Should We Call Ourselves Sunni, Salafi or Any Other Name? April 1, 2012
Posted by Admin in al-Imaan, Bid'ah, Rebuttals.add a comment
Authubillaahi min ash-Shaytaani rajeem
Bismillaahi ar-Rahmaan ar-Raheem, as-Salaatu was-Salaam ‘ala Rasulullaah
Salafis Imitating the Jews in Dress July 27, 2011
Posted by Admin in Heretical Callers & Sects, Khawaarij, Salafis.add a comment
Bismillaah, as-Salaatu was-Salaam ‘ala Rasoolullaah
The impurity of foreign religious cultures has crept into the lands of Muslims under the disguise of scholarship. The Arabs, and in particular the Saudis, have adopted head dresses from their Jewish counterparts.
A typical Salafi man, or scholar (aka rabbi), looks like this:
In comparison to a Jewish Rabbinical dress called the “Tallit”:
One cannot help but notice the similarities between a Salafi Saudi (scholars or rabbis) head dress, called Shemagh (or Kefaiya, Ghutrah etc.) from a Jews prayer shawl.
The eery relation doesn’t only reflect on their fashion, it also shows from their Creed and the hypocritical implementation of Islaam by both the Salafi scholars and their blind followers.
It’s collected in Sahih al-Bukhaari, the Prophet of Allaah (s) had said,
“You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them.”
The Grand Khariji Mufti ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Baz October 4, 2009
Posted by Admin in al-Kufr bit-Taghout, Heretical Callers & Sects, Khawaarij.add a comment
DRAFT
Bismillaah as-salaatu was-salaam ‘ala Rasoolullaah
“And thus We do make the Thaalimeen supporters of one another…” [al-Anaam: 129]
“…and indeed, the Thaalimeen are allies of one another…” [al-Jaathiya: 19]
There is no doubt that the Saudi regime has been one of the main allies of the Western powers in battling against the Islaamic Dawah. As it was established by the Colonialists, ruled by al-Saud family and cemented by the Saudi clergy that wear the veil of scholarship. One of these clergymen was the late Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Baz. He was a major asset for al-Saud royal family and their allies, the Western colonialists who help keep them in power until this day. They had enlarged bin Baz’s role in society due to him being their well obedient slave and propagated him to generations of naive individuals, creating the illusion to make him look like a giant in front of their eyes. Hence, his popularity grew and became known; although his evil is quite clear, yet people have deliberately over looked his major heresy (or agreed to it) and have continued to idolize him. Although they claimed he was a pious man, the reality is he was a corrupt individual, who was at the feet of the tyrants and furthest away from Allaah ta’ala, Abu Hurayrah narrated Rasoolullaah sallallaahu alayhi wasalam said,
“Whoever approaches the ruler’s gates becomes afflicted. Whenever a slave draws closer to the ruler, he only gains distance from Allaah.” [Collected in Musnad Ahmed and also reported in Saheeh at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb hadeeth #2241]
And whatever good he has done, Allaah knows. We are more concerned with what he did towards the end of his life as one may do an act of major disbelief, nullifying all his previous good deeds. So we look at what he died upon as comes in a hadeeth from ‘Abdullaah who narrated Rasoolullaah sallallaahu alayhi wasalam said,
“Every one of you is collected in the womb of his mother for the first forty days, and then he becomes a clot for an other forty days, and then a piece of flesh for an other forty days. Then Allaah sends an angel to write four words: He writes his deeds, time of his death, means of his livelihood, and whether he will be wretched or blessed. Then the soul is breathed into his body. So a man may do deeds characteristic of the people of the Fire, so much so that there is only the distance of a cubit between him and it, and then what has been written surpasses, and so he starts doing deeds characteristic of the people of Paradise and enters Paradise. Similarly, a person may do deeds characteristic of the people of Paradise, so much so that there is only the distance of a cubit between him and it, and then what has been written surpasses, and he starts doing deeds of the people of the Fire and enters the Fire.” [Saheeh al-Bukhaari “Book of Prophets” hadeeth # 549]
‘Abdul ‘Aziz’s crimes have continued to harm the Muslim Ummah even until today. Him issuing endless fatawa for defense of the tyrannical Saudi state and legitimizing their evil, his fatawa declaring innocent believers to be disbelievers and making their forbidden blood halaal, allowing them to be killed with no Sharee’ah justification. Defending the Jews, Christians and Hindus that occupy the Islaamic lands, his hypocritical fatawa which contradicted each other and confused his worshipers for the sake of his beloved King Fahd al-Saud by concealing the truth, lying upon the early scholars and in replace promoting his crooked beliefs…and numerous other examples etc…These examples were not mere errors of “ijtihad” as the bigots have tried to cover up and excuse, rather these errors were in the fundamentals of Islaam and went directly against the Qur’aan, Sunnah and ijmaa. And it is well known that there is no ijtihad when clear-cut text exists. This is enough to silence the bigots who excuse everything in the name of “ijtihad” even if it be clear and open kufr.
We would also like to sadly note even those who carry the label of “jihadi” or support the Mujahideen, have fallen into this indecency and blind praise of the Khariji mufti. Even though it was bin Baz who gave the golden shield to the enemies of Islaam to occupy, rape and plunder the Islaamic lands. The leaders of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan have distanced themselves from this man, yet the blind fans continue to attach themselves to him. We also mention that bin Baz even earned the praise of the enemy of Allaah ta’ala, the Jewish Israeli Prime Minister Ishaaq Raabeen.
