This is why we take from the scholars and not social media. Daniel Haqeeqatiou unplugged.

Regarding the issues facing Da’wah now. Apparently Daniel Haqeeqatiou is waging war on the “Madkhalis” presently.

Without doubt he is very precise in his refutations of modernist thought, liberal philosophical views and the compassionate Imams such as Umar Sulaimaan and those of his ilk. May Allah reward him for such work.

BUUUUUUUUUUUUT…

As we say in the West Indies: “Bat in yuh crease.” Meaning, try to stay in areas you are familiar with and avoid throwing caution to the wind.

So, in educating the brother we must first take the following matters into consideration:

1. DON’T do like Uthman Farooq, Karim Abu Zaid and others have done in trying to corner the brother into Tawbah in public.
2. That this issue must be approached with knowledge and not emotion.

Regarding the Muslim rulers there are a few things to say:

• The Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said to not expose him publicly. Hence, it is not for us to mention the names of the rulers on Social Media, the public square or the Minbar in a negative light as this would cause more harm than benefit to those living under that ruler.
• There is a legislative principle which states that repelling evil takes precedent over bringing about that which is beneficial. Without doubt this principle can be used regarding the Muslim ruler who is an open sinner. Because although mentioning the ruler’s faults may have some benefit the harm overrides the benefit as speaking against the Muslim ruler can lead (and indeed it often led) to open revolt.
• Speaking against the Muslim rulers openly is from the methodology of the Khawarij and the Mu’tazilah. This clarity is found in several books of the Salaf including Sharh Us Sunnah by Imam Al Barbahari.
• The issue is not an issue of bootlicking, it is an issue of Islaam. Since the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) gave us clear advice to neither revolt against the ruler physically nor to advise him publicly this is to be followed regardless of the status of the individual who went against this advice.
• Because many brothers express this position which is of the Methodology of the Salaf it is indeed inappropriate to call them bootlickers and even FEDS (which would make them Munafiqeen).

As for other brothers, we have to be careful in labelling others. Because someone has an aspect of the Manhaj of the Khawarij it doesn’t necessitate that such a person is Khariji. Rather it is upon us to advise and establish the evidence clearly against his methodology.

In conclusion, as Muslims in the west we have to stop aggrandizing social media figures, take from real scholars and learn our religion or else we can lead ourselves and others astray.

And Allah knows best.

N.B: I know a brother has compiled my posts on Social Media personalities, Jazahullahu Khairan. In Sha Allah, instead of basing my treatise on Yaasir Qadhi and Shirk I will extend it to other personalities such as Daniel Haqeeqatiou, Muhammad Hijaab, Bro. Hajji, Yaqeen Institute and others.

The END of the SPUBS Methodology in their fanaticism and blind-following of Shaikh Rabee’

Assalamu Alaikum,

After more than a decade of clarifying the pristine Salafi Methodology and opposing the hizbi (partisan) methodology of SPUBS I have decided that after translating this audio clip (from Shaikh Muqbil) I shall spend much less time and energy clarifying the errors of the above aforementioned aspect of their methodology. If after more than a decade of clarifying that it is NOT obligatory to follow Shaikh Rabee’ in EVERY criticism he makes; using principles from the books of Jarh Wa Ta’deel and the speech of scholars such as Shaikh Ahmad An Najmi and Shaikh Muqbil, then I can only quote Shaikh Al Albani when he says:

“For the person of truth you only require one evidence. As for the person of falsehood then there is no way to get through to him.”

I hope that after this the brothers in SPUBS repent from their partisan methodology in warning against scholars and callers to Tawheed and Sunnah.

Shaikh Muqbil Ibn Haadi was asked:

“Do you agree with Shaikh Rabee’, his writings of criticism in Jarh Wa Ta’deel and in the methodology that he is upon or do you oppose it. And do you know as to whether or not Shaikh Ibn Baaz, Uthaimeen and Al Albani agree with him?”

The Shaikh said:

“Ahlus Sunnah have one spring from which they drink from and it is the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), their ‘Aqeedah is one and their methodology is one in every Muslim country. Yes. And they agree in disparaging the people of innovation and the partisans. They agree upon this.

