The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century

Category: Methodology

September 19, 2013

How Does The Common Muslim Know What To Do When Scholars Differ? Think and Use Your Brain to Try and Understand the Proofs


 

Questioner: Some scholars differ in their opinion [with others], one will say something and another will say, “No, this is a mistake, [rather] this is correct,” and let’s assume that we are not people of knowledge or people of … ya’ni we’re just common folk … of course … we want to know the principles and the mistake if … this person says … and the second one says, “This is a mistake … this is not …” so what is your opinion [about] the differing between the scholars in a particular issue, an issue which concerns one?

Al-Albaani: [Concerning] issues such as this the reason [people] fall into difficulty is that the effect of that sentence which we hear many times in the present day and age and especially in this country is not found among the general Muslims, what is that sentence? “Enlightenment/education …” the majority [of people] do not have a general awareness or knowledge of the reason for the differing, and [additionally] they [also] do not have an awareness of what their stance in relation to this differing must be.

So many of them will say what occurs in the weak hadith, “The differing of my Ummah is a mercy,” thus they ratify differing, however severe and copious it might be [due to it], and a few of them [go to the other extreme and] want to put an end to differing from its very root such that the scholars become [united] upon a single word in all issues [even those] which the scholars of fiqh of old have differed over–and this is something impossible! Because in His profound Wisdom Allaah عز وجل ordained, and there is none who can stop anything He ordains, saying:

“And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community, but they will not cease to differ, except whom your Lord has given mercy.” [Huud 11:118-119]

Differing is of two types: the first is where there is mercy with one another and where [each party] tries to understand the other. The second is the type of differing which involves conflict, antagonism, and enmity.

The first is the type which is unavoidable and is that which our Pious Predecessors were on, they would differ but they would not have enmity for one another and nor were they divided due to the differing because of what you have heard in the aayah:

“… and do not be of those who associate others with Allaah [or] of those who have divided their religion and become sects, every faction rejoicing in what it has.” [Ruum 30:31-32]

So if our Salaf as-Saalih, at the head of whom are the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, differed then it is unavoidable for [the people of] a [particular] group, or age, or generation not to differ, but that which was sufficient for the Prophet’s Companions صلى الله عليه وسلم when they differed is also sufficient for these people, [i.e.,] that they do not becomes enemies one to another and do not hate one another–there is no escaping such differing, the generality of Muslims must know this and they should not condemn any [and every instance of] differing between one scholar and another which they hear about, because this is something which is from man’s nature which Allaah created them with, an indication of which has preceded in the aforementioned aayah.

If this is the case, what should the general Muslims do when they see such differing? Here lies the crux of the matter [that I had intended] by my [earlier] statement when I said that there is no enlightenment/education and no general cultivation. Before about a quarter of a century, the general Muslims were living according to a constrictive Madhhabism, each individual from millions of Muslims was satisfied with his school of thought, this one is a Hanafi, that one a Shaafi’i and so on.

But as for now, then there has been found, alhamdulillaah, the beginnings of an awakening, I do not say the awakening has been found, [but rather] that the beginnings of an awakening can be seen, so the people are aware of things which they were not mindful of before, but this awareness needs a completion. It is this completion which I am in the middle of explaining now, and it is: that you, O Muslim, however highly educated or not you are in the Islamic Legislation, when you hear about some differing between two scholars then think a little, look … is it said of both of them that they truly are scholars from the people of knowledge? It may be a student who thinks he is a scholar–and who thus says something in which he differs with the scholars and as a result differing between the scholars in the issue occurs. No.

So after this observation, when it is established, for example, that there is some differing between two venerable scholars, then the following caveat comes into play: if you are able to distinguish between one proof and another, then you must become acquainted with the proofs of both scholars, and [after doing so] find comfort with the stronger proof, what I mean is that even the general Muslims should strive [to understand the proofs/ijtihaad], but such ijtihaad differs from person to person, so how can, for example, a common person perform ijtihaad? His ijtihaad in relation to himself is as follows.

He hears a fatwa from one scholar which opposes that of another, so he should not stop at that fatwa, and here many, many different forms become apparent … you request proof from one of them and he says, “This is my opinion and ijtihaad,” or, “This is my madhhab,” and you request it from the other and he says, for example, “Allaah said … Allaah’s Messenger said … the Salaf said,” and so on, as Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:

“Knowledge is, ‘Allaah said … His Messenger said …
The Companions said …’ and it is not hidden

Knowledge is not your raising up a dispute foolishly
Between the Messenger and the opinion of a faqeeh.”

When you traverse upon this methodology in trying to become acquainted with the proof, the difference between the two answers will become clear to you … I told you that one of them says, “This is my opinion … my itjtihaad … my madhhab,” this happens sometimes, the other will give you proofs, either from the Book or the Sunnah or the actions of the Salaf as-Saalih, at that point you will find yourself leaning towards the opinion of this scholar and his ijtihaad and you will not look at the opinion of the first, and at that time the difficulty [you have] will disappear from you, this is a very clear illustration.

And if we assume [a case where] both scholars used proofs, as occurred recently with Shaikh al-Bannaa, I think some of you were present when we discussed, with one of the noble teachers, the issue of reciting Surah al-Faatihah behind the Imaam in the prayers where the recitation is made audible, and those listening listened, and the person takes whatever the soul feels comfort in [since both scholars were providing proofs], whether the truth is with Zaid or ’Amr [i.e., whoever the truth is with]–what is important is that he not be a person of desires or [someone with] a particular purpose [that he seeks through his fatwa] and that he not be as is mentioned in a statement made by Ibn Mas’ood رضي الله عنه in marfoo’ and mowqoof form but what is correct is that it is mowqoof, where he said, “Do not let yourselves be ‘yes-men,’ [إمعة: the one who has no opinion so he follows everyone’s opinion] saying, ‘If the people are good then we will be good, and if they are wrong then we will be wrong.’ Rather, make up your own minds, if the people are good then you are good, and if they are evil, then do not behave unjustly.” [Tirmidhi, v. 4, no. 2007, Darussalam transl.]

So, the general Muslims must set their hearts on knowing who the truth is with and then follow it, each person doing so according to the limits of their education, intellect and understanding, and Allaah does not burden a soul with more than it can bear.

The summary is that it is not possible to put an end to differing, it was there in the time of the Prophet and has continued to this day of ours, so do not seek the impossible. And when this is the case, what should the stance of the general masses be? It is as I just explained, that they seek out the truth, then their condition will be like that of those who strive to come to religious verdicts [mujtahideen]–if they are correct they will have two rewards, and if mistaken, then one, what is important is that they do not be people of desires and [particular] aims, and Allaah is sufficient …

Fataawaa Jeddah, Ahlul-Hadith wal-Athar, 5. [2/5/474]

For a similar discussion see here.

1 Comment
September 17, 2013

On Election Results – It’s Only The Faces That Change


 

Questioner: Our Shaikh, some Muslims observe the West and their advancements and when something happens there they display joy and happiness, is this regarded as a defect in ’aqidah related to actions or the heart? And what do you advise these people with?

Al-Albaani: I’m sorry, what do you mean … what do you mean by …

Interjection: Clinton, Shaikh.

Questioner: America’s Presidents, so and so went and so and so has come.

Al-Albaani: Ah.

Questioner: This one is better than that one, this one will benefit the Muslims and so on.

Al-Albaani: This is a weakness in both eemaan and intellect, a weakness of eemaan and intellect. The reality which every Muslim must bear in mind regarding such situations is His Saying تبارك وتعالى, “Every time a nation enters, it will curse its sister,” [A’raaf 7:38] so that they may taste the punishment.

