Do not worship based upon what you think is good nor upon taqleed (blindly following) – Shaykh Fawzan | Dawud Burbank [Audio|En]


Sharh-ul-Usool-ith-Thalaathah : Lesson 07 – Part B
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzan | Dawud Burbank [Audio|English]

[Souncloud Audio Link

[Previous ClassThe first matter is that Allaah created us and gave us provision and did not leave us without purpose]

Imaam Muhammad ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhaab (rahimahullaah) said: 

Rather He sent a Messenger to us.4

[4]: Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzan’s Explanation

Since it is the case that we may not carry out worship based upon what we think is good nor upon taqleed (blindly following) so-and-so and so-and-so from the people, then therefore Allaah sent to us Messengers to make clear to us how we are to worship him, because acts of worship are tawqeefiyyah (dependent upon text) it is not permissible that Allaah be worshipped except with that which He has legislated.

So acts of worship are tawqeefiyyah – restricted to text, to that which the Messengers ‘alaihimussalaatu wassalaam came with. So the wisdom behind sending the Messengers is that they should make clear to the people how they are to worship their Lord, and for them to forbid them from shirk (association of others along with Allaah) and from kufr (disbelief) in Allaah the Mighty and Majestic. This is the duty of the Messengers ‘alaihimussalaatu wassalaam. And therefore he ‘alaihissalaatu wassalaam said:

من عمل عم لا ليس عليه أمرنا فهو رد

“Whoever does an action which our affair is not in accordance with, then it will be rejected”.[1] 

So worship is tawqeefiyyah (dependent upon text), and bid‘a (innovations) are rejected, and baseless superstitions and ideas are rejected and blind following is rejected. Acts of worship are not taken except from the sharee‘ah (revealed law) which the Messenger sallallaahu alaihi wa sallaam came with.

His saying, “Rather He sent to us a Messenger”: he is Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallaam the seal, the last one of the Prophets. He sent him to make clear to us why we were created, and to make clear to us how we are to worship Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, and to forbid us from shirk and kufr (unbelief) and from sins. This was the duty of the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallaam, and he clearly conveyed the message and he fulfilled the trust which was given to him, and he gave sincere advice to the nation ‘alaihissalaatu wassalaam, and he explained fully and made clear, and he left us upon a clear white ground, its night is just the same as its day, no-one deviates away from it except one who is destroyed, and this is just as is in His saying, He the Most High:

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا

This day have I completed your religion for you and perfected my favour upon you and are pleased for you with Islaam as your religion. [5:3]


[1] Its checking has preceded. (Mentioned by al-Bukhaaree in disconnected form as hadeeth 7350 in the Book of clinging to the Book and the Sunnah Chapter 20. And the Hadeeth is reported by Muslim with a fully connected chain as a hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah radiyallaahu ‘anhaa.)

Sharh-ul-Usool-ith-Thalaathah. Explanation of the Three Fundamental Principles of Imaam Muhammad ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhaab by Shaykh Saalih ibn Fowzaan al-Fowzaan hafizahullaah. Translated by  Daawood  Burbank, rahimahullaah

Posted with kind permission from Dawud Burbank rahimahullaah

Listen to the Full Audio Series:
Sharh Usool-ith-Thalaathah – Shaykh Fawzan | Dawud Burbank

Book Study Resources – Three Fundamental Principles

Related Links:

No obedience to the created if it means disobedience to the Creator – Shaykh al Albaani

“There is no obedience due to anyone in disobedience to Allaah Tabarak wa Ta’aala.” [Silsilah Saheehah: 179]

“There is no obedience in disobedience to Allaah Tabaraka wa Ta’aala.” [Silsilah Saheehah: 180 ]

“There is no obedience to mankind in disobedience to Allaah, indeed obedience is in goodness.“[Silsilah Saheehah: 181]

The reason for this hadeeth:

The Messenger of Allaah- sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – dispatched an army, and he commanded a man to lead them, who lit a fire, and the man said to the army: enter into the fire. The people wanted to enter into the fire, but some of them said : verily we have just fled from the fire.

This was mentioned to the Messenger of Allaah – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – and he said to those who wanted to enter into it: if you entered it you would have remained in it until the Day of Judgment, and he said a good word to the others, and he said…..(the above hadeeth).

The extra wording in the hadeeth is from Tayyalisee and the context is by Muslim.

In another narration by him where he said:

“The Messenger of Allaah – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – dispatched a battalion and ordered a man from the Ansaar to lead them, and he ordered them to listen to him and obey him. They caused this man to get angry, so he said to them: Gather some firewood for me, so they gathered it for him. Then he said: light the fire and they lit the fire, then he said to them: Did not the Messenger of Allaah – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – order you to listen and to obey me? They said Yes, of course.

