The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century

Month: October, 2011

October 23, 2011

When he was operated on …


Dr. Abdul-Aziz as-Sadhaan said, ‘Shaikh Esaam Haadi said, ‘When our Shaikh, may Allaah have mercy on him, was admitted to hospital I visited him and asked how he was.

He praised Allaah and then said, ‘So far they have performed more than one endoscopic procedure on me but the cause of the illness is still not clear.  And these operations hurt me a great deal.  But I seek aid in overcoming them by remembering Allaah and thinking of what happened to our brothers in the way of Allaah, so I say, ‘What have we been through in comparison to what they went through?’

Then he cried, may Allaah have mercy on him.’’

Al-Imaam al-Albaani, Duroos, wa Mawaaqif, wa Ibar, of Abdul-Aziz ibn Muhammad Abdullaah as-Sadhaan, p. 90.

1 Comment
October 10, 2011

He Cut off his Lesson to Receive Shaikh Ibn Baaz


Dr. Abdul-Aziz as-Sadhaan said, ‘And an old person in Madinah told me that one time Shaikh Naasir al-Albaani was in a religious gathering with the students around him.  At the beginning of the lesson one of the people present whispered something in his ear.

So the Shaikh excused himself from continuing the lesson and explained that Shaikh Ibn Baaz was about to arrive in Medinah and that he was going to give salaam to him or that he would receive him at the airport, and that was when Shaikh Ibn Baaz was at Medinah University.

But what I am not certain of is whether this occurred when Shaikh Naasir was a teacher at the university or when he was visiting Medinah and his presence there happened to coincide with the return of Shaikh Ibn Baaz from one of his journeys.’

Al-Imaam al-Albaani, Duroos, wa Mawaaqif, wa Ibar, of Abdul-Aziz ibn Muhammad Abdullaah as-Sadhaan, p. 257.

Leave a comment
October 9, 2011

The Extremist Sufi Saying, ‘Allaah is a monk in a church …’ The Disbelief of Those Who believe in the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | 1


Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Questioner: The Sufis have recently come to our city, what advice can you give us?

Al-Albani: There is an old difference between the Muslims about the Sufis. The reality is that this name, Sufism [tasawwuf], and those who affiliate themselves to it, the Sufis, have many different meanings.

We know from our interaction with many of them that when the proof is established against them they say, ‘Sufism is nothing except clinging to the manners of Allaah’s Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, like abstaining from the world and desiring the Hereafter,’ this is what they say when the proof is established against them.

Thus we say that if this is what Sufism is in your opinion, then the difference between us and you regarding the word remains. Remove this word, ‘tasawwuf,’ because it has become a word having a great many meanings. One of which we mentioned just now, [i.e.,] sticking to noble manners and abstaining from the world and turning to the Hereafter. There is no need for us to use this name whose meaning is dubious when referring to that affair which [the Muslims] are united upon, i.e., sticking to the manners of Allaah’s Prophet عليه السلام and abstaining from the world and devoting oneself to the Hereafter.

But the reality is that [the word] tasawwuf [Sufism] has meanings far removed from this correct meaning [mentioned above]. And sometimes this distance [from the Truth] takes the one who is upon it out of the fold of Islaam, and sometimes it will place him among one of the misguided groups.

As for the first group [i.e., the people who have left the fold of Islaam], then it refers to those who believe in what the people of knowledge refer to as the creed of unity, or The Unity of Being/Existence [Wahdatul-Wujood] to be more precise. The Unity of Being, which is pure denial [of Allaah, ilhaad], means Nature, as expressed by naturalists (believers in naturalism), i.e. there is nothing but matter.

One of them says, ‘Everything that you see with your very eye is Allaah.’ So it’s nature, everything that you see with your eye is Allaah!

A second says:

And the dog and the pig are nothing but our God.
And Allaah is nothing but a monk in a church.

A third [Ibn Arabi, the Sufi] says:

God [Rabb] is man and man is God
How I wish to know who the one ordered (to perform worship) is

If you say man (is the one ordered), then that is a denial (of the presence of a God, based on the concept that God is man and man is God!)
And if you say God, how can He be obligated?!

