Popular @troid.org

Topic-icon Regarding Rahma Conference 2010

  • B,dhore
  • B,dhore's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Jadīd Boarder
  • Jadīd Boarder
More
9 years 5 months ago - 9 years 5 months ago #872 by B,dhore
Regarding Rahma Conference 2010 was created by B,dhore
Assalāmu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh
I was wondering about the speakers that will be attending Rahma Conference 2010
which are Sh.Said Rageah,Sh Abū Usamah Attahabi, She Abū Taubah, She Kamal El-Mekki, Sh. Abdulqadur Ali and Sh.Yahya Aby Sumayah
Since I am a salafi, Im I allowed to go to a conference that the speakers arenot salafy's and also this confernce is organised by Abū Huraira Center and Khalid Bin Walid Mosque
Last edit: 9 years 5 months ago by B,dhore.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • troid.ca admin
  • troid.ca admin's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
9 years 5 months ago - 9 years 5 months ago #873 by troid.ca admin
Replied by troid.ca admin on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010
Wa 'alaykumus Salaam wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakatuh,

This is something we hope to address. It has also surfaced that Mutah Beale and Amir Muhaddith will be speaking to the youth at the conf. They have had their names attached to this event without consent - they will not be attending or supporting the lectures or organisers of the event and are free from it. Brother Mutah contacted the organisers and ensured that he and Amir would not be attending.
Last edit: 9 years 5 months ago by troid.ca admin.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • troid.ca admin
  • troid.ca admin's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
9 years 5 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #876 by troid.ca admin
Replied by troid.ca admin on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010

From: Mutah Beale
Sent: May-10-10 2:59 PM
To: troid.ca
Subject: Re: Few Lines

In the name of Allah the Beneficent The Most Merciful.

I'm writing about something that occurred recently with my name being distributed on a flyer that's promoting an conference put together by deviants and calling to their deviation. I Mutah beale is free of them and has no involvement what so ever with this conference. They put my name along with brother Amir junaid's name on the flyer with out our permission. I don't sit with the people of innovation and I always stress if I'm called out to do a talk for the youth as a motivational speaker then to not have any other speakers unless they are upon the methodology of the Salaf nd are known among the ulema and the salafi community to be upright. These people took it upon their selves to put my name on their flyer I contacted them three times telling them to remove my name off the flyer, website and other avenues they are using to promote this deviant get together. Once again I has nothing to do with this conference and will not be attending this conference I will be in edmonton doing other lectures with the youth but nothing to do with rahma conference in edmonton. May Allah guide us all.
Mutah (Napoleon) beale
Mutah Beale
President
Beale Holdings Inc

Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by troid.org admin.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • troid.ca admin
  • troid.ca admin's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
9 years 5 months ago - 9 years 5 months ago #883 by troid.ca admin
Replied by troid.ca admin on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010


Should We Go to the Rahma Conference?

Bismillah was-Ṣalātu was-Salaam ‘alaa Rasoolilaahi wa ‘alaa aaliyhi wa Sahbihi wa manitabahu ilaa yawmid-deen. Wa nashhadu an laa ilaaha ilal Allaahu Wahduhu Laa Shareeka lahu Ama Ba’ad:

Allaah The Most High said:
“Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islām), enjoining Al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islāmic Monotheism and all that Islām orders one to do) and forbidding Al-Munkar (polytheism and disbelief and all that Islām has forbidden). And it is they who are the successful.
[Sūrah Aali-‘Imrān, 3:104]
Allaah the Most High also said:
“You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islāmic Monotheism and all that Islām has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islām has forbidden), and you believe in Allaah”
[Sūrah Aali-‘Imrān, 3:110]
Also Imām Aḥmad narrates in his Musnad on the authority of Abū Sa’eed al-Khudree that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Do not let the fear of the people stop any of you in saying the truth if they see it or hear it or witness it” and this ḥadīth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Ṣaḥīh al-Musnad.

And the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, as narrated by Imām Muslim on the authority of Abū Sa’eed al-Kudhree who said the Messenger of Allaah said:

“Whoever of you sees an evil let him change it with his hand. And if he is not able then let him change it with his tongue. And if he is not able then let him hate it in his heart, and this is the lowest of īmān”

In light of these divine verses and prophetic narrations it becomes obligatory upon us to perform that which Allaah has made waajib on us by enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. Were it not out of fear of Allaah’s statement the Most High:
“Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dāwūd (David) and 'Eeesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allaah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evil¬doing, sins, polytheism, disbelief, etc.) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do”
[Sooratul-Maa’idah, 5:78-79]

And Allaah’s statement:
“Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allaah and cursed by the cursers”
[Sooratul-Baqarah, 2:159]

And the ḥadīth narrated by Imām Aḥmad on the authority of Abū Hurayrah that the Messeneger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whoever conceals knowledge then Allaah will bridle him on the day of judgment with a bridle of fire” this ḥadīth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Ṣaḥīh al-Musnad.

Were it not out of fear of these texts than we would not have written that which we are about to state. However because Allaah has made it obligatory on every Muslim that he enjoin the good and forbid the evil it becomes incumbent on us to address an issue which is known to many in the city. This discussion is regarding the Rahma Conference taking place on May 22-23 2010 organized by Khalid Ibn al-Walid Mosque and Abū Hurairah Mosque (of Toronto, Canada) and those attendees invited to speak.

Before we present this article there are a few things I would like to address. Firstly, some might be wondering what concern is it to investigate who is coming - they’re all Muslims? Although this is correct, I remind the reader about the statement of the illustrious companion Abū Hurayrah in which he said:

“Verily knowledge is (part) of the religion, so be careful whom you take you religion from”

Also this statement was authentically reported on the authority of the noble taab’iee Muhammad Ibn Sireen (d110) who is the student of the Abū Hurayrah. It is authentically reported on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Sireen that he also said:

“The people did not used to ask about the (situation) of men, then when the fitnah (trial i.e. innovation) happened Ahl al-Sunnah said to the people of innovation ‘name us your men (whom you take knowledge from)’ so if they were from Ahl al-Sunnah we took from them and if they were from the people of innovation we left them.”

Likewise Imām Sufyaan ath-Thawree, when he intended to seek knowledge of ḥadīth from an individual he used to enquire about his situation, and if he was told that he was a man of innovation he would not take knowledge from him. This is the way that our pious predecessors used to view the affair of seeking knowledge. They would not learn from an individual except after making sure that he was a man of Sunnah, and they were diligent in taking precaution that they did not learn from the people of misguidance.

After answering the question (why investigate who is attending the rahma conf.), we also have to understand the this principle (of being cautious to whom one takes his knowledge from) is a principle which is obligatory for every Muslim to adhere to, this was a the methodology of the Companions and our pious predecessors and we have been commanded to follow them. Allaah the Most High says:
“And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (Muhammad ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers' way. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell - what an evil destination.”[Sooratun-Nisaa, 4:115]

The scholars of tafsīr have said that the believers mentioned in the ayah are the Companions, showing that whoever opposes the way of the Companions, that they are threatened with the hellfire.

Imām Abū Dāwūd and Imām al-Tirmidhī mention in their sunans on the authority of ‘Irbaadh Ubn Saariyah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Upon you is (to follow) my Sunnah and the Sunnah of my rightly guided Khaalifahs, hold on to it with your molar teeth,” and this ḥadīth was authenticated by Shaykh Al-Albaanee and Shaykh Muqbil Ibn Hādī.

Imām al-Bukhārī and Muslim also narrated on the authority of ‘Imrān Ibn Hussayn that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“The best generation is my generation then those that come after them then those that come after them”

So Allaah and his Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) clearly told us to follow not only the Qur’aan and the Sunnah but also the way of the Companions and the two generations after them and from their manhaj was carefully scrutinising whom one takes his religion from. With this being said, we present to the reader points of criticism regarding the manhaj of some of the speakers attending the Rahma conference as a clarification to the one seeking safety in his religion and desiring to adhere to what the Salaf were upon. This academic presentation is not intended in any way to defame or vilify any of the speakers rather it is based upon authentic texts from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and the statements of the Scholars, hoping that Allaah guides these individuals back to the truth and that Allaah guides those who are sincere in being acquainted with the truth. As for the one who has been blinded by tribal partisanship or blind following and fanaticism - then his affair is with Allaah. We ask Allaah the Most High that he makes this presentation sincerely for his sake and that he may reward us for enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, and that he guides those who are willing to be guided, ameen.


1. Shaykh Bashir Yosuf Shiil:

From his mistakes which are in opposition to the manhaj of the Salaf:

A. From his statements: “The affair of revolting against the oppressive ruler is an a affair widespread and is not an affair that is new and (revolting) has precedence in the Salaf”

See the audio lecture: Points of Criticism Regarding the Manhaj of Bashir Yosuf Shiil by Shaykh Ḥasan Kafi - www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_conten...w&id=1025&Itemid=344

Let us examine what Allaah and his Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said regarding the affair of revolting against the Muslim ruler and is it really an affair which is differed in as Shaykh Bashir claims?

