Skip to main content

Tag: ibaadah

[2] Following the Proofs is Not Limited to Fiqh Issues, Rather One Has to Accept The Statements of Those Scholars Who Establish The Clear Proofs Against The Innovators and The Deviants!

Written by Masjid Furqan on . Posted in Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Scholars of Islam.

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy

They (i.e. the people of doubts) say: ”We are not obliged to take the speech of the Shaikh.”

——————————————————————————————————————-

Shaikh Rabee (may Allaah preserve him) said:

You find a scholar quoting and refuting the affairs of misguidance found in the Book of such and such a person, in such and such page, yet you find these people saying: ‘’I am not obliged to (take/accept) the speech of such and such a Shaikh?!’’

——————————————————————————————————————-

This statement of theirs is a principle by way of which they seek to shun and reject truth.  It is a false principle by way of which they seek to reject the sound principles of Jarh Wat-Tadeel.  Therefore, learn the sound principles of Jarh Wat-Tadeel and look to the methodology of the Salaf; and leave alone these who misguide. They bring turmoil upon the true religion of Allaah and upon the Methodology of the Salaf and its followers.

Question to Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhali (may Allaah preserve him)

Are the issues of Jarh Wat-Tadeel based on Ijtihaad? And how do we refute the one who says, ‘’I am not obliged to (take/accept) the speech of such and such a Shaikh?!

Answer:

A group among the schemers against the Salafi Methodology and those who wear a false garment of the Salafiyyah Methodology seek to place in the affair of Jarh Wat-Tadeel, (the false principle): ”We rectify, but we do not disparage;” (and the false principle): ”We want a broad and extensive methodology that will accommodate all the ummah”; (and the false principle): ‘’We rectify but we do not destroy;” Meaning: Neither evil nor bidah is repelled; rather all the Ummah are accommodated in a board and extensive methodology to the extent that even the Raafidah (shia) are accommodated.  So these people begin to make false accusations against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel and against those (i.e. the scholars) who establish it.  Some of these false accusers have gone as far as saying that there is no proof in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah to establish the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel!

Indeed, the Qur’aan is filled with the proofs of Jarh Wat Tadeel. The people of pharaoh have been refuted and disparaged; the people of Prophet Nooh have been refuted and disparaged; the people of Prophet Hud have been refuted and disparaged; the people of Prophet Saaleh have been refuted and disparaged; the Quraish have been refuted and disparaged and Abu Lahab has been refuted and disparaged.  The Sunnah and the methodology of the Salaf are filled with Jarh Wat Tadeel and it is a weapon against the people of innovation.  These people promoting such false principles want to break this ‘Jarh Wat-Tadeel Weapon’ into pieces, and they want to deprive the Salafis of this ‘Jarh Wat-Tadeel Weapon’ which is traced back to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam).

So a person comes along and wages war against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel; then a second person comes along and wages war against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel; then a third person comes along and wages war against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel; then a fourth one comes along and wages war against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel……..then a tenth person comes along and wages war against the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel and they are all followed by crowds!! Therefore be warned against these people, for they wear a false gown of Salafiyyah in order to split the Salafis through these false principles and precepts.

A person commits murder and was seen by two trustworthy witnesses; then these two witnesses are summoned in the presence of the ruler who applies the Islamic rulings; so what will he judge by?  He should judge by the law of Islam; and if not then he has opposed the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah Allaah’s Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam).    Allaah (The Most High) said:

وَأَشۡہِدُواْ ذَوَىۡ عَدۡلٍ۬ مِّنكُمۡ

”And take for witness two just persons from among you (Muslims).” [65:2]

The evidence for giving witnesses and the evidences for Jarh Wat-Tadeel are one and the same thing.  As for the untrustworthy person, then his narration is not accepted. Likewise, the liar- the deceiver whose speech cannot be determined for its correctness, then his testimony is not accepted. Neither his criticism nor commendation of a person is accepted.  However, if he is a scholar who is precise and skillful, and he says about a person: ”Such and such a person is a liar”; then it is obligatory upon the people to accept his speech.  The Salaf followed this methodology, (such as their saying): ”such and such is a liar”; ”such and such has a bad memory”; ”such and such is an innovator”; ”such and such is a murji”; ”such and such is a khaariji”; ”such and such is a mutazili.” etc   These statements have been made by Imaam Ahmad, Imaam Ibn Ma’een, Imaam Ibn Al-Madeenee, Imaam Bukhaaree etc.  This the path followed by the Salaf; and why is that the case? That is because Allaah commanded us to accept the narration of the trustworthy narrators.  Allaah (The Most High) said:

يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ إِن جَآءَكُمۡ فَاسِقُۢ بِنَبَإٍ۬ فَتَبَيَّنُوٓاْ

O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it’’ [49:6]

Clarification and verification is to be sought when a rebellious evil person narrates. The narration of a rebellious evil person is not declared a lie straight away because it may be correct; but it is not accepted until it is verified.

