What Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari said About Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon

What Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari[1] said About Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon[2]Compiled & translated By Abbas Abu Yahya

1 – al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon & the Rafidah

a) ‘In the past I heard about the group al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon who had gathered in the era of King Farooq [3] and agreed upon a point that they clarify, which is that the Rafidah (the Shia) are regarded as a school of thought from the schools of thought of the Muslims, and therefore, they must be included amongst the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon.  This is why they were the ones who aided the Khomeni revolution and were happy with it, and they said there is no Islaam except with him (Khomeni).’[4]

b) Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari said:

‘Indeed the Ikhwan al-Muslimoon are from the helpers of Khomeni and the Rafidah (Shia).’[5]

3 – Are al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon & the Tableegh from the Ahl-ul-Sunnah?

Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari was asked:

‘Who are the Ahl-ul-Sunnah wal Jammah?’

He answered:

‘They are those who adhere to what the Companions were upon.’

Then the questioner asked: ‘Are the Salafiyoon, the Ahl-ul-Sunnah wal Jammah?’

The Shaykh said:

‘Yes, as-Salafeeyah[6] is the Sunnah and the Jammah; because the meaning of Salafeeyah is adhering to what the Salaf as-Salih were upon in the past.’

The questioner said:

‘O Shaykh, regarding the Ikhwan group and the Tableegh are they from the Ahl-ul-Sunnah?’

The Shaykh said:

‘Everyone who is upon a thought which opposes the Ahl-ul-Sunnah, then he is not from them, therefore the Ikhwan group and the Tableegh are not from the Ahl-ul-Sunnah, because they have thoughts which oppose the Ahl-ul-Sunnah.’[7]

4 – Doubts

‘Do not come close to Jamat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon since everything they have is doubtful.’[8]

5 – Sayyid Qutb

a) A man asked Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari:

‘There are some people who identify Sayyid Qutb with the title ‘Reviver’?’

The Shaykh disapproved of this title and said:

‘What did Qutb revive? Did he revive Tawheed? Meaning did he call to Tawheed?  Or did he revive the call to judge by what Allaah has revealed, and that was by authoring a book, actually all his speech was philosophy.’[9]

b)  Shaykh Hamad al-Ansaari said:

‘Indeed Sayyid Qutb has a lot of Hizbeeyah and many customers.’[10]

6 – Muhammad Qutb

‘Indeed Muhammad Qutb the blood brother of Sayyid Qutb is a dangerous Ash’ari.  He authored a book of Tawheed for the Saudi education ministry and this book was all rhetoric and philosophy.’[11]

7 – Surooreeyah

‘Indeed the Surooreeyah are a group from the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon who broke away from them and live in London.’[12]

Footnotes:

[1] For a Brief Biography of the Shaykh refer to  Here

[2] The statements here were taken from the biography of the Shaykh, which was compiled by the Shaykh’s son AbdulAwal bin Hamad al-Ansaari who is a teacher in the faculty of Hadeeth in the prestigious Islaamic University of Madina. The Collection is called: ‘al-Majmoo’ Fee Tarjama al-Allama al-Muhaddith ash-Shaykh Hamad bin Muhammad al-Ansaari -Rahimullaah- wa Seeratahi wa Aqwaalihi wa Rihlatihi’. It is a large two-volume collection of the sayings, wisdom and various biographies of the Shaykh. The statements in this translation are all from his son AbdulAwal unless stated otherwise.

[3] King of Egypt died in 1965 C.E

[4] [Taken from: al-Majmoo Hamad al-Ansaari 2/p.698 no.111]

[5] [Taken from: al-Majmoo Hamad al-Ansaari 2/p.699 no.118]

[6] [For a brief explanation see here]

[7] [Taken from: al-Majmoo Hamad al-Ansaari 2/p.762 no. 22]

[8] [Vol.2 p.561  No. 60]

[9] [Taken from: al-Majmoo Hamad al-Ansaari 2/p.763 no. 24]

[10] [Vol.2 p.636 No. 245]

[11] [Vol.2 p.617 No. 150]

[12] [Taken from: al-Majmoo Hamad al-Ansaari 2/p.765 no. 40]

Posted fromhttps://followingthesunnah.com

Related Link:
https://abdurrahman.org/innovated-groups-sects/ikhwaan-al-muslimoon/

 

Imaamah, Khilaafah & al-Haakimiyyah – Refutation of Maududi – by Shaykh Rabee

The following is excerpted from Appendix I of  the book : “The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah – that is the way of wisdom and intelligence” – by Shaykh Rabee hafidhahullaah, translated by Dawud Burbank rahimahullah

Appendix I [1]

All praise is for Allaah alone, and may He send praises and blessings of peace upon the Messenger of Allaah, and upon his family and true followers, and his Companions and those who follow his way.

To proceed, I praise Allaah, with abundant, pure and blessed praise for every blessing which He has bestowed on me, and I give thanks to Him, the Most High, and praise and extol Him, and I cannot praise and extol Him as truly befits Him, and no-one can do so.

Then from the blessings which Allaah has bestowed on me is that He has enabled me, despite my weakness, to speak the truth openly according to my capability, whether in writing or face to face encounters, so I thank Him and praise Him with praise such as would fill the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. I also ask that He grants me firmness upon that until I meet Him and that He is pleased with me. I further ask that He grants me increase in guidance to what is correct, and protection, and I do not forget, and all praise is for Allaah, that when my book, ‘The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah – That is the Way of Wisdom and Intellect,’ was published it was accepted by the true Muslim youth in every place with joy and was greatly welcomed. This was because it made the call of the Prophets clear to them, until it became as clear as the sun in the middle of the day, and it removed confusion, distortions and the deception of some writers whose hearts were like those of devils in the form of humans those whose only concern is to gather the people around them and around their fraudulent slogans. It does not worry such people that this gathering of people should include the Raafidees (extreme Shee’ah), the hypocrites, the heretical Khawaarij,[2] the extreme Sufis who are guilty of apostasy, the ignorant and their like from the worshippers of the graves, or whichever of the wretched and unfortunate groups.

It does not worry them that this type of people rally together with them and rally to their slogans, despite the evil consequences of this in this world and the Hereafter. This is because they are as they were described by Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )  , “Callers to the gates of Hell, whoever answers their call will be thrown into it,” and because they are as the sincere, truthful and trustworthy Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )   described them, “Devils in the bodies of humans.” If this is not the case then what is it that causes them, and those who follow their lead, to flee from and separate themselves from the clear and radiant way and methodology of the Prophets, which is made clear by the Qur’aan and shown to be their way and their methodology?

Tawheed of Allaah with regard to this His names and attributes, tawheed of Allaah in His lordship, and tawheed of Allaah in His worship, and to disbelieve and reject everything that is worshipped besides Him – that is the pure religion. Allaah the Most High, says:

“We sent a Messenger to every nation, ordering them that they should worship Allaah alone, obey Him and make their worship purely for Him, and that they should avoid everything worshipped besides Allaah.”[3]

He said:

“We did not send any Messenger before you, O Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )  , except that We revealed to Him that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah – so make all of your worship purely for Allaah.”[4]

Study any of the other da’wahs of the sects and parties – other than the Salafee[5] da’wah – do you see this methodology or any trace of it in their schooling, their persons, or their jamaa’aat? Then show it to me if you are truthful. As for myself I do not find in these sects and parties except that they wage a fierce war against this methodology and its people. I do not see except belittlement and mockery of this methodology and its people. I do not see except hatred and enmity for this methodology and its people, and I do not see except warm greetings and respect from them for the deviant and misguided calls and their people. Indeed you will frequently see and hear the last of these from those who disguise themselves as Salafees but are in reality closer in relation to their enemies, and there are ties and relationships between them which are such as they are known only to Allaah.

Then there are some who are passionately in love with the state of superstitions, innovations and misguidance who think- and evil are their thoughts, and evil is the lie which they invent- that Imake a separation between the religion and the State, and that I dispute about the importance of the subject of authority of sovereignty.

“What a serious word it is that comes out of their mouths! What they say is nothing but a lie”[6]

So this book displeased them and it made clear the falsity of their calls and their misrepresentation and distortion of Islaam and of the text concerning tawheed – particularly with regard to the da’wah of the Messengers, may Allaah’s praise and blessings of peace be upon them. The book did not join them in welcoming the state of the Raafidee Shee’ahs. Nor did it support them in seeking establishment of statelets founded upon the building of the tombs and upon the belief that the pious who have died know the Hidden and Unseen and have some control over the creation. Nor did it support them in seeking establishment of statelets based upon any such things as have preceded, nor in accepting the misguidance and shirk of secularism which seeks to disguise itself in the guise of Islaam.

Rather the book, and all praise is for Allaah, made clear that the true and trustworthy da’wah is that which follows the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allaah, and the state which is established upon this correct methodology – that is the Islamic state. Then despite the fact that the book was dealing with a particular topic – which was to explain the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allaah – it still gave attention to mentioning the Islamic state which it mentioned repeatedly and emphasised a number of times. It even had a chapter headed: “The view of the scholars of Islaam concerning leadership (al-Imaamah) and their proofs of its obligation”. Then the scholars sayings about that were quoted and their proofs mentioned. However what angered the people of innovations and desires, and the callers to falsehood, is that I placed leadership and the state in the place given to them by Allaah and which was accepted by the scholars of Islaam. I did not support the people of innovation and desires in their abandonment of the methodology of the Prophets in calling to tawheed, and fighting shirk, innovations and the rest of the types of misguidance and deviation, and fighting idolatry and grave-worship.

Nor did I support them in making leadership (al-Imaamah) the most important matter, and the most fundamental principle – which is something which has led people to rejection of the methodology of the Prophets and has lead them to fight against it. It has also led them to fling themselves into the arms of the Raafidee Shee’ah, and to having affection for them, and to allying themselves with them, defending them and to falsley adorning their ideology which is at war with Islaam, in opposition to the Book and the Sunnah and waging war against the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )   and his pure wives and the rest of the Muslims and their scholars. Indeed it goes beyond that to the point that they declare these great people to be disbelievers and make the foulest attacks against them.

I did not support them in this misguidance and this loathsome excess, so they disliked the book and thought evil about its author. So they said the falsehood which they said in order to turn the youth who thirst for the truth away from the irrefutable and clear truth in this book. This book which openly spoke the truth and placed both correct creed and belief (‘aqeedah) and the state in the place given to them by Allaah – without going beyond the bounds or falling short, and without distorting and deception. Then it is essential that I explain to the youth the distinction between the state (ad-Dawlah) and the dominion and sovereignty of Allaah (al-Haakimiyyah). As for the state, then it is a gathering of people who may be disbelievers, may be misguided deviants, or may be Believers. Then the people may be gathered under a rightly- guided khilaafah, or restricted kingships- which has been the case with the Islamic states after the rightly -guided khilaafah. So these individuals who form the Believing state are no more than the means to implement the Sharee’ah of Allaah- the establishment of jihaad, the ordering of good and forbidding of evil, establishment of the Prescribed Punishments and retribution, and the protection of the ummah from the plots and aggression of the enemies against the lands of the Muslims and against their souls, their wealth and their honour. So the Muslims must establish a state to accomplish these great obligations – either : by giving the pledge of allegiance to a khaleefah whom all of the Muslims are united upon; or by the fact that an individual from the ummah gains ascendancy and has power, an army and authority – which means that the benefit of the ummah lies in accepting him as long as he proclaims Islaam, establishes the laws and the creed (‘aqeedah) and protects the ummah from its enemies and does whatever is required, the details of which are known and mentioned in the source works of Islaam; or by the fact that some individuals gain ascendancy over some areas as happened in the lands of Islaam after the weakening of the khilaafah, so overall benefit necessitated submitting to this situation.