Allaah the Most High says in the Qur’aan:
“’O you who believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.”
[Sooratun-Nisaa’, 4:59]

‘Abdullahi Ibn ‘Abbās, the commentator of the Qur’aan and the noble companion says regarding those who are in mentioned to be “in authority” in the ayah are “The scholars and the rulers”. This narration is found in Tafsīr Ibn Jareer.

Imām al-Bukhārī and Imām Muslim narrate in their two ṣaḥīḥs on the authority of Abdullāh Ibn ‘Abbās that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whoever sees from his ruler that which he dislikes then let him be patient, for verily whoever revolts against his leader a hand span and he dies then his death is a death of pre-Islāmic ignorance”

Imām al-Bukhārī and Muslim also narrated on the authority of Abū Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whoever obeys me then they have obeyed Allaah and whoever disobeys me than they have disobeyed Allaah and whoever obeys the leader than they have obeyed me and whoever disobeys the ruler than they have disobeyed me”

Imām al-Bukhārī and Muslim narrate on the authority of ‘Abdullāh Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Hearing and obeying is (obligatory) upon the Muslim in that which he likes and that which he dislikes as long as he is not ordered with disobedience and if he is obeyed with disobedience then there is no hearing and obeying.”

Imaaam Muslim narrates in his Ṣaḥīh on the authority of Hudhayfa Ibn al-Yamaan that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“There will be leaders who will not be led by my guidance and who will not adopt my ways? There will be among them men who will have the hearts of devils in the bodies of human beings. I said: What should I do ‘O Messenger of Allaah, if I (happen) to live in that time? He replied: You will listen to the Ameer (ruler) and carry out his orders; even if your back is flogged and your wealth is snatched, you should listen and obey”

As for the statements of the Salaf in this issue:

Imām Abū ‘Uthmān as-Saaboonee (born 373) said in his momentous book, “The ‘Aqīdah of the Pious Predecessors and the People of Ḥadīth” page 94:

“They (the Salaf) also hold that Jihaad against the disbelievers is valid with them even if they are oppressors and tyrants. They agree to make supplication for them, asking to rectify their situation, to be given tawfeeq and to establish amongst their subjects. They do not deem permissible rebeliion against the leaders by the sword even if they are unust and tyrannical. They say that the extremists should be fought until they return to the obedience of the just Imām.”

So this is a consensus amongst the people of ḥadīth that it is prohibited to revolt against the unjust Muslim leader. This book written by Imām as-Saaboonee is a compilation of that which the Companions and the Salaf have agreed upon.

Imām Aḥmad said in “Usūlus-Sunnah” point number 53-54:

“And whoever revolts against the leader of the Muslims after the people have agreed upon him and united themselves behind him, after they have affirmed the khilaafah for him in whatever way this khilaafah may have been, by their pleasure and acceptance or by his force and domination over them then this revolter has disobeyed the Muslims and has contradicted the narrations of the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And if the one who revolted against the ruler died he would have died a death of ignorance. And the killing of the one in power is not lawful. Nor is it permissible for anyone amongst the people to revolt against them, whoever does that is an innovator and is upon other than the Sunnah and the correct path”

Imām at-Tahaawee mentions in “al-’Aqīdah at-Tahaawiyyah”:

“This is an explanation of the creed of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah....”

Point 72: “And we do not see (it permissible) to revolt against our leader and those over our affairs even if they are oppressive and we do not make supplication against them nor do we pull a hand away from their obedience. We see that their obedience is obligatory and (it is) from obedience to Allaah. As long as they do not order with disobedience and we make supplication for them with rectification and wellbeing.”

It is imperative that one understands that the statements of these past Imāms are the consensus of the Companions and those after them because when these scholars wrote these treatises their intention was to clarify the way of Ahl al-Sunnah and the Salaf. Were it not out of fearing boredom upon the readers we would have mentioned (numerous) statements regarding the impermissibility of revolting against the Muslim leader even if they are oppressive. However we will allude to (some of) them so that the reader may be convinced of the truth. From those pious predecessors that mention likes of the above were: Imām Abū Haneefah, Imām ash-Shaafi’ee, Imām Maalik, Imām Aḥmad, Sufyaan at-Thawree, Abdullah Ibnul-Mubaarak, Imām al-Barbahaaree and other than them and this can be found in ‘Usūl ‘Itiqaad Ahlus-Sunah wal Jamaa’ah by Imām al-Laalakaa’ee, As-Sunnah by Imām ‘Abdullāh Ibn Imām Aḥmad and “Sharḥ as-Sunnah” by Imām al-Barbahaaree - May Allaah have mercy upon them all.

Also from those scholars who explicitly stated a consensus that revolting against the Muslim ruler is impermissible was Imām an-Nawaawee. He mentions in Sharḥ Ṣaḥīh Muslim:

“As for revolting against the Muslim ruler and fighting them then it is prohibited by the Ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Muslims even if they are oppressive sinners”.

Likewise Haafidh Ibn Hajr mentions in Fathul-Baaree the statement of Imām Ibn Battal:

“And the Jurist have come to an Ijmaa’ (consensus) that it is obligatory to obey the Muslim leader who gained dominance and that Jihaad is fought alongside him and that obedience to him is better than revolting because of what it entails (from harms).”

Also from those who mention consensus of the Ummah is Imām ‘Abdil-Barr in his explanation of the Muwatta of Imām Maalik and Imām Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisee in al-Mughnee. Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said in Minhaaj as-Sunnah 4/531:

“The Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) never praised anyone regarding fighting in times of fitnah (between the Muslims) nor revolting against the ruler.”

He (Ibn Taymiyyah) also mentions in Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa 14/472:

“And revolting against the leaders with the sword is impermissible.”

How can it be then that after all these texts from the Qur’aan and Sunnah and the consensus of the Companions and those that followed them in goodness - that ‘Shaykh’ Bashir can claim that:

“Revolting against the Muslim ruler is something which is widespread and has precedence from the Salaf”?

Is it because he is ignorant of the Qur’aan and Sunnah or is it an attempt to deceive the people by mentioning such statements that no one from the past nor present scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah have mentioned. To rub salt in the wound after making this incorrect statement, the least he could have done was clarify to the listeners the correct position of Ahl al-Sunnah; that revolting against the Muslim leader is prohibited. However, he did not and persisted upon this error and began mentioning isolated incidents from the Salaf regarding individuals from them who revolted.

Before we answer this doubt of his we ask the questions:

If a person was sitting in the class when he said this - what do you think his outlook would be on revolting against the leader (or other general issues of takfeer)?

Naturally, he would deem it (revolt) as something of not so great importance since some of the Salaf did it (in his mind)? This misunderstanding and grievous error is caused by Shaykh Bashir’s belittlement of the affair. It would have been sufficient and upright to mention the texts of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and what the scholars have said instead of mentioning such a grave issue then leaving it up in the air without clarifying the truth.

As for the issue of some of the actions of the Salaf such Imām as-Shaa’bee revolting then this was explained in great detail by Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah in Minhaaj as-Sunnah and Imām Ibn Kathīr in al-Bidaaya wan-Nihaayah.

Firstly, isolated actions of the Salaf cannot be deemed as a hujjaah (proof) making things permissible or prohibited.

Secondly, these pious predecessors such as Imām as-Shaa’bee who revolted - it is authentically reported from them that they regretted their actions. Thirdly, Imām Ibn Kathīr in al-Bidaaya wan-Nihaayah clearly rebukes their actions and describes it as being a mistake and those who desire the truth regarding the affair and the statements of the Scholars should return to the audio of Shaykh Ḥasan Kaafee refuting Shaykh Bashir Shiil - www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_conten...w&id=1025&Itemid=344

Therefore, these examples which Shaykh Bashir presents are an unfortunate attempt to pull the wool over the listeners eyes and if he was sincere in explaining the truth of the affair he would have mentioned the above texts from the Qur’aan and Sunnah and the statements (ijmaa’ – consensus) of the Salaf.

So we ask the reader that he/she look at Shaykh Bashir’s statement regarding revolting against the Muslim leader in light of the words of Allaah and the ḥadīth of Allaah’s Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and the consensuses mentioned. With this it will become clear that indeed Shaykh Bashir has opposed one of the foundations from the foundations of the Sunnah and Allaah’s aid is sought!

B. From his statements: Leave alone speaking against the people, teach the people only, it’s not from my custom to research about the situation of people”

And: “It doesn’t concern you the situation of the people and this is a fitnah, and it’s the fitnah of refutations, and it entered upon the Somalis later on.”

