What Shaikh Hasan Ibn Abdul Wahhab Al Banna said of Dammaj

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab Al-Banna (hafeedahullaah) on Dammaaj

 

A speaker says and now I shall name for you some of the modern day eminent personalities of salafiyyah;

They are the noble outstanding sheikhs ‘Abdul-’Aziz Ibnul Baaz, Muhammad Nasirudeen Al-Albanee, Muhammad Salih Al-’Uthaymeen, Muqbil Ibnul Hadee’, ‘Abdur-Razzaq ‘Afeefi, Muhammad Aman Al- Jamee, Hamad Al-Ansaree, Saalih Al-Fawzaan, Rabee’ Ibnul Hadee Al-Madkhali, Ahmad An-Najmi, ‘Abdul-Muhsin Al- Abbaad, Muhammad ‘Abdul-Wahaab Al-Banna, and his brother Hasan ‘Abdul-Wahaab Al-Banna.

The Sheikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahaab Al-Banna comments: “I am not an ‘Alim, may Allah guide you. Fine, you have forgotten Sheikh Muqbil Al-Wadi’ee ”

Speaker: No I have mentioned him.

The Sheikh: He is from the best of the salafiyeen, meaning there is no one who has had more of an effect upon his students and his country more than Sheikh Muqbil. Wallahi now his students are from the best of what there is.

Speaker: Meaning it is not as some have claimed that they have changed and altered after Sheikh Muqbil.

Shaikh: Wallahi I don’t know what to say, wallahi, meaning now the best place to learn salafiyyah upon its reality with knowledge and action is Dammaaj, wallahi. Now the ikhwaanul mufliseen have entered into makkah and corrupted it. Wallahi, meaning the one who is destitute can learn the correct salafiyyah along with action in Dammaaj. This Al-Ma’rabee has come to tear them apart, may Allah guide him or shatter his back.

About Shaikh Yahya Al Haajuri

Alhamdulillaah wa Salaatu wa Salaam ‘Alaa Rasoolillaah wa ba’d

 Assalaam allaaykum warahmatullaah, This was sent to us by Nawaz as-Srilaankee, a student in Dammaaj. It was sent to us to encourage the brothers in the west to travel to seek knowledge. He translated some of the praises of the Ulamaa for Dammaaj and its teachers. The following are some praises of the ‘Ulamaah on Damaaj,Yeman and its Shaykh Aboo Abdur-Rahmaan Yahyaa ibn ‘Alee al-Hajooree (Hafidhahullaah. Statement of the Imaam Muqbil ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee (rahimahullah) in Praise of a Shaykh Yahyaa ibn ‘Alee al-Haajooree.

·                    1. The Imaam said in his book “The autobiography of Abee Abdur-Rahmaan Muqbil ibn Haadee ” page 48: ” Yahyaa ibn ‘Alee, Aboo Abdur-Rahmaan al-Hajooree, from the memorizers of the Qur’aan well learned in various fields of Knowledge. I have listened to some of his lessons which prove him to be well learned. He is strong in Tawheed (The field of Islaamic Monotheism) He has done a Tahqeeq (adding footnotes, checking the Ahadeeth and correcting errors) of the book “Islaah al-Mujtama’ ” by Al-Bayhaanee. Also, he has written a refutation against az-Zindaanee criticizing his book ‘Tawheed al-Khaaliq’ and he has (written) some other small books.

·                    2. The Imaam said in the preface to Shaykh Yahyaa’s tahqeeq of the book ” Islaah al Mujtama’ “The brother as-Shaykh Yahyaa with praise to Allaah has became an authority in the field of teaching and legal rulings. I ask Alllaah , the Exalted, to grant him a good rewards and to bless him in his knowledge and his wealth and his children, indeed He is the All-Generous, All-Benefitiant.