As for dominion and sovereignty then these are attributes of Allaah and qualities particular to Him alone, as He, the Most High, says:

“Judgement and command is for Allaah alone, He ordered that you should worship none but Him. That is the true and straight religion.”[7]

So this authority and sovereignty is not denied except by one who is a disbeliever in Allaah and is severe in his enmity to Allaah, His Messenger and His Books. Indeed one who even denies Allaah’s authority in the slightest matter, not to mention with regard to fundamental matters, then he is a disbeliever in Allaah, outside the fold of Islaam if he knowingly denies that. As for the ignorant person, then he has excuse until the proof is established against him.

What I have said applies to the rulers, the ruled and to indivduals and groups (Jamaa’aat). This has been affirmed by the trustworthy scholars of Islaam, and from them Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, rahimahullaah,[8] and his student Ibnul-Qayyim.[9] So whoever accepts and abides by this rule and authority in the fundamentals of the religion and its details, and in matters of creed and belief, and matters of worship, and dealings and political affairs, and economic affairs, and manners, and social affairs – then he is a Believer. But he who does not abide by it all or some of these then he is a disbeliever, whether he is an individual or a group, a ruler or one ruled, a caller or one called. Indeed I fear, by Allaah, for many of the sects, parties and individuals that they may fall into disbelief due to their not abiding by the rule and authority of Allaah with regard to the fundamentals of the religion, indeed with regard also to its details. I fear for many of them, against whom the proof has been established and to whom the truth has been made clear, yet still they persist in opposing the call to tawheed and oppose waging war against shirk and innovation, aswell as opposing its people and to cutting from them. Instead these people incite others against and warn against those who call with the call of the Prophets, and those who seek truly and sincerely to amend the affairs. After establishment of the proof against such a person he would fall into the abyss of disbelief.

Then I call all of the ummah – its rulers and its ruled, its indivduals, sects, and parties, to all have true belief in the all-encompassing authority and sovereignty of Allaah which covers the fundamental matters of the religion and its details, and that they should fully abide by it with regard to the fundamental matters of the religion and its details. I also call the heads of the states, from those who abide generally by the rule and authority of Allaah, and yet are negligent in some areas of practice, I call them to abide by it totally and unrestrictedly in every field, in the matter of ‘aqeedah, and worship, and dealings, and economics, and politics, and with regard to ordering good and forbidding evil, and that they should strive to fight against shirk and innovations, and against sins and against evil – particularly usury and the rest of the major sins which harm the ummah and its manners. Indeed Allaah prevents by means of the rulers those who are not prevented by the Qur’aan. They should be fully aware that Allaah will question them about every small and large matter which they are responsible for. “Each of you is a guardian and is responsible for thoses whom he is in charge of.” I also remind them of the saying of the Prophet, “There is no ruler having authority over Muslim subjects who dies while he is decieving them except that Allaah has forbidden Paradise for him.”[10] and his saying, “There is no servant whom Allaah places in authority over some people, and he does not deal with them sincerely and honestly, except that he will not find the fragrance of Paradise.”[11]

From sincerity to the ummah is that you encourage them to abide by the ruler of Allaah and His Sharee’ah, by teaching them, directing them, encouraging and warning them, and by ordering the good and forbidding the evil, and by establishing prescribed punishment and using every means which will cause them to respect the Sharee’ah of Allaah in ‘aqeedah, worship, political affairs and manners.

I also call the heads of state in Islamic lands who do not abide by the Sharee’ah of Allaah that they should turn back to Allaah and respect His religion which is found in the Book and the Sunnah, and that they should cling to the creed and beliefs of this religion and its rulings, and to be proud of that – since therein lies honour and nobility. However total disgrace and humiliation comes from submission to laws laid down by the most despicable humans, the enemies of this ummah whether they are Jews, Christians, Magians or atheists. So I call such leaders to respect the feelings of the ummah of Islaam which has striven and fought and sacrificed millions of its sons for the achievement of a noble and lofty goal – which is that it should be ruled by Islaam, and Islaam alone is the religion of Allaah, the Creator of this creation, the Creator of mankind and jinn so that they should worship Him alone and submit to His revealed laws alone. They should abide by the Sharee’ah of Allaah and impose it upon the ummah in creed and beliefs, in manners, in teaching and in Islamic curriculae which education and training are to be based upon.

I also enjoin the scholars of the ummah, and its callers, and parties and groups that they should sincerely advise all of the ummah, its elders and its youth, its males and its females, and unite them upon the Book of Allaah, the Sunnah of his Messenger, and upon the methodology and understanding of the Salalafu-Saalih (the Pious Predecessors), the Companions, the Taabieen and those who followed them upon good, the imaams of guidance, the scholars of fiqh, the scholars of hadeeth and of tafseer, in creed and beliefs, in worship, in manners, in dealings, in economic affairs, and all the other affairs of Islaam and eemaan. Then they should fully comprehend the Sayings of Allaah, the Most High,

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed then they are the ones guilty of unbelief.”[12]

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed then they are the transgressors.”[13]

“And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed then they are the disobedient.”[14]

They should understand that these Sayings of Allaah apply to all individuals, groups, rulers and subjects. So to restrict it to refer it to the rulers alone and not to the people of deviant sects and misguidance, those who do not judge by the Sharee’ah of Allaah in their creed and beliefs, nor in their worship and their behaviour, then this is from ignorance, misguidance and foolishness, since Allaah sent these Aayaat down concerning the Jews at a time when they had not had any state or authority for centuries. He sent these Aayaat down concerning them at a time when He had imposed humiliation and lowliness upon them. I have explained the authority and sovereignty of Allaah in this broad and all-embracing sense in the book itself.

I should also not fail to draw attention to an error made by the author of ‘Meezaanul-I’tidaal litaqyeem Kitaabil-Mawridiz-Zallaal fir-Tanbeeh ‘alaa Akhtaa’iz Zilaal,’ who is ’Isaam ibn Muhammad ibn Taahir al-Barqaawee, who attributed to me something which my tongue has never uttered and which I never believed, nor have I ever written such a thing. Furthermore I seek Allaah’s refuge from what he said, and I declare myself free before Allaah from it, and I ask Allaah to save me and all the Muslims from it.

Al-Barqaawee said in a footnote (p.15) to his aforementioned book: “This also reminds me of what Shaykh Rabee’ ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee, hafizahullaahu ta’aalaa, did in his book, ‘Manhajul-Anbiyaa fid-Da’wah illallaah…’ when he criticised the view of al-Maududi, rahimahullaah ta’aalaa, about the importance of leadership (imaamah), khilaafah, and judging by that which Allaah sent down, since he also sought to use as evidence the saying of Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah about the position of the imaamah with the Raafidee (Shee’ahs). So he took up six pages in quoting the discussion of Shaykhul-Islaam with those Raafidee (Shee’ahs). However the numerous and great differences between the beliefs of the Raafidees concerning the imaamah and the infallibility of the Imaams, and the twelve imaams and so on, and between what al-Maududi and others call to, i.e. the necessity and importance of striving to return to judging by the Sharee’ah, through the khilaafah, and to establish a single ruler for the people of Islaam; the differences between these two are well known. Even if the words of Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah contain something which is fitting in this regard, yet most of it, if a just person were to examine it, is not fitting to this discussion, rather it applies to the matter of imaamah with the Raafidee (Shee’ah) with its well known details… so he should not have quoted it all… for fear of deception.”

Al-Barqaawee’s scales are unbalanced and he has not judged between myself and al-Maududi with justice, and perhaps he has forgotten the saying of Allaah:

“And weigh justly with the true balance.”[15]

And His saying,

“Woe to those who give short measure to others. Those who demand full measure from others, but when they give them in measure or weight then they give them less than their due. Do these people not think that they will be ressurected for reckoning on a formidable Day. The Day when all mankind will stand before the Lord of the Worlds.”[16]

O brother al-Barqaawee, I was debating the view of al-Maududi about the importance of the matter of leadership (imaamah), the khilaafah and judging by that which Allaah has sent down!

As regards the fact of their importance, then no Believer having a trace of eemaan would dispute that. But O brother you have failed to note the point of disagreement between myself and al-Maududi. I debated with the view of al-Maududi with regard to his going beyond the due limits about leadership to such an extent that no Muslim who has respect for Islaam could remain silent about this excess, and it was of such a level that even the misguided would not accept it, not to mention the people of hadeeth and the Salafees. Indeed very many scholars from his own land, from the Salafees and others have replied to him. Then this excess of his has travelled and has reached many Arab and Islamic lands, and it has fooled an overwhelming majority of authors and youth, which has led to great neglect of the ‘aqeedah of tawheed, and even comtempt of it and of its people. It has also led people to treat shirk and innovation lightly and has caused al-Maududi and his like to ally themsleves with and to befriend the devotees of the graves and even the Raafidees (Shee’ah), and to gather these people under their banner, to treat them as brothers, to love and defend them and their beliefs and creed, and this is something which is a reality and is clear to everyone possessing intellect and religion. So since the matter has reached this frightful state, I replied to al-Maududi with regard to some of his excess in order to make the people in general aware, and also the people of the Arabian Peninsula, to which the followers of al-Maududi and their helpers direct their attention. So they seek to wipe away the ’aqeedah of tawheed, and the ’aqeedah of true and correct alliance and enmity (al-Walaa wal-Baraa). Do you think that my reply to al-Maududi was so unreasonable that you seek to defend his view with falsehood, and by forgetting to judge justly, to the point that you take my words to mean something which I did not say, and which they did not mean?! Listen to what al-Maududi says:

“The question of leadership is the most important matter in human life and its most fundamental principle.” Then try to defend this saying with clear and unequivocal texts from the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and the words of the Companions and the scholars of Islaam. If you have not seen this, then you must adjust your scales in order to establish justice, equity and fairness, and to abandon the excess which has led al-Maududi and his followers to scorn the call of the Prophets and the goal of their da’wah, and to turn the affairs upside down. Listen to his saying: “The true goal of the religion is to establish the system of the rightly guided and righteous leadership (imaamah).” So to him this is the true goal of the religion. So tawheed, and the Prayer, and Zakaat, and jihaad and other matters from the religion become only means to reach this goal in the view of al-Maududi. So produce the clear proofs from the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )  , in place of al-Maududi, to support this and if you are unable then do not be too embarrassed to say, ‘This poor weak servant, Rabee’ ibn Haadee, has spoken the truth and has been sincere towards Islaam and the Muslims, and has put matters in their due place.’ Then listen to the saying of al-Maududi: “This is the purpose for which the Prayer, Fasting, the Zakaat and the Hajj have been made obligatory in Islaam. Then the fact that they are called acts of worship does not mean that they are themselves worship, rather its meaning is that they prepare mankind for the true and fundamental worship, and these are a training course which are essential for that.’ He also says, ‘You think that standing facing the Qiblah, placing the right hand upon the justify, and rukoo’ with your hands upon your knees, and prostration upon the ground, and reciting particular words, and these actions and movements are themselves worship; and you think that fasting from the start of Ramadaan until the start of Shawwaal, and going hungry and thirsty from morning until evening, you think that this is worship; and you think that reciting a number of Aayaat from the Qur’aan is worship; and you think that performing Tawaaf around the Ka’bah is worship. In summary you have called the manifestation of certain actions worship, and when a person performs these actions with their form and manners you think that he has worshipped Allaah… but the truth is that the worship which Allaah created you for, and which he ordered you to perform is something else.”[17]

