Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan: Deconstructs the Basis of the Da'wah of the 20th Century Callers to the Narrow, Restricted Haakimiyyah
Tuesday, January 19 2010 - by Admin
Read more articles at TheMadkhalis.Com

Amazing Words from Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan Uncovering the Futility of the Callers to the Narrow, Restricted, Political Haakimiyyah

Often you come across many statements from the Scholars that lay down hardcore usoolee perspectives that pertain to da'wah and manhaj and their great significance is often missed and not recognized or appreciated to the degree they should. Here is one such statement from Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, in this article (see below).

This is a statement that essentially invalidates the entire basis of the da'wah of the Harakiyyeen Qutbiyyeen. You have to compare these types of fundamental usoolee clarifications that come from these Scholars, and there are many more on this site, from the likes of Imaam Ibn Uthaymin, Imaam Ibn Baz, Imaam al-Albani and others,with the cheap and shoddy attempts of the Qutbiyyah whose methods to corroborate their da'wah are not unlike those of the Ash'aris who always begin their da'wah by reviling Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (as a means to scaremonger people away from "tajseem" so that they are more palatable towards their extreme, exaggerated "tanzeeh" which is in reality "ta'teel").

So this is the method traversed by the innovators in general instead of comparing the actual aqidah and methodologies of the people they are bending over backwards to defend, with the actual aqidah and methodologies of the Salaf, and then taking proper, Sunni, Salafi, Athari, Shar'iyy stances, and then making their walaa and baraa based around that. So this is from their talbis (deception) and it deserves a separate article in the series "Bayan Talbish al-Qutbiyyah".

Shaykh al-Fawzan on the Du'aat of al-Haakimiyyah

The Shaykh wrote in his book (إعانة المستفيد بشرح كتاب التوحيد), an explanation of Kitab ut-Tawhid, concerning the issue of judging to the Book and the Sunnah (p. 151):

ثانيا: وجوب تحكيم الكتاب والسنة في كل المنازعات، لا في بعضها دون بعض، فيجب تحكيمها في أمر العقيدة، وهذا أهم شيء، وفي المنازعات الحقوقية بين الناس، وفي المنازعات المنهجية والمذاهب والمقالات، وفي المنازعات الفقهية: (فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ) أما الذي يريد أن يأخذ جانبا فقط، ويترك ما هو أهم منه، فهذا ليس تحاكما إلى كتاب الله .

فما يقوله دعاة الحاكمية اليوم ويريدون تحكيم الشريعة في أمور المنازعات الحقوقية، ولا يحكمونها في أمر العقائد، ويقولون: الناس أحرار في عقائدهم، يكفي أنه يقول: أنا مسلم، سواء كان رافضيا أو كان جهميا أو معتزليا، أو . أو . إلى آخره، "نجتمع على ما اتفقنا عليه، ويعذر بعضنا بعضا فيما اختلفنا فيه" هذه القاعد التي وضعوها، ويسمونها: القاعدة الذهبية . وهي في الحقيقة: تحكيم للكتاب في بعض، وترك له فيما هو أهم منه، لأن تحكيم الشريعة في أمر العقيدة أعظم من تحكيمها في شأن المنازعات الحقوقية ، فتحكيمها في أمر العقيدة وهدم الأضرحة ومشاهد الشرك، ومقاتلة المشركين حتى يؤمنوا بالله ورسوله، هذا أهم .

فالذي إنما يأخذ جانب الحاكمية فقط ويهمل أمر العقائد، ويهمل أمر المذاهب والمناهج التي فرقت الناس الآن، ويهمل أمر النزاع في المسائل الفقهية، ويقول: أقوال الفقهاء كلها سواء، نأخذ بأي واحد منها دون نظر إلى مستنده . فهذا قول باطل، لأن الواجب أن نأخذ بما قام عليه الدليل، فيحكم كتاب الله في كل المنازعات العقدية، وهذا هو الأهم، والمنازعات الحقوقية، والمنازعات المنهجية، والمنازعات الفقهية (فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ) هذا عام (وَمَا اخْتَلَفْتُمْ فِيهِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ فَحُكْمُهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ) هذا عام أيضا .

وهؤلاء الذين جعلوا الحاكمية بدل التوحيد غالطون، حيث أخذوا جانبا وتركوا ما هو أعظم منه، وهو العقيدة، وتركوا ما هو مثله - أو هو أعظم منه - وهو المناهج التي فرقت بين الناس، كل جماعة لها منهج، كل جماعة لها مذهب، لم لا نرجع إلى الكتاب والسنة ونأخذ المنهج والمذهب الذي يوافق الكتاب والسنة ونسير عليه .

