Monday, 24 April 2017    HomeAbout UsContact Us     



Abdullaah al-Farsee, Sajid Kayum (Slanderhouse Master), Salman al-Awdah al-Ikhwaanee, Muhammad al-Areefee al-Ikhwaanee and Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan al-Salafee and Ta'weel of the Hadeeth of Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan
Filed under: The Rulers, Obedience, Takfir and Khurooj
Wednesday, June 19 2013 - by Admin
Key topics: Muhammad Al-Areefee Salman Al-Awdah Abdullaah Al-Farsee Sajid Kayum

Mail to a FriendPrinter friendly

Sajid Kayum the Slanderhouse Master and The 21st Century Khawaarij Trying to Play with the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger and Attributing Lies to Great Scholars Such as Imaam al-Nawawi

To the right you will see an article posted by Sajid Kayum dated 8th June 2012. The intent behind is to defend al-Areefee who lied against the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and lied against Imaam al-Nawawi (rahimahullaah). What happened is that al-Areefee got slapped down in an instant when his bid'ah was rightfully taken to the Major Scholars and some of them, such as Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan described the author of the innovated explanation of the hadeeth of Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan as a "person of desires" who is "saying upon the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) what he did not say" (listen to audio - first part of audio is al-Areefee's innovated explanation). Al-Areefee says that the hadeeth only applies to a specific individual who has a problem with the ruler. Then he goes on to to mention how the rulers say we have no money because the economy is bad, then all of a sudden they announce a 20% increase in (government) salaries. Al-Areefee says, "so where has the money come from now, from the sky?" He says "it was there all along, in the banks and in foreign banks." Now this is part of a devised agenda because Salman al-Awdah came out with this bid'iyy distortion first, and then the student began to propagate it and they had hoped they could cause doubt about the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger in this way - upon the way of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Khawaarij of old - using their desire and their reason to challenge and abolish the Sunnah.

When this bid'ah (innovated) was slapped down, al-Areefee, in order to do some damage limitation went to see Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan and to make a "clarification". So his clarification was that he had not brought this from himself but he based it upon some speech of Imaam al-Nawawi (rahimahullaah) which he merely quoted. This was given some online coverage (see this article). In the article to the right, the Slanderhouse Master positions himself in this incident in a way where he is finding fault with those (Arab brothers) who took this kalaam to the Major Scholars and rightfully spread their clarifications. Sajid Kayum is blaming them for this action. Namely, when someone brings a tahreef and ta'weel of the speech of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) not known in any books of the Salaf or by any scholar from Ahl al-Sunnah, and spreads it to millions of viewers on satellite channels, it is evil and wrong for people to take it to the Major Scholars. This is what we mean and is the key point you have to understand here, that you have to look at how these people behave and position themselves in these types of situations. Their orientations are towards defence of baatil and its people, making excuses for them, lavishly praising them and finding fault with truth and those who wish for it to be known and manifest. So those Arab brothers who approached all those Scholars, Shaykh al-Fawzaan, the Muftee, Shaykh Ubayd, Shaykh Muhammad bin Haadee and others, they are mischief-makers, they were not motivated by zeal and jealousy for the Sunnah of the Messenger but were just intent on bringing individuals down as if this Farsee Fanatic tore open their hearts and saw what was inside. From this you can see the "spin" which ignorant and blinded individuals like Sajid Kayum put on events and incidents to give a means of escape for the true and real culprits, whilst vilifying those who love and venerate the Sunnah and wish for clarity from the Scholars and do not accept lies upon Allaah's deen and violation of its mighty and firmly established principles.

If we pay attention to Sajid Kayum's final remark at the very end, "Of course, the "group" that fanatically spread the refutation of the statements will not spread this clarification," he is referring to what is reported about Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan's clarification when al-Areefee went to him. Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan is reported to have said that he did not mean to label al-Areefee in person as a person of desires but was only addressing the actual incorrect statement and making a general remark when it was brought to him. As far as we know, this is not on tape, but in any case, lets assume it is true for now. [There is a justifiable reason to doubt al-Areefee's integrity and to challenge his honesty, see what follows below of a further clarification which Shaykh al-Fawzaan himself wrote and put out publicly afterwards which indicates there is lack of integrity on behalf of al-Areefee and those with him].