Are you pleased by this derisive manner about speaking about the great pillars of Islaam and those who worship in this way? These are not, in the view of al-Maududi, forms of worship for which man was created, rather the worship for which man was created and which they were ordered to fulfil is something else. O Barqaawee, do you take this as your religion before Allaah? That the forms of worship are only a training course which if applied will… etc. Is this something stated textually in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, and which the Prophets came with and which was accepted by the best of the people of this ummah? If you agree with al-Maududi then bring the proofs to support his saying. Otherwise bite upon your knuckles in regret and grief for having deserted the truth and offended its people and helped falsehood. This, O my brother, was the subject of my debate with al-Maududi, and about which I quoted the words of Shaykhul-Islaam concerning the exceeding of the bounds by the Raafidees about leadership (imaamate). What I quoted from him was all relevant, not just a part of it as al-Barqaawee claimed. Then if you were correct, O Barqaawee, then why did you not explain what was relevant from the words of Shaykhul-Islaam and what was not? As for the claim of ‘infallibility’ for the ‘twelve imaams,’ then I did not attribute it to al-Maududi, nor did I debate about it with him, nor did I quote Shaykhul-Islaam’s words about it. So your words are totaly opposed to justice! As for your equity and justice which you set up for yourself in judging between Sayyid Qutb and ad-Duwaysh, then I do not know what you have done. Indeed you have totally failed to be just between myself and al-Maududi, and how would it have harmed you to speak the truth? Then as for the khilaafah, I do not know if you read what I wrote and quoted from the scholars of Islaam, or if you merely took the subject with the tips of your fingers with your eyes closed, thinking that justice and equity would be achieved that easily. So read this and that anew and speak the truth, supporting it with proof, not alarmism and agitation!

As for judging by that which Allaah sent down, then how can you imagine that I would dispute about it with al-Maududi or anyone else, when it is something known necessarily in the religion, and not even the deviant and deviated sects dispute about it?! So I seek Allaah’s refuge from what the author of ‘al-Meezaan,’ attributed to me. Rather read again what I wrote concerning the authority and sovereignty of Allaah, and that it comprehends every part of the religion, and you will see the extent of the mistake of al-Barqaawee, may Allah guide him. Then finally the points of criticism of al-Maududi and his like are so many that this introduction is not the place for them. But in summary, he is one of those furthest from abiding by the authority and sovereignty of Allaah with regard to his ’aqeedah and his Fiqh, and with regard to his stance on the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )  , and his stance with regard to the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم )  , and with regard to their enemies the Raafidee Shee’ah. Indeed he and his followers have alliance and friendship with those Raafidees, they support them and they praise their Taaghoot, al-Khomeini and his students, the Aayatur-Raafidiyyah. So noble reader be aware of this, and judge the people according to the truth, and do not judge the truth according to its people, and beware of falling into the abyss of over-exaggerated respect for personalities so that it leads you to reject the truth, and to argue against its people.

May Allaah guide and grant the ummah to loving the truth and its people. Indeed my Lord hears and responds to supplications.

Written by:
Rabee’ ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee,
13/6/1413H.

Footnotes

[1] In the orignal Arabic print this was the “Introduction to the Second Edition.”

[2] For more details on the Shee’ah and the Khawaarij refer to the Book “The Devils Deception”

[3] Soorah an-Nahl (16):36.

[4] Soorah al-Ambiyaa (21):25.

[5] Publisher’s note: One who attributes himself to the salaf. The salaf being primarily the Companions of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ), and the two generations that came after them (taabi’een and the atbaa at-taabi’een). Therefore a Salafee will always refer to the Qur’aan and Sunnah, relying on the explanation of the salaf.

[6] Soorah al-Kahf (18):5.

[7] Soorah Yoosuf (12):40.

[8] Minhaajus-Sunnah an- Nabawiyyah (3/32) where he clearly explains that one not accepting the rule and authority of Allaah is a disbeliever, and he explains how that applies in matters of knowledge and action.

[9] Madaarijus- Saalikeen (91/336).

[10] Reported by al- Bukhaaree (Eng. trans. 9/197/no.265).

[11] Al-Bukhaaree (Eng. trans. 9/197/264).

[12] Soorah al-Maa’idah (5):44.

[13] Soorah al-Maa’idah (5):45.

[14] Soorah al-Maa’idah (5):47.

[15] Soorah al-Israa (17):35.

[16] Soorah al-Mutaffifeen (83):1-6.

[17] Quoted from the book, “The book of al-Maududi, what is for it and what is against it,” of Muhammad Zakariyyaa al-Kandahlaawee (pp.45-46), 2nd Edn.

[Excerpted from the book : “The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah – that is the way of wisdom and intelligence” – by Shaykh Rabee hafidhahullaah, translated by Dawud Burbank rahimahullah]

Download the full PDF Book:
https://abdurrahman.org/dawah/methodology-of-the-prophets-in-calling-to-allaah/

Ten Points about Jamaa’at-ul-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon – Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa An-Najmee

Definition of the Ikhwaan Al-Muslimoon:

They are the followers of Hasan Al-Bannaa. There are several points to be noted about their methodology, the most important of which are the following:

1. They show a lack of importance to Tawheed Al-‘Ibaadah [1], which is the most important matter in Islaam, since the Islaam of an individual is not valid without it.

2. They remain silent and concede to the people in their performance of major Shirk, supplication to other than Allaah, performance of tawaaf around graves, making oaths to the dead in the graves, sacrificing in their names and so on.

3. The founder of this methodology was a Sufi. He had a connection with Sufism to the point that he gave bay’ah (oath of allegiance) to ‘Abdul-Wahhaab Al-Khusaafee upon (following) his Khusaafee Shadh-lee order.

4. The presence of innovations amongst them and their worshipping Allaah through them – even to the point that the founder of this methodology acknowledged that the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would attend their gatherings of dhikr and that he (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would forgive what past sins they had committed, as is found in his saying:

“May Allaah bless the one who upon light in which he appeared
To the worlds, and so he surpassed the sun and the moon
This habeeb (i.e. Muhammad) along with his beloved has gathered
And pardoned everyone in what sins they did in the past.”

5. They call to establishing the Khilaafah and this is an innovation because the Messengers and their followers were not entrusted with anything except to call to Tawheed. Allaah says: “And We have indeed sent to every nation a messenger, (saying to his people): ‘Worship Allaah and avoid the taaghoot (false deities).’”[Surah An-Nahl: 36]

6. They have a lack of Walaa and Baraa (loyalty and disavowment) or a weak form of it. This is made clear in their call to bring closeness between the Sunnis and the Shee’ah. And their founder was quoted as saying: “We will cooperate with one another in what we agree on and pardon one another in what we disagree on.”

7. They hate and despise the people of Tawheed and those who adhere to the Salafee Way. This is made clear in their talk concerning the Saudi state, which is founded upon Tawheed and which teaches Tawheed in its schools, institutes and universities. And it was made clear in their killing of Jameel Ar-Rahmaan Al-Afghaanee just because he called to Tawheed and because he had schools in which he would teach Tawheed.

8. They pursue the mistakes of the leaders and expose their faults – whether true or false – spreading them amongst the youth in order to make the leaders appear hateful to them and so that they can fill their hearts with contempt against them.

9. They hold detestable partisanship to the party they ascribe themselves to. So they show friendship based on this party and they show enmity based on this party.

10. They give their oath of allegiance to work for the Ikhwaani Manhaj according to the ten conditions that the founder has set forth. And there are other issues of concern, which perhaps can be dealt with at a later time.

Footnotes:

[1] Translator’s Note: This is the category of Tawheed related to the Oneness of Allaah in the worship that is performed to Him, i.e. that we worship only Allaah and no one else.

Posted from al-ibaanah eBook: Modern Day Deviant Groups – Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa An-Najmee

Al-Qaradaawee on the Scales – Naasir bin Hamad Al-Fahad

AUTHOR: Naasir bin Hamad Al-Fahad
TRANSLATED: Al-Ibaanah Book Publishing
PRODUCED BY: Al-Ibaanah.com

About the Book: 

This is a translation of a small booklet titled: “Al-Qaradaawee fil-Meezaan” [Al-Qaradaawee on the Scales] compiled and prepared by Naasir bin Hamad Al-Fahd and published by Maktabah Asad as-Sunnah, Egypt (2nd Edition).

This small pamphlet provides a glimpse into some of the peculiar and strange opinions of the well known Dr. Yoosuf Al-Qaradaawee so that the Muslims could be aware of his reality. If it were not for his widespread fame throughout the Muslim and non-Muslim lands, there would be no need for treatises such as this, let alone detailed books, which have also been authored about him by various authors.

However, for the sake of advising the Muslims and warning them from the dangerous views and philosophy of this individual, these books and treatises were written – this pamphlet being one of the smaller abridged ones. This e-book is in no way meant to be a definitive source or a comprehensive refutation. Rather, the main goal intended here is to provide the readers with a glimpse of some of Al-Qaradaawee’s outlandish views and statements, which prove his remoteness from knowledge and the way of the true scholars.

We ask Allaah to make this treatise a source of guidance for the Muslims and a means for them to avoid deviation and misguidance and all those who call to it.

Excerpts from the Book: 

“He said about the Christians: ‘All of the issues that exist between us are common. We are all sons of one country – our destiny is one…our nation is one…I say about them that they are our Christian brothers…but some people condemn me for this…How can I say that they are our Christian brothers when Allaah says: ‘Verily the believers are only brothers?’…yes, we are believers but they too are believers from another perspective.’”

“As for the Raafidah, who inherited the beliefs of the Mu’tazilah and added more grotesque and bizarre views to it of which the least of them is enough to associate them with the likes of Abu Jahl, then you find him defending them and fraternizing with them. In fact, he even regards inciting any conflicts with them as an act of treachery against the ummah. And he considers their cursing of the Companions, their distortion of the Qur’aan, their beliefs that their Imaams are infallible, and their pilgrimage to the gravesites among other things as ‘marginal oppositions to Creed.’”

He said in quote: ‘Unfortunately, I am in my seventies and I go to America to participate in Islamic conferences, but the lectures in these conferences are held with the women on one side and the men on another side. So sternness has overcome the organizations there and they have forced customs on the western community itself to the point that they have followed the stricter views whilst abandoning the more favorable views. So this has resulted in men having their own gathering place apart from the gathering place of women.’”

