|Wednesday, 23 April 2014 Home About Us Contact Us|
You are here:
Mail to a Friend Printer friendly
In this article we look at a cold, calculated deliberate fabrication and lie perpetrated by Abu Zubair Saleem Begg al-Kadhdhaabee. When you look at it, you will see that there is absolutely no room for any excuse such as it being a genuine mistake, oversight, misunderstanding etc. because this liar actually posted the audio which he was claiming to quote directly from, and thus ignorance or being mistaken is disqualified. There used to be a time in the past when honesty and integrity was honoured and valued, even in relation to foes and enemies. Make one fabrication like this one here (made by al-Kadhhaabee), and you would be finished and buried forever. Unfortunately, we are living in a time where the various ahzaab and jamaa'aat (parties and groups) operate with plenty of makr (plotting) and khiyaanah (deception) to further their own goals, often being deceived that their supposed lofty-goals justify all the means, including outright blatant lying. To this end, we see the loss of honesty and integrity, its value is diminished in the hearts of the people and this is why and how people like the fanatical Qutbiyyah and Takfiriyyah are able to deceive their ignorant followers with spreading and distributing lies (like the one covered in this article).
Reasons for Attacking Shaykh Rabee
For three years now the Qutbiyyah, the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ma'ribi and likewise the Haddaadiyyah from the "Athary" website, have been distributing a 3 minute audio recording in which they claim Shaykh Rabee' makes Takfir of Ibn Jibreen by allegedly saying ("ضيع دينه وإسلامه").
As for the Qutbiyyah then their intent behind this is to seek revenge against Shaykh Rabee because he refuted their 20th century figureheads who brought them the "fikr" of "Social Justice" and "revolution" through the ideologies, maxims and principles of Marx and Engels (see article link below), through some of the terminologies of Abu A'laa Mawdudi, "jaahiliyyah" and "Haakimiyyah", and through some help from French Philosophers such as Alexis Carrel - and all of this combined was behind the penning of the methodology of the Leninist-type revolution in "Milestones" and the latter part of his "Zilaal" from the late 1950s.
So the intent of the Qutbiyyah is to attack and revile Shaykh Rabee' because he refuted their ramz (symbolic figurehead) and because he pointed out the Socialist Marxism in the books of Qutb and because he pointed out the bid'ahs of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Jabariyyah, Ittihaadiyyah, as well as the evil poison of the Raafidah, and then the doctrines of the Khawaarij that took shape from the ideologies of the secular atheist Jews upon which he built his notion of "Social Justice" and "revolution" (see here). So with a huge dent in their "harakah", "sahwah" and "fikr" - the Qutbiyyah have been, for the past twenty years or so, trying to defame this noble Scholar. And this is after their full knowledge that the majority of the major Scholars and Imaams of the Sunnah have already vindicated him and his methodology and his refutations of Qutb and others.
We could bring literally scores of such statements from the likes of Imaam al-Albani, Imaam Ibn Baz and Imaam Ibn Uthaymin to show that these Scholars were with Shaykh Rabee', agreed with him, commended his efforts, praised them and defended him - at this point we have not fully documented them all on this site - but we will just provide a sample of such statements from Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin to corroborate our claims:
Here is the claim of the Extremist Qutbiyyah, in particular Abu Zubair Saleem Begg al-Kadhhaabee (from Lewisham), and in the screenshot below, you can actually see the motivation behind these people - these slanders are only taking place to defend Sayyid Qutb:
As we pointed out in previous articles, the Qutbiyyah do not have any knowledge-based responses on the usoolee issues that pertain to the actual doctrines found in Qutb's works, except to cause doubt, confusion and scare-mongering and rumour-mongering in order to cast aspersions upon the person of Shaykh Rabee bin Haadee, not unlike the way taken by the grave-worshippers against Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab and the Jahmiyyah Ash'ariyyah against Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah - from their respective times to this day of ours. And this is the type of activity that the Qutbiyyah are engaged in because they know they cannot defend the presence of the doctrines of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Marxist Socialists, Jabariyyah, Ittihaadiyyah, Raafidah and Khawaarij evidently found in the books of Sayyid Qutb.
So here is the audio they are circulating. Its in RealAudio format and the discussion is between Shaykh Rabee', Fareed Maalikee and Taraaheeb ad-Dawsaree and the discussion is pertaining to Ibn Jibreen and his behaviour in holding stances in defence of the people of innovation (like Qutb, Banna and so on).