What remains is that there are some people who according to one person is disparaged and to another is not disparaged. This occurred during the time of the Salaf. Because regarding an individual during that time, Ahmad (Ibn Hanbal) may see him as upright and to Yahya Ibn Ma’een may deem him to be a liar. Or the opposite. And the likes of this has come from Al Bukhari, Abu Zur’ah and Abu Hatim.

And that which is most important is that they DIDN’T BLIND FOLLOW each other. If we disagree regarding disparaging or appraising an individual it neither means that we differ in our ‘Aqeedah nor does it mean that we differ in our methodology.

And as for if whether or not Shaikh Ibn Baaz and Shaikh Al Albani agree or disagree with him. The issue is that I haven’t read many of the books of Shaikh Rabee,. This is one matter. Another matter also is that Ahlus Sunnah DO NOT BLIND FOLLOW each other. And if they criticize him or saw that he left that which is correct they would have brought out material with refutations regarding what he said and would have written books to oppose what he said.

And Allah’s help is sought. All in all;

ALL of us can be correct and wrong, and have knowledge and ignorance.

And Allah’s help is sought. Yes.”

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyzN0aTKgRE

Linking Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab to violent extremism. Dog whistling 101 from Qadhi, Hijab and Hajji.

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah

In history there are many lessons. And from them is that whenever the Da’wah of Ahlus Sunnah and Tawheed becomes apparent the people of Bid’ah begin to dog whistle.

What do I mean by this?

They make SURE to throw certain speech upon which many parties would pay attention. The lies and half truths of the aforementioned characters regarding Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab is nothing new and is a means of paving the way for a Western Islam primarily based on Shirk, Bid’ah and reconfiguration of the religion into a mere Friday hobby.

Understand that the books of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab only has verses, hadeeth, speech of the pious predecessors (Salaf) and the speech of ‘Ulama such as Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymeeyah and Shaikh Ul Islaam Ibnul Qayyim. So I sincerely ask the question:

1. What is the problem with the Three Fundamental Principles? This book which Muhammad Hijab (May Allah guide him) has such a big problem with that he would make TAKFEER on the one who says the Three Fundamental Principles is better than the Hadeeth about the three questions in the grave!!

That young man who really needs to learn and exercise humility doesn’t realize that firstly no MUSLIM who has intellect would EVER say that the words of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab are better than the words of the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi wa Sallam). Hence, that debunks an extremely large red herring.

Secondly, without realizing what he was saying, what follows from his speech is that there should be no explanation of Qur’an and Hadeeth. Since the best and most clear of speech is the book of Allah and the best of guidance is that of the Messenger (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) there is no NEED to have Ibn Katheer, Qurtubi, Fathul Baari etc.

Of course no Muslim with a sound mind would ever say the above. The Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said that the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets. According to an interpretation this means that since Prophethood is cut off those who teach and explain the legislation regarding creed, jurisprudence and behaviour (not western philosophy) to the masses would be THE SCHOLARS OF ISLAM. These explanations would be available via a live class, audio or written material. Hence, the Three Fundamental Principles is an attempt by a scholar, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, to explain the questions that every Muslim would be asked in the grave especially in an environment where GRAVE WORSHIP, BID’AH and others deviance was prevalent.

So what is the REAL PROBLEM?

2. What is the problem with the books: The Four Principles and Uncovering the Doubts? If these books establish that calling upon other than Allah directly and taking intercessors with Allah are both actions of MAJOR SHIRK as is established in the QURAN. What is the problem with saying that those who do the aforementioned are disbelievers (in a general NOT specific individual sense) when this is already established in the QURAN? These books would not upset anyone who has Imaan and Tawheed within their hearts. Rather, they would upset those who either worship the dead or are plotting against Islam and its people.

3. What is the problem with the book Kitaab Ut Tawheed. Again, it is a book with Qur’an, Sunnah, statements of the Salaf and the scholars. A book that has few of the Shaikh’s words himself. A book wherein he shows the importance of Tawheed and explains Shirk in detail with evidences.

Bro. Hajji, formerly the clandestine deobandi and now the grave kissing and crawling goofy sufi, would obviously have a problem with these books. As they tell you that seeking blessings from graves is incorrect. Hence, he attempts to make it seem that Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was not dissimilar to Hitler or Christopher Columbus (two genocidal warlords). This is not because of the reality but rather it is because of Hajji’s corrupted beliefs.