He said – enter in to the fire!

So they started to look at each other, and said (and in another narration: a young boy said to them) : indeed we fled to the Messenger of Allaah – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – from the fire, [ do not be hasty, until you meet the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – and if he orders you to enter it, then enter into it ], so this is what they did.

The man’s anger came down/subsided, and the fire was put out. When they returned to the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – and mentioned it to him, he said: if you had entered it, you would never have exited from it, indeed obedience is in goodness.”

Narrated by Bukhari (8/47, 13/109), Muslim (6/16), Ahmad (1/82, 134) and other narrations which contain the extra wording is also by Ahmad.

This hadeeth has many benefits, the most important of which is the impermissibility of obedience to anyone, if it is disobedience to Allaah Tabarak wa Ta’aala, whether it is the leaders, scholars and the shaykhs.

Also from this hadeeth you get to know the misguidance of different groups of people;

The first: some of the soofis who obey their shaykhs, even if they command them to commit sins, using as a proof, that they in reality are not committing sins. Also that the shaykh sees that which the follower does not see.

I know a shaykh from amongst these people who appointed himself as a leader. He mentioned a story to his followers in some of his lessons in the masjid, the summary of which is, one of the Soofi shaykhs ordered one of his followers that during the night he should go to his father and kill him while he is in his bed next to his wife! So when he killed him, he returned to the shaykh, happily having carried out the command of the shaykh! The shaykh looked at him and said: Do you think that you have really killed your father? Rather he is your mother’s boyfriend! As for your father he is away!

Then he makes and presents a Sharia’ ruling, as he claims, from his story, and he says to his followers : If a shaykh orders his follower with a ruling which is apparently against the Sharia’, it is upon the followers to obey him in this, then he said: Do you not see this shaykh, he apparently orders the boy to kill his father, however in reality he ordered him to kill the one who fornicated with his mother, and that person deserved to be killed!

The falsity of this story is not hidden according to the Sharia’ from many angles:

Firstly: Carrying out the punishment is not the right of the shaykh, no matter how important he is; rather it is from the right of the leader or the one in charge.

Secondly : if the case was that this actually took place, then why did he only carry out the punishment on the man and not the woman, and they both fornicated?

Thirdly: the Sharia’ ruling for the married adulterer is to be stoned to death, and the person is not killed except by stoning. From this it is clear that the shaykh has opposed the Sharia’ from many angles, this is also the situation with the follower who based upon this previous story, made it incumbent upon the Muslims to be obedient to the shaykh, to the extent one of them said to the people: if you see the shaykh and he is wearing a cross around his neck, then it is not allowed to criticize him!

With all the clarity of the absurdity of these stories, and their opposition together to the Sharia’ and to the intellect, we find some people become deceived by these stories, and amongst them some of the cultured youth. A discussion took place between me and one of those youths about that story, and he had heard it from that follower of the shaykh, and what the shaykh had based his ruling upon. However, the discussion with him did not bring about any benefit. He persisted in believing this story, since according to his claim, it was a miracle, and he added: you people reject miracles!

So when I said to him: If your shaykh orders you to kill your father, would you do it?

He said: Indeed, I have not reached that level yet!

So after this can anyone be blamed for characterizing the religion of these shaykhs except that they are the opium of the people?

The second group is:

The blind followers who prefer to follow the statements of the Madhab above the statement of the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam with what is clearly taken from the statements of the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam. So if it is said to one of them, for example: do not pray the Sunnah of the Fajr prayer after the obligatory prayer has begun, due to the prohibition of the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – from doing so, which is clear, they do not obey, and they say the Madhab allows this.

If it is said to them: the Nikah at-Tahleel ( whereby another man marries the divorced woman and then divorces so that she can be allowed to marry her first husband) is invalid, because the Prophet – sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam – cursed the one who does this. They would answer by saying: No, but it is permissible according to such and such Madhab!

There are hundreds of issues like this, and this is why many of the scholars held the opinion that the saying of Allaah Tabaraka wa Ta’ala about the Christians: << They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah >> applies to these blind followers, as Fahkr ar-Razi has explained in his Tafseer.

