And again the ignorant speaks

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

May Allah guide us to what he loves and is pleased with and may he make us followers of the evidences rather than followers of men. 

Now, Amjad Rafeeq, the charlatan, has again added his two cents in this time. Although it has been proven time and time again that he needs to study the basics he still refuses and wishes to postulate himself as someone learned. In other words: “I am the son of so and so therefore acknowledge me.”

After accusing me and Abu Fajr of Hadeedeeyah and Irjaa, both of which he has been unable to substantiate, the copy and paste king quoted from Shaikh Rabee’ that Shaikh Yahya and his followers have some of the ideas of the Khawarij with them and tried to use Shaikh Yahya’s speech regarding Qabeel and Haabeel to prove that he is following the way of the Khawarij. 

As I could remember, this individual was simply told to stick to the translation of books since he was not qualified to teach. Unfortunately, he has gone beyond his bounds several times including this instance. Therefore, such an attention seeker must be put in his place knowing his track record. Hence, to summarize, I bring the following points to the esteemed reader:

1. Shaikh Rabee’ (may Allah preserve him) has made mistakes regarding this Fitnah. He has said that they call Shaikh Yahya Imaam Ath Thaqalain in Dammaj repeatedly and further claimed that calling him the trustworthy adviser is from exaggeration. However, both have been found unproven as the poet who called Shaikh Yahya Imaam Ath Thaqalain repented and it was Shaikh Muqbil who called him the trustworthy adviser in his last testament. 

Afterward, Shaikh Rabee’ tried to weaken the narrator Hishaam Ibn Ghaaz, who several Imaams previously and from this time deemed to be trustworthy. And from those who said that he is trustworthy are Imaam Ibn Hajar, Imaam Adh Dhahabi, Shaikh Abdul Muhsin Al Abbad, Shaikh Muhammad Aadam Al Ithiopi and others.

Likewise he tried to claim that the one who said that ‘Uthmaan did a bid’ah by having the second Adhan was in fact making Tabdee’ of ‘Uthmaan when it is that Shaikh Muqbil, Imam Al Mubarakpuri, Imaam As San’aani, Taqi Ud Deen Al Hilaali and others all said it was Bid’ah without saying that he was an innovator. 

And now there is the claim that Shaikh Yahya is following the way of the Khawarij and what is the evidence? 

For Spubs it is: Shaikh Rabee’ said.

For us it is: Allah and the Messenger said. 

As for the evidence that is used by Amjaad it shows that indeed he still does not understand the difference between Salafeeyah and Hadaadeeyah. Abu Hakeem and others were stalwarts of Faalih Al Harbi in the University of Madeenah and were nurtured upon that methodology. Therefore, to see them traversing the path that they traverse is not amazing. 

Hence I ask where is the evidence that he is following the way of the Khawarij?

Does he revolt against the ruler? Rather, on the contrary he sought advice from his ruler and obeyed him when he told them to leave Dammaj. 

Does he call others to revolt against the ruler?

Does he take Muslims out of Islaam because of major sins? 

Does he see that the one who commits a major sin until he dies has in fact made it Halaal?

Does he believe in Wa’d Wal Wa’eed like the Mu’tazilah believe in? 

For the last one he may say yes due to his statements regarding the issue of Qaabeel and Habeel?

So I would tell him that he took the opinion of some of the scholars regarding it and although he was incorrect regarding this issue of Qaabeel and Habeel does this mean that according to him that everyone who commits a particular sin must be punished for that sin?

And I think that he would be unable to answer the last question. This is because the likes of SPUBS and their co-horts lack knowledge of the methodology of the Salaf. If Shaikh Yahya were to say that everyone who commits Zina, eats Riba, Kills etc must face punishment in the hereafter then by all means he has taken a path other than the path of the Salaf. 

However, because he is incorrect regarding a single issue doesn’t mean that he doesn’t hold the belief of Ahlus Sunnah regarding the punishment of those who do major sins in the hereafter. On this note the likes of extremist blind-followers such as Amjad should know the following:

1. Mistakes do not take a person out of Ahlus Sunnah. Rather it is only when someone follows a path other than the path of the Salaf. And how many Ulama have made mistakes in ‘Aqeedah but the scholars excuse them because they used to strive upon the way of the Salaf. One needs to just read Siyar ‘Alaam An Nubala to understand this point. 

2. The statements of any scholar is rendered to be either accepted or rejected according to whether they have proof or not. 

3. Thirdly, as for the Maslak of Amjad Rafeeq and their croonies, in taking bits and pieces from Al (Faalih’s website) then reproducing it 12 years after to a western audience then this is from the way of the Shaitaan. If nothing was wrong with the Shaikh 12 years ago when these same accusations were made then what is wrong with him now? It shows one of two things:

a. They delayed clarification beyond its time therefore they have sinned. 

b. They are using it for their own gains. 

And I advise Amjaad and his likes to listen carefully to the tape of Shaikh Al Albani called الانصاف عند الشيخ الالباني 

I give this as a gift to all spubs fanatics so they would not have excuse on judgment day. And I dare them to translate this whole tape and put it on the net. I await them to do so but I will not hold my breath. 


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s