As for the narration of a trustworthy person–as long as he is trustworthy and precise in what he narrates from the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam), then it is obligatory to accept his narration.  The Books of the Sunnah are filled with the narrations of those truthful narrators—a truthful person who reports from another truthful person with a chain of transmission going back to the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam). However, these people who are seeking to attack the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel with their false principles want to abolish the sound principles upon which our Religion is established.

Many of the Ahaadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam), the transmissions from the companions (radiyallaahu-anhum) and the transmissions from the Imaams of the Sunnah were transmitted from one trustworthy person to another trustworthy person… and it obligatory to accept them, due to the saying of Allaah (The Most High):

[وَأَشۡہِدُواْ ذَوَىۡ عَدۡلٍ۬ مِّنكُمۡ ]

And take for witness two just persons from among you (Muslims).

And with regards to transmission of information, then the information transmitted by one person is sufficient because the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) used to send one person to Chosroes (i.e. the Emperor of Persia) to call him to Islaam and establish the proofs against him.

And he (sallal-laahu-alayhi-sallam) sent one person to Caesar the King of Rome to call him to Islaam and establish the proofs against him.  The people used to enter Islaam through the message of this one trustworthy-truthful person sent by the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam).  And if they rejected Islaam and refused to follow the Messenger of Allaah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) based on the information transmitted by this one trustworthy-truthful person, he (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) prepared an army against them. The Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) prepared an army for the battle of Tabuk against the Romans based on the fact that they rejected the call to Islaam which was communicated to them by one person.

He (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) sent individuals to Bahrain, Oman and Yemen and their narrations were accepted; so how about in this present time of ours when there are ten or fifty Salafi (scholars) who are in agreement regarding a particular affair, but their narrations are rejected. And those who reject them, say: ‘’There has to be a consensus of all the scholars.’’  And from the false principles of these people is that they say: ‘’we neither accept criticism against a person nor a praise for him even if many of the contemporary scholars say that such a person is an innovator.’’

Therefore be warned against these people, because they make a claim to Salafiyyah, whilst seeking to destroy the Salafi Methodology, its principles and foundations.  How many false precepts do they have, such as their saying: ‘’I am not obliged to (take/accept) the speech of such and such a Shaikh?!’’  You find a scholar quoting and refuting the affairs of misguidance found in the Book of such and such a person, in such and such page, yet you find these people saying: ‘’I am not obliged to (take/accept) the speech of such and such a Shaikh?!’’

This statement of theirs is a principle by way of which they seek to shun and reject truth.  It is a false principle by way of which they seek to reject the sound principles of Jarh Wat-Tadeel.  Therefore, learn the sound principles of Jarh Wat-Tadeel and look to the methodology of the Salaf; and leave alone these who misguide. They bring turmoil upon the true religion of Allaah and upon the Methodology of the Salaf and its followers.

———————————————————————————————–

Source: Slightly Paraphrased from a lecture of the Shaikh delivered on Yawm Al-Khaamis 28 Shawaal 1431

[1] Following the Proofs and Being Care of Blameworthy Blind Following, Especially When You Know the Proofs and They Are Very Clear to You

Written by Masjid Furqan on . Posted in Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Scholars of Islam, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy

Ibn Abdul-Barr (rahimahullaah) said:

According to the scholars, Taqleed (i.e. blind following) is other than Ittibaa. That is because Ittibaa is to follow a person based on what is apparent to you based on the superiority of his statement and soundness of his school of thought. And Taqleed is that you speak with his statement, whilst you neither know the angle of his speech nor its meaning and you reject speech besides it; or his mistake is made manifest to you, but you follow him and venerate his opposition (to the truth), whilst the corruptness of his speech is clear to you. This is what is forbidden to speak with in the religion of Allaah (The Most High). [End of quote] [1]

Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhalee (may Allaah preserve him) said:

Indeed, bigoted partisanship and (blind following) of schools of thought in affairs of creed, affairs of worship, politics and other than it has appeared; so what was the stance of the Imaams of Islaam towards those bigoted partisanships and oppressive Pre-Islamic (traits), which split the Muslims and weakened Islaam at the same time?