Posted from: The Ahadeeth of Tawheed, Explained By the Muhaaddith, the Allaamah, Shaykh Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee (rahimullaah), Source: Silsilah Ahadeeth As-Saheehah of Shaykh Al-Albaani (rahimahullaah), Translated by: Abbas Abu Yahya (hafidhahullaah)

The Forbiddence of Adhering Blindly to the Saying of a Scholar in Opposition To An Authentic Text, and the Severe Rebuke due Upon One Who is Guilty Of this

The Forbiddence Of Adhering Blindly To The Saying Of A Scholar In Opposition To An Authentic Text, And The Severe Rebuke Due Upon One Who Is Guilty Of This (Part I)

Shaikh `Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn `Abdil-Wahhaab – rahimahullaah – said in “Fathul-Majeed‟ (2/527-530), in explanation of the saying of Ibn `Abbaas – radiyallaahu `anhumaa – :

“Stones will soon fall upon you from the sky. I say: Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said…, and you say: Aboo Bakr and `Umar said!” :-

“…This saying from Ibn `Abbaas – radiyallaahu `anhumaa – was a response to those who said to him: “Aboo Bakr and `Umar – radiyallaahu `anhumaa – did not hold joining the `Umrah along with the Hajj (at-tamattu`), and they held that performing Hajj on its own (al-Ifraad) is better‟, or the like of that…

So in summary, it was because of this that Ibn `Abbaas said, when they countered the Hadeeth with the opinion of Aboo Bakr and `Umar -: “Stones are about to fall upon you from the sky…” – the hadeeth.

And Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee – rahimahullaah – said:

“The scholars are agreed, by consensus, that whoever is such that the Sunnah of Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) becomes clear to him, then it is not for him to leave it for the saying of anyone.”

And Imaam Maalik – rahimahullaahu ta`aalaa – said:

“There is none of us except that he rebuts and is rebutted, except for the occupant of this grave (صلى الله عليه وسلم)”,

and the speech of the imaams with this meaning is abundant…

…So the speech of Ibn `Abbaas – radiyallaahu `anhumaa – shows that whoever receives a textual proof, and he does not accept it, because of taqleed (blind-following) of his imaam, then it is obligatory to criticize him severely, because of his opposing the proof.

And Imaam Ahmad said: “Ahmad ibn `Umar al-Bazzaar narrated to us: Ziyaad ibn Ayyoob narrated to us: Aboo `Ubaydah al-Haddaad narrated to us: from Maalik ibn Deenaar: from `Ikrimah: from Ibn `Abbaas, who said:

“There is not one of us except that some of his sayings are taken, and some are left; except for the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم).”

So therefore it is obligatory to criticise whoever leaves the proof in favour of anyone from the scholars, no matter who that is. The recorded sayings of the imaams clearly state this; and state that ‘taqleed’ (blind-following) is not allowable except in matters of ijtihaad (personal deduction) for which no proof is found in the Book or the Sunnah. So this is what some of the scholars meant by their saying: ‘There is to be no criticism in the matters of ijtihaad (personal deduction).’ As for the one who acts contrary to the Book and the Sunnah, then it is obligatory to refute him; just as was said by Ibn `Abbaas, ash-Shaafi`ee, Maalik, and Ahmad – and this is something agreed upon, as has preceded in the speech of Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee – rahimahullaahu ta`aalaa…”

The Forbiddence Of Adhering Blindly To The Saying Of A Scholar In Opposition To An Authentic Text, And The Severe Rebuke Due Upon One Who Is Guilty Of This (Part II)

Shaykh `Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn `Abdil-Wahhaab – rahimahullaah – said in “Fathul-Majeed‟ (2/532), in explanation of the saying of Imaam Ahmad:

“I am amazed at a people who are aware of the chain of narration and its authenticity, and yet they hold on to the opinion of Sufyaan, whereas Allaah – the Most High – says:

So let those who oppose the Messenger‟s command beware, lest a fitnah (affliction) befalls him, or a painful torment be inflicted upon him.[Sooratun-Noor (24):63]

Do you know what the affliction is? The affliction is Shirk. Perhaps if he rejects something from his saying, some deviation will fall into his heart and he is destroyed.”

“So the saying of Imaam Ahmad – rahimahullaah – “I am amazed at a people who are aware of the chain of narration and its authenticity…” is a criticism from him of that; and shows that it leads to deviation of the hearts, which causes a person to become a Disbeliever.

So this evil has become extremely widespread, particularly amongst those who claim attachment to knowledge. They do whatever they can to prevent people from acting upon the Book and the Sunnah; and they block people from following the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and from honouring and respecting his commands and prohibitions. So from that is their saying: “No one except a “mujtahid‟ can use the Book and the Sunnah as proof, and “ijtihaad‟ has ended‟, and the saying: “This person who I am blindly following knows better than you do about hadeeth, and about the abrogating and abrogated narrations‟, and the like of these sayings, whose goal is just the abandonment of following of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم): he who does not speak from his own desires, in favour of dependence upon sayings of those who can err, and who is contradicted by other imaams and whose saying can be nullified by a textual proof. So there is not an imaam except that he only possessed a portion of knowledge; he did not possess all of it. So what is obligatory upon every legally responsible person, when a proof from the Book of Allaah or the Sunnah of His Messenger reaches him, and he understands its meaning, is that he accepts it and acts upon it, no matter who contradicts it.