“You will find that the elder figures and prominent members of the Ikhwan-ul-Muslimoon group do not allow one single hair to grow on their faces. And this is even though everyone knows that this person is from the Ikhwan-ul-Muslimeen – I mean by this (especially) the national security forces. So therefore, the issue (of shaving) is not that of someone who is fearful and afraid of being targeted, rather it is a matter of flattering the secular community and presenting the Ikhwani version of Islamic moderation!!! Did you not see their most recent caller, ‘Amr Khaalid, and how he always appears clean-shaven, charming the crowds and demolishing what Ahlus-Sunnah have built, since when confronting the low ones among them, they are faced with the argument: ‘Are you better than ‘Amr Khaalid?!’ As for those from the Ikhwan-ul-Muslimoon that do grow a beard, then it is only a light circular set of hairs around the face – the trademark of the Ikhwan and the practice of Hasan Al-Bannaa, not that of the Prophet! [Written by the Publisher]”

[Download the Book PDF Here]

Returning a Reply to the one who Requested me not to Print my Book – Shayikh Ahmad Najmee

AUTHOR: Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa An-Najmee
TRANSLATED: Al-Ibaanah.Com
PRODUCED BY: Al-Ibaanah.com

About the Book:

This is a traanslation of the small booklet Radd-al-Jawaab alaa man Talaba Minnee ‘Adam Taba’il-Kitaab (Returning a Reply to the one who Requested me not to Print my Book) by Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa An-Najmes, may Allaah preserve him.

The original source for this booklet was a letter Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmee sent to Shaikh ‘Abdullaah bin Jibreen in response to a letter he received from the latter requesting him not to print his book Mawrid-ul-Adhb az-Zulaal, which is a valuable work consisting of about 300 pages and provides an in-depth analysis and refutation of the deviant groups, Jamaaat at-Tableegh and Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimoon.

This magnificent book was published in 1418H with forewords from Shaikh Saalih al-Fawzaan and Shaikh Rabee‘ bin Haadee Al-Madkhalee. The letter was also later published and distributed, in order to refute those who misuse Shaikh Ibn Jibreen’s erroneous  stances regarding Hasan Al-Bannaa and the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimoon as a means to attack the Salafi Da’wah and create disunity amongst its ranks. May Allaah reward Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmee for the sincere advise, valuable work and exposition of the deviations of Hasan Al-Bannaa that he produces in this treatise.

[Download PDF Book]

Read the Book Below:

Returning a Reply

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

From Ahmad bin Yahyaa An-Najmee to my brother and loved one for the sake of Allaah, a member of the Committee of Religious Verdicts (Daar-ul-Iftaa), Shaikh ‘Abdullaah bin ‘Abdir-Rahmaan Al-Jibreen:

As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuh. To Proceed:

I am in receipt of your kind letter written on 4/11/1418H as well as your valuable gift, which was copies of your precious books, may Allaah reward you with good, bless you, guide you and me and protect you and me from the evils of our souls. And since I am thanking you for the gift, I also thank you for your advice and for your openness, if only they were put in their proper place, since a Muslim is only obligated to accept the advice if that person’s advice implicates an incorrect understanding or an erroneous statement. So I apologize and ask your forgiveness beforehand if I state something in this discussion that you may interpret as being or having in it that which hurts your feelings. So I say:

You stated in your letter concerning my book “The Pure and Pleasant Spring containing criticisms of the beliefs and actions of some of the Methodologies used in Da’wah”:[1] “I was delighted by this splendid title … (up to where you said) … but when I reached the ninth chapter, I encountered that which I didn’t expect…” I felt saddened upon reading your letter that such a thing would emanate from the likes of someone with your standing, in terms of knowledge and status. Why did you not continue reading it in order to find out if what I had written in it was the truth or falsehood? So if it were true you would then support it, acting on the statement of the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), the prophet of guidance and the messenger of mercy, when he said: “Assist your brother whether he is oppressing or being oppressed.” It was said: “A person can help him if he is oppressed but how can he assist him if he is oppressing others?” He (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Impede him or prevent him from oppressing (others).”

And if what I had written in it were false, you would then assist me by clarifying the truth to me with proofs and evidences. And I would have been ready to accept that from you and to thank you and supplicate for you, because you would have saved me from a sin and a wrong that I would have fallen into. But this is on the condition that this criticism would be detailed with clear proofs and decisive evidences, which would clarify to me my error. But as for you reaching the ninth chapter and then abandoning reading the rest of it and thereafter launching an all-out attack without proofs, then I can never accept this from you or agree with you on it.

As for your saying that the title pleased you and that you decided to read the whole book, stating: “I was delighted by this splendid title such that I set out to read the entire book. However, in the beginning of it, I found beneficial subjects regarding Calling to Tawheed and the methodologies employed in Da’wah. But when I reached the ninth chapter, I encountered that which I didn’t expect from the likes of you, such as attacks on the personality of Hasan Al-Bannaa. And you unleashed great anger against him”, then I say:

First: Allaah, the All-Knower of what is seen and unseen, knows that I did not intend to attack the honor of anyone, not Hasan Al-Bannaa or anyone else. This is especially since I know that on the Day of Judgement people’s rights will be recompensed with the taking of good deeds (from others’ scales) and the giving of bad deeds (to others’ scales).

Second: You know that mentioning the bad qualities a person has in him is permissible if it is done for a beneficial reason, and this is from the allowable forms of backbiting. The proof for this is what the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) told Faatimah bint Qays when she came to him seeking advice on who to marry. He (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “As for Mu’aawiyah, then he is utterly broke, he has no money. And as for Abu Jahm, then he beats his wives. Instead, marry Usaamah.”

And he (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) consented with Hind bint ‘Utbah’s statement concerning (her husband) Abu Sufyaan that he was: “A stingy man who doesn’t give me enough money for me and my children.”

And he (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said concerning a man who sought permission to enter his home: “What an evil brother of his family he is.”

Third: You also know that the Scholars of Hadeeth spoke against those narrators who had in them that which necessitated that their reports be rejected and declared weak. So they issued such statements as: “So and so is a liar”, “So and so is a fabricator”, “He narrates from reliable reporters that which is not found in their narrations”, “So and so has weak memory”, “So and so make many errors”, and “So and so is heedless.”

They did this out of sincerity to Allaah, His Messenger and the Muslims, and in order to defend the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger from having what isn’t part of it enter into it. This was such that when it was said to one of these scholars: “What will you do when these people – meaning those whom he spoke against and criticized – come to you on the Day of Judgement disputing with you (i.e. seeking their right)?” He responded: “That all of these people be my opponents (on the Day of Judgement) is more beloved to me than that the Messenger of Allaah be my opponent on the Day of Judgement.”

So because of this, they spoke out against the criticized narrators without any hesitancy and they considered that as being the best of their deeds, which they hoped would be stored for them and wished would be rewarded.

Fourth: You stated in your book “The Lone (Ahaad) Reports in the Prophetic Hadeeth” in the fifth chapter on “Efforts of the Scholars in Preserving the Hadeeth” (pg. 30), and you were correct in what you said that:

“2. Investigating the Conditions of the Reporters and Researching their Status in Hadeeth and their Qualification for conveying it: They took it upon themselves to speak out against them, from the aspect of sincerity to the ummah, since they were entrusted for conveying something from the affairs of the Religion that had a ruling in it. And they distinguished this aspect as being separate from the general forbiddance of backbiting, due to what it contained from overall benefit to the ummah.”

This is the view of all of the people of knowledge from the scholars of Fiqh and Hadeeth, without exception, may Allaah reward them with good. You will see in what follows that I only spoke against Hasan Al-Bannaa and those who follow his group in order to sincerely advise the ummah. And I am not praising myself, as Allaah knows all that we conceal and reveal and nothing is hidden from Him whether it is in the the heavens or the earth.

Fifth: Please think, what is the reason that caused me to speak against this man who died while I was still in my adolescence? [2] He didn’t shed any of my blood or destroy my honor, nor did he take any of my wealth. So what is it that caused me to speak out against him when he didn’t transgress against me personally in any way? If I had spoken against him without him having previously oppressed me or not due to some religious benefit, just speaking against him for the sake of it, then I would be an oppressor and a transgressor and Allaah would take his right from me.

Sixth: We are afflicted in this time of ours with methodologies of Da’wah that have come to us from abroad,[3] which turn the eyes away from Major Shirk and allow it to spread. The greatest of these in terms of self-corruption and corrupting of others is the methodology of the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen for it indeed brainwashes the minds of the youth who are raised upon its way, transforming them into revolutionists, takfeeris, terrorists and khawaarij. The proofs for this are many, the most significant of them being the own acknowledgement of this by those who bombed the upper part of Riyadh – ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ‘Athaam and his cohorts. So this is what caused me to write about him (i.e. Hasan Al-Bannaa) and his group, before the story of this bombing occurred.

Seventh: Concerning your saying that when you reached the ninth chapter, you encountered that which you didn’t expect from me, such as attacking the personality of Hasan Al-Bannaa, and that I unleashed great anger against him and that I took his words to mean what he didn’t intend, my response to this is:

If you had read the entire book with impartiality, you would have known that I made clear what this methodology and its founder have in them from opposition to the Islamic Legislation and the Creed of the Salaf. He is the one, according to his own brother’s acknowledgement, who would boastfully say, and this is widely circulated in the books of his party:

“Allaah raised and scattered (all) the existence and what it contains
So if you desire to attain His perfection
Then everything in the universe if you realize it
is non-existent, specifically and generally.”

So if you think that I understood from his words that which he didn’t intend, then please interpret for me what this statement of his contains religiously and intellectually, other than wahdat-ul-wujood.[4]

And Secondly: He is the one who would recite the following poetry: “May the Divine (Allaah) bless the light (i.e. Muhammad) that appeared to the creation and so he surpassed the (light of the) sun and the moon This beloved one (i.e. Muhammad) along with his loved ones has attended And pardoned everyone of what they did and will do (of sins).”

Interpret these verses with an interpretation that this wording contains other than that of Major Shirk, as in his statement “And pardoned everyone of what they did and will do (of sins)” and other than that of a lie against Allaah’s Messenger, as in his statement: “This beloved one (i.e. Muhammad) along with his loved ones has attended”, as well as what these words contain from affirming the lies of the Sufis who say that the Prophet attends their innovated gathering, which is nothing else but the celebration of the Prophet’s Birthday.

Third: Explain to me his praise for Al-Mirghanee, who was well known for wahdat-ulwujood with an explanation that would please Allaah and His Messenger and then the believers other than that he was pleased with wahdat-ul-wujood and praised those who held that view.

Fourth: Explain to me the statement he made to the Associated Press: “There is no religious enmity between us and the Jews” with an explanation pleasing to Allaah and His Messenger and then the believers other than the fact that he was flattering the Jews and Christians by lying on Allaah, His Messenger and the Religion of Islaam.