Why is Yasir Qadhi CONSTANTLY LYING in the plain sight by saying that the creed of Ibn Taymeeyah, Imam Ash Shawkani and Imam As San’aani is different from that of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab when there is much written material which proves otherwise? Why? Or why is Hajji the Sufi TRYING TO DECEIVE the people by pathetically trying to link ISIS to Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab when:

1. All of the “Wahhabi” scholars warned against ISIS.
2. There is absolutely nothing in the books of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab which links him to the creed of the Khawarij.
3. Thirdly, if clarifying that Du’a to other than Allah and seeking intercession from the dead makes an individual from the Khawarij this means (according to the logic from that foolhardy statement) that ALL of the Prophets from Adam (Alaihis Salaam) to the Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) were all Khawarij (according to their logic).

By Allah, all of the Messengers and the Imams and callers toward guidance clarified that only Allah is to be worshipped without any partner.

So take heed of that major principle Oh Muslim.

And think:

Why are these three (Hajji, Hijab and Qadhi) and the western media attacking Shaikh Muhammad Abdul Wahhab on a regular basis WITH THE SAME accusations?

Allah knows best but these can be the possible answers:

1. They know that the Creed of Tawheed is what distinguishes Islaam from other religions. Hence, by attacking the rightly guided scholars who preached Tawheed they can point their arrows at the ‘Aqeedah itself. Hence, if we really look at the progression of the three aforementioned characters they would first attack the Shaikh then reveal their true beliefs.
2. They realize the weakness of Da’wah Salafeeyah currently and hence they use this opportunity to exploit this weakness. May Allah unite the hearts of Ahlus Sunnah and distance them from blind partisanship to individuals and organizations.
3. Possibly, it can be a means to water down true Islam and metamorphize it into a WESTERN LIBERAL ISLAM that would “fit” the “modern world”. The powers know that in order to do so the obstacle of Tawheed and its people must be removed. They know that the Raafidah, Al Azhar (not all Azharis) and others of their ilk bear no resemblance to the Islam that conquered the Iberian Peninsula and knocked on the doorstep of France in the 7th Century.

May Allah ta’ala guide us toward learning, practicing and preaching Tawheed.

And Allah knows best.

Yasir Qadhi sanatizing Shirk-again.

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakaatuhu.

My dear brothers and sisters,

Some years ago Yasir Qadhi exposed his clear deviation regarding the issue of invoking the dead. After many Du’aat warned against him in Khutbas, Podcasts, articles and books, Yasir Qadhi in his new “clarification” in stubborn, arrogant fashion re-emphasized his heretical beliefs regarding the aforementioned issue.

The ignorance of the aforementioned individual coupled with his arrogance knows no bounds. His idle boast regarding he being the first one to translate Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s books and him having knowledge of Ibn Taymeeyah’s writings are all in vain as verily it is quite apparent that he didn’t understand an iota of what he wrote or read.

It is unfortunate that one who has a master’s degree in ‘Aqeedah hasn’t mastered the most fundamental issue of ‘Aqeedah which is the oneness of Allah in worship. He has abandoned all the texts from the Qur’an and the Sunnah which all state that Allah alone is to be worshipped. He has also abandoned the human’s natural disposition and basic common sense in comprehending that invoking, sacrificing, seeking aid, prayer and other forms of worship which are directed to a place, person, animal or thing constitute Shirk (associating partners with Allah). And he expects us in the west to throw the texts and our intellects behind our backs in order to grovel at the alter of his “qualifications” which don’t go beyond ink and stamps. As the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said regarding the Khawarij:

“They read the Qur’an and it doesn’t go beyond their throats.”

And indeed Yasir Qadhi has certificates that don’t go beyond laminated sheets of paper.

Enough of this individual. Now to get to the meat of the matter which is a billion dollar question. Who is the liar, Yasir Qadhi or the major scholars of present and the imams of the past?

Now, YQ has the belief that the idolators of the Arabs worshipped their gods WITH the belief that they can harm, benefit and give other than Allah. He also claimed that seeking intercession from the dead is not Shirk. Although it doesn’t matter whether or not the Arabs believed that their gods could harm or benefit in the grand scheme of things it is still appropriate to write a few short paragraphs to uncover and obliterate the above doubts.”

