Questioner: O Utsaadh! Are there people who have now entered Paradise or people who have entered the Fire? Like the aayah in Surah Yaa Seen, “It was said to him, ‘Enter Paradise.’” [Yaa Seen 36:26]
Al-Albaani: This is about what will be. As for now, there is nothing but the life of al-Barzakh. Entering Paradise or the Fire is appointed at the Reckoning … [at] the resurrection on the Day of Resurrection.
Questioner: Even the martyrs and Prophets?
Al-Albaani: All of them. But their souls are in a specific state of bliss as he عليه السلام said, “The souls of the martyrs are in the crops of green birds, eating from the fruits of Paradise,” and likewise, “The souls of the believers are in the bellies of green birds, eating from the fruits of Paradise.” So this bliss is that of the souls, as for the bliss of the body and soul together and likewise the torment [of them both together], that will not be except after the resurrection.
Questioner: Okay, O Ustaadh! What we understood, according to our intellect, is that when a person is living, his soul and body are interconnected …, when Allaah the Mighty and Majestic says, “Think not of those who are killed in the Way of Allah as dead. Nay, they are alive …” [Aali-Imraan 3:169] what I mean is [i.e., what I understand from the aayah is], ‘Nay, they are alive …’ i.e., alive as in the soul is in the body, connected.
Al-Albaani: This is something well-known which does not need to be asked about, the Prophet explained it for you and gave you the answer and I mentioned it to you earlier … the souls of the martyrs are in the crops of green birds, what does this mean? That firstly, the life of a martyr is commensurate with his rank before Allaah and, secondly, [at the same time it is also commensurate] with his existence in barzakh.
Life differs. Life in Barzakh differs from life in this world, and life in the Hereafter differs from both of those forms of life together, life in the Hereafter is different from life in al-Barzakh and life in this world too.
For this reason it is not permissible for a person to employ analogical reasoning [qiyas] … making an analogy of that which is Unseen based upon that which is, such that you say, ‘We don’t know life except in this manner!’
Don’t use this life which you are familiar with to make an analogy of that life which you are not acquainted with; especially when some texts have been related which totally clarify for you the fact that the life of martyrs which our Lord the Mighty and Majestic affirmed in the Quraan, saying, “Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, receiving provision …” … what is their provision?
It is not [various] dishes like those we have, their provision is that they eat by way of what that green bird eats, this is the provision [being referred to], the hadith explains the Quraan.
Questioner: When the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام saw Paradise and the Fire and found those who were being punished therein and those who were in bliss, how is that then?
Al-Albaani: Yes,the [differing] states that the Companions of Paradise and those of the Fire will be in [i.e., after Barzakh, on the Day of Judegement] was unveiled to him–this is the true unveiling [kashf] which the Sufis have stolen and attributed to themselves; it [i.e., such kashf] is only for the Prophets and Messengers.
The Shaikh said, “Not too long ago I had a meeting with a man who claimed that he was the Mahdi. So we met and I put this frank question to him:
“Are you the Mahdi meaning a Muslim who is rightly guided, a righteous Muslim, or are you ‘the’ Mahdi about whose arrival we have been given glad tidings?”
He said, “No. I am the Mahdi about whose coming glad tidings have been mentioned in the hadiths.” Then he started to speak.
I wanted to know how best to tackle him, so I listened to him and then he said, “Some of the hadiths regarding the Mahdi are authentic and others are weak.” This was sound.
After he finished, I said, “Can I ask you a question?”
He said, “Please do [tafaddal].”
I said, “If you could please give us some of the authentic and weak hadiths you just alluded to.”
So the miskeen was at his wit’s end and did not know what to say. He twisted and turned, saying what he had said before, until finally he said, “Tonight, I will not speak about these hadiths.”
Interjector: Allaahu Akbar!
Al-Albaani: He didn’t want to speak. So I said, “Why? Do you think this discussion is going to be according to how you want it? I asked you a question, you have to answer. You claim to be the Mahdi … the one who is a guide for the people, amongst the people are scholars and ignorant folk, righteous people and sinners–the real [Imaam] Mahdi is supposed to bear [the responsibility of guiding] the people not the other way round, with the people bearing [the responsibility of guiding] him. Because the Mahdi is all good, he is full of knowledge and so on. For this reason, I ask that you present us with some of the authentic and weak hadiths [that you alluded to].”
He said, “Tomorrow, I will bring them.”
I said, “No. I will not continue until tomorrow, and who can guarantee for himself that he will live until tomorrow?”
[Again] he started to go this way and that.
At the end I said to him, “Okay! We will give up half of the request but not the other. I asked you to bring some authentic and weak hadiths, I will let you off regarding the weak: bring some of the authentic ones.”
But he had nothing, and if he had mentioned any, they would obviously have been a proof against him. He was a man from whose appearance you wouldn’t judge him to be a Muslim: clean-shaven, head uncovered, obese, and he couldn’t recite an aayah correctly as it had been revealed by Allaah.
And the strange thing was that this miskeen thought that he was a Messenger from Allaah.
Interjector: His brother followed him.
Al-Albaani: Sorry?
Interjector: The person who followed him was his brother.
Al-Albaani: Right, his brother followed him. So he said that he was a messenger from Allaah but not a prophet. Look at the miguidance?! He had made a plan so that he could deceive the people: you know the clear hadiths, “There is no prophet after me …” but because of his ignorance it seems as though he did not picture there to be a hadith which says, “There is no messenger after me,” and that is why he claimed to be a messenger but not a prophet.
So I said to him, “You say you are a messenger …” and he said that Allaah revealed the Quraan to him afresh yet along with that he couldn’t even read it properly, making clear mistakes when reading it, reading a dammah in the place of a fathah and a fathah in the place of a dammah and so on.
Interjector: Had he memorised the Quraan?
Al-Albaani: No … only some aayahs. He brought a mushaf, and the mushaf has all the diacritical marks yet along with that he still made mistakes. So I said to him, “How can revelation have come down upon you … if we were to read the Quraan and make a mistake there would be nothing strange about that because it was not revealed to us afresh: [but] how can you make mistakes when reading it [since you claim it was revealed to you all over again]?”
I asked him some questions to uncover his ignorance and misguidance, saying, “What do you believe, are the messengers infallible or not?”
He said, “Infallible in some things and not others.”
I said, “Clarify.”
He said, “Infallible in their delivery of the message and not infallible in what is besides that.”
I said, “Do you have anything else you want to add?”
He said, “No.”
So I said, “So [according to what you just said], it is possible that they can steal, it is possible that they can fornicate and so on.”
Naturally, this was a strong doubt [I raised concerning his futile definition, a definition which, once this doubt was raised] he did not apply to himself, but instead, as was his habit, he fled from it.
I asked him [moving the argument along since he couldn’t answer the previous one], “So a messenger is infallible in delivering the message?”
He said, “Yes.”
I said, “Okay, but just an hour ago you [in fact] made it clear that you are not infallible: the Quraan has been sent down to you again [as you claim] but you couldn’t read it as it has been sent to you, afresh. So this is a proof that you are not infallible and following on from that, you are not a messenger as you claim.”
The debate continued like this between me and him until finally I said to him, “Is there a difference between a messenger and a prophet?” I wanted to see what the difference [in his eyes] was since he had confined himself to being a messenger and not a prophet.
He said, “There is a difference but no-one except Allaah knows it .”
I said, “Okay. You’re a messenger and not a prophet?”
He said, “Yes.”
So I said, “That is a proof that you know a messenger differs from a prophet: so how does this go with your statement that, ‘No-one knows the difference except Allaah?’”
In summary, the group of people present detected his misguidance and his ignorance of the Sharee’ah.