A fourth:

When the Magians worshipped the fire
They worshipped nothing but the One, the Irresistible Subduer
[i.e., Al-Qahhaar, Allaah]

All of these are statements written down in their books through which they seek blessings. A belief [aqidah] such as this takes one outside the fold of Islaam, for it is a creed greater in disbelief than that of the Jews and Christians.

This reminds me of the saying of one their extremists, ‘The Jews and Christians only disbelieved because the Jews restricted Allaah to being in Uzair, and the Christians confined Him to being in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit–but as for us, we have generalized Him to be in all things.’

For this reason from their words of remembrance [dhikr]–and their dhikr is not from that of the Muslims, that which the Prophet mentioned [when he said], ‘The best form of remembrance is, ‘Laa ilaaha illallaah,’–their remembrance is, ‘He, He …’

And they [also] say other phrases which, regretfully, some of the general masses with us in Syria have latched on to. You’ll find one of them sitting, wanting to remember Allaah, and so he will say, ‘There is nothing other than Him.’ What does, ‘There is nothing other than Him,’ mean? [This is incorrect because] there is a Creator and then there is the creation.

So this is the creed of The Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood], wording which is mentioned by some people, but they have not paid attention to the misguidance found therein.

Like these phrases totally is the saying of many of the common folk and their scholars, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists, Allaah is everywhere …’ [this is] the creed of The Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood], but along with that it is the creed [aqidah] of the Ash’aris and Maturidis of the end of time.

[They say], ‘Allaah is in all places,’ this [i.e., where we are sitting right now] is a place, is Allaah here?  What is here?  Zaid, Bakr, Amr, matter, a wall, air and so on–is Allaah here?!

‘The Most Gracious rose over the [Mighty] Throne [in a manner that suits His Majesty],’ [Taa Haa 20:5]  This is the creed of the Salaf as-Saalih.

So this type of Sufism is the severest of the most severe forms of disbelief found on the face of the earth.

[Translator’s note: The following is another example of the extremists amongst them: ‘Sulaimaan bin Ali bin Abdullah al-Tilmisaani d. 690AH.  He is highly revered among Sufis.  The Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said about him, “He used to make all forbidden things lawful.  To such an extent that some of the reliable people reported that he said:

‘The daughter, the mother, all (foreign) women–all of them are one and the same–there is nothing forbidden in that for us.  It is only the ones who are veiled that say that that is haraam.  So we in reply say to them: ‘It is haraam for you (not us).”  (Majmoo’atur-Rasaa’il (1/184).

This Sufi Tilmisani once passed by a mangy, scabby dead dog on the street whilst he was talking to his companion about Wahdatul-Wujood (the Unity of Being/Existence).  So his companion said to him, “Is this also the Essence (Dhaat) of Allaah?” pointing to the dead dog.  So Al-Tilmisani replied:

“Yes.  Everything is His Essence.  There is nothing that is outside His Essence (Dhaat).”

High is Allaah above what the Sufis ascribe to Him!’

(Majmoo’atur-Rasaa’il (145) of Ibn Taymiyyah).]

Leave a comment
October 7, 2011

The Extremist Sufis and the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | End


So this discussion [that we’re having] is concerning refining such wording–so clarify what you mean.

From the goals that the Legislator laid down is a refinement of the terminology used, so when referring to Allaah’s Knowledge, instead of us saying, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists … Allaah is present everywhere,’ we should say, ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge,’ because the first expression, i.e., ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ is connected to the aqidah of the extremist Sufis who say, ‘There is no He but He,’ so [according to them] there is no [distinction between] Creator or created, as one of them said:

When the Magians worshipped the fire
They worshipped nothing but the One, the Irresistible Subduer [i.e., Allaah]

Because [according to these people] Paradise, the Fire, the Creator, the creation, all of these things have no reality, and in summary [they say], ‘There is no He but He,’ they say, ‘Everything that you see with your very eye is Allaah!’

Thus it does not befit a Muslim to say a word which he will be compelled to explain afterwards. [So] make a clear statement–and there is nothing clearer than the Quraan, ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge.’

As for you saying a sentence and then saying after it [having being compelled to explain it], ‘By Allaah! I mean such and such …’ then [in answer to this] the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام said … and this was part of his disciplining us and teaching us manners, manners which if we followed we would have succeeded, [he said], ‘Do not say something which you have to make an excuse for before the people.’ [Compiler’s note: Reported in Sahih al-Jaami’ no., 742 with the wording, ‘And do not say something which you have to seek an excuse from …’]

And in another shorter narration there occurs, ‘Beware of that which you must seek an excuse from.’