·                    3. The Imaam said in the preface to as-Shaykh Yahyaa’s book” as-Subh a Shaari’ “. To proceed; Verily I have read through most of the book of the brother in Allaah deen. The outstanding Shaykh ibn ‘Alee al-Haajooree (May Allaah protect him) and I found that he did very well and brought much benefit in his refutation against Abdul-Majeed az-Zindaane what a good reaserch he did discussing in the majins beneficial pieces of knowledge in to the topics of ‘Aqeeda and Fiqh and Hadeeth and Tafseer. Our Lord has spoken the truth when he says (the english meaning is) ” O you who believe if you fear Çááå (Allah) , Çááå (Allah) will grant you a criterion (al-Anfal:29). and when He says ” Fear Çááå (Allah) and Çááå (Allah) will teach you ” (al-Baqarah:282) and when He says ” O you who believe fear Çááå (Allah) and believe in His messanger he will give you a double portion of His Mercy and He will give you a light by which you shall walk (straight). (al-Hadeed:28). Shaykh Yahyaa (May Çááå (Allah) protect him) Çááå (Allah) has endowed him with knowledge because of his adherence to the Book of Çááå (Allah) and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Çááå (Allah) (May the peace and blessings of Çááå (Allah) be upon him) He has completed the tahqeeq of the book ” Islaah al Mujtama’ “and other small books containing beneficial pieces of knowledge in which journeys are made in search of, the Ayah ” That is the Grace of Çááå (Allah) in which he bestows on whom He wills. And Çááå (Allah) is the owner of the mighty grace. (the english meaning of al-Jumu’a:4). We ask Çááå (Allah) to grant us and him ( as-Shaykh Yahyaa) success in serving and defending the Sunnah of the Messenger of Çááå (Allah) and we ask that He protects us from the trials of the life and death, verily He is able to do all things.

·                     4. The Imaam said in the preface to ash-Shaykh Yahyaa’s book ” al-’Arba’oon al-Hisaan”. To proceed I have read portions of what the outstanding Shaykh, the Muhaddith, the Faqhee , Yahya ibn ‘Alee al-Haajooree has written in the forty Hadeeth. Dealing with gathering around the meal and I found that he (May Çááå (Allah) protect him) did very well and brought much benefit, rather he brought beneficial pieces of knowledge in which journeys are made in search of. May Çááå (Allah) grant him a good reward.

·                    5. The Imaam said in the preface to ash-Shaykh Yahyaa’s book “Ahqaamul Jumu’ah” to Proceed; “I have looked through the book al-Jumu’ah by Shaykh Yahyaa ibn ‘Alee Haajooree and I found it to be a magnificent book. In it are beneficial pieces of knowledge in which journeys are made in search of including, giving every hadeeth the ruling it deserves and covering the entire topic. So it is a complete book sufficient in this topic. And how can that not be the case while ash-Shaykh Yahyaa is someone who goes to the extreme in searching for what is best and in righteousness and in leaving of those things that don’t benefit in the hereafter (az-Zuhud), and piety and in fearing Çááå (Allah). He is someone who speaks the truth and He for Çááå (Allah) is not afraid of the criticism of the one who criticize, and he (May Çááå protect him) acts as my substitute in the lessons in Darrul-Hadeeth in Dammaj. giving them in the best desired manner. 6. One of the guards of Shaykh Muqbil (rahimahullaah), mentioned to us that he asked Shaykh Muqbil (rahimahullaah) at a Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia “Who is the most Knowledgeable man in Yemen?” So the Shaykh remained silent for a moment then he said “ ash-Shaykh Yahya “

Explaination of the statements of the Imams.

Bismillah Ar Rahmaan Ar Raheem

Alhamdu lillah, Was Salaatu Was Salaam ‘Ala Rasulillah Wa Ba’d.

I hope that Allah puts this treatise on the scales of my good deeds and that he expiates some of my sins. And he is the generous and the holy.

Shaikh Hamd Ibn Naasir said: There is no doubt that Allah has made obidience to him and his Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) compulsory upon his worshippers. Allah ta’ala has said: “Obey that which has been revealed from your Lord and do not obey other than him, how little do you reflect”. And Allah has said: “Say (O Muhammad) Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger”. And he has said: “And if you follow him (Muhammad (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) you will be guided”. He has not made it obligatory upon the Ummah to obey anyone specifically in every order and prohibition except for the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam), and the Ulama have agreed that there is no one sinless except for the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam).