“And never will the Jews or the Christians be pleased with you until you follow their religion…” [al-Baqara: 120]
However we will only scratch the surface with a few of his impure fatawa that he and his Thaalimeen “Ulema” committee friends had issued…
Bin Baz Unjustly Declaring Believers to be Disbelievers…
When some believers attacked and killed the Christians and Hindus who were occupying and polluting the Islaamic land of the Haramayn, ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Baz rushed to defend these Christians, Hindus and the tyrannical al-Saud regime from the Mumineen. He issued the following shameless fatwa:
“There is no doubt that this is a grave sinful act and a great evil that results in nothing but widespread corruption and great oppression. There is also no doubt that the execution of such a crime is by someone who does not believe in Allaah and the Last Day. You will never find one who believes in Allaah and the Last Day with correct faith that would do a detestable criminal act like this in that such gain nothing except harming and injuring of people and mass corruption. Such incidents and similar to them can only be perpetrated by immoral souls full of animosity, envy, evil, corruption and lack of faith in Allaah and His Messenger. We ask Allaah for rectification and safety. We ask Him to help those in authority in anyway possible to thwart the plans of these people to retaliate against them because of their crime is indeed great and the evil of which is widespread…” [Majmou’ al-Fatawa wal-Maqaalaat, volume 9 page 253]
This slave of the taghut had declared the brothers to be disbelievers for the sake of his Christian and Hindu awliyaa as he describes the believers as “…someone who does not believe in Allaah and the Last Day. You will never find one who believes in Allaah and the Last Day with correct faith…” and says again “…immoral souls full of animosity, envy, evil, corruption and lack of faith in Allaah and His Messenger…” So there is no confusion on his takfir of these brothers for attacking his cross-idol worshiping friends. And because of this repulsive fatwa which declared the brothers to be disbelievers and made their blood halaal, obligated their capturing and punishing, they were killed by the Saudi government. Although Rasoolullaah sallallaahu alayhi wasalam said,
“The Muslim is not killed for the disbeliever”
[Saheeh al-Bukhaari from ‘Ali and in Sunan Abu Dawud]
And there is nothing authentic that contradict this.
‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Baz had also prohibited fighting crusaders and idol worshipers as he mentions the acts to be corruption. And no Muslim would deny this as being absolutely repugnant and wrong. Imaam ibn Hazm had said,
“And there is no greater sin after disbelief than the prohibition of Jihad against disbelievers and giving them the Muslims’ women…”
To be continued inshAllaah…
Is Calling Oneself ‘Salafi,’ permitted in Islaam? August 27, 2009
Posted by Admin in Bid'ah, Brotherhood, Heretical Callers & Sects, Morals & Manners.8 comments
Bismillaah, as-salaatu was-salaam ‘ala Rasoolullaah
Is Calling Oneself ‘Salafi,’ permitted in Islaam?
Before we proceed deeply into the discussion, one must keep in mind that these labels are not legal terms defined by Qur’aan and Sunnah. They are simply linguistic concepts used in language and do not carry any Shari’ meaning which one will be sinful for not adhering to. Also, we should remind the reader that those who profess ‘salafi’ are not in agreement as to who they consider to be from the ‘salaf.’ Some restrict this to the Sahaabah [ra], others to the first three generations (Sahaabah [ra], their followers and then those who followed them) while the rest say anyone who has preceded their generation. From this, we will continue inshAllaah…
Definition and usage
Arabic definition of the word ‘Salaf’:
وسَلَفَ يَسْلُفُ بالضم سَلَفاً بفتحتين أي مَضَى. والقَوْمُ السُّلاَّف المُتَقَدّمون. وسَلَفُ الرَّجُل آباُؤه المتقدّمون والجَمْع أَسْلاف وسُلاَّف
“It means what passed, and people who have gone forth can be called Salaf, and the ‘Salaf’ of a person are his forefathers, and plural can be Aslaaf and Sullaaf” (Mukhtaar as-Sihaah)
Allaah ta’ala says in surah az-Zukhruf referring to Firawn and his people:
فَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ سَلَفاً وَمَثَلاً لِلْآخِرِينَ
“And We made them a precedent, and an example for later generations.”
And recorded in Saheeh al-Muslim under ‘Kitab al-Fada’il al-Sahaabah’ book 031 hadith #6004 from our mother ‘A’isha [ra] that Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam said to Fatima [ra] (narrating from her):
“…so fear Allaah and be patient (and he told me) that he would be a befitting forerunner for me…”
In simple terms, ‘salaf’ means those who past away.
Claims and criticism
“…so fear Allaah and be patient (and he told me) that he would be a befitting forerunner (salaf) for me…”
Many, if not all, have used the above hadith to justify labeling themselves as ‘salafi,’ separating themselves from other Muslims. This no doubt demonstrates the deficiency of their intellects.
Firstly, Allaah ta’ala has clearly prohibited the Muslims from breaking into differing sects intentionally, each rejoicing on that which they are upon. So this action of there’s is in fact sinful and not praiseworthy.
Secondly, if calling yourself ‘salafi’ was to be derived from this hadith, Fatima [ra] would have been the first one to use it. Since Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam was directing this towards her.
Thirdly, this hadith alone proves that the best person to follow is Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam himself. He is the best of salaf. And it is reported in Musnad Ahmad (4/130, 202 & 344) and by at-Tirmithi in a lengthy hadith, from Harith al-Ash’ari that Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam said:
“…so call with the call of Allaah which Allaah gave you – al-Muslimeen, al-Mumineen, ‘Ibaadullaah.”
Hence, the best of the salaf said to call ourselves by the call of Allaah which he gave us. Thus, calling yourself ‘salafi’ is in disobedience towards Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam.
In this way, the claim of theirs is frail and holds no weight.
Another argument they have brought forth is that by calling themselves ‘salafi,’ they are referring themselves as followers of the best of generations. And they use the following ahadith for their justification:
Reported in Saheeh al-Bukhari and Saheeh al-Muslim from our mother ‘Aisha [ra] that Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam said:
“The best of people is my generation, then those who come after them, then those who come after them.”
And reported by at-Tirmithi:
“The best of people are my generation, then those who follow after them, then those who follow after them. Then there will come after them a people who will be fat, and they will love obesity, bearing witness before being asked to.”
And other similar reports.
Again, these reports by no means provide any evidence for them. None of the generations that Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam praised, referred to themselves as ‘salafis’ saying they follow the salaf. They all called themselves Muslims, in accordance with the Sunnah. So this claim is void of any substance.
They also use statements of some later scholars, such as ibn Taymiyyah and adh-Dhahabi. This does not require any criticism as sayings of scholars is not evidence and their opinions are not binding upon the Ummah. Their statements must be judged according to the Qur’aan and Sunnah and if their sayings comply with these two divine sources, then it is accepted. If not, then their sayings are discarded and rejected. Also to note, nowhere does ibn Taymiyyah state that calling yourself ‘salafi’ is permissible.
They also state that since times have changed and many sects have emerged. It is obligatory to identify and separate ourselves from these deviant sects (deviant in their eyes), is in fact an innovated belief and method. There existed sects amongst the previous nations, such as amongst the followers of Eesa ibn Mariam [as], and also during the time of the Sahaabah [ra]. Yet, they still referred themselves as Muslims; since this is what Allah ta’ala had named us.