Recording of the discussion:
Now, the truth is that in this audio, as there are three people talking, often over each other, its fairly difficult to figure out exactly what they are saying in certain parts and what the discussion is about in certain parts of the recording. It is three and a half minutes in length. The alleged Takfir occurs at the 3:19 mark, and whoever listens to it repeatedly will realize that what the Qutbiyyah have claimed that the Shaykh says, ("ضيع دينه وإسلامه") is a fabrication because there are no pronouns in what the Shaykh said, and it is not entirely clear that he actually used the word ("ضيع"). In any case, let's give the Qutbiyyah a favorable position in this and let us accept he used the word ("ضيع"), then, upon this basis, in the recording it appears the Shaykh says ("ضيع الدين والإسلام ") or ("ضياع الدين والإسلام")- as we said, there are no pronouns in that statement for sure, and it is the first word of those three words is not clear.
Annihilating the Claim of Takfir
First of all you can see clearly that the quote ascribed to Shaykh Rabee' is a complete utter fabrication, that quote does not exist anywhere in the recording. What they have done is put things together from different parts of the recording and presented it, in writing, as one passage, and presenting it (in quotation marks) as a verbatim statement. That's outright dishonesty. Then they have based their allegation of Takfir, as has preceded upon a phrase that is found at position 3:19, which is either ("ضيع الدين والإسلام ") or ("ضياع الدين والإسلام").
The cheapness of the Qutbiyyah should be readily apparent and the claim of Takfir is already known to be spurious, however, we want to send these rodents a few hundred feet further down the sewer that they are operating from, so we can add something here that will serve this objective very well.
The following statements refer to the issue of showing rejection in the issues of khilaaf (differing), and in particular the claim of some that we ought not to show any rejection in those issues in which there is differing between the Scholars. When applied absolutely, this saying amounts to silence upon error and falsehood, and this no doubt leads to the wastage and ruin of the deen.
The Saying of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen
The Shaykh (rahimahullaah) said in clarifying the claim that "there is no rejection to be shown upon the issues of difference (ikhtilaaf) or issues of ijtihaad" is applied unrestrictedly, as occurs in (لقاء الباب المفتوح) at (49/192-193):
لو أننا قلنا المسائل الخلافية لا ينكر فيها على الإطلاق، ذهب الدين كله حين تتبع الرخص؛ لأنك لا تكاد تجد مسألة إلا وفيها خلاف بين الناس. نضرب مثلاً: هذا رجلٌ مسَّ امرأة لشهوة، وأكل لحم إبل، ثم قام ليصلي، فقال: أنا أتبع الإمام أحمد في أن مسَّ المرأة لا ينقض الوضوء، وأتبع الشافعي في أن لحم الإبل لا ينقض الوضوء، وسأصلي على هذه الحال !!، فهل صلاته الآن صحيحة على المذهبين؟ هي غير صحيحة؛ لأنها إن لم تبطل على مذهب الإمام أحمد بن حنبل بطلت على مذهب الشافعي، وإن لم تبطل على مذهب الإمام الشافعي، بطلت على مذهب الإمام أحمد، فيضيع دين الإنسان !
If we had said that there is no rejection to be shown in the issues of difference (masaa'il khilaafiyyah) in absolute terms, then the whole of the religion would have gone [disappeared, lost], when you start following up all those [verdicts in which there are] concessions. This is because you will hardly find any matter except that there is differing over it between the people. We will give an example: This man touches a woman out of desire, and he also eats the meat of a camel. Then he stands and he prays, and then he says, "I follow Imaam Ahmad in that touching a woman does not invalidate wudhoo, and I follow ash-Shaafi'ee in that [eating] the meat of the camel does not invalidate wudhoo, and I will pray in this condition (i.e. touching a woman with desire and eating camel's meat)!! So is his prayer valid upon either of the madhabs? It is not valid! Because if it is not invalidated upon the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal, it is invalidated upon the madhhab of ash-Shaafi'ee, and if it not invalidated upon the madhhab of Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee, it is invalidated upon the madhab of Imaam Ahmad, and thus the deen of a person becomes ruined (lost, wasted).
Thus, the concept of the wastage and ruin and loss of the religion (ضياع الدين) is found in the language of the scholars, and it does not imply Takfir, and all the Qutbiyyah are doing is simply trying to twist the words of Shaykh Rabee', and that's after fabricating upon him what he did not actually say in the first place.