Imam Abu Hanifa has said: If a Hadeeth is Saheeh it is my Madhab

I say: This narration from this great scholar is as clear as the midday sun. He has made it clear that his Madhab is the Madhab of the people of Hadeeth and Sunnah. And he never called the Muslims to blind-follow him, but he called them toward obidience of the book and the Sunnah. But the astray blind-followers call toward this evil blind following which deviates from the straight path and heads to the path of clear ignorance. They have steered people away from the way of the belivers (the Sahabas) and have directed them to the way of the people of the hellfire. And we know that this blind partisanship is one of the many reasons for the seperation of this Ummah of Muhammad (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) and has splintered it into many groups. And all success lies in holding on to the rope of Allah together. And the rope of Allah and his straight path is what the first Muslims were upon. The Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: “Upon you is my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Khulafa Ar Rashideen who are guided” And he has told us in the Hadeeth of the saved sect that they are: “Whoever is upon what I am upon today and my companions”. Therefore it is upon every Muslim to follow the Methodology of the Salaf in terms of belief, learning the religion and in manners and from it is not to blind-follow anyone specific in the religion.

Imam Malik said: Verily I am a man I am sometimes correct and sometimes incorrect. Therefore look at my speech, and everything thing that conflicts with the book and the Sunnah abandon it.

This statement of Imam Malik shows the methodology of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah in dealing with the evidences and the scholars. Ahlud Sunnah Wal Jama’ah do not follow the Thahireeyah. Rather we use the four Mathabs as a means to understand the evidences of the Qur’an and the USnnah. Ibn Mubarak said: Rely upon the narrations and take from the opinions of the scholars which explain those Hadeeth. . But the blind-followers have put the statements of the scholars on the station of the Shariah (the Qur’an and the Sunnah) and this is clear misguidance. Imam Ash Shatibi said: Using men to make rulings without looking at them as a means to understand a Shariah ruling is misguidance, because verily the greatest of all evidences and rulings is the Shariah (Qur’an and Sunnah) not other than it.

Imam Ash Shafi’ee said: The Ummah has agreed that whomsoever a Sunnah of the Rasul (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) becomes clear to it is not lawful for him to leave it for another statement.

This is evidence that the blindfollowers have deviated from the path of the first generations of Muslims and have followed the way other than the way of the believers (the companions). Verily consensus (Ijma’) is an evidence upon the Ummah until the final hour. And whoever disregards it Allah leaves him to the path he has chosen. Allah has said: “And whoever opposed the Messenger after clear guidance has come to him and follows a way other than the way of the belivers we leave him to the path he has chosen and we throw him into the hellfire and what an evil abode”. And we know from them before and now that if we put forward a Sunnah of the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) the say: My Madhab is so and so!!! And they have not been ordered except to worship Allah as one without any partner, and to follow the Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) alone.

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Salih Al Uthaimeen said:… We find that many people follow books that are authored according to their Madhabs, and they say: My Madhab is so and so! Even if one was to tell a person and says to him: The Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) said so and so, he would say my madhab is Hanafi, or my Madhab is Maliki, or my Madhab is Shafi’ee or my Madhab is Hanbali … and other than this.

And the answer: To say to all of them that we all say: I bear witness that there is nothing worthy og worship except Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger.

What does the declarations that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah mean?

The scholars have said: It means: Obidience to him in what he has ordered, staying away from what he has forbidden, believing what he has given news of and not to worship Allah except by the way he worshipped Allah. This is the meaning of Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.

So if one says my Madhab is so and so or my Madhab is so and so we say to him: this is the statement of the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam), therefore we do not oppose his statement for the statement of anyone else. Even the Imams have prevents people from following every single one of their statements, And they all have said: whenever the truth has been clarified it is compulsory to return to it.

We therefore say to that brother who has opposed us by saying that he follows Madhab so and so: Ourselgves and you declare that Muhammad (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) is the Messenger of Allah. And this declaration means that we should not follow anyone except the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam).