In surah aali ‘Imraan ayah 52:
“But when Jesus felt disbelief from them, he said, “Who are my supporters for Allaah?” The disciples said,” We are supporters for Allaah. We have believed in Allaah and testify that we are Muslims.”
And in ayah 78 of aali ‘Imraan:
“…It is He Who has named you Muslims both before and in this…”
And the hadith reported by Abu Dawud from Furat ibn Hayyan [ra]:
“Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam commanded to kill him: he was a spy of Abu Sufyan and an ally of a man of the Ansar. He passed a circle of the Ansar and said: I am a Muslim. A man from the Ansar said, Rasoolullaah, he is saying that he is a Muslim. Rasoolullaah sallaahu alayhi wa salam said: ‘There are people among you in whose faith we trust. Furat ibn Hayyan is one of them.’”
So the best label and the most proper is what Allaah ta’ala and His Messenger sallaahu alayhi wa salam had given us. This is also the way of the salaf.
It is a Call of Jaahiliya (Asabiya)
Linguistically, ‘asabiya’ comes from the word ‘asabah’, which is the relative of the person from the fathers’ side. These relatives are called ‘asabah’ because they strengthen and defend the person that makes him stronger.
So ‘asabiya’ is mans supporting his people to whom he belongs, whether they are right or wrong, oppressing or oppressed. The belonging to these people can be due to kith and kin, ethnicity, color, birthplace, citizenship, school of thought, or a group of people with common interest.
And an example is an incident that took place amongst the Sahaabah [ra] themselves. Jabir ibn ‘Abdullaah [ra] narrated what happened at the watering place of al-Muraysi which led to the Munafiqoon stirring up the traces of asabiya and seeking to destroy the unity of the Muslims. He said:
“We were on a raid when one of the Muhajiroon kicked one of the Ansar. The Ansar said, ‘O Ansar! Help me!’ and the Muhajir said, ‘O Muhajiroon! Help me!.’ Rasoolullaah sallahu alayhi wa salam heard them and said, “Why are you stirring up something which belongs to Jaahiliya?”
From this we can conclude, calling towards this label of ‘salafiya’ is indeed against the Sunnah and it is a call of jaahiliya which holds no benefit. And calling oneself ‘Muslim’ is the right way and in accordance to the Sunnah.
“O you who have believed, fear Allaah as He should be feared and do not die except as Muslims. And hold firmly to the rope of Allaah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allaah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allaah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.” [aali 'Imraan 3:102-103]
Wa Allaahu alim
Innovators in al-Saheehayn (Bukhaari and Muslim) February 10, 2009
Posted by Admin in Khawaarij, Murjiah, Shiaism, Ulum ul Hadeeth.add a comment
Imaam Jalaal ud-Deen as-Suyooti in “Tadreeb ar-Rawi” Vol.1 Pgs. 328-329 said that Imaam Bukhaari and Imaam Muslim took narrations from the following innovators:
30 followers of the Qadariyyah sect
27 Shi’as
16 Murjia
7 Nawaseeb
2 Khawaarij
1 Jahmiyah
To be continued…
Research for the Athar ‘Kufr Duna Kufr’ of ibn ‘Abbas October 29, 2008
Posted by Admin in Khawaarij, Rebuttals, Takhrij, Ulum ul Hadeeth, Weak & Fabricated Hadeeth.1 comment so far
CONCERNING THE TAFSEER ATTRIBUTED TO IBN ‘ABBAS
“And whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”
Is The Kufr In This Ayah, Kufr Akbar Or Kufr Asghar
A beginning note, most of the following is taken from Abu Ayoob bin Noor al-Burqa’ee/Abu Marwaan as-Sudaani’s refutation of ‘Ali al-Halabi in his takhrij of the athaar of Ibn ‘Abbaas. I will quote the athar, then quote al-Burqa’ees reply, insha’Allaah.
Athar One and Two
Ibn Jareer reported, “Narrated to me, Hunaad and narrated to me, Ibn Wakee’ah who said, ‘Narrated to me, my father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad from Ibn Tawoos from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas, “and whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not like Kufr in His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’ [Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]
Comment: I say this isnaad is saheeh, and what it apparent is that all the statement is from Ibn ‘Abbas rahimahullah. And many people have fallen for this athar due to its isnaad and have not noticed the idraaj (interpolation) which is made clear by the narration found in the collection of Imaam ‘Abdurazzaaq (who said): “We were informed by Mu’amar from Ibn Tawoos from his father: “Ibn ‘Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, [so] he said: “In it there is kufr” (hiya bihi kufrun). Ibn Tawoos said: “But not like kufr in His angels, and His books and His messengers”‘
And idraaj, as can be read in the small booklet on science in hadeeth in English, by Shaykh Suhayb Hasan, is: “If an expression or statement is proved to be an addition by a reporter to the text, it is declared as mudraj (interpolated).” al-Burqa’ee quotes the definition of ath-Thahabi, which adds that ‘and later a hadeeth may be found that splits the additional expression of the reporter, from the original statement. [al-Muwqitha fi 'Ilm il-Hadeeth, page 53-54]
[al-Burqa’ees words:] Add to that, that ‘Abdurrazaaq is more reliable (athbat) and more better (atqan) than Mu’amar, and the saying is for him if differing occurs: Ya’qoob bin Shaybah says: “‘Abdurazzaaq is more reliable than Mu’amar, and better”
And Ibn ‘Asaakir said: “I heard Ahmad bin Hanbal say, ‘If you see the companions of Mu’amar differ, then the hadeeth is for ‘Abdurazzaq’”. [See: Sharh 'Ilal at-Tirmithi for Ibn Rajab, volume 2/607] [In addition, one should note that Ibn Katheer does not mention the athar found in Ibn Jareer with its idraaj].
Athar Three
al-Haafith Ibn Nasr al-Marwazee said: “Narrated to us Muhammed bin Yahya, narrated to us ‘Abdurazaaq, narrated to us from Sufyaan, from a man, from Tawoos from Ibn ‘Abbas, in His saying: “…such are the disbelievers”. He said: ‘Kufr which does not expel one out of the millah.’”. [See Ta'theem Qadr is-Salaah, number 573] And the isnaad is da’eef due to the unknown man.
Athar Four
al-Haafith Ibn Nasr said: “Narrated to us Yahya bin Yahya, Sufyaan bin ‘Uyaynah informed us, from Hishaam (bin Hujayr), from Tawoos that Ibn ‘Abbas said concerning His saying, “…such are the disbelievers”, he said ‘It is not the kufr which you are going to’.