Then: [b]“I advise my brothers that they beware of refutations and the books of refutations they don’t benefit anything books of refutation and you should go back to the books of the Salaf.”[/b]

Firstly, Allaah says:

“You [true believers in Islāmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin al-Ma'roof (i.e. Islāmic Monotheism and all that Islām has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islām has forbidden), and you believe in Allaah”[/b]
[Sūrah Aali-‘Imrān, 3:110]

And the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as narrated by Imām Muslim on the Authority of Abū Sa’eed al-Kudhree who said the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whoever of you sees an evil let him change it with his hand. And if he is not able then let him change it with his tongue. And if he is not able then let him hate it in his heart, and this is the lowest of īmān.”

Also Imām Muslim narrates on the authority of ‘Abdillah Ibn Mas’ood that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Never a Prophet had been sent before me by Allaah towards his nation who had not among his people (his) disciples and companions who followed his ways and obeyed his command. Then there came after them their successors who said whatever they did not practise, and practised whatever they were not commanded to do. He who strives against them with his hand is a believer: he who strives against them with his tongue is a believer, and he who strives against them with his heart is a believer and beyond that there is no faith even to the extent of a mustard seed.”

By way of these texts from the Qur’aan and Sunnah it becomes clear that enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is from the foundations of Islām. By leaving it off the Ummah is under the threat of being cursed the same way that the Jews were cursed.

Allaah the Most High says:
“Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dāwūd (David) and 'Eeesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allaah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds.
They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evil¬doing, sins, polytheism, disbelief, etc.) which they committed.
Vile indeed was what they used to do.”
[Sooratul-Maa’idah, 5:78-79]

How is it then that Shaykh Bashir then encourages us to remain silent about individuals who oppose the Qur’aan and Sunnah and commands us to leave off speaking about the people, whilst Allaah tells us that those who do not enjoin the good and forbid the evil were cursed. Likewise, Imām Aḥmad mentions in his Musnad on the authority of Abū Bakr that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“There are not a people that sins are committed within them, and they have the ability to forbid it and they do not forbid it except that they are at risk that Allaah includes all of them in punishment”

This ḥadīth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Ṣaḥīh al-Musnad

Also Imām Aḥmad narrates in his Musnad on the authority of Abū Sa’eed al-Khudree that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Do not let the fear of the people stop any of you in saying the truth if they see it or hear it or witness it”

This ḥadīth was declared authentic by Shaykh Muqbil in Ṣaḥīh al-Musnad

How are we expected to act in light of these divine verses and prophetic narrations in which Allaah commands us to enjoin the good and forbid the evil? Do these aayaat and ḥadīth not take precedence over the statements of Shaykh Bashir Shiil? The answer is apparent for those who seek truth in the matter. If we were to remain silent about those who innovate in the religion of Allaah the Most High and deviate from the Sunnah, then this would result in the religion of Allaah being corrupted. Silence about the innovations in the religion and the innovators are in opposition to the commands of Allaah and His Messenger. And part of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is by refuting the innovators and deviants.

“It was mentioned to Imām Aḥmad: ‘A man fasts, prays and make ’ittikaaf, meaning he strives hard in worship, is he more beloved to you or the one who refutes the people of innovation? He said “if he stands, fasts , and makes ‘ittikaaf then this is for himself, and if he refutes the people of innovation then this is for the Muslims and this is better.’”

Shaykhul-Islām says in Minhaaj as-Sunnah 2/53:

“And commanding the people with the Sunnah and forbidding innovation is from enjoining the good and forbidding the evil and it is from the best of deeds”

Also Shaykh Abdurazaaq Ibn Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abaad (hafidhullaah) mentions in his book:

“The Sound statement regarding the one who denies the categorization of tawḥīd” pg. 9 after mentioning words from Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah regarding speaking against the people of innovation, he says:

“Verily there has appeared in our time from some individuals and parties deceptive positions and lowly opinions that call without shyness to remaining silent about the people of innovation and desires and not warning from them, claiming that this is the upright way, and the perfect path. And they say that this (not refuting) is reparation of the cracks (within the Ummah) and an assembly of the masses (of Muslims) and a unification of the rows and a gathering of speech (unifying the voice of the Ummah). Without a doubt this is a manhaj which is false - its harms are many and its dangers are grave upon Islām and the Sunnah. In it (remaining silent of the people of innovation) is a great establishment for the people of innovation and desires in spreading their misguidance and their falsehood, and it is a manhaj (way) which is deviant from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah.”

This statement is over 700 years old, what about the multiplicity of Islamic groups and movements and the innovations they propound today, ‘O seeker of the truth?

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Fawzān says in his book, “Beneficial Answers to Questions on Innovated Methodologies”
www.troid.ca/store/product.php?productid=16219&cat=0&page=1

Question Number 9:

Is there any harm in warning against those sects which are in opposition to the Methodology of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah?

Answer: “We warn against all those who oppose the Salaf in general and say we adhere to the path of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah while abandoning those who oppose Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah regardless of whether there opposition is major or minor. This is because if we are lenient with the opposition it is possible it will grow and increase. Therefore opposition to the way of the Salaf is not allowed at all. Furthermore it is obligatory to adhere to the path of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah in both major and minor issues.”

Shaykh Jamaal Ibn Furayhaan al-Haarithee commented on this question and said:

“This is the custom of the Salaf. Rather they criticize the one who remains silent Mohamed Ibn Bindaar al-Jarjanee once said to Imām Aḥmad, “it has become hard for me to say this person is like this and that person is like that (disparaging them)” So Imām Aḥmad replied “If you remain silent and I remain silent then how will an ignorant person realize the authentic narration from the weak” (Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa 28/231).


C. From his statements “It was not from the path of the Salaf to speak against the people.”

This ascription of Shaykh Bashir that refuting the innovators was not the path of the Salaf is a grave mistake. This indicates one of two things - either he has no knowledge of the way of the Salaf or he has knowledge but purposely deceives the people. For verily if he was to read the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and the biographies of the Companions and the books of the Salaf he would come to the conclusion that not only was it the way of the Salaf to refute those who oppose the Qur’aan and Sunnah but that it is obligatory to do so.

Imām Muslim narrates in his Ṣaḥīh on the authority of Abū Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“There will come a people who will speak regarding that which you and your fathers have never heard so be aware (of them) and let them be aware.”

Imām al-Bukharee and Muslim mention in their two Ṣaḥīhs on the authority of ‘Aaishah, may Allaah be pleased with her who said:

“A man asked permission to enter upon Allaahs Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said ‘admit him, what an evil brother of his ‘aasheerah or a son of his aasheerah!”(some scholars say ‘aasheerah means tribe or group)’ But when the man entered, the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) spoke to him in a very polite manner. (And when that person left) I said ‘‘O Messenger of Allaah, you have said what you had said, yet you spoke to him in a a very polite manner?’ The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, ‘’O Aa’ishah, the worst people are those whom the people desert or leave in order to save themselves from their dirty language.’”

Imām Bukharee and Imām Muslim also narrate on the authority of Abū Sa’eed that the Messenegr of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“From the progeny of this man (Dhul Khuwasirah At-Tameemee)” or he said, “From the offspring of this man, there will come a people who will recite the Qur’aan but it will not go beyond their throats. They will go through the religion like an arrow going through a target. They will murder the people of Islām whilst ignoring the people of idol-worship. If I were to reach them (their time), I would destroy them like the people of ‘Aad were destroyed.”

Imām Aḥmad narrates on the authority of Abū Umaamah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said regarding the Khawaarij:

“(They are) the worst people killed under the sky, and the best people killed are those whom they kill. They are the dogs of Hellfire.” This ḥadīth was authenticated by Shaykh Muqbil and Shaykh al-Albānī.

Also the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said on the authority of Abdullāh Ibn ‘Umar:

“The Qadariyyah are the Majoos (fire-worshippers) of this Ummah, if they get sick do not visit them and if they die do not witness their burial” Narrated by Imām Ibn Maajah and Imām Abū Dāwūd and the ḥadīth was declared Ḥasan by Shaykh al-Albānī.

In these aforementioned statements, the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) spoke against innovations and the people of innovation and cautioned his ummah from them. So how is it that Shaykh Bashir Shiil -may Allaah guide him- says that speaking against the people was not from the path of the Salaf, and that refuting is a fitnah. What the generalization of Shaykh Bashir entails is that the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and his Companions used to say things that cause fitnah, and we seek Allaahs refuge from such an idea.

Does Shaykh Bashir Shiil not know that Imām Muslim narrates on the authority of ‘Abdullāh Ibn ‘Umar that he said regarding the people who deny qadr (decree):

“Inform them that I am free from them and they are free from me, and if they were to spend the mountain of Uhud in gold it would not benefit them until they affirm the Qadr.”

Is this not a refutation? Does Shaykh Bashir Shiil not know that Imām Ibn Battah mentions in his book “Al-Ibaanah” on the authority of ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Abbās that he said:

“Do not sit with the people of innovation. For verily sitting with them is a sickness to the heart”.