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: Do not blind follow any man in your religion because they are not immune to making errors

The statements of a scholar can either be correct or incorrect. However the statements of the Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) is exempted from this. And he has said in an aithentic hadeeth: “If a judge makes a judgement and is correct he gets two blessings and if he is incorrect then he gets one blessing” Therefore, how can a Muslim follow only one Imam from the many Imams in all aspects of his religion and the Imam himself is not immune from making mistakes? Instead it is upon us all to follow the one who is free from error in what he relayed. And also it is upon us to relay it to the rest of the Ummah. And whomsoever follows an Imam from the many Imams blindly in every single thing he has said he has put him in the status of Prophethood. Imam Ash Shatibi he has demonstrated that the blind-followers of Madhabs are similar to the Shiah when he said about them: And from this also is the opinion of the Imameeyah and the Mahdawiyah (two sects of the Shiah) so much so that they raised the statements and actions of their scholars and Mahdi as a proof over the Shariah (the Qur’an and the Sunnah) and they say that they are free from error. And from this is the opinion of the blind-followeres of Madhabs who think that the statements of their Imams is the Shariah and when a person who has reached the level of Ijtihaad and speaks about issues comes to them and doesn’t ascribe himself to their Imam they start saying ill things of him and they put him among those who have deviated and from those who have sperated from the jama’ah without the usage of any evidence. Only the thoughts of a general person. And there is no doubt that this blind partisanship is one of the reasons for disregarding beneficial knowledge. And Imam Ash Shatibi also demonstrated this by what occured with Baqee Ibn Mikhlad when he entered Andalus. He studied in the East and obtained much knowledge about Ahadeeth. He also studied from the Musnad of Imam Ahmad from the Imam himself and he authored a Musnad which no one in Islam has authored the likes of since. And the people who had no knowledge came to him and disliked this from him and claimed that he was astray. And Imam Ash Shatibi said in the end of the story: And putting the statements of men over truth leads to exaggeration in the love of a Madhab.

A summarised refutation upon these biased partisans.

We have known already that they have conflicted with the Methodology of the companions.

But if one of them were to say: “We have to follow a specific Madhab”.

We ask him: Did Allah in his book or the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) order this?

If he says: No, then teach him

And if he says yes, Allah says: “Ask those who know if you do not know”.

Then we answer with only one verse, Allah says: “Oh ye who believe obey Allah and Obey his Messenger tand the people in authority among you and if you disagree about a matter return it to Allah and his Messenger if you truly believe in Allah and the last day…”. Allah Ta’ala has put obidience to Allah and his Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) before obidience to the people in authority i.e the scholars and the rulers. This shows that obidience to the scholars and the rulers is based upon their obidience to Allah and the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) and we know that the scholars and the rulers are not immune to being incorrect. The Messenger of Allah (Salallahu walaihi wa sallam) has said: “There is no obidience to the creator in disobidience to the created” . Therefore whoever follows the Ulama with evidence or follows them with the lack of ability to know the truth then there is nothing wrong in this. However, whoever follows them in their opinions after the truth has come to them, with the fact that a scholar can be incorrect in an issue from the many issues this person would be one who is heading for destruction and is astray and leads others astray because he has taken his scholars as dieties other than Allah because he has made the statement of an Alim over the evidences of the book and the Sunnah.

Shaikh Ul Islam Ibn Taymeeyah said: Whoever makes Taqleed of a specific Imam compulsory he must make Tauba or he is killed; because making this compulsory is Shirk with Allah in lawgiving which is part of Allah’s lordship.
And with this allah has told us to return to the book and the Sunnah when we disagree in a matter and he has not ordered the believers to return to the Madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik or other than them. Imam Ibn Katheer has said about this part of the verse: Mujahid and other than them from the salaf said that the meaning of (return the matter to Allah and the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam)) means to return it to the book of Allah and the Sunnah of his Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam). And this is an order from Allah ta’ala, that everything that the people have disagreement about in the Fundamentals of the religion and its branches that this disagreement must be returned to the book and the Sunnah.

And if they say that Ijtihaad has been cut off we say to them that the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) has said: “There will always be a group from my Ummah who will remain upon the truth”. Imam Ahmad Ibn Sinaan has said: They are the people of knowledge and Hadeeth and additionally Imam Ahmad has used this Hadeeth as evidence that Ijtihaad will never be cut off from the Ummah. Therefore, there is no evidence for this great lie. Allahu Musta’aan.