It is just as He – the Most High – said:

Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and do not take others besides Him: obeying them in disobedience to Him. Little do you remember! [Sooratul-A`raaf (7):3]

And He – the Most High – said:

Is it not sufficient for them that We sent down to you this Book which is recited to them?! In it there is mercy and a reminder for those who believe in it [Sooratul-`Ankaboot (29):51]

A statement of the consensus (ijmaa`) upon that has already preceded [1] , and an explanation that the blind-follower (muqallid) is not from the people of knowledge; and Aboo `Umar ibn `Abdil-Barr and others also report ijmaa` (consensus) upon that.

[1] Transl. Note: [i.e. from Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee.]

I say: And no one disagrees with this except for the ignorant ones from the blind-followers, because of their ignorance of the Book and the Sunnah, and because of their turning away from these two. So those people, even if they think that they are following the imaams, then in reality they have only contradicted them and followed other than their way. So we have already quoted the saying of Maalik, ash-Shaafi`ee, and Ahmad. However in the speech of Ahmad – rahimahullaah – there is an indication that “taqleed‟ (blind-following) before the proof reaches is not blameworthy; rather it is only criticised for one whom the proof has reached, and he opposes it in favour of the saying of one of the imaams.

So this only comes about as a result of their turning away from seeking to understand the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger; and turning instead to the books of the later people, and sufficing with them to the exclusion of the two parts of Revelation. So this resembles what occurred with the People of the Book: those about whom Allaah said:

They took their scholars and monks as lords besides Allaah [Sooratut-Tawbah (9):31],

an explanation of which will follow in the hadeeth of `Adiyy ibn Haatim.

So what is binding upon the one who is sincere is that when he reads the books of the scholars, and examines them, and becomes aware of their sayings, that he submits them to what is found in the Book, and the Sunnah; for every mujtahid from the scholars, and those who follow him and ascribe themselves to his madhhab, must mention his evidence; and the truth in any matter is one; and the imaams are rewarded for their ijtihaad.

Therefore the justly balanced person makes examination of their speech, and consideration of it a path to acquiring awareness of the different issues, and a means to bring them to mind, and a way to distinguish what is correct from what is incorrect – by means of the evidences which those who use the evidences mention; so that in this way he will become aware of which scholar was most fortunate in having the proof.

So the proofs for this fundamental principle are more than can be enumerated, in the Book of Allaah and in the Sunnah likewise….

And the imaams – rahimahumullaah – did not fall short in clarifying this matter. Rather they forbade that they be followed blindly when the Sunnah becomes clear, because they knew that there were matters of knowledge unknown to them, and that this knowledge could reach others, and this occurs a great deal; and this will not be hidden from one who examines the sayings of the scholars.

Aboo Haneefah – rahimahullaah – said:

“When a hadeeth comes from Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) then it is upon the head and the eyes; and if something comes from the Companions – radiyallaahu `anhum – then upon the head and the eyes; and if something comes from the Taabi`een, then we are men and they were men.”

And he said:

“If I say a saying, and the Book of Allaah contradicts it, then abandon my saying in favour of the Book of Allaah.” It was said: “If the saying of Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) contradicts it?‟ He said: “Abandon my saying for the narration of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم). It was said: “If the saying of the Companions contradicts it?‟ He said: “Abandon my saying for the saying of the Companions.”

And ar-Rabee` said: I heard ash-Shaafi`ee – rahimahullaah – say:

“If you find in my book something contrary to the Sunnah of Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), then take hold of the Sunnah of Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and leave whatever I said.”

And he said:

“When a hadeeth is authentic with something contrary to my saying, then throw my saying against the wall.”

And Maalik said:

“Everyone is such that some of his sayings are taken and some are left, except for Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم).”

And the like of this has already been mentioned from him, so there is no excuse for a blind-follower (muqallid) after this… .”