Regarding the first issue Allah has said in his book in Yunus (10) verse 31:

Say, “Who provides for you from the heaven and the earth? Or who controls hearing and sight and who brings the living out of the dead and brings the dead out of the living and who arranges [every] matter?” They will say, “Allah,” so say, “Then will you not fear Him?“

Shaikh Saalih Al Fawzaan said: “This shows that Tawheed is not only to establish Allah’s Lordship and that Shirk is not only Shirk in Allah’s Lordship…”

Shaikh Aaman Al Jaami said: “The disbelievers who the Prophet fought and made lawful their blood and wealth established the oneness of Lordship for Allah. They believed that he was the creator, the provider who disposes of all affairs in the heavens and the earth. Hence they had this belief, meaning that they singled out Allah in his actions and didn’t believe that their gods such as Laat, Uzza, Manaat and Hubal were partners with Allah in creating, provision and giving. They did not believe that.”

Shaikh Saalih Aal Ash Shaikh said: “From the proofs of the oneness of Allah in worship is to establish its proof using the oneness of Allah in his Lordship because the one who does these things alone (creation, provision etc.) is the only one deserving of worship.”

Imam Al Baghawi said: “…Do you not fear Allah’s punishment in your Shirk? Would you not distance yourself from Shirk after this pronouncement?”

Ibn Katheer said regarding this verse: “Allah establishes the proof upon the idolators regarding (their belief) that he is one in Lordship (to demonstrate) that he is the only one worthy of worship…”

Imam Al Qurtubi said: “The reason for putting forth this speech is to refute the idolators and to establish the evidence upon them…”

Secondly, there is the issue of intercession. Keep in mind that the following paragraphs refer to the issue of seeking intercession; verses 18 in Surah Yunus (10) which says: “And they worship other than Allah that which neither harms them nor benefits them, and they say, “These are our intercessors with Allah ” Say, “Do you inform Allah of something He does not know in the heavens or on the earth?” Exalted is He and high above what they associate with Him.”

And verse 3 of Surah Zumar (39) which says: “Unquestionably, for Allah is the pure religion. And those who take protectors besides Him [say], “We only worship them that they may bring us nearer to Allah in position.” Indeed, Allah will judge between them concerning that over which they differ. Indeed, Allah does not guide he who is a liar and [confirmed] disbeliever.

N.B: The word protectors should be replaced with gods (i.e idols) in this case as it corresponds more with the tafseer.

Shaikh Saalih Aal Ash Shaikh said: “The idolators of the Arabs didn’t call upon their God independently, they would call upon their gods as intermediaries. And this intermediation was used to come close to Allah from this angle. And the second angle (which was used) was from the angle of intercession.”(Sharh Qawaid Al Arba :17-18)

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaimeen said: “The idolators who Allah sent the Messenger among DID NOT worship these idols because of their belief that they BENEFIT or HARM but rather they worshipped them in order to come close to Allah.” (Sharh Kashf Ash Shubuhaat: 86)

Shaikh Saalih Al Fawzaan said after quoted the aforementioned verses: “They know that they (these idols) NEITHER BENEFITTED nor HARMED. But they took them as intercessors in order to be intermediaries between themselves and Allah in order to fulfill their needs. They sacrificed for them, made oaths to them. Not because they CREATED, PROVIDED, BENEFITTED or HARMED in their belief system…” (Silsilah Sharh Ar Rasail: 340)

These scholars who are mountains of knowledge have all come to the same conclusion. Is it that these scholars are misinterpreting the Qur’an? Or is it that YQ is selecting carefully from his bag of tricks?

Let us see shall we?

Regarding verse 18 of Surah Yunus:

Imam At Tabari said: “Abu Ja’far said: Allah has mentioned that these idolators who have been described worship other than Allah that which neither benefits nor harms them in this world, not in the hereafter, and this refers to their gods and the idols that they worshipped. “They say that these are our intercessors with Allah.” Meaning that they worshipped them wanting intercession to Allah.”

Ibn Katheer said: “Allah condemns the idolators who worship other than Allah thinking that they benefit from the intercession of their gods. Hence, Allah clarified that they neither benefit, nor harm and own nothing.”

Imam Al Qurtubi said: “They say that these are our intecessors to Allah. And this is extreme ignorance on their part as they wait for their intercession regarding the future which neither contains benefit or harm in the present. And it is said: Our intercessors: meaning that they intercede for us to Allah in order to rectify our worldy affairs.”