And now, in conlusion I leave the noble reader with the statement of Ibn Jawzi in his book talbees Iblees where he said: AndTaqleed removes the benefit of the intellect; because the intellect was created in order to reflect and think, and the worst of matters is that when some is given his senses in order to see the light and then shuts it off and chooses to walk in darkness. if you want further information look to the introduction of the book: “The Prophet’s prayer described” by the noble Shaikh and reviver of the Sunnah Muhammad Nasir Ud Deen Al Albani.

Wa Salallahu ala nabeeyinah wa ‘Ala Aaalihi wa Sahbihi wa Sallam

Written by: Abu Talha Musa Millington

Notes on Lecture by Shaikh Muqbil on Taqleed

I listened to a lecture by Shaikh Muqbil Ibn Hadi Al Wadi’ee which spoke about Taqleed. And he said that Taqleed is Haraam upon the Muslim who is a scholar/ student of knowledge and even the Muslim who is seen as a general Muslim.

He said that all the verses that refer to obidience of the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) refer to those who are scholars and those who are the general people. Except that the scholar or student of knowledge teaches the general person about the Sunnah. And if the general person learns by this way this would not be termed as Taqleed by rather it would be termed as following (Al Ittiba’)

And the proofs that Taqleed is Haraam is where Allah said about the Mushrikeen : “We found our forefathers upon a way and we will follow their way”.

And where they will say on Yaumil Qiyamah: “Verily we followed out leaders and our elders therefore give them a punishment that is doubled”.

And Allah ta’ala he said about the Christians and Jews: “They took their scholars and worshippers as deities other than Allah”.

And also he showed that the order : “Follow that which was sent down from your Lord and do not follow other than this” was to all Muslims whether it be the Alim or the one who is not an Alim.

And as for the statement of Allah: “Ask those people of thikr if you do not”. Ibn Hazm said that we were told to ask about the thikr (the Qur’an and Sunnah) not about the opinions of men.

And to those who say that we must make Taqleed of a Madhab I ask them some simple questions.

Did Allah order us to follow a specific Imam? No.

Did the Prophet (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) say to follow a specific Imam without following others? No.

Did the Khulafa Ar Rashideen. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan and Ali follow a specific Madhab in Fiqh? No.

Did the Imams of the Madhabs say to follow them? No

Did the students of these Imams tell the people to follow a specific Imam in Fiqh? No.

Rather all of them followed the Sunnah of the Messenger (Salallahu alaihi wa sallam) And ordered others to do so.

What is the proof that one must follow a single Imam in every statement he makes. Allah has said: “Bring your proof if you are truthful”. Bring one statement from the Salaf Us Salih from the Sahabah, the Tabi’een and the Imams of Fiqh and Hadeeth that you must follow a specific Imam. And if proof is not shown then that statement that one must make Taqleed is rejected.

Debate between Shaikh Al Albani and Booti

The debate between Sa’eed Ramadan Buuti and a Salafi teacher is a debate actually made up by Sa’eed Ramadan and his followers which never occured. In fact it was a lie on Shaikh Sultaan Al Eed. What I will do I will now copy and paste a real debate that happened between Shaikh Al Albani and Sa’eed Ramadan Al Buuti

First some of the history behind this debate.

Soon after Sa`eed Ramadaan al-Bootee had written his ‘Fiqh as-Seerah’ in which he accused Ahlus Sunnah, the Salafees, of that which they are free of, Shaykh Naasir [al-Albaanee] asked to open a discussion with al-Bootee. The topic was to be these accusations and some more specific ones levelled at Shaykh Naasir himself.

However, for various reasons this discussion never occurred. Then when al-Bootee wrote his book ‘laa madh-habiyyah’ in which he launched even more attacks against Ahlus Sunnah, Shaykh Naasir renewed his efforts to open a discussion with al-Bootee, writing a letter to him which commenced with Surah al-Asr.

This meeting did take place and took more than three hours. The following is a summarised transcript of this meeting reproduced in the book ‘Bid`atut Ta`ssub al-Madh-habee’ of Shaykh Eed al-Abbaasee, may Allaah preserve him, who states that he would soon, insha`Allaah, produce a separate booklet with the transcript to the whole discussion. He states, “this is [the discussion] O brother reader, I have quoted it truthfully and sincerely, highlighting its important points. If you wish to ascertain this for yourself then listen to the tapes which [you will find] in the possession of either party.”