And subhaanallaah! His brother … in the end I admonished both of them, saying to his brother, “Fear Allaah. The least that can be said about your brother is that the issue has become obscure to him [such that he sees himself to be correct] and that he is a person imagining things and is deluded and so on. Don’t you see how he is asked questions but cannot answer them?”
And I challenged them, saying, “What do you know about the sharee’ah? Do you know how the Prophet used to pray? I challenge you now. Stand and pray.”
He said, “I don’t want to pray.”
… during the debate between me and him, this person, what was his name, Khaleel?
Interjector: Khaleel … Khaleel is his brother’s name.
Al-Albaani: When I was debating with the self-professed Mahdi, his brother would interrupt. [I would say to him], ‘Yaa akhi, this is not the way to debate. I’m speaking to your brother why are you interfering? If your brother allows you to speak I have no objection but I’m only one person and can only speak to either you or him …” because there was a chair here and there and his brother was next to me. “So I speak with him one time and the other with you … who am I supposed to talk to.” In order to defend his brother’s mistake [the claimant to prophethood] said, “I give him permission to speak.”
So I said, “Then we will leave you [i.e., the false Mahdi] now and speak to your brother. When we asked him [i.e., your brother, the false Mahdi] to get up and pray … who didn’t want to? [He didn’t], your brother, the ‘Mahdi.’ So we said okay.
[Now], you’re his brother–you stand and pray so we can see.’”
He said, “No. Not until he [my brother, the ‘Mahdi’] gives me permission.”
[I said], “He [already] has given you permission … didn’t he say that he gives you permission to say or do anything?”
In summary, their ignorance has blinded their hearts.
You know the [false] Mahdi whose name is Ghulaam Ahmad al-Qadiyani, he was a man who had knowledge, a complete Dajjaal with knowledge, but these miskeens are ignorant people who don’t know a thing from the Sharee’ah and don’t [even] know how to read the Quraan … they don’t know the language … they don’t know anything.”
Questioner: A questioner is asking whether the aayahs and hadiths that talk about Allaah’s Attributes are from the precise [muhkamaat] aayahs or hadiths] or the unspecific ones [mutashaabihaat, cf: Surah Aali-Imraan 3:7] … as the Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said …
Al-Albaani: From one angle, namely in that which is connected to the exact nature [i.e., the ‘how?’] of those Attributes, they are from the unspecific aayahs [al-mutashaabihaat, but] from the other angle they are not [regarded as being from the unspecific ones but rather are from the precise [muhkamaat] aayahs] in that they have a clear meaning.
As we just said now that the saying of the Salaf, ‘Pass them on/relay them as they have come,’ i.e., as they are understood in the Arabic language and we mentioned the example of [Imaam] Maalik about that previously too. So in this sense they are not from the unspecific [aayahs], i.e., in that they have a [linguistic] meaning well-known in the Arabic language.
But as regards the exact nature [of those Attributes they talk about] then they are regarded as being from the unspecific aayahs [mutashaabihaat], because it is not possible for us to know the exact nature [i.e., the ‘how?’] of Allaah’s Dhaat, and following on from that it is not possible for us to know the exact nature of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic’s, Attributes either.
For this reason some of the Imaams of Hadith, like Abu Bakr al-Khateeb [al-Baghdaadi], author of the well-known [encyclopaedia], ‘The History of Baghdaad,’ [said that] the same is said concerning the Attributes as is said concerning [Allaah’s] Esssence/Dhaat, both in negating and affirming, that which is said concerning the Esssence/Dhaat is said concerning the Attributes.
So just as we affirm [Allaah’s] Essence/Dhaat [i.e., His very existence] and we do not deny it–for such a denial is total and utter rejection [of Allaah]–then we say the same about [Allaah’s] Attributes: we affirm them and do not negate them, but just as we do not ask exactly ‘how?’ His Essence/Dhaat is [but still affirm it], then in the same way we do not ask ‘how?’ His Attributes are [but still affirm them].
Questioner: There are principles, O Shaikh, which some of the youth act upon, from these rules is, ‘Whoever does not declare a disbeliever to be a disbeliever then he is a disbeliever. Whoever does not declare an innovator to be an innovator then he is an innovator,’ and another rule, ‘Whoever is not with us, then he is against us.’
What is your opinion about these rules, O Shaikh?
Al-Albaani: And where have these rules come from?! And who laid them down?!
This reminds me of a joke that is told in my motherland, Albania, my father, may Allaah have mercy on him, related it in a sitting. In the story he said that a scholar visited a friend of his at his house and then when he left he declared his friend to be a disbeliever.
He was asked why …
In our country we have a custom, and I think it is [something] uniform in the countries of non-Arabs, they glorify and respect, and revere the scholars with some customs and habits which differ from country to country. From these is that when a scholar enters a house, visiting someone, upon leaving his shoes are supposed to be turned around so that the scholar will not have to burden himself by turning around—he should just find the shoes are ready for him to slide his feet into.
So when this scholar visited his friend and then went to leave he found that his shoes were just as he had left them, i.e., the host had not respected the Shaikh and had just left them as they were.
So ‘the scholar’ said that this is disbelief.
Why? Because the host had not respected the scholar, and the one who has not respected a scholar has not respected knowledge, and the one who does not respect knowledge does not respect the one who brought the knowledge—and the one who brought the knowledge is Muhammad عليه السلام and he carried on in this way until he got to Jibreel and then the Lord of the Worlds, and thus the host is a kaafir.
This question [of yours], this rule [you mentioned], reminded me of this fable!
It is not a condition at all that someone who has declared a person to be a disbeliever or has established the proof against someone, that [as a result of that] all of the people have to be with him in that judgement of takfir, because he [i.e., the person’s situation] may be open to interpretation and [thus] another scholar may hold that it is not permissible to declare that individual to be a disbeliever, and the same goes for declaring someone to be a faasiq or an innovator.
This reality is from the trials of the present day, and from the hastiness of some youth who falsely claim knowledge. So the point is that this chain [of deduction] or making this binding is not incumbent at all.
This is an open/expansive issue, one scholar may hold something to be obligatory and the other may hold that it is not. And the scholars of before and those who came later never differed except due to the fact that the door of ijtihaad does not make it incumbent on others to take his opinion, ‘that others have to take his opinion.’ It is only the blind-follower [muqallid] who has no knowledge who has to blindly-follow [yuqallid].
The scholar, who sees another declare an individual to be a disbeliever, or a faasiq or an innovator, but does not agree with his opinion—it is not incumbent upon him at all to follow that [other] scholar.
And this is a calamity which, inshaa Allaah, has not spread from your country to others?
Questioner: By Allaah, O Shaikh, it is present in our country, the issue of declaring people to be innovators and declaring them to be disbelievers.
Al-Albaani: As for the Jamaa’atut-Takfeer then it is well-known that it is a group that started in Egypt and their fitnah was here in Ammaan before I settled here, i.e., about fourteen years ago. But Allaah the Mighty and Majestic guided them and they became upright on the Sunnah with us. Likewise some of them came to Damascus before I came here, and they tried to spread the fitnah of declaring other people to be disbelievers there, but again, our Lord did not give them success and they returned empty-handed. As for this misguidance, it is still present in Egypt and I fear that some of it may have reached the students of knowledge, and Allaah’s Aid is sought.
Continuing from the same sitting mentioned in the last post.
Questioner: O Shaikh, a number of Yemeni brothers came to you asking you about a Jam’iyyah. There was some obscurity in their question … and he said that some of the people of such and such a charitable organisation [Jam’iyyah] are the students of Shaikh Muqbil and so on and so on even though Shaikh Muqbil has warned against them many times and has spoken against them harshly when warning against them, in fact, he freed himself from them and they greatly vilify Shaikh Muqbil.