Someone Else: The aayah, “… when they have all overtaken one another therein, the last of them will say about the first of them …” [A’raaf 7:38]

Al-Albaani: Allaahu Akbar. Yes, so the point is that in reality this joy is a childish one, not that of men, firstly, and secondly, not that of believing men. [That one becomes joyful] because Bush lost and in his place came …

Questioner: Clinton.

Al-Albaani: I don’t know what his name is.

Questioner: [Laughs]

Al-Albaani: Names that are strange to me.

Questioner: By Allaah, O Shaikh of ours, the names of devils.

Al-Albaani: [Laughs] so the point is … Bush lost and so and so won the elections–all of them follow the same policy, it is only the faces that change.

For this reason it is silliness to become happy because Bush has gone and so and so has taken his place, even more so when we don’t yet know so and so’s [the new leader’s] good from his evil, if there is good in them. So why this haste? As long as disbelief is one community, and the politics of the American population as a people is with the Jews, so the fact that Bush lost and so and so won does not change the politics of this populace in such a speedy manner which some of those of weak minds and intellects imagine, [imagining to themselves] that we are rid of Bush [and this new leader will be better] … ok, maybe this [new leader] is worse than Bush.

Whatever the case, a Muslim does not become joyful when a disbeliever loses and another disbeliever takes his place, because disbelief is one millah, and their politics is one and the same. Look at … who was it in the ministry of the Jews and someone else took his place …

Questioner: Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin.

Al-Albaani: Yitzak Rabin, what did we see between this one falling and that one taking his place? Nothing whatsoever. It is just a game they play with the minds of those of weak intellects and unfortunately with some Muslims or politicians who did not lead according to the politics of the Quraan and the Sunnah.

So because of that I am able to say concerning this that Allaah … as He عز وجل said … “Indeed, Allaah does not like the exultant.” [Qasas 28:76], these people who become joyful at the downfall of this person and the success [in becoming leader] of that one, these people are as I just said … their intellects are like those of children, rather, sparrows.

And Allaah’s aid is sought.

Questioner: Does this issue have a connection to aqidah, i.e., is it possible to call … i.e., some of our brothers call those who display such joy for those people disbelievers?

Al-Albaani: No, no, all of that is a mistake and disobedience, if it has a connection to disbelief then it is to disbelief in action. Yaa akhi, we go by the principle and relax [which is that] the disbelief which takes one out of the religion is that connected to the heart, not the tongue. This question of yours reminds me of another just way of categorising disbelief, so there is disbelief in word [kufr lafdhee] and disbelief of the heart [kufr qalbee], the previous categorization was disbelief in creed [kufr I’tiqaadi] and disbelief in action [kufr amalee].

Now another just way of categorising disbelief is disbelief in word and disbelief of the heart, the disbelief of the heart is the equivalent of disbelief in action, and disbelief in word equates to disbelief in action.

So a person who displays joy at the loss of Bush and the success of George or Antonius or whoever, there is no doubt that such joy should not emanate from a Muslim, so it is possible for us to term this as disbelief in word, but such a person is not declared a disbeliever based on it, because it happened in the time the Prophet عليه السلام, [an incident] I’m sure some of which will not be hidden from any of you, like the hadith of Ibn Abbaas when he said that the Prophet عليه السلام gave a sermon to his Companions one day and a man then stood up and said to him,  “As Allah and you, will,” so he said, “Would you set me up as a partner beside Allaah? Say, ‘As Allaah, Alone Wills.’”

So this is disbelief in word, he said to him, “Would you set me up as a partner beside Allaah?” but he did not impose upon him any of the requisites of disbelief in creed [kufr I’tiqaadi].

So we should always keep this correct categorization before our eyes: disbelief in creed or the heart [is the first], and disbelief in action or in word [the second], because uttering a word is an action, so when we see a thing such as this we do not rush to say, ‘A disbeliever,’ even if he uttered a word of disbelief we do not rush to declare him to be a disbeliever and to remove him from the religion until we clarify what he meant by that statement.

Interjection: With your permission, O Shaikh of ours, if I could please …

Al-Albaani: Tafaddal …

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 672. [1/5/708].

2 Comments
July 13, 2013

Al-Albaani Praying Behind a Sufi


 

Shaikh Esaam Moosaa Haadi said, “And in 1990 and 1991 our Shaikh used to pray Fajr in the mosque at the service station close to where I live and we used to pray Fajr with him. The Imaam of that mosque had a stance against al-Albaani and the Salafi da’wah, infact he was a Sufi but not an extreme one, despite that our Shaikh would pray behind him even though he knew about that.”

Muhaddithul-Asr, Imaam Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani Kamaa ’Araftuhu, p. 121.

For detailed answers by the Shaikh on this topic please refer to the following posts:

Praying Behind the People of Innovation.

Leave a comment
July 13, 2013

Al-Albaani asked, ‘O Shaikh of Ours! Do You Know the ‘Aqeedah of this Imaam You Pray Behind?’


 

Shaikh Esaam Moosaa Haadi said, “In the late 80’s our Shaikh, may Allaah have mercy on him, used to pray fajr behind an Imaam in the An-Nuzhah district, the mosque was far from the Shaikh but he used to love the salaah and recitation of this Imaam. There was a group of us brothers who would stand [waiting] for the Shaikh on the street and when he’d pass us he’d pick us up in his car and we’d go to pray with him and then we’d come back with him. One time, a young guy new [to the da’wah] in those days got in with us, on the way back he said to the Shaikh, ‘O Shaikh of ours! Do you know the ’aqeedah of this Imaam you pray behind?’ So our Shaikh said:

‘I don’t know his ’aqeedah just like I don’t know yours.’”

Muhaddithul-Asr, Imaam Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani Kamaa ’Araftuhu, p. 121.

3 Comments
July 9, 2013

Al-Albaani on Dealing Gently With The People When They Are Wrong–They Are Not as Bad as Pharaoh | 1 |


 

Questioner: It’s as though in his books Sayyid Qutb declares communities to be disbelievers because they don’t believe in Haakimiyyah, and he also doesn’t differentiate between minor disbelief and major, and the innovations which take place around graves and the supplications to other than Allaah are not of interest to him, and other things [too], he only talks about Haakimiyyah.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: And some people make excuses for him, so what is his excuse?

Al-Albaani: By Allaah, O Ustaadh, I hold that it is better for us that we busy ourselves with those who are alive instead of those who are dead, this is the first thing.

Secondly, I said to our brother Dr. Rabee that Sayyid Qutb is a man who is not a scholar, and that he is one of those Egyptian writers who were not nurtured on knowledge, correct knowledge.

But it seems that he had a flowing pen, and perhaps in addition to that he, like many of today’s youth, had an unruly Islamic compassion, but they, as is said:

Sa’d led the camels to water while being completely wrapped up
[with only his hands sticking out].

This is not how, O Sa’d, the camels are taken to water.

So his books, as Dr. [Rabee’ al-Madkhali] may Allaah reward him with good has explained, are full of mistakes in terms of knowledge, some of them related to ’aqidah and some to fiqh.

So when I say that it is sufficient for us to busy ourselves with those who are alive instead of those who have passed away, I mean that we should not set up enmity between ourselves and a certain person, but only between us and his da’wah, and this is especially so after he has passed away and gone on to Allaah’s Forgiveness, inshaa Allaah, and His Mercy. This is from one angle.

And I said to Dr. [Rabee’], and I remain upon this, and I think that a lot of our brothers from the students of knowledge and our Shaikhs are [also in agreement] on this, that the truth, in and of itself, is heavy on the general people except for those whom Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, wills [for it not to be as such]:

“Indeed, We will cast upon you a heavy word.” [Muzzammil 73:5]

So when hardness and harshness is added to the da’wah and its heaviness upon the people, as we mentioned–then two types of hardness and harshness have come together, and that will be a cause which will repel people from the true call, whereas the purpose of da’wah was to draw them to it.