The First Issue:

Shaykh Naasir mentioned what occurred in some of the Mosques wherein a number of congregational prayers were held for the same prayer and the blind-followers of one madh-hab preventing them from praying behind a blind-follower of another madh-hab. This led him to declare the point to be incorrect that al-Bootee made [in his 'Laa Madh-habiyyah'] that there was a consensus that the prayer of a blind-follower of one School behind a blind-follower of another School was valid. The reality is that there is a great deal of difference over this issue and in fact the weightiest opinion in the Hanafee and Shaafi`ee Schools is that it is disliked to pray behind an adherent to another madh-hab. He asked al-Bootee to prove the correctness of his quote and assertion.

Al-Bootee objected to the words of Shaykh Naasir by saying, ‘the dislike of a thing does not negate its validity.’

Shaykh Naasir refuted this by saying that it was established in the Books of Shaafi`ee Fiqh that if a Shaafi`ee follower comes to know that his Hanafee Imaam has touched an ajnabee woman and that Hanafee led the prayer without performing wudu` then the prayer of the [Shaafi`ee] follower is invalid.

Al-Bootee replied by saying that this was not what he intended by his words. What he meant was that the prayer was valid behind an Imaam with the condition that the Imaam being followed had not done something that invalidated the wudu` or prayer according to the madh-hab of the follower.

Shaykh Naasir objected to this by saying [that this could not be understood from his words in his book] because his words were general and hence would remain upon their generality until some [text] occurred that restricted their meaning.

At this juncture there arose a discussion concerning Usul in which the meaning of general and restricted was discussed wherein al-Bootee fruitlessly tried to avoid the point that Shaykh Naasir made. His father [who was also present] aided him in this even though he admitted that the words of Shaykh Naasir spoke the truth and his son had no idea how to respond!

The discussion concluded with it being agreed that it would have been upon Dr. al-Bootee to bring some form of restriction to his words by saying: The scholars have agreed that the prayer of a Shaafi`ee behind a Hanafee and vice-versa is valid with the condition that the follower not know of anything the Imaam may have done that invalidated the wudu` or prayer according to the madh-hab of the follower.

The Second Issue:

Shaykh Naasir asked Dr. Bootee to furnish him with the evidence that would justify the correctness of the title of his book that the Laa Madh-habiyyah [Anti-Madh-habees] were the most dangerous innovation destroying the Islaamic Sharee`ah.

Al-Bootee replied by saying that the evidence lay in his book in that the Sahaabah used to stick to the madh-habs of their scholars. Likewise those who followed them, then those who followed them until this day of ours.

This astonished Shaykh Naasir who said: It becomes clear to me that you [he refers to al-Bootee in the plural] intend by the word madh-habiyyah a meaning other then what commonly crosses ones mind. For the understood meaning of it is that the Muslim sticks to one specific Imaam for the entirety of his life in all of the matters related to his religion. This was never present amongst the Companions, for they were never divided into different groups wherein each group followed its specific Mujtahid from amongst the Mujtahid Companions.

Dr. Bootee replied by saying: Amongst the Sahaabah were the muqallid and the mujtahid. The Muqallid Sahaabah used to follow one of the Mujtahid Sahaabah whose ruling he felt comfortable with.

Shaykh Naasir replied: The Muqallid Sahaabah used to adhere to the opinion of every Mujtahid amongst them and did not restrict themselves to just one (i.e. they asked any Mujtahid they found easy to go to at the time they needed a ruling). So sometimes if they found it easy to go to Abu Bakr they would take to his legal verdict without then clinging to him [in all matters of the religion]. Similarly if they found it easy to go to Umar they would take to his legal verdict and so on. There was never this clinging to one Imaam present amongst them, however you claim there is so I ask you to furnish me with evidence.

At this juncture al-Bootee tried to escape the strong point that Shaykh Naasir made and rejected that he had ever made such a statement, and then gave a whole new definition to al-Madhhabiyyah.

He said: al-Madh-habiyyah is that one person who has not reached the level of ijtihaad follow an Imaam from amongst the Imaams, regardless of whether this Imaam changes or the number [of Imaams asked] be more than one or he does not change and there not be a number of [Imaams being asked]. As for the Laa Madh-habee then he does not go to a single Imaam for a legal verdict and neither does he go to a number of Imaams ( i.e. neither does he not stick to just one). Hence such a person is from the most dangerous of innovators.