Fifth: Explain to me why he attended the gravesite of Sayyida Zaynab (radyAllaahu ‘anhaa) on the occasion of the yearly migration, and why he didn’t mention the Shirk that occurred there nor forbid it, even though he saw people making Tawaaf around the grave and asking the one buried in it requests that only should be made to Allaah? Explain that to me in a way that pleases Allaah and His Messenger, and then the believers, other than that it was because he was pleased with Major Shirk and that he permitted it with himself and in his methodology.

Sixth: Explain to me why he would walk to the graves of Ad-Dasooqee and Sinjar on foot, 20 kilometers going and (another) 20 kilometers returning, with an explanation pleasing to Allaah and His Messenger and then to the believers other than that it was because he was either performing a polytheistic form of visitation or an innovated form of it.

Seventh: Explain to me why he strived to unite the Sunnees and the Raafidees with an explanation pleasing to Allaah and His Messenger and then the believers, other than that it was because he was ignorant of what the Raafidah were upon from innovations and deviations or that he was lenient towards them and their deviations and sacrificed the Islamic Creed for the sake of pleasing them.

Eighth: Explain to me how he could combine between opposing factors in the description of his Da’wah (Call), (stating) that it was a “Call to the Salaf, a Path upon the Sunnah and a Sufi Reality.” Is it possible that these opposing factors can be united? Is it possible to unite Sufism and Salafiyyah and to unite Sufism and the Sunnah? Trying to combine between these two is like trying to mix water with fire!

Ninth: Explain to me the ten pillars of his ba’yah (pledge of allegiance) with an explanation pleasing to Allaah and His Messenger and then the believers, other than that he brought a new legislation to the Da’wah.

Tenth: Explain to me why he took the bay’ah (pledge of allegiance) from people who bay’ah was binding on other than that it was because he was disobeying Allaah and His Messenger and introducing new laws into Islaam, which neither Allaah nor His Messenger gave permission for.

Eleventh: Explain to me why he made obedience to him, which he placed as a condition in his bay’ah, as something obligatory to be carried out immediately and without any reservations, even though according to Islaam, obedience is restricted by two things:

1. It must be with regard to something good, and
2. It is dependent upon one’s ability.

So isn’t this legislating a law into the Religion, which neither Allaah nor His Messenger authorized?!

Twelfth: Explain to me why he limited Islaam to just twenty principles or why he gave these principles the ultimate importance with an explanation that Allaah and His Messenger, and then the believers would be pleased with, other than that it was because he introduced a new legislation into Islaam.

Thirteenth: Explain to me why he said Tafweed was the madh-hab of all of the Salaf without exception, with an explanation pleasing to Allaah and His Messenger and then the believers, other than that it was because he was ignorant of the madh-hab of the Salaf regarding Allaah’s Attributes or because he forged a lie against them stating that the Salaf would believe in the meaning (of the Attribute) but return knowledge of how the attribute was to Allaah.

Lastly, I say: If you can interpret and explain these statements of his, which I just mentioned, with explanations that do not contradict the Religion and do not leave from the fold of what is contained in the wording, then I rightfully deserve your comment of me understanding from his words that which they don’t contain. And if you are unable to do that, then it becomes clear that you lied on me and slandered me with this statement. And know that I will not seek my right from you, even if your wronging of me becomes manifest, except before Allaah on the Day of Judgement. However I will place between you and I the noble Shaikh, ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin ‘Abdillaah bin Baaz, Chief Muftee of the Kingdom (of Saudi Arabia), head of the Committee of Senior Scholars, and head of the Committee for Religious Research and Verdicts, as well as his deputy, Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin ‘Abdillaah Aali Shaikh, and Shaikh Saalih bin Fawzaan Al-Fawzaan, Shaikh ‘Abdullaah Al-Ghudayyaan and Shaikh Saalih Al-Atram to read the ninth chapter of the book from its beginning to end. So if they find that I have misinterpreted Al-Bannaa’s words in a way that they were not intended then they shall pronounce me guilty, and if they find that the one who stated this wronged me and slandered me with this statement, then they will find him guilty.

As for your statement that I took my anger out on him, then Allaah knows that I didn’t write what I wrote except to clarify the truth and to advise the people. This is what I hope for and I am not praising myself nor am I purifying my soul from sin:

“Verily the soul commands to evil except for those whom my Lord has mercy on. Verily, my Lord is Most Forgiving, Bestower of Mercy.” [Surah Yoosuf: 53]

And if there was some anger on my part, then Allaah knows that it was only for His sake. This is since, it can hardly be imagined that I would be angry for my own sake towards a man that didn’t oppress me in any way, along with there being great distances and time-spans between him and I. And indeed I ask Allaah, may He be Glorified, to make my deed sincerely for His Face, intending to please Him by it, and to not make any part of it for the sake of anyone from His creatures. Verily, he is the All- Hearer, the One who responds to invocations.

As for your saying that you encountered that which you didn’t expect from me, then did you find that I disobeyed Allaah and His Mesenger and opposed the Religion of Islaam by clarifying the truth that I did? Didn’t Allaah take a covenant from the People of the Scripture that they would convey the truth to the people and not conceal it? Isn’t this covenant that He took binding upon us? Didn’t the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) take this covenant from his Companions when giving the bay’ah (pledge), as is stated in the agreed upon hadeeth of ‘Ubaadah bin Saamit, where he said: “And (we pledge allegiance to you) that we will speak the truth wherever we may be and not fear the blame of the blamers?” Doesn’t Allaah curse those who conceal the truth in His Book, as He states:

“Verily, those who conceal what We have revealed from the clear proofs and the guidance after We clarified it to the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allaah and cursed by the cursers. Except for those who repent, rectify matters and clarify. These people, I will accept their repentance, and I am the Acceptor of Repentance, the Bestower of Mercy?” [Surah Al-Baqarah: 159-160]

Isn’t refuting those who oppose the mandates and laws of the Religion an obligation upon the people of knowledge? So if they fall short of this necessary obligation and someone fulfills this task, the obligation is removed from the rest. And from the rights he has over others is that they should supplicate for success for him and thank him after thanking Allaah in a good and nice manner, and not that he be confronted with accusations and bad thoughts about him.

Didn’t the Salaf carry out this order and fulfill this obligation, thus authoring numerous books, the likes of which cannot be counted, refuting the innovators from the time of the Taabi’een to this time of ours, and they still continue to do this?

Didn’t you, O Shaikh, write two books refuting the people of innovation, the first of which is the book “Akhbaar-ul-Aahaad”, in which you refuted the Mu’tazilah and whoever holds their views, and the second of which is your book “Al-Faa’iq fir-Raddi ‘alaa Mubaddil-il-Haqaa’iq?”

And, by the One of whom there is no deity that has the right to be worshipped except Him, I truly love a man who defends the religion, protecting it and shielding it, and who refutes those who enter into it that which doesn’t belong to it. However, I don’t know why some of the Mashaayikh, may Allaah guide them, have swerved away from the truth, when they know (better), instead rebuking the one who rises to fulfill this obligation, calling him a criminal, transgressor and an oppressor! And yet on the other hand if this evil were to affect anyone else, the world would be in an uproar and huge commotion. But when it affects the Religion, violating it and oppressing its right, the whole world is peaceful and forgiving! Would we be giving justice to the Religion and fulfilling its right this way, or would we be violating it, disregarding it and neglecting its characteristics, especially if what was affected from it was its foundations, principles and fundamentals, such as Tawheed when it is demolished by Major Shirk, and the Sunnah when it is destroyed by innovations, and the truth when it is ruined by falsehood? So at this point, do you hold that we should remain silent? No, by Allaah! Unless some of us rise to fulfill this right, since it is a collective obligation. And as for the one who fulfills this obligation (of refuting innovation), he has a huge reward and a grand recompense with Allaah, the Mist High, the All-Able, as has been stated just now.

As for your statement that for the past forty years you received news about him from noble scholars such as Shaikh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefee, Shaikh ‘Abdur- Rahmaan Ad-Dawsiree, Shaikh ‘Abdullaah bin Humaid and Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz, and that they praised his Da’wah and mentioned his positive effects and they examined news of him, then I say:

First: As for the Mashaayikh you mentioned, then you probably asked them before they were aware of what is well known today about his condition.

Second: Perhaps during that time news about the outer appearance of his Da’wah reached them. Many people are deceived by the outer appearance of his Da’wah even up to today, because they do not know this (Ikhwaanee) methodology well enough since they didn’t read about it during those times.

Third: If they didn’t say anything against him, then this was because they weren’t aware of any of the mistakes he made. So they had a right to refrain (from speaking against him) if this was the case.

Fourth: But as for now, then it has been made clear and manifest that there are many errors in his Da’wah. And “The one who preserved it is a proof against the one who didn’t preserve it.” This is a principle that is well known amongst the Muhadditheen, and acting on it with regard to this matter is an obligation.

Fifth: As for Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz, who is the only one who remains alive from them,[5] then he knows what they are upon and there is no doubt about this. He responded to a question related to the movement of the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen founded by Hasan Al-Bannaa, in which the questioner said: “Noble Shaikh, the movement of the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen entered the Kingdom (of Saudi Arabia) some time ago, and they became active amongst the students of knowledge. What is your opinion with regard to this movement and to what extent do they comply with the methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah?”

He responded by saying: “The movement of Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen has been criticized by specialized scholars because they do not have any enthusiasm with regard to calling to the Tawheed of Allaah and rejecting Shirk and rebuking innovations. And they have specific methods, which are made deficient by their lack of efforts to call to Allaah and their lack of guiding towards the correct Creed, which Ahlus-Sunnah wal- Jamaa’ah are upon. So it is upon the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen to give importance to the Salafee Call to the Tawheed of Allaah, and to reject the worship of graves, the devotion to the deceased and the seeking assistance of those buried in the graves such as Husayn or Badawee and so on. This is what I wanted to convey.” [6]

Did you hear, O brother in Islaam, what Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz said, may Allaah prolong his life? So why won’t you say similar to what he said concerning the Da’wah of the Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen and what it contains from oppositions to the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih. By this, you would be aiding the truth, removing an evil and advising the ummah.

As for your statement that they would mention his positive effects, then if any of the Mashaayikh you mentioned, with the exception of Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz, stated that he had positive effects, then he has been deceived just like you. However, what seems apparent from your words is that you are convinced that he had positive effects, therefore I must ask you the following questions, which I hope you can answer clearly and truthfully. So I say:

1. Is it from his positive effects that he was silent about the polytheistic worship that the people committed at the gravesites and tombs present in Egypt and that he didn’t forbid it, as if it had been sent down definitively from the heavens in verses recited?

2. Was from his positive effects the partisanship and division that he left behind amongst the ummah?

3. Is it from his positive effects that he established the Call to the Khilaafah and abandoned the Call to Tawheed, which all the messengers called to?

4. Is it from his positive effects that he caused the youth to hate the leaders and the scholars and prepared them to overthrow the present (Muslim) countries in order to establish a Khilaafah, which they claim will be opposite to them?

5. Is it from his positive effects that he brought about the false ascription of faults and blemishes on the leaders and the scholars, which his followers do, claiming afterward that these leaders are not fit for ruling and that the scholars are only flattering them?