And there is not a single student of knowledge from us except that he remembers the aayahs in the Noble Quraan and many of the Messenger’s hadiths, عليه الصلاة والسلام, which exhort kindness and gentleness, the aayahs [in this regard] are well-known and we do not need to be reminded of them, like the aayah in which Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, ordered Moosaa عليه السلام and his brother Haaroon, saying:

“Go, both of you, to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed. And speak to him with gentle speech that perhaps he may be reminded or fear [Allaah].” [Taa Haa 20:43-44]

And I do not believe that someone who bears witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allaah and that Muhammad is Allaah’s Messenger and who professes this testimony, [and while we do leave] his [final] reckoning with Allaah, there is not a single person from us who will imagine that however deviated he is in his call, especially when he has not used hardness or harshness in his call with those who he is calling towards his da’wah, however deviated it is from the truth, [not a single person from us will imagine that] his situation will reach an atom’s weight in comparison to this Pharaoh to whom Moosaa and Haaroon were sent.

Despite that, Allaah the Mighty and Majestic ordered these two noble Prophets and chosen Messengers to speak gently to the greatest transgressor on the face of the earth [a level of transgression which was shown] when he [i.e., Pharaoh] said:

“Saying, ‘I am your lord, the most high.’” [Naazi’aat 79:24]

Despite that Allaah said:

“Go, both of you, to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed. And speak to him with gentle speech that perhaps he may be reminded or fear [Allaah].” [Taa Haa 20:43-44]

So I believe that Sayyid Qutb’s condition doesn’t reach that of Pharaoh at all, so it is his present followers who are intended when refuting him because he has [now] gone with all of his open and hidden flaws and defects. And so if those who are aimed at are the living, then regarding them I will say the same as that which I did about this one who has died: that the evil of these people does not reach the level of Pharaoh who claimed to be a deity worthy of worship [uluhiyyah].

Thus it is not fitting that we bring two types of hardness together, one of which is a necessity, i.e., the call to the truth which differentiates between the truth and falsehood, between a man and his brother, which was the reason one of the Noble Qur’aan’s names is Al-Furqaan [The Criterion], and which was also one of the names of the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام, because he, firstly, separated truth from falsehood, tawhid from shirk, indeed between a man and his son, between a son and his father … and so on. This is the nature of the call to the truth, so it is, thus, enough for us to call the people to this da’wah as He the Most High said:

“… with wisdom and good instruction …” [Nahl 16:125]

And something which should be mentioned here, as a reminder is …

1 Comment
July 7, 2013

Al-Albaani on Safar al-Hawaali’s Book


 

Shaikh Esaam Moosaa Haadi said, “I asked Shaikh al-Albaani about Safar al-Hawaali’s book called Dhaahiratul-Irjaa, and so he said, ‘An evil book. I hadn’t thought that he had deviated to such an extent.’”

Muhaddithul-Asr, Imaam Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani Kamaa ’Araftuhu, p. 72, of Esaam Moosaa Haadi.

Leave a comment
June 14, 2013

Al-Albaani’s Humility: Not Seeing Himself as The Embodiment of The Sunnah


 

Shaikh Esaam Moosa Haadi said, “Some brothers said to him, ‘O Shaikh of ours! There is a man by us who regards you as an enemy and speaks ill of you—should we boycott him?’

So our Shaikh replied, ‘Does he oppose Al-Albaani as a person or does he oppose the ’aqeedah which Al-Albaani holds and calls to? The ’aqeedah of the Book and the Sunnah? If he is showing enmity to the ’aqeedah of the Book and the Sunnah then one is to discuss [such issues] with him and he is to be shown patience. Thereafter if you see that it is beneficial and more advantageous to boycott him, then he is boycotted.

But if he is opposing Al-Albaani as a person whilst he agrees with us on the path of the Book and the Sunnah—then no [he is not to be boycotted].’”

Muhaddithul-Asr, Imaam Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani Kamaa ’Araftuhu, p. 94, of Esaam Moosaa Haadi.

4 Comments
May 22, 2013

On Mentioning the Good Deeds of a Person When Refuting Them | 1 |


 

Questioner: Noble Shaikh!  Is it from the methodology of the Salaf to mention the good qualities/deeds [hasanaat] of a dissenter when one is refuting him?  We would like a detailed answer to this question.

Al-Albaani: If the purpose is to clarify the truth concerning an issue that has arisen, then this is something.  And if the purpose is to give a biography of someone who we hold to have been mistaken in a certain issue then this is something else. In the first instance it is not a condition when answering someone who opposes [the Sunnah] that his good deeds are mentioned.  But if the situation differs from that, and that is what I just alluded to, that the person himself is going to be spoken about, then there is no doubt that the one refuting/making the criticism should not turn to mentioning [just] his mistakes but should couple that with a mention of his virtues and good qualities based upon His Saying, the Blessed and Most High, “… and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just. That is nearer to righteousness.” [Maa’idah 5:8]

As for when just refuting then this [i.e., mentioning the good deeds] is in opposition to the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih and in opposition to what is known from the Prophet’s responses عليه السلام to whoever had made a mistake from his Companions. And in my opinion, if the hadiths that have been reported concerning this issue were to be collected they would form a treatise.

For example, he said to the person who praised his brother to his face …

Leave a comment
May 8, 2013

Did al-Ghazali Come Back to the Manhaj of the Salaf?


 

 

Questioner: Did Abu Haamid al-Ghazali come back to the methodology of the Salaf, how correct is this statement?

Al-Albaani: No, unfortunately. But he started to take a few very slow steps towards it, and I ask Allaah عز وجل to forgive him and those like him from the people of knowledge.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 13.

2 Comments
April 29, 2013

The Shaikh’s Advice to a Christian who Embraced Islaam | 1 |


 

Al-Albaani: Regarding the brother I want to say that his reward is doubled, this is what our Prophet عليه السلام stated in the authentic hadith which Imaam Bukhaari reported in his Saheeh, “Three people will be given their reward twice …” and from those three he mentioned, “… and a man from the Christians who believes in me and becomes a Muslim, his reward is doubled,” this means that he was a believer beforehand in the legislation of Jesus, peace be upon him, then when the truth became clear to him [concerning the fact] that what Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام brought is the truth he also believed in that, such a person’s reward is recorded twice for him.

This is not the case with anyone who was an unbeliever [mulhid] from the Christians, [someone who was] not a Christian or a Muslim and who then embraced Islaam, such a person is rewarded once, but as for the person who was truly a Christian including whatever deviation that may entail then he is a believer and he is rewarded twice, and I say, ‘… including whatever deviation the Christians have …’ because when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم uttered this hadith, saying, ‘… he will be given his reward twice …’ he was referring to the Christians who were present in his time عليه الصلاة والسلام, those Christians about whom Allaah عز وجل said in the Noble Quraan, “They have certainly disbelieved who say, ‘Allaah is the third of three,’” [Maaidah 5:73] and these are the people whose sacrificial slaughter it is permissible for us to eat, thus it is not fitting that a Muslim doubts or questions [himself] about these Christians [saying] that they say, ‘The father, the son and the holy ghost are one,’ in response we say that they were like that in the time of the Messenger عليه السلام and they are the ones who the Lord of mankind referred to in the previous verse, “They have certainly disbelieved who say, ‘Allaah is the third of three.’”

Thus, any person from the People of the Book who embraces Islaam and believes in Allaah and His Messenger will be rewarded twice: one time for his previous eemaan with all its flaws and defects, and a second time for his subsequent eemaan which is all truth containing no falsehood.