Comment: And this sanad, its people are trustworthy except Hishaam bin Hujayr al-Makki, for he has been weakened by the great a`immah: Such as ‘Ali bin al-Madeenee, Yahya bin Sa’eed. [see: al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, volume 9/54] ‘Abdullaah bin Ahmad said: “I asked Yahya about Hishaam bin Hujayr and he weakened him very much”. [See al-'Ilal wa ma'rifat ar-Rijaal, volume 2/30]
And he also said: “I heard my father [Imaam Ahmad] say: ‘Hishaam bin Hujayr is a Makki, and he is weak in hadeeth’” [See: Ibid, volume 1/204] And also, al-’Uqayli recalled him in ad-Du’afaa’.
Athar Five
al-Haakim narrated, from the way of ‘Ali bin Harb, from Sufyaan bin ‘Uyaynah from Hishaam bin Hujayr from Tawoos, that Ibn ‘Abbas said: “It is not the kufr which you tend to, ‘Whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers’ is kufr lesser than [greater] kufr”. [-See al-Mustadrak, volume 2/313]
And this athar, despite its popularity, is also from the path of Hishaam bin Hujayr and he has been declared weak by the mountains of knowledge from amongst the Salaf.
Athar Six
Ibn Jareer at-Tabari said, narrated to us al-Muthanna, ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh said, Mu’awiyah bin Saaleh told us, that ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah, from Ibn ‘Abbas that he said concerning His saying: “Whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, ‘Whoever rejects what [He] revealed then he has disbelieved, and whoever affirms it, and does not rule by it, then he is a thaalim and faasiq’” [See Ibn Jareer's tafseer, volume 4/256]
And ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh is: Ibn Muhammed bin Muslim al-Juhni al-Misree, al-Layth bin Sa’d scribe, and he is weak.
‘Abdullaah bin Ahmad said: I asked my father about ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh, the scribe of al-Layth bin Sa’d, so he said: “He was at first firm, then he became corrupt, and he is nothing.”
Ibn al-Madeenee said: “I do not narrate from him anything”. [See al-'Ilal wa Ma'rifat ar-Rijaal, volume 2/213]
an-Nisaa`ee said: “He is not trustworthy”
Ahmad bin Saaleh said: “He is accused, and is nothing”
Saaleh Jazarah said: “Ibn Mu’een used to consider him trustworthy, and he is to me a liar in hadeeth”
Abu Zur’ah said: “To me he wasn’t a person who intentionally lied, and he was acceptable in hadeeth”. [See, al-Mizaan for ath-Thahabi, volume 4/441]
Abu Haatim said: “Trustworthy, truthful, I never knew him as such” And much has been said about ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh, but the summary is as follows, as Ibn Hibbaan mentions: He was righteous within himself, but many false ahadeeth were given to him by his neighbour, and I heard Ibn Khuzaymah say, ‘He had a neighbour, with whom there was much enemity, and he [the neighbour] would narrate the false ahadeeth upon the Shaykh of Abu Saaleh, and write it in a handwriting similar to ‘Abdullaah and he would throw it in his house amongst his books, so ‘Abdullaah would imagine that that was his own handwriting, and so he would end up narrating it. [See al-Majrooheen for Ibn Hibbaan]
And in the isnaad is ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah, and his full name was Saalem bin al-Makhaariq al-Haashimi.
Ahmad bin Hanbal said: “‘Ali bin Abi Talhah, has many criticisms upon him.” [See ad-Du'afaa`, volume 3/234]
an-Nisaa`ee said: “There is no problem with him.” [See al-Mizaan for ath-Thahabi, volume 3/134]
al-’Ajali said: “He is trustworthy.” [See Tareekh al-Thiqaat, page 283]
Ibn Hibban considered him from the trustworthy reliable narrators, as can be seen in ath-Thiqaat, volume 7/211.
Ya’qoob narrated from Sufyaan that he is weak, and not reliable. And he also said: He is a Shaami, he is not avoided nor taken as evidence. As for his narration from Ibn ‘Abbas, then is it munqati’ah (not connected), for he did not hear from him. Ibn Abi Haatim said: I heard my father say, I heard Daheem saying: ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah did not hear tafseer from Ibn ‘Abbas. [See al-Maraseel, page 117]
Ibn Hibban said: “He narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas and never saw him”. [See, ath-Thiqaat, 7/211][And al-Burqa’ee quotes many more statements, and ends by saying:] al-Manwaawi quotes, in Fayd al-Qadeer, volume 2/397, Ibn Abi Haatim saying regarding ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh: “He is really bad in hadeeth when narrating from Mu’awiyah bin Saaleh”.
And as any student of this art knows, whoever this kind of statement is said of, then he cannot be used as a witness to anything. Furthermore, I found a refutation for al-Albaani – the Shaykh of al-Halabi – were he criticised Ahmad Shaakir for classifying this hadeeth, “‘Abdullaah bin ‘Amr narrates, ‘The angels said, ‘Oh our Lord, you gave the children of Aadam the dunya letting them eat and drink in it….’”, so he [al-Albaani] said: “And it is not correct to me, to declare this hadeeth as strong, relying upon that, with the statement of ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh, due to the latter being from those who have been criticised (dakhala ‘alayh)” And then he mentioned Ibn Hibaan’s statement as can be found above. [See his commentary on the explanation of at-Tahawiyyah, page 308] So we see that al-Halabi’s shaykh is in agreement with us.
And so, we conclude by saying that the only authentic narration concerning the tafseer of this ayah, from Ibn ‘Abbas is the following: We were informed by Mu’amar from Ibn Tawoos from his father: “Ibn ‘Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, [so] he said: “In it there is kufr”(hiya bihi kufrun). As for the rest, they are all weak, and Allaah knows best what is correct. Written by Abu Ayoob al-Burqa’ee. [End]
In addition, Hasan bin Abir-Rabee’ al-Jurjaani said, that ‘Abdurazzaq informed him that Mu’ammar narrated from Ibn Tawoos from his father, the statement of Ibn ‘Abbas, “It is enough kufr for him” (kafaa bihi kufruh), as can be seen in Akhbaar al-Qadaa`, volume 1/40 and onwards for Imaam Muhammed bin Khalaf bin Hayyan, known as Wakee’. And from the contemporaries who have made tad’eef of the athaar that are attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas, is al-Muhaddith, al-Haafith, ash-Shaykh Sulaymaan al-’Alwaan, hafithahullah, as is in at-Tibyaan Sharh Nawaaqid al-Islaam.