Regarding Surah Zumar verse three:

Imam At Tabari said: “Those who took gods other than Allah, and worship them other than Allah, they say to them: We don’t worship you O gods EXCEPT to come closer to Allah in order to intecede for us regarding our needs.“

Imam Al Baghawi said: “Qatada said: This is because when it was asked of them: Who is your Lord? Who is your creator? Who created the heavens and the earth? They said: Allah. It was asked of them: Then what is the meaning of you worshipping idols? They said: In order to come closer to Allah.”

 Imam Ibn Katheer said: “That which carried them upon their worship is that they directed themselves to idols which were taken in the images of angels as they perceived. Therefore they worshipped these images worshipping them in the way that they worshipped the angels in order that they intercede for them in aiding them and providing for them and whatever they deputize for them in worldy issues.”

Imam Qurtubi has the same speech as Al Baghawi hence there is no need to repeat it.

Oh Muslims, it is obvious from the aforementioned that YQ seeks to constantly propagate heresies while insulting the intelligence of the western Muslims. Ask yourselves the following questions:

i. Are we going to choose Yaasir Qadhi, the Raafidah Shee’ah and the Brelawis to follow regarding this matter or are we going to choose the imams and scholars of past and present?

ii. Is the problem with Imam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab who has a similar ideology of Imams of the past and the present or is the problem with Yasir Qadhi who analyzes Islam in Einsteinian proportions? The latter who either fabricates novel heresies or rehashes those of the Sufis and the Raafidah.

May Allah guide us and protect us from Qadiism and its heresies.

And Allah knows best.

Do not put the Manhaj of the Salaf aside because of the errors of SPUBS.

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

My dear brothers and sisters. Again I keep looking at the situation regarding the contemporary Da’wah scene and without fear of reproach it is without doubt that SPUBS have run afoul with the following:

i. Mass Tabdee’ and warning against those who don’t tow their line even if they are scholars who ascribe and follow the methodology of the Salaf.

ii. Hysterical fanaticism to Shaikh Rabee’ regarding Jarh Wa Ta’deel.

iii. Double standards, innovating principles and blatantly lying.

iv. Arrogance when they make errors.

v. Pushing themselves forward in affairs which they should distance themselves from.

And the list goes on. HOWEVER:

It does not mean that we abandon aspects of the Manhaj which SPUBS implements (and misapplies) which are correct. This is because we have to be just as Allah said: “And don’t let your hatred of a people allow you to not be just. Be just as this is closer to piety.”

So what aspects are we speaking about (Please note that these are principles that I am speaking about. The manner in which SPUBS misapplies these principles at times is another story)?:

i. Examining the condition of Du’aat (callers) before taking knowledge from them (i.e Manhaj checking them). YES, du’aat have to be MANHAJ CHECKED! Muhammad Ibn Sireen (May Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Verily this knowledge is the religion therefore examine those who you take your religion from.”

ii. Examine the associates and friends of individuals. The Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said: “A man is upon the religion of his friend therefore he must examine the one who he befriends.” And the Salaf would say that they would not take from an individual unless they knew who they entered with, exited with and sat with.

iii. Disassociating from innovators and its people and refuting them. It is established that the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) refuted the Khawarij as well as the Qadareeyah. Additionally he said regarding innovators: “If you see someone following that which is unexplicit (from the Qur’an) then these are the individuals who Allah has named therefore stay away from them.”

iv. Taking from the Kibaarul Ulama (although they are selective when it comes to this principle) and having a connection with them. As the Salaf used to say: “The people would be upon goodness once they take from their Kibaar (seniors).” Also, taking from those who are known to the scholars and have adherence to As Salafeeyah.

v. Returning to the books, explanations of texts and verdicts of the major scholars regarding ‘Aqeedah, Manhaj, Fiqh etc and making effort to implement what is found in these books.

In closing those who ascribe to Salafeeyah should adhere to its principles. It is not befitting for a Salafi to abandon an important principle because speakers from SPUBS call to it! Rather, we must understand, implement and call toward these correct principles which would keep our Salafeeyah intact.