In fact, in a cassette called, Hiwaarun Haadi ma’a Muqbil ibn Haadi, one of them said to him, ‘In my eyes you and al-Ghazali are the same,’ and this is a student of Shaikh Muqbil’s saying to him, ‘In my eyes you and al-Ghazali are the same. Al-Ghazali spoke against the Sunnah and you speak against the Sunnah in the name of defending the Sunnah.’
And one of them who is also a student of Shaikh Muqbil’s, but who is a disobedient student said to me, ‘The Ahlul-Hadith have harshness in them and a lack of worship, look at Shaikh Muqbil,’ and at the same time they praise the people of innovation.
I’m not talking about the people of innovation concerning whose innovation one may have a doubt–rather the innovators like the grave worshippers. There is a Sufi in Hadramaut who has every calamity in him, i.e., a grave worshipper, a mufawwid [someone who says we don’t know the meanings of Allaah’s Attributes], everything, so they go to him and study with him in fact some of them said, ‘The open heartedness of this Sufi is better than the intolerance of Muqbil.’ And this Sufi sends the children of those whom they call as-Saadah [Ed. Note: i.e., those who they claim are Haashimis whose family tree goes back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم] to Saqqaaf [the well-known Sufi who lives in Jordan].
And now Ali Hasan Abul-Harith told me that their numbers have reached forty, by Allaah, this news was like a bolt out of the blue … when he started to see the youth turning towards the Sunnah he took their kids and sent them here [to Jordan, to the Sufi Saqqaaf]. So these hizbis, those from these Jam’iyyah’s or the hizbis in general, these people, wallaahi, they try to make the people stop going, wallaahi, to Shaikh Muqbil while at the same time they praise these innovators and send their children here to Saqqaaf and others.
So what do you say about that, O Shaikh, and we have grown tired of them and they have bothered and disturbed us?
Al-Albaani: I say, you … may Allaah guide you. Why are you distressed/concerned about these people? We have no power, my brother, why do you concern yourself with these people? They are numerous, the whole world is full of them, falsehood is like this.
Questioner: Many people follow them.
Al-Albaani: Here from the aayahs which are relevant, “Then perhaps you would kill yourself through grief over them, [O Muhammad], if they do not believe in this message, [and] out of sorrow.”[Kahf 18:6]
My brother, take an instruction and lesson from the consolation the Lord of the Worlds gave to His Noble Prophet in this aayah, even though these people [mentioned in the aayah] were disbelievers, misguided people, polytheists and so on. Those people [who you mentioned], even though they are misguided, whatever the case they have not left the fold of Islaam and [have not left being] Muslims.
For this reason I am amazed, wallaahi, every time someone sees a person or people who he used to think were Salafi but who then deviated that they say this and that and this and that.
This saying [i.e., that the Sufis are tolerant whereas Shaih Muqbil, rahimahullaah, is harsh] emanates from two things: either ignorance or feigning ignorance, or both.
The Sufis are well known, for example, in Syria, so and so the Sufi will not reject [something but at the same time will not] fulfil its rights, he has a sweet tongue–because he does not order the good or forbid the evil, he will not love for the Sake of Allaah or hate for the Sake of Allaah. Whereas a person who is on the Path of the Salaf loves for the Sake of Allaah and hates for His Sake, he will at times speak softly and at other times will speak sternly, because this is the Sunnah of the Prophet عليه السلام.
The Sufi does not know sternness because the ahkaam of the sharee’ah do not concern him, what concerns him is attracting the hearts, what concerns him is that the people come forward to kiss his hand, nay, even both his hands at the same time. For this reason when these people say that [Shaikh] Muqbil is harsh but that Sufi is easy-going and soft they do so because of their ignorance or due to their purposefully ignoring [the truth] and because they are running behind that which will benefit them personally.
You said some Yemeni brothers came to me and then what was it [that you were reminding me of?]
Questioner: They wanted to obscure [the situation by using what you said in the wrong way] they said that …
Al-Albaani: What shall we do with them?
Questioner: I asked because, of course, many of the youth there listen to the statements of the Shaikh [i.e., Shaikh al-Albaani] so when they hear what you say, inshaa Allaah, the situation will become clear to them. I remember that in the fatwa, [there was a mention of the permissibility or not of] putting money in the bank, you don’t remember, O Shaikh?
Interjection: … they started forming groups, the tape is present.
Al-Albaani: O my brother, what can we do with them?
Questioner: Some scholars say that Jesus’ descent عليه السلام or that the hadith of the Anti-Christ [Al-Maseeh ad-Dajjaal] is weak and that it has no basis because Jesus عليه السلام… i.e., after a human passes away or was living on earth, he will not return again until the Day of Resurrection, he will not return to earth again, and the aayah they used as a proof is, “[Mention] when Allaah said, “O Jesus! Indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself …”Aali-Imraan 3:55 to the end of the aayah, so it means that his death has taken place, so how will he be able to descend after his death?
Al-Albaani: The answer, quite frankly, is that those who make such statements … and the onus is on the narrator, i.e., you are the narrator so the onus is on you, you are the one who is transmitting [what they said, i.e., the onus is on you to have asked the question correctly and thus the answer I give will be based upon what you asked].
So the quotes that you just transmitted are from people who are not scholars, why [are they not scholars]? Because where does a scholar take his knowledge from? “Allaah said … Allaah’s Messenger said …” okay, after, “Allaah said … Allaah’s Messenger said …” we have nothing except what the Salaf as-Saalih said.
How do we understand what Allaah said in His Book and what His Prophet said in his hadith? [We do so] according to what the Salaf as-Saalih were upon. And I will remind you of the aayah, “And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers–We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.”Nisaa 4:115
So now, this quote which you narrated to us from those people, is it, “… the way of the believers …” [as mentioned in the above aayah?] Is it the way of the Salaf? Is it the way of the four Imaams? Fourteen Imaams? Forty? As we mentioned, the scholars of the Muslims, maa shaa Allaah [are great in number].
I say: this is not the way of the believers, this is the way of one of two men:
Either an ignorant Muslim or a kaafir who is concealed amongst the Muslims and who tries to scheme against or corrupt the creed of the Muslims with philosophising like the type you mentioned.
And which is what? That Allaah said, “O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself …” … we say to this person: what does, “… indeed I will take you …” mean? Is the word al-Wafaah [which is the word used in the aayah] only used to mean death in the Arabic language? The answer is no, because al-Wafaah [death] comes with the meaning of sleep? True or not?
Questioner: True.
Al-Albaani: “And it is He who takes your souls by night and knows what you have committed by day. Then He revives you therein [i.e., by day] that a specified term may be fulfilled.” An’aam 6:60
Questioner: Allaah takes[Trans. note: same verb as the one used in the aayah mentioned in the question about Jesus] the souls at the time of their death, and those that do not die [He takes] during their sleep. Then He keeps those for which He has decreed death and releases the others for a specified term. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.” Zumar 39:42
Al-Albaani: Yes, the aayahs in the Noble Quraan explain each other. So the verb الوفاة/al-Wafaah [lit. death] does not mean death [here], and concerning this ayaah that which comes after, “… indeed I will take you …” explains it. Who is being addressed? Jesus. So let us, by way of explanation, say, “… indeed I will take you, O Jesus …” in soul and body, and [then Allaah said] , “… and raise you to Myself …” who is being addressed here? Jesus. Namely, [“I will raise you to Myself …”] [both] your soul and your body.