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al-`Uthaymeen On ‘Taqleed’ (Blindfollowing)

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-`Uthaymeen – rahimahullaah – said in “al-Qawlul-Mufeed `alaa Kitaabit-Tawheed‟ (2/152):

“Some people commit a grievous mistake when it is said to them: “Allaah‟s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said‟, he says: “But in the book of so and so there occurs such and such.‟ So it is upon him to fear Allaah, Who said to him in His Book:

And the Day when Allaah will call to them, and say, “What response did you give to the Messengers? [Sooratul-Qasas (28):65]

He did not say: “What response did you give to so and so?‟ As for the author of the book, then if it is known that he loves good, and intends good, then supplication for forgiveness and mercy is made for him if he errs. It is not to be said that he is infallible, and his saying used to contradict the saying of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم).”

Translated by Aboo Talhah Daawood ibn Ronald Burbank -rahimahullaah

Blind Following and its Dangers – Shaikh Saalih Al-Fawzaan

The Fourth Aspect: Blind Following and its Dangers

Imaam Muhammad bin ‘Abdil-Wahhaab said:

[4] Their religion was built upon certain principles, the greatest of which was taqleed (blind following). So this was the biggest principle for all of the disbelievers – the first and last of them – as Allaah says:

“And similarly, We sent not a warner before you (Muhammad) to any town (people), except that the luxurious ones among them said: ‘Verily, we found our forefathers following a certain way and religion, and we will indeed follow in their footsteps.'” [Surah Az-Zukhruf: 23]

And He says: “And when it is said to them: ‘Follow that which Allaah has sent down’, they say: ‘Nay, we shall follow that which we found our forefathers (following).’ Would they do so even if the Devil invites them to the torment of the Fire?” [Surah Luqmaan: 21]

So He revealed to them His saying: “Say: ‘I exhort you to one thing only – that you stand up for Allaah’s sake in pairs and singly – and then reflect (upon the life of the Prophet). There is no madness in your companion (Muhammad).'” [Surah As-Saba`: 46]

And His saying: “(Say to the disbelievers): ‘Follow what has been sent down unto you from your Lord, and follow not any partners besides Him.’ Little do you remember!” [Surah Al-A`raaf: 3]

– the explanation –

From the characteristics of people of the Days of Ignorance is that they would not base their religion on what the Messengers came with. Rather, they would only base their religion on principles that they innovated from their own selves. And they would not accept any change or abandonment of these principles, of which one was: Taqleed (Blind Following). Taqleed means to imitate another person to the point that one resembles him, even though the one being imitated is not fit to be followed. Allaah says:

“And likewise, We did not send before you a warner to any town except that the extravagant ones amongst them said: ‘Verily, we found our forefathers upon a certain way and we will follow in their footsteps.'” [Surah Az-Zukhruf: 23]

What is meant by the “extravagant” are those who live in luxury and possess lots of wealth, since for the most part they are evil people who do not accept the truth. This is contrary to the weak and the poor, for indeed, for the most part, they are humble and more likely to accept the truth. So the people of extravagance are those who possess status and wealth. “Except that the extravagant ones amongst them said” – i.e. those amongst them who had affluence and position in the society –“Verily, we found our forefathers upon a certain way” – meaning: upon a religion and practice.“And we will follow in their footsteps” means: “We have no need for you Messengers.” They thought that this sufficed them over having to follow the Messengers. This is an example of Blind-Following, and it is from the characteristics of the Days of Ignorance.

As for performing taqleed in matters of good, this is called Ittibaa¡¦ (Following) and Iqtidaa (Taking example). Allaah said on behalf of Prophet Yoosuf:

“And I follow the Religion of my forefathers – Ibraaheem, Ishaaq and Ya’qoob. It is not befitting for us to ascribe anything in worship with Allaah.” [Surah Yoosuf: 38]

And Allaah says:

“And the first and the foremost from among the Muhaajireen and the Ansaar and those who followed them in goodness, Allaah is pleased with them and they with Him. And He ha sprepared for themgardens under which rivers flow to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success.” [Surah At-Tawbah: 100]

This is why Allaah said about the people of the Days of Ignorance:

“And when it is said to them: ‘Follow what Allaah has revealed’, they respond: ¡¥Rather, we will follow what we found our forefathers upon!’ Would they do that even though their forefathers did not understand anything and were not guided?” [Surah Al-Baqarah: 170]

So one who doesn’t understand and is not guided cannot be taken as a role-model. Rather, the true role-model is only he who comprehends and is guided. Therefore, blind-following is from the characteristics of the people of the Days of Ignorance, and it is also known as fanatical attachment, since the only true role-model is the Messenger of Allaah and those who follow him.