6. Is it from his positive effects that he transformed the youth and placed them in positions in Da’wah while they were ignorant?

7. Is it from his positive effects that he instituted giving bay’ah (pledge of allegiance) to common people whilst abandoning those who rightfully deserve the bay’ah, such as the rulers?

8. Is it from his positive effects that he called to the coming together of the Shi’ees and the Sunnees? What is meant by coming together, is that each group should refrain from criticizing any of the beliefs of the other groups, so that the first group can come closer to the second group.

9. Is it from his positive effects that he claimed that the Salaf would commit Tafweed, designating the meaning of all of Allaah’s attributes (back to Allaah)?

10. Is it from his positive effects that he said: “There is no religious enmity between us and the Jews” which means that the Jews are our brothers?

11. Is it from his positive effects that he said: “We will work with one another in that which we agree on, and overlook from one another that which we differ on” which means that we should nullify the acts of commanding good and forbidding evil, which Allaah described the believers with, while praising them, in His saying:

“You were the best nation brought forth for mankind – commanding towards good and forbidding from evil and believing in Allaah” [Surah Aali ‘Imraan: 110] and other ayaat?

12. Is it from his positive effects that he gathered together people whose beliefs differed and whose convictions varied? So this person is a Sunnee and that person is a Shi’ee. This person is a Sufi and that person is a Jahmee. This person is an Ash’aree and that person is a rationalizing Mu’tazilee and so on and so on. And he claimed that they are all brothers because they say Laa Ilaaha IllaaAllaah Muhammad Rasoolullaah!

13. Is it from his positive effects that he revived innovations, amongst which was the innovation of celebrating the Prophet’s Birthday and his attending a gathering for it?

14. Is it from his positive effects that he claimed that the Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) attended his gathering, blessed it and forgave the sins of those present?

15. Is it from his positive effects that he was immersed in Sufism, having passion and affection for it?

16. Is it from his positive effects that he limited Islaam to twenty principles, making that binding upon his followers?

17. Is it from his positive effects that he made the conditions of bay’ah ten and that he obligated conditions that are not found in the Book of Allaah or in the Sunnah of His Messenger?

18. Is it from his positive effects that he made blind obedience a condition for the bay’ah, where he said: “By obedience I mean that the command should be carried out and executed immediately in times of hardship and in times of ease, in things pleasing and in things detested. This is because the levels of this (Ikhwaanee) Da’wah are three…(up to where he said about the second level, which is the level of Formation)…Organizing the da’wah in this level is to be carried out purely in a Sufi way from the spiritual standpoint and militarily from the practical standpoint.” [7]

Hearing and obeying is obligatory to the one in authority. However it is constrained by two restrictions:

First: It must be obedience with regard to something good. So there is no obedience to be given if it entails disobedience to Allaah.

Second: It must be in those things that a person is able to do, therefore he is not required to do what he is unable to. The Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would instruct his Companions to only obey in what they were able to.

19. Is it from his positive effects that he attended the gravesite of Sayyidah Zaynab (radyAllaahu ‘anhaa) on the occasion of the annual gathering, and did not reject one word of the Shirk that took place there? On the contrary, he would advise and encourage the attendees to purify their souls and hearts from spite and malice!

20. Is it from his positive effects that he allowed Coptic Christians to enter his organization, making them supporters of his Call? Did any of the callers ever do this?

21. Is it from his positive effects that he established an assembly for Muhammad ‘Uthmaan Al-Mirghanee, who is well know for his belief in wahdat-ul-wujood, praising him and saying in this gathering: “Indeed, we the gathering of Ikhwaan owe the Mirganee leaders pure affection and a warm welcome?”

22. Is it from his positive effects that he would go to public assemblies from the first night of Rabee’-ul-Awwal to the 12th of Rabee’-ul-Awwal in which he would recite a chant that consists of Major Shirk:

“May the Divine (Allaah) bless the light (i.e. Muhammad) that appeared to the creation and so he surpassed the (light of the) sun and the moon This beloved one (i.e. Muhammad) along with his loved ones has attended And pardoned everyone of what they did and will do (of sins).”

23. Is it from his positive effects that he and his associates would travel three hours on foot going and three hours returning in order to visit the graves of the elite among the Husaafee Shaadhilee Order? But if it is said that his intention behind visiting was for purposes related to the Sunnah (i.e. to remind himself of death), then we say that it is not permissible to set out on a journey to them.

24. Is it from his positive effects that he would chant the following verses, which clearly indicate wahdat-ul-wujood:

“Allaah raised and scattered (all) the existence and what it contains
So if you desire to attain His perfection
Then everything in the universe if you realize it
is non-existent, specifically and generally.”

25. Is it from his positive effects that he claimed that Tawassul, which is the greatest of ways that people fall into Shirk, is from the subsidiary issues, which should not be given importance?

Lastly, I ask you, by Allaah, are these things that I have just listed above in these numbers in agreement with the Religion or in contradiction to it?

And I ask you, by Allaah, a third time: Is the one who clarifies the truth to the people and defends the Creed considered erroneous and a criminal who deserves to be censured, reprimanded, incriminated and told that your books should not be printed?

As for your statement that they excused him from the errors he committed, then I say:

First: What are the errors that should be excused – aren’t they those that are made in subsidiary issues, which stem from Ijtihaad? So are the errors committed by Al- Bannaa on subsidiary issues, such that they can be excused? And is Al-Bannaa from the people of Ijtihaad whose status should be preserved? Who are his teachers whom he studied religious knowledge under?

Second: Errors made in matters of Creed are not excused based on the unanimous agreement of the scholars from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. And the books that they wrote refuting the innovators during every era and every location, which are too many to be counted, from the time of the Taabi’een to our present time, bears witness to this.

Third: The Mashaayikh you mentioned are from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and if they knew of Al-Bannaa’s contradictions against the Religion in fundamental issues and matters of Creed, they would not make excuses for him.

Fourth: As for your saying that they excused him, then this is an allegation on your part. So if you have with you something that confirms this, then present it. This only applies to you with respect to those who have passed away. But as for Shaikh ‘Abdul- ‘Azeez [8] then he is still alive and his stance regarding them (i.e. Ikhwaan-ul-Muslimeen) is well known. And he is our Imaam and our role model, and we know from the Shaikh that he refutes every error that he hears or learns of even if the one who commits it may be far away and even if the error is in relation to subsidiary issues. So how many errors has he refuted – they are too many to be taken into account. And if they were to be counted, then it would be long. And if it is possible, I will write to him asking:

“There is a person that claims that you have excused Hasan Al-Bannaa for the errors in Creed that he made, so is this correct?”

Fifth: Even if we assume that someone from Ahlus-Sunnah excused him for what he committed from errors in Creed, then his opinion of excusing him is to be considered as irregular and in contradiction to what Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah are upon.

Sixth: As for the one who excused him, did he say that he can’t be refuted? If he said that he can’t be refuted, then he has aided the innovators and troublemakers who seek to deviate others by it.

As for your saying: “And they found in his words that which makes it known that he is a Mukhlis (sincere), Muwahhid (affirmer of Tawheed)”, then I say:

As for his being sincere (mukhlis), then no one can know this except Allaah because sincerity is something hidden, which only Allaah has knowledge of. It is stated in the authentic hadeeth: “Actions are only base don’t heir intentions, and indeed every person will have only that which he intends.” [9]

And in the hadeeth of Abu Moosaa: “Whoever fights so that the Word of Allaah could be the highest, then it (his fighting) was for the sake of Allaah.” And in the hadeeth of Ibn Mas’ood reported by Ahmad: “Perhaps a person may be killed between two groups and Allaah only knows his intention.”

And in the hadeeth of ‘Ubaadah: “Whoever fights not intending anything except recognition, then he will have what he intends.”

And in the story of the (brave) man who would follow and kill with his sword every pagan he encountered (during a battle), and the Companions were amazed by him and said: “No one amongst us has profited today like so and so has profited.” So the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “He is from the inhabitants of the Hellfire.” So a man followed him the next day (while the battle continued), and found him fighting (with polytheists). When he had suffered many wounds, the man placed the tip of his sword on his upper chest and fell on it, thrusting it in him and thus killing himself. The man (who followed him) then went to the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and said: “I bear witness that you are the Mesenger of Allaah.” He (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Why is that?” He said: “That man about whom who said what you said yesterday killed himself.” So the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Rise, O Bilaal, and announce to the people that no one shall enter Paradise except a believing soul, and that Allaah will indeed aid this religion by an evil man.”

The important point here is that sincerity is something hidden, which no one has knowledge of except Allaah.

As for you saying that he is a Muwahhid,[10] then this is a testimony and a commendation for him on your part that Allaah will question you about. It is obligatory for you to think carefully before sending out such commendations – where they put in their proper place or not? I don’t know if perhaps this is due to ignorance on your part of what Al-Bannaa fell into from Shirk, his disregard for those who committed it, as well as their polytheistic rituals, and his accepting them as members in his methodology. He is the one who said during the innovation of the Prophet’s Birthday:

“This beloved one (i.e. Muhammad) along his loved ones has attended And pardoned everyone of what they did and will do (of sins).”

This means that the Messenger of Allaah attends their gathering, blesses it and pardons and forgives them! So I ask is this Shirk or not, O Shaikh?! And is the one who says such a statement and chants it a Muwahhid?! Is the one who takes the bay’ah (pledge of allegiance) in accordance with the Husaafee Shadhilee (Sufi) order a Muwahhid?! Have you come to know that the Sufis are Muwahhids and that they call to Tawheed, or that they commit Shirk and call to polytheism and innovation? Are you aware that Sufism is built upon Shirk and that it weaves its thread and fabric from polytheism and innovations?! Did you know that Hasan Al-Bannaa used to walk by foot, 20 kilometers going and the same distance returning, every Friday, to visit the graves of the (deceased) high members of Sufism, like Ad-Dasooqee, Sinjar and their likes? Is the one who does this a Muwahhid? O Shaikh, fear Allaah and know that you have severely damaged and violated your Tawheed by testifying that those upon Shirk (polytheism) and Bid’ah (innovation) are Muwahhideen. So repent to Allaah and turn to Him before time runs out.

Indeed, the true Caller who was a Muwahhid was Shaikh Muhammad bin ‘Abdil- Wahhaab, may Allaah have mercy on him, as well as those who treaded upon his methodology and followed his way from the scholars and the leaders from his time and the time of the Ameer, Muhammad bin Sa’ood up to this day of ours. May Allaah have mercy on those of them who passed away and preserve those of them who remain living.

And also the Shaikh, ‘Abdullaah bin Muhammad Al-Qar’aawee, who spread Tawheed throughout the southern areas (of Saudi Arabia) with the help of the late king, who went by the nickname of “The Falcon of Arabia”11 and who brought most of the areas of the (Arab) peninsula together under his sovereignty, uniting them under his rule, and cleansing them of aspects of polytheism and innovation. And he was followed in this by his noble children, may Allaah have mercy on those of them who passed away and may He preserve those of them still living.