The likes of Muhammad Hijab, Yasir Qadhi and friends who make “strategic alignments” with the alphabet gang, Bro. Hajji and others have been able to run a muck on social media because they all realize that these principles have been practically abandoned by many who ascribe to Salafeeyah. This is because SPUBS have misapplied these principles for their own benefit and hence the deviants above have taken advantage of this by labelling anyone who applies these principles as “Madkhalis.” Firstly, that label is used to slander a great scholar of Hadeeth and a reviver of the Manhaj of the Salaf and secondly it shows their fear of being refuted and exposed for their clear deviance.

I therefore implore my brothers and sisters to be fair and just. Learn the methodology of the Salaf, implement it and call toward it despite the conduct of SPUBS even if deviants like Qadhi, Hijab and Hajji are adverse to such.

And Allah knows best.

Salafis! Where we were, where we are and where we should go.

Salafis in the West. We were once united under scholars like Ibn Baz, Uthaimeen, Al Albani and Muqbil. So what has happened to us in the last few years?

Well…

Fitnah after fitnah after fitnah.

So there was Abu Hasan Al Masri then Saalih Al Bakri then Faalih Al Harbi then Shaikh Yahya Al Haajoori then Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Haadi and things just seem to get worse.

Notwithstanding that there were legitimate statements made regarding some of the individuals above HOWEVER to test the common Muslim regarding his stance regarding these individuals, the latter two being from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is simply preposterous as they don’t have the knowledge to decipher between the statements of the scholars.

Currently, (Wa Tabban Lahum), some foolish youth are even warning against Shaikh Saalih As Suhaimi, the Mufti of Madeenah and others like Shaikh Sulaimaan Ar Ruhaili who are well respected Ulama of very high calibre.

Unfortunately, this is where we are NOW. Imagine we as Salafis in the west are divided because of Fitan going on in lands far away from us! We are doing the following:

i. Dividing communities

ii. Warning against scholars and students of knowledge

iii. Breaking up families and marriages

iv. Having fights and in some cases confrontations can be almost deadly!

v. Disallowing Muslims from going into the Masjid to pray!

vi. Sending threats!

And the list goes on.

And for this reason there are those who stir in murky waters in order to cause doubt regarding:

i. The Ahadeeth of the 73 sects.

ii. Shirk

iii. Working with deviant organizations like Yaqeen

iv. Philosophizing the Da’wah of Islam

v. Rebellion against the Muslim Ruler

The general public speaking about issues that are known by neccessity! And to this juncture, imagine two individuals who Allah has blessed to study overseas can say that another individual is not qualified to speak against homosexuality because he is not a scholar!

How foolish do you think the people are? You can fool some people sometimes but you can’t fool all the people all the time.

Now, I am going to be really really brutally honest in this discourse in discussion where we are and the reality of our situation in the west and I may get some opposition but take it as advice:

i. The level of knowledge that we THINK that some prominent brothers in the west have in fact DO NOT have it. My brothers and sisters, when we raise individuals based on certificates, recommendations or experience we become blind to the reality of what that person says and does. Furthermore, it is difficult to examine the veracity of their statements or actions because knowledge is lacking for such examination.

N.B: I am not categorically stating that there are no knowledgeable people in the west.

ii. Because we don’t have a community where it is regular for the people to have knowledge, be fluent in Arabic, Huffadh of Qur’an and other Islamic Sciences the one eyed man can lead the blind to their destruction. Take for instance when individuals make it seem that if you don’t follow Shaikh Rabee’ in every statements he has made regarding individuals that equates to automatic deviance. Such a nonsensical statement will not work on individuals who are familiar with the Science of Hadeeth and Jarh Wa Ta’deel.

iii. Hence, when we see crazy behaviour being displayed and foolish statements being peddled as truth it should not amaze us as the one eyed man is leading the blind to their own detriment. And this is where we are at as a Salafi community in the west. Only because those who are in leadership don’t have the requisite knowledge and ability to both sojourn communities specifically and a trans-national da’wah generally.

So what do we need to do?

We need to:

i. Revive our intentions and set them aright to be sincere to Allah.

ii. Seek knowledge to aid this religion and to spread Islam and the Sunnah.

iii. Build communities based on knowledge where it would be a norm to have at least a significant crop of brothers who have knowledge of different Islamic sciences.