So firstly we ask Allaah to grant you firmness, and then [we ask Him to grant you] steadfastness upon the truth.

And it is obligatory upon you–and the religion is but to sincerely advise–to be eager to become acquainted with the correct Islaam, and unfortunately I say, ‘… the correct Islaam …’ because the Muslims have been afflicted with that which those who came before them were afflicted with, the Muslims have been stricken with that which befell the Jews and Christians in terms of becoming divided in the religion, and this is a confirmation of the statement of the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام, “You will certainly follow the ways (and habits) of those who came before you, handspan by handspan, cubit by cubit, until even if they entered a lizard’s hole, you would follow them.” We said, “O Messenger of Allaah, the Jews and the Christians?” He said, “Who else?” [Muslim] Namely, they will have power and influence at that time.

This narration,“You will certainly follow the ways (and habits) of those who came before you, handspan by handspan …” is true concerning most of the Muslims today, the Muslims have become divided.  So if Allaah عز وجل has blessed you with the greater [type of] guidance …

Leave a comment
April 1, 2013

Al-Albaani’s Advice to Every Muslim on the Face of the Earth


 

 

The Imaam said, “My advice for every Muslim on the face of the earth, especially our brothers who share with us their affiliation to the blessed da’wah, that of the Book and the Sunnah on the methodology of the Pious Predecessors–I advise them and myself to fear Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, firstly, and then [advise them] to seek more beneficial knowledge as He the Most High said:

“And fear Allaah. And Allaah teaches you.” [Baqarah 2:282]

And [I advise them] to couple their meritorious knowledge which in our united opinion is that which does not digress from the Book, the Sunnah and the methodology of the Pious Predecessors, along with this knowledge of theirs and [along with] whatever increase in it they are able to seek–[I advise them] to couple that with action upon that knowledge, so that it will not be a proof against them but for them:

“The Day when there will not benefit [anyone] wealth or children. But only one who comes to Allaah with a sound heart.” [Shu’araa 26:88-89]

Thereafter I warn them from joining many of those who have left the path of the Salaf in many, numerous issues, something which can be termed as rebelling against the Muslims and their Jamaa’ahs [i.e., like the Khawaarij], rather we order them to be as the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام said in an authentic hadith, “And be servants of Allaah, brothers,” as Allaah the Blessed and Most High ordered you, and we should, as I said in a previous sitting and which I repeat again [here], and there is benefit in repeating [such points]–in our da’wah we should be gentle with those who oppose it and we should always and forever stand in line with His Saying, the Blessed and Most High:

“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best,” [Nahl 16:125] and the ones who have the most right for us to use [such] wisdom with them are those who are the most severe in their conflict/disagreement with us in our doctrine and our aqidah so that we do not bring together [both] the weightiness of the true call [itself which] Allaah عز وجل favoured us with and the burden of ill manners in calling to Allaah عز وجل.

So I hope that all of our brothers in all Islamic countries imitate these Islamic manners and seek, by doing so, Allaah’s Face عز وجل [i.e., to do so sincerely] and not to want any reward or thanks [from the people].”

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 900.

2 Comments
March 11, 2013

PDF of The Recent Boycotting Posts


Here is the PDF of the recent boycotting posts:

On Boycotting.

1 Comment
March 10, 2013

Al-Albaani on Boycotting | End | Wrongfully Looking at Misguided Muslims with Scorn, Contempt, Spite and Buried Hatred and a Discussion About Whether the Ruling Applied to Whole Groups is Applied to Individuals from those Groups


Continuing from the previous post.

Al-Albaani: Today, regretfully, my brother, the situation of the Muslims is very precarious. Today the Christians, rather the Jews, in fact the Magians live in an Islamic country as natives and the ruler does not differentiate between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, all are covered by the term citizen, and our Lord the Mighty and Majestic says, “Then will We treat the Muslims like the criminals? What is [the matter] with you? How do you judge?” [Qalam 68:35-36] for this reason this society which has reached this level of corruption … it is not permissible for an individual, righteous Muslim who acts upon his knowledge to confront this society with force because he will have to make an about turn, but rather [he should use] the force which cannot be overpowered, and that is the force of proof/evidence and clear statements [explaining the truth].

Next question.

Questioner: Also, as a completion, O Shaikh, ya’ni, a Muslim’s compassion for such a person before, ya’ni, establishing [the proof] …

Al-Albaani: It is that, all of that … ya’ni¸“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction …” [Nahl 16:125] that is what this means, and in this regard I say that many of our brothers who are enthusiastic for the correct Islaam [wrongfully] look at other Muslims, who have deviated due to their ignorance of the Book and the Sunnah, with a look of scorn and contempt and spite and buried hatred.  For example, many [astray] Shaikhs permit seeking succour from the Allies [of Allaah] and the righteous, they permit other things even more readily [like] seeking intercession through them instead of the Lord of the Worlds, they permit frequenting their graves and seeking blessings [from them] by coming to them and so on. And another type [of Shaikh] forbids following the Book and the Sunnah based upon the fact that [according to them] the general folk do not understand the Book and the Sunnah, and they impose blind-following on them, and then the stance of the other people who are with us upon the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the Pious Predecessors is to have enmity towards these people and to hate them in a most severe manner, such that it is not possible that this person will meet that one–this is a mistake.

I say: these people [who call upon the Allies of Allaah and the righteous etc.] … I do not refrain from calling them by their [rightful] name … [i.e.,] people have ‘deviated from the truth [daaloon]’ and when I [do] say that they have ‘deviated from the truth’ there is no problem in using this expression from an Islamic perspective, for Allaah the Mighty and Majestic used this expression concerning His Messenger عليه السلام [stating] that before the revelation was sent down to him, “And He found you lost [daal] and guided [you].” [Duhaa 93:7]

Thus, there is no doubt that these people who oppose the Book and the Sunnah are misguided/lost [daaloon] … what I want to say is: as long as they are like that then they are ill and it is obligatory for us to be compassionate towards them and to deal with them with gentleness and to call them [to the Truth] as is mentioned in the previous aayah, “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” [Nahl 16:125]

And we remain in this state until it becomes clear to us from one of them that he is haughty and denies the truth and that kindness and softness have no benefit at all with him, it is then that the Statement of our Lord the Mighty and Majestic comes in to play, “… and turn away from the ignorant.” [A’raaf 7:199]

Bring the next question.

Questioner: I mean, O Shaikh, now … so that we can move on to the second question [let me just ask about this final point] because it [i.e., the second question] is totally separate from this one … [so] is this [i.e., the answer you just gave] regarding Jamaa’ahs as a whole or [is it applied to] people on an individual basis … when it becomes clear that all of them as a group or sect or such are haughty [subsequently] when someone meets one of them individually should he apply this to them on an individual level?

Al-Albaani: No. That which is applied to a Jamaa’ah is not applied to the individual.

We say, for example, the system and laws of some of the factions present today in the Islamic world, unfortunately, are ones of disbelief, like the Ba’ath Party for example and the Communist Party, there is no doubt that these forms of government are those of disbelief, and that whoever adopts them as religion is a disbeliever.

But we know that as regards the reality in many Islamic countries, especially Syria for example, many of those people who used to affiliate [themselves] to the Ba’ath [Party] used to pray and fast and totally guard the obligatory duties, and [that] when they would be reminded and warned from affiliating to a sect such as it they would say, and their statement was invalid [i.e., incorrect] … but we understand that they have not adopted Ba’athism as a replacement for Islaam [and we know this] because they would say, ‘Yaa akhi, what can we do, we want to live,’ so the example of such a person is like any other obstinate sinner [faasiq] who does something forbidden in order to live … in order to earn a living.

