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.

Regarding the utterances of Amjad (not) Rafeeq on Shaikh Sulaimaan Ar Ruhayli.

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

I personally didn’t want to return to the issue of SPUBS but I thought it necessary because of the recent utterances of the aforementioned. Hence, I write this based upon the Hadeeth: “Remove something harmful from the road for verily it is a charity.”

Imagine Shaikh Sulaimaan Ar Ruhayli, a well known scholar of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is coming to your shores and instead of humbling yourself, listening and learning from the etiquettes and knowledge of that said scholar you warn against him! This is indeed a very amazing and strange matter that has only taken place because everyone: whether they are righteous, wicked, learned, ignorant, sensible or foolish can speak and write on this platform called the internet.

Now the accusations that were leveled at Shaikh Sulaimaan Ar Ruhayli were the following:

1. He is not following the evidences and makes excuses for falsehood.
2. He is not conforming or valuing the truth.
3. He is not taking the correct positions.

Now this seems like a change in the policy of SPUBS who essentially made Tabdee’ of countless individuals for defending those who they considered as innovators. It is amazing, or possibly not, that those of SPUBS and their affiliates haven’t been able to accuse many of those who they labelled as Mubtadi’ah (in the west & the east) of opposing one of the fundamentals of Ahlus Sunnah in ‘Aqeedah or Manhaj. However, what they have utilized (as in the case of Amjad Rafeeq in many cases) are deliberate LIES, half-truths and exaggerations.

Secondly, what are the “correct” positions. Is the “correct” position at all times that which SPUBS takes regarding individuals or does the correct position have to correspond to the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the Understanding of the Salaf? All of these vague terms neither satiate one’s hunger nor quench one’s thirst!

My dear brothers and sisters, the truth and the correct position is based upon evidence and those who value the evidences value the truth. The truth is not restricted to a specific Shaikh or an organization.

Hence, Oh Amjad, vague statements, with several pauses I may add, are not sufficient. Clear cut evidences for this Jarh (disparagement) are required in order to deter the Muslims from sitting with Shaikh Sulaiman Ar Ruhayli who is known worldwide for his correct ‘Aqeedah and Manhaj. And once such EVIDENCES can’t be presented in a clear and explicit manner the Asl (origin) remains i.e that Ahlus Sunnah should continue to gather around them.

May Allah guide us and protect us and may Allah make the visit of Shaikh Ruhayli beneficial for the people of England.

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.

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.