So here comes the actual point then. Two weeks before Sajid Kayum even wrote his article to defend Muhammad al-Areefee, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan had already written a clarification statement after he went to Imaam al-Nawawi's explanation of the hadeeth to see if al-Areefee and those with him were telling the truth. The Shaykh felt it important enough to put out a public clarification when he realized they ascribed to al-Nawawi that which he is free of. Of course, when Sajid Kayum was informed of this, we did not see him fanatically spread the Shaykh's final clarification as fanatically as he wrote his defence of Muhammad al-Areefee and his attack upon those Arab brothers who rightfully took the matter to the Scholars. In this clarification Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan clarified a great and mighty foundation of Ahl al-Sunnah, one that no Salafi who has read and studied the books of the Salaf can be confused about or can claim to be confused about.

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan's Written Clarification (Which Comprises a Rebuttal of the Claim by al-Areefee And Exoneration of Imaam al-Nawawi from the Lie Against Him)

The Shaykh followed up with a clarification on his website (original here) (screenshot), dated 27th May 2012:

Notification of an Error Regarding the Explanation of the Hadeeth, "Even if Your Back is Beaten and Your Wealth is Taken"

All praise is due to Allaah, and may prayers and salutations be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions. To proceed: There has come in Sahih Muslim in the hadeeth of Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan (radiallaahu anhu) regarding tribulations and what is obligatory upon a Muslim when they appear - specifically in relation to what occurs from some of rulers of the Muslims of oppression and tyranny - where the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in this hadeeth, "Hear and obey the ruler even if your back is beaten and your wealth is taken."

This became problematic to some of the brothers until some of them said about this hadeeth that it is addressed (only) to an individual present in an Arabic environment which scorns obedience (to the ruler) and rejects oppression, and perhaps that might carry him (individually) to reject obedience (to the ruler) in that which is good, or to split off or to stand up to fight [and thus constitutes a prohibition at the individual level], and then they began to interpret it upon other than its (actual) meaning so that they can take it away from its apparent (dhaahir) meaning. Then, when objection was made against them, they attributed (this interpretation) to Imaam al-Nawawi, but upon returning to the explanation of Imaam al-Nawawi of Sahih Muslim with respect to this hadeeth, we found that he says in the hadeeth of Hudhayfah (radiallaahu anhu), when he said to the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), "How shall I behave O Messenger of Allaah, if that reaches me" he means what occurs of tyranny from the rulers and their oppression. He replied, "You must hear and obey the ruler even if you back is beaten and your wealth is taken." Al-Nawawi said, "(Even if your back is beaten), unjustly, (and your wealth is taken), without due right, with the verb being constructed upon the passive form in both places, and they comprise the condition (shart) for the response (you must hear and obey) him in what is other than disobedience" - end quote. This is the actual text of the explanation of al-Nawawi upon this hadeeth in that he left it upon its apparent meaning and import and he did not make Ta'weel of it to what those brothers said.

This hadeeth and its like comprises a mighty foundation from the foundations of the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah in adhering to the jamaa'ah of the Muslims, having patience upon the tyranny and oppression of the rulers because of what results from that of mighty benefits, such as preserving the blood of the Muslims and protecting their honours, their safety and settlement (in the land). And these are benefits that are above, by a great deal, than the associated harm that comes with them of bearing their tyranny with patience. More harmful than this (having patience) is the harm of revolting, and splitting the ranks of the jaamaa'ah. This is from (the principle of) bearing the least of two harms in order to repel the greater of them, and this is a mighty principle from the principles of Islaam. For the purpose of making notification of the error which has occcurred with respect to this topic from some of the brothers, I wrote about that.

Written by Saalih bin Fawzaan al-Fawzaan. Member of the Committee of Major Scholars. 07/07/1433H.

From this clarification by the Shaykh, the reality concealed by Sajid Kayum is made apparent. And this is what we mean in that Hizbees such as Sajid Kayum, take certain events, incidents and occurrences, lie about them through distortion or ommission or concealment and then overturn the realities and make the culprit to to be the victim and the one who is right to to be wrong and the one who deserves thanks to be one who deserves criticism and derision. This is because the hizbiyyah in their hearts has actually blinded them from seeing truth as truth and falsehood as falsehood. There are some hugely important and fundamental lessons that need to be taken from this, because this nicely illustrates the nature of the attacks and polemics made by Hizbees like Sajid Kayum against the Salafis in the West in particular but to the Salafis in all places more generally. We can finish off this article by listing the key things that should be noted.