And how many trades, professions and businesses many of the Muslims pursue nowadays which contain forbidden things, and when you remind them and tell them that this and that are haram, they’ll say, ‘Yaa akhi, what can we do,’ and the good one from among them will say to you, ‘Wallaahi, I’m thinking about getting something … [getting] another job which will be [Islamically] legal but until it becomes possible I’ll carry on doing what I’m doing,’ and so on. This all shows that it is not possible to declare these people to be disbelievers in the same way that we declare the system and all those who [actually] adopt it as a part of their ’aqidah to be disbelievers.

Therefore, it is possible that individuals in these factions can be found who really are disbelievers because they have adopted their system as a replacement for Islaam and [at the same time] there are individuals amongst them who are not like that and who only, as I gave you an example of just now, take it as a means of living–[but by me saying this] I do not mean that this way is permissible, what I mean is that as long as the individual has not adopted it as creed, as a system [which replaces Islaam], as an ideology, then it is not allowed to deal with them as the system itself and those who do adopt it as ’aqidah are dealt with.

End.

Al-Huda wan-Noor, 735.

2 Comments
March 6, 2013

Al-Albaani on Boycotting | 2 | Nowadays, Boycott, Cut off, Ostracise, Disassociate or Be Gentle?


Continuing from the first post of this series.

“So now, it is not necessary/a prerequisite that [such a] warning is coupled with ostracism or boycotting in this day and age, but as for when our society is an Islamic one then all of these issues must be brought together.

Nowadays, for example, there is a very clear example [which I will give you]: the Muslim who doesn’t keep up/maintain his prayers [and thus] to whom applies the hadith which you mentioned in your [other earlier] question, “Between a person and disbelief is abandoning the prayer, whoever abandons the prayer has disbelieved,” the correct, legislated expression concerning this man who I just mentioned is that he be called someone who is defiantly disobedient [a faasiq], if not a disbeliever who has apostatized from his religion, it is only by way of using gentler words that he be called, ‘not practicing,’ he is a faasiq, and that disbeliever is more of a faasiq than him, so [for now] we will speak about this person and then we may be in need of talking about the one who is ever more defiantly disobedient than him, i.e., the kaafir.

This Muslim who has abandoned the prayer has left obedience to Allaah in that issue, for this reason he deserves the title of faasiq: if we warned the people against him and, along with this warning, [also] connected what I just mentioned earlier, [i.e.,] boycotting him … this warning and this cutting off and this boycotting will not produce the results desired by [the implementation of] these three words : warning … cutting off … boycotting–why?

Because if you cut off from him you will find tens of people like you who will keep contact with him, and thus the situation will be turned on its head–you will be cut off from him and not him from you, and at that point, what is the advantage of you boycotting him?

This reminds me of a Syrian saying and it has a similar [version] here [in Jordan], but [whatever the case] the Syrian expression says that the people thought that a faasiq who had abandoned the prayer repented to Allaah and turned back, and for the first time he goes to the mosque to pray but finds it closed, and so says, ‘You’re closed and [so] I have a day off [from praying]!’ obviously the saying is understood.

Okay, likewise nowadays this faasiq, the one who has abandoned the prayer, when you decide to boycott him … to cut off from him … to warn against him … he doesn’t care, [and even if he doesn’t say it with his tongue] his state of affairs says, ‘You’re closed and [so] I have a day off [from praying]!  You’re cutting off from me and I’ll cut off from you and distance myself from you,’ and so on.

In summary, the principle of cutting off/ostracizing today is out of the question because we are in a time when the Muslims are weak.

And this connection [that I’m about to mention] which keeps them linked together, [i.e.,] the correct Islaam, represented in his saying عليه السلام in the authentic hadith, ‘The example of the believers in their mutual love, mercy and compassion is that of the body, if one part of it complains, the rest of the body joins it in staying awake and suffering fever,’–the Muslims today are not like that.

For this reason we do not have the means which it is fitting to rely on to bring together this widespread and dispersed division of today except by relying on His Statement the Mighty and Majestic:

“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” [Nahl 16:125]

This is now the means which it is fitting that we rely on.

So when we see a faasiq person who has turned away from performing some of what Allaah has made obligatory upon a Muslim, we admonish him and remind him and are gentle with him.

Likewise, when we see a person or people who we cannot call faasiqs because we [for example] assume that they are guarding the obligatory duties whose obligation is well-known amongst all of the Muslims, i.e., the type of things [that are so fundamental to the religion and well-known] that they are from the category of actions called, ‘known as being from the religion by necessity,’ for we may find people who perform such obligatory duties and who do not leave them, and [thus] their perseverance in those obligatory actions comes between us and the application of the term faasiq to them, understood [so far]?

Okay, yet along with that it is possible that in these people there is some deviation from the correct ’aqidah in a certain issue or in many points of ’aqidah, this is possible, like the groups whose names today we hear recorded in the books dealing with sects and history [but which] we do not find [present] with those names in the current day and age, but we do find their effects in the state of affairs of many of the Islamic jamaa’ahs or individual Muslims, the Mu’tzailah for example, the Jabariyyah, the Qadariyyah, the Khawaarij, and so on.

In these sects there used to be found people who had deviated from the Sunnah in ’aqidah and who were regarded as righteous worshippers, yet along with that would be misguided, for example, ’Umar ibn ’Ubaid al-Mu’tazili, he would be cited as an example in his righteousness and his taqwaa but he held the [belief of the] madhhab of the Mu’tazilah, so it is not said of him that he is a faasiq but rather that he strayed from the correct ’aqidah.

And this type exists today in the Muslim world even if there is no group or Jamaa’ah which [verbally] say, ‘We are Mu’tazilah,’–I haven’t heard of anyone except one man who openly declared it in this city in front of the people, he said, ‘I’m a Mu’tazili,’ he said it openly, ‘I’m a Mu’tazili,’ and he really was a Mu’tazili and [in fact] even more misguided than they were … [but] we’re not in the middle of explaining that right now …

So the point is that it is obligatory on us to be gentle with misguided people such as these too and to establish the proof against them from the Book of Allaah, the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, the statements of the Pious Predecessors and the Mujtahid Imaams–this is what it is obligatory for our stance to be towards those who have deviated from Islaam in either action or notion, until the Muslims become stronger and gain power and a country, then when these people are told about the correct Islaam and [still] do not restrain from the defiant disobedience [fisq] and misguidance they are upon, they then have a different ruling, [but at the same time] this ruling is not connected to individual righteous Muslims [to carry out], but is rather connected to the Muslim ruler, and perchance this is close, if Allaah so wills.

Perhaps I’ve answered your question?

Questioner: Yes, as a completion, what … [is it] likewise with non-Muslims?

Al-Albaani: Yes, it is likewise, without a doubt.

Questioner: The Jews and the Christians and so on?

Al-Albaani: Today, regretfully, my brother, the situation of the Muslims is very precarious …”

The next post.

Leave a comment
March 4, 2013

Al-Albaani on Boycotting | 1


 

Questioner: The first is concerning the topic of the ’aqidah of loyalty and disavowal [al-Walaa wal-Baraa]: is it permissible for a Muslim that the ’aqidah of loyalty and disavowal be made apparent [i.e., implemented] before, ya’ni, establishing the proof against the other person, whether that other person is a non-Muslim or someone from other than Ahlus-Sunnah, ya’ni, someone astray …

Al-Albaani: If you were to remove the term ‘loyalty and disavowal [al-Walaa wal-Baraa],’ from your question, do you think the question still holds? Because I see that a connection which holds the question together cannot be found if you remove the term ‘loyalty and disavowal?’

Questioner: No, it does not hold.