The Saying of Imaam ash-Shawkaani
And also the saying of Imaam ash-Shawkaanee - rahimahullaah - (السيل الجرّار المتدفق على حدائق الأزهار) at (4/588):
هذه المقالة - أي لا إنكار في مسائل الخلاف- قد صارت أعظم ذريعة إلى سدّ باب الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر، وهما بالمثابة التي عرفناك، والمنـزلة التي بيّناها لك، وقد وجب بإيجاب الله عز وجل، وبإيجاب رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم على هذه الأمة، الأمر بما هو معروف من معروفات الشرع، والنهي عما هو منكر من منكراته: ومعيار ذلك الكتاب والسنة، فعلى كل مسلم أن يأمر بما وجده فيهما أو في أحدهما معروفاً، وينهى عما هو فيهما أو في أحدهما منكراً. وإن قال قائل من أهل العلم بما يخالف ذلك، فقوله منكر يجب إنكاره عليه أولاً، ثم على العامل به ثانياً. وهذه الشريعة الشريفة التي أُمِرْنا بالأمر بمعروفها، والنهي عن منكرها، هي هذه الموجودة في الكتاب والسنة
This saying - meaning that there is no rejection [shown] in the issues of differing - has become the greatest of means in closing the door of commanding good and forbidding evil, and these two (commanding good and forbidding evil) are they are like what we have informed you of, and [hold] a position which we have clarified to you. And commanding what is good from the [things declared] good in the Sharee'ah and prohibiting what is evil from the [things declared] evil in the Sharee'ah have become obligatory through Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, making them obligatory, and through His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) making them obligatory upon this Ummah.
Wrapping it All Up
We could bring many more statements to clarify exactly what is going on here, but the following two as examples should suffice.
So here is what is going on:
Shaykh Ibn Jibreen is defending the innovators like Sayyid Qutb and Hasan al-Banna who had calamities in their aqidah and in their methodologies, the bid'ahs of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Mufawwidah, Rafidah, and so on. And Ibn Jibreen treated these people as people of ijtihaad who erred - just like Ibn Jibreen treats Bin Ladin as one who erred in making Takfir of nation states and Muslims (see that article here) - and in this Shaykh Ibn Jibreen is in clear manifest error. For falling into any of the well-known major innovations (which have become clear to the Ummah) through ijtihaad is not excusable, otherwise we can excuse the "khawaarij" and other innovators. And there is ijmaa (consensus) on this issue: Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani narrates it in "al-Jaami'" and it is on page 121:
And from the saying of Ahl us-Sunnah: Is that a person whose ijtihaad leads him to an innovation is not excused, because the Khawaarij made ijtihaad in [their] Ta'weel [faulty interpretation] and they were not excused, since they departed, by way of their Ta'weel from [the way of] the Companions, and he (alayhis salaam) described them as maariqeen (those who exit) from the religion.
It is for this reason that Shaykh Ibn Jibreen was subsequently refuted by the likes of Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee who refuted him in aid of the Book and the Sunnah and in defense of the sanctity of the Islamic aqidah (see that series here).
The point here is that you should go back and read the saying of ash-Shawkani again,and you will understand that what Shaykh Rabee' is saying in that audio is that Ibn Jibreen needs to be refuted for defending the people of baatil (falsehood), because in remaining silent upon his activities, there is a wastage of the religion. And this is a correct Shar'iyy meaning and it is found in the sayings of all of the Salaf who consider innovations to be what destroy and corrode Islam, and in which there is ruin, loss, wastage of the religion, and if it is the case that failing to show rejection in issues pertaining to fiqh (jurisprudence) and rulings, when they are in clear opposition to the texts is a "wastage of the deen" of a person, upon the saying of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin, then failing to show rejection upon the calamities, and innovations (of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Raafidah, Jabariyyah, Mufawwidah, Mutasawwifah and the doctrines of Marxist Socialists and secular pluralist mass-populist reform ideologies) present in books that are distributed in the millions all over the world, and propagandized for is even more worthy of being described as "wastage of the religion and Islaam"!!. And whoever opposes and dislikes this, rather defends the lords of innovation, and hates that they be refuted and the people turned away from those books and instead directed to the books of the Salaf and the Scholars of the Sunnah, then no doubt in the actions of such a one, there is wastage and ruin of the religion - and there is no Takfir in any of this, neither from near, nor from far.
The Qutbiyyah are Intellectual Fraudsters and They are Hypocrites (in Action)
We have elaborated this in more detail in the first part of this series (please refer to it here). In the attempted use of this recording to malign and attack Shaykh Rabee' for having allegedly made Takfir of a Scholar of the 20th century, you can straight away see the hypocrisy and fraud of these people. Because for 15 years these people have been waging and fighting a war against Shaykh Rabee' because Shaykh Rabee, although he was not the first Scholar to do so, he wrote books in defence of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger, and in particular against Qutb's negation of Islam from some of them and from the Bani Umayyah. Allaamah Mahmood Shakir refuted Qutb for the same in 1952 in a series of five articles and Qutb rejected that advice, and continued publishing his books, and despite some minor changes in wording, he persisted upon his evil viewpoint and expression of it towards the Companions in these books until his death in 1966. We are documenting that in this series of articles.
