In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy
Fudayl Ibn Iyaad (rahimahullaah) was asked about humility, so he said: It is to humble oneself to the truth, submit to it and accept it from the one who utters it.
Ibn Ataa (rahimahullaah) said: Humility is to accept the truth wherever it may be; honour is found in humility, so whoever seeks it though pride is like one who seeks water from fire.
[Madaarij As-Saalikeen Vol. 2]
Firstly: Dear Reader, the confused caller to brotherhood at Markaz as-Sunnah stated that the Qur’aan and Hadeeth are the absolute proofs and besides these two everyone’s statement can be accepted or rejected. There is no doubt that this above statement is absolute truth by way of which he seeks to turn a blind eye to the hizbiyyah of his companions and thus reject the unambiguous proofs produced by the salafiyyoon against them.
Al-Allaamah Saaleh Al-Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) was asked about the statement of Imaam Maalik (rahimahullaah): Everyone can have his statement accepted or rejected except the inhabitant of this grave [i.e. the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam)]’’ as to whether this applies to the Masaa’il Al-Fiqhiyyah Al-Ijtihaadiyyah (i.e. those affairs of fiqh about which the scholars perform ijtihaad to reach a verdict) and not the Masaa’il Al-Aqadiyyah (i.e. the affairs of Aqeedah)?
Answer: There is no differing in the affairs of Aqeedah- there is no room for accepting or rejecting because it is a clear affair based on Tawqeef (i.e. clear and unambiguous evidence from the Qur’aan and authentic Sunnah), rather this (i.e. accepting or rejecting) is with regards to the affairs of Fiqh [i.e. the Masaa’il Al-Fiqhiyyah Al-Ijtihaadiyyah (i.e. those affairs of fiqh about which the scholars perform ijtihaad to reach a verdict)], so everyone can have his statement accepted based on what is in agreement to the evidence (i.e. the Qur’aan and the Sunnah) and what is in opposition to the evidence (i.e. Qur’aan and Sunnah) is rejected. This is what Imaam Maalik (rahimahullaah) intended (by his statement). [source: http://www.alfawzan.af.org.sa/node/2392 ]
Reader: Pay attention to Shaikh Fawzaan’s words as follows: so everyone can have his statement accepted based on what is in agreement to the evidence (i.e. the Qur’aan and the Sunnah) and what is in opposition to the evidence (i.e. Qur’aan and Sunnah) is rejected
Therefore, the confused caller to brotherhood at Markaz as-Sunnah should not follow his desires and deliberately turn away from the proofs produced by the Salafiyyoon against the Hizbiyyoon of Greenlane and their allies, rather if he thinks that there are no proofs he should justify his view. This is what he should do rather than saying that everyone’s statement can be rejected, even though he has no justification to do so. Indeed, the evidences against these people are nothing else but their own deviations in Manhaj, which they openly proclaim by cooperating and sitting with ahlul bidah. Therefore, this statement of Imaam Maalik (rahimahullaah) should be utilised for truth and not for obstinacy and unjustified rejection against truth.
Secondly: The confused caller to brotherhood at Markaz as-Sunnah should know that the Khilaaf between Masjid Al-Furqan and Greenlane’s allies in Stoke-On-Trent is not Khilaaf in issues of Fiqh; rather the khilaaf between Masjid Al-Furqan and them is khilaaf Manhajiy. Shaikh Muqbil Bin Haadi (rahimahullaah) said:
Al-Khilaaf Fiqhiy: It is when the evidence can carry this (meaning) or that (meaning), such as the Hadeeth:”When one of you wakes up from his sleep, he must not put his hand in a utensil till he has washed it three times, for he does not know where his hand was.” The scholars have differed in this (affair); amongst them are those who say that the water becomes impure and amongst them are those who say that it is forbidden (to put one’s hand in the water) but (the water) does not become impure and this affair is a legislated act of worship; and amongst them are those who say that it is Makrooh (disliked to put the one’s hand in the water but not forbidden), because he (i.e. the person) is upon certainty that his hand is in a state of purity. So the likes of this (affair) is Ikhtilaaf fiqhiy and similar to it (also is whether) the Basmallaah is to be uttered loudly (during the prayer).
Al-Khilaaf Manhajiy: As for Al-khilaaf Manhajiy, it is a problematic disease such as the methodology of Ikhwaan Al-Mufliseen; for their Manhaj is entry into elections, houses of parliaments and party Multiplicity. This is considered to be Ikhtilaaf Manhajiy because it is in opposition to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wa-alaa-aalihi-wasallam)…… [End of quote…See: Ghaaratul Ash-ritah: page: 40-41: Vol 1]
This is Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen and their differences with the Salafiyyoon are nothing else but Khilaaf Manhajiy- an affair that will lead to deviation and destruction. Likewise, the Khilaaf between Greenlane’s associates (i.e. Ihya Turaath) and the Salafiyyoon is Khilaaf Manhajiy. Shaikh Ubaid (may Allaah preserve him) said: Ihyaa Turaath mixes the religion with politics or bidah with Sunnah. The Shaikh also says: Their call is a mixture. They call to those who are considered to be from ahlul bidah. http://www.sahab.net/forums/?showtopic=117024 [see link about the severe manhaj deviations of ihya turaath (the allies of greenlane: http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=5220&srow=21&erow=40
Indeed, pay close attention to this affair so that you are not deceived- in your religious affairs- by the deceitful false claimants to Salafiyyah. The Maraakiz of Salafiyyah do not have a working relationship with any organization or group that mixes Sunnah and bidah. However, Greenlane’s Admin co-operates with organizations and groups that mix Sunnah and Bidah, such as Ihyaa Turaath, Al-Maghrib Institute. This is a Manhaj shared between Ihyaa Turaath and Greenlane’s Admin.