At this Shaykh Naasir expressed his utter astonishment and said: upon this definition you will not find a Muslim on the face of this earth except that he is a madh-habee! So who are you refuting in your book? And why did you not make clear what you meant by al-Madh-habiyyah so that the people could understand?

The Discussion Now Digressed into talking about al-Ma`soomee’s book [translated into English as 'The Blind Following of Madh-habs' – this book was the initial reason behind al-Bootee authoring 'Laa Madh-habiyyah']

Al-Bootee understood from this book that the author took it upon every Muslim to perform Ijtihaad and to take [directly] from the Book and Sunnah.

Shaykh Naasir asked him to furnish evidence from the book that would justify his understanding. So al-Bootee quoted some sentences that mentioned that the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) was sinless (ma`soom), that the Madh-habs were an innovated matter, that Imaams were not sinless, that the Madh-habs consisted of the opinions of some of the Mujtahids in some issues, and that neither Allaah or His Messenger (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) had obligated following them.

Shaykh Naasir stated that these statements were restricted [and to be understood in the light of] other statements that [al-Ma`soomee] made in his book, such statements that al-Bootee had overlooked and had not indicated to in the slightest way.

Al-Bootee asked Shaykh Naasir to quotes some of these.

Shaykh Naasir mentioned some of them, for example on page 29 where al-Ma`soomee said, “know that taking to the opinions of the Scholars and their analogies is like performing tayammum. One only does it when one cannot find water. In the case that a text from the Book, Sunnah or statements of the Sahaabah are found then taking to them is obligatory and one should not then turn to the opinions of the Scholars.”

[The meaning of the words of al-Ma`soomee can be found articulated by ash-Shaafi`ee in his Risaalah (pg. 599 – tahqeeq Ahmad Shaakir). It is strange that al-Bootee, who claims to be a follower of ash-Shaafi`ee refutes these words [of al-Ma`soomee] understanding them in this strange way that they necessitate that everyone must perform ijtihaad. For sure if these words were to have been quoted to him as the words of ash-Shaafi`ee then he would have directed them towards their correct meaning (with no problem)!]

Shaykh Naasir asked al-Bootee: Do these words not restrict the generality of his words [that you quote]?

Al-Bootee replied that al-Ma`soomee had mixed truth with falsehood. For if these words of his are compared to what he states on page 40 that ‘understanding the Book and Sunnah is easy and does not require more than the Six Books of Hadeeth’ then his words are contradictory.

Shaykh Naasir remarked that al-Bootee had not fully quoted the words of al-Ma`soomee and asked him to read from beginning of al-Ma`soomee’s words that said, “O Muslim! When you delve and excel in knowledge and your strength of resolve increases through taqwaa then strive in understanding the clear [texts] of the Book and the clear Sunnah and the actions/understanding of the majority of the People of Knowledge…”

So Shaykh Naasir asked al-Bootee: So did al-Ma`soomee require every Muslim to understand the Book and Sunnah or did he restrict it to a specific group of Muslims?

Again al-Bootee tried to avoid Shaykh Naasir’s point and claimed that al-Ma`soomee [began by] addressing all the Muslims with those words.

Shaykh Naasir then said: however he has set two conditions “when you delve and excel in knowledge and your strength of resolve increases through taqwaa” so is he addressing those who have no knowledge or those who have no taqwaa?

Al-Bootee did not reply, instead he quoted again from Ma`soomee claiming that his words required every Muslim, including the ignorant, to perform ijtihaad. He quoted from page 5 where al-Ma`soomee quotes some ahaadeeth proving the ease of Islaam and the ease of understanding it such as the hadeeth of Jibreel and the hadeeth of ibn Umar concerning the five pillars.

