Concerning the Doubt that the Origin of Muslims is Integrity, Sunnah and Salafiyyah

Shaykh ’Abdul-Muhsin Ibn Hamad al-’Abbaad Clarifies the Origin of the Muslim is Ignorance:

[Q]: Allaah the Glorified and Exalted says,

O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it.” [Sooratul-Hujuraat 49:6]

Is the report accepted when it comes from other than a rebellious evil person (faasiq), knowing that the origin concerning the Muslim is integrity (’adaalah)? Continue reading “Concerning the Doubt that the Origin of Muslims is Integrity, Sunnah and Salafiyyah”

Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee on Affiliating with as-Salafiyyah

The Quintessential Gathered Advices and Instructions of ash-Shaykh Rabee' to the Youth
The Quintessential Gathered Advices and Instructions of ash-Shaykh Rabee’ to the Youth

[Q]: Noble Shaykh, is it sufficient for the one who follows the Sunnah to just call his self a Muslim or must he add to that another name, meaning Salafee?

[A]: Why are not the likes of these questions asked all the time regarding being Ash’aree for example or Maatureedee or Teejaanee or Marghanee or Naqshabandee or Sahrawardee; you find hundreds of paths (of deviation and misguidance) and there is never a problem with that. The reason is, it is as if these are correct with these people and there is no objection to them. The apparent from the one on all these misguided paths is that he is a Muslim (as well) and there is never an objection (to these names). It is as if they see it to be correct and there is never any objection, except with the word: Ahlul-Hadeeth, except with Salafiyyeen.

Ok, what do the words Teejaanee, Naqshabandee or Sahrawardee entail? They entail Hulool and Wahdatul-Wujood (belief that Allaah enters His creation and that Allah becomes one with His creation) and they entail Shirk, kufr (disbelief) and various types of misguidance. As for the word Salafee, what does it entail?

Put the words to the side (for a minute), what is important now is the meanings. What does the word Salafiyyah and Ahlul-Hadeeth entail; do they carry and falsehood?

I ask you all now and you are in front of me, the People of Hadeeth, do you find that they carry any falsehood or call to falsehood? So long as this reality is correct (i.e. that Salafiyyah and Ahlul-Hadeeth do not entail falsehood) then the word is correct and there is no disputing in regards to the words.

However, these (who dispute that) are the people of  fitnah (trial, tribulation) and the people who stir up trouble and they only seek to cause trouble upon the truth that this word carries. So know the plots and attacks of the people of fitnah and innovation and continue upon using the word Ahlul-Hadeeth and Salafiyyeen because they are the truth.

Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) said that it is incumbent to affiliate with Salafiyyah. If you affiliate with Salafiyyah you do not affiliate with a specific person or the methodology of a specific person and you are not affiliating with innovations, rather (by this) you only affiliate with the Companions and the virtuous generations who were upon guidance by the testimony of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam),

“The best of the people is my generation then those who follow them and then those who follow them. Then there will come after them a people who will give testimony when not asked to do so, and they will vow but not fulfill it and obesity will become abundant in them.” [1]

So therefore you affiliate with these generations in which the Messenger (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) testified to their goodness. Rather, Allaah testified to their goodness,

You are the best nation to be raised up from Mankind, you command the good and forbid the evil.” [Soorah Aali-’Imraan 3:110] [2]

Endnotes:

[1]: Saheeh: Related by Aboo Daawood (no. 4657), at-Tirmidhee (no. 2222) and Ahmad in al-Musnad (no. 19405).  It was authenticated by al-Albaanee in Silsilatus-Saheehah (no. 1845).

[2]: Refer to al-Lubaab (p. 102-103) of Rabee’ al-Madkhalee.

Translation by Abu Suhayl Anwar Wright

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee Disproves the False Principle: Do not Refute Them Until you Know What They Meant

[fap_track id=”3631″ layout=”list” enqueue=”no” button_enqueue=”no”]

ibnhadi[Q]: This questioner says: We have heard those who ascribe to as-Salafiyyah have formed a principle in refuting the innovator, “Do not refute him up until you know what he meant and up until you are a Scholar and so on.”  So what is the response to this?

[A]: I say: As for knowledge being a condition for the refutation, then yes.  You heard about it not too long ago.

As for the statement that you cannot refute someone up until you know what he meant, then this is speech which is in need of further detailed speech.

If his statement is apparently falsehood, then I must ask him about what he meant?!  He is only to be asked about something that is ambiguous.  As for that which is clear falsehood, then it is necessary to refute it.

If you are from those who are fit to refute and you are asked about that, or it has been obligated upon you, such that there is no one else to absolve you of this task, then it is obligatory upon you to clarify.  And we have not been commanded to investigate into the meanings of the people.  We have been commanded to take the people at face value.  The Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said,

“I am only a human being, and you people have disputes. May be someone amongst you can present his case in a more eloquent and convincing manner than the other, and I give my judgment in his favour according to what I hear. Beware! If ever I give somebody something of his brother’s right then he should not take it as I have only, given him a piece of Fire…” [1]

And he (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said to Usaamah Ibn Zayd (radiyallaahu ’anhumaa),

“Did you tear open his heart?”

This was when the man stated that there is no one worthy of worship besides Allaah, but Usaamah killed him, as Usaamah had been standing over him with the sword, so he killed him.  Usaamah replied,

“He only said it as a means of seeking protection.”

The Prophet said,

“Did you tear open his heart?” [2]

So he did not know what was inside the man’s chest and he was not held responsible for it.  He was held responsible for what was apparent.  And ’Umar (radiyallaahu ’anhu), the Leader of the Believers, said, as occurs in al-Bukhaaree,

“During the time of Prophethood, people accepted the Revelation.  As for now, then the Revelation has ceased…”

The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) had died.

“We only take the people at face value.  We bring close and favour the one who manifests goodness in front of us.  And we dismiss and distance ourselves from the one who manifests evil in front of us,” or as he – rahimahullaah – said. [3]

So we have not been commanded to investigate into the intended meanings.  Whosoever has speech that is falsehood, then falsehood must be refuted.  And if he is ignorant and he says, “I meant such and such, but I erred in the expression,” we reply, ‘The praise is for Allaah.  Therefore, you have corrected yourself.  So it is not permissible for anyone, from this point onwards, to follow you in that falsehood now that you are aware of it.’

So now you – O critic – have benefited the people firstly and him (i.e. the speaker of falsehood) secondly.

This speech (i.e. that you cannot refute someone up until you know what he meant) is incorrect.” [4]

Endnotes:

[1]: Related by al-Bukhaaree (no. 2291), Muslim (no. 3237), Aboo Daawood (no. 3115), Ibn Maajah (no. 2310), at-Tirmidhee (no. 1256), an-Nisaa‘ee (no. 5683) and Ahmad in al-Musnad (no. 26016).

[2]: Related by Muslim (no. 140) and Aboo Daawood (no. 26430).

[3]: Related by al-Bukhaaree (no. 2498) and Ahmad in al-Musnad (no. 288).

[4]: Taken from the recorded gathering entitled, “Thawaabit ’Aadoo ilat-Tashkeek feehaa.”

Translation by Maaz Qureshi