Shaikh Muhammad Umar Baazmool’s speech.

This is from the treatise: Reminder and Clarification.

Indeed it is strange that I have accused Shaikh Muhammad ‘Umar Baazmool on falling into the Bid’ah of Ma’ribi when the Shaikh said himself that the statement is not automatically accepted unless a detailed explanation is given.

Shaikh Ul Islam Ibn Taymeeyah said: “There is not a person of misguidance who uses an evidence from the Qur’an or Sunnah except that it is an evidence upon him.” So Amjad Rafeeq should stop grasping to straws to save himself. 

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar Baazmool said:

Unrestrictedly: (to say) that actions are a condition of Imaan. I say: This expression may make someone think that actions are not from Imaan and that Imaan can be established without actions. And this is not the statement of Ahlus Sunnah. What is apparent from the context of his (Shaikh Al Albani’s) speech is that he intends that being deficient in doing good deeds does not render one’s Imaan null and void. Therefore he intends by this statement a refutation upon the one who makes actions a condition of correctness of Imaan that he does not do sin, and that the person does not fall into deficiency, not that he wants that Imaan is established without actions in the first place.And Al Albani has established that actions must be present to establish Imaan. As I saw in the second paragraph and I will increase it with some speech by him regarding this issue when he said:

“And upon this when a Muslim says La Ilaha Ill Allah by his tongue, it is upon him to join with it knowledge of this speech in summary and then with detail. If he is that he has knowledge, bore witness to the truth and believed, then he is the one who has truly carried out that which is within the Ahadeeth that I have mentioned before. And from it is his statement (صلى الله عليه و سلم) where he points towards something of detail which I have previously mentioned: “Whoever says La Ilaha Ill Allah it would benefit him at a time.” Meaning: this good word after knowledge of its meaning safeguards him from dwelling in the hellfire forever and I repeat this so it would remain in the mind. It is possible that he may not have established by what is followed from it from complete good actions and staying away from sin. However, he is safe from Major Shirk and established what is followed by it and what is obligated by it from the conditions of Imaan from the actions of the heart and what is apparent according to the deduction according to some of the people of knowledge and there is detail in this and this is not the time to go forth (in detail) regarding this topic. (Speech finished) From that which I would like to draw attention to which is important:

That it is upon the Muslim to make effort regarding his speech in Shar’eeyah matters to go in accordance with the speech that is narrated in the Noble Qur’an, the Prophetic Sunnah and what has been narrated from the Salaf Us Saalih. You see here an example of that. Verily, in the issue of Imaan statements which were not narrated were used regarding it and as a result this cause confusion which was not the intention. From them is their statement: “Actions are a condition of completeness of Imaan,” and their statement: “Actions are a condition of correction for Imaan,” for verily the generality of these statements makes one think that these are from the ways of the people of innovation.

The first of which, when stated in its generality, makes one think that it is the Madhab of the Murji’ah who say that actions are not from Imaan and that Imaan is established without actions. And the second makes one think, when said in its generality, about the way of the Khawarij, therefore if one is deficient regarding his actions his Imaan is not correct. And the truth is that these statements are Mujmal (meaning that they cannot be understood except if explained) it is a must to clarify them. Therefore it is not accepted and not narrated except after explaining in detail the intention of those who say it. If it is that the one who said that actions are a condition of Imaan that being deficient in actions is a reason for the reduction of Imaan and that it increases in obedience and decreases in sin and it can reduce until it completely leaves if it is that he leaves off actions totally with his ability to do them without anything preventing him from such then this is the meaning of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah.However, the expression is incorrect. However, if he wants by it that Imaan is established without actions and that actions are not from the reality of Imaan then this is the statement of the Murji’ah…[1]

Comment: Notice the statements of Shaikh Saalih As Suhaimi and Shaikh Baazmool regarding this. They both said that the expression was incorrect and Shaikh Baazmool said that it is unacceptable to be brought forth unless a detailed explanation regarding it is given. And for this reason, as aforementioned, the categories of the ‘Ulama regarding such statements are as follows:

  • The one who makes the statement sincerely searching for the truth.
  • The one who makes the statement because no other information came to him.
  • The one who makes the statement yet his other statements and actions show opposite to the incorrect statement.[2]
Additionally in the recent treatise relating to the Hadaadis I wrote the following:
  • Abu Hasan in his definition of Mujmal and Mufassal included Ahlus Sunnah when they say a statement that carries truth and falsehood.
  • Shaikh Rabee’ Ibn Haadi refuted this notion and showed several examples from the Salaf where they looked at the statement and not the intent. Furthermore, he did not address this issue to only false statements but also to statements that carry truth and falsehood.
  • That Shaikh Muhammad ‘Umar Baazmool cannot be accused of this since he did not say that the statement should be carried upon a good angle. Rather he established that there was a need to explain the statement and that the expression itself is incorrect.