Statements by other companions and tab’ieen
1. ‘Abdullaah bin Mas’ood said, as mentioned by Ibn Katheer in his tafseer, that he was asked about bribery in judgement, so he said: “That is the very kufr (thaak alkufr)”, and then he quoted the ayah, this is also mentioned by Ibn Jareer, who has numerous quotes for this, one of which is from the path of Masrooq who said: “I asked Ibn Mas’ood about as-suht (ill gotten wealth), is it [like] bribery in judgment?” So he said: “No, whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then he is a kaafir, whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then he is a thaalim, whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed then he is a faasiq, but as-suht is when you help someone to do something oppressive, so he gives you a gift, so you accept it” [See Tafseer of at-Tabari, 6/240].
And at-Tabaraani collected, with a saheeh isnaad, from Ibn Mas’ood that he said: “Bribery in judgement is kufr, and it is amongst the people ill gotten wealth” [Ibn Hajr al-Makki collected it in az-Zawaajir, volume 2/189, Daar al-Ma'rifah print 1402 AH]
2. And similar to this was said by ‘Umar bin al-Khattab and ‘Ali bin Abi Taalib, radiAllaahu ‘anhum, as has been collected by al-Aloosee al-Baghdaadi in his tafseer; he said: “And Ibn al-Munthir collected from Masrooq that he said: “I said to ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, radiAllaahu ta’ala ‘anh, “What do you think of bribery in judging, is it from the ill-gotten wealth? He said ‘No, rather it is kufr, ill-gotten wealth is when a man has a position and rank in the view of a ruler, and the man seeks something from this ruler, he cannot achieve this thing, unless he gives the ruler a gift [and this is ill-gotten wealth].’”
And ‘Abd bin Humayd collected from ‘Ali, radiAllaahu ta’ala ‘anh, that he was asked about as-suht (ill-gotten wealth), he said: “It is bribery”, so he was asked, “In rulership”, he replied: “That is the very kufr” (thaak al-kufr)”. And al-Bayhaqi collected from Ibn Mas’ood similar to this statement”. [See, Tafseer Rooh al-Ma'ani, for al-Aloosee, volume 3, part 6, page 140]
3. And similar to this has been said by the tabi’een, from them: al-Hasan al-Basri, Sa’eed bin Jubayr, Ibraheem an-Nakh’ee, as-Suddi, Ibn Qudaamah al-Hanbali said: “Allaah ta’ala said: “Akaloona lis-suht” (Takers of ill-gotten wealth), al-Hasan and Sa’eed bin Jubayr explained it to be, “It is bribery”, and said: “If the judge takes bribes, then it reaches alkufr”. [al-Mughni ma' ash-Sharh al-Kabeer, volume 11/437-438]
al-Qaasimi said regarding its tafseer, as has been mentioned in al-Lubaab, that Ibn Mas’ood, al-Hasan and an-Nakh’iee said: “These ayaat are general regarding the Jews, and regarding this ummah, so whoever takes bribes, and replaces the judgement of Allaah, so he ruled by other than what Allaah has revealed, then he has disbelieved, and oppressed and become evil, and to it went as-Suddi [And this statement of as-Suddi, was recalled by Ibn Katheer, and Ibn Jareer collected with his sanad: “Whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revaled”, he [as-Suddi] said: “Whoever does not rule by what I revealed, so he left it intentionally, and trangressed whilst knowing, then he is from the disbelievers”. See Tafseer at-Tabari, volume 6/257.], and it is the apparent meaning of the statement [i.e. the ayah, See Mahaasin at-Ta`weel, for al-Qaasimi, volume 6/215, Daar al-Fikr print, 1398 AH]
The Permissibility of Fighting Alongside Sinners and Innovators October 17, 2008
Posted by Admin in Hijrah & Jihaad, Khawaarij, Laa ilaha illAllaah, Rebuttals.add a comment
People of hypocrisy and confusion have claimed all these calamities that have befallen the Muslim Ummah is because of our sins, so it’s not allowed for us to fight unless we clean our rows from sinners.
In replay to this false claim, it’s said:
FIRSTLY, This contradicts common sense, because it’s impossible to be free of sinners and we admit that all what happens to us, is because of sins. But it does not mean that we can not repel a harm, unless we repel the other harm. It’s like a person who is injured in a car accident because he hadn’t security belts on, so imagine a doctor saying: “Go and learn how to use the security belt, then we can treat your injuries.”
SECONDLY, Imaam Ibn Taymia said in “Majmu al-Fatawa“, 28/506-507:
“Those who fight the enemy have agreed upon the perfect form of jihaad and it’s the purpose of pleasing Allaah, dignifying His word and establishing His religion and obeying His Messenger, even if there is immorality and corruption of intention amongst them, like their fighting for the sake of authority or transgressing against them in some matters. And when the harm of abandoning the fight against them is greater for the religion than the harm of fighting in this way, then it becomes obligatory to repel the greater harm by accepting lesser harm. And it’s from the usul of Islaam that should be given proper attention!
That’s why it was from the usul of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah to fight with all good and bad Muslims and indeed Allaah helps sometimes this religion with bad people and even with corrupted nations as the prophet informed us about it. And if the fighting can not be achieved except with help of corrupted leaders and soldiers most of them being fajirs, then we have two situations here: either to abandon fighting with such Muslims, and it means invasion of others whose harm is greater for the religion and for worldly life, or to fight with a corrupted leader and by doing so we repell those who are more corrupted and we establish the most parts of Islaamic Shari’ah if it’s not possible to establish the whole Shari’ah and it’s obligatory to do it in such situations or similar situations. And most of the battles that happened after righteous khalifas didn’t differ from this case.”