Is this not a refutation?

From the strangeness of this man (Bashir Shiil) is that he says “leave the books of refutation they don’t benefit anything go back to the books of the Salaf.”

His statement go back to the books of the Salaf is an indication that he thinks the Salaf did not refute and clarify the misguidance of the people of innovation. Does Bashher Shiil not know that Imām al-Bukhārī mentions in the beginning of his Ṣaḥīh, chapters in refutation of the Murji’ah and the Khawaarij and in the end of the book he mentions chapters in refutation of the Qadariyyah and the Jahmiyyah? Does he not know that Imām Abū Dāwūd mentions in his Sunan, “The Chapter of Refuting the Jahmiyyah.” Does he not know that Imām al-Bukhārī has an entire book called, “The Refutation of the Jahmiyyah and the people who negate Allaah’s Attributes.” Does he not know that Imām Aḥmad has a book entitled also “The Refutation of the Jahmiyyah”. Is he ignorant of the book of Imām ‘Uthmān ad-Daarimee entitled, “The Refutation of Bishr al-Mareesee”? Is he ignorant of the fact that it was mentioned to Imām Aḥmad:

“A man fasts, prays and make ’ittikaaf, meaning he strives hard in worship, is he more beloved to you or the one who refutes the people of innovation? He said “if he stands, fasts and makes ‘ittikaaf then this is for himself, and if he refutes the people of innovation then this is for the Muslims and this is better.”

How can Shaykh Bashir then say after all this that refutations were not the way of the Salaf and that they don’t benefit? From the things that this statement entails is that the aforementioned books from the Salaf do not benefit and Allaah’s aid is sought from such a proposal.

As a result, either he is ignorant of the way of the Salaf or he purposely chooses to lie upon them by saying that they did not used to refute the people of innovation. May Allaah guide him.

What is also important to note is that the refutation of the people of innovation and misguidance is done by mentioning names if required, and not as we hear some individuals say ‘refute the innovation not the person’. Not only is it logical (mentioning names because every innovation needs an innovator to introduce it, but it is something that has precedence in the Sunnah like the ḥadīth when the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said regarding Dhul-Kuwaysirah:

“Verily from the offsprings of this one…” So he (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) used the word Haadha (this one) which is specification and not mere generalization. Also it was something done by the Companions and those that came after them as found in the books of Sunnah such as “Usūl ‘Itiqaad Ahlis-Sunnah” and “Al-Ibaanah” and other than these books. Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah says in Majmoo’ Al-Fataawaa 28/233:

“So it is obligatory to warn from those innovations even if that necessitates mentioning them (innovators) and specifying them.”

D. From his statements is that: “the issue of staying away from the people of innovation and not listening to the innovators is not an affair which is agreed upon by the scholars”

Allaah the Most High says:
“And when you see those who engage in a false conversation about Our Verses (of the Qur'aan) by mocking at them, stay away from them till they turn to another topic. And if Shaytaan (Satan) causes you to forget, then after the remembrance sit not you in the company of those people who are the and wrong¬doers”[Sooratul-An’aam, 6:68]

Imām Ibn Jareer at-Tabaaree mentions in his tafsīr on the authority of Imām Muhammad Ibn Sireen that he said:

“This ayah is regarding the people of innovation”

Also, this was the position of Imām at-Tabraree and Imām as-Shawkaanee in their tafsīrs.

Imām al-Bukhārī mentions in his Ṣaḥīh on the authority of ‘Aaishah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) read the ayah “It is He Who has sent down to you the Book (this Qur'ân). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkâm (commandments, etc.), Al-Faraa'id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers, etc.)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah, and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord." And none receive admonition except men of understanding” He then said “If you see those following the ambiguous verses then know that they are those whom Allaah has mentioned, so beware of them”.

Imām Muslim narrates in his Ṣaḥīh on the Authority of Abū Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “There will come a people who will speak regarding that which you and your fathers have never heard of so be aware (of them) and let them be aware.”

Based on the above mentioned ayah and the two authentic narrations from the Prophet Muhammad (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) it becomes evident that the affair of warning from the people of innovation is an affair which has origins in the sharee’ah and it is not something which surfaced later on after the death of the Messeneger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Not only does it have precedence but it is something which is obligatory and the person who does not adhere to it (staying away from the innovators) is a sinner. This is derived from known principle in Usūlul-Fiqh. The Scholars have mentioned that, “the command necessitates obligation, and the prohibition necessitates impermissibility”. So any command given by Allaah and his Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), the origin of it is obligation and any prohibition, the origin of it is impermissibly and anyone who leaves off an obligation or commits a prohibition then they are sinners as mentioned by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymīn and other than him in his explanation of “al-Waraqaat fee Usūl al-Fiqh”. Imām Abū Dāwūd mentions in his Sunan, The book of Sunnah, “Chapter: Staying away from the People of Desires and Hating Them” and also he mentions in the book of Sunnah, “Chapter: Not Giving Salaams to the People of Desires”

Although these proofs from the Qur’aan and Sunnah are enough to show the invalidity of Bashir Shiil’s statement(s) we would also like to mention a consensus quoted by Imām Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn ‘Amr Al- Awzaa’ee (d.157) as occurs in “Tareekh ad-Dimashq” 6/372 stating that it is impermissible to sit and learn from the innovators and it is waajib that they are boycotted. So the reader can be satisfied, we present twenty-nine other scholars past and present all mentioning an ‘Ijmaa’ (consensus) that it is impermissible to learn from the innovators and that it is obligatory to boycott them.

1. Imām Abdurahmaan Ibn Abee az-Zinaad (d.174) and he is from teachers of the teachers of Imām al-Bukhārī al-Ibaanah by Imām ibn Battah 2/532

2. Imām Fudhayl Ibn ‘Iyaḍh (d.187) in Hilyat al-Awliyaa 8/104

3. Imām Abū ‘Ubayd Qaasim Ibn Salaam (d.223) in his book entitled al-Imaan page 34-35

4. Imām Aḥmad Ibn Hanbal (d.241) in Masaa’il Imām Aḥmad libni Ṣāliḥ 2/166-167

5. Imām Ismaa’eel al-Muzanee (d.264) in his treatise Sharḥ as-Sunnah page 85

6. Imām Abū Haatim ar-Raazee (d.277) in ‘Sharḥ ‘Usūl ‘Itiqaad Ahl al-Sunnah 1/197-202

7. Imām Abū Zu’rah ar-Raazee (d.264) in ‘Sharḥ ‘Usūl ‘Itiqaad Ahl al-Sunnah 1/197-202

8. Imām Ibn Battah (d.387) in his book al-Ibaanah by Imām Ibn Battah 2/476

9. Imām Ibn Abū Zamneen (d.399) as in ‘Usūl as-Sunnah page 293

10. Imām Abū Mansoor Ma’mar ibn Aḥmad(d.418) as in Al-Hajjah Fee Bayan al-Mahajjah 1/231-232

11. Imām Abū Uthmān Ismaa’eel as-Saaboonee (d.449) as in Aqīdahtus-Salaf wa Ashaabil-ḥadīth page 123

12. Al-Qaadhee Abū Ya’laa (d.458) in his book “Al-Amr bil Ma’roof wa An-Nahi ‘an al-Munkar” 189-200

13. Imām Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr (d.473) in his book “At-Tamheed” 6/127

14. Imām Abū Ad-Dhafr As-Sam’aanee (d.489) as in “Sawn al-Mandiq wal-kalaam li as-Suyuutee 153-155

15. Imām al-Baghawee (d.516) in his book Sharḥ as-Sunnah 1/226-227

16. Imām Muwafaq ad-Deen Ibn Qudaamah (d.620) as mentioned in Al-Aadaab As-Shareeyah li Ibn Muflih 1/232

17. Imām Abū al-‘Abbās al-Qurtubee (d.656) as mentioned in Al-Mufhim fee Sharḥ Ṣaḥīh Muslim 6/534

18. Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (d.738) Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa 24/174-175 and 28/231-232

19. Imām Ibnul-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d.751) as in as-Sawaa’iq al-Mursalah 3/1064-1080 and Madaariji AS-Saalikeen 1/372

20. Imām Muhammad Ibn Muflih al-Hanbalee (d763) in Al-Aadaab As-Shareeyah li Ibn Muflih 1/232

21. Imām Abū Ishaaq ash-Shaatibee (d790) as mentioned in his book Al-‘Itisaam: 1/142

22. Imām al-Mujadid Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab (d1206) as in Majmoo’atu al-Mu’alafaat page 11

23. Shaykh ‘Abdul al-Lateef Ibn Abdur-Rahmaan Aalush-Shaykh (d1293) in Majmoo’ Ar-Rasaa’il wal Masaa’il An-Najdeeyah 3/111