Then the author, may Allaah have mercy on him, said: “And He says:

‘And when it is said to them: ‘Follow that which Allaah has sent down’, they say: ‘Nay, we shall follow that which we found our forefathers (following).’ Would they do so even if the Devil invites them to the torment of the Fire?’ [Surah Luqmaan: 21]”

When it is said to the polytheists and the disbelievers: ‘Follow that which Allaah has sent down’ – i.e. the Qur’aan, they say: ‘Nay, we shall follow that which we found our forefathers (following).’ “Would they do so even if the Devil invites them” – i.e. calls these forefathers “to the torment of the Fire?” Would you follow them into the torment of the Fire? This means: Would you follow your forefathers even if they were followers of the Devil and he led them to the Hellfire? Everyone with common sense and intellect must investigate into his affair and look to whom he is following. The author, may Allaah have mercy on him, continued: “So He revealed to them His saying:

‘Say: ‘I exhort you to one thing only – that you stand up for Allaah’s sake in pairs and singly – and then reflect (upon the life of the Prophet). There is no madness in your companion (i.e. Muhammad).’ [Surah As-Saba`: 46] And His saying:

‘(Say to the disbelievers): ‘Follow what has been sent down unto you from your Lord, and follow not any partners besides Him.’ Little do you remember!’ [Surah Al-A`raaf: 3]”

Meaning: When the Messenger of Allaah countered them with this ayah, they said: We will stick to what our forefathers practiced, and we will not obey this man, referring to Muhammad. But Allaah is telling them: “Look and reflect on what this man is saying to you. Think about it and do not let fanaticism overtake you.” “That you stand up for Allaah’s sake in pairs and singly.” – meaning: in groups and individually. You must look at what Muhammad is calling you to. If it is the truth, you are then obligated to follow it and it is not permissible for you to remain upon what your fathers and grandfathers were upon.

“That you stand up for Allaah’s sake” and not for the sake of desires or fanaticism. Rather, your standing up should be for the sake of Allaah, desiring the truth. “In pairs and singly” meaning two by two. Reflect, come together and set up a gathering. This is since when there is cooperation between two people that sit together or a group of people, it is more likely that the truth will be achieved. Or this can be done individually, such as when someone isolates himself to reflect and contemplate on what the Messenger of Allaah came with. And he will find it to be the truth and thus it will be incumbent for him to follow it.

“Then reflect. There is no madness in your companion.” This refers to Muhammad of whom they claimed was mad (i.e. insane). But he had no madness in him. Rather, he was the most intellectual of mankind and the most understanding amongst creation. And he was the most sincere and knowledgeable amongst creation. So how can you say that he was mad? Think about it. Look at his intellect. Look at his actions. Is it the actions of someone who is crazy?

“There is no madness in your companion. He is only a warner to you in the face of a severe torment.” [Surah Saba: 46]

If you don’t believe in him and follow him, a severe torment will befall you. So he came to you in order to sincerely advise you. He wants good for you and he wants salvation for you. He desires rectification and success for you in this worldly life and the Hereafter. So how can you describe him with this characteristic, saying that he is mad without looking at, reflecting on and contemplating on what he came with? Likewise, it is obligatory upon everyone with intellect to investigate the statements of people, discerning and scrutinizing them, and distinguishing between the erroneous and the correct. So he should then accept the truth and reject the error. And blind-following should not cause him to remain upon falsehood. – Published: August 30, 2005 | Modified: August 30, 2005

Misplaced Loyalty – Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Baz

Al-Istiqaamah Magazine, Issue No.6


Shaykhul-lslaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) – rahimahallaah – said:

“The Religion of the Muslims is built upon following the Book of Allaah, the Sunnah of His Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and that which the Ummah has agreed upon. So these are the three infallible usool (fundamentals). So whatever the Ummah differs in, then it is referred back to Allaah and His Messenger. Thus, it is not for anyone to set-up a person for the Ummah, and to call to his way, and form walaa (love, loyalty and allegiance) and ‘adaa (enmity and hatred) based upon that, except for the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Nor is any speech set-up for them based upon which they form walaa and ‘adaa, except for the speech of Allaah, and that of His Messenger, and that which the Ummah has agreed upon. Rather, this is the practice of the people of Innovation, who set-up a person, or a saying, with which they cause splits in the Ummah; forming walaa or ‘adaa based upon that saying or ascription.”1

Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah – rahimahullaah – also said:
“It is not for anyone to ascribe himself to a particular Shaykh and to have walaa with those who follow him, or to have ‘adaa based upon that. Rather, he should have walaa for everyone who is from the people of eemaan (i.e. is a Muslim) and is known to have taqwaa (piety and obedience to Allaah in that which He has ordered and prohibited), from the Shaykhs, or from others. No one should be particularised with an increase in walaa except if he sees from him greater eemaan and taqwaa. So precedence and excellence is given to whomsoever Allaah and His Messenger have given them to. Allaah – the Most High – said: “O mankind! Indeed We created you from a man and a woman, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Indeed the most noblest of you with Allaah are those that have the most taqwaa (piety).” [Soorah al-Hujuraat 49:13].”2