Important Lessons and Observations That Should Not Be Missed From This Incident

The First: Look at how Sajid Kayum brings lavish praises for Muhammad al-Areefee. He studied with Shaykhs Ibn Baz, Ibn Qu'ud, Barraak and so on. He has a doctorate in aqidah. He has books on Tawhid, aqidah, da'wah. He has spoken about the plight of the Syrians and so on. What we are seeing here is the implementation of the bid'ah of al-Muwaazanah. To these people, this is only applied selectively. It is not for the Salafis (Scholars and otherwise) whom people like Sajid Kayum have hatred and animosity towards. It is only for those people who innovate and invent false ta'weels to nullify the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger and also feel the need to lie upon Scholars such as Imaam al-Nawawi (rahimahullaah) when corrected and refuted. How can a person with a doctorate in aqidah, having studied with Shaykh Ibn Baz and other scholars for so long come out with such a lie? Even a Salafi in the West who has only read translated works of some of the books on creed, knows that the hadeeth of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) regarding hearing and obeying even when oppressed applies to the whole society and is taken upon its apparent meaning, that it is exactly as it says it is. These credentials are in fact against a person when he chooses misguidance in a matter that is such a great and mighty foundation of the deen and in which there is no ambiguity. Of what benefit were the credentials of Husayn al-Karaabeesee (associate of Imaam al-Shaafi'ee and Imaam Ahmad) when he inherited the madhhab of Bishr al-Mareesee. Or al-Haarith al-Muhaasibee (associate of Imaam Ahmad) when he took to kalaam? None! So we see here Sajid Kayum making light this affair and making huge muwaazanah for al-Areefee, and as always this love, lenience, sympathy, support, excuse and defence is always for those who oppose the usool of the Sunnah, who fabricate lies against the aqidah of the Salaf, but as for the Salafis, only scorn, vilification and judging their intentions.

The Second: When a person makes a mistake in an obscure, detailed matter then yes, an excuse can be made, that he erred genuinely. But when person makes a blunder in one of the greatest and mightiest foundations of Islaam which has been explained and clarified the world over, again and again, over many centuries, and there is hardly a book of aqidah except that this issue is present and clarified within it, and in which there is absolutely no confusion or ambiguity, then there is little excuse for a doctor in aqidah to bring a bid'iyy ta'weel with respect to this matter. This becomes even more suspect when we realise that he is a student coming from the madrasah (school) of an individual (al-Awdah) refuted by the Major Scholars for statements of mass Takfir, Takfir by way of major sin and labelled as "Contemporary Kharijites" by greatest Imaam of Hadeeth in the era, (al-Albaanee), and who himself came out leading demonstrations against the rulers in the 1990s (videos available on Youtube). This matter is so clear that the mistake al-Areefee fell into would not be far off in similarity to the case where he came along and made Ta'weel of a hadeeth mentioning one of the attributes of Allaah, and then when refuted he comes with the excuse that "al-Nawawi said it." Except that in this case, he would probably be speaking the truth whereas in the case of the hadeeth of Hudhayfah, he has clearly uttered a lie!

The Third: And this really is the key point which is being demonstrated in this article: Look at how these people align themselves straight away, how they speak and write, and whom they defend and whom they assault when certain incidents occur. It is not based upon the actual usool of the Sunnah or around truth and falsehood. It is based upon a pre-existing hizbiyyah, a pre-existing animosity and hatred they have towards others whom they want to vilify and attack in every situation and incident. As for the actual usool (foundations) of the Sunnah that are at stake in the particular incident in question, then no, it does not really concern them. Let's elaborate upon this, there are two orientations, a Salafi, Sunni, Athari orientation and a Hizbiyy, Mumayyi', Ikhwani orientation:

  • The Salafi, Sunni, Athari Orientation, Alignment, Positioning and Way of Thinking: Salafis hear a student of one of the heads of the Kharijites (and the teacher himself) invent a lie against Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and say what he did not say in the hadeeth of Hudhayfah (radiallaahu anhu) and thereby oppose what is an explicit and manifestly clear foundation from the foundations of the Sunnah. They are concerned that this baatil is spread to millions through satellite channels, online video sites and elsewhere, because they venerate the mightiest of usool of this religion. So just as the people of Iraaq came to Abdullah bin Umar (radiallaahu anhu) to ask about people who were casting doubt regarding al-Qadar, these Salafis went to the people of knowledge and accurately conveyed the statement of this student (of the Kharijite teacher). One of the Shaykhs (al-Fawzaan) responds and says, (هذا صاحب هوى يريد أن يفسر كلام الرسول على هواه وعلى طلبه ، ما يجوز هذا، هذا يقول على الرسول ما لم يقل عليه الصلاة والسلام ، هذا خطر عظيم), "This is a person of desire, he wishes to explain the speech of the Messenger upon his own desires and upon his objective. This is not permissible. This one says about the Messenger (alayhis salaatu wassalaam) what he did not say, this is great danger." And the Shaykh spoke truth indeed. And many others also demolish this bid'ah (such as the Muftee, Shaykh Abdul-Azeez Aal al-Shaykh, Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiree, Shaykh Muhammad bin Haadee and Shaykh Hamad al-Ateeq who demanded the originator of this bid'ah to "bring someone from the Salaf who preceded him in this "new innovated understanding"). So the truth is established and the bid'ah is demolished and the masses are saved from the whisperings and doubts of Shaytaan in the form of these "reformers" claiming rectification and their so-called [Marxist] "social justice." Further, the people now recognize who are the true and real scholars and who are the ignoramuses who are not rooted and grounded at all and are prone to doubts and innovations and false ta'weels they originate from themselves and falsely impute to great Scholars. This is how a Salafi, Sunni, Athari sees the situation and praises and thanks Allaah that the Scholars have clarified this matter and that the Scholars are distinguished from the pseudo-scholars who despite twenty or so years apparently studying aqidah, Tawhid and usool pretended not to know that in 1200 years of the compliation of books of aqidah, not a single Salafi, Sunni, Athari scholar brought the bid'iyy ta'weel they (al-Areefee and al-Awdah) tried to invent and impute to al-Nawawi (rahimahullaah). Further, one of those Scholars who clarified the truth (al-Fawzaan) felt it important enough to make a public, open clarification on the matter in which he alluded to the incident, and this only validates that the way, orientation and way of behaving of the Salafis in this matters was correct and truth and justice from the beginning to the end.

  • The Hizbiyy, Mumayyi', Ikhwani Positioning, Orientation and Alignment: The issue of whether an asl (foundation) from the great usool of the religion has been attacked and invalidated and the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has been lied upon and a great Scholar of Islaam (al-Nawawi) has been lied upon and imputed with what he is free of matters little, because the issue here is not about usool. It is about personal interests, hatreds and animosities. Hence, the incident which occurred can be utilized (and distorted through concealment and ommission of some of its details) to maintain that position of revilement, abuse and belittlement of those upon the aforementioned Salafi, Sunni, Athari way. "They are mischief-makers", "They are tale-carriers" it is broadcast (by Hizbees such as Sajid Kayum) and so on. You get the picture. In other words, because the hearts of these people are clearly not grounded upon making al-walaa and al-baraa upon the actual usool (foundations of the religion), they are subsequently blinded in not reading a situation for what it actually is and hence, who is the criminal and who is the victim and who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed and who is the one upon truth and who is the one upon falsehood, who deserves commendation and who deserves rebuke, all of this becomes confused and overturned for them. In fact this is actually a punishment because when a person chooses deviation (zaygh) in his heart, as in he chooses not to make his love and hate, loyalty and disownment purely upon the usool of the Sunnah, he is made to inherit blindness in his basr (vision) and baseerah (insight). This is the path of people like Abdullaah al-Farsee and Sajid Kayum and others who have demonstrated that they follow their desires and choose falsehood over truth and that they are the most hypocritical and contradictory of people in their da'wah, in their positions and in their love and hate.

The Fourth: We make mention of a strategic Ikhwaani methodology which the Salafis should not be ignorant of, and this is written and outlined in their books, those of the Ikhwanis, and is not something hidden. From their strategies is to take issues that are in the hearts of the Muslim masses, to speak about them, author works in respect to them and to draw the masses to themselves in this way through those issues. This is a calculated methodology. The aim here is to raise themselves above and over the Scholars and Imaams of the Sunnah who are an obstacle because these Scholars, by virtue of adhering to the sunan and aathaar, are not opposed to the rulers, rather they adhere to the foundations of the Sunnah with respect to the rulers because they venerate the wahy (revelation) of Allaah. Hence, the aim of these Ikhwanis is to win mass populist support that is as broad as possible and from every segment of society (irrespective of creed) and to have a much greater attachment to the masses than the masses have to the Scholars. For this reason they:

  • Focus on current affairs and speak about issues such as Syria, Egypt, Libya and often precede the Major Scholars in speaking about these issues. In the 1990s the Qutbiyyah used the Gulf War as an ideal opportunity to come out and call to their da'wah and claim that the Scholars do not really know what is going on began to mobilize the youth against the Scholars and rulers. This is one tact. So here, what the likes of Salman al-Awdah and his student Muhammad al-Areefee are really saying in essence is that "We are the ones who know what is going on regarding the injustice of these rulers, they hoard the wealth, forget the people, commit injustice and tyranny, and these ahaadeeth do not really apply to them. As for those scholars (like the Muftee, and al-Fawzaan and al-Ghudayaan and others), they don't really know what is going on, we are the ones who know what is going on, we know these rulers have bank accounts in which the wealth is hoarded, we know they are unjust, we know they tell lies, and we know how these ahaadeeth are really understood, they don't apply to these situations, regarding the society as a whole, when it is oppressed, upon hunger and fear ..." all of this is the unspoken word and the unspoken meaning which is being conveyed (non-verbally) through certain positions and interpretations they put out to the masses, and this little incident of their's with respect to this bid'iyy ta'weel of hadeeth of Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan (radiallaahu anhu) is an illustration of what these people are upon.

  • Focus on certain topics such as "how to live a happy life", "how to become confident", "how to be a good speaker" and social issues that pertain to personal development and marriage and likewise to come out as champions of women's rights, their betterment, empowerment and development. Through these types of publications they win mass acclaim, and they often go to non-Muslim authors who have written popular books on these topics and then adapt them for an Arab audience. That is why you see Salman al-Awdah and Aa'id al-Qarnee taking this approach. You will not go to any bookstore except their books (on topics such as these that relate to personal development) with their faces on the covers are plastered all over the place. This is part of their strategy through which they earn a place in the hearts of the people that is greater than that of the true and real Scholars and Imaams of the Sunnah. In the West, we see individuals upon this same manhaj like Shadeed Muhammad who claimed in essence that books such as Thalaathat ul-Usool and Kitab al-Tawhid do not solve social problems, and that we need to tackle these social issues directly. He speaks and promotes works such as those of Dale Carnegie that relate to self-development, and comes out to champion, as he claims, the needs of women. Now, we do not deny these things have a place and context within Islaam, but to these people, these approaches are merely means by which to appeal to the masses. They have an underlying manhaj behind which are goals and objectives that are not in line and in accordance with Prophetic methodology (of rectification) in reality. Thus when Salman al-Awdah says "You can teach Tawhid in ten minutes" as he used to say in the 1990s and when the likes of Shadeed Muhammad says in essence that the books of Tawhid don't really do anything to build communities, then this is an indication that there is something in their hearts towards the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allaah and in rectification, and the stench of Ikhwaniyyah in their da'wah is readily apparent.

So the intent here is that when we hear bid'iyy statements (such as those of Salman al-Awdah and Muhammad al-Areefee) we are not naive and stupid to think these are innocent mistakes, because men in positions like these in front of the masses are not stupid people. They know what they are saying. They have been trained to become leaders and spokesmen and they are upon methodologies they are working to in the long term. They know that ultimately, they want to win the ears, eyes and hearts of the masses. They can nurture them more easily and start making ta'weels of the Sunan in order to invalidate them - just like all the innovators of old, the Jahmiyyah, Muta'zilah, Ash'ariyyah and others make Ta'weel of that which their souls do not agree with from the Sunan of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). And it is here that they can bring what has occurred in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya to the Gulf states which are their actual targets, whereby the masses no longer have obstacles in front of them that will prevent them from participating in demonstrations and demanding their rights and so on.