So don’t say, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists, Allaah is present in all that exists,’ because you will face many objections and much criticism which you will have no way of answering.

It will be said to you, ‘The place which a Muslim is forced to go to two or three times a day, a place which he wishes he wouldn’t have to enter, is your Lord there too?’ Likewise, with [places such as] sewers etc., a Muslim does not say this.

So take back this statement of yours.  Do not say it.

This is complicated, so what should we believe and what should we say? [What should we say] instead of, ‘Allaah is everywhere?’ Namely, when we speak about the One who is worshipped Himself, i.e., Allaah, [which is] the Name of Supreme Greatness [Ismul-Jalaalah], known amongst all Muslims, [what should we say?]

We know that the saying of some of them that ‘Allaah is everywhere,’ is a mistake and that what is meant is His Knowledge, so we say [to these people]: when referring to Divine Knowledge let your wording be correct, say, ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge.’

But when we speak about Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, about the Divine Dhaat what should we say?

It has been reported from one of the Salaf, Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak, who is from the major Shaikhs of the Imaam of the Sunnah, Imaam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy upon him … he said in a statement which gathered and included [a summary of the topic at hand], he said, ‘Allaah the Blessed and Most High is above His Throne in His Essence [bi dhaatihi]. Separate and distinct from His Creation. And He is with them in His Knowledge.’

The previous discussion [that], ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge,’ is an explanation of this last sentence, ‘And He is with them in His Knowledge.’

But at the beginning of this statement [of Ibn al-Mubaarak] he spoke about the Diving Dhaat, he said that Allaah the Blessed and Most High is above His Throne in His Essence [Dhaat], he based this statement upon many aayahs from the noble Quraan, [such as], ‘The Most Gracious rose over the [Mighty] Throne [in a manner that suits His Majesty],’[Taa Haa 20:5] ‘To Him ascend (all) the goodly words, and the righteous deeds exalt it (the goodly words i.e., the goodly words are not accepted by Allaah unless and until they are followed by good deeds),’ [Faatir 35:10]

And in the famous hadith, ‘Have mercy on those on earth and the One above the Heavens will have mercy on you,’ it is as though this hadith is an excerpt from His Saying, the Blessed and Most High, ‘Do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allaah), will not cause the earth to sink with you, then behold it shakes (as in an earthquake)? Or do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allaah), will not send against you a violent whirlwind? Then you shall know how (terrible) has been My Warning?’ [Mulk 67:16-17] Imaam Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak, the Shaikh of Imaam Ahmad, is expressing [the meaning of] these ayaahs [quoted above] and others [in that statement of his].

The Haafidh of Damascus, adh-Dhahabi, collected such statements in a book particular to this topic, which is printed and is called ‘The Ascendancy of the Most High, the Oft-Forgiving’ [Al-Uluww lil-Aliyyil-Ghaffaar]. In this book, he collected those aayahs which talk about this characteristic of the Divine Dhaat, i.e., the characteristic of being totally and absolutely above all creation.

The aayahs, hadiths, sayings of the Companions, narrations from the Salaf, amongst whom are the four Imaams, [which adh-Dhahabi collected in that book] all talk about what Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak gathered in that one sentence, ‘Allaah the Blessed and Most High is above His Throne in His Essence, separate and distinct from His Creation …’ so he nullified the belief of indwelling [hulool], Allaah being the One in no need of any of His Creation.

But this ascendancy which it is not possible for the human intellect to grasp or imagine does not mean that any secret is hidden from Him, Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak said, ‘And He is with them in His Knowledge.’

So this brief sentence has collected [the meaning contained in] tens of aayahs and hadiths and sayings from the Salaf, so that the creed of the Muslim can be correct and far removed from that of ‘the Unity of Existence’ [Wahdatul-Wujood] and far removed from [believing in] ‘indwelling’ [hulool] which some of the misguided sects affirm.

Allaah the Blessed and Most High is above His Throne in His Essence, separate and distinct from His Creation and He is with them in His Knowledge.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 69.