Answer:

Indeed, the companions (may Allaah be pleased with them), such as the likes of Abdullaah Ibn Umar freed themselves from the people of bigoted partisanship and desires, as it was narrated by Imaam Muslim (regarding) the time when news reached (Ibn Umar) about those who innovated the doctrine of the negation of Allaah’s pre-decree; so he (Ibn Umar) said:”If you meet those ones inform them that I am free from them and they are free from me”, and what Ibn Umar swore by that ”if one of them were to spend in charity gold equal to mount Uhud, it will not be accepted until they believe in the pre-decree of Allaah.” [2]

A Misunderstanding Regarding 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. [3]

Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadee Al Madkhalee (hafidha-hullaah) said:

We do not say that there are people of ijtihaad amongst ahlul bidah because they are followers of desires, and Allaah and His Messenger have testified to this.  The misguided innovator stirs up discord (or splitting) and errs, and then says to you, ‘This is ijtihaad’.

When Hikmatiyaar and the misguided parties (in Afghanistan) murdered Shaikh Jameel Ur-Rahmaan, they said: ‘This is ijtihaad’.  Making lawful the spilling of the blood of the Salafis is Ijtihaad to them.  This is what it is! They (ahlul bidah) do not fall into an affair of misguidance or a calamity except that they say, ‘This is ijtihaad’. This is diluting Islaam.  It is falsehood, misguidance and bidah mixed with truth when the mistakes of the (true and qualified scholars of ijtihaad)- for which they are rewarded- are placed at the same level with innovation about which the Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said that it will be in the fire. [4]

————————————————————————————-

[1] [Jaami Bayaan Al-Ilm Wa-Fadlihee: 2/787]

[2] [Source: Silsilah Ar-Rasaa-il Al-Ilmiyyah Li-Fadheelatis Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadee Al-Madkhalee….page 370]

[3] [Source: Ibaaraat Moohimah, page 25’ by Shaikh Muhammad Bin Umar Saalim Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him). Abridged and slightly paraphrased]

[4] Ajwibatul Allaamatush Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadee Al Madkhalee Alaa As-ilah Abee Rawaaha Al-Manhajiyyah; page: 20

Reminder: Unbefitting or Bad Words In Our Conversations and Discussions Will Enable shaytaan to sow enmity among Us, So Let Us Not Be From Those who help him in anyway

Written by Masjid Furqan on . Posted in Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Qur'aan, Scholars of Islam, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

Allaah (The Most High) said:

وَقُل لِّعِبَادِي يَقُولُوا الَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ ۚ إِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ يَنزَغُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ كَانَ لِلْإِنسَانِ عَدُوًّا مُّبِينًا

And say to My slaves that they should (only) say those words that are the best. (Because) Shaitan (Satan) verily, sows disagreements among them. Surely, Shaitan (Satan) is to man a plain enemy.

Imaam Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaah) stated:

Allaah [The Blessed and Most High] command His slave and Messenger [i.e. Muhammad (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam)] to command Allaah’s believing slaves that they speak to one another in their conversations and discussions with what is better and good, for if they do not do that, shaytaan will sow a state of conflict between them and speech will lead to actions, and thus evil, (blameworthy) argumentation and fighting will arise; for indeed shaytaan is an enemy of Aadam and his children since (the time) he refused to prostrate to Aadam. His enmity is clear and manifest, so because of this, it prohibited for a man to point at his Muslim brother with an iron (instrument), for indeed shaytaan (can entice an evil action) in his hand and he may cause him to strike him (i.e. his Muslim brother) with it.

———————————————————————————————

[Source: Al-Misbaah Al-Muneer Fee Tahdheb Tafseer Ibn katheer’ Surah Al-Israa 17: 53]

Food for thought about those exaggerators among the callers to Imaamah or the Khilaafah!

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Deviated Callers & Individuals, Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Scholars of Islam.

Ibnul Mutahhir (a raafidi) said that Imaamah is the most important obligation.

Response: This is a lie according to the consensus of the scholars, for Imaan [i.e. belief in Allaah; belief in Allaah’s Angels; belief in Allaah’s Books; belief in Allaah’s Messengers; belief in the hereafter and belief in Qadr-its good and evil)] is more important.  And from those affairs that are known by everyone in the religion is that when the disbelievers during the era of Messenger entered into the fold of Islaam, the rulings of Islaam were conveyed to them and Imaamah was not mentioned to them in any situation. Then how can it be the most important obligation?!

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

[Source: Al-Muntaqaa Min Minhaaj Al-I’tidaal Fee Naqdi Kalaam Ahl Ar-Rafdi Wal-Itizaal’ page 26-27 by Muhibbud-deen khateeb (rahimahullaah)]

Abu Mu’aawiyah (Abdullah Al-Gambi)

Precise quote by Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi from Imaam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab about referring back to the Book and Sunnah during differ

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Scholars of Islam, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi (may Allaah preserve him) stated in ‘Al-Iqnaa’u Bimaa Jaa’a An A’immatid Da’wati Minal Aqwaali Fil Ittibaa’ page17:

Imaam Muhammad Bin Abdil Wahhaab (rahimahullaah) said regarding the statement of [Allaah (The Most High)]:

فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِ

 (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger

When it is the case that Allaah [Glorified be He and free is He from all imperfections] has indeed obligated on us to refer back to Allaah concerning wherein we differ- that is (referring back our differing) to the Book of Allaah and to the Messenger – that is his Sunnah-; we know definitely (without any doubt) that the one who refers back to the Book and the Sunnah regarding what the people differ in, he will find in them (i.e. the Book and the Sunnah) that which will end the differing (i.e. the correct position will be established and the differing will end).