24. Shaykh Ibrāhīm Ibn Abdul-Lateef Aalush-Shaykh (d1329) in ‘Ijmaa Ahli As-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah ‘alaa Takfeer Al-Mu’adilah wal-Jahmeeyah page 157

25. Shaykh Abdullah Ibn ‘Abdul-Lateef Aalush-Shaykh (d1339) as in ‘Ijmaa Ahli As-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah ‘alaa Takfeer Al-Mu’adilah wal-Jahmeeyah page 157

26. Shaykh Sulaymān Ibn Sahmaan An-Najdee (d1349) in ‘Ijmaa Ahli As-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah ‘alaa Takfeer Al-Mu’adilah wal-Jahmiyyah page 37-48

27. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-lateef Aalush-Shaykh (d1367) as in Ad-Duroor As-Sineeyah 8/443

28. Shaykh Humood Ibn ‘Abdillaah at-Tuwayjiree (d1413) as mentioned in his book “Al-Qawl Al-Baleegh fee Tahdheer min Jamaatut-Tableegh page 31-33

These consensuses can be found at the sources mentioned or in the treatise ‘Ijmaa’ al-‘Ulamāʾ ‘alaa al-Hajr wa At-Tahdheer min Ahlil-Ahwaa (The Consensuses of the Scholars on Boycotting and Warning from the People of Desires) written by Shaykh Khālid Ibn Dhawee Ad-Dhufayree. In light of these statements from the Imāms of the religion it becomes evident that Shaykh Bashir’s statement: “the issue of staying away from the people of innovation and not listening to the innovators is not an affair which is agreed upon by the scholars” is a grave mistake intended to mislead the youth and open the door to co-operation with the people of innovation. This manhaj of accommodation of the innovations adopted by Shaykh Bashir is a manhaj in opposition to The Qur’aan and Sunnah and the ‘Ijmaa of the Companions. For example allowing Jamaa’atut-Tableegh to recruit youth in his masjid...

Shaykh Ibn Bāz was asked about jamaa’atut-tableegh and that which is with them from shirk and innovations and jama’aah ikhwaanul-muslimeeen (The Muslim Brotherhood) and that which is with them from partisanship and revolting against the Muslim Ruler and their lack of listening and obeying – are these two sects enter in to the destroyed (seventy-two) sects?

“They enter in to the seventy-two sects, whoever opposes the creed of ahl al-sunnah, they enter the seventy-two (sects) and the intent from his statement “My Nation” is the nation who accepted the call meaning those that answered him and they showed their adherence to him they are the seventy-three sects, the one that is the correct, saved one - is the one who followed him and was steadfast upon his religion. And seventy-two sects, from them is the disbeliever and from them is the sinner and from them is the innovator.”

The questioner interjects: “meaning that these two sects (ikhwaanul-muslimeen, jamaa’atut-tableegh) they are included in the seventy-two sects?”

He answered: “Yes, they are included in the seventy-two sects and the murji’ah and other than them (are included). al-murji’ah wal-khawaarij, some of the people of knowledge see that the khawaarij are from the disbelievers and outside (the fold of Islām). However, they enter in to the general seventy-two sects.

Sharḥ al-muntaqaa (recorded cassette – 1418 [1995CE])

Also asked to Imām Ibn Bāz:

Questioner: “Is it permissible to go with ikhwaanul-muslimeen for da’wah”

Answer: “Verily the jamaa’atut-tableegh do not have any insight in to the affairs of ‘aqīdah therefore it is not permissible to go out with them except the one who has knowledge and insight in to the right ‘aqeeedah, that which ahl al-sunnah are upon so he may direct them and give them advice.

Majmoo al-Fataawee Ibn Bāz

The following was asked to Imām al-Albānī

Question: “Is it permissible for a student of knowledge or other than him that he go out with them (jamaa’atut-tableegh) with the claim of calling to Allaah?”

Answer: “Jamaa’atut-tableegh are not upon the manhaj of the book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and that which our righteous predecessors were upon and if the affair is like this, then it is not permissible to go out with them because it negates our manhaj in our propagation of the methodology of the salaf al-ṣāliḥ…they jamaa’atut-tableegh do not give any importance to calling to the book of Allaah and the Sunnah…For this reason they are similar to the jamaa’atul-ikhwaanul muslimeen so they say ‘verily our da’wah is founded upon the book and the sunnah’ but this is only just (empty) words, therefore ‘aqīdah does not join them (in their call). So this one is matarudee, ash’aree and this one is soofee and this one has no madhhaab?!…so the call of jamaa’atut-tableegh is modern-day soofism. They call to manners (alone), as for the rectification of the creed then ‘they do not move one who is stagnant’ [meaning it is ineffective da’wah they call to].

Fataawaa al-Emreratiyyah lil al-Albānī

Dr. Ṣāliḥ al-Fawzān, member of the permanent committee of major scholars was asked about making khurooj (going out) with Jamaa’atut-Tableegh (for da’wah):

Answer: “The khurooj in the path of Allaah is not the khurooj that they mean today (jamaa’atut-tableegh). Al-khurooj in the path of Allaah means going out to battle (legislated war), as for what they (jamaa’atut-tableegh) called khurooj today, then this is bid’ah that did not emanate from the salaf.

From the book: Three Lectures Regarding Knowledge and Da’wah.



...allowing Adnan Ar’oor a platform to speak after the Scholars warned from him (and these warnings were presented to him on cassette yet the admonitions from the scholars were abandoned?). Allowing ‘Abdullahi Ibn Bayah, the famous Soofee Ash’aree - who denies Allaah’s attributes and who is the Shaykh of the Soofee mouthpiece of the West, Hamza Yusuf - to speak in his masjid (a man from the heads of soofiyyah!), inviting the likes of Muhammad Dirir who is an Ikhwaanee modernist, inviting the likes of the known Takfeeree Xassaan Xussein who declared all the Muslim governments to be disbelievers, who declares Shaykh Al-Albaanee to be a Murj’ee, declared Shaykh Ibn Bāz to be a “scholar for dollars” also from his sayings is that “parts of Sharḥus-Sunnah of Imām al-Barbahaaree need to be burnt”. These incidents clearly demonstrate that this statement of his (the issue of staying away from the people of innovation and not listening to the innovators is not an affair which is agreed upon by the scholars) is not an honest mistake rather it is something he practically applies, holds to be permissible and readily implements.


E. His believing that the seventy-two misguided sects of Islām are disbelievers. He says in his cassettes in defense of Shareef Abdinoor:

“If you declare Shareef Abdinoor is not from Ahl al-Sunnah this means that you declared him to be a Kāfir”

And this incorrect understanding leads him to think that Shaykh ‘Uthmān (Mu’aalim) is declaring Shareef Abdinoor a disbeliever because he said “Shareef Abdinoor is not from Ahl al-Sunnah” and he constantly reiterates that this is declaring Shareef Abdinoor to be a disbeliever. What this necessitates is that the Muslims are only of two types either from Ahl al-Sunnah or he is a Kāfir.

Sadly, once again we see how Shaykh Bashir opposes the Qur’aan and Sunnah and ‘Ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Companions and the Salaf.

Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah was asked as occurs in Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa 3/351 about the ḥadīth of splitting, when the Messsenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

Shaykhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah was asked as is in Majmoo’ al-Fatawaa 3/351 about the ḥadīth of splitting, when the Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said “The Jews split up in to seventy-one sects, the Christians split up in to seventy-two sects and this nation will split up into seventy-three sects. All of them in the hellfire except one.” It was said “Who are they ‘O Messenger of Allaah” He (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said “Those who are upon what I and my companions are upon today” and in another narration “whoever is upon that which I and my companions are upon today” and in another narration “whoever is upon the likes of which I and my companions are on today”

Shaykhul-Islām was asked about this ḥadīth, and he said after a long explanation “…and this is built upon another principle, and it is takfeer of the people of innovation. So whoever expels the Jahmiyyah from them (seventy-three sects) then he did not declare the rest of them to be disbelievers. So indeed he does not declare the rest of the people of innovation to be disbelievers rather he makes them from the people who have been threatened with the punishment of the hellfire like the sinners and the disobedient ones. And he makes his statement (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) “all of them are in the hellfire” like that which came (mentioned from the texts) regarding the rest of the sins like the one who eats the wealth of the orphan and other than that”

Allaah says:
Verily, those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, they eat up only fire into their bellies, and they will be burnt in the blazing Fire![Sooratun-Nisaa, 4:10]

Does this mean that everyone who consumes the wealth of the orphan is a disbeliever? According to your corrupt understanding (Bashir) everyone who eats the wealth of the orphan is a disbeliever. Because Allaah said “they eat up only fire into their bellies and they will be burnt in the blazing fire” and you understood from his (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) statement “all of them are in the hellfire” that the seventy-two sects are disbelievers, and this is a corrupt understanding (of the ḥadīth).