The second and third factors are those of the highest importance. And the foundation of it is Basic Aqeedah, Basic Fiqh, ARABIC LANGUAGE AND QUR’AN. It is neither proper not fair that individuals who have little to no Arabic or Qur’an delve into possibly complex issues such as:

i. Jarh Wa Ta’deel

ii. Tabdee’

iii. Tafseeq &

iv. Takfeer etc.

In a nutshell my dear esteemed reader what we are in dire need of manners and knowledge. It is about time that our communities evolve from this current state of constant bickering and infighting into that which can produce righteous, knowledgeable, preservers of Islam in theory and practice.

And Allah knows best

On Mufti Menk, Joel Olsteen and Dale Carnegie.

For months I have been grappling with this topic as to whether or not I should write regarding Mufti Menk. Reason is that I didn’t want to simply give a spubsy post (for lack of a better word) or a post that really does not deal with the Usool (principles) that I perceive that he bases his Da’wah upon. One thing we can say is that his Da’wah is accommodating to all and sundry and hence he has widespread popularity.

My dear Muslim brothers and sisters, commanding the good and forbidding the evil should not be sacrificed for widespread popularity. As the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said: “Whoever pleases the people in displeasing Allah then Allah leaves him to the people.” In any case, the other day I began reading Dale Carnegie’s famous book: “How to win friends and influence people.” Now, I personally do not advise the majority to read that book because if one does not have grounding in Islamic studies and lacks understanding the the Prophetic method of correcting others that book could indeed lead a Muslim into a wrong path.

Why do I say this? It is because his number one rule is NOT TO CRITICIZE ANYONE. I want us to really reflect on these words. He said that the egos of people are fragile and if we engage in crticism the people would run away. NOW, I would like my dear Muslim brother and sister to think and reflect upon Mufti Menk’s Da’wah:

Has he criticized actions of Shirk and Bid’ah within the Ummah?

Has he criticized groups that aren’t upon the path of the early Muslims?

Has he even criticized other religions and has he ever called his audience from those religions to Islam?

Why does he use the word Allmighty in his tweets and avoids using Allah?

I am not saying that it is necessary that criticism is rough and the issue of roughness and gentleness have to be weighed according to the situation. However, it is incorrect to remain neutral or politically correct on that which obviously opposes Islam. We see callers now sidestepping issues of Shirk, Bid’ah, Da’wah to Non Muslims, homosexuality etc. in order to not cause a perceived controversy.

This sunshine, lollipops and rainbows Da’wah is similar to that of the Christian Preacher Joel Olsteen who doesn’t criticize but simply encourages. Someone who does not draw clear lines in his preaching gives everyone a feel good moment. Hence, like Mufti Menk, he has widespread popularity.

In Islam there is a balance, there is use of encouragement as well as the use of threat and this is according to the context. In the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the speech of the early generations of Muslims are filled with encouragement toward paradise and threats of the hellfire. Once we proceed upon putting forth a sunshine, lollipops and rainbows da’wah, which resembles a Murji’ approach {mentioning that Allah is the most merciful WITHOUT mentioning that he is severe in punishment}, the people would not respect the boundaries that Allah has set within his legislation. The reason why the Christian world as well as the Zionist world are so enveloped in sin and immorality is because their preachers, priests and rabbis do not call a spade a spade and avoid making strong stances against immorality and sins in order to not cause offense. And I fear that if Mufti Menk is not called out on this the English speaking audience would be beguiled into thinking that they are the best of Muslims while they are astray.

May Allah guide us to what he loves and is pleased with.

Uncovering the doubts of callers on Social Media (Part 6/1)

From the doubts that are spreading on social media from those who oppose Ad Da’wah As Salafeeyah was that Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab was a Khariji/ from the Neo-Khawarij or had Khariji tendencies.

Before I debunk such propaganda it is a must to know who the Khawarij are and their beliefs. Then, after doing so one can examine as to whether or not such a description fits Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab and his da’wah.

The word Khawarij comes from Kharaja (خرج) meaning to leave. The group was named the Khawarij because of their action of making Khuruuj or rebelling against the Muslim ruler, the first being ‘Ali (رضي الله عنه). In other words they left (خرجوا) from the obedience of the Muslim ruler.

Secondly, one of the major beliefs of the Khawarij was that they call those who commit major sins disbelievers. They therefore believe that Imaan (belief) is stripped from a Muslim if he commits Zina (fornication/adultery), Riba (usary) etc.