Like His Saying, the Most High, in Surah al-Israa which [brother] Abu Bakr mentioned just now, even though in doing so he was wrong [i.e., in a previous question], “Exalted is He Who took His Servant [i.e., Prophet Muhammad] by night from al-Masjid al-Haraam to al-Masjid al-Aqsaa …”Al-Israa 17:1 some of the tafsir scholars of the past and hadith scholars said that the Prophet’s Ascension was by his soul and not his body, but the people of knowledge refuted them, saying, [in the aayah] “Exalted is He Who took His Servant [i.e., Prophet Muhammad] by night from al-Masjid al-Haraam to al-Masjid al-Aqsaa …” the servant is in body and soul, likewise Jesus is body and soul, so He said, “… indeed I will take you …” i.e., I will take your body and soul and raise you up to Me, i.e., just as you are, with your body and your soul.
The clear Arabic tongue mentioned in unanimous [mutawaatir] hadiths from the Prophet عليه السلام supports this meaning, in some of those hadith he said, “Verily, Jesus the son of Mary will descend among you as a just judge. And so [he] will break the cross and kill the pigs, and wealth will become so abundant that no one will accept it. And a [single] prostration that day will be more beloved to a believer than the world and everything in it.”Bukhaari and Muslim.
So, the Prophet عليه السلام confirmed this raising which was mentioned in the previous aayah, “… and raise you to Myself …” and there is an ending [to this], which is that this revered individual who will be taken up [to Allaah] in both body and soul will then descend as a just ruler, break the Cross, kill the pigs and so on until the end of the hadith.
So Jesus عليه السلام is alive in Heaven.
He will descend to establish for these Christians who took him as a deity instead of Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, that he is a servant on one hand and that Muhammad عليه السلام is better than him on the other, since he will judge by his [i.e., Prophet Muhammad’s عليه السلام] sharee’ah and will be a part of his Ummah.
Such that in another authentic hadith there occurs that he said, “Jesus the son of Mary will descend by the white minaret in the eastern part of Damascus on the wings of two angels,” this is in Sahih Muslim in another hadith [it is mentioned that] when he descends at Fajr time, it will have been established for Muhammad the Mahdi [to lead it], Muhammad the son of Abdullaah al-Mahdi, well-known as The [Imaam] Mahdi, so the prayer would have been established for him to lead, but when he sees that Jesus عليه السلام has descended he will ask him to go forward to lead it, but Jesus will say, ‘No, an honour bestowed by Allaah on this Ummah.’ So Jesus the Prophet of the Christians and the Jews who disbelieved in him–will follow [Imaam] Mahdi in prayer, [Mahdi] who is a person from the Ummah of the Prophet صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ.
All of these hadiths are authentic.
For this reason, al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani and many others like him from those well-acquainted with the science of hadith say that the hadiths about the belief concerning the descent of Jesus عليه السلام at the end of time are unanimous [mutawaatir]. It is not the hadith of [only] one person which maybe authentic and maybe weak [no, it is unanimous].
Hadiths which have come from different paths of narration as you just heard now. Just now I quoted you three hadiths without straining myself [i.e., they are so well-known and numerous], you see, so if a person wanted to gather all of the hadiths [about this] for you … one time I gathered forty authentic hadiths [about it], some of the [hadiths of the] Companions have more than one path of narration … etc.
So how is it [then] said about this hadith, “It is weak.”
It [really] means that it is not possible that any hadith can be regarded as authentic by such people.
Questioner: What do you say, O Shaikh, about someone who says, ‘You do not ask for [Allaah’s] Mercy for those who opposed the Aqidah of the Salaf, like Al-Nawawi, Ibn Hajr, Ibn Hazm, Ibn al-Jawzi and others, and those from this day and age like Sayyid Qutb and Hasan al-Banna,’ bearing in mind that you know what Al-Banna [has written] in his Memoirs and [what] Sayyid Qutb has in [his book], ‘In the Shade of the Quraan?’
Al-Albaani: We believe that mercy, or to be more precise, asking for mercy is permissible for every Muslim and impermissible for every non-Muslim. So the answer depends on what the person believes–[i.e.,] whoever thinks that these people and those like them who were named in the question are Muslims then the answer is known from what has preceded: that it is permissible for a person to supplicate for mercy and forgiveness for them.
And whoever thinks, Allaah forbid, that these Muslims who were mentioned in the question are not Muslims then it is not permissible to ask for mercy for them, because [asking for] mercy has been forbidden for the unbelievers. This is the answer regarding what was asked in the question.
Questioner: Theysay this based upon [their assumption] that the manhaj of the Salaf was that they would not ask for mercy for the people of innovation, and following on from that they regard these people who were mentioned in the question as being from the people of innovation, so it is from this angle that they do not ask for Allaah’s Mercy for them.
Al-Albaani: We now made a statement, [that] asking for Allaah’s Mercy is permissible for every Muslim and not permissible for a non-Muslim, is this statement correct or not?
Questioner: It’s correct.
Al-Albaani: If it is correct then the second question is not valid, and if it is not correct then the discussion can continue.
Are not those, who some of these name as being from the people of innovations, prayed over? Is the prayer of the Muslims not performed over them?
And from the aqidah of the Salaf which the khalaf inherited from the Salaf is that prayer is performed behind every righteous or sinful [Imaam] and it is [also] performed over every righteous and sinful person, as for the non-Muslim, then he is not prayed over.
So, these people who I do not think the second question applies to, are they prayed over or are they not prayed over?
I do not want to get into a debate unless I am forced to, so if the answer is that they are prayed over the topic is over and no tenable position remains for the second question, and if not, then the discussion is open and possible.
Questioner: Okay, the person who says they shouldn’t be prayed over, O Shaikh, does so based upon [their assumption] that they are from the people of innovation, so what is the answer to that?
Al-Albaani: What is the proof?
Questioner: He uses the Salaf as proof, for example, he will differentiate between sins and immorality [on one hand] and the people of innovation who innovate into the religion [on the other]. And the Salaf never used to pray over the people of innovation nor sit with them nor eat or drink with them, so it is from this angle that he says this thing.
Al-Albaani: You have digressed, so pay attention. What was the question?
Questioner: About praying over them?
Al-Albaani: No. And [indeed] you had to have digressed because you gave a long answer that was misplaced. The question was, ‘What is the proof?’ You mentioned a claim, and a claim is not proof. Who is the one who says that the Muslim who innovates is not prayed over? What is the proof?
Questioner: He doesn’t have any proof except, just … only … that he uses the action of the Salaf as proof.
Al-Albaani: Are the actions of the Salaf proof?
Questioner: This is what he says.
Al-Albaani: Okay. Where is the proof?
Questioner: He doesn’t mention any, but the statements in this regard are always general.
Al-Albaani: Okay, the Salaf, wouldn’t the Salaf boycott people for committing a certain sin or for a certain innovation, does this then mean that they declared them to be disbelievers?
Questioner: No.
Al-Albaani: So they judged that he was [still] a Muslim.
Questioner: Of course.
Al-Albaani: Okay, we do not have a middle way between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, i.e., we do not have a station between two stations as the Mu’tazilah do. [A person is either] a Muslim and so is treated as a Muslim, or a disbeliever and is treated as such.
Thereafter, my brother, may Allaah bless you, these are just claims, that the Salaf would not pray over the generality of innovators, or over all innovators, this is just a claim which is present in the minds of some good people who …
Questioner: I have found, and I ask Allaah to forgive me and I hope that my feeling is misplaced, but I’ve started to notice that some of the students of knowledge, young people, who generally, alhamdulillaah, are good, but you will see that he has studied for four or five years, just having started [studying] the science of hadith and you find that he tries to build himself up by opposing so and so, for example, he will disagree with Al-Albaani [in hadith], or in fiqh he will even oppose Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baaz or Uthaimeen, so this is a phenomenon which I fear, O Shaikh.
Al-Albaani: We are men and they are men!
Questioner: In fact they did say that! But someone replied to them, O Shaikh, and said, ‘They [i.e., the scholars] are men, and you are a Dajjaal [imposter].’ Because one time the issue [being discussed] was about a Companion, the discussion reached the Companions, he said, ‘They are men and we are men.’ So he [the other person] replied, ‘No, they were men and you are a Dajjaal.’