Shaykhul-lslaam Ibn Taymiyyah said:
“Indeed the people of the truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone (unconditionally) other than Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; who does not speak from his desires, rather it is nothing less than Revelation sent down to him. So it is obligatory to affirm all that he informs, and to obey all that he commands. This status is not given to anyone else from this Ummah. Rather, every person’s saying can be taken or left, except that of Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. So whoever sets up an individual other than Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, such that the one who loves and agrees with him is reckoned to be from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and the one that differs with him is reckoned to be from the people of innovations and sectarianism – as happens with those groups who follow certain Imaams of kalaam (theology and rhetorical speech) – then the person doing so is from the people of innovation, deviation and sectarianism.”3

He – rahimahullaah – further said:
“Indeed many – from the people who say such sayings – follow their desires in this, in order to elevate their egos, or to gain leadership; or whatever is connected to it. Their intention is not to make the word of Allaah uppermost, nor is it to make the Religion purely for Allaah. Indeed, they have hatred for those who oppose them – even if it is a mujtahid (a Scholar striving his utmost to arrive at the truth) who is excused, and whom Allaah is not angry with. Likewise, they are pleased with those who agree with them – even if it is an ignorant person with evil intentions, who neither has any knowledge, nor good intent. This leads them to praise those whom Allaah and His Messenger have not praised, and to censure those whom Allaah and His Messenger have not censured. It also causes them to have walaa (love and allegiance) and ‘adaa (enmity and hatred) based upon their own self-desires, not upon the Religion of Allaah and His Messenger … So whosoever does this will only bring about fitan (trials and discord) between the people.”4


Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz – hafidhahullaah – said:

“The Religion of Allaah orders to judge (with justice) in all matters, and not to have walaa (love, loyalty and allegiance) with your brother merely because he agrees with you, or to have ‘adaa (enmity and being distant) from him merely because he disagrees with you on a certain opinion or issue. This is not from justice at all! The Companions – radiallaahu ‘anhum – differed in various issues, yet this did not affect the happiness and sincerity between them, nor their walaa and love for each other – may Allaah be pleased with them all. So the Believer acts upon the Sharee’ah (Prescribed and Divine Islaamic Law) of Allaah, follows the truth, gives priority to the evidences before anyone – yet in doing so, he does not oppress his brother, nor negate doing justice to him when he differs regarding any issue of ijtihaad in which the evidences are not so apparent. Likewise is the case for those issues in which differences occur due to a different interpretation of the text. So, in such instances he is excused, and it is upon you to sincerely advice him, and to love only the good for him, and not to split-up, nor to have enmity and hatred between you and your brother – and there is no might, nor any power, except with Allaah. “5

1. Majmoo’ Fataawaa (20/164) of Ibn Taymiyyah.
2. Majmoo’ Fataawaa (11/512).
3. Majmoo’ Fataawaa (3/346-347).
4. Minhaajus-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (5/255).
5. Majmoo’ Fataawaa wa Magaaalaat Mutanawwi’ah (11346).


The Attack on the Madhahib and the forbidding of Taqlid (blind following) of today – Shaykh al-Fawzan

Scholar: ´Allâmah Sâlih bin Fawzân al-Fawzân
Translation & video:


People who subscribe to knowledge and especially young students look down upon Fiqh-matters and especially the books of the Madhâhib. Their argument is that they do not consist of evidence. They even look down upon the Ijtihâd of the Imams in this matter. What do you advise in terms of this and the respect for the Imams of the Madhâhib and the importance of the Madhâhib. There are people today who look down upon them, criticize them and say that they are freed from the Madhâhib and that they take directly from the Qur’ân and Sunnah.

Shaykh al-Fawzân:

It is a deviation. We have said that and clarified it. We said that the one who fulfils the conditions of Ijtihâd does Ijtihâd. He is not allowed to follow blindly. THESE ARE HOWEVER FEW TODAY, IF THEY EVEN EXIST. The more time passes, the more the knowledge disappears. The prophet (sallâ Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Allâh does not seize this knowledge by pulling it out from the chests of men. It is seized by the death of the scholars. When there then are no scholar left, the people take the ignorant as leaders who in turn will answer without knowledge and go astray and lead others astray.”

The more time passes, the more the knowledge disappears. It has also been reported that by the end of time, few scholars will exist and many readers [will exist]. Many readers who lack understanding will exist.