Shaykh Naasir replied by saying: It is necessary to understand these hadeeth in their correct context for the author did not intend by quoting these two hadeeth what al-Bootee understood from them. This is because al-Ma`soomee mentions in his introduction the reason why he wrote this book. This being that some Japanese Muslims had written a letter to him mentioning that some Japanese desired to enter Islaam in the year 1357H. This was presented to the Jam`iyyah of Muslims in Tokyo and some of these Muslims asked these Japanese to become Hanafee and others asked them to become Shaafi`ee. This confused the Japanese and became the cause for them not to enter into Islaam! So the people who wrote al-Ma`soomee the letter asked him to clarify his views on this issue. So al-Ma`soomee wrote them this book explaining that entering into Islaam was easy, by articulating the Shahaadah and establishing the remaining four pillars and that it was not necessary to follow a specific madh-hab.

Al-Bootee objected to this by quoting al-Ma`soomee on page 6 as saying, “as for the madh-habs then they consist of the opinions and the understanding of the People of Knowledge in some issues and neither Allaah or His Messenger have obligated anyone to follow them.”

Shaykh Naasir explained that al-Ma`soomee had restricted the meaning of his words when he said, “in some issues” and it is known that there are some opinions that are purely ijtihaadi [not having any text to support them] and it is these that al-Ma`soomee intended.

At this point al-Bootee accused al-Ma`soomee of having a bad convention in writing.

Shaykh Naasir replied by saying that al-Ma`soomee was to be excused for this because he was a non-Arab, a Turk, and that the important point was to take note of the meaning of his words and not the sentence construction. Indeed that which was to be understood from the book of al-Ma`soomee was the opposite to what al-Bootee understood.

The Discussion now digressed to Ijtihaad

At this point the father of al-Bootee interjected saying that the analogy that al-Ma`soomee made to water and tayammum was correct. However this was for the Mujtahid scholar who fulfilled the well-known and many conditions. He stated that the Hanafee, Shaafi`ee and Maalikee madh-habs are agreed that the door to ijtihaad closed after the fifth century to the extent that they considered an-Nawawee and ar-Raafi`ee to scholars who merely decided what the strongest opinion [of already existing opinions] was.

Dr. Bootee, realising that this was a point of difference between himself and his father tried to change the subject. However Shaykh Naasir mentioned that Dr. Bootee differed with him on this issue and that he endorsed the fact that the door to ijtihaad remained open. The father thought this was to be very strange. Dr. Bootee again interjected trying to return the discussion back to the book of al-Ma`soomee claiming that the analogy of water and tayammum meant that al-Ma`soomee required everyone to perform ijtihaad because it required everyone to leave the words of the scholars except in those issues for which there was no text.

Shaykh Naasir refuted him by saying that this was an erroneous understanding and he mentioned other texts from the book endorsing this in which al-Ma`soomee explained the obligation of taqleed upon the ignorant.

Then al-Bootee found no further room for arguing except through claiming that the words of al-Ma`soomee were self-contradictory.

The Discussion now Digressed to Whether one could call the religion of Muhammad (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) a madh-hab.

Both al-Bootee and his father rejected this. Shaykh Naasir stated that from a linguistic point of view there was nothing preventing this however he agreed to their stance.

The Discussion then Digressed to whether an incorrect ijtihaad could be called (or taken as) deen

Shaykh Naasir was of the opinion that to do so was erroneous, however al-Bootee and his father were of the opinion that to do so was correct. After some discussion they conceded to Shaykh Naasirs stance.

The Discussion digressed to the issue of Ittibaa` (following) and whether or not it was an independent level that a person could reach

Shaykh Naasir was of the opinion that it was an independent station falling between the station of taqleed and ijtihaad because its [state] differs from the [state] of the other two. Dr. Bootee was of the opinion that it falls within taqleed. A number of those present agreed with Shaykh Naasir because he quoted a number of the People of Knowledge in their affirming the station of ittibaa`. The discussion on this went on for a long time ending with both sticking to their opinion. However there was a weakening in al-Bootee’s stance for he stated that this was an issue over which there was a difference of opinion.

The Discussion ended with a Vile word from al-Bootee

Finally Shaykh Naasir asked al-Bootee for another sitting but he refused and so Shaykh Naasir asked permission to leave. He stood and moved towards the door. Al-Bootee realising that he had been defeated [in a number of his stances] then called out, “By Allaah! Shaykh Naasir you state what is not in your heart.”

Shaykh Naasir rejected this vile accusation, as did those who were present and then the discussion was over.