Hence, in the post where Amjad figuratively throws acid on my keyboard he did not address the points regarding the definition of Mujmal and Mufassal according to Abu Hasan. Nor did he address the manner in which Shaikh Rabee’ refuted it. And he tried to grasp at straws by using Shaikh Muhammad ‘Umar Baazmool’s statement when it is in reality evidence upon him which are clear in several of his books.

Also Shaikh Rabee’ Ibn Haadi mentioned that this is one of the issues relating to Mujmal and Mufassal:

Thirdly: What has been repeated regarding the issue of (Al Mujmal Wal Mufassal) and what is ascribed to it. And the truth regarding it is as follows:

The issue of (Mujmal Wal Mufassal) in this usage is not researched except regarding the words of Allah and the Messenger (salallahu alaihi wa sallam). The research in this issue in the speech of the scholars is called the unrestricted statements of the scholars as Shaikh Ul Islam Ibn Taymeeyah mentioned (rahimahullah). The incorrect unrestricted statement which is clarified by other statements which clarify it is seen in the following matter:

1. Saying that this unrestricted statement is incorrect (Comment {Musa Millington}: Not saying what is intended by this is thus and so) saying that it is a statement of innovation or an incorrect statement.

2. Acceptance of the clarification. 

3 Not making a ruling upon the one who said it by saying he is an innovator except if he is an innovator already.

4. As for the Salafi student of knowledge who is known for his Salafeeyah and Minhaaj if it is that something of this occurs from him then we show that he is incorrect in that unrestricted statement. And we place his condition in front of this. Except if his opposition becomes apparent and he continues upon it.

5. It is unlawful to take this issue of the unrestricted speech of the scholars and apply it to the speech of the known innovators such as Sayyid Qutb and other than him.

http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=127058

ثانياً: ما تكرر ذكره من مسألة ( المجمل والمفصل ) وما يتعلق بها ؛ الحق فيه ما يأتي :
مسألة ( المجمل والمفصل ) مسألة – بهذا الاصطلاح – لا تبحث إلا في كلام الله – تعالى – ورسوله – صلى الله عليه وسلم – . بحث هذه المسألة في كلام العلماء يسمى ( إطلاقات العلماء ) – كما ذكره شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية – رحمه الله – . الإطلاق المغلوط الذي يوضحه ويبينه كلامٌ آخر – للقائل نفسه – يعامل كالآتي :
أ – تخطئة هذا الإطلاق – بحسبه – بدعةً أو غلطاً .
ب – قبول ذلك البيان .
ج – عدم الحكم على هذا المُطْلِق الغالِط حكماً عينياً بأنه ( مبتدع ) إلا إذا كان مبتدعاً أصلاً أو صاحب هوى.
د – وأما طالب العلم السلفي المعروف بسلفيته ومنهجه إذا واقع شيئاً من ذلك؛ فإننا نخطئه في إطلاقه، ونجعل صوابه المبين هو الغالب، مع نصيحته وتذكيره وبيان الحق له ؛ إلا إذا ظهرت معاندته وانكشف إصراره .
ه- لا يجوز اتخاذ هذه المسألة ( إطلاقات العلماء ) ذريعةً لتمشية كلام المبتدعة المشهورين كأمثال سيد قطب – وغيره – .

In the speech of Shaikh Rabee’ Ibn Haadi it is clear that regarding the unrestricted statements of the scholars that they are not accepted but rather the statement is rejected and the one who said it is corrected and it is not said (his intent or my intent was so and so). Rather, the statement in itself is corrected. However, regarding the person himself, whether it is a scholar or a student of knowledge, he is not ascribed to the people of innovation because of his statement. Rather it is compulsory to have good thoughts about such a person but at the same time that does not negate the fact that the mistakes must be corrected and that the statements must be clarified.


[1] http://almenhaj.net/makal.php?linkid=8680 (Note: I did not translate the whole article rather I translated what was particular to the discussion)

One thought on “Shaikh Muhammad Umar Baazmool’s speech.

  1. Assalaamu alaykum could not understand why your website was remove from Abdur Rahman.org website after you posted these article did you know that

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s