————————————————————————————————–

Abu Mu’aawiyah (Abdullah Al-Gambi)

Reminder: The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) Advised Mu’aadh (radiyallaahu-anhu) To Make This Supplication after the Prayer

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Announcements, Purification of The Soul, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

It was reported from Abu ‘Abdur-Rahman Al-Hubli, from As-SunãbihI, from Mu’ädh bin Jabal, that the Messenger of Allah (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) held his hand and said: “0 Mu’adh! I swear by Allah, I love you. I swear by Allah, I love you. I advise you, 0 Mu’ãdh, that you never leave saying after every prayer,

[اللَّهُمَّ أَعِنِّي عَلَى ذِكْرِكَ وَشُكْرِكَ وَحُسْنِ عِبَادَتِكَ – O Allah! Help me in remembering You, thanking You, and perfecting my worship of You (1)].” And Mu’ãdh advised As-Sunãbihi with that, and As-Sunabihi advised Abu ‘Abdur-RahmAn with that. [2]

——————————————————————–

[1] According to Imaam Abdul-Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah), it is better to supplicate with this supplication after the Tasha’hud and before the Tasleem, but there is no harm in doing so after the Tasleem. For further details, refer to this link to find out why the Shaikh (rahimahullaah) says so. http://www.binbaz.org.sa/node/949

[2] Declared Saheeh (authentic) by Imaam Albaani (rahimahullaah) in his checking of Sunan Abee Dawud’ Hadeeth number: 1522

Abu Mu’aawiyah (Abdullah Al-Gambi)

[3] Shaikh Rabee quotes a statement of some of the Salaf regarding one of the qualities of a just person

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, The Salaf - Pious Predecessors, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhali (may Allaah preserve him) said that some of the Salaf stated regarding a just person:  ”The just (person) is the one who when angry is not entered into falsehood by his anger. And when he is pleased, being pleased does not removed him from the truth.”

——————————————————————————————————–

[Source: Al-Mahajjatul Baydaa Fee Himaayatis Sunnatil Gharraa’i Min Zallaati Ahlil Akh’taa Wa Zayghi Ahlil Ahwaa’ page 37′ by Shaikh Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhali (may Allaah preserve him)]

Abu Mu’aawiyah (Abdullah Al-Gambi)

Shaikh Rabee Clarifies Regarding When Someone Would Be Regarded as One imitating the khawaarij In Their Act of Shaving the Head

Written by Abdullah Jallow on . Posted in Belief - 'Aqeedah', Calling To Islam - 'Da'wa', Deviated Groups, Sects and Parties, Innovations In Islam (Bidah), Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Seeking Knowledge, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

Question to Shaikh Rabee (may Allaah preserve him):

Our Shaikh-may Allaah preserve you. (Regarding) the statement of the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam): ‘’Their sign (i.e. the khawaarij) will be the habit of shaving.’’ [Saheeh Al-Bukhaari, Hadeeth Number 562, Vol 9] So is the one who shaves a lot in this era similar to them because some of the scholars say that it (i.e. shaving) is not a sign of theirs at present?

The Shaikh (may Allaah preserve him) responded:

Answer: The who does not intend to imitate them, rather he (only) wants to shave his head, this is permissible. (That is) because the initial (ruling regarding this affair) is Al-Jawaaz (permissibility) and he (i.e. the person) does not desire to imitate them. Therefore, this person is not from them, for they (i.e. khawaarij) used to adopt shaving as a sign for themselves in order to distinguish them from the Muslims. They adopted shaving as a distinguishing sign just as the shee’ah adopt black clothing. This is a general distinguishing sign of black (clothing) and what is similar to it, just as the soofiyyah (i.e. the soofees) adopt patched garments and some (other types of) clothing to distinguish them from the people. So these distinguishing signs which some people wish to be distinguished by way of religious practice and from the Muslims, then these (people) are people of misguidance who are similar to the khawaarij in their (act of) shaving. As for the one who shaves because it is permissible, he is not included in this In-Shaa-Allaah, except if he adopts it as a distinguishing sign. [الذريعة إلى بيان مقاصد كتاب الشريعة – Vol 2, page 266 ]

Abu Mu’aawiyah (Abdullah Al-Gambi)