Shaykhul-Islām also said in Majmoo’ al-Fatawaa 7/219 regarding the same issue: “Whoever says that the seventy-two sects: every one of them are disbelievers, the type disbelief that expels them from the fold of Islām, then he has opposed the Qu’raan, the Sunnah and consensus of the Companions - may Allaah be pleased with all of them” So whoever says that the seventy-two sects are outside the fold of Islām then he has opposed the Qu’raan, Sunnah and the Consensus of the Companions. This is similar to the likes of you and those similar to you who have opposed the Qur’aan, the Sunnah and the consensus of the Companions. Shaykhul-Islām goes on and says “rather he has opposed the consensus of the four Imāms and other than the four Imāms. So then there is not from amongst them (the Companions and the Imāms) anyone who declared that everyone of the seventy-two sects to be disbelievers.”

Also Shaykh Abdul-‘Azīz Ibn Bāz in the compilation Fataawa Noorun ‘ala ad-Darb 1/15-16 answers with the same answer likewise and Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Fawzān in his explanation of Sharḥ as-Sunnah of Imām al-Barbahaaree 1/412. Or you can refer back to the refutation of Shaykh Hasaan Kaafi URL.

2. Mistakes of Shaykh Muhammad Umal

This is a summarized version of the refutation of Shaykh Muhammed al-Imām al-Yemenee upon Shaykh Umal. Umal authored nine cassettes in response to a refutation of Shaykh Yahyá al-Haajooree hafidhuhullah. Thereafter, they were translated into Arabic by students of Shaykh Muhammad al-Imām (in which he responded to the errors). Due to the length of the cassettes we have selected only a few excerpts to illustrate the gross mistakes of Umal:

A. Umal says in cassette 6, side B:
“When I was asked by a young man about Shareef Abdinoor and Omar al-Farooq are they from Ahlul-Bid’ah or not? So I said to him ‘how long have you been abiding by the deen?’ He said ‘three years’. So I answered him with that which was more befitting for him than this question because this is the way of the guided Salafī manhaj, as for the manhaj of explaining (the mistakes of) then this is a false manhaj.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Imām replied:

.....”His statement ‘false manhaj’: Explaining the mistakes of an individual and mentioning him by his name is not a false manhaj. As long as the person has mistakes and oppositions that necessitate him to be warned from”

Then the Shaykh mentioned that the origin of warning is that a person’s name is not mentioned. And the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) used to do this a lot and say, “what is wrong with such” a people - without mentioning a name. However if there is a need for it and the benefit is greater, than the individual’s name is mentioned and specified, as was done by the Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and his Companions and the scholars of Islām. The Messenger of Allaah (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said regarding ‘Abdillaah Dhul-Khuwaysirah:

“Verily there will come from the offspring of this man a people” so he pointed to him and specified him.

Also the ḥadīth that’s in Bukharee and Muslim:

“A man asked permission to enter upon Allaahs Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said ‘admit him, what an evil brother of his ‘aasheerah or a son of his aasheerah!”(some scholars say ‘aasheerah means tribe or group)’ But when the man entered, the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) spoke to him in a very polite manner. (And when that person left) I said ‘‘O Messenger of Allaah, you have said what you had said, yet you spoke to him in a a very polite manner?’ The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, ‘’O Aa’ishah, the worst people are those whom the people desert or leave in order to save themselves from their dirty language.’”

And Mohamed Ibn Sireen mentions:

“That the people did not used to ask about the situations of others. But when the fitnah took place Ahl al-Sunnah said to the people of innovation ‘mention to us your men (that you take knowledge from)’ and this a principle and a guideline showing that a person takes heed and is careful whom they take their knowledge from.

B. Umal says in cassette 9, side B: “It is obligatory that our importance be (placed upon) gathering the ummah in one line. And that the differences that our present in the ummah now be looked at, and how the salaf used to work together with the presence of differences, and that we work together in advising, and in issues that differences are permissible, and in issues of ijtihaad. And that splitting is not spread in it (i.e. the ummah). This person is Ikhwaanee, and this is Ittihaadee and this is that. We are sufficed with the problems that are present in the Ummah by the disbelievers. And this is the Manhaj of the Salaf....”

Shaykh Muhammad Al-Imām responded:

…“Without a doubt the call to unification (of the Ummah) and the unification of the Ummah in one row is a legislative request. It is an obligation that Allaah has made obligatory upon us all. However from what we have clarified and mentioned, the listener knows and the writer understands from what is written on these papers regarding the mistakes of Umal, that Umal has missed the correct (understanding) regarding the call of unification because there is a difference between the call of Ahl al-Sunnah to unification (of the Ummah) and the call of the callers of partisanship to unification. The people of partisanship call the people every so often to agreement and harmony and to aiding one another, but their intention is to agree upon their paths of partisanship, and based upon their secret organizations (or pledges of allegiance) and their deceptive tricks. As for Ahl al-Sunnah then they call the people to agree and harmonise upon the path of the Messenger. From the aspect that the truth is what is relied upon and returned to in every affair. So Umal in these cassettes defends different partisanships and individuals of partisanship and does not touch them with any evil. And he directs defamation and criticism (towards Ahl al-Sunnah)....”

…“and if he (Umal) remains upon what he is upon, then I do not see and advise that knowledge is sought from him nor that he is returned to, because of that which is found with him from mistakes and his laying down principles and things that are in opposition to that which Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah are upon, and Allaah’s aid is sought”

3. Mistakes of Shaykh Muhammad Dirir, Shaykh Mustafa Haaji Haaruun , Qaari Abdurashid Ali Sufi

Questions asked to Shaykh ‘Abdullāhi al-Barbaraawee (hafidhullaah):
These questions were presented to the Shaykh by the brothers at Masjid al-Furqaan (TROID) on May 11th 2010 after Ṣalātudh-Dhuhr.

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Na’am

Questioner: As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Wa ‘alaykumus Salaam wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakatuh

Questioner: Is this Shaykh Barabaraawee?

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Na’am

Questioner: Barakallaahu Feek, ‘O Shaykh - We are some Salafī youth calling from Canada.

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: I understand, barakallaahu feekum

Questioner: We had some questions ‘O Shaykh - we wanted you to answer them, is this a good time?

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: No, I am sort of busy. I am preparing for a lesson I’m going to teach.

Questioner: Okay, then when is a good time for us to call so you can answer these questions regarding some callers coming to this country. We wanted you to tell us what you know about their situation.

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: I understand
Questioner: Some of them are from Hargeisa and others from Nairobi. So we wanted some short time that you can tell us about them and what you know about them, are they Salafī and can we seek knowledge from them?
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Who is from them? If the questions are summarized we can answer them.

Questioner: From them is a Shaykh named Muhammed Umal.
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Okay

Questioner: As for us Yaa Shaykh al-hamdulillaah we are Salafī youth and we know what the ‘Ulamāʾ have said about Muhammad Umal. Shaykh Yahyá (al-Haajooree) refuted him –hafidhullaah- and Shaykh Muhammed al-Imām and that he is a man from the hizb of Ittihaad - we know this. However, we wanted your advice because some of the youth have doubts. So they said let us call Shaykh ‘Abdullāhi al-Barbaraawee and let us see what he says about Shaykh Muhammad Umal. Some are arguing that he is a Salafī and that he is upon the path of the Salaf. What do you say about this affair?
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Wallaahi, as for me I do not know him personally but from the information I have about him from that which individuals that know him have told me and (based on) the positions he took from the fitan (trials) that happened in Somalia. (Then) To say that he (Umal) is a man upon the manhaj of the Salaf and he did not oppose the manhaj of the Salaf in anything, (then) this is not true.

Questioner: Barakallaahu feek. Also we wanted to ask about an individual located in Hargeisa named Mohamed Dirir?
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Mohamed Dirir he is from the Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen. His manhaj is the manhaj of Ikhwaanil-Muslimeen.

Questioner: Barakallaahu Feek. Also another Shaykh named Mustafa Haaji Haaruun?
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: From that which I knew he was from the of hizb of Ittihaad or the hizb of ‘Itisaam (off-shoot of Ittihaad).

Questioner: Also another Qaaree which is well known named Abdurashidd Ali Sufi who is located in Qatar, what do you know about his situation?
Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: I know he is from Jamaa’atut-Tableegh. And some brothers I rely upon have told me that he is a Sufi Ash’ari.

Questioner: Barakallaahu Feek Shaykh, May Allaah reward you for your time that you have given us. We wanted to explain these affairs to some of the youth, and the advices of the Somali Mashaayikh have said about these individuals.

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Did you record this?
Questioner: We recorded it but we wanted your permission to spread it, yes or no?

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: No, tell them yourselves but don’t record it. It’s possible other evils might occur because of it.
Questioner: Okay Yaa Shaykh, we will not record it we hold on to it (the recording) and we will not spread it.