Some may say: “Ok! but innovation is not like other sins, it’s worse than that and salaf did clearly warned us against befriending them and using their help in Jihaad”
And they cited some sayings of scholars (not Qur’aan or Sunnah) as a proof:
Ali ibn Bakaar said: “Ibn Awn sent some money to me and I divided it in the way of Allaah and he said: “Don’t give a Qadari anything” and I think he said as well “Do not do battle alongside them with you for they will not be given victory.” [Ibn Abi 'Asim, "as-Sunnah", p.88]
‘Umar bin Abdul ‘Aziz said: “Do not go to battle alongside Qadari, because you will not be given victory because of them” [Ibn Batta, "al-Ibaana", # 1848]
Similar words are reported from Imaam Ahmad about Jahmia. (Ibn Muflih, “al-Adab ash-Shari’yya“, 1/256)
In reply to this, it’s said: This is not a proof against the issue, because:
FIRSTLY, These quotes are irrelevant because it’s not a proof that seeking aid of a mubtadi’ is forbidden, rather it’s a proof that sects like qadaria and jahmia were not considered Muslims by early Muslim scholars, like Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Ibn ‘Umar, ‘Umar bin Abdul ‘Aziz, Malik bin Anas, Sufyan as-Sawri, Abdullaah bin Mubarak, Ahmad bin Hanbal and others treated “qadaria” as kuffar…
Ibn Battah relates from ‘Umar bin Abd al-’Aziz: “Abu Suhayl bin Malik said: “One day I was accompanying ‘Umar bin Abd al-’Aziz and he asked me: “What is your opinion about qadaris?” I said: “I think we should demand that they repent, if they repent good, otherwise I would behead them” ‘Umar said: “it’s also my opinion!” Narrators Ma’an and Qutayba said: “Malik said: “It’s my opinion as well!” ["al-Ibaana", 2/233 (1834) Dar ar-Raya, Riyad, 1410]
And it’s related from Imaam Ahmad about jahmiyya that they were kuffar.
SECONDLY, All what salaf said about seeking aid from ahlul bid’a and hawa, then it should be applied to ‘Jihaad ul Talab,’ when you are initiating war and not when Jihaad is obligatory upon every single Muslim, even women, old people, children who are able to fight.
THIRDLY, Scholars have allowed seeking help from people of innovations and we have full of exemples in the history.
Imaam Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Shaybani said:
“There is no problem for righteous muslims to fight alongside khawarij against mushriks..”
And Imaam as-Sarakhsi commented upon these words:
“Because they fight know to repell the harm of kufr and to make Islaam superior and this fighting is an obligatory kind of fighting, it’s dignifying the Word of Allaah!” ["Sharh Siyar al-Kabir", 4/# 2970]
And it’s narrated from ‘Ali that he said about khawaarij:
“We will not hinder you from taking from what you earned in Jihaad”
And Imaam as-Sarakhsi commented on these words:
“It proves that if khawaarij fight ágainst disbelievers under the banner of righteous muslims, they deserve their share from the booty as the others deserve, because they are muslims.” ["al-Mabsut", 10/125-126]
Imaam Ibn Taymia said in “Majmu al-Fatawa“, 28/212:
“If establishing the obligations such as education, Jihaad and other obligations besides that becomes impossible except with the help of one who has bid’a and its harms are less than the harms of leaving the obligation: So obtaining the interest of the obligation – even if it has some evil as a result – is better than the opposite of this (i.e. abandoning ahlul bid’a).
And we know from the history that when Fatimis ruled in Egypt whey were kuffar according to all Muslim scholars. So when Abu Yazid revolted against Banu Ubaydullah, all Sunni scholars agreed to help Abu Yazid, although he was a heretic khariji.
Imaam az-Zahabi writes:
“Faqihs and devoted worshipers began preparing with drums and banners with a great zeal and Ahmad bin Abil-Walid addressed them in a Friday sermon and encouraged them. He said: “Fight those who disbelieved in Allaah and who claims to be a Lord besides Allaah and he changed Allaahs laws and cursed His prophet and his companions. And people burst into tears. And he said: “O Allaah! This Qarmati (batini) is kaafir known as Ibn Ubaydullah, claimant to the lordship, a denier of your blessings, who disbelieves in Your Lordship, who abuses Your Messenger, who discredits Your prophet Muhammad and sheds blood of Muslims. Curse him and humiliate him and send upon him Your anger every morning and every night!” Then he stepped down and led them in the friday prayer.” ["Siyar Alam an-Nubala", 15/155 Muassasa ar-Risala]
And it was Abu Yazid Makhlad bin Kidad al-Khariji who initiated this uprising against kaafir fatimis and Sunni scholars supported them. And az-Zahabi writes:
“Abu Ishaq al-Faqih joined Abu Yazid in latter revolt and he used to say: “They are from ahlul qiblah, but those (i.e. fatimis) are not ahlul qibla, rather they are Banu Aduwullah (sons of Allaahs enemy) If we win with them, we will not obey Abu Yazid, because he is a khariji.” ["Siyar Alam an-Nubala", 15/155]
Ibn Baaz Between Reality and Illusion October 13, 2008
Posted by Admin in Khawaarij, Rebuttals.add a comment
Ibn Baaz between reality and illusion
By Sheikh Ayman az-Zawaahiri (HA)
I listened to the fataawaa of Ibn Baaz, like many other millions of Muslims, which was broadcasted all over (the world). He was calling the Muslims to pray in Masjid al-Aqsaa and permitted trade with Israel.
Then I heard the response of the prime minister of Israel, Is’haaq Raabeen, saluting and welcoming the “honorable” mufti. [1]
Unlike many people, I wasn’t very surprised from what that man (Ibn Baaz) said, because I have a very firm opinion about him, despite the great elevation that many people have given him. In my simple understanding, it is impossible for a man to be an imaam, mufti, person of fatwaa, example of education, and simultaneously have one of the highest religious positions in the regime of Aal-Sa’oud (the Saudi government) – America’s greatest agent.
So how does Aal-Sa’oud pay that man (Ibn Baaz) all these salaries, and give him all these positions whilst they are the strongest followers (allies) of America, except if the presence of that man in those positions was a major benefit for Aal-Sa’oud. Aal-Sa’oud are the ones who are ruling the Muslims by the edge of the sword (by dictatorship), without any mercy or compromise.
And if it occurred to them (the Saudi regime) once, that this sheikh will ever oppose them, or be of any kind of threat to their authority, they would have taken so many measures to silence him through isolation or even by killing him. And the history of Aal-Sa’oud of killing their oppositions goes without say.
All of the above is not the main purpose of this speech (article), but the purpose is as follows…
Verily many people have taken Ibn Baaz and those with him as an example in the Deen and as a reference for their fataawaa. They refer to their (Ibn Baaz and his followers) fataawaa and publications in the vital issues of the Deen, i.e. in ‘aqeedah and tawheed, and in the most dangerous issues related to the Muslims – being the apostate rulers who are ruling the Muslim lands.
And those followers, despite all what they choke about in regards to their independence (disassociation) from taqleed (blind following) and madhaahib (schools of thought), they are the biggest people of taqleed towards him (Ibn Baaz) and his people. And this da’wah has spread amongst thousands of Muslim youth until it has become the normality.