والحاصل؛ أن تحكيم الكتاب والسنة يجب أن يكون في كل الأمور، لا في بعضها دون بعض، فمن لم يحكم الشريعة في كل الأمور كان مؤمنا ببعض الكتاب وكافرا ببعض شاء أم أبى،

أَفَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِبَعْضِ الْكِتَابِ وَتَكْفُرُونَ بِبَعْضٍ


These are some really amazing words, and the Shaykh actually said something very similar in his introduction to the book of Shaykh Rabee bin Haadee al-Madkhali "The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah", which we can reproduce in a separate article.

The Shaykh said:

Secondly, the obligation to judge by the Book and the Sunnah in all disputes, not just in some of them as opposed to others. So it is obligatory to judge by them both in the affair of aqidah, this is the most important thing, and in the disputes pertaining to the rights between the people, and in the disputes pertaining to methodologies and the madhaahib and sayings, and in the disputes pertaining to jurisprudence (fiqh), "And if you dispute in anything then refer it back to Allaah and His Messenger" (Nisaa 4:59).

The Qutbiyyah today raise the likes of Qutb, Banna and Mawdudi to the levels of the "Imaams of Guidance", they love and hate for their sake and for their teachings which were nothing but the products of their own fikr, fused with the prevailing secular ideologies of their times (communism, leninist-marxism, mass-populist reform movements, mobilization of the proletariat), and in the lands of these same people was the greatest of Shirk taking place before their eyes, and instead of beginning where the Prophets and Messengers began, they desired to "snatch and restore the Haakmiyyah back to Allaah" in the disputes that take place pertaining to the rights of men, as they claimed. And along with the serious, huge, glaring, obvious, manifest, in your face, and on the tip-of-your-nose error that these people fell into (your heart will only accept this if you are someone who truly judges to the Book and the Sunnah), an even greater calamity is those faking attachment to Sunnah and Salafiyyah yoday and then waging a war against those who corroborated the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allaah, defended it, and cleansed it from the secular methodologies and secular ways of thinking (fikr), and political ambitions and ramblings of 20th century ignoramuses. And what makes this calamity of these (contemporary) people even worse is the fact the same ignoramuses they are defending and loving and hating for their sake were Ash'arite Soofees, harboring the poisons of the Rafidah, Jahmiyyah, Mufawwidah, Mu'tazilah and others!

The Shaykh continues:

So what the callers of al-Haakimiyyah do today, and they desire to make the Sharee'ah the reference point of judgment in the affairs of dispute pertaining to the rights (of the people), but do not judge to it in the affair of beliefs (aqaa'id), and they say, "The people are free in their beliefs, it is sufficient that he says, 'I am a Muslim', whether he is a Raafidi, Jahmee, or Mu'tazilee", and so on, [and that], "We will unite on that which we agree upon and excuse each in that which we differ over", this is a principle that they have devised, and they call it "The Golden Principle", and it is in reality judging to the Book in some (affairs) and abandoning (judging to it) in that which is more important than (those affairs).

This is the da'wah of Hasan al-Banna, the mass-populist, pluralist, da'wah of putting aqidah to the back seat, eroding the aqidah of al-walaa wal-baraa, working to establish a khilafah and improving the "social and economical" situation of the Muslims, and joining hands with the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Rafidah and their likes (see here, here, here and here)! And this mindset is present today amongst the Qutbiyyah. It is for no reason that they defend the likes of Qutb and Banna, it is because they are actually upon that fikr. And so we see the Qutbiyyah in London and elsewhere, permitting themselves and arguing the case for working with the likes of Hizb ut-Tahrir for what they see to be a greater good. This is 100% Bannaawiyyah, and it's simply a reproduction of 1940s Egypt. And this type of da'wah that pushes aside aqidah and walaa and baraa around it, to focus on less important matters, is believing in part of the Book and disbelieving in another part of the Book (as the Shaykh himself says later).

The Shaykh continued:

[This is] because judging by the Sharee'ah in aqidah is greater than judging to it in the affairs of the disputes pertaining to the rights (of the people). And thus, judging to it in the affair of aqidah, destroying the tombs, and the places of Shirk (shrines, tombs), and fighting the Mushriks until they believe in Allaah and His Messenger, this is more important.

So the Qutbiyyah have apportioned a great deal of resentment hatred and anger for Shaykh Rabee' in particular because he judged to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger, he made Tahkeem to the Sharee'ah, and thus he wrote:

  • The book: (منهج الأنبياء في الدعوة إلى الله فيه الحكمة والعقل ) "Manhaj al-Anbiyaa fid-Da'wah ilallaah" (The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah) - Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan wrote and introduction to this book which contains the same message that is in this particular statement of his in this article.

