Introduction

After the Imams, Mashayikh and students of knowledge of Ahl al-Sunnah silenced and laid to rest the slander perpetrated by Mohammad Qutb al-Ash'ari against the leading Scholars of the followers of the way of the Salaf, in particular, Imaam al-Albani, there remained but rodents and scavengers in the shipwreck, manifested in the form of gormless Hawaalians muttering "shart kamaal, shart sihhah, al-Albani did have some expressions of Irjaa." These mutterings serve as a means of psychological comfort to avoid facing up to the realities of their disgraceful past. So here it is important to drive the stake into this devious doubt, and send these rodents, the by-product of 20th century As'harites (see here) who entered turmoil into the da'wah of Ahl al-Sunnah, on their way into the dustbin of history.

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin on Shart Kamal, Shart Sihhah, Imaan and Irjaa

In his explanation of the 34th hadith in an-Nawawi's al-Arba'in, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin said:

This translates as:

And there is no need for us to say what is circulating now, between the youth and the students of knowledge: Are actions from the perfection of eemaan or from the validity of eemaan? There is no need for this question, meaning that a person asks you and says: Are actions a condition of perfection of eemaan or a condition of the validity of eemaan?

This was not initiated except by the Jamaa'ah of Mohammad Qutb who was the first [along with Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaliq] to accuse those not making Takfir of the rulers with Irjaa'. This bandwagon was then led by his students, chief amongs them Safar al-Hawali. They raised these issues and then started attacking Imaam al-Albani after isolating some of his statements. In particular his position on the one who abandons prayer, and other matters related to Takfir, as well has his speaking with this issue of shart kamal and shart sihhah. The da'wah of Ikhwan is antithetical to the da'wah of al-Albani and al-Albani called to tasfiyah and tarbiyah. For this reason, he pointed out what is contained in the books of Qutb of deviations, such as the statement of wahdat al-wujood. When he did this, he was subject to a organization level boycott by the Ikhwaan (read all about it here and here). So this attack upon al-Albani and his da'wah (which is the da'wah of Ahl al-Sunnah) is not without history and background. Mohammad Qutb found some stooges in the form of Hawali, Awdah and others who were tutored through the 80s prior to the Gulf War, who were used to propagate the Leninist methodology of his brother (social and political justice through through ideological, leading to physical revolution). All of the Scholars (Al-Albani, Ibn Baz, Ibn Uthaymin etc.) exposed these stooges eventually by the turn of the new century after a decade of turmoil. There is plenty of evidence in the rest of this site in this regard, and this movement, spawned by the Ash'arites of Egypt in Saudi Arabia, was identified and referred to as Qutbiyyah (by Shaykh al-Fawzan and Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin and many others prior to them).

We say to him: the Companions (radiallaahu anhum) are more noble than you, more knowledgeable than you, and more eager than you for goodness. And they did not ask the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) this question. Therefore, what suffices them suffices you.

When evidence shows a person leaves Islam by this action then it becomes a condition for the validity (sihhah) of eemaan. And when evidence shows that he does not exit (Islaam) it becomes a condition of the perfection (kamaal) of eemaan. The topic has ended.

Here, the axe has fallen on the Gormless Hawalians who to this day are still muttering "shart kamaal, shart sihhah, al-Albani took it from Ibn Hajar, so he did have some aspect of Irjaa' at least." These are just the ramblings of rodents on a shipwreck who were washed ashore by the sheer power of the defence of the Scholars of al-Albani. Left in ruins and deserted on their forums, they mutter these statements out of reminiscence of the days gone by in the 90s when Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin had not discovered the truth about Hawali, Awdah and others who allied with the Ash'arite agitators and their Leninist methodologies in order to cause turmoil in the land to tear the youth away from the true and real scholars.

As for trying to contend and refute and make disputation, such that whoever opposes you, you say this one is a Murji' and whoever agrees with you, you are pleased with him, and if he adds, you say this one is from the Khawaarij, then this is not correct.

It was Mohammad Qutb and his bandwagon who initiated this matter, and they were the first to raise these issues and as it has been rightly said by some of the people of knowledge, it was from Safar al-Hawali's qillat ul-'aql (deficiency in intellect) that he used the issue of the abandonment of prayer in order make the accusation of Irjaa' against Imaam al-Albani.

For this reason, my counsel to the youth and students of knowledge is that you leave investigation of this matter, and that we say: What Allaah, the Exalted and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) have made a condition for the validity of eemaan and its remaining, then it is condition, and whatever has not [been made a condition], then no, [and through this] we settle the matter.

That really is the absolute end of this matter, and since the guillotine has come down on this cadaver (dead body) for good, we can clean up efficiently:

• Imaam al-Albaani for all of his life has been defending the actions of the Sunnah and explaining that they are from eemaan.

• The view of the abandonment of prayer (while affirming its obligation) not being major kufr (to those who hold that) is not an issue that can be used to make the accusation of Irjaa' since this is a fiqh position and not one that pertains to aqidah or eemaan itself, since those who hold this view from Ahl al-Sunnah affirm that actions are from eemaan. Those who erroneously used it as matter pertaining to the creedal discussion of emaan and Irjaa' were a sect of the Khawarij called the Mansuriyyah - and that's who Mohammad Qutb and al-Hawali were following in their innovated saying.

• Al-Albani, like Shaykh Ibn Ibraaheem and others, classifies kufr as a) al-kufr al-i'tiqaadee (kufr of belief) and b) al-kufr al-'amali. In the first he includes beliefs, statements and actions which expel from Islaam and in the second he includes actions which do not expel from Islaam. Gormless Qutbi Hawalians were not able to grasp his speech on this subject and on that of Takfir, it confused them, because they could not separate between the various classifications of kufr used and that in the speech of the scholars one needs to be aware of how they classify kufr, because this allows the determination of their intent behind their discussions on the subject.

• Likewise, Gormless Qutbi Hawalians, deficient in intellect, wrongly interpreted his statements to do with the barriers and conditions of Takfir (ilm, qasd) and the ruling upon an action as to whether it is kufr or not and through this, they accused al-Albani with the Irjaa' of Jahm bin Safwan.

• Al-Albani was refuting the Hanafi Murjites for expelling actions from eemaan whilst the bandwagon of al-Hawali were either in nappies or not even born.