On Amjad’s recent rantings.

It is quite obvious to all that SPUBS are in desperation mode in order to pull wool over the eyes of their followers.

When Shaikh Yahya (who according to them is an innovator) was received by Shaikh Wasiyullah, Shaikh Ali Naasir Al Fiqhi, Shaikh Abdul Muhsin Al Abbad, Shaikh Saalih As Suhaimi, Shaikh Abdul Azeez Aal Ash Shaikh, Shaikh Saalih Al Luhaidaan, Shaikh Muhammad Aadam Al Ithiopi, Shaikh Saalih Al Fawzaan and other than many sentences which began with maybe began to surface.

And when Ali Hasan Al Halabi and Al Maribi went to meet him they said that he accommodates them and he is with them!

And then poor Amjad who has no recourse but to grasp unto seaweed in the middle of the Atlantic ocean by reminding his blind-followers that Sh. Yahya is a head of evil! Masha Allah, so Shaikh Yahya is a caller to the hellfire amongst those being.

1. The Disbelievers in all their forms, shapes, sizes and beliefs.

2. The callers to Shirk from the Raafidah and the Brelawis.

3. Al Qaaidah and others.

Sorry to say this but those who follow SPUBS must really be void of any common sense whatsoever. Seriously, do these people have any intellect at all in order to comprehend exactly what they’re saying?

As for the perpetual list of “maybe” then the Qur’an tells us that proof is not established by maybe. Allah has said:

“Verily conjecture is no substitute for the truth.”

Likewise the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) said:

“Beware of conjecture because conjecture is the most false of speech”

Hence what Mustafa George did was a travesty. As a person who studied in the University of Madeenah for 8 years and is known to be hard-working he has really ashamed himself. If he simply adhered to the stipulations of the Qur’an and the Sunnah it would have been better for him.

As for the next issue people have run far and wide with it and yet again they applied conjecture when dealing with this matter. And it is known that it is lawful to advise the people of innovation to clarify the truth to them. This is different from smiling with them, being in their sittings and accommodating them:

1. When the scholars met with Shaikh Yahya they are advising him and when Shaikh Yahya meets Maribi and Halabi he is accommodating them! At the same instance when Shaikh Abdul Muhsin doesn’t speak against Al Halabi or Al Maribi he is left alone!

2. When Shaikh Yahya makes mistakes he is the head of evil but when Shaikh Ubaid makes mistakes of a similar nature excuses upon excuses are sought for him!

3. When Shaikh Wasiyullah and Shaikh Khaalid Ar Radaadi spoke against SPUBS they asked what are the evidences? But when we ask for clear evidences regarding this issue of Shaikh Yahya they say that we are following the principles of the people of innovation and not accepting the disparagement from the trustworthy.

May Allah help us to see the truth as truth and falsehood as falsehood.

N.B Correction made tonight. Amjad Rafeeq said a head of evil not the head of evil. I therefore own up to it and ask Allah forgiveness for that slip.

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