Al-Albaani: Why … I then don’t understand the question, because the completion of your question …

Questioner: Loyalty … so, the question … it’s as though it is worded incorrectly, in the negative, I mean disavowal …

Al-Albaani: Let us repeat the question. What is the question that is connected to [the term] disavowal, is it permissible for a Muslim to what?

Questioner: That, ya’ni, he starts from the person …

Al-Albaani: Now it’s clear.

Questioner: … from the action, the basis is for him to start from the action … but from a person, [his question is jumbled and not clear, he is saying that if you want to boycott someone you boycott him for the action not because of him personally, so you say the action is misguidance etc., and then afterwards based upon that that the person is misguided etc.] ya’ni, who is involved in this action before the proof being established against him, whether he is a non-Muslim or [a Muslim but] from other than Ahlus-Sunnah.

Al-Albaani: Now the question is clear. After this clarification, maybe we can replace the term, ‘disavowal,’ with another word which will make the question aimed at clearer, i.e., ‘disassociation or boycotting,’ is this correct do you think, so I can go on to answer?

Questioner: Disassociation?

Al-Albaani: Yes, i.e., ‘Is it permissible for a Muslim to disassociate [himself] from a non-Muslim and not deal with him and to boycott him, [and] is it permissible for a Muslim to disassociate [himself] from an openly sinning Muslim who does not practice, [is it allowed for the practicing Muslim to] act upon Islaam and boycott him?’ This is what is intended from the question or something else?

Questioner: Warning, ya’ni, against him.

Al-Albaani: What?

Questioner: Warning against him and his da’wah.

Al-Albaani: Warning against him, does this warning against him necessitate cutting off and boycotting him? Say [in response to this question I just asked], ‘Of course,’ or should he maintain communication and then warn against him? Namely, the question must be clarified until we can come to know the answer.

Questioner: … so that I understand …

Al-Albaani: I’m saying, a person is warning against another, does he maintain relations with him or boycott him?

Questioner: He boycotts him.

Al-Albaani: Okay, so there is a correlation, the two issues are linked, after this clarification I now say that I can tackle the answer to the question.

Amongst our problems in this day and age is that we deal with issues based upon emotion.

[What] I want to say is that lots of the youth today who are enthusiastic about their Islaam, their religion, deal with some critical/complex fiqh issues in a manner based upon [their] emotions for Islaam … dealing with [those issues] in a manner not accompanied by knowledge drawn from the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the Pious Predecessors.

I believe that a question such as this, i.e., warning … cutting off … boycotting … loyalty and disavowal … these are issues that are connected to a strong Islamic society which is capable of, firstly, implementing issues such as these and secondly, is capable of benefitting from their outcome.

So now, it is not necessary/a prerequisite that [such a] warning is coupled with ostracism or boycotting in this day and age, but as for when our society is an Islamic one then all of these issues must be brought together. Nowadays, for example, there is a very clear example [which I will give you] …

The next post.

2 Comments
January 25, 2013

When Does a Person Know that He can Reach the Ability of Making a Ruling Concerning a Hadith?


 

Questioner: When does a person know that he can reach the ability of making a ruling concerning a hadith?

Al-Albaani: This is an important question. He will know that when he puts his research and personal statements before those of the people of knowledge of old whose statements have been penned down in their books–and finds that in the majority of cases he is in agreement with them. This is from one angle.

From another angle [is that he] finds that the people of knowledge value his knowledge and ijtihaad, and that they do not regard him, as we just said, as yet unqualified to prop himself up as someone who authenticates [hadiths] and declares them to be weak.

In other words: a person should be distant from being deceived by his knowledge. And it is in the nature of many people not to see their own faults but to see those of others, for this reason he should seek the aid of those people of knowledge who are around him, and thus see his faults through them, as [the Prophet] صلى الله عليه وسلم indicated in the well-known hadith, ‘The believer is his brother’s mirror.’ [As-Saheehah, no. 926, hasan]

A believer truly sees his mistakes and faults through others.

And he should seek the help of the people of knowledge in order to know whether or not he is worthy of researching or performing ijtihaad–whether that be concerning declaring matters of knowledge authentic or weak or whether that be concerning issuing religious verdicts in fiqh issues.

Al-Fataawa al-Kuwaitiyyah, pp. 83-84.

Leave a comment
December 12, 2012

None of the Companions said, ‘I’m a Bakri … I’m an Umari …’


 

“When the Companions came across an issue for which they didn’t know the ruling, they would ask Abu Bakr [about it] when they met him, they would ask Umar, they would ask Ibn Mas’ood and so on. There wasn’t anyone among them who would say, ‘I’m a Bakri,’ i.e., I don’t believe in anything except Abu Bakr’s knowledge, or, ‘I’m an Umari! I don’t believe in anything except Umar’s knowledge!’

Rather, they would ask whoever amongst them was from the people of the message [Ahlul-dhikr]—and this is how it is fitting that the course of action should be, for all good is in following the Salaf and all evil is in the innovations of those who came later [the khalaf].

When the affair became one of partisanship [hizbiyyah] to a school of thought, each person became partisan to an Imaam and fanatical towards him.”

Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor, 1/219.

1 Comment
September 6, 2012

Hizbiyyah That Resembles Taking Rabbis and Monks as Lords Besides Allaah


 

The Imaam said, “And it has reached the extent that one of those factions [hizbs] made it obligatory on all its members to adopt any opinion the hizb adopts, whatever that opinion maybe–even if it has no value from an Islamic point of view–and if that individual is not convinced with a particular opinion of the hizb, he is excommunicated and is not regarded as being part of the hizb, [a hizb] which calls itself a [so called], ‘Islamic’ one.

And what that means is that they are going back to what resembles the Jews and the Christians when they follow whatever their rabbis and monks make halaal or haram, for indeed Allaah, the Most High, has said, “They have taken their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allaah and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God–there is no deity [who has the right to be worshipped] except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.”” [Tawbah 9:31]

Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor, 1/320.

1 Comment
August 24, 2012

Al-Albaani Destroys the Stance of One Salafi Trying to Impose His Opinion on Another Salafi


 

The Imaam said, “Your imposition on another to adopt your opinion whilst he is not convinced of it negates one of the principles of the Salafi da’wah—which is that judgement [Haakimiyyah] is for Allaah Alone, and I reminded him of the Most High’s Statement about the Christians, ‘They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allaah,’ [Tawbah 8:31] thus it is enough for you that each one of you remains on his opinion—since neither one of you is convinced of the other’s—and that you should not declare him to be misguided, as he should not declare you to be misguided, and through that it is possible for you to continue cooperating with him in those principles of the da’wah and their subsidiary issues that you are both agreed upon.”

As-Saheehah, vol. 6, p. 30.

Leave a comment
August 23, 2012

Al-Albaani Warning Against Native Arab Speakers Who Have Doctorates But Not Knowledge, What of Those Who Have Neither Doctorate Nor Arabic, Let Alone Knowledge?


The Imaam said, “And in this regard, I advise the noble readers not to trust what is written these days in some of the magazines in circulation or widespread books containing Islamic research, especially those which are concerning the science of hadith, except if they are, firstly, written by the pen of someone whose [understanding of the] religion is trusted, and secondly that his knowledge and speciality in it [are trusted too]–for self-importance has conquered many of the writers of the present age, especially those who carry the title of, ‘Dr.,’ for they write about things which are not from their speciality, and about which they have no knowledge.