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: Barakallaahu Feek
Questioner: Jazaak Allaahu Khayr

Shaykh al-Barbaraawee: As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum wa Rahmatullaah
Questioner: Wa ‘alaykumus Salaam…

End of conversation.


Another set of questions posed to Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi as-Somaalee by the brothers at Masjid al-Furqaan (TROID) also on May 11th 2010 after ṣalātudh-dhuhr:
After introducing ourselves to the Shaykh and explaining that we are calling from Canada we asked him some of the speakers invited to the rahma conference:
Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: Do you want these questions answered right now or tomorrow night?

Questioner: Wallaahi, we would like for you to answer these questions urgently regarding something that’s happening in this city

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: What is from it?

Questioner: Some of the hizbees part of al-itihaad are holding a conference in a week and a half, so from the attendees are Muhammad Umal, who is known, and others, so we would like a brief advice regarding what these callers are upon whom are coming. They are approximately fifteen and we would like you to tell us about those whom you know of.

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: ...the youth (audio unclear) do you know that Umal and those like him are from itihaad?

Questioner: We understand well, there are other youths that have doubts.
Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: No, no, no, leave them with their affair, those who have doubts, it’s up to them. Umal is the one whom when Shaykh Yahyá (al-Haajooree) refuted, (yet) he continued to babble on. He is someone who is part of itihaad and those with him are like him, and those who want to be with him, then leave them with him. As for those who want sunnah; these individuals, their affairs are clear. The agenda of itihaad is clear and is not something new we need to speak about today. Their affair is clear; the fitnah they started in Somalia is the one today, because of it Somalia is being destroyed by the hands of the disbelievers, each party trying to rule the other. So if the issue is something else, then I’m ready, but if it is Umal, the major scholars have spoken about him, there’s nothing remaining for me to speak about regarding him.

Questioner: Baarakallaahu feek Shaykh, what advice to you have for the youth here, regarding Shaykh Muhammad Umal, and others such as Muhammad Dirir coming from Hargeisa, what do you know about him, “Muhammad Dirir”?

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: (Thinking we are still asking about Muhammad Umal) Brother, may Allaah be pleased be with you! You know him, are you not Shaykh Yahyá’s student?!

Questioner: Yes

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: Did Shaykh Yahyá not refute him?

Questioner: Yes, Shaykh Yahyá did refute him, so did Shaykh Muhammad al-Imām!

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: Okay, okay, then why are you saying you don’t know him (Umal)? The person who is convinced with it, the major scholars have refuted him, whether they are from the land of Somalia or Yemen.
Questioner: No, not Shaykh Umal, his condition is clear, we are taking about Muhammad Dirir, he is from Hergeysa as it’s written on the flyer, we have no knowledge of him, what is he upon?

Shaykh Abdullāhi Hashi: As for Muhammad Dirir ask Shaykh Abdullāhi Barbaraawee [see previous telelink converstion] about his condition. Do you have his number?

Questioner: No
[The Shaykh told us where we can find

Last edit: 9 years 5 months ago by troid.ca admin.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • troid.ca admin
  • troid.ca admin's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
9 years 5 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #884 by troid.ca admin
Replied by troid.ca admin on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010
English Speakers

4. Said Rageah

Said Regeah, Imām of Abū Hurairah masjid in Toronto, Canada. One whom we met with and advised more than eight years ago (before he became known) and advised him with the manhaj of the salaf and holding firm to the ‘ulamāʾ. He is an official lecturer on the al-Maghrib roster, he lectures alongside Yaasir Qadhee, Zakir Naik, Abū Muslimah, Bilāl Philips and many others.

We direct the reader to the following posts:

Modern Myths Conference/al-Maghrib and their praise for the kharajee Anwar al-Awlaki:
www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_kunena...view&catid=14&id=716

Sa'eed Rageah, his legacy of cooperation with Ahlul-Bid'ah since 2002
salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum...960&CFTOKEN=48107328

Sa’eed Rageah, Abū Usamah and others in cooperation with Zakir Naik
www.peaceconference.in/

Who is Zakir Naik? [Calling Allah With Names That Mushrikeen Have Named Their Dieties With]
www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=8&Topic=4240

5. Abū Usaamah adh-Dhahabee

One who warns against Salafī Maraakiz such as Salafi Publications in the UK (speaking against them calling it ‘jihaad against the deviants’) or TROID in Toronto (labelling them ‘hadaadees (extremists) from TROID in Toronto’) all the while working openly with the hizbiyyeen and ahlul-bid’ah all in the name of Salafiyyah? He cooperates with Zakir Naik, Yaasir Qadhi, Abū Muslimah, QSS, Jim’iyyah Ahle-Hadith (Green Lane Mosque, B’ham, UK) and just about everyone else waging war against the Salafī manhaj whilst wearing the thobe of Ahl al-Sunnah. He has been warned against by the scholars; the likes of Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Hādī of Makkah, Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jābirī and Shaykh Muhamamd Ibn Hādī of Madeenah and Shaykh Falaah Ismaa’eel of Kuwait.

Abū Usamah adh-Dhahabi's False Notions!
www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=7061

The scholars reply to Abū Usamah Khalifah's question against Sh. Rabee' at Green lane mosque Birmingham December 2009
www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=10356

Sh. Aḥmad Bāzmool replies to questions related to Abū Usaamah
www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_conten...ew&id=739&Itemid=308

[Q10]: The legacy of Yaasir Qadhee/Abū Usamah working with Ahlul-Bid'ah whilst claiming Salafiyyah
www.troid.ca/index.php?option=com_conten...ew&id=812&Itemid=344

A Reply to Abū Usamah Adh Dhahabi's Slander of Salafi Publications by Shaykh Al Anjaree (From the Well Known Shaykhs of Kuwait)
video.albaseerah.com/2010/01/reply-to-ab...ah-adh-dhahabis.html

We trust that this will suffice for the seeker of truth, the one who desires safety. If love for one’s tribe, nation, teacher, masjid or any other things is given preference to the truth, then the preceding is of no benefit to the reader. We ask Allaah to make us sincere, lovers of the truth and those who give preference to the Book, the Sunnah and the way of the righteous predecessors, ameen.
Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by troid.org admin.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • troid.ca admin
  • troid.ca admin's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
9 years 5 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #885 by troid.ca admin
Replied by troid.ca admin on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010
The Subtle Connection between the “Mainstream” Conferences and Hard-Core Extremists

Kamal El-Makki – Ali Al-Tamimi – Syed Qutb



6. Kamal El-Makki

Who is Kamal El-Makki?

As we previously mentioned, the illustrious companion Abū Hurayrah said:

“Verily knowledge is (part) of the religion, so be careful whom you take you religion from”

Also this statement was authentically reported on the authority of the noble taab’iee Muhammad Ibn Sireen (d110) who is the student of the Abū Hurayrah. It is authentically reported on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Sireen that he also said:

“The people did not used to ask about the (situation) of men, then when the fitnah (trial i.e. innovation) happened Ahl al-Sunnah said to the people of innovation ‘name us your men (whom you take knowledge from)’ so if they were from Ahl al-Sunnah we took from them and if they were from the people of innovation we left them.”

So in investigating the inspirational teachers of Kamal El-Makki, a lecturer who employs a blend of melancholy humour to entertain his audience, it becomes quite clear that his heroes are from the most destructive Qutbee, Surooree figureheads of the Western world. El-Makki, beyond the satire in his lectures is deeply enchanted by a man named ‘Ali Al-Timimi’, the following video was posted on Youtube, April 2010:

Kamal el-Makki on Ali Tamimi (the imprisoned qutbee)

Said Regeah, during an interview asks Kamel El-Makki about his experiences studying in Virginia. (Or as he refers to him “Shaykh” Kamel El-Makki [everyone in the West seems to be Shaykh these days – whilst the flesh of the scholars, the true mashaayikh is gnawed on])

He (El-Makki) clearly mentioned Jafar Idris and Ali Tamimi as his most influential teachers. In the case of Tamimi (currently in prison), he excessively praises him to the point that he found him insurmountable in any area of Islām or worldy affairs! He says:

“I have never sat with anybody, a big scholar or not big scholar, except that I found an angle that I am more or better versed than them in it, ya’nee (meaning) you sit with someone who is a monster in ‘Aqīdah but you’re in history, you’re better than that, you sit with someone who is phenomenal in fiqh but you know interfaith better than them or whatever it is ya’nee (meaning), if you never sit with anyone in life except you’re better than them – you can surpass them in something. Even major scholars, you can surpass them in some angle or another but I’ve never in my life sat with someone that I could never find myself better than them in anything besides Ali Al-Tamimi…


El-Makki continues:

…I’ve never ever been impressed with anyone in my life more than Ali Al-Tamimi”


Not al-Albānī? Not Ibn Bāz? Not Ibnul-‘Uthaymīn? Not al-Fawzān? not al-Waadi’ee but Ali Al-Tamimi.