Leave a comment
October 6, 2011

The Extremist Sufis and the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | 2


Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Thus, when a heedless Muslim says that Allaah is present in all that exists he will intend one of two things by it, and they are totally contradictory: the true existent, i.e., Allaah, and the possible existent, i.e., the creation. If he intends this meaning, then he has fallen into a creed other than wahdatul-wujood, i.e., [he has fallen into] hulool [divine indwelling].

You know, for example, that some Islamic groups believe that Allaah enters/dwells within certain esteemed–according to them–personalities.

You will see these Alawites or Ismailis for example, maybe you have read a lot about the Ismailis whose leader is the Aga Khan, every year he would be weighed in gold in America.

So they believe that the one worshipped transmigrates into him, indwells in him; this is called hulool.  It is less than wahdatul-wujood which we just spoke about.

Wahdatul-Wujood is referring to something which cannot be separated one from the other, in hulool Allaah is separate and distinct from His creation as the scholars say but, according to them [i.e., the extremist Sufis] obviously, He has indwelled and transmigrated into a person.

So when this person who says that Allaah is present in all that exists means that there are two existents, then that means that one of them entered the other, instead of entering a person He entered the entire universe. This, of course, is disbelief and absolutely no Muslim doubts that it is.

And if by [the statement], ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ he intends the first meaning, i.e., there is no Creator or created, there is only one thing, then this disbelief is much more severe.

You see these Muslims who fast and pray along with us and we pray behind them etc., if you were to say to one of them, ‘‘[Your statement that] Allaah is present in all that exists,’ does it mean one of these two meanings?!  Does it mean the total unity of existence that the Sufis refer to, i.e., that there is no Creator or created, or does it refer to indwelling [hulool], i.e., that Allaah created the creation then entered it?’–I do not think that a Muslim can believe such a creed as either of these.

So, why do you use this statement?  Why don’t you emulate the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم who said, ‘None of you should say, ‘My soul has become evil [khabuthat],’ but he should say, ‘My soul has become remorseless [laqisat].’  The meaning of [the Arabic word], ‘khabuthat’ is the same as ‘laqisat,’ ‘laqisat’ means ‘khabuthat,’ but the Prophet wanted us to talk about ourselves with kind words even though the meaning is the same.

So what is wrong with us? When we talk about our Lord the Blessed and Most High it is not allowed for us to say a word which can give an impression of disbelief or misguidance.

In reality, when such topics are discussed and most of the people present take heed [of the point being made], as though some of them had hitherto been in heedlessness, some of them will say, ‘We don’t mean that Allaah the Blessed and Most High has entered all of His Creation Himself,’ and we didn’t say that they did intend that, for if they had–and this is another topic–it would be disbelief, but the point being discussed now is about refining the terminology [being used].

So, [we ask these people], ‘What do you mean by, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists?’ [They reply, saying,] ‘His Knowledge.’

How beautiful!

Without doubt, Allaah has encompassed all things in His Knowledge, He has encompassed all things, the Blessed and Most High–but the wording used is incorrect.

You want to talk about Allaah’s Knowledge, then say, ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge.’ [Talaaq 65:12], a text from the Noble Quraan [itself], ‘Allaah surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge.’ [Say], ‘Not a secret in the earth or the heavens is hidden from Him.’ [But] don’t say that Allaah, the One who is worshipped and possesses every characteristic of perfection and Who is free from every shortcoming–don’t say that, ‘Allaah is everywhere,’ [or] ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ instead say, ‘He surrounds (comprehends) all things in (His) Knowledge.’

Leave a comment
October 5, 2011

The Extremist Sufis and the Unity of Being [Wahdatul-Wujood] | 1


Al-Albani: All of you must have heard of a group called the Sufis, and of a [type of] knowledge, or Sufi spiritual path [sulook] known as tasawwuf.

The people who ascribe themselves to this tasawwuf are of differing ranks, some of them have overstepped all limits and left Islaam in the name of Islamic Sufism, left Islaam just as a strand of hair is pulled out of dough [i.e., totally].  Why?