And indeed I know one of these individuals, he recently brought out a book before the people, most of it being about hadith and the seerah, thinking that in it he had relied upon authentic hadiths and narrations from the books of the Sunnah and Seerah! [Yet] then he [proceeds to] report narrations and hadiths in it which are unique in only being reported by the weak narrators, the abandoned narrators and those who have been accused of lying, like Waqidi and others. In fact, he reported the hadith, ‘We judge by what is apparent and leave what is hidden to Allaah,’ and he was resolute in attributing it to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم even though it has no basis [in being a narration] from him صلى الله عليه وسلم with this wording–so, readers, beware of people like these.

And Allaah’s Aid is sought.”

As-Saheehah, vol. 1, pp. 100-101.

1 Comment
July 20, 2012

The Common Muslim, Ijtihaadi Issues and Asking for Proof


Questioner: [Concerning] issues of ijtihaad, must the common person ask the scholar for their proofs?

Al-Albaani: If he is someone who understands the proof … and if not, then no.

Rihlatun-Noor, 44.

Leave a comment
July 19, 2012

Someone Who Has Excelled in Studying a Madhhab Such that He Has Memorised It and Bases His Answers on it Alone is Not Called a Scholar but a Muqallid–So What of Someone Who Has Studied Nothing At All?


Questioner: A questioner is asking saying, ‘A Muslim who has memorised one of the four schools of thought and has accepted what it permits and [also what it] does not sanction, is it allowed for him to give a religious verdict based upon that to those who ask him questions?’

Al-Albaani: It is not allowed for him to give a fatwa based upon what he has learned from his madhhab except by clarifying that it is the madhhab of so and so and not upon the basis that it is some knowledge which he has arrived at through his own personal study–because the blind-follower is not a scholar, the blind-follower is narrating what he has heard.

So based upon this he should say, ‘The answer to what you asked about according to the madhhab which I have studied is such and such,’ and he should not say, ‘The answer is such and such,’ because the difference between these two answers is that the second one, i.e., being resolute that the answer is such and such, this is the state of the scholar who is versed in the Book and the Sunnah.

As for the blind follower, even if he is from the major, from those who are assumed to be from the major scholars, as long as he is a blind-follower then he is not a scholar.

In the opinion of the scholars, a scholar is the one who is as Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:

“Knowledge is, “Allaah said … His Messenger said …
The Companions said …” and it is not hidden.”

This is the scholar.

As for a person who has spent his life studying the sayings of a particular madhhab without knowing whether its proofs are from the Book or the Sunnah or ijmaa’ or qiyaas–then he is a blind-follower, and according to the agreement of the scholars, the blind-follower is called ignorant and is not called a scholar.

For this reason in the book of judgments found in the books of fiqh it is stated that, ‘… it is not allowed for a jaahil [an ignorant person] to be given the position of a judge,’ the scholar explaining this said, ‘Namely, the blind follower,’–however much he knows about his madhhab he is still a blind follower and is not a scholar for whom it is permissible to give a religious verdict [fatwa].

And from the fruits of this distinction between the real/true scholar and between what some of the blind-followers have aptly named a, ‘figurative/metaphorical scholar’, i.e., a blind-follower, the difference between these two is that the real/true scholar gives a religious verdict based upon proof, he either says, ‘Allaah said,’ or ‘Allaah’s Messenger said,’ or ‘The consensus [ijmaa’] in this is …’ or he says, ‘There is no text [concerning the issue at hand] but I’m just giving my opinion, and this is my ijtihaad, and whoever has something better than it, let him bring it to us.’

As for the metaphorical/figurative scholar, i.e., the blind-follower, he is the one who gives an answer based upon his madhhab–and since the common folk do not differentiate between true/real knowledge and metaphorical knowledge, then this metaphorical scholar has to say, ‘My madhhab is such and such,’ and he should not say, ‘The answer is such and such,’–because he is not acquainted [with true knowledge] and he does not know.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 319.

2 Comments
June 29, 2012

The Shaikh Asked About Ansaarus-Sunnah


Questioner: Tell me your opinion regarding the Ansaarus-Sunnah al-Muhammadaiyyah Jamaa’ah [in Egypt] and then after that I will ask you the rest of the question [that I have].

Al-Albaani: Take their knowledge and/but leave their actions.

Questioner: Huh?

Al-Albaani: Take their knowledge and leave their actions, take their knowledge and leave the actions of individuals from them, have you understood me? This is enough for you, this is enough for you … as-salaamu alaikum.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 268.

1 Comment
June 18, 2012

The Shaikh Praises Allaah for Saving Him From Fanaticism for a Madhhab


“The truth is lost due to fanatical ‘madhhabism’, and Allaah the Most High is the One who is Praised for saving us from it, and granting us love of the Sunnah and [the love of] aiding it, and being partial to it alone. So all praise is for Allaah for what He has given and I ask Him for more of His Bounty in the Hereafter and this life.”

Ad-Da’eefah, 12/1/150.

Leave a comment
June 18, 2012

Al-Albaani’s Du’aa Regarding Being Fanatical Towards a Madhhab


“I ask Allaah to protect me and you from fanatical ‘madhhabism’, and that He grants us and you success in following the truth whoever it is with and that we go wherever it does.”

Ad-Da’eefah, 9/375.

1 Comment
June 18, 2012

On Fanatical Blind Followers


Renouncing some of the fanatical Hanafis, the Shaikh said, “[This is] enough twisting and turning, O people, in defence of your Imaam even though he is not to blame, because he stopped at what he knew, so you have to follow what is established in the Sunnah, for it is the foundation. And if it [i.e., a particular proof] eluded your Imaam then it hasn’t eluded you, and through it, the proof has been established against you.”

Ad-Da’eefah, 12/1/298.

Leave a comment
June 1, 2012

Is it Allowed to Backbite Someone who is Defiantly Disobedient [a Faasiq]?


Questioner: Is it allowed to backbite someone who is defiantly disobedient [a faasiq] in order to warn against him and so as not to fall into trials [fitnah] like fornication and stealing?

Al-Albaani: Naturally, [that is] the least that can be said, otherwise it is obligatory.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 12.

Leave a comment
May 30, 2012

Forbidding the Evil Harshly and with Cruelty During Hajj and By Hitting Someone?


 

Questioner: During tawaaf for Umrah [as part of Hajj] someone tried to prevent an incorrect act, which was that someone else was touching and kissing the standing place of Ibraahim [Maqaam]–but the way he stopped this act was with harshness and he raised his voice and also hit [the other person]. Can the Hajj of this person be regarded as a correct and valid one [mabroor]? Bearing in mind that the person asking the question has repented to Allaah, and is ardently waiting for an answer? He hit the other person … it reached such an extent that he hit the other person …

Al-Albaani: Was the one who was performing Hajj the one who struck [the other person] or the one who was hit?

Questioner: Both of them … it was during tawaaf.

Al-Albaani: Namely, they were both performing Hajj?

Questioner: Yes. It was during the tawaaf of the Umrah [which is part of Hajj at-Tamattu], one of them disapproved of what the other was doing but he didn’t respond so he hit him.

Al-Albaani: Naturally, this is not compatible whatsoever with the Prophet’s عليه السلام saying … in fact, [it is not compatible whatsoever with] the verse, “So whoever has made Hajj obligatory upon himself therein there is [to be for him] no sexual relations and no disobedience and no disputing during Hajj,” [Baqarah 2:197] since firstly, enjoining the good and preventing the evil shouldn’t be done with cruelty or harshness, especially when most people do not know [the truth].

We should regard the people as being ill and that they are in need of being treated with kindness, sympathy and mercy and not with cruelty or harshness. This is as a general rule. So what is the situation when we are, firstly, talking about [such harshness occurring during] Hajj, and, secondly, [that it occurred] in the Masjid al-Haraam?

There is no doubt that this action of his has nothing at all to do with a correct Hajj [mabroor].

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 386.