Until we saw someone like Safar al-Hawaali coming out with the idea that democracy might be a necessity to rescue the country from chaos, referring to Algeria as an example, he is referring all of this (i.e. the idea of democracy) to Bin Baaz, in his tape no.4661 Tasjeelaat al-Hidaayah al-Islaamiyyah in Dammaam, lecture dated 23/06/1412. All of this is despite al-Hawaali’s knowledge in ‘Ilm ut-Tawheed and despite all his books about secularism. If this was the case with Safar al-Hawaali, so what about anybody else? (In other words, if someone “knowledgeable” as Sheikh Safar al-Hawaali could be misguided by Ibn Baaz, what about those who are less knowledgeable)?
Thousands of youth have been living as prisoners to these dazzling names, Bin Baaz, ‘Uthaymeen and Abee Bakr al-Jazaa’iri, who they follow and will not even dare to oppose, even though their mistakes are so great, and their deviation is so outrageous.
And I used to wonder how do those people imitate in their Deen a man (Ibn Baaz) who never sacrificed anything for the sake of Allah and was never tested? On the contrary, he doesn’t get his salary except by defending the interests of the tawaagheet (false gods or those who do not rule by Islam). So how do these people ask him about the solution for the tawaagheet and about the sanctity of their blood and to wipe out their authority? (In other words, how can people ask him how they should deal with the tawaagheet when he himself was a defender of taaghout)?
It is about time for the Muslim youth to free themselves from these empty ringing names who have exaggerated their nifaaq (hypocrisy) with the tawaagheet until they have become a laughing-stock in front of friends and enemies. [2]
And it is about time for these youth to gather around the ‘ulamaa al-’aamileen (sincere active scholars) who are suffering and being tested for the sake of their Deen, the ones who Allah (SWT) has described them as, “And we made from among them [Children of Israel], leaders, giving guidance under Our Command, when they were patient and used to believe with certainty in Our Aayaat.” (EMQ as-Sajdah, 32:24)
It is also about time for these youth to wake up from their unconsciousness which they are living in, and understand that the battle of Islam and kufr, haq and baatil, is a crucial battle and there is no escaping it. And whoever is not going to prepare himself for it and get ready, he is going to be the first victim of it.
It would have been possible for us to stay silent about those people (Ibn Baaz and his cronies), if only they themselves accepted to keep their mouths shut, and just speak about what is not going to make the rulers angry – the personal ritual affairs of the Deen, even though that would have been impossible since all these tawaagheet are so evil and corrupted. But those ‘ulamaa have turned into the destroyers and demolishers of the ‘aqeedah for the youth, making excuses for the kufr (apostasy) of the taaghout, go against commanding good and forbidding evil, permit the settlement of the invading forces of the American crusaders in the Arabian peninsula, and bless the policies of normalizing relationship with Israel and the Jewish upper hand on the Muslim land.
Now this is what nobody with one atom’s weight of shame in his heart can accept, let alone to have one atom of imaan in his heart (in other words, if a person has an atom’s weight of shame in his heart he will never accept this, let alone to have an atom’s weight of imaan).
And I know my words are going to be too much for many of the good people who are still living in the illusion, or for the people who agree with me but have no bravery or courage to come out with it, fearing that others might start accusing them of belittling the ‘ulamaa, or because they cannot go against what they have been repeating (regurgitating) for many years.
However, the haq is ablaj (clear), and the baatil is shaken; indeed Ibn Baaz and his taa’ifah (entity, group, followers etc.) are the government scholars who are selling us (the believers) to our enemies in return for some salary and some position. Let whoever wants to be angry be angry, and whoever wants to be pleased, let them be pleased (with what I am saying).
Indeed the camp of imaan can confront the camp of kufr; we have to get rid of the munaafiqeen and the fraudsters,
“And thus do we explain the Aayaat in detail, that the way of the mujrimoon, may become manifest.” (EMQ al-An’aam, 6:55)
The Magazine of the Mujaahidoon, 11th edition, first year, Wednesday the 3rd of Sha’baan 1415
Footnotes
——————————————————————————–
1 Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’aan: “And never will the Jews and Christians be pleased with you until you follow their millah” (EMQ al-Baqarah, 2:120)
2 On one hand these people condemn those who do not rule by what Allah has revealed, yet they defend the apostate rulers and heretically justify all their crimes.
See also the following related link: http://millatibraheem.muslimpad.com/2008/09/29/identifying-government-scholars-and-clarifying-their-purpose/
And a reminder of what Imaam ibn Taymia had stated in ‘Majmua al-Fatawa‘ Vol. 20, Pg 200 :
“The person who is obeyed in disobedience of Allaah or the person who is obeyed in following other than the guidance of the religion of truth; in either case, if what he orders mankind is in opposition to Allaah’s orders, then he is a Taghoot. For this reason, we call the people who rule by other than what Allaah revealed, a ‘Taghoot’.”
Satanic Fatwa of bin Baz and Some Remarks October 9, 2008
Posted by Admin in Khawaarij, Rebuttals.add a comment
Satanic Fatwa of bin Baz and Some Remarks
The late Mufti of al-Saud, Abdul Aziz bin Baz stated:
“What resulted from the Saudi government is for reasons of these well played out developments against the oppression of the state of Iraq towards the state of Kuwait by SEEKING HELP ALTOGETHER from the ARMIES which are composed of a number of people from the MUSLIMS and OTHER THAN THEM (kuffar) for resistance against military aggression and defense of the lands (the Peninsula).
“ Thus that (the fatwa) is a permissible order, and on the contrary its judgment is necessity, and it is a necessity on the Kingdom that it (the Kingdom) establish this compulsory act for the defense of the lands of Islam and the Muslims. The sanctity of the land and its people is an imperative matter as well. On the contrary, it is absolutely necessary and an obligatory duty.
“So it (the Kingdom) is excused and praiseworthy on its sudden, spontaneous action towards this prudence and the avid desire for protection of the land and its people from evil and defending it (the lands) from expected military aggression. It has already been established that the president of Iraq is not trusted by the common folk from the country of Kuwait. So treachery is to be expected from him. So because of this, the necessity was called to take precaution and help in a number of FOREIGN ARMIES for the protection of the land and its people and in the avid desire for the safety and well being of the land and its people from every thing.