I ask you, by Allaah, O Shaikh, if a person were to ask you: “What do you say concerning an individual who participated in a procession from the first of Rabee’-ul- Awwal to the twelfth of Rabee’-ul-Awwal and happily chanted verses of poetry, which I mentioned previously, amongst which was:

“This beloved one (i.e. Muhammad) along with his loved ones has attended And pardoned everyone of what they did and will do (of sins)?”

Will you make a ruling on him, that he is upon Shirk or Tawheed? What would be your answer?

And if you were asked about a man who endured the hardship of traveling by foot every week the distance of twenty kilometers to the Sufi gravesites and then the same distance returning, how would you judge this individual? Would you say that he is a Sunnee or an innovator, and would you say that he is a Muwahhid or a Mushrik?

So fear Allaah man and return to the truth, and repent to Allaah for indeed He accepts the repentance. Do not misguide the people, especially the students of knowledge, by defending the innovators. This traveling that Hasan Al-Bannaa and his associates would do every week is not free from three possibilities:

1. Either they intended to supplicate to those buried in the graves, which is Major Shirk and takes one out of the Religion, or

2. They intended to supplicate to Allaah while at these gravesites, which is an innovation, or

3. They intended to visit the graves as part of the Sunnah (i.e. to be reminded of death). However this couldn’t be achieved except by setting out on a journey, and setting out on a journey to make the lawful visitation of the graves, is an innovation. So based on this, the one who does it is either a polytheist or an innovator.

As for your statement: “Allaah granted benefit through his Da’wah and guided many people”, then:

What benefit came about for them? Is having disregard for Major Shirk and being silent about those who perform it, such as the deviants and the innovators considered a benefit? Is keeping silent about evil and not forbidding it – which stems from the principle that Hasan Al-Bannaa instituted: “We will work together in that which we agree on and pardon one another in that which we disagree on” – is this a benefit. Are those who are calling to the Khilaafah and who have abandoned calling to Tawheed, which was the way of all the messengers, a benefit?!

Is intending to destroy the present (Muslim) states and revolting against them, even if those who govern them are Muslims and rule by Allaah’s Legislation, establishing the penal laws, a benefit?

Rather, the Da’wah (Call) of the Ikhwaan (Al-Muslimoon) only destroys the youth and doesn’t benefit them, and it only corrupts them and doesn’t rectify them. As for your statement that you didn’t stop hearing him being praised in gatherings and his books being read until about seven years ago when the brothers turned against him and degraded his rank, then I say:

Is this a proof for him? If someone praises his methodology or praises him, who doesn’t know what is in his methodology from destructive ideologies and what he had from vile errors, this is not a proof for him or a scale determining the correctness of his methodology.

You know as well, deep down inside, that this is not a proof, and that they only praised him when they were misled by the general outer appearance of his methodology. But when they came to realize what he was upon, they rebuked it and censured him. and they had every right to do what they did.

O Allaah, You indeed know that we do not intend to disparage anyone nor to speak out against anyone, rather we only intend to clarify the truth and to warn the youth and the students of knowledge from the methodologies that consist of innovations and deviations. And we are only pointing out to them the errors in them so that they may not be deluded by them, entering into them and missing the path of truth, thus being misguided and misguiding those who come after them.

As for them having degraded his rank, then this is not correct. Rather they said about him what was conveyed to them with statements established in their sources, mentioning the names of the books and their page numbers. So are they degrading his rank when they relate these quotes to convince the youth that this methodology is erroneous because it contains truth and falsehood and mixes that which is correct with that which is wrong? This is like someone who drinks from water with impurities and dirtiness, and next to him is a person who drinks from water that is pure and free from pollution. Which of these two would you love most to drink from? So by doing this are they degrading or destroying his status?

I say: No, then again no. Rather, the heavens and the earth were not established nor were the messengers sent nor were the divine books revealed except to establish the truth and suppress the falsehood and to command the good and forbid the evil. So if the universe is void, or more appropriately, if the earth is void of one who will establish the truth for the sake of Allaah and those who command good and forbid evil, the earth will earn Allaah’s wrath and His punishment will descend. What indicates this is Allaah’s statement:

“And when the Word is fulfilled against them, we shall bring out from the earth a Beast for them to speak to them because mankind believed not with certainty in our ayaat (signs).” [Surah An-Naml: 82]

Ibn ‘Umar and Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudree, may Allaah be pleased with them, said: “When they stop commanding good and forbidding evil, (Allaah’s) Discontentment becomes binding upon them.”

Concerning the part “when the word is fulfilled”, ‘Abdullaah bin Mas’ood said: “It will be when the scholars die, knowledge goes away and the Qur’aan is raised up (to Allaah).”

I say: It is clear from this that commanding good and forbidding evil prevent torment from descending and Allaah’s Displeasure of His servants from being mandated.

And what falls into commanding good and forbidding evil is refuting the errors in Creed made by those who pronounce that, whoever they may be and wherever they may be. Would you like that the people of truth remain silent about clarifying it (i.e. the truth) and hold back from purifying it from that which is not part of it mixing and entering into it? Never! This will never be, by the Will of Allaah, so long as there are men to carry the Hadeeth and there is room for speech and there is force and strength for the truth and its people, who in doing this hope for Allaah’s Contentment.

As for your saying: “And they imposed themselves over him without there being anything mandating that he be specified (apart from others), for there were other more famous books that were worse that his books. And there are other leading figures, both dead and alive, that are more deviant than him”,

then I say: First: All praise be to Allaah who caused you to speak the truth even though you weren’t aware of it, for you have acknowledged that there is evil in his books, as well as deviation in his methodology and history. How close in resemblance is your statement O Shaikh to the speech of the people of innovation in terms of contradiction, so reflect!!

Second: The obligation on the scholars is to clarify to the people, according to the extent of their ability, what they are unaware of and to distinguish the truth from falsehood.

Third: We have been afflicted by this methodology in our very own lands and so it has corrupted the minds of our children. So now they reject the compassionate father, the affectionate friend and the educating teacher. And they do not take the advice of the advisor or the criticism of the critic unless he is a member of their party. So they resemble those who Allaah spoke about in His saying:

“And do not believe (in anyone) except he who follows your religion.” [Surah Aali ‘Imraan: 73]

And they say: “Do not believe anyone except the people of your group.” So this makes it necessary that one speak out against this methodology and its founder, as well as its offshoots, such as the Suroorees and the Qutubees. This is the reason that caused it (i.e. Ikhwaanee Manhaj) to be specified because it has spread amongst us and extended throughout our lands and regions. And it has corrupted the minds of our youth turning them into revolutionaries, takfeeris and terrorists.

So there is nothing strange if the Salafee students of knowledge rebuke this methodology and spread the errors it has in it, in order to uphold the truth, advise the people, seek nearness to Allaah and make Jihaad in His Cause:

“Verily We will not cause the reward of one who does a good deed to be lost.” [Surah Al-Kahf: 30]

As for your saying: “They have specifically chosen him and his books out of other well known books that are far worse than his books and callers, dead and alive, that are more deviant than him”, then I say:

I have already explained to you the reason for this. Also, along with this is the fact that the Salafees, all praise be to Allaah, do not remain silent with falsehood for they have refuted all of the deviant sects, past and present, old and new, as much as they were able to.

In this time, I specifically mean our noble teacher and our unique great intellectual and our sincere and dignified scholar, Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin ‘Abdillaah bin Baaz, may Allaah preserve him, grant him success and aid him, then the Committee of Senior Scholars after him, may Allaah grant all of them success, assist them with every good and aid them against every evil. So whoever flips through the fataawaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz, whose number has reached seven volumes, will realize that he has written many refutations against the people of falsehood, with all of its components and all of their factions.

And this goes as well for what has been written from verdicts and refutations in the magazine of Islamic Research of the Committee of Senior Scholars, may Allaah reward them with good and bless their time

The point is that your statement: “Many of the brothers have imposed themselves over him without there being anything mandating that he be specified (apart from others), for there are other more famous books that were worse that his books. And there are other leading figures, both dead and alive, that are more deviant than him” means that they should not be refuted. This is a statement that is not put in its proper place. May Allaah forgive you and us and rectify our affairs and yours. This, O Shaikh, isn’t the way the arguments of the scholars are. On the contrary, their proofs were in affirming what the texts of the Book and the Sunnah, according to the understanding of the Salaf of the ummah, affirmed and negating what they negated.

Therefore, O brother in Islaam, if you hold that refuting Hasan Al-Bannaa and the people of his group from those who wallowed in Sufism and idolatry, entered innovations into the Religion and legislated into it that which Allaah and His Messenger didn’t legislate. If you consider that refuting these people and clarifying what their methodology consists of from falsehood and deviation – if you consider that to be a violation against the members of this methodology and its founder, then we have no control over guiding others, however it is upon us to supplicate to Allaah to remove from you this strange ideology and this false understanding that has deprived you and confused matters for you. And at the same time we fear that this ideology causes you to enter into the ranks of those whom Allaah spoke of when He said:

“And whoever opposes the Messenger after the guidance was made clear to him and follows a way other than the Way of the Believers, We will turn him to what he has chosen and land him in Hell – what an evil destination.” [Surah An-Nisaa: 115]

Know that supporting the people of falsehood and defending them is not from the Way of the Believers, especially if they are polytheists or innovators, whose innovation leads to disbelief or sin. So I advise you and ask Allaah for you, O brother in Islaam, that you return to the truth and to supporting it. And I ask Allaah that He allow you to see it (i.e. the truth) and that he remove the veil that is before your eyes.

This is my advice to you, and it is the advice of every Salafee that loves good for you and fears for you the consequences of this foreign ideology and erroneous understanding. And with Allaah lies the success, to him I place my reliance and to Him I repent.

As for your statement: “Therefore I advise you O Shaikh to withhold your tongue and your pen from attacking this Caller, whom Allaah granted benefit by”,

I say: What a great advice this is, if only it were put in its proper place. This is a valuable gift for the one who wishes to preserve his Religion by it. However, you advised me not to advise, so is this a proper advice? So in reality it is only preventing good and hindering from the Path of Allaah. So fear Allaah, O Shaikh ‘Abdullaah [12], and return to the truth. By Allaah, of whom there is no deity worthy of worship except Him, there is not one percent of doubt in my heart that would lead me to undo what I have done. Rather, I hold that this is obligatory on me, since I have come to know about this man and his methodology that which entitles me to advise others and to clarify the observations made against this methodology, out of sincerity for the students of knowledge who have been deceived by them, in order to fulfill Allaah’s right over me that I defend the Religion of Islaam and to protect the Tawheed and preserve its honor as the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) did.

As for your statement where you advised me to not attack the honor of this Caller, I say:

In your opinion, what has more right to be defended and protected – Tawheed and the authentic Creed, the Creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah or the honor of Hasan Al- Bannaa? Didn’t Allaah order us to fight the polytheists and the disbelievers for the sake of the Creed? Allaah says:

“And fight them until there is no more fitnah and the Religion is for Allaah.” [Surah Al-Baqarah: 193]

The word fitnah has been interpreted here as Shirk. Didn’t Allaah permit the termination of the lives of the disbelievers and the polytheists, the imprisonment of their women and children and the taking of their wealth as booty for the Muslims due to the Creed? Shouldn’t this be permitted for one who commits Major Shirk, agrees with those who perform it, and introduces innovations into the Religion as well as laws that have not been legislated?