Knowing that these are the main beliefs of the Khawarij and that they are now known to the esteemed reader the question must be asked as to whether or not such a description should be applied to Sh. Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab. In other words:

i. Does Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab believe that it is lawful to rebel against the Muslim ruler?

ii. Does Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab believe that the one who commits major sin is a disbeliever?

These two aforementioned questions are the main two questions we must ask before we make a judgment as to whether or not an individual is from the Khawarij/ Neo-Khariji/ Kharijite. We shouldn’t get caught up on the banter, emotion and apparent eloquence of speakers on social media like Bro. Hajji and others of his ilk. Rather, we must base our arguments on solid premises and evidence.

Hence, in the next post I shall debunk the arguments of Yasir Qadhi and Bro. Hajji regarding Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s Da’wah by clarifying the following:

i. Sh. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s position regarding revolting against Muslim rulers.

ii. Sh. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s position regarding the one who commits major sins.

و الله تعالى اعلم

Note: Another topic that needs to be dealt with is the topic of homosexuality (LBGTQ alphabet soup movement) and Islam. In that I will go point out the following:

i. Islam’s view on the LBGTQ movement.

ii. The History of the LBGTQ movement in the U.S.A and how it piggybacked (and is still piggybacking) off the African American Civil Rights movement.

The deviance of the Neo-Hanbalis.

Truth:

The phenomenon of the New Hanbalis only began to develop after the time of Shaikhs Ibn Baaz, Uthaimeen, Al Albani and Muqbil.

When the people of innovation saw their deaths and saw the weakness of Ahlus Sunnah they did the following:

1. They told the people to study a Madhab which in its origin is good. Shaikhs Ibn Baaz, Al Albani, Uthaimeen and Shaikh Fawzaan (who is still alive) all studied from Madhahib. HOWEVER, what those who had ulterior motives did was to:

i. Steer people away from the statements of the above scholars regarding the same Fiqh issues under the guise of “the Madhab”. This is although the leading scholars of the Hanbali Madhab were and still are in Saudi Arabia.

ii. Revive the innovation of Madhab Partisanship. To the point that the elder scholars, dead or alive, were spoken ill of because they went against the “established stance” of the Madhab.

So we have two things here: Steer people away from the elder scholars and introduce blind partisanship and taqleed. This went to the point that these inexperienced, arrogant and ignorant “students” began to speak ill of Shaikh Ul Islam Ibn Taymeeyah although much of the later statements of the Madhab is based on the specific stances of Ibn Taymeeyah.

2. They then began saying that there is such a thing called Hanbali ‘Aqeedah. This is compounded ignorance to the hilt. As there are three schools that claim to be Ahlus Sunnah, with two of them i.e the Maturidi and Ashari creeds being based on philosophical rhetoric, and the Salafi creed (based upon the creed of the earliest generations of Muslims) who are truly Ahlus Sunnah.

Then claiming the following which are as false as the blood on the clothing of the son of Yaquub (Jacob):

1. That Ibn Qudama didn’t believe that Allah’s descriptions had a meaning, which is the way of the Jahmeeyah.
2. That Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen saw the Asharis and Maturidis as Ahlus Sunnah. When there are many audios and statements that clarify the opposite.
3. That supplication to the dead is an issue of difference of opinion.

My dear brothers and sisters, Neo-Hanbalism, is nothing but an attempt to deviate the Muslims from the ‘Aqeedah and methodology of the early Muslims. Beware of such individuals who have neither sat under the scholars nor take their advice but rather speak ill of them and proceed to follow ignorant leaders who speak without knowledge.

Fareed Abdullah: An ideal western student of knowledge.

May Allah have mercy on Sh. Abu Mujahid Fareed Abdullah.

In sha Allah, some brothers should make an anthology of his lectures and classes for brothers in the West and English speaking world in general to benefit.

Shaikh Fareed was a man of Sunnah; one who practiced and called to it, humble and ALWAYS advised to return to the ‘Ulama (scholars) although he had a higher level of knowledge than anyone currently in the west.

In these times of uncertainty; wherein there are ‘Shaikhs’, callers and Facebook Muftis who are amazed by themselves and their statements, the likes of Shaikh Fareed Abdullah stands as an example of how an Imam, a caller and a student of knowledge should be in the West.

May Allah grant him the highest rank in Paradise. Ameen.