Al-Albaani: Allaahu Akbar!
Questioner: So this is something noted, now for a few days I’ve been having a discussion with a student of knowledge, may Allaah reward him with good, who is attentive in this regard, so one of the brothers said to me, ‘But he opposes Al-Albaani or differs with Al-Albaani,’ so the issue … ‘… and so and so opposes Shaikh Ibn Baaz and so and so differs with Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen.’
Al-Albaani: The love of fame will break one’s back.
Questioner: I liked this statement of yours …
Al-Albaani: This is a blight on the students in this age except for those who Allaah has protected, and how few they are.
Questioner: Laa hawla wa laa quwwata illaa billaah.
Al-Albaani: Allaah’s aid is sought, Allaah’s aid is sought.
Questioner: There are some youth in Holland and elsewhere, Salafis alhamdulillaah, we do not doubt their creed but they say vile things about some of the scholars, especially the scholars of the Hijaaz. They say, ‘We don’t trust them because some of them flatter taaghuts [evil leaders]’ is this correct, O Shaikh?
Al-Albaani: From what I myself hear directly and from those things I hear through others, like you just told me now, it appears to me that those who speak against the scholars and charge them with flattering taaghuts [evil leaders], [it appears to me that] these people who accuse the scholars of the present day are, without doubt, from the youth.
And we, in turn, cannot think ill of them, i.e., of their intent–but we do suspect their knowledge. So firstly, the shallowness of their knowledge and their scant acquaintance with correct Islamic fiqh and [secondly] with Islamic manners which the Muslim youth should have been brought and raised up on, it is this, with regret, which the present day and age’s generation of youth has been deprived of.
It is true that there now is an Islamic, as they say, awakening. But I say, firstly, that this awakening is in its early stages, it has not even reached half way yet, let alone its end. Secondly, that this awakening is an ideological and knowledge-based one which has not been accompanied by an awakening in manners.
For this reason we advise these youths to apply themselves eagerly to seeking knowledge and to do so sincerely for Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, firstly. And that they rectify/discipline themselves and teach themselves Islamic manners.
And if they do that, they will withhold their tongues from speaking ill of people in general, let alone speaking about the honour of the scholars who are the elite of this Ummah.
Questioner: In the talks of the brother Kamaal, he described the Salafis as having harshness and not being kind, so I don’t know, do you think … that this feature is the one most common, the Saved Sect inshaa Allaah they are the strangers, or is it a characteristic of some people and what is your advice regarding this issue?
Al-Albaani: By Allaah my brother, I believe that there is a basis for this accusation but that it is exaggerated. We cannot free ourselves from faults such as this but I also think that the opponents of the da’wah exaggerate its extent.
And there are reasons for that some of which are from the nature of the jamaa’ah [itself], and some of them are from the nature of its opponents. If there is a jamaa’ah ordering the good and forbidding the evil from the generality of Muslims then it is this group.
For this reason when they urge the enjoining of good and forbiddance of evil it appears to those other people who are overly lenient in upholding this obligation [themselves] that there is harshness and extremism is in it.
For this reason the oppressive international disbelieving media calls these [so called] extremists, ‘fundamentalists’, because they are distinct from the others due to the fact that they are very eager for their Islaam and their religion to be a judge on earth, so this is what is connected to the reality of these strangers or the people of creed or the saved sect.
Another thing which may be a fault in them or some of them and no group or jamaa’ah is free of this, is that at times harshness may emanate from them which should not do so, but then this is exaggerated and then all who follow this correct methodology become included in it, and thus the matter moves from reality to imagination.
So for these two reasons, one of which is connected to the reality of these people who uphold this obligation which others do not uphold except the very few who are rare, and the other which is connected to their opponents who are not happy with this methodology which they tread upon especially when they are trying to tackle issues which those other [overly-lenient] people regard as secondary issues, this is what they call it [i.e., ‘secondary’ issues] when they are being soft, for otherwise they have called it [by names such as] ‘trivial’ and they say it is a cause for disunity … and so on …
So this is what I see to be an answer to your question.
The video is of this post and the next one in the serious, number 4:
Al-Albaani: There are two types of boycotting in Islaam. Boycotting … a Muslim boycotting his Muslim brother is [regarded as being] of two types in the Legislation of Allaah.
The first: Is that he boycotts him due purely to a worldly matter, and it is not important whether this matter is something material or not [related to individual taste]–it is purely worldly.
This [type of] boycotting is forbidden in Islaam.
In situations such as it, there is an allowance of [not speaking for] three days only. So if it continues for more than three days, it is forbidden [haraam]. And that is his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام, ‘It is not allowed for a Muslim to boycott his brother for more than three. They meet and so this one turns away from that one, and that one from this. And the best of them is the one who initiates giving the salutation to his brother.’
[His saying] ‘More than three,’ i.e., more than three days, its meaning is that it is permissible for three days, an allowance from Allaah the Blessed and Most High, for His believing servants to vent their anger … by boycotting his brother Muslim for a day, two days, three–any more than that is forbidden [haraam]and not allowed. For this reason the Prophet عليه السلام described this boycotting by saying, ‘It is not allowed for a Muslim to boycott his brother for more than three days.’
[And he said], ‘They both meet …’ i.e., one is going, the other is coming, but instead of one giving salaam to the other and the other person replying, ‘…this one turns away from that one, and that one from this …’ i.e., he ignores his brother who just passed by him. This action is not permissible after three days.
‘…And the best of them is the one who initiates giving the salutation to his brother.’ This last sentence from the hadith gives us two things:
The first: that this forbidden boycotting will cease just by the mere giving of salaam. And this is a very beautiful policy legislated by the Sharee’ah.
Because it is difficult to bring together hearts which have boycotted and hate each other all at once. But the All-Wise Legislator [i.e, Allaah] presented us with an easy key, which is that when you have a dispute with your brother regarding a worldly matter and it continues for more than three days, then it is forbidden [haraam] for you [to continue boycotting], and it is upon you to break the boycott, and to stop the separation/exodus [from one another].
And it is not necessary for you to go to his house–that would be something good, something beautiful, and that you apologise to him, but this requires extremely strong eemaan–and this is rarely found among the people.
Thus the All-Wise Legislator made the way to ending this boycotting and separation easy: when you meet him in the street you give him salaam, [saying], ‘As-Salaamu alaikum,’ and thus the sin would be lifted. This is taken from his saying, ‘… And the best of them is the one who initiates giving the salutation to his brother.’
There is no doubt that the better of the two is the one who gives the salaam first. So this person who gave the salaam first has moved from the level of committing a forbidden act to the level of entering into the way of Islaam, through [showing] his brotherhood for his Muslim brother.
The other person without doubt is also someone who has turned away and abandoned his brother, this other person to whom the salaamwas given by the first … this [second] person who returns the salaam has committed a sin, and that [person who gave the salaam first] has been saved from the sin. The best of the two is the one who gives the salaam first.
So when the sin of abandoning and boycotting ceases to exist by giving the salaam, then this is usually the first step to meeting again, even if [that second meeting is] only through giving salaam, then maybe a handshake [will follow] which is regarded as one of the strongest reasons in attaining forgiveness from Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, since the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام said, ‘No two Muslims meet and shake hands except that their sins fall away just like leaves fall off a tree in autumn.’
You know how in autumn a tree’s leaves turn yellow and fall away, and you hear a sound when they fall, the sins of two Muslims who meet and shake hands fall off just like that, their sins fall off just as leaves fall off a tree in autumn.
This is when the boycotting is related to worldly matters, whether material or abstract [but worldly nevertheless].
