This is part two and likely the final part which pertains to Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Al Wassabi. Although some claim that he is the real successor to Shaikh Muqbil after listening to another tape I realized why Shaikh Muqbil did not choose him to be the head of Daar Ul Hadeeth.
In the tape I have on my desktop he said:
“Haajoori has innovated in Islaam many innovations”
Comment: In case someone is wondering, an innovation is a statement or belief concerning Islaam or an action of worship that was neither done by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) nor his companions. And the evidence is:
“من أحدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو رد”
Whoever innovates in this matter of our’s it is rejected.
And although this is the same Wassabi who mentioned Tawheed Al Haakimeeyah as a category of Tawheed in Qawl Ul Mufeed (the new edition) he goes forth to declare others to be out of the pale of Salafeeyah. And these are mainly regarding two issues (as he claims)
1. Boycotting because of issues of Ijtihaad: He claimed that Shaikh Yahya innovated this concept into Islaam. And he also mentioned that the issue of ‘Abdur Rahmaan Al ‘Adani is an issue of Ijtihaad. And that as a result of it he has boycotted and cursed others.
This what he said is entirely untrue. Shaikh Abul Yamaan Al Masqari mentioned to me that there are people in Dammaj studying who do not see that ‘Adani is a Hizbee and Shaikh Yahya leaves them alone providing that they do not make Fitnah between the students. Hence, Shaikh Yahya’s issue is with those who defend him with falsehood and have become partisan to him.
Secondly, this is one of the principles of the people of Tamyee’. When they want to reject a Jarh (disparagement) they claim that it is from the issues of Ijtihaad. However, if a disparagement comes in a manner which is detailed it is a matter of accepting the proof once the disparagement comes from one who is equipped to do it. This is called a Jarh Mufassar (which spubs have been using as their catch phrase yet apply it whenever they wish). And without doubt the Jarh on ‘Adani is Mufassar as he was one of Shaikh Yahya’s students and made Fitnah in Dammaj itself and went about dividing the students promising them greener pastures in Fayoosh (‘Aden) while he was in Daar Ul Hadeeth Dammaj. Therefore, since it came from within his own quarters he would have extra knowledge regarding it.
2. Taqleed: Wassabi claimed that Shaikh Yahya forces others to make Taqleed of him. And this is entirely untrue also. I heard Ustaadh Ahmad Banajah, Shaikh Abul Yamaan and others say that many times they do not take Shaikh Yahya’s opinion. Even upon listening to Shaikh ‘Abdul Hameed when he came in Trinidad it was obvious that he does not take all of Shaikh Yahya’s opinions.
Therefore, without doubt the Jarh is not Mufassar. And if we really look at the issue:
i) Who is forcing others to not say that ‘Adani is a Hizbee?
ii) Who is saying that the Raafidah are not Kuffar unless they make cursing the companions Halaal and want by it the destruction of Islaam?
iii) Who is it that remains quiet when Shaikh Muqbil is cursed by ‘Abdullah Al Bukhari?
iv) Who is it that says that the fighting between the Raafidah and Ahlus Sunnah is Fitnah?
v) Who is it that says that a magician can take out magic because necessity makes Halaal the Haraam?
And it can go on and on. So one wonders why Wassabi chose to focus on Shaikh Yahya while his own companions have faults that are possibly even worse !!