It is wrong to ignore the Fiqh-books. Fiqh is the richness of this Ummah. It is a great richness. However, that does not mean that we take everything that is in them to heart. We filter (I.e. right from mistakes). The one who has the capacity filters. He takes that which is strongest according to the evidence. We said that there are four types of people; an absolute Mujtahid, a Mujtahid within his Madhhab who considers what opinion is the correct one, one who follows blindly and a layman. This fiqh is, as said, a great richness in the hands of the scholars. They study it and take help from it in order to understand the Qur’ân and Sunnah. They take its verdicts and the statements of the Imams that agree with the evidence and leave that which contradicts the evidence.

As for the one who ignores it and says that they shall do a new Ijtihâd… Who is the one who is to make a new Ijtihâd? There is none! It is a deviation. Are you who say that you shall make a new Ijtihâd as the four Imams? Such as Imâm Ahmad and Imâm Mâlik? What does this mean? I wish that they existed. But you don’t have more than the smallest who follows blindly. You have nothing to come with. Don’t destroy yourself. Don’t destroy others. Fear Allâh! It is allowed to blindly follow in necessity. Allâh (ta’âlâ) said:

فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ

“So ask the people of the message if you do not know.” (16:43)

This is a blind following in necessity. It is OBLIGATORY to blindly follow in necessity. It is prohibited to blindly follow in the case of capability. It is forbidden for the one who is able to make Ijtihâd to blindly follow. In necessity, it is obligatory to blindly follow. It is not fully prohibited to blindly follow and neither is it fully allowed to blindly follow. The matter is thusly detailed. We do not say that you should take to heart everything that exists in Fiqh. We say that you should filter and follow that which is based on evidence. They are after all more knowledgeable than you about proving and the extraction of rulings. You have nothing to come with. You should rely on them and the words of the Fuqahâ’ and look to their evidence. If you are able to consider, do so. If you are not able to, you follow that which is (written) there even if you do not know of the evidence. For this is a necessity. This has to be understood. There are people who fight the Madhâhib today. Where should the people go? Should they deviate? There is one who has authored a book by the name “Islâm without Madhâhib”. What without Madhâhib? Where should the people go then? Should they go to the ignoramuses? This is a great problem.

Partisanship to a Scholar or a Da’ee – Shaikh Saalih bin Fawzaan Al-Fawzaan


What is the ruling of an individual who loves a scholar or a Da’ee and says: I love him very much, I do not want to listen to anyone refuting him and I take his word even if it goes against the evidence, because the shaykh has more knowledge of the evidence than us?


This is detestable and blameworthy partisanship and it is not allowed. We love the scholars-and all praise is to Allaah-and we love the Du’aat (callers) for the sake of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. However if one from amongst them makes an error in an issue, we make clear the truth in that issue with the evidence and this does not decrease our love for the one who is refuted nor does it decrease his status.

Imaam Maalik-rahimahullaah- said: “There is no one from amongst us except that he will refute or be refuted, except the companion of this grave.” Meaning the Messenger of Allaah SAllaahu Alihee Wasallam.

If we refute some of the people of knowledge and some of the people of virtue, this does not mean that we hate him or dispraise him, we only make clear what is correct and for this reason some of the scholars, when some of their colleagues made an error, said: “So and so is beloved to us, however the truth is more beloved to us than him. “ And this is the correct way.

Do not understand from this that to refute some of the scholars in an issue where they have erred in, means lowering them or having hatred for them. Rather the scholars have not ceased refuting each other and at the same time being brothers and having mutual love. It is not allowed for us to take everything that an individual says unquestionably, whether he is correct or in error, because this is partisanship.

The one whose statement is taken absolutely and nothing from it is left, is the Messenger of Allaah Sallaahu Alihee Wasallam. Because he is a Messenger from his Lord and does not speak from his desires. As for other than them (messengers), then sometimes they make errors and sometimes they are correct, even though they may be from the best of the people, they are Mujtahidoon that make mistakes at times and are correct at others. No one is infallible from falling into error except the Messenger of Allaah Sallaahu Alihee Wasallam. It is therefore Waajib that we know this and that we do not remain silent upon error, due to love of an individual. Rather it is upon us that we make the error clear.

The Prophet Sallaahu Alihee Wasallam said: “The religion is sincere advice. We said: To whom. He said: To Allaah, His book, His messenger, the leaders of the Muslims and their general people.”

So clarification of an error is advice for all, as for concealing it, then this goes against advice.

Reference: Q67 Beneficial Answers to Questions on New Methodologies.”(Q: 67).