The second type of abandoning and boycotting is when …
Questioner: Regarding an individual who boycotts [others] … if a person [the boycotted] came to him [the boycotter] and extended his hand to him [offering to shake hands] and tried to speak with him and the other person [the boycotter] refused, what should he do?
Al-Albaani: If that’s true then it is as though you’re feeding him hot ashes, i.e., it is as though you are throwing ash in his eyes: so you do what is obligatory upon you and don’t care.
Questioner: How many times should I repeat this?
Al-Albaani: Every time you do it, the reward will be multiplied for you, and the sin will become more severe upon him.
Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 25.
Questioner: What are the reasons which permit one to boycott another Muslim? And when it becomes permissible, what are the limits [of this] boycotting and cutting off as regards time?
Al-Albaani: Without doubt,the reasons which permit the boycotting of a Muslim are his persistence on committing forbidden acts which he knows are forbidden in Islaam. So when he persists in that, then boycotting and cutting off from him is permissible.
As for the second part of the question?
Questioner: Continuing from the first part of the same question, I say: is boycotting the people of innovation from the same category?
Al-Albaani: From the same category. This requires a clarification as I alluded to earlier.
Questioner: That he knows.
Al-Albaani: Yes.
Questioner: So what are the limits regarding [this] boycotting, cutting off and the time limit?
Al-Albaani: The limits are clear that if the persistent, disobedient Muslim sinner [faasiq], the criminal [faajir], continues upon his disobedience to his Lord, then the boycotting and cutting off persists until he repents to Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. And if he turns back we turn back to him, and return to interacting/communicating with him as our Lord, the Blessed and Most High, ordered us to. The length of time, therefore, is in the hands of the one who is being boycotted. It is within his hands to lengthen it and it is in his hands to shorten it.
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.
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.
This is the last post from the lecture. Now what’s the point of reading this and not helping to spread it? Forward the PDF to whoever you can, here it is: Ascendancy
Al-Albaani: At this moment we are in a house [of Allaah, i.e., a mosque], a place that is from the most excellent of places as occurs in the Saheeh [where it is mentioned] that the Prophet of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم was asked about the best and worst of places, so he said that the best places are the mosques and the worst are the marketplaces.
In the marketplace there are places that are even worse than the market [itself], like the lavatories for example, so the marketplace is from the worst of places as you just heard, and even worse than it are the lavatories, in some markets there are bars, pubs, brothels and so on.
Is Allaah the Mighty and Majestic in these places in His Essence [based upon the aayah], ‘… and He is with you wherever you are?’
Never!
Rather He is above His Throne as Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak said—but He is with you in His Knowledge, no secret is hidden from Him in the earth or the heavens.
So let not the intending meaning of this aayah be difficult for anyone to understand: Allaah’s [Dhaat] Essence, Allaah’s [Dhaat] Essence is free of all creation, ‘Allaah was and nothing was with Him.’
So, ‘… and He is with you wherever you are …’ He is with you wherever you are in His Knowledge.
No person says, ‘By Allaah, I’m [here] between the four walls [of this place], so there is a veil between me and my Lord such that He cannot see me,’ no, no one says this except an unbeliever who denies the existence of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic.
The same is said about aayahs like, ‘…Indeed, I am with you both. I hear and I see.’[Taa Haa 20:46]
The last part of this aayah explains its first part, and its first part the last, ‘… Indeed, I am with you both. I hear and I see.’ This sentence is an explanation of His Saying, the Most High, ‘… Indeed, I am with you both …’ how? ‘I hear and I see.’
So He was with them when He sent them to Pharaoh and ordered them to remind him [of Allaah] and to make him fear [Allaah]. Allaah said to them, ‘Fear not. Indeed, I am with you both. I hear and I see.’
So this sentence, ‘… I hear and I see,’ is an explanation of His Saying, the Most High, ‘… Indeed, I am with you both,’
He is not there [Himself] as someone who would lead an army would be, or present as the head of an army would be–no, it is not like that–Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, is free and in no need of the world. He regulates the universe from the heavens to the earth while having ascended and being above The Throne, as He, the Most High, has stated.
[Allaah’s Knowledge is All-Encompassing. He has complete, total and perfect Knowledge of what was, what is, and what will be, but He is not everywhere]
The Shaikh was questioned about what many people say, that Allaah is everywhere or present in all things, so he answered:
This is manifest misguidance, [in opposition] to the clear text of the Quraan that, ‘The Most Gracious rose over the [Mighty] Throne [in a manner that suits His Majesty],’ [Taa Haa 20:5] and His Saying, the Most High, ‘Glorify the Name of your Lord, the Most High,’ [Al-A’laa 87:1] and He described His believing servants as those who, ‘… fear their Lord above them, and they do what they are commanded,’[An-Nahl 16:50] [and], ‘The angels and the Spirit [Jibreel] ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years,’ [Al-Ma’aarij 70:4] [and], ‘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].
Many aayahs and hadiths which clarify that Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, does not stand in need of any of the worlds, that He is above all of His Creation, that He is not commixed with His Creation as these people who I pointed to say–[those who say] that Allaah is everywhere, Allaah is everywhere–exalted is He and high above what the oppressors say by great sublimity.
In an authentic hadith [there occurs], ‘Allaah was and nothing was with Him,’ where is the place which [He is supposedly] gathered in as these people who claim that He is everywhere say? Especially when amongst these places are those which are clean, and those which are vile and filthy, [like] bathrooms, bars, pubs, brothels and so on.
How can they not declare Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, to be far above being everywhere even though He has said in more than one aayah that He rose over the [Mighty] Throne?
And in an authentic hadith [there occurs] that the Prophet عليه السلام asked a slave girl whose owner wanted to free her, ‘Where is Allaah?’ She replied, ‘Above the Heavens.’ He then asked her, ‘Who am I?’ She said, ‘You are the Messenger of Allaah.’ So he turned to her master and said, ‘Free her for she is a believer.’
The slave girl in the time of the Prophet has more fiqh than the faqihs of today, because if you were to ask many of them where Allaah is, they would reply, ‘Everywhere.’
A neighbour of mine says that Allaah is present in all things–these people are miskeens.
That which is present is created. Allaah was and there was nothing created. So after our Lord created the creation did He become part of it [bearing in mind] all the rubbish that it contains?! [Never]. Exalted is He and high above what the oppressors say by great sublimity.
Al-Albani: A woman who was also teaching at the university [asked me] … a doctor was arguing with her about the topic of Allaah’s Ascendancy over the Throne. The doctor said [that such a belief] was a mistake and that Allaah is everywhere.
Interjection: May Allaah guide him.
Al-Albani: By Allaah! A disbeliever would not even accept this belief, and this is something I have experience of.
One time I was travelling in Syria from Aleppo to Idlib, and from Idlib on to Latakia, westwards. One of our brothers, Abdur-Rahmaan Shilbi, was with us, [so] we went to Latakia from Idlib.
You know that the Europeans have a particular way of asking for a free car ride … the ones who get in to cars for free, what do they do?
Interjection: They call it, ‘Stop.’ [i.e., hitching a ride].
Al-Albani: I don’t know. A person [lit. beggar] stands on the road asking for a ride. [So] I’m going in my car and my companion is sitting next to me, naturally we were going slightly fast, or very fast [even], I don’t know … the important thing is that after we had travelled some distance I heard [i.e., was told] that there was a man who had raised his thumb so we stopped and looked in the [rear view] mirror. And indeed [there was, so I said], ‘What do you think, Abdur-Rahmaan, let’s take him with us, the car’s empty.’
The point is that we went back and found that the man was an American and his wife was standing … but she wasn’t in plain view, [she was standing] to the side, so when we stopped the car he signalled to her [to come]. So I said to [our brother] Abdur-Rahmaan, ‘We’ll cover the distance [on the journey] with them,’ after we came to know that they were foreigners.