Leave a comment
May 14, 2012

Use Your Brain


 

Questioner: A questioner says, ‘When some scholars give a religious verdict [fatwaa] in a certain issue and another group of scholars give a verdict which is the opposite of the first, which one should the common Muslim follow?’

Al-Albaani: The common Muslims must have a general education … the common masses must have a general, Islamic education; by ‘general education’ I mean the one which it is obligatory on every Muslim to know even if he is from the common masses, that he know the truth is not pluralistic.

So when, as occurs in the question, there are two contradictory statements, this common Muslim must call to mind that one of them is correct and the other is a mistake, due to His Saying, the Mighty and Majestic, “So after the truth, what else can there be, save error?” [Yunus 10:32]

So when he brings this principle to mind it will motivate him to ask the people of knowledge, ‘You say it’s permissible … and you say it’s not … what’s your proof? And what’s your proof?’ This will open up a path to understanding and awareness and then he can choose what he feels at ease with and what his heart opens up to, and he will be rewarded.

As for him going against this legislated principle and saying as many of the people today do that, ‘Whoever blindly follows a scholar will meet Allaah safe and sound,’ [then] where has this sentence come from? It is not in the Book of Allaah and nor in a hadith from Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, it’s only a sentence [prevalent] on the tongues of the common folk, ‘Whoever blindly follows a scholar will meet Allaah safe and sound …’ no.

Rather whoever follows Allaah’s Guidance is the one who is rightly guided, and whoever goes astray then it goes against himself, I just said to you now that Allaah said, “So ask the people of the message if you do not know,” [Nahl 16:43] He said, “… the people of the message [dhikr] …” hereby the word ‘message’ [dhikr] what is not intended is the dhikr which some of the ignorant Sufis are familiar with, dancing while doing dhikr and going crazy in it, and they call it, as he عليه السلام said regarding something else [but which still applies here], “… they will name it with other than its [real] name …” they call dancing and ecstasy [tawaajud] the remembrance of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, but on the contrary it is play and amusement, in addition to another sin, which is to call things by names other than their legislated ones.

So the dhikr mentioned in the verse is the Quraan, as He the Mighty and Majestic said, “And We revealed to you the message [i.e., the Quraan] that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them …” [Nahl 16:44] so the dhikr here is the Quraan, “So ask the people of the message if you do not know.”

And there is another caveat for this questioner [to bear in mind] here: this person says [the thing being discussed is] permissible and that one says it’s not permissible, Yaa akhi, are these people really scholars? Are they scholars of the Book of Allaah and the hadith of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم? Or do they differ most greatly? This one giving a fatwa according to the Book of Allaah and the hadith of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and that [other] one maybe walking on all fours, i.e., not walking according to the Book or the Sunnah but only according to the four madhhabs, taking whatever he fancies from them.

What a difference there is between these two.

For this reason, it is fitting that the common Muslim—and [when] I say, ‘The common Muslim,’ [it] doesn’t mean that he doesn’t understand … no, if he couldn’t understand it would mean he is mad, and if he was mad then he would not be accountable—but [on the contrary] he can understand, it’s only that he is not a scholar—thus, he must use his intellect, so when two statements come to him, one of them will have come from someone who is not a scholar, and so such a statement has no weight, and thus the first opinion stands.

And it may happen and we do not deny it: that both of them may be scholars of the Book and the Sunnah but the issue may be a disputed or controversial one, and this happens as it did in the past, and it can happen today, here the common Muslim must use his brain and strip away his desires and not follow them which would be something that would lead him away from Allaah’s Path, and he عليه السلام, “The mujaahid is the one who strives against his desires for the Sake of Allaah.”

But most regretfully, when the elite, the elite of the people today seek out the fatwa which suits them … he will say to you—Yaa akhi, and all of them say that they go back to the sayings of Allaah’s Messenger—[but then] he takes whatever suits him from these madhhabs, [if this is the case with the elite] what are we to say about the common folk then? And as was said:

If the man of the house is beating the daff, those living in it will dance along.

So if this is the case with the elite, except for those whom Allaah has had mercy on, and how few they are, then what will the state of the general folk be?

I remind the elite and the general masses that the religion is not desires but rather knowledge, and it is upon the general folk to learn how to ask questions.

And maybe in some of these blessed, inshaa Allaah, gatherings I have on more than one occasion mentioned that hadith narrated by Abu Dawud in his Sunan that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم sent a detachment to fight in the Way of Allaah, whereupon one of them received wounds to his body, when he awoke in the morning, he found that he needed to take a ghusl, and so he asked those around him whether they knew of an excuse for him not to have to bathe, they said no, that he must take a ghusl, so he did and died because when the water got on his wounds they festered … and so on and his temperature rose and he died.

When news about what happened to him reached the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم he became extremely angry عليه الصلاة والسلام and said, “They killed him, may Allaah kill them,” i.e., the ones who gave the fatwa that he had to take a ghusl were the reason for his death, “They killed him, may Allaah kill them, should they not have asked if they didn’t know?!  Verily the cure for ignorance is to question! It would have been enough for him had he performed tayammum.”

So, those [Companions] gave him a fatwa without knowledge, so we take a lesson from this hadith, that it is not fitting for the common folk to ask [just] anyone who claims knowledge, or who it is claimed has knowledge, but rather, O Muslim, the person who you know does not give fatwas except based upon, ‘Allaah said … Allaah’s Messenger said,’ such a person is the one you should direct your question to, as for those people who say what they do not do, and who give fatwas that aren’t based upon the Book and the Sunnah, then such people are not scholars.

And these are the people the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم foretold [us] about when he said, as occurs in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim from the hadith of Abdullaah ibn Amr ibn al-Aas, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with them both, that, ‘Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Verily, Allaah does not take away knowledge by snatching it from the breasts of the scholars, but He takes it away by taking away the scholars such that when no scholar remains the people take the ignorant ones as leaders and so they are asked and give religious verdicts without knowledge and [thus] are misguided and lead others astray [too].”

This is the state of affairs of many of those in places of responsibility today who it is thought are from the people of knowledge [but who really aren’t], and so the commoner who asks [them] a question becomes confused: ‘This one says haraam and that one says halaal, or this one says obligatory and that one says sunnah,’ or other such things from the issues which are disputed.

A process of purification must be carried out in the minds of all the common folk: the scholar of the Book and the Sunnah must be filtered from the one who, as some of the witty people in our country Syria say, ‘The scholars are of two types. One is a scholar-doer, the other is the doer-scholar!’ The ‘scholar-doer’ i.e., is a scholar who acts upon his knowledge, and the ‘doer-scholar’ is the one who does things and whose status is that of a scholar but who has nothing whatsoever to do with knowledge.

And unfortunately this is present, and whoever doesn’t know, let him go and try [and he’ll see how true what I am saying is].

Ask whoever you want from those who you think are from the people of knowledge well-known amongst the people, and I will not name them even if only by title, ask whoever you want, even though it [i.e., a certain situation] may be a fiqh issue in which there is difference of opinion, he will answer you according to the madhhab he grew up on, was nurtured on, and became old on, he will give you a fatwa according to it, and then you will say, ‘What’s the proof?’ And he will say [rhetorically], ‘We are people of proof? How can we understand the proof?’ This is if he is forthright [admitting that he doesn’t know the proof], but if he is someone who hides things, he will say, ‘How are you going to perceive the proof?’ So he covers his own ignorance by declaring others to be ignorant.

This, unfortunately, is the reality of many people today, and the One whose Aid is sought is Allaah.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 455.

5 Comments
May 12, 2012

Al-Albaani’s Oath


“Yes, by Allaah, I believe in Allaah and Allaah’s Messenger and in what has reached us from our Salaf as-Saalih.”

Su’aalaat, p. 100.

Leave a comment