So why are these people scurrying around in those sewers trying to find and then propagate these types of cheap attempts to malign Shaykh Rabee? This is a question that needs no answer, its already very clear and we suggest you go and read (the first part in this series) where this outlined in more detail.
Putting the Nail in the Coffin
Shaykh Rabee' bin Hadee has a cassette lecture entitled ( النقد منهج شرعي تعليق على كتاب ابن رجب الفرق بين النصيحة والتعيير) and a full transcription of it is on the Shaykh's website. We will quotes some excerpts from this transcript.
قال الحافظ ابن رجب - رحمه الله - : <وقد قرر علماء الحديث هذا في كتبهم في الجرح والتعديل وذكروا الفرق بين جرح الرواة وبين الغيبة> .
الغيبة : ذكرك أخاك بما يكره لغرض شخصي ما تقصد وجه الله عز وجل ولكن قصدك الطعن فيه ، أما جرح الرواة فهذا حفاظ على دين الله تبارك وتعالى يعني كيف نميز بين الصحيح والضعيف إذا كان الرواة كلهم لم يتكلم فيهم أحد ، الرافضي والجهمي والكذاب وفاحش الغلط أليس في هذا ضياع الدين؟ ألا يترتب على هذا ضياع الدين ؟ طيب أنت عندك كتب في الموضوعات وكتب في العلل مجلدات كبيرة ما هو سببها ؟ سببها : الجرح في الرواة والكلام على الأسانيد والكلام على المتون إذا كان فيها مُدْرَجات وفيها مراسيل وفيها كذا
al-Hafidh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (rahimahullaah) said:
And he says after a few lines:
لأنا إذا سكتنا عن الرواة عن الكذاب والمتهم والسيء الحفظ والفاحش الغلط وكذا ، ضاع الدين أليس كذلك ؟ لكن بهذا النقد وبهذا التجريح وبهذا التمييز بين هذا وذاك حفظ الله لنا هذا الدين ، وثمار هذا العلم واضحة ولله الحمد .
وجهل الصوفية الذين كانوا يودون أن يُغطُّوا أفواه الرواة والنقاد ويكموا أفواههم فلو كان استسلم لهم علماء الجرح والتعديل وعلماء النقد لضاع دين الله تبارك وتعالى لكن أبى الله إلا أن يتم نوره ولو كره المبتدعون
Because when we remain silent upon the narrators, about the liars, the one suspected of lying, the poor in memory, the one making serious errors and so on, the religion would have been ruined, wasted, is that not the case? (ضاع الدين أليس كذلك) However, with this criticism and with this disparagement, and with this distinction between this and that, Allaah has safeguarded this deen for us, and the fruits of this knowledge is apparent, and all praise is due to Allaah.
Then after a quoting a passage from Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali in which he indicates that there is no difference between disparaging the narrators of hadeeth and those who err in their understanding of the Book and the Sunnah (meaning the Innovators), Shaykh Rabee' comments:
يريد أن يقول ليس هناك فرق بين الطعن في الرواة وبين من يبين خطؤه في الدين في الفقه في الحديث في التفسير في الأصول في أي مجال ،أو عنده بدعة .
بعض الناس يقولون : هذا الجرح للرواة فقط للحفاظ على سنة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم !! نقول لهم : وعقائد المسلمين إذا دخل أناس يشوشونها ويضيعونها لا ينتقدون ؟!
ما ننتقد الجهمية ما ننتقد الروافض وليس لهم علاقة بالرواية وهؤلاء جاءوا بعقائد تخالف عقائد الإسلام وتناقض عقائد الإسلام هل نسكت عنهم ؟! صوفية جاءوا بالحلول ووحدة الوجود والرقص والأناشيد والبدع والأذكار المبتدعة الضالة ، وهم ليسوا رواة ولكن يجب أن ننتقدهم
He wishes to say that there is no difference between revilement upon the narrators (of hadeeth) and between those whose errors in the religion are to be explained [whether] in jurisprudence, in hadeeth, in tafsir, and in the usool, in any place, or [with respect to one] with whom there is innovation.
So from all of this the truth is clear walhamdulillaah, there is no Takfir anywhere and these people return to the sewers (from where they are operating) empty handed whilst the Imaams of the Sunnah, ennobled and honoured by their adherence to, love of, and defence of the aqaa'id and manaahij of Islaam, continue to shine, and Allaah will perfect His Light even if the Innovators detest it!
And here, for the sake of completion, is a summary of the refutation of Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee against Shaykh Ibn Jibreen on this particular subject matter:
Link to this article: Show: HTML Link Full Link Short Link
You must be registered and logged in to comment.