They both got in and we left. My companion [Abdur-Rahmaan] speaks English as for me, I do not. My Albanian is enough for me.
I said to him, ‘Ask them where they’re from …,’ until we go to the point [where I told him to ask them], ‘What is your belief in Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic?’ The American replied, ‘He’s everywhere,’ this is [also] the aqidah of the doctor [at the university]. How strange that the belief of a non-Muslim American … [in fact] it’s not strange.
I said to Adbur-Rahmaan, ‘Say this to him, say that to him …,’ so he’s translating until we got to the crux of the matter. [After explaining the correct Islamic belief to him], the American said, ‘By God, this makes sense. It makes sense that God is above all creation.’
Because Allaah existed when there was no creation, no time, no place, [so] how can it be said that Allaah is everywhere.
The Egyptian doctors still don’t understand this creed and teach the students that He is everywhere; in Azhar University, an Azhari will come and debate with you [about this issue] and then above that will declare you to be misguided because you say, ‘The Most Gracious rose over the [Mighty] Throne [in a manner that suits His Majesty].’ [Taa Haa 20:5]
Questioner: The trial which is more severe than that of Dajjaal … is it after or before Dajjaal?
Al-Albani: There is no trial greater than that of Dajjaal according to the clear text of the hadith, ‘From the time of the creation of Aadam to the Hour, there is no trial more harmful than the trial of Al-Maseeh ad-Dajjaal.’
Questioner: There is nothing more harmful than it?
Questioner: In the hadith of the Prophet’s Ascent to the Heavens, when the prayer was prescribed upon him صلى الله عليه وسلم and Moosaa عليه السلام asked him to go back [and ask for the number of prayers to be reduced] … how [exactly] was it?
Al-Albani: There is no ‘how’ in the matters of the Unseen, may Allaah bless you!
Regarding the matters of the Unseen, take [the following] as the principle and relax: there is no ‘how’ in the matters of the Unseen. People other than you twist and turn [this way and that], and go on at length but in the end they conclude with this word which you just said now, ‘How?’
There is no, ‘How?’ in the matters of the Unseen.
There is only total and complete faith, without [the question], ‘How?’
Because that world is metaphysical [lit. ‘… behind or beyond matter …’] as they say today, that which is beyond the intellect … our physical world cannot be compared to it and vice versa.
Questioner: Recitation of the Quraan reaches the dead?
Al-Albani: If the one reciting the Quraan is the child of the one who has passed away, whether it is the father or mother, then this recitation will benefit.
As for other than the children then their recitation will not benefit [anyone] other than their [own] parents as we just mentioned.
Thus the wife is excluded [from this category]–but [at the same time] there is no doubt that you, as a wife who has been afflicted with the demise of her husband … [there is no doubt that] it is within your capability to supplicate for him: [that] if he was someone who would do good, that our Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, increases his good deeds; and if he was someone who erred, that our Lord overlook his sins.
Always remember him with good and supplicate for him.
As for you reciting [the Quraan] and sending the reward for that recitation to the husband, then it is over, his actions have come to an end as I stated in the aforementioned hadith, the conclusion of which was, “… except for three: recurring charity, knowledge that others benefit by, or a righteous son who supplicates for him.”
Question: O Shaikh,is it allowed to send the reward for reciting the Quraan [to a dead person]? Some people use what you said in your commentary on the Explanation of Al-Aqidah al-Tahaawiyyah as a proof in this regard, that you hold it to be permissible …
Al-Albani: I do not say, my brother, that it is permitted unrestrictedly. [Rather] I say that the earnings of the child … as he عليه السلام said, “The best earnings are those which a man receives through his own work. And your children are from your earnings.” And the Most High said, “And We record that which they send before and their traces …”[Yaa Seen 36:12]
And he عليه الصلاة السلام said in an authentic hadith, “When a person dies …” and in another narration, “When the son of Aadam dies, his actions are cut off except for three: recurring charity, or knowledge that others benefit by, or a righteous son who supplicates for him.”
So this righteous son, his righteous actions will benefit his parents, because he is a trace that they have left behind, “And We record that which they send before and their traces …”
And I do not say that this recitation will benefit other than the parents or that any righteous action [which he does] will benefit other than his parents.
And maybe you will recall that some of the past scholars say that charity given by a person on behalf of some of the Muslims will reach them even if they are not his parents. In this situation we specify that it will [only] reach the parents. So the charity a son gives will reach the parents, and every righteous action [he/she does] like freeing a slave and other acts of worship in general will reach the parents due to the generality of the proofs I just mentioned.
As for other than the parents benefitting from this charity and these acts of worship, part of which is recitation of the Quraan, then we do not hold this generality.
For this reason it is fitting that such a statement be looked at again so that something we did not say is not attributed to us.
We only hold this limited restriction to be correct.
Question: The soul of the dead, does it come [back] and recognise what we do, in our houses for example?
Al-Albani: Never. These are superstitions which are present in the minds of some people. When a person dies his connection to the world is totally cut off. Namely, if a nuclear bomb were sent down, and you have heard about [how powerful] one of them [is], [such as the one] the Americans sent down on Japan … if hundreds of nuclear bombs were sent down on this planet the dead would not feel it whatsoever, “When a person dies, his actions are cut off except for three things …” And our Lord said in the Noble Quraan, “But you cannot make hear those in the graves.”[Faatir 35:22].
The dead do not hear, so do not believe any of these stories.
Al-Albani: It is obligatory upon every Muslim, as an act of worship firstly, and secondly as a means of [medically] treating oneself, to seek refuge with Allaah the Mighty and Majestic with those words authentically reported from the Prophet عليه السلام, [which are] that he either say:
Bismillāhilladhi lā Yaḍurru Ma’asmihī shai’un fil-Arḍi wa
lā fis-Samā’i wahuwas-Samī’ul-Alīm
I take refuge in Allaah’s Perfect Words from the evil He has created.
For then nothing will harm him that day. Imaam Ahmad reported this hadith in his Musnad as did the authors of the Sunan in their [respective] collections by way of Abaan ibn Uthmaan ibn Affaan.
Uthmaan ibn Affaan is more famous than a fire on a mountain top [Trans. note: an Arabic proverb to show how famous and well-known something is. As part of their generosity, Arabs would light a fire on the top of a mountain so that any prospective guests could see it from far away, and so come and eat from their food. Such a fire would be seen easily by everyone and would thus be very famous], one of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, the third one. His son, Abaan, is from the trustworthy taabi’een and one of the great preservers of hadith [huffaaz] amongst them.
One time he was sitting in a gathering when he narrated this hadith [i.e., that whoever says the above will not be harmed that day] and one of the people present looked at him in a certain way. Abaan understood what he meant. For the hand of this muhaddith, Abaan, was paralysed. So [like I said] Abaan understood what the person who looked at him in that particular way meant [i.e., you’re relating this hadith but what happened to your hand then?].
So Abaan said to him, ‘O my son …’ and the meaning of what he said was, ‘… when the Decree comes nothing else can avail against it, I forgot to seek refuge with Allaah with this supplication that day, so I was afflicted with this paralysis.’
Someone present: Laa ilaaha illallaah.
Al-Albani: For this reason it is befitting that the Muslim makes it his practice and principle [to say these supplications so that] it is not possible for him to forget [them] just as it would be impossible for him to forget to drink or eat if he was in dire need of food or water. In such a way he should be eager to say such supplications of refuge.
But when that which [is written in the Decree] occurs, then none besides Allah can avert it.
One or two brothers have started taking articles from the blog and converting them into YouTube videos so that those who want to listen to the Shaikh and read the article at the same time can do so. May Allaah reward them with good for helping to spread the Sunnah. I’ll be listing all the articles that have been converted under the new, “YouTube Videos” category, some have been added already. Scroll to the end of the articles to see them.