Because their interpretation of aayahs from the noble Quraan [is so incorrect that it] and philosophy and apostasy are one and the same. In the eyes of the scholars of the Muslims they are known as the people who believe in Wahdatul-Wujood [lit: the unity of existence], the ones who say the same thing as the atheists, but their wording differs from that of the atheists, they say, ‘There is nothing except one.’ So [according to them] the universe that we see is Allaah. For this reason they are called people who believe in Wahdatul-Wujood.

The Muslims say that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah [Laa ilaaha illallaah], in this sentence there is an affirmation and a negation. There is a negation of whoever might interpret falsely (the presence of another god), then the affirmation that Allaah is the one and only God, the Most High.

As for those Sufis, then they say, ‘There is no He but He.’ They then paraphrase it and make it a form of remembrance which they repeat for themselves, [saying], ‘He, He …’ This is a dangerous deviation as you can see, i.e., a denial of the true existence of Allaah, and following on from that, a denial of the legislation, no Islaam … no Judaism, no Christianity–because there is no [differentiation between the] slave and the Lord, a Lord who obligates others to worship Him and a slave who is obligated to worship. For this reason one of them said:

God [Rabb] is man and man is God
How I wish to know who the one ordered (to perform worship) is

If you say man (is the one ordered), then that is a denial (of the presence of a God, based on the concept that God is man and man is God!)
And if you say God, how can He be obligated?!

[According to them] there is no He but He. So in the end: He is He!

There are words that emanate from Muslims who bear witness [by saying] Laa ilaaha illallaah Muhammad Rasulullaah, these people are not atheists but they will sometimes utter words which lead them to that false aqidah. This is something very dangerous and hardly any but a few are safe from it.

Now in our normal gatherings [you will hear] one of them say whether on a particular occasion or not, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ [this statement of theirs] equals, ‘There is no He but He.’

You will hear [this statement] many times, ‘Allaah is present in all that exists,’ and after close scrutiny of its meaning and purport and what it entails one can see that it equates to the saying of the Sufis–the extremists amongst them obviously–who openly declare that, ‘There is no He but He.’

There are Two Existents Not One

Because if we were to ponder over the declaration of truth which is when a believer truly says, ‘None has the right to be worshiped except Allaah,’ [then we will find] that it establishes two existences.

‘None has the right to be worshiped except Allaah,’ negates the false deities which are worshipped other than Allaah, and they are present [as is mentioned, for example,] in the Quraan in the statement of Noah to his people, “And they have said, ‘You shall not leave your gods, nor shall you leave Wadd, nor Suwa’, nor Yaghuth, nor Ya’uq, nor Nasr.’” [Nooh 71:23] These were idols worshipped instead of Allaah, for that reason when Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, sent Noah عليه السلام to his people he ordered them to worship Allaah alone.

So, ‘None has the right to be worshiped …’ is a negation of the false deities which are present. ‘… except Allaah,’ is an affirmation of the existence of the Truth, i.e., Allaah the Blessed and Most High.

So there are two existences.  It is not possible for a Muslim who, firstly, understands his Islaam and who, secondly, believes that Allaah created him, not to affirm two [separate] existents.

The scholars of tawheed refer to the First Existent, i.e., that of the Creator the Most High, He exists in His Essence, i.e., is eternal, having no beginning. So His existence is termed as being the necessarily existent [Waajibul-Wujood].

As for the other existent then it is [called] the contingent or possible existent which is mankind and all creation. Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said to it, ‘Be!’ And it was. So it was preceded by nonexistence in contrast to the existence of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic–for He is the First having no beginning, as you all know.

Leave a comment
October 2, 2011

A Refutation of Those who Accuse Ahlus-Sunnah of Confining Allaah to a Place | End


And I had already spoken to him about the fact that Allaah was and there was nothing with Him … so there was nothing there [with Him], thereafter He said, ‘Be!’ and the creation was.  If we conclude that we haven’t reached the Throne yet and in your opinion those angels are above the Throne: then what is above the Throne?  Nothing or something [wujood/existence/being/entity]?

The Azhari Shaikh: No, nothing.

[So I said] because we had agreed that nothing was in existence before Allaah the Blessed and Most High created the heavens and the earth … Allaah was and nothing was with Him … so before Allaah created anything there was nothing–so when your knowledge leads you to understand that the Kuroobiyoon angels are above the Throne and that nothing from the universe is there after that, the creation having ended … [thereafter] when the Salafis say that Allaah the Blessed and Most High rose over, i.e., ascended over, the [Mighty] Throne–why do you accuse them of having confined Allaah the Mighty and Majestic to [a place in] His universe when there is no universe there?