So who you may ask is Ali Al-Tamimi:

The following article from the 2001 sheds some light: Ali Timimi was formerly with QSS - and as was observed about him - he had a craving for being known and wanting to be heard. His commitments to the Innovators of lANA led to him to lend ear to the doctrines of the Qutubiyyah and neo-Bannaawiyyah, as a result of which he became affected and poisoned by their concepts. The da'wah of Sayyid Qutb, Hassan al-Banna and Mohammad Qutb entered into his mind through the route of the writings and doctrines of Safar al-Hawali and Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq, which were essentially the doctrines of Sayyid Qutb and Hassan al-Banna. He remained a Closet Qutubi through 1995 until around 1999 when he became more vocal in his doctrines - openly proclaiming his true orientations and openly vilifying the manbaj of the Salaf and the generality of the Salafi Mashayikh.


He (Timimi) is one who excessively praised the revolutionist-minded Safar al-Hawali and Salman al-Awdah, callers to revolution and slandering the scholars through their political activism. This is what the late Muftee, Imām Ibn Bāz wrote to the Minister of Interior about them:

Shaikh Abdul Azīz Bin Bāz gave the order to the Minister of the Interior - on behalf of the Committee of Senior Scholars - that if Safar and Salmaan did not stop from what they were doing, as had been requested from
them, then they should be "prevented from lectures, conferences, giving sermons, lessons and recordings [of their talks and lectures etc.] - as a protection of the society from their mistakes - may Allaah guide them both and in spire them both towards their guidance - and the Committee of Senior Scholars has reques ted me toconvey its opinion to you." This is in a letter dated 3/4/ 1414H to Nayef bin Abdul Azīz, the Minister of the Interior.


He (Timimi) is one who implied Salafiyyah (and the Salafī Scholars) was a supporting factor the New World Order. He said: "Another Manifestation of the New World Order in which we find ourselves and to which I and other brothers have commented on this forum for the past few years is the re-interpretation of concepts of the Islamic religion in order to support the new world order in the name of sunna and salafiya."

We direct the reader to the following series:

Bayaan Talbees al-Qutubiyyah: The Timimi Scandal - Part 1 spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&arti...70012&articlePages=1

Bayaan Talbees al-Qutubiyyah: The Timimi Scandal - Part 2 spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&arti...70013&articlePages=1

Bayaan Talbees al-Qutubiyyah: The Timimi Scandal - Part 3 spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&arti...70014&articlePages=1

Bayaan Talbees al-Qutubiyyah: The Timimi Scandal - Part 4 spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&arti...70015&articlePages=1

Bayaan Talbees al-Qutubiyyah: The Timimi Scandal - Part 6

spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&arti...70020&articlePages=1

Timimi's Farewell Sermon: Reference to Sayyid Qutb

During his most trying times, facing the end of his trial and possible life-imprisonment, who does he reference for inspiration? None other than Syed Qutb, the most devastating kharajee of the 20th century and provider of the ideological blueprint for many of the extremist groups existing today in their many forms/names (including al-Itihaad/al-Itisaam and al-Shabaab whose speakers have priased Qutb). During his ‘farewell sermon’ he said the following:

Ali Tamimi reminisces about Sayyid Qutb - Who he calls 'ash-shaheed' (the martyr)

The Connection: Kamal El-Makki praises Ali Al-Tamimi (and he) praises Syed Qutb

So follow along, El-Makki praises Timimi with an outstanding praise, Timimi likens his situation to that of Sayyid Qutb and praises him, so...

Who is Syed Qutb?

The Socialist, Marxist, Leninist, revolutionist, journalist and literary critic; the contemporary flag-bearer of takfeer who spawned a generation of extremists.

Many Muslims praise and adore Qutb, many others may be unaware of his harm and destruction, how amazing it is to see some of the non-Muslims recognising the legacy of chaos Qutb created, whilst the likes of Timimi (El-Makki’s hero) praises him:

The New York Times’ Judith Shulevitz writes:

Anyone who doubts that literary critics can play a part on the bloody stage of history should consider the example of Sayyid Qutb. Qutb, born in Egypt in 1906 and university educated, was a Western-style literary critic until he devoted himself to Islam after spending two years in the United States, exposed to what he viewed as our decadence. He died in 1966, when he was hanged along with other Muslim radicals by the government of Gamal Abdel Nasser. Qutb’s books of hard-line political theology have had a direct influence on the Saudi Arabian Muslim opposition; the Islamic Salvation Front in Algeria; the Palestinian group Hamas; the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon; Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the Egyptian cleric jailed for several thwarted terrorist plots and linked to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; and the Iranian writer Ali Shariati, who helped foster the Islamic revolution in Iran. Judith Shulevitz, Some ideas demand rebuttal, The New York Times, 21st October 2001.


Qutb held that everything, including the Muslims lands were un-Islamic states:

“Today, we are in Jaahiliyyah, like that which was prevalent at the dawn of Islām, in fact more severe. Everything around us is Jaahiliyyah…” Ma’aalim fit-Tareeq (Milestones) p. 21, 17th edition, 1991. (Translation: Salafi Publications)


Qutb held that Islām is moulded from Christianity and Communism!

“Islām must necessarily rule,” stated Qutb, “because it is a unique, constructive and positive creed perfectly moulded from Christianity and Communism together, comprised of both of their objectives, adding to their balance, harmony and justice.” Sayyid Qutb, Ma'arakatul-Islām wa al-Ra's Maaliyyah p.21 (Al-Madkhali, Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadi, Al-‘Awaasim mimmaa fi Kutub Sayyid Qutb min al-Qawaasim, p.20, Maktabatul-Furqaan, 2001.)


Abdullah Azzam, one who Bin Laden referenced often, one of his spiritual mentors:

Abdullah Azzam, Bin Laden’s mentor, was also no stranger to the radical ideology of Sayyid Qutb. Azzam remarked: “Those who went to fight in Afghanistan realize the profound effect Sayyid Qutb’s thought had upon the Islāmic jihaad and the generations that would proceed. Some of the fighters would not request clothes, even if they were naked, nor would they request food, even if they were hungry, nor would they request a weapon, even if they were weaponless; but they would request Sayyid Qutb’s books from you.” ‘Abdullah ‘Azzam, ‘Ishroona ‘Aaman ‘ala ash-Shahaadah: Sayyid Qutb, Chpt. 5.


And this in reality is just scratching the surface with Sayyid Qutb. We direct the reader to the important series, “Readings in Qutbism”:

Readings in Elementary Qutubism
www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&...70003&articlePages=1

Readings in Intermediate Qutubism
www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&...70004&articlePages=1

Readings in Advanced Qutubism
www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=GRV07&...70010&articlePages=1


So the connection is subtle, indirect but entirely dangerous.

1. Young Muslim browses the web, enjoys fancy flash video about conference
2. Young Muslim purchases tickets, attends conference
3. Young Muslim enjoys entertainment, develops an attachment to the ‘funny’ speaker
4. Young Muslim follows up conference on the internet, searches and studies (just like we did with El-Makki on youtube), through more videos and lectures, finds out about Ali Al-Tamimi, intrigued by the high praise El-Makki has for Timimi, he begins to listen to Timimi and develops an attachment to him and the people he praises such as Qutb, Hawali and others (remember this is all stemming from El-Makki's extreme praise for Timimi and the intrigue may create in the mind of the unsuspecting youth)
5. Young Muslim learns of Qutb via Tamimi, googles Syed Qutb and an enormity of extremist websites result and the mellow indoctrination begins, loving son and student one month, kamikaze killer the next...

...Far fetched? Tell that to the father of lost children, murdered or missing in Somalia or elsewhere. Tell it to the mothers who received phone calls from Somali from their sons informing them of their migration to Somali and that they may not hear from them again because it has happened and is happening right under our noses. These are real-life situations that have happened to Somali familes in Toronto, Minneapolis and elsewhere. These people (El-Makki) and those like him are a bridge to the open extremists through their praise of the likes of Tamimi. Said Regeah observes quietly, does not rebuke or contridict El-Makki in his praise of Timimi in the slightest. So take heed 'O seeker of the truth - is the affair not clear for those who wish to see?
Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by troid.org admin.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
9 years 5 months ago #886 by hamzaia
Replied by hamzaia on topic Regarding Rahma Conference 2010

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: troid.ca admin
Time to create page: 0.296 seconds

RT @1MMeducation: It is NOT PERMISSIBLE for a man to be alone with a female (other than a spouse or close relative) in a car going anywhere…

troid.org troid.org

RT @1MMeducation: لا يخلون رجل بامرأة فإن الشيطان ثالثهما قال الشيخ ابن باز في شرح هذا الحديث: فالواجب الحذر، وألا تخرج أبداً إلا ومعها ثا…

troid.org troid.org