Questioner: An Imaam of a mosque claims that the Prophet of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم knows the Unseen, so is it permissible to pray behind him?
Al-Albani: The texts of the Quraan regarding this topic are explicit in stating that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم does not know the Unseen, as occurs in His Saying, the Most High, “If I had the knowledge of the Unseen [Ghaib], I should have secured for myself an abundance of wealth, and no evil should have touched me.”[Al-A’raaf 7:188]
And likewise, the hadiths reported in this regard confirm this meaning. Such as the hadith in Sahih Bukhari that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم passed by a little girl who was singing [lines of elegiac poetry] and was saying, ‘Among us is a Prophet who knows what will happen tomorrow.’ So he صلى الله عليه وسلم said, ‘Leave this (saying) for none knows the Unseen except Allaah and carry on saying the like of what you had been saying before,’ i.e., the permissible things.
So when that Imaam is informed [about this issue] but still insists on his misguidance, then it is not allowed to pray behind him, yes.
Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, no. 19.
Here’s the video a brother made of this post, jazaahullaahu khairaa:
Questioner: Our teacher,the punishment in the grave, is it [constant] up until the Day of Judgement or does it cease? And what is the proof for that?
Al-Albani: In the Noble Quran, our Lord said about Pharaoh and his people, “The Fire, they are exposed to it, morning and afternoon.”[Ghaafir 40:46]. This is in relation to most of the people, Pharaoh and his people, who took a deity [to worship] other than Allaah. As for the others then there is no doubt that the disobedient sinners [faasiq] from the Muslims, their punishment will be less than that. As for details of between how long and how long [the punishment will last for], then this is not mentioned in the Sunnah.
Al-Huda wan-Noor, no. 9.
Here’s the video a brother made of this post, jazaahullaahu khairaa:
Questioner: He said in the Musnad … the hadith of Hudhaifah, who said, “We were with the Prophet of Allaah, صلى الله عليه وسلم, during a funeral. So when we got to the grave he sat down on his two shins and started to look at it, and then said, ‘The believer is squeezed in it one time such that his ‘hamaa’il’ are crushed, and the disbeliever is covered in Fire.'”
He said the hamaa’il are the veins of the testicles. What does, “… the veins of his testicles are crushed …” mean?
Al-Albani: It’s an expression to show the severity of the punishment. [The compiler of the book said, ‘I.e, his ribs are crushed to such an extent that it affects his testicles.’]
Questioner: Namely, the believer will be squeezed to such an extent?
Al-Albani: And his ribs will overlap, no one will escape it, not even Sa’d ibn Mu’aadh [did] as he, عليه السلام, said in some authentic hadtihs.
Questioner: Namely, he will feel pain from this squeezing?
Al-Albani: … without doubt. When the ribs overlap then this is severe pain, but it does not persist. One squeezing and then everything returns to its natural state, if he was a righteous person then [he will be in the state of a] righteous person, and if he was an evil person then [he will be the state of an] evil person, as we just explained that a window is opened up in the grave for the dead person.
Questioner: Namely, the squeezing, there is no escape from it?
Al-Albani: There is no escape from it.
Mawsoo’atul-Allaamah, al-Imaam, Mujaddidil-Asr, Muhammad Naasirid-Deen al-Albaani, of Shaikh Shady Noaman, vol. 9, pp. 159-160.
Here’s the video a brother made of this post, jazaahullaahu khairaa:
Questioner: Regarding the jinn, there are two questions regarding them, the first is about seeking assistance from them. It is known that amongst the jinn there are disbelievers, sinners [faasiq] and Muslims.
Al-Albani: Yes, by Allaah.
Questioner: So is it permissible for a Muslim, if he is able to, or some things happen [as a result of which] it becomes clear to him that the jinn, for example, is a Muslim, and so he seeks his assistance in some worldly affairs. So is it permissible for a Muslim to use this jinn …, in the same way that I seek the assistance of a human Muslim brother?
Al-Albani: When you mentioned seeking assistance from the Muslim jinn, how do you know he is a Muslim?
Questioner: He says so!
Al-Albani: He says so?
Questioner: Yes.
Al-Albani: And you do not know him [he is unknown].
Questioner: Yes.
Al-Albani: And you do not know him [he is unknown].
Questioner: Yes. Unknown because I do not know him.
Al-Albani: So how do you judge with the testimony of someone unknown?
Questioner: And he, namely, in reality, he is just like one of the brothers.
Al-Albani: No I am asking you, if there were a brother next to you, how do you know if he is a Muslim and a righteous one if you do not know him?
Questioner: I don’t know.
Al-Albani: Thus, the question from its general, initial, onset was wrong. Is it permissible to seek assistance from the jinn or not? The answer is no.
As for categorising the jinn then it can be [done] in two ways. Dividing them in terms of there being amongst them those who are righteous and those who are sinners, believers and disbelievers. This is correct, “There are among us some that are righteous, and some the contrary; we are groups each having a different way.” [Jinn 72:11]. This is from the angle of there being an unseen reality, something which we do not see.
As for dividing the jinn in terms of their relation to us humans/mankind, then such a division is lost on us. We cannot say, “So and so who speaks to us is a Muslim jinn, or a non-Muslim jinn, or a righteous Muslim jinn … no, we cannot make apparent such judgements. Because this is a judgement about something which is behind–as they say today–nature, i.e., in sharee’ah terminology, the Unseen. We do not know the Unseen.
And at the same time as it not being something legislated, believing someone who is unknown and from the Unseen, is also stupidity. Because if a person who you do not know at all were to come to you and say, ‘I am a trustworthy Muslim. And I want to share with you [in something].’ You would not agree to it, because you don’t know him. So then it is even more fitting that you do not accept the testimony of someone who is behind a wall who says, ‘I am a good, righteous Muslim. And I am going to interact with you from behind this wall based upon the fact that the religion is sincerity.’
Questioner: Yes.
Al-Albani: Would a person accept such a dealing?
Questioner: No.
Al-Albani: So what do you think about [someone] behind a wall, behind all matter [i.e., someone from the Unseen].
Thus, the correct question is: is it permissible to interact with the Jinn at all?’ The answer is that it is not allowed at all.
The only thing that is allowed in that which is connected to Jinn and mankind is that if one were pretty sure that there is a person who has been possessed by a Jinn, then some aayahs can be recited on him, and [the Jinn] can be warned through such recitation … this is what has been established in the Sunnah.
As for the Quraan then it warns us against seeking the assistance of the Jinn [this having been quoted] from the believing Jinns [themselves] who came to the Prophet عليه السلام and believed in him. They spoke about their situation such as saying, ‘And verily, there were men among mankind who took shelter with the masculine among the jinns, but they (jinns) increased them (mankind) in sin and disbelief,’ [Jinn 72:6] i.e., … in misguidance.
Because of this it is not allowed to seek the assistance of the Jinn. This is the answer to the question. End of Shaikh al-Albaani’s words.
I’ve seen some of the translations that have been put up on the blog have been taken and made into YouTube videos. I happened to chance by some of them. I don’t mind anyone taking such an initiative since I had been hoping someone could do it, may Allaah reward you guys well, whoever you are. At the same time I’d like it if you could send me a link to inform me of such videos. If they’re done well, I can then put up a link to them on the blog here. Shukran.
Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, Tape no. 704, starts at 3 minutes and 50 seconds approximately.
Mawsoo’atul-Allaamah, al-Imaam, Mujaddidil-Asr, Muhammad Naasirid-Deen al-Albaani, of Shaikh Shady Noaman, vol. 3, pp. 1053-1055.
The Albaani Site 