“ And we ask Allaah that He assist it (the action) and that He put it (the action) on every good and that He benefit the motives, make good the outcome, that He put to rest every evil and that He make the plan of the enemies of Allaah go astray and that He purify the Muslims of their evil and He, Mighty and Majestic, is the best One to be responsible.” (al-Fiqhiyyat ul Ma’aasira, No. 6, year 1990 regarding the Gulf Crisis)
Remarks about this fatwa
This fatwa is nothing but a piece of satanic paperwork that has been handed out to destroy the Ummah. This is known for the following reasons,
a. This fatwa, if you have noticed, did not include one single ayah from the Qur’an, for there is no single ayah to support it, as any ayah would be against it.
b. There was not one single hadith quoted to support it, due to the fact that all ahaadith are against it.
c. He did not have any evidence from scholars of the past, which he could mention to support his evil fatwa.
d. This fatwa is hindering and denying what the Rasoolullaah sAllaahu alayhi wa salam said about expelling Jews and Christians from the Peninsula. This man is actually bringing them into the Peninsula and opposing the words of the Rasoolullaah sAllaahu alayhi wa salam and Musims. This could only be a naked kufr and clear opposition to the statements of the Rasoolullaah sAllaahu alayhi wa salam
e. This shows that he is making halaal haraam and haraam halaal, and is even willing to go against the fatwa mentioned before this one. That fatwa stressed that it is major kufr to give even the slightest aid to kuffar against Muslims. Scholars of the Peninsula have never called Saddam a kaafir, and they even called him ‘the Guardian of the Eastern Gate against the Shi’a.’ Yet, they imported all of these kuffar troops from outside of the Peninsula to kill Saddam and the Iraqi people, and this is clear kufr, for Allaah said, “And if you give allegiance to them, then you are one of them,” Surat ul Ma’ida, ayah 51
f. We can also see his true evil, when he makes the kaafir armies appear as something mild, when he writes, ‘foreign troops,’ instead of saying kuffar. And he knows that these troops are nothing but armed Crusaders, full of homosexuals, who are rejoicing at their entry into the Peninsula. Inside of these armies are the Jews and Christians, who have built churches and synagogues in the Peninsula to comfort their soldiers, even though the Rasoolullaah sAllaahu alayhi wa salam ordered their expulsion in very clear statements. This fatwa even goes against the clear verses of the Qur’an, which are also against their presence in the Peninsula. And to compound all of this, for the first time in 1400 years, the Jews have sounded the shofar (the ram’s horn blown on religious ceremonies) inside of the Peninsula to celebrate their triumphant re-entry into the Peninsula since they were forced from the area of Khaibar, which they used to inhabit. Christians as well have been active, and have not ceased in propagating their evil on radio stations, which has led some sisters astray and caused them to apostate. There have also been some reports of young Muslim girls running away with these ‘foreign’ soldiers to Western countries to claim asylum. We have Sheikh Ibn Baz and the Senior Scholars of the Peninsula to thank for these achievements.
g. Ibn Baz has gone against another one of his famous fataawa where he stated that no Muslim is allowed to take help from a pagan to fight pagans, as the Rasoolullaah sAllaahu alayhi wa salam ordered in authentic narrations. But look at what he turned around and did when he aided pagans in killing MUSLIMS using the Holy Land.
h. This fatwa is used to cast a spell over the reader, as the end is filled with supplications to Allaah. This is a clear trick of the magicians of the Pharaoh’s court. Allaah has warned us not to clothe truth with falsehood. Yet this man has, and has tried to make the falsehood appear Islamic in nature, when it is antagonistic to Islam. For the sake of evidence, this fatwa will appear in the appendices in the back of the book in its original Arabic form.
*** Until now, children are still being killed in Iraq due to this fatwa. On top of that, Ibn Baz died unrepentant and without retracting a single part of this fatwa. He simply was not told by his master to do so. – Allahs Governance on Earth
See also the following related links: http://millatibraheem.muslimpad.com/2008/09/29/identifying-government-scholars-and-clarifying-their-purpose/
Some Narrations and Sayings about the Khawaarij September 22, 2008
Posted by Admin in al-Imaan, Current Affairs, Khawaarij, Laa ilaha illAllaah, Rebuttals, Takfir.add a comment
The Messenger of Allah said “I have not been ordered by Allah to search the hearts of the people or to cut open their bellies” Then the Prophet looked at him while the latter (the man) was going away and said, “From the offspring of this (man) there will come out a people who will recite the Quran continuously and elegantly but it will not exceed their throats. They will then go out of the religion as an arrow goes through the games body.I think he also said, If I should be present at their time, I would kill them as the nations of Thamud were killed.” Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 #637
Abu Huraira narrated: I heard the truthful and trusted by Allah (the Prophet) saying, “The destruction of my followers will be through the hands of young men from Quraish.” Sahih Bukhari Vol 9 #180
“There shall come in another time foolish and simple minded youth. They will say the best words of creation. They will recite the Quran and it will not go past their throats. They will go out of the religion, just as the arrow goes out of the game. Then, when you establish the proof on them, then kill them. Then if you kill them, in killing them is a reward in the sight of Allah on the Day of Resurrection.”
“There will be in my Ummah differences and division. A people will speak goodly and they will do sinful acts. They will recite the Quran and it will not go past their throats. They will leave out of the religion as an arrow leaves out of the game. They will not return until a part of it apostates. They are the worst of creation and creatures. So blessings and good tidings be to the one who kills them and they kill him.”
Ali said “No, by Allah, they are still in the backs and spines of men and the wombs of women. And when are alive, they hardly leave anyone alone.” Bidayah wa Nihaya Vol 7 P295
Ibn Taymiyyah said about the Khawarij:
“And this sign which the Messenger of Allah mentioned would be the sign for the first people of the Khawaarij. But they are not the only people that are spoken of in these verses because He mentioned in other hadith that they would still keep coming until the age of the Dajjal. It is concluded by the Muslims that the Khawaarij are not the only Khawaarij mentioned in the battles with Ali in the battle of Nahraawaan.” – Majmua Fatawa Vol 28 P495-496
Ibn Taymiyyah said with regards to a helpless or weak individual of the Khawarij and the Rawafida:
“It is narrated on the authority of Ali and Umar as well as the consensus of the scholars of Islam that these two individuals should also be killed.
Some scholars argue about the individual that is not fighting. However, they all agree that to kill them in a group as a group protecting themselves with the sword is allowed. This is because fighting is more general than killing.” – Majmua Fatawa Vol 28 P476-479