For the universe is limited and restricted and in our opinion the end of the universe and its highest part is the Throne and in your opinion it is the Throne and then above it are the ‘Kuroobiyoon Angels,’ and then nothing after that.

So the correct aqidah according to both the intellect and the text is truly that of the Pious Predecessors–because they did not say that Allaah is in a place, as you [falsely] assume, because there is no ‘place’ beyond the Throne, only total and complete nonexistence [of anything] except Allaah the Blessed and Most High.

But what is the matter with you when you fled from that which you accused the Salafis of, [something] which they are [in fact] free of–since [we say that] Allaah is not in a place because there is no universe or place after the [Mighty] Throne, Allaah having ascended over it–but what’s the matter with you fleeing from affirming this attribute for Allaah the Blessed and Most High, i.e., the attribute of declaring Him completely free of any likeness to His creation and not ascribing the qualities of the creation to Him [tanzeeh], because He is not in the universe.

So how is it that you say He is everywhere, you confine Him to being inside His universe which He created after it was not in existence?

So you are the Mushabbihah, and you are the Mujassimah [anthropomorphists].

And we the Salafis are nothing other than those who go by what Allaah the Most High said, ‘There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer,’ [Shuraa 42:11] and upon this aayah, upon [the meaning contained in] its beginning and end, we declare Him, the Most High, to be totally and utterly free of any likeness to His creation and do not ascribe the qualities of the creation to Him [tanzeeh], whilst affirming [His] Attributes as befits His Majesty and Exaltedness.

Fataawaa Jeddah, 17.

The video:

2 Comments
October 1, 2011

A Refutation of Those who Accuse Ahlus-Sunnah of Confining Allaah to a Place | 2


Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Al-Albani: Do you agree with me that Allaah was and there was nothing [in existence] with Him?

The Azhari Shaikh: Of course.

Al-Albani: Was the Throne there when Allaah was?

The Azhari Shaikh: No.

Al-Albani: So Allaah was and there was nothing with Him and then He created the Throne?

The Azhari Shaikh: Yes.

I carried on with him in this manner and then said: We are now on earth, what is above us?

The Azhari Shaikh: The sky.

Al-Albani: Then?

The Azhari Shaikh: The second.

And we carried on like this until we came to the seventh. Then I said to him, ‘What is above the seventh?’

The Azhari Shaikh: The Throne.

I said–and here is the crux of the matter– what is above the Throne?

The Azhari Shaikh: The Kuroobiyoon Angels.

So this was the first time in thirty years that I heard this name. I said, ‘What? The kuroobiyoon angels are above the Throne?’ We know that it is the Creator of the Throne who is above the [Mighty] Throne according to the aforementioned aayah and the Salaf’s interpretation of it [which states that] He rose over the Throne, i.e., ascended over it, and as those relied upon in this matter said:

And the Lord of the Throne is above the Throne but
Without describing Him as being in a place or being connected [to the Throne]

So Allaah is in no need of the worlds, but for the first time I was [now] hearing that it is the kuroobiyoon Angels that are above the Throne, [so I asked him], ‘Do you have an aayah which establishes, firstly, that there are angels called, ‘The kuroobiyoon Angels?’

The Azhari Shaikh: No.

Al-Albani: Okay. Do you have a hadith in which a mention of them has been made with this name?

The Azhari Shaikh: No.

Al-Albani: So then where did you get this aqidah that above the Throne are the Kuroobiyoon Angels?

The Azhari Shaikh: This is what our Shaikhs at the noble Azhar University taught us.

So I said how strange. I know that [from what] the Azhari scholars teach their students in their lectures concerning that which is connected to the principles of aqidah and Usool al-Fiqh is that, ‘[Points of] aqidah are not established through aahaad hadith which are authentic,’ so how have they taught you a point of aqidah that is not mentioned in the Quraan nor the Sunnah? How have you come to believe this?

He was dumbfounded.  I continued and said to him, ‘Imagine that those angels who you call the Kuroobiyoon are above the [Mighty] Throne–what is above them?

So he stopped.  Baffled.

And I had already spoken to him about …

2 Comments