Shouldn’t this be permitted against his honor, for the purpose of clarifying the truth to those who have been deceived by this man and his methodology?

Rather, by Allaah of whom there is no deity worthy of worship except Him, the obligation upon me and you and all of the seekers of knowledge is that aiding the Religion and exposing the truth must take precedence over everything in this world, out of obedience to Allaah, establishing His right, aiding his Religion and defending the beliefs of the Muslims from deceptions. And with Allaah lies the success.

As for your statement in which you advised me to not print my book, then:

First: I consider this to be hindering from the Way of Allaah on your part. This is because I hold this book as being one of the best of my good deeds since I aided the truth by it, preserved the honor of Tawheed with it and defended the authentic Creed through it. I hope that I have done this sincerely for Allaah’s sake, establishing His right and defending the sanctuary of His Religion, but I am not freeing myself from shortcomings and errors. And I ask Allaah to forgive me, for indeed whatever deed an individual performs, he is prone to deficiencies and shortcomings.

Second: I consider this to be an abandonment of the truth from you, a siding with the people of falsehood on your part and support for them. This is enough as an offense against the Religion and then against those who carry it, those about whom Allaah said:

“And who is better in speech than he who calls to Allaah and does righteous deeds and says: ‘I am from the Muslims.’” [Surah Fussilat: 33]

Third: I heard that some of the hizbees (partisans) buy the books that criticize and speak against their party in large amounts and then burn them. So what is the difference between one who burns my book after it’s printed and one who tells me not to print it?

Fourth: I consider this to be from interfering in other people’s affairs in order to prevent the spread of good. And it states in the hadeeth: “From the goodness of a person’s Islaam is that he abandons what doesn’t concern him.”

Fifth: If I printed it and the people disseminated it, then I would be printing a book that affirms Tawheed and censures Shirk, that affirms the Sunnah and censures Innovation, and that affirms the truth and censures falsehood. So it would be an obligation on you to request the expeditious printing of the book, in order to aid Tawheed, the truth and the Sunnah. However, you have done the opposite and instead requested me not to print the book. And by doing this, you are supporting the people of innovations and partisanship wrongfully against the people of Tawheed and the Sunnah, the followers of the way of the Salaf.

So seek forgiveness from Allaah and repent to Him before your life passes and comes to an end. For by Allaah, neither this person nor that person will be able to benefit you before Allaah (on the Day of Judgement). Rather, the only thing that will benefit you is your standing up for the truth and your support for it and its people. And Allaah is the only One whom we ask that He guide us and you to the truth and to supporting it and its people. And He is the only One whom we seek refuge in from vain desires and misguidance.

As for your warning me against printing the book out of fear for me that it will ruin my reputation, then I say to you:

Know that the ruining of one’s reputation comes only due to supporting falsehood and speaking it or doing it. And I, thanks to my Lord, have not committed any falsehood and nor have I supported the people of falsehood in order that my reputation would be ruined in front of the believers, who are Allaah’s witnesses on His earth. Rather, I have performed the truth and supported the truth, which I hope I will be rewarded for by Allaah and due to which I will be considered honest amidst the people.

As for the people of falsehood, then I am not concerned about my reputation with them. I ask Allaah the Most Great, Lord of the Noble Throne, to protect me from their evil and to save me from their plots. And I will continue to pursue my printing and distribution of the book, if Allaah wills, relying upon Allaah in whose Hand lies the forelock of all His slaves.

Was-Salaam ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuh.

Footnotes:

[1] Translator’s Note: This tremendous book written by Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmee was written and published in the same year as this letter (1418H). It is about 300 pages long and contains an in depth analysis of the two most popular deviant methodologies in the field of Da’wah today, that of the Jamaa’at at-Tableegh and the Ikhwaan-ul- Muslimeen. The book has introductory commendations from Shaikh Saalih Al-Fawzaan and Shaikh Rabee’ Al- Madkhalee, may Allaah preserve all of them.

[2] Translator’s Note: Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmee was born in 1346H and was around 22 years old when Hasan Al- Bannaa was shot and killed in Egypt on 2/12/1949 (1368H).

[3] Translator’s Note: He means by this outside of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

[4] Translator’s Note: The belief of wahdat-ul-wujood is a deviant Sufi concept that entails the belief that Allaah and His creation are one existence. Thus there is no distinction between Creator and creation.

[5] This treatise was written during the lifetime of Shaikh Ibn Baaz, may Allaah have mercy on him

[6] In a magazine Shaikh An-Najmee has.

[7] From Majmoo’at Rasaa’il (Collection of Essays) of Al-Bannaa; Risaalah at-Ta’aaleem (pg. 268)

[8] He is referring to Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz, may Allaah have mercy on him.

[9] An “agreed upon” hadeeth from the narration of the Commander of the Believers, ‘Abu Hafs, ‘Umar bin Al- Khattaab, may Allaah be pleased with him.

[10] Translator’s Note: The word Muwahhid comes from Tawheed. Consequently it means someone who abides by the mandates of Tawheed, which means worshipping Allaah alone without any partners, and shunning all forms of Shirk.

[11] The “Falcon of Arabia” was King ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin ‘Abdir-Rahmaan Aali Su’ood, may Allaah have mercy on him.

[12] He is referring to Shaikh ‘Abdullaah bin Jibreen.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer or Fee Dhilaal-il-Qur’aan (of Sayyid Qutb)? – Imaam Muqbil

Author: Imaam Muqbil bin Haadee Al-Waadi’ee
Source: Fadaa’ih wa Nasaa’ih (pg. 163-164)
Produced By: Al-Ibaanah.com

Question:

Al-Ahdal said: “A summary of Tafseer Ibn Katheer can be found in the tafseer Fee Dhilaal-il-Qur’aan (of Sayyid Qutb).”

Answer by Imam Muqbil (rahimahullaah):

Then let him bring us ten or twenty hadeeths with their chains of narration in the tafseer Adh-Dhilaal. Or let him bring us one example of where (Sayyid Qutb) declares a hadeeth authentic or weak! And let him show us where the ‘Aqeedah of the Salaf is in the tafseer, Adh-Dhilaal. Rather, the majority of what is in Adh-Dhilaal is from the (individual) ideologies of Sayyid Qutb.

As for Tafseer Ibn Katheer, then Imaam Ash-Shawkaanee said about it:

“His tafseer is from the best of tafseers, if not THE best.”

As-Suyootee said in “Tabaqaat-ul-Huffaadh”:

“His tafseer is from the best of tafseers.”

He has interpreted the Qur’aan with the Qur’aan, and he has interpreted the Qur’aan with the Sunnah. He has interpreted the Qur’aan with the statements of the Salaf, and he has interpreted the Qur’aan with the Arabic language. Then he authenticated and weakened (reports) and mentioned which ahaadeeth had no basis (i.e. source). And he refuted those who use some of these ahaadeeth as proof (for their views) by showing that they are not authentic.

I remember when I was in Madeenah, one person, who was from the seniors amongst the Ikhwaan al-Mufliseen, told me that he advises the youth to read tafseer Adh-Dhilaal, and that it is better for them than Tafseer Ibn Katheer!

But these farces will soon die just as the books of Sa’eed Hawaa, which served the ideologies of the Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen, died. And the books of Salaah as-Saawee, which aid the ideologies of the Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen will soon die as well.

And ‘Abdullaah bin Faysal Al-Ahdal will die (i.e. his da’wah) – the one who launches attacks against Ahlus-Sunnah. And we say to him: “Where is your attack against the Sufis, who have transgressed so much so that they supplicate and seek assistance from other than Allaah? Have you called the people to destroy and demolish the shrines (graves) in al-Hawta, and in al-‘Aynaat, and those which are in Shihr itself?

So I must say: It is as if the Devil has deceived you. So it is as if you are prepared to (only) wage war against Ahlus-Sunnah. However, Ahlus-Sunnah give no importance to you. And if it were not that I were encouraged and requested by others to make a refutation against you, I would not have refuted you. This is since these words that come out from you are demented and have no worth whatsoever. So all praise be to Allaah, the Sunnah and good are both widespread. And the people do not look to and rely in (anyone) except Ahlus-Sunnah.

So your words will only increase the people in their trust and reliance in the da’wah of Ahlus-Sunnah. One time, when the Communists were in ‘Aden, one person from the inhabitants of ‘Aden said to me: “We came to love you before we even saw you.” So it was said to him: “How is that so?” He responded: “Because the Communists used to say to us: ‘There exists a people in Sa’adah who go to their slaves from behind when they want to pray’, so we knew that the Communists did not speak against anyone except for righteous people.”

The people know ‘Abdullaah Al-Ahdal and what he is upon from deviation and misguidance, so his words only serve to aid the Sunnah…

Published: October 7, 2004 | Modified: October 7, 2004

The Arab Spring? – The Reality of Revolution in Light of The Qur’aan and Sunnah – Shaykh Adil Sayyid [Audio|Ar-En]

The Reality of Revolution in Light of The Quraan and Sunnah by Shaykh 'Adil as-Sayyid

Bismillaah wa -Alhumdulillaah wa Salaatu wa Salaam ‘alaa Rasulullaah ‘amma ba’d

The Noble Shaykh ‘Adil as-Sayyid (May Allaah Preserve Him), from the mashayikh of Egypt, delivered a beautiful LIVE Telelink Lecture with Muwahhideen Publications. The Shaykh brought some of the reasons for oppressive rulers over the muslimeen as a punishment or test from Allaah, then he expounds on the method of change that begins with the society first in order to deserve better rulers and/or Governments.

Beginning with Tunisia then Libya, Egypt, Yemen and now Syria, the Muslim lands have become riddled with the fitnah of revolution – an adopted method of change that has never been part of Islaam.

This disease has entered the hearts and minds of Muslims who have resorted to demonstrations, protests and revolting against the Muslim ruler – all of which are haram (impermissible), according to the pristine sharee’ah (the final and preserved Islaamic legislation revealed from above the heavens by One Who is All-Wise and All-Knowing). Many have been deceived into change through these hectic and democratic methods.[1]

This sickness of revolution, which was innovated by the early deviant groups such as the Khawaarij, has now sadly become the accepted way amongst ignorant Muslims – and undoubtedly this benefits none but the enemies of Islaam. May Allaah rectify the Muslim lands from this disease, and return us all back to the Qur`aan and Sunnah upon the understanding of the righteous predecessors (the Prophet, salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and his companions, radiallaahu ‘anhum).

Shaykh ‘Adil Sayyid (hafidhahullaah), who is in the middle of this calamity in Egypt and who has defended the position of Ahlus-Sunnah, clarified this very important issue on the 20th of Jamada ath-Thaani, 1433, corresponding to 5-9-12.

Source: Listen/Download (Arabic & English)
[audio https://salafiaudio.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/the-reality-of-revolutione2809dthe-arab-springe2809d-in-light-of-the-quraan-and-sunnah-e28093-shaykh-e28098adil-as-sayyid.mp3]

Read /Download the Full transcription of this Beneficial audio [PDF]