Finally: Some people similar to the confused caller to brotherhood have attempted to portray the differences between Greenlane and SP as issues of permissible khilaaf, rather the khilaaf between SP and Greenlane is Khilaaf Manhajiy. See here: http://salaficentre.com/2013/08/salafi-publications-and-greenlane-masjid-what-is-the-basis-of-the-differing/
Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him) responded to the statement [Laa Inkaar Fee Masaa’il al-khilaaf- There Should Be No Repudiation In The affairs of Khilaaf (i.e. differing)]:
Some people are under the illusion that what is intended by this statement is that it impermissible to repudiate (others) regarding any affair in which difference of opinion is held. So based upon this (illusion of theirs), it becomes impermissible to disapprove of a Munkar (an evil) unless there is complete agreement in doing so. This is a wrong understanding which necessitates the termination of enjoining good and forbidding evil.
The scholars (i.e. of Ahlus Sunnah) hold differences of opinion in most of the Masaa’il (i.e. the verdicts on fiqh and subsidiary issues). And what is correct regarding this statement ‘Laa Inkaar Fee Masaa’il Al-Khilaaf- There should be no repudiation in affairs of Khilaaf (differing)’ is that there should neither be harshness in (one’s) disapproval nor (in one’s) criticism regarding those issues about which there is no manifest proof to be taken as the final (verdict). And the basis upon which this is founded is that the issues of khilaaf (differing) are of two categories:
The First Category: They are those issues of khilaaf in which there is proof necessitating that it should be taken as the final (verdict). So here, the proof must be taken and the other statement (or opinion) in opposition is discarded. And whoever follows the statement (or opinion) that is established to be in opposition to the proofs, then he is to be repudiated.
The Second Category: It is those issues of khilaaf in which the proof has not been manifested in order to be taken as the final (verdict). It is an affair in which the evidences contend with each other or the views are at variance. This is an issue of Ijtihaad, and there is neither disapproval nor reprimand against the one in opposition; rather advice is given to acquaint (each other) with the statement that carries more weight. This second category of (khilaaf) is what is intended by the statement ‘Laa Inkaar Fee Masaa-il Al-Khilaaf’ which some people have understood in an unrestricted manner. [Source: Ibaaraat Moohimah, page 25’ by Shaikh Muhammad Bin Umar Saalim Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him)]
Indeed, the issues between Greenlane and SP, between Masjid Al-Furqan (stoke) and the allies of Greenlane in stoke (Markaz as-Sunnah, Markaz at-Tawheed and Markaz al-Huda) are issues of Manhaj. SP, Masjid Al-Furqan and their brothers do not cooperate with ahlul bidah, such as Ihyaa Turaath, al-Maghrib Institute and others, but Greenlane and their allies cooperate with ahlul bidah, such as Ihya Turaath, Al-Maghrib Institute and others. There are clear and unambiguous evidences showing that Greenlane are upon a hizbi manhaj and this is manifested in their deeds- cooperating with ahlul bidah, such as Ihya Turaath, al Maaghrib institute and others.
And even if Greenlane’s Admin and their allies seek to hide their reality by having links with some the Saudi Shaikhs, then we say to them, ”Why do you have links with these Shaikhs- some of whom are considered to be upon the Sunnah- but on the other hand you cooperate with ahlul bidah, such as Ihya Turaath, Yasir Qadhi and other al-Maghrib speakers? Indeed, this is nothing else but mixing haqq with baatil. It was said to Imaam Al-Awzaa’ee (rahimahullaah): Indeed a man says, ”I sit with Ahlus Sunnah and I sit with ahlul bidah.” So Al-Awzaa’ee said: This man wants to equate truth with falsehood. [Al-Ibaanah 2/456]
Therefore, the confused caller to brotherhood should know that the differences between us and his friends are Manhajiy- we are free from the people of bidah, whilst his friends ( Greenlane and their allies) are with the people of bidah and misguidance, such as Ihya Turaath, Al-Maghrib Institute and others. He should submit to the truth and stop seeking lame excuses and making unwarranted emotional appeals. Imaam Fudayl Ibn Iyaad (rahimahullaah) was asked about humility, so he said: It is to humble oneself to the truth, submit to it and accept it from the one who utters it. Ibn Ataa (rahimahullaah) said: Humility is to accept the truth wherever it may be; honour is found in humility, so whoever seeks it though pride is like one who seeks water from fire.
And Allaah knows best
To be continued…In-Shaa-Allaah