  • The book: (مطاعن سيد قطب في أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم), "Mataa'in Sayyid Qutb Fis-As.haabi Rasoolillaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)" (The Revilements of Sayyid Qutb Upon the Companions of Allaah's Messenger)

  • The book: (أضواء إسلامية على عقيدة سيد قطب وفكره ) "Adwaa Islaamiyyah 'Alaa aqidah Sayyid Qutb wa Fikrihi" (Islamic Illuminations Upon the Creed and Ideology of Sayyid Qutb)

  • The book: (جماعة واحدة لا جماعات وصراط واحد لا عشرات) "Jamaa'ah Waahidah, Laa Jamaa'aat Siraat Waahid, Laa Asharaat" (A Single Jamaa'ah, not Many Jamaa'ahs, A Single Path, not Tens of [Paths])

These books were written to clarify the true methodologies and to clarify the true nature of the da'wah of the Prophets to the all-inclusive Tawhid, and to defend the aqidah of Islaam from the poisons of the Raafidah, the Marxist Socialists, the Jahmiyyah, the Mu'tazilah, the Ash'ariyyah, the Jabariyyah and other innovations, and in all of that, the Shaykh made Tahkeem to the Sharee'ah.

And this proves that the Qutbiyyah who have come out these days on the blogs and forums (and are singing the blues after their flag-ship "the Qutbiyyah" was battered and left on the shore in ruins by the tsunami of Shar'iyy proofs found in the likes of these works), venting their hatred and anger, are foolish in what they are doing. They don't even have a right to be speaking.

This is because they are showing enmity, love and hate for the sake of a fikr that is based around establishment of the Sharee'ah in issues which are of lesser importance relative to the issues on which Shaykh Rabee' has written about, the issues of the all-inclusive Tawhid, of aqaa'id (beliefs) and manaahij (methodologies), and they apportioned their hate and scorn upon him, specifically because he wrote on those issues!! And thus, just by their actions their fraud is laid bare in plain sight for all to see!

The Shaykh (hafidhahullaah) continues:

So the one who takes an aspect of al-Haakimiyyah only and neglects the affairs of beliefs, and neglects the affairs of the madhaahib (schools) and manaahij (methodologies) which have split the people now, and neglects the affair of disputation in the issues of fiqh and says, "All the sayings of the fuquhaa (jurists) are on an equal footing, we take from any one of them", without looking at its evidence, then this is a futile saying. [This is] because it is obligatory that we take whatever the evidence is established upon, and thus the Book (of Allaah) is judged to in all the affairs of the creed, because this is the most important (matter) and then also the disputes pertaining to the rights (of the people) and the disputes in methodology, and the disputes in fiqh, "And if you dispute in anything" (Nisaa 4:59), this is general, "And whatever you differ in of any matter, then it's judgment is with Allaah" (Shurah 42:10), this is general also.

And those who have made Haakimiyyah as a replacement of [the all-inclusive] Tawhid are in error in that they have taken one aspect and abandoned that which is more important than it, which is aqidah, and they have abandoned that which is like it - or that which is greater than it - the methodologies that have split the people, every jamaa'ah has its own manhaj, every jamaa'ah has its school of thought. Why do we not return back to the Book and the Sunnah and take the manhaj and madhhab which agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, and traverse upon.

The Shaykh here has made the aqidah to be much more important than what the du'aat of Haakimiyyah have based their da'wah upon, and he made the methodologies (manaahij) of da'wah and rectification to be like it, or greater than it, meaning that establishing Haakimiyyah in relation to one's methodologies is like, or greater than, what these people are basing their da'wah upon (of establishing Haakimiyyah in the restricted way they are calling to), yet they neglect correcting themselves in their methodologies, and this is after we have established that the affairs of aqidah are the most important and are the greatest of affairs, yet these people have replaced them with their restricted form of Haakimiyyah.

The Shaykh then says:

The result [of the above discussion] is that judging to the Book and the Sunnah is obligatory in all affairs, not in some of them as opposed to others. So whoever does not judge by the Sharee'ah in all the affairs is a believer in part of the Book and a disbeliever in part of the Book, whether he wills or refuses, "Do you believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in a part?" (Baqarah 2:85)

The du'aat of Haakimiyyah who do not judge to the Book and the Sunnah in all the affairs, and who push the affairs of aqidah to the back seat and focus only on one aspect which they have made into the basis of their call, then they believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in part of the Book. Now, that's quite a heavy statement!

Related Articles: