppression and ignorance into al-ʿadl (integrity)." (Majmūʿ al-fatāwā 15/357). Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī was asked the question "Is the origin with respect to the people that they are upon the Sunnah?" And he replied, "How can the base rule concerning the people be that they are upon the Sunnah, when we have with us the Rawāfiḍ (Shites) and we have with us the Bāṭiniyyah, and we have with us the Communists, and we have with us the Hizbiyyūn (Partisans), and we have with us every type of group (of people)? How can the base rule concerning them be that they are upon the Sunnah? Who said these words? And Ibn Taymiyyah, rahimahullaah, refutes the one who says that the base rule concerning a Muslim is that he is upright, just, honest (al-ʿadālah). He says that this is "false speech," because Allaah the Most High has said concerning humankind that he is dhalūm (oppressive) jahūl (ignorant), Truly, We did offer the trust to the heavens and the earth, and the mountains, but they declined to bear it and were afraid of it. But man bore it. Verily, he was unjust (to himself) and ignorant (of its results). Hence, the base rule is that he is upon dhulm and jahl (oppression and ignorance), meaning that his entry into Islaam does not confer integrity, honesty, justice, upon him, or as he (Shaykh ul-islaam Ibn Taymiyyah) said. So how can the base rule concerning the people in the various places - where there is great confusion and where most people are upon other than the Sunnah - how can [the base rule be that] they are upon the Sunnah? However, if you know a person coming from a specific Salafi school (teaching place), then there is good opinion to be made of him (ihsān udh-dhann), so we think the best of him. However, as for when the whole world has become a place of great confusion and you do not know one person from another (as to what they are upon), then you should know the person upon the truth. And it is for this reason that they (the Salaf) used to say, "Verily, this knowledge is the dīn, so look at whom you take it from." As for the opinion of the one who says that 26

29 statement is falsehood, and the books of al-jarḥ wal-taʿdīl are a witness to what we say. If the original basis with respect to Muslims was that they are all upon ʿadālah (upright and trustworthy), the people would not have required Scholars and Imāms who disparaged whom they disparaged and gave appraisal to those whom they appraised. the base rule concerning the people is that they are upon the Sunnah, then in that case you should take it from every person and his brother. And Ibn Sīrīn said, "Verily the people did not used to ask about the isnaad, then when the fitnah (tribulation) occurred..." and the fitnah was not like that of the current times, it was actually less than it, "... they began to say: Name us your men. So if they were from Ahl us-sunnah, his speech would be accepted and if he was from the people of Innovation, his speech would be rejected." So we ask Allaah that he grants to you and to us success, and that Ahl us-sunnah increase, however statements that are sent without any restraint, then it is not desirable for them to be uttered." End quote. From the cassette "Meeting with the People of Yemen," posted on Sahab (1425H). 27

30 6. Quoting From the Books of the Innovators v Question: When a student of knowledge is compelled to quote from the books of the people of knowledge or to take from them, then what are the Sharīʿah guidelines regarding this in the view of the Scholars of Tawḥīd and Sunnah? Shaykh ʿUbayd: The books of the people of knowledge, if the authors of these books are from Ahl us-sunnah, there is no problem in this matter for me, except that he should only quote the clear expressions from them which will be understood by the people being addressed. Whilst quoting he should choose expressions that are appropriate to the situation and the speech at hand. As for when the one being quoted from is from Ahl al- Bidʿah, then the matter can vary and is not all at the same level. It is for this reason that the Scholars divided the books of the Innovators into three categories: The first: That which is a pure innovation and does not have any Sunnah in it or it only has a very small amount of Sunnah in it. It is not lawful (for anyone) to look into it except a firmlygrounded scholar who desires to refute the people from their own books. Amongst the examples of these books are those of the Rāfiḍah such as al-kāfī and Uṣūl al-kāfī and Faṣl ul-khiṭāb. The second: That in which Sunnah and Bidʿah are mixed. So they say it is not lawful to look into except for the firmlygrounded Scholar who can differentiate between the authentic from the unauthentic and the corrupt from the sound and 28

31 upright and the truth from falsehood. In that case it is lawful for such a person (who is a scholar). Since, he is able to distinguish and he knows what he will quote of the truth. And I hold that he should not engage in this much, because when he engages in this a lot and this (practice) becomes common, it might lead to confusion. Perhaps those who listen or read might think that that which has been quoted from is the Sunnah. Rather, I see it obligatory upon him to explain the condition of this man in the footnotes, to explain his misguidance and (to explain) that he quoted from him whatever he quoted because it was appropriate or because it agrees with the saying of Ahl al-sunnah. However, in my view, I hold that it is better to do away with (this practice), especially in the time of turmoil as occurs in our time today when the various (false) methodologies have appeared and caused confusion. For the methodology of the truth and of the people of truth clashes with the methodology of falsehood and its people. Hence, I hold that we not be in need of them since there is in the books of the Salaf, and all praise is due to Allāh, what makes one free of need of the books of those people. However, some of the noble Scholars, we have seen them quote from the Innovators, but we are not able to say about them that they are Innovators, or that they have made themselves a ladder for the Innovators (allowing the Innovators to be propped up through citation of them). No, far be it from them. However, I do hold that being without need of this is far better, since the books of the Salaf are replete with the truth. However, perhaps this Scholar saw it fit to quote a sound, correct expression from a book of a misguided, misguiding innovator, because it agreed with the truth, and it agreed with what he has of the truth, and thus he quotes it from the angle of seeking it as an (additional, supporting) witness and not from the angle of independent (proof or support). 29

32 So from the examples of the second type is al-kashshāf of al- Zamakhsharī and al-zamakhsharī, I think his name is Maḥmūd bin ʿUmar, labelled as Jārullāh, he is a pure hardcore Muʿtazilī, however the Scholars quote from him in the meanings (of the Qurʾān) and in language. They quote these statements of support from him. The third: That which is free from innovation, and its author has no concern in spreading innovation (by way of it), or calling to it, but his concern is taḥqīq (verification, corroboration) of a book from the books of Ahl al-sunnah. As if he is a person of trade, or a person of commodities and he desires to subsist and receive sustenance (through this activity). So he verifies this book or that book and he does not include within it any of his innovations or his deviations. So this affair is a vast one (contains much room). And examples of the third type, then I am not able to say with certainty, but found within it, perhaps is Abū Ghuddah's arrangement of Sunan al-nasāʾī. Abu Ghuddah is a blazing Sūfī, rather he is the Kawtharī of this Era, an enemy of Ahl al-sunnah. 30

33 7. Between a Person of Innovation and an Innovator v Question: What is the difference between their saying, "This is a person of innovation (ṣāhibu bidʿah)" and "this is an innovator (mubtadiʿ)"? Shaykh ʿUbayd: In my view the difference is clear and I will explain it to you: That which we know from the expressions of the People of Knowledge, and their way and methodology in their saying "Mubtadiʿ", is that they do not apply it absolutely, except for the one upon whom the proof has been established, and who is a person of misguidance, and who is misguided, misguiding others. So they say, "Mubtadiʿ". And sometimes they may also use it unrestrictedly, but from the angle of reprimand. However, overwhelmingly, they do not say "Mubtadiʿ" except for the one who traversed upon innovation and the proof was established upon him. As for "person of innovation (ṣāhibu bidʿah)", then the condition of the proof being established does not apply to it. And they say, "This is a person of innovation", meaning he traverses upon innovations (or something from them), and this is more general. "Person of innovation" is something more general, and as for "Innovator", then it is more specific. Meaning a word that is more specific. So understand this well, may Allāh bless you. 31

34 8. Mingling With and Giving Advice to the Innovators v Question: Some people spend years and months in advising the people of the sectarian groups such as al-ikhwān al-muslimīn and at-tablīgh, whilst also sitting with them (mixing with them), using the proof that they are advising them. Is this what the Salaf were upon? Shaykh ʿUbayd: It is vital that giving advice leads to and ends in something, which is that the one being advised accepts the advice of the one who gives it and returns to the truth and then traverses upon the path of the Believers and follows the way of the Sunnah. Or he shows resistance and persistence (in his way). Hence, it is necessarily so that this advice will end in something (after a certain point). This matter does not require for it to be prolonged, ever. Rather, (one of the two outcomes) becomes clear in just a few sittings and this is what occurs in the majority of cases. And if prolonging (the affair) was permitted, then it would occur very rarely in relation to people from whom some sort of softness and some sort of nearness appears from them, but they are (genuinely) in the dark (about matters). So the likes of these people are in need of (longer) utual engagement. But as for sitting with all of the people of desires, or in a sitting in which the the people of desires are the majority, in a mixed, 32