The Fifth: It is established and proven that the refutations by Shaykh Rabee' against the new face of Ikhwanis - Safar al-Hawali, Salman al-Awdah, Aa'id al-Qarnee, Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, Adnan Ar'oor, Abu al-Hasan al-Ma'ribee, from those who brought the fitnah of Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb into the ranks of the Salafis in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Yemen, Sudan, and the Western lands and subsequently launched a whirlwind of tribulations and splitting in the ranks of the Salafis - that the Shaykh has been proven and vindicated to have been correct in all of that walhamdulillaah. This is because the reality of those Hizbees and deviants has manifested itself (see the sick condition of al-Ma'ribee for example in this article). The Shaykh defended the usool of the Sunnah and the Salafi Manhaj and was not merely attacking personalities. It is not for no reason that Imaam al-Albaanee said all those years ago, (فالحط على هذين الشيخين الشيخ ربيع والشيخ مقبل الداعيين إلى الكتاب والسنة، وما كان عليه السلف الصالح ومحاربة الذين يخالفون هذا المنهج الصحيح هو كما لا يخفى على الجميع إنما يصدر من أحد رجلين : إما من جاهل أو صاحب هوى.), "So attacking these two Shaykhs, Shaykh Rabee' and Shaykh Muqbil, who are callers to the Book and the Sunnah and what the Salaf were upon and waging war against those who oppose this sound, correct manhaj, then this, as is not hidden to everyone, this only emanates from one of two men, either an ignoramus or a person of desires", and also (وباختصار أقول: إن حامل راية الجرح والتعديل اليوم في العصر الحاضر وبحق هو أخونا الدكتور ربيع، والذين يردون عليه لا يردون عليه بعلم أبداً، والعلم معه), "And in short I say: Indeed the carrier of the flag of al-jarh wal-ta'deel (i.e. with respect to sunnah and bid'ah) today, in the present time, and in truth, is our brother, Dr. Rabee'. And those who refute him do not refute him with knowledge at all, rather the knowledge is with him." Then in addition to Shaykh Rabee', the other scholars when we put them all together, we find that they each refuted at least some of those hizbees and deviants mentioned earlier, and these scholars include Imaams al-Albaani, Bin Baz, Ibn al-Uthaymeen, Muqbil and Shaykhs Muhammad Amaan al-Jaamee, Shaykh Saaalih al-Fawzan, Shaykh Ahmad al-Najmee, Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad, Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiree, Shaykh Muhammad bin Haadee, Shaykh Saalih al-Suhaymee, Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhalee and numerous others. All of those deviants people brought false usool (foundations) and opposed the way of the Salaf and were justly and rightly refuted after they were given years and years of advice. They were not dealt with unjustly in the least and were not attacked personally. It was a matter of the deen. We established in a recent article how Shaykh Rabee' was correct regarding al-Ma'ribee and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-'Abbaad was mistaken (see article here). Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin failed to see that the orientation of al-Ma'ribee and many of his principles were the same as the principles of Adnan Ar'oor, whom Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin himself had warned against previously. Not every scholar will have detailed knowledge of every one who has chosen misguidance after guidance and has deviated and for that reason when differences arise between the Scholars of the Sunnah, we are obligated to follow the one who brings evidence. Refer to (this article) for an elaboration of this matter.

The key point being made here is this:

The Sixth: To conclude our article, those traversing the way of the Khawaarij of our times and their students tried to invalidate the Sunnah of Allaahs' Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) through a bid'iyy ta'weel not known to anyone in 14 centuries of Islaam. They were then slapped down by the Scholars, one of whom (al-Fawzaan) declared that the author of this statement is "a person of desires" who has attributed to the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that which he did not say and another whom declared the author of the statement as a "misguided, misguiding liar". Then when the author of this statement engaged on a public relations mission to mend his image after it was battered by a mighty statement from that Scholar, he forged a lie against Imaam al-Nawawi as a means of trying to absolve himself, claiming that what he said came from al-Nawawi not himself. The Shaykh (al-Fawzaan) took him at face value but the Shaykh is not naive and heedless and so he went back to al-Nawawi's explanation and found that the claim of al-Areefee is false. The Shaykh then went out of his way to make a public statement actually referring to this whole thing and making it known that that person (al-Areefee) made a false Ta'weel, was corrected for it, then claimed it came from al-Nawawi, and that upon verification, al-Nawawi does not actually say what was claimed. Then Shaykh al-Fawzaan emphasized that this is one of the greatest usool of Ahl al-Sunnah and one of the greatest foundations of the religion. The question that one must beg is how did a doctor in aqidah who apparently studied with the Major Scholars such as Shaykh Ibn Baz - as Sajid Kayum flatters about al-Areefee - speak with such baatil in the first place? It's not a slip of the tongue. It's an underlying methodology. The fact that Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan went out of his way to make this clarification and make the actual incident known like this reveals a great deal indeed for the one who has the sincerity and the sense to see that.



Link to this article:   Show: HTML LinkFull LinkShort Link
Related Articles:
Add a Comment (comments are currently moderated)
You must be registered and logged in to comment.



© TheMadkhalis.Com. All rights reserved.
Madkhalis Madaakhilah The Madkhalis