The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century
April 18, 2012

When Can You Exclude Someone from Ahlus-Sunnah or Call Him an Innovator? | 1 | Someone Who Sincerely Seeks the Truth But Then is Mistaken, Even in Aqidah or Usool, is Excused and Receives One Reward


This sitting was concluded on the 22nd of Dhul-Qa’dah 1413 which corresponds to 12th May 1993.

Questioner: All praise is due to Allaah, Lord of the Worlds, and may prayers and peace be upon the Messenger of Allaah, his family, Companions and whoever followed him in good until the Day of Judgement.

Your eminence, Shaikh, may Allaah reward you with good. I have some issues which I and others from the people of Medinah have found to be problematic, if you could please and with thanks from us, may Allaah reward you with good, give us an answer, in the detail that we [have come to] expect from you.

From these issues is [the question]: when is a person emitted from Ahlus-Sunnah? Is it when he believes as creed something different to their creed? And when he does fall into things which oppose the Ahlus-Sunnah, is it allowed to declare him to be an innovator straight away or after establishing the proof against him? And if it is not easy to establish the proof against him, either due to the death of that person or because of it being such a long time ago, or because it is [just] not possible to meet him in order to establish the proof against him [what do we do?].

So advise us [of the answer], and we thank you [for that].

Al-Albaani: Your question, may Allaah bless you, contains many [different] questions. If you would split between one question and the next, or put the paper in front of me so I can give you the answers to these parts which make up that one question.

Questioner: Okay, O Shaikh, I will repeat it point by point.

Al-Albaani: Point by point.

Questioner: Okay.

Al-Albaani: The first question?

Questioner: The first question: when is a person emitted from Ahlus-Sunnah, is it when he believes a creed other than their creed or when he falls into a few things which oppose their creed?

Al-Albaani: Yes. I say, and I ask Allaah the Mighty and Majestic for success in being correct in what I say:

It has become common amongst the scholars of the past and those of today that when a Muslim makes a mistake in what the scholars call the subsidiary issues [furoo] he is excused, but that if he makes a mistake in the fundamentals [usool], in aqidah, he is not—we believe that, firstly, this differentiation does not have any proof in the Legislation, and that secondly, it is obligatory upon a Muslim to, always and forever, seek to know the truth in that which the people have differed, whether that is connected to the fundamentals or the subsidiary issues or in aqidah or in the ahkaam.

So if he expends all his effort to come to know the truth in that which the people have differed and is correct then he has two rewards and if he is mistaken then he has one, as is well-known from the hadith of the Prophet reported in the Sahih, “If a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards.  And if he makes a mistake he will have one,” this is the basis/foundation.

Secondly, if a Muslim was eager in wanting to know the truth yet made a mistake, even if it is in aqidah or the fundamentals, then, firstly, he is not held to account for that—rather he is rewarded one time for his mistake, and secondly, due to what was previously mentioned [just above].

This is confirmed by the saying of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم which occurs in the Saheeh from the hadith of Hudhaifah ibn al-Yamaan and other noble Companions, [where they reported] that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said, “Amongst the people preceding your age, there was a man who had never done any good. While he was on his death-bed, he called his sons and said, ‘What type of father have I been to you?’ They replied, ‘You have been a good father.’ He said, ‘I have sinned against my Lord and if Allaah has power over me, He will punish me severely. So when I die, burn me and scatter half of the resulting ashes in the sea and half in the wind.’ His sons did accordingly, but Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said, ‘Be so and so,’ and so he became a fully formed man. Then He said to him, ‘What made you do so?’ He replied, ‘Fear of you.’ So Allaah said, ‘I have forgiven you.’”

So Allaah the Mighty and Majestic forgave this person even though he had fallen into disbelief and shirk, [and he fell into this disbelief and shirk] through this will of his, which may not, amongst all of the wills that we have known or come across, have an equivalent in terms of its injustice and oppression. [But] Allaah did not take him to account, in fact He forgave him, because He knew that he didn’t leave that unjust will except out of [his] fear of Him.

Thus, the Muslim … [and] now comes the summary of the answer … when a Muslim seeks Allaah the Mighty and Majestic’s Face in all that he holds as religion before Him and takes as creed concerning Him, but then misses the truth, then there is no doubt that Allaah the Mighty and Majestic will forgive his mistake—in fact he will be rewarded for it one time.

This is what we hold as religion before Allaah and this is the fatwa we give–always and forever.

And the summary of that is: that it [i.e., believing otherwise] is in opposition to the foundation and principle that Allaah does not hold a person to be accountable for what he is mistaken in but only for that which he wilfully intended, and secondly, due to [the reasons given when explaining] this authentic hadith [mentioned above].

What’s next?

Questioner: Next is that the Shaikh of Islaam [Ibn Taymiyyah] may Allaah have mercy on him, mentioned in [his book], Al-Iqtidaa, he mentioned that a man may be rewarded for his presence at the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday or for an innovation depending on his purpose and intention, what do you say about that?

Al-Albaani: This is not a question … this wasn’t read out just now, you read a question which included many others.

Questioner: Yes …

Al-Albaani:So maybe you have taken a leap like that of a gazelle!

Questioner: Yes, I leapt.

Al-Albaani: Why did you jump?

Someone else: Go back to the first.

Questioner: Shall we go back to the first?

Al-Albaani: We said that your first question was composed of [many different] questions, so just now you repeated the first part of it and I gave you the answer, because you based many questions upon the first which was whether he leaves the Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah …

Questioner: Okay.

Al-Albaani: Yes?

Questioner: Now … would you like me to …

Al-Albaani: Ya’ni, there are things you jumped over …

Questioner: Yes, O Shaikh.

Al-Albaani: I don’t know, maybe if you are not in need of them then that is up to you, but I feel as though you are in need of the rest of the answers.

Questioner: Yes, we said, ‘When is a man …

3 Comments
April 18, 2012

The Elite of the Elite from the People of Knowledge are The Ones who can Deal Justly Between Two Disputants Those Students of Knowledge or Common Muslims Less Than Them Should Stay Out of It


Questioner: What do you advise us with Shaikh, what do you advise concerning this issue, i.e., [that] some of the brothers abroad regard books like these … they do not examine them closely, books will come out and they’ll start looking at the title only, and [then] they’ll try to judge some of their brothers from the title alone, without close examination. So what is your advice in terms of [explaining the correct] da’wah and in terms of help and so on, may Allaah bless you.

Al-Albaani: I think that along with the answer for the previous question, it is possible for us to get an answer for this one.

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Now, without doubt, we are living through a very big problem. Where, in recent times, disunity between the groups that affiliate themselves to the Book and the Sunnah has surfaced. So, from one angle, we advise the students of knowledge and especially the general masses of Muslims not to raise their heads towards such differences as these and from the other that they not be with one group against another.

Because firstly, it is not easy, ever, to distinguish what is correct from an error or the truth from falsehood. And secondly, and this is very important, not every person can judge with justice and fairness and stand by His Saying, the 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]

Carrying out justice between two disputants, especially when a person’s desire is with one of the two, is very, very difficult. And from the authentic Sunnah we know that when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم sent Ali as a judge to Yemen he said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah! You’re sending me to a people and I do not know how to judge?’ So he عليه السلام struck his chest and said to him, ‘Do not judge between two people until you have heard from both of them.’

Actualising this text in such differences which you referred to [in your question] and a part of which I have [already] explained, achieving justice, in fact, actualising the truth before justice—none except the most elite of the elite from the people of knowledge are capable of it.

Because they are the ones who have the capability to familiarise themselves with what these [disputants] say and what those others say and then compare the statement of this [group of people] with that, and then extract the correct from the two statements.

And sometimes there may be no [actual] difference between the two parties or statements except for, as the scholars say concerning some matters of dispute, that it is a, ‘Difference in wording.’

No one can do this except for a few individuals from the elite.

And [yet] there are people from the elite who cannot judge with justice–he knows where the truth is concerning the two parties, [he knows] whether there is a difference between them or not, [but still even] if there is a difference between them, the truth may be with the side which he does not feel affection for—and so he swerves away from justice, and for this reason He, the Most High, said, “… and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just–that is nearer to righteousness.”

For this reason, we advise the students of knowledge, let alone those less than them, not to delve into [such matters] in this way, and that they not take a stance except for the truth that they know before this problem occurs or before these differences appear.

Questioner: May Allaah bless you.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 674.

1 Comment
April 17, 2012

Al-Albaani on Distancing Ourselves From Disgusting Bigotry and Offensive Harshness


Questioner: O Shaikh, may Allaah bless you! Regarding the youth that Allaah has blessed with the Salafi Da’wah, and those who have united on the fundamentals, but when they differ regarding some of the subsidiary issues you find that they have enmity in that? And likewise what is your advice regarding the youth whether it be those who associate themselves with the other Islamic calls or those who have associated [themselves] with the Salafi call and who stage protests and call out their slogans, is this from the methodology of the Salaf or not?

Al-Albaani: As for the students of knowledge who study the two fundamentals, i.e., Usoolul-Hadith and Usoolul-Fiqh, then these people have to implement the subsidiary affairs according to the usool [they have learnt], and they must not blindly-follow anyone from Allaah’s creation but should benefit from each scholar of the Salaf who were on the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the Companions and those who followed them in good, this is my advice to the students of knowledge.

From another angle it is obligatory that we distance ourselves from [this] disgusting bigotry and offensive harshness and that we do not become enemies … that we do not have enmity towards each other because of hizbiyyah and [because of] gathering [the people] or affiliation to one of the groups, and it is fitting that we advise each other and show each other love/affection.

And that when we see some people are far from the Book and the Sunnah in practice even if in affiliation, verbally, they have taken as methodology the Book and the Sunnah, if we see that in action they are far away from that then it is upon us to be gentle with them and to call them to be with us in implementing what we all verbally affiliate ourselves to, that we [practically] make it the methodology of our lives, calling them as He the Most High said, “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” [An-Nahl 16:125]

As for shouting out slogans, [a method] which some of the groups adopt, then in reality this, as has preceded in the previous repudiation of it, was something not present in all [previous] generations–I don’t just say [that it was not present] amongst the Salaf as-Saalih only who are our proof and our example, but that in fact such slogans were not present in the generations that came after them.

We have copied such shouting slogans from the Westerners and the disbelievers and the polytheists who do not have a methodology that was sent down by Allaah the Blessed and Most High, so every day they are upon innovation, rather misguidance.

So it is upon the Muslims to emulate what the Salaf as-Saalih alone were upon and not to increase upon that in any way.

These protests remind me of another custom of some people: when they enter a gathering and those in it are sitting and the person who enters is able to [go around, there being room, and] shake hands with each person, then [what they do is that] every time he gives salaam to one person he follows it up with another for the next person, and so on until he finishes shaking hands with all of them, this also is an innovation, an additional innovation [bid’ah idaafiyyah].

Because the Sunnah is that when a Muslim enters a gathering he gives salaam one time, [saying], ‘As-Salaamu alaikum … [or] As-Salaamu alaikum wa Rahmatullaah … [or] As-Salaamu alaikum wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuhu …’ and [then] if he is able to shake their hands then doing so is a sunnah due to the saying of some of the Companions, ‘We never met Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم except that we shook hands.’

And there is another hadith in Sunan at-Tirmidhee, I will mention it because of its total connection to this topic so that we can kill two birds with one stone, meaning it’s connected to what we are talking about, its chain of narration is weak, and it is, ‘From the completion of the greeting is to shake hands.’ So when a person enters, the Sunnah is that he gives salaam one time and then if it is possible for him to shake hands with those present then that is better, and better because of the authentic hadith which I just mentioned now concerning his action in that regard عليه السلام [i.e., the first hadith mentioned about the Companions above].

And for this reason, the weak hadith … regarding weak hadith like this one it is possible to say that it can be acted upon in relation to the excellence of performing certain actions [fadaa’ilul-a’maal], and this is a very fine and sensitive point which many of those who hold that weak hadith can be used regarding the excellence of performing certain actions are unmindful of.

Because in reality by the statement that, ‘It is permissible to act upon a weak hadith regarding the excellence of performing certain actions,’ they mean that it is permissible to establish the legitimacy and excellence of an action in the Sharee’ah through a weak hadith–and no scholar says this, for it is to make something part of the Sharee’ah through a weak hadith.

And the scholars are united, except some of the ones who came later who have taken an anomalous stance, like some of the Ghumaaris and their likes who said that it is permissible to establish a legislated ruling with weak hadiths, and they thought that the Imaams–and this is a lie and fabrication against them–established rulings with weak hadiths. 

And these people were heedless of or wilfully ignored this … Allaah knows best as to what their intentions were … because some of the Imaams may establish a ruling without any hadith at all but instead based upon deductive analogy [qiyaas], and putting aside whether such qiyaas was correct or not, that being another issue, it is not allowed for us to say that they established legislative rulings with weak hadiths.

So if the ones who say that it is permissible to act upon a weak hadith regarding the excellence of performing certain actions [means] to legislate actions which have an excellence in the Sharee’ah with a weak hadith–then no scholar says this.

But if they mean that it is permissible to act upon a weak hadith regarding the excellence of performing certain actions which have already been established in the Sharee’ah with a proof which is qualified to be used as a proof in the Sharee’ah, and then they came with a weak hadith which established a [type of] excellence for this [action] already established by an authentic hadith, then there is no objection to that, and this example has [already] come to you [i.e., the one about shaking the hands].

‘We never met except that we shook hands,’ [which is an authentic narration, and then], ‘From the completion of the greeting is to shake hands,’ [which is weak].

So when he met them there is no doubt that he would give them salaam and then shake hands. So from the greeting’s perfection is to shake hands, so there is no harm in shaking hands as a completion of the greeting–but we do not establish this through a weak hadith, we do so through all of the hadiths regarding the obligation of giving salaam, and I mean what I say … ‘the obligation’ of giving salaam, and not just that it is a sunnah, because the Prophet said, ‘When you meet him then give him salaam,’ so when the Prophet met his Companions he for sure gave salaam to them and [this is also shown through] this hadith which we mentioned, that, ‘We never met except that we shook hands.’

Thus, it has been established from both of these hadiths at the very least that shaking hands is from the completion of the legislated greeting, and so if a hadith like this comes along and we mention it whilst making its weakness clear then there is no harm in that, and it is a good example of the permissibility of acting upon a weak hadith concerning the excellence of certain actions which have [already] been established not through a weak hadith but an authentic one.

This is what comes to me as an answer to the previous question.

Questioner: … also as a caution … for the youth …

Al-Albaani: Please go ahead …

Liqaa’aat al-Madinah, 3.

Leave a comment
April 17, 2012

Shaikh Al-Albaani on Shaikh Rabee’s Book on Sayyid Qutb’s Mistakes


Shaikh al-Albaani said about Shaikh Rabee’s book in which he explains the mistakes of Sayyid Qutb, “Everything that you have refuted Sayyid Qutb with is true and correct, and from that it will become clear to every Muslim reader who has some Islamic heritage that Sayyid Qutb was not acquainted with the fundamentals and subsidiary issues of Islaam.   So may Allaah reward you with the best of rewards, O brother Rabee, for fulfilling the obligation of clarifying and uncovering his ignorance and his deviation from Islaam.”

This book of Shaikh Rabee’s can be downloaded here.

 

2 Comments
April 17, 2012

Emotional Youth Slandering Shaikhs



Questioner: Shaikh, that which is connected to this topic is that many of the youth slander the Shaikhs.

Al-Albaani: Correct.

Questioner: So what is your advice to these people?

Al-Albaani: Our brothers have already heard the answer to questions like this one, and it is that it is not permissible for these youth to defame/malign the people of knowledge who have a sure precedence of honour in knowledge due to, in the opinion of these youth, these scholars having made a mistake—bearing in mind that when these youth accuse those scholars of having made a mistake it is not based upon knowledge but rather emotions.

And so if the fatwa of such and such a scholar impresses them, on the other side you will find those who are zealous for the scholars who differ from that scholar, in fact, they [i.e., those youth on the other side] will also take the same stance in relation to the Shaikh whose fatwa and opinion they are impressed with [and so on].

For this reason we advise the youth not to meddle in such issues and not to slander, or speak evil of, or find fault with the scholars who they think have made a mistake.

It has reached us that some of them have reached the level where they passed the judgement of disbelief, and refuge is sought with Allaah, on some of the scholars who we respect, regard as being great and honour totally.

The reason for all of this is that the people, whether they are right or wrong, set off, as we just said, based upon emotions and not knowledge or reasoning, but rather upon ungovernable emotions—these people will be fanatical for such and such a fatwa and those others will be fanatical for a different fatwa which opposes the first and so on, and that is a cause to increase the burning amongst the people and the differing amongst the Muslims.

For this reason, we rebuke these youth even if, for example, they hold the same opinion as us [in a certain issue] from slandering the other scholars who have their own opinions and ijtihaad.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 511.

2 Comments
April 16, 2012

Being Bigoted or Fanatical About One Person or Shaikh is A Violation of the Testimony that, ‘Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah.’


 

 

Questioner: The fourth question: there are some people who are bigoted/fanatical about some Shaikhs, what do you say to them?

Al-Albaani: There is no doubt that it is not allowed for a Muslim to show bigotry/fanatacism for any person in the world except our Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم because he is the one who was sent as a mercy and guide for the worlds and he is the only one عليه الصلاة والسلام who we have been ordered to take as an excellent example to be followed.

And all of the scholars whose knowledge we benefit from, we only do so not because of them themselves or their persons but only because they are the guides who show us the light and guidance that our Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم was upon.

So when a Muslim becomes bigoted for one of the Shaikhs, whether he is alive or dead, then the meaning of that is that he has forgotten the message of the Prophet عليه السلام and he has [instead] stuck/clung to this person who it is not allowed to couple with the Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم in knowledge or manners or perfection—so there is nothing strange when I say that verily, a Muslim’s bigotry for one person or Shaikh is indeed a breach/violation on his part of his testimony that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah.

For this reason, when I explain the testimony that Allaah is One, having no partner, and that Muhammad is His Slave and Messenger I say that indeed the first [part of the] testimony necessitates that a Muslim not worship anything else with Allaah for if he does then it is pure shirk, and that likewise, regarding the second testimony, [i.e.,] that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah, His Slave and Messenger—[I say that] whoever in this life takes an example or model to follow other than Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم as many of the bigots today do [then it is a breach/violation of this part of the testimony].

As is the madhhab of the Sufis who take their Shaikhs as examples and some of them have gone to extremes and laid out this major misguidance [I’m about to mention] for their followers: that they do not take another example to follow along with the Shaikh, so they said without any embarrassment or shame, ‘The example of the follower [mureed] who has two Shaikhs is like a woman who has two husbands.’ And so they enslaved the followers, making them their slaves such that we used to hear from some of them that they would not carry out any of their worldly affairs except after consulting with his Shaikh.

They have taken [the] Shaikhs as examples to be followed more than the Messenger’s Companions صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم—and that is [shown] because the Prophet’s Companions صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم used to ask him عليه السلام about things connected to their religion relating to selling, buying, business transactions, [as for whether] they should go [here or there], should they travel or not, [then] no, they were free, because from the completion of the Prophet’s call صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, and [the completion of] his conveyance of his Lord’s Sharee’ah was that he said to them, ‘Whatever I have ordered you to do concerning your religion then do as much of it as you can, and whatever I have ordered you with concerning your worldly affairs, then you know better about your worldly affairs. ’

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم clarified to his Companions that he had not come to teach them about their worldly affairs, or about their striving and travel through the lands in search of sustenance, but on the contrary that he had come to teach them the acts of obedience and worship and avoidance of forbidden things which they could fear Allaah the Blessed and Most High with.

As for the Shaikhs of the Sufis, they have enslaved their followers [mureeds] completely and made them believe that they must consult with them in every issue related to their worldly affairs let alone their religious ones.

There were people we knew by name who would not get married except according to the Shaikh’s opinion, [people] who would not travel except under his counsel: if he told him to travel he would, if he told him not to, he wouldn’t—an enslavement which overtook any enslavement done by the disbelievers, however big. Because the disbelievers enslave the people from a monetary angle, as for these people, they do so from a psychological angle–and so they are more subservient than [normal] slaves are with their masters.

And I will tell you a story in which there is a lesson for whoever wants to take heed. One of the Shaikhs in a mosque in one of the most famous markets in Damascus, Syria, I don’t recall the name of the mosque right now, [it] was in the middle of the marketplace, maybe later its name will come to me, [the Shaikh there] mentioned the following story.

A Shaikh of a Sufi Path [Tariqah] said to his follower one day, ‘Go and bring me your father’s head.’ So he did, coming to the Shaikh happy and joyful at having carried out his order. Then the Shaikh but smiled at him, laughing, and said, ‘You think you really killed your father?’ He said, ‘Of course.’ To which he replied, ‘I’m [really] going to tell you to kill your father? I only ordered you to kill that man because he was your mother’s boyfriend. As for your father, he is absent, travelling.’

He related this story and the people were sitting down listening mesmerised as though they were under a spell. No one said a statement [like], ‘How is it possible to say this? The Shaikh tells his follower to go and kill his father and he carries out the order …’ no one said a word.

So he relates this story and then bases a legislative ruling upon it, saying, ‘From here we learn that when a Shaikh orders his follower with a ruling which apparently opposes the Legislation it is obligatory to obey him. Why? Because the Shaikh sees what the follower does not. Don’t you see in the story how he ordered the follower to kill his father but later it became clear to him that he was in fact his mother’s boyfriend, and based upon this, if one of you were to see a cross hanging on the Shaikh’s neck, it is not permissible for him to be reprimanded,’ because the Shaikh sees what the follower does not.

The lesson was concluded and in those days we used to pray taraweeh in a mosque that was upon the Sunnah and we would gather in a shop where I would repair watches, we would get together there every night in Ramadaan. A young man from our brothers came to me and told me the story, he had been present at the sitting [where it was told].

And [then] for a wisdom which Allaah wanted, a person passed by the shop who was a relative of [this] friend of mine. So he [i.e., the first youth who came to the shop and who was a friend of the Shaikh] went after him and called him saying, ‘O Abu Yusuf! Come here!’ So he came in and he [i.e., the first youth] opened up the topic about the Shaikh and his follower with him, [saying], ‘What do you think, Abu Yusuf, about today’s lesson?’

[These Sufis are] miskeens, he replied, ‘Maa shaa Allaah! …’ saying [in reply] such things which are normal over there [amongst such people]. So he [i.e., the first youth] started to debate with him, ‘How can the Shaikh order for him to kill his father?’ He replied, ‘You people reject the miracles [karaamaat] of the Allies of Allaah.’ He said some things until finally I entered the discussion with him … it’s a long story … if you were to explain an aayah or a hadith to a wall and it understands you, then that guy would’ve understood, he didn’t understand anything we said.

Finally I said to myself, let me touch a sensitive spot with this person who is not conscious of the Speech of Allaah nor a hadith of His Messenger, touch on a sensitive spot as they say nowadays, so I said—and here is the point of this story, ‘O Abu Yusuf! Let us be frank and open with each other. If your Shaikh ordered you to slaughter your father, would you?’

What do you think a person who has an atom’s weight of intellect or faith would say apart from, ‘I seek refuge with Allaah! No!’ [But] he didn’t say that, he said, ‘I haven’t reached that level yet.’

Look what they have done to these people, they have really made their intellects fizzle out, they have influenced their minds such that they cannot differentiate between the haraam and the halaal anymore, [or between] what is permissible and what is not.

In fact, they have reached that level where … he acknowledged that he hopes to reach that level where if the Shaikh told him to, ‘Kill your father,’ he would do it. When he [i.e., Abu Yusuf] said to me, ‘I haven’t reached that level yet,’ I said to him in the Syrian tongue, ‘Inshaa Allaah, you never will! You never will reach that level.’ [You can find another post where the Shaikh mentions this story and refutes the falsehood it contains in further detail here.]

So look at how breaching/violating the [testimony] that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah, sincerity in following him alone and not associating partners with him in following him, [lead to] the people falling into shirk and misguidance because they committed shirk in following the Prophet of Allaah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم by following someone else along with him.

For this reason, it is not allowed for someone in this world who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to take one Shaikh no matter how lofty and exalted he is, no matter how much of a scholar or how righteous and so on he thinks him to be, but rather he should be like a bee, which visits all the trees and flowers, taking from its stomach the honey which has been testified as being a cure for mankind.

This is how it is fitting for a Muslim to be, he takes from every scholar the knowledge that he has as the scholars of the Salaf, may Allaah be pleased with them, were, for in the biographies of many of the scholars they wrote that they had hundreds of Shaikhs, for example, they mentioned that Abu Hanifah, may Allaah have mercy on him, had a thousand Shaikhs, and it doesn’t concern/worry me whether this narration is authentic in its chain and riwaayah, but this [i.e., such a thing as someone having so many Shaikhs] was present.

For in the book, Ar-Rawdan-Nadhir fee Tarteeb wa Takhreej Mu’jam at-Tabaraani as-Sagheer … his method in it … and this method has [great] skill … in it is ingenuity … to memorise the names of his Shaikhs he arranged their names in alphabetical order, alif, baa … the letters of the alphabet, and he reported one hadith from each one of these Shaikhs, how many were his Shaikhs in number?

More than a thousand, this is recorded in his book called, Mu’jam at-Tabaraani as-Sagheer, more than a thousand Shaikhs, from each Shaikh mentioned in this book he reported one hadith only, he wanted to gather and memorise the names of his Shaikhs.

He has three books: Mu’jam at-Tabaraani as-Sagheer, Mu’jam at-Tabaraani al-Awsat and Mu’jam at-Tabaraani al-Kabeer. The first and second employ the same method where he arranged the names of the Shaikhs [in alphabetical order], but the second [does] differ from the first in that in it he mentions more than one hadith for one Shaikh, as for the first, he only mentions one hadith … so he has more than one thousand Shaikhs.

This is how the scholars of the past were, because in reality each scholar is set apart from another in terms of knowledge, or manners, or deen, or righteousness and so on.

As for Al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, the third one, then his method in it completely differs from the first and second books, and the summary of that is that it is done according to the method of the Musnad collections, those of you who know the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad and that of at-Tayaalisi and those Musnads like them which have now begun to become apparent in the printed world [will know what I mean in terms of the method employed].

So he arranged the Mu’jam at-Tabaraani al-Kabeer according to the names of the Companions, he started with the ten who were given the glad-tidings of Paradise and then he started with alif, baa, [mentioning, for example] Ubayy ibn Ka’b [whose name begins with an alif] and so on, and he mentions many hadith there for each Companion and all of their hadith cannot be taken in [due to their numerousness] … and in this much there is sufficiency, and all praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds.

Fataawaa Raabigh, 5.

2 Comments
April 15, 2012

Worshipping Personalities, Fanaticism Towards or Against a Particular Personality, Turning Away from Knowledge and Memorising the Quraan and Becoming Known for Saying, ‘‘This person is an innovator … this person is misguided … this person has such and such an issue …this one has this and that … and this one praises the people of innovation … and this one says such and such …’ | End |


Continuing from the second post.

Al-Albaani: In order to guard unity and stand united he عليه السلام said, as is reported in Sahih Bukhari regarding the Imaams who lead the people in prayer, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”  [Bukhaari, no. 694] so, O common Muslim who does not enter the category of scholars who have been mentioned in His Saying, the Most High, “So ask the people of the message …” [Nahl 16:43] these people are the scholars, so you, the group of Muslims who do not know, i.e., those who are not from “the people of the message,” it is obligatory upon you to ask the people of the message and it is not obligatory upon you to be fanatical/take sides for an individual from these scholars except for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم who has been described by Allaah the Mighty and Majestic in truth, “Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed.” [Najm 53:3-4]

On this occasion it is fitting that we remember that we cannot claim infallibility for any caller or any scholar and nor is it possible for us to claim that he is free from following his own desires even if only in one issue–for this reason, do not, O Muslim, tie your fate to an individual from the scholars or an individual from the callers, and this is for two reasons:

The first is that it is unequivocally guaranteed that everyone apart from the Prophet عليه السلام will make mistakes. And secondly that it is possible that he [i.e., the scholar or caller] may have come to know the truth but [instead] followed his desires and so gave a verdict in opposition to the truth and knowledge that he knows.

For this reason it is not allowed for the general Muslims to be fanatical/bigoted for one caller [daa’i] against another, rather the situation is as He, the Most High, said in the Noble Quraan and with this statement I will end the answer to this question, “… and be with those who are true …” [Tawbah 9:119]

Just as we say regarding the four Imaams, that we do not show fanaticism for one of them but rather take the truth from each of them, and the truth was spread out amongst them [i.e., not one of them had a monopoly on it], likewise it is fitting that everyone who attributes himself to following the Salaf as-Saalih does not to become a ‘Zaidi’ or an ‘Umari’ [i.e., does not become someone following someone called Zaid or Umar] but he should rather take the truth wherever he finds it and whoever it comes from.

This is how it is fitting for the general masses of Muslims to be, and we ask Allaah for guidance for us and [all] the generality of Muslims, and all praise is for Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds.

Questioner: Shaikh, here … may Allaah protect you … please allow me, of course …

Al-Albaani: Please go ahead.

Questioner: So that I can, inshaa Allaahu tabaaraka wa ta’aala, remove the ignorance from my brothers in this issue, he’s saying that some of the examples you mentioned about Allaah’s Messenger’s Companions صلى الله عليه وسلم like Umar and Uthmaan, may Allaah be pleased with them, were fiqh issues and not those related to manhaj, as for praising the people of innovation or inciting or provoking the people against the rulers and other issues, then it is obligatory to warn against it, so this differs from that, there is a difference between these issues, so [how do you] answer it, O Shaikh … the issue … and he makes the issue the thing he talks about all the time, and I’ll give you a live example, may Allaah bless you.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: Shaikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Baaz’s fatwa came regarding a question about the tapes of Salmaan and Safar and so on and that benefit is taken from them if they have material which is knowledge based and that as for the mistakes then everyone’s statements are taken and rejected except for the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم …

Al-Albaani: Okay.

Questioner: … so one of the brothers spoke and read this fatwa … it was put to him in a dars so he read the fatwa and after reading it said yes and then increased on that with a specific statement saying that we take these mistakes and put them in a tape, namely, we warn against the statements which are present but we do not warn against the men and slander the people [themselves] but rather we warn against the statements that are present, the mistakes, and take the good that is in them if there is good in them …

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: … after this a lot of the youth said, ‘How can he read this fatwa in front of an assembly of people, this is a proof of praising such people and listening to their tapes,’ and so on and then they started warning against that person [who read out the fatwa], it reached such an extent, in fact [it reached the extent where] they called into question/maligned this man’s [practise of] religion. Subhaanallaah, besides whom none has the right to be worshipped.

Someone else: This is Shaikh Ibn Baaz [they started talking about?]

Questioner: No. He [the person who read out Shaikh Ibn Baaz’s fatwa] said, ‘By Allaah, I didn’t read out the fatwa of anyone but that venerable scholar … when I read this fatwa it was in order to calm these people down … that one of the scholars of the Ummah has spoken about this issue …’ for the issue came from Shaikh Naasir, or Shaikh Ibn Baaz or Ibn Uthaimeen–these people are the Imaams of the Dunyaa, so he was saying, ‘[He read it] in order to calm the situation down …’ but, laa hawla wa laa quwwata illa billaah, they started to stir up the matter and it became a problem having no end.

Al-Albaani: At any rate, Yaa Ustaadhi, now the issue is not a knowledge-based one, it is one of manners, it is an issue to do with manners. And just now I pointed out that desires may enter the situation.

The termination of this issue from a knowledge based angle is [done] as I just said at the end of the previous statements [I made]: that just as we are not bigoted for any one of the four Imaams, who were people upon whose knowledge and excellence and fear of their Lord there is unanimity, and that they would not say anything except after they were satisfied that it was correct even though they could make mistakes as we said, so we advise these people [you are asking about] not to become fanatical/bigoted for people who are insignificant in relation to those exemplary Imaams, and [we advise] that they take what is correct from any person from whom it emanates.

Curing desires is one of the most difficult things, for this reason we order them to fear Allaah the Mighty and Majestic and not to hate and be averse to one another, which [is something] we have been forbidden from in the Book of Allaah and in the hadith of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.

So [unlike] a mistake [which] is pointed out by the Book and the Sunnah, bad manners and bad upbringing are not cured by a statement, a reminder or advice … when a person knows the truth and turns away from it … he knows that a certain person is not infallible but still is bigoted for him and he knows that another person is like the first [i.e., also not infallible] but is bigoted against him, then there is no cure for this except for that person to fear Allaah the Mighty and Majestic.

And this is what has been facilitated for us [as an answer].

Someone: As-Salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi

Al-Albaani: Wa alaikum salaam wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu. Subhaanakallaahumma wa bihamdika, Ashhadu an laa ilaaha illaa anta, astaghfiruka wa atubu ilaik.

End.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 799.

1 Comment
April 14, 2012

Worshipping Personalities, Fanaticism Towards or Against a Particular Personality, Turning Away from Knowledge and Memorising the Quraan and Becoming Known for Saying, ‘‘This person is an innovator … this person is misguided … this person has such and such an issue … this one has this and that … and this one praises the people of innovation … and this one says such and such …’ | 2 |


 

Continuing from the first post …

For this reason, before everything we advise these people who have differed and who were the cause of the youth around them splitting into two factions or more, we advise these people who are at odds with each other in some issues, and I praise Allaah that this difference, in my opinion, is not a difference in aqidah but in some issues which maybe we can call, in the terminology of those who came later, subsidiary issues not fundamentals or the core of the matter–so if the scholars differ then it is not fitting that those people around them split due to the division of the scholars, because the issue is as he عليه الصلاة والسلام said, “If a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards.  And if he makes a mistake he will have one.”

So we advise these scholars or callers who have differed not to discriminate/be prejudiced against each other and to deal with each based upon his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام, ‘Beware of suspicion, for truly, suspicion is the most false of speech.’

So if some person, [let’s say he’s called] Zaid, makes a mistake then it is upon us to clarify his mistake to him in the best manner and not the worst, and all of those who differ [should] tread this path, because we all claim that we are Salafis, i.e., that we follow the guidance, manhaj and behaviour the Salaf as-Saalih were upon.  And we know that they did differ in many issues but this difference [of opinion] was never a cause for them to split or for them to treat each other as enemies.

There are some statements which have been authentically reported from some of the Salaf as-Saalih which if today someone were to mistakenly adopt because it has no angle from which it is correct, a great furore would arise against him, but such a huge furore did not arise against that Companion who, in a certain opinion or ruling, parted with an anomalous stance from the ruling which the other [Companions] had adopted: Umar ibn al-Khattaab, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, used to prohibit performing the tamattu type of Hajj and after him Uthmaan ibn Affaan, may Allaah be pleased with him, followed him in this prohibition.  When Uthmaan performed Hajj during his caliphate he also prohibited the pilgrims from performing the tamattu type of Hajj. 

So Ali ibn Abi Taalib, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, stood in his face, an individual from the Ummah, and he would be the Khalifah after him, [he stood in his face and] said to him, ‘Why do you prohibit something which we did in the time of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم! [And then he announced the talbiyyah for the tamattu type of Hajj] Here I am, O Allaah, performing Umrah with Hajj!’

That person [i.e., Uthmaan] was prohibiting performing the Umrah with Hajj [called Hajj tamattu] and this person [i.e., Ali ibn Abi Taalib] is declaring [his intention to do it] in his face, [saying] that the Sunnah is like this–despite that the people did not split around them, on the contrary they continued to respect each one’s opinion, and they [i.e., the people] may have leaned towards the Khalifah’s opinion [more than the other], because he was the Khalifah of the Muslims etc., [but] why [did the [people not split?]

Because when a dispute breaks out between the scholars it is fitting that it remains confined to them and that the dispute’s infection is not transmitted to the population, because the people do not have the composure, the impregnability and the mind to prevent them from going to extremes in the dispute.

Similarly, Uthmaan ibn Affaan used to hold the opinion that if a man has intercourse with his wife but does not emit any semen then it is enough for him to perform wudoo instead of ghusl, although this contradicts the authentic, clear hadith, ‘When the circumcised part meets the circumcised part ghusl becomes obligatory whether there is ejaculation or not,’ despite this, no fitnah and no discord occurred between him and, for example, Aaishah who is the one who narrated the hadith opposing Uthmaan’s statement, may Allaah be pleased with him.

There are many examples, and even stranger than all of this, and the intent [here] is just to give an example and to bring [what I am trying to convey] closer, is that Umar al-Khattaab used to forbid the traveller who could not find any water from performing tayammum, [saying that] he should carry on as he is without praying until he comes across some water, even though the aayah is clear in its apparent meaning, “… and find no water, then seek clean earth …” [Nisaa 4:43]

And it reached Umar ibn al-Khattab that Abu Musa al-Ash’ari used to give a verdict based upon the apparent meaning of the aayah: that when a traveller does not find water he performs tayammum, so Umar sent for him and said, ‘It has reached me that you say such and such?’ He said, ‘Yes, O Chief of the Believers! Don’t you remember that we were on a journey and we became junub [i.e., entered a state of ritual impurity], and so you and I rolled about in the dust and then when we came to the Prophet عليه السلام and told him the news he said, ‘It would have been enough for you to strike the earth with your palms one time and wipe over your face and hands.’

Okay, [so he said], ‘Don’t you remember that the Prophet عليه السلام said, ‘It would have been enough for you to strike the earth with your palms one time and wipe over your face and hands.’ He replied, ‘I don’t remember.’ So Abu Musa al-Ash’ari said, ‘Shall I cease giving the fatwa?’ Umar said, ‘No, we leave you to that which you have chosen …’ i.e., as they say today, ‘[It’s] under your responsibility, under your guarantee, [since] I don’t remember this story.’ [He i.e., Umar ibn al-Khattaab too was] a man, you are not the only one who forgets, here is the Chief of the Believers who forgot.

Questioner: … what was Umar’s proof … what was Umar’s proof that when [a person is on a journey and doesn’t find water he should wait and not pray until he does so] …

Al-Albaani: His proof was the basis/foundation [al-asl], the basis [in the ruling] is water …

Questioner: … the basis …

Al-Albaani: The basis is water … the important thing is that this dispute and many, many other such disputes were not the cause for the splitting of the Muslim nation, because knowledge takes its course and the ummah stays behind its scholars: whoever is content with this opinion then he is upon guidance and whoever is content with that opinion is upon guidance.

We make a statement regarding this which should be penned down and spread [and which is]: just as when, “… a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards. And if he makes a mistake he will have one,” then likewise the one who follows a mujtahid comes under the ruling which applies to the mujtahid, i.e., someone who follows a correct opinion, the Mujtahid Imaam was correct [in a ruling he made] and so he has two rewards–so this person who followed him in this correct [judgement] is also rewarded twice, of course [the extent of] the reward differs, but [still he gets] two rewards. The other person who follows another Imaam who was mistaken, then such an Imaam is rewarded once, and likewise is the one following him.

So when a dispute between the scholars occurs, it is not fitting, firstly, that it should be taken as a cause for splitting amongst them [i.e., amongst the scholars themselves] and secondly, it is not fitting that it should be a cause for a split amongst the people because they are all rewarded, whether he is right or wrong.

This is how our Salaf as-Saalih were–and we think that we are treading upon their manhaj and their way.

Rather I say with profound regret that many of us make this claim and do implement it to a large extent but have deviated in some of its implementation to a very dangerous extent–and here are its effects manifesting themselves now and in a people who we used to think would be an example for others in collecting and bringing them together upon adherence to [the way of] the Salaf as-Saalih, following the Book and the Sunnah upon the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih.

With regret, some disunity has occurred and thus just as we advise the very people who have differed from amongst the callers or the scholars or the students of knowledge not to be enemies [one to another] but rather to love each other and to make excuses for each other whilst sticking to reminding and advising [each other] with that which is best, then in the same way we advise those of the Ummah–with all their [differing] levels–who are not scholars or students of knowledge but are from the general [mass of] Muslims, also not to be influenced by such differences which they see occurring between the callers.

Because in the Noble Quraan we read that separation in the religion is not from the makeup of the Muslims but rather is a characteristic of the polytheists, “… and be not of the polytheists, of those who split up their religion and became sects, each sect rejoicing in that which is with it.” [Rum 30:31-32]

Click here for the final post.

3 Comments
April 13, 2012

Worshipping Personalities, Fanaticism Towards or Against a Particular Personality, Turning Away from Knowledge and Memorising the Quraan and Becoming Known for Saying, ‘‘This person is an innovator … this person is misguided … this person has such and such an issue …this one has this and that … and this one praises the people of innovation … and this one says such and such …’ | 1 |


 

The PDF: Worshipping Personalities.

Questioner: I want you to give some advice to some of the brothers, students of knowledge in Kuwait. The current situation will not be hidden from the Shaikh concerning the fitnah which is on-going one after the other with the youth of the awakening, from which is the fitnah of the brothers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [concerning] the brother Safar and Salmaan and so on and those who support what they are on in some issues which they speak about, this issue has reached us in our area in Kuwait and then, ya’ni,“… each group [is] rejoicing in its belief …” [Mu’minoon 23:53]

Al-Albaani: Allaahu Akbar.

Questioner: … and each person claims the love of Lailaa [i.e., each person claims that he is right] …

Al-Albaani: Yes, by Allaah.

Questioner: … every one of them says, ‘I am on the Straight Path …’

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: ‘…I am the one bearing the Banner … the Banner of Salafiyyah and I am defending it.’

Now something has come between the brothers who are, inshaa Allaah tabaaraka wa ta’aala, on the Salafi way because of these issues, and there is nothing for us except this issue [i.e., it has become the only thing that concerns them]: we have left seeking knowledge …

Al-Albaani: Yes, by Allaah.

Questioner: … we have left memorizing the Book of Allaah the Blessed and Most High, we have left many things and [instead] speak about this issue, such that many of our brothers, the youth, have no concern except this issue, speaking about this person’s honour or that.

And they have made this the vehicle for what? The vehicle for the Salafi da’wah and for defending the Sunnah speaking by dishonouring so and so, and so and so, and so and so, and so and so [fulaan and fulaan and fulaan and fulaan], then the issue resulted in defaming[tajreeh] the people themselves and not the mistakes they have.

So now the youth, our youth who are at their prime, when someone comes … and I’ll give you one example, what we know about the Muslim Brotherhood when a youth starts practising Allaah’s Religion, taking up this way, they warn him against what? Against the Salafis.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: [So] now as soon as this youth comes to practice the first thing they warn him against is the tape of so and so, and the cassette of so and so, and so and so.

This is the most important thing now, and this is what many of the youth talk about now until they have become identified with and known for [saying things like], ‘This person is an innovator … this person is misguided … this person has such and such an issue …’

Al-Albaani: Laa hawla wa laa quwwata illaa billaah..

Questioner: ‘… this one has this and that … and this one praises the people of innovation … and this one says such and such …’ and if you were to say to this person that this person [who you’re talking about] …

I was asked one time, a person came to me and said, ‘What do you say about Shaikh [Sayyid] Qutb?’ I said, ‘Yaa akhi, I love him for the Sake of Allaah, he’s a Muslim, and I hate the mistakes that he has. I love him as a Muslim, the general love [a Muslim has for another], and I hate the mistakes that he has …’

Al-Albaani: Tamaam [i.e., perfect/right/fine].

Questioner: … so they started saying, ‘This person is praising the people of innovation! And he’s saying that they have this and that! … These people should be warned against! … Here the proof is available …’

Shaikh, your advice for these youth, may Allaah bless you.

Al-Albaani: By Allaah, Yaa akhi, my opinion is not to apply oneself to/turn to these people who are being praised or criticised today.

And in reality, on many nights questions come to me from Kuwait, the Emirates and elsewhere, [saying], ‘What is your opinion about so and so?’ from which it is obvious that he [i.e., the questioner] is either for that person [he is asking about] or against him.

So I repel him from such a question and say to him, ‘Ask, Yaa akhi, about that which will benefit you concerning those things connected to rectifying your aqidah, your worship, improving your manners. Don’t ask about Zaid, Bakr and Amr [i.e., Tom, Dick and Harry], because this question adds fire to fire.

The person asking might be with these people and against those, or with those and against these, so if you [i.e., I] praise this one you will have slandered that one, or if you praise that one you will have slandered this one, [and] so this, as we said, just increases the fire’s intensity.

For this reason, I advise [the youth] with a concise statement which [in fact] reminds me of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq’s statement when the Prophet عليه السلام passed away. He [i.e., the Prophet عليه السلام] is the one personality whose love all of the Muslims are united upon, whoever turns away from this love will have disbelieved, in contrast to their difference in their love for many of the Companions and their slander of some of them, in most cases this will be [regarded as] fisq and not disbelief.

[So] what I want to say is that even though the Prophet عليه السلام is the Chief of Mankind, and every Muslim’s beloved, when Umar stood up fervently against the one who reported the news that the Prophet had passed away, you know the story, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq proceeded to say, ‘Whoever used to worship Muhammad, then Muhammad has died, and whoever used to worship Allaah, then Allaah is Living, Eternal, and does not die.’

So I do not hold that each one of these factions should be partisan to so and so against so and so or vice versa. Rather I advocate the statement of the Lord of the Worlds, ‘And be with the truthful,’ [Tawbah 9:119], so these youth you pointed out [in the question] are most deserving of [listening to] this statement, it is upon these people who get all worked up to correct their aqidah, their worship, their behaviour, and not to become bigoted for one of these individuals or against him.

Because such fanaticism, firstly, is just like worshipping people/personalities, the type of worship which Abu Bakr as-Siddiq warned against in his previous statement, ‘Whoever used to worship Muhammad, then Muhammad has died, and whoever used to worship Allaah, then Allaah is Living and does not die.’

So becoming enthused towards these people is to become enthused over those who are not infallible, and the issue is as Imaam Maalik, the Imaam of the place of migration, said, ‘There is none from us except that he rejects and is rejected, except for the companion of this grave,’ and he pointed to the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم grave.

So any person who becomes fanatical for another, [whether that person be] a scholar or a caller, then he will find mistakes in him, and [any person who] becomes fanatical against another will soon find that he [i.e., the person he is against] will have something correct and will soon find some good in him …

Click here for the second post.

2 Comments
April 11, 2012

A New Form of Extremism, Hizbiyyah, Hatred and Hostility


 

 

Questioner, reading out a written question: How correct is the statement that the present-day Islamic groups apart from the Salafi Jamaa’ah–[the questioner wrote], ‘the mother of the groups,’ and between brackets he put, ‘Salafiyyah’–are more harmful to Islaam than the Jews and the Christians, groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, basing this analogy upon this statement of Ibn Taymiyyah’s [Trans. Note. which must have been mentioned in an earlier sitting] regarding the Raafidah?

Al-Albaani: No, I don’t believe except that this is a new form of extremism and a new form of partisanship and hatred and hostility.

In all of the Islamic Jamaa’ahs there is good and bad.

Passing judgement regarding the Jamaa’ahs, my brothers, is like passing judgement on individuals, passing judgement regarding the Jamaa’ahs is like passing judgement on individuals. There is no Muslim individual who has gathered all the qualities of perfection, only some and not others, maybe his good will be more than his bad, his bad more than his good–and even in the case where his bad is more than his good, it is not fitting that we deny the good which has come from him.

So the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hizb at-Tahrir and the Tablighi Jamaa’ah have good in them but they are also distant from Islaam, either out of ignorance or because they have ignored it.

For this reason, this statement contains extreme gravity, it is not allowed to make such generalised statements, in fact, it is not permissible to declare them to be misguided. We said in some of our sittings … [I said that] I do not hold that we should say that every Shee’ee is a kaafir, but any Shee’ee who says that our Quraan is only a quarter of the missing one, [the one they call] the Mushaf of Faatimah, or he makes statements of disbelief such as that and believes in them and takes them as religion before Allaah, then such a person is the one we call a kaafir. As for saying that all of the Shee’ah are disbelievers, then this is an expression of extremism in the religion.

So it is more becoming, more fitting, that this statement [I just made above] is applied to [those less than the Shee’ah like] the Muslim Brotherhood or other Jamaa’ahs which are all gathered together by Islaam.

But some of them are closer to Islaam than others, some are further than others, so, in all of these Jamaa’ahs there is good and [also] smoke, as occurs in an authentic hadith.

So we in reality look at the Salafi da’wah as the one call which unites the Muslims, because it is the call of truth which the Pious Predecessors were upon, as for the other groups then they have this and that and such and such.

Thus it is not allowed to make such statements general, for they contain oppression and an opposition to 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 …” [Al-Maa’idah 5:8]

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 752.

Leave a comment
April 11, 2012

Warn Against Him Personally or Clarify the Mistakes?


Questioner: A man whose foundations are those of Ahlus-Sunnah and he traverses their methodology, and is known for defending it and for his service to their methodology, and sometimes some mistakes in the methodology emanate from him: should he be warned against personally or by clarifying his mistakes?

Al-Albaani: The second and not the first.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 751.

2 Comments
April 10, 2012

Writing off Scholars who Fall Into Mistakes in Aqidah And A Discussion of Other Important Issues


 

Questioner: O Shaikh! One more question, and it’s the last: there is someone who is vicious in speaking about the scholars, not concerned whether they are major or not, I’ll give you an example, whoever has been described as being Ash’ari or about whom it has been said that his aqidah is Ash’ari, then you will find that this person speaks about him in the most despicable manner, so we want you to advise him, especially since a lot of people have been deceived by him and they say that, ‘He has the characteristics of the righteous.’

So we want you to advise him, O Shaikh!

Al-Albaani: Yes. May Allaah reward you with good.

I believe that justice is that every Muslim is mentioned with the goodness and correctness that he has, and that he is mentioned with the mistakes that he has–and I [say ‘mistakes’ and] not, ‘evil’ because evil is more specific than a mistake.

I believe that this person mentioned in the question is not a faqeeh, it may be that he is righteous, but righteousness is something and understanding in the religion [fiqh] is something else.

And maybe it is pertinent [here] for me to remind you that the result of righteousness which is not coupled with knowledge is that such a righteous person will end up giving himself the death penalty.

As he عليه الصلاة والسلام narrated to us in an authentic hadith, agreed upon by Bukhari and Muslim, on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, who said, “Allaah’s Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said, ‘Amongst those before you was a man who killed ninety-nine people and he wanted to repent so he asked about the most knowledgeable people on the face of the earth? And so he was directed to a raahib …” i.e., a righteous slave who had secluded himself from the people to worship Allaah according to their way of monasticism in those times, “… so he came to him and said, ‘I have killed ninety-nine people, is there a chance for me to repent?’ He said, ‘You have killed ninety-nine people and now you’re asking if you can repent?’ There is no chance for you to repent,’–and so he killed him and completed a hundred …”

And it seems from the many versions of the story and its context that the man [i.e., the murderer] really was sincere in wanting to repent, but he wanted a scholar who could show him the path that he should undertake, “… so he carried on asking until he was directed to a scholar and so went to him and said, ‘I have killed one hundred people unlawfully, is there a chance for me to repent?’ So he replied, ‘And who can come between you and repentance? But you are in an evil land …’ this is the answer of a scholar, ‘… so leave it and go to such and such a place whose inhabitants are righteous.’”

So he left, walking, and on his way there his appointed time came and so the angels started to contend over him, the Angels of Mercy and the Angels of Punishment, each one claiming that the man was rightfully theirs to take. So Allaah sent an angel to them to judge between them, and so he said, ‘Measure the distance between him and both towns, the one he left and the one he was going to, and cause him to join the people of whichever of the two he is closest.’

So they measured and found him to be closer to the town he was going to and so the Angels of Mercy took his soul. [Transl. note: so the Shaikh was trying to show that even though the first person the murderer asked may have been righteous, he was not a scholar and gave the wrong answer, telling the murderer that there was no way for him to repent, and thus the result of his incorrect ruling was that he was also killed. Whereas the second person was a true scholar, someone who is righteous and has knowledge too, and based upon his knowledge did give the correct answer.]

The point is that this man [you mentioned in the question], if he is righteous, as we hope he is, then [we still say that] he is not a faqeeh.

He does not picture, and he is not alone in this–and I think this is a very important point–many people differentiate between mistakes in the subsidiary issues [furoo’] and those in the fundamentals [usool], saying, ‘Mistakes in the subsidiary issues are forgiven if they emanate from ijtihaad, but as for those which occur in the fundamentals then they are not forgiven,’–this is incorrect.

The first reason [for this being incorrect] is that there is no proof for this categorization, i.e., splitting the Sharee’ah into fundamentals and subsidiary issues and then basing judgements on this categorization has no basis.

The second is that the proofs, or some of them at the very least, confirm that even if a person makes a mistake in things connected to aqidah he is also excused.

The greatest proofs for that are the two hadiths which I will quote now. The first is the one of that man who gathered his children when he was about to die and said to them, ‘What kind of a father have I been to you?’ They said, ‘The best father.’ He said, ‘Verily, I have sinned against my Lord. After my death, burn me and then crush me, and scatter half the powder in the air and half in the sea, for by Allah, if Allah has control over me, He will give me such a punishment as He has never given to anyone else.’

So when he died they carried out his request, a request whose injustice and distance from the legislation may not have an equivalent, So Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said to his particles, ‘Be so and so.’ And then Allaah the Mighty and Majestic asked him, ‘My servant! What made you do that?’ He said, ‘My Lord! I was afraid of You.’ So He said, ‘Go, for I have forgiven you.’

So he disbelieved, there is no doubt that he disbelieved, because he made that unjust will thinking that he would be able to get away from his Lord, which reminds us of the Most High’s Saying, “And he presents for Us an example and forgets his [own] creation. He says, “Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?” [Yaa Seen 36:78]

So this man, [what] his will [contains] says that Allaah the Mighty and Majestic is unable to resurrect him to be the fully formed man that he was, but Allaah did, saying, ‘Be so and so,’ and then addressed him.

But Allaah the Mighty and Majestic who is the One who knows what man’s breast conceals, knew that this person in doing that action was not denying the Resurrection and that it was only the fear of the impending punishment [which made him do what he did], and he admitted that it would happen and that he would deserve it, [so it was these things] that blinded his insight and thus he left that unjust will.

The second hadith is his saying عليه السلام–and this is also very important and has a connection to the issue of the Ahlul-Fitrah, and many sittings concerning this topic have preceded–he عليه السلام said, “There is no man from this Ummah, whether Jew or Christian, who hears about me yet does not believe in me except that he will enter the Fire.”

So, these people who did not hear of the Prophet عليه السلام and died as disbelievers, as polytheists, will not be punished because of their shirk and misguidance–in fact I will go even further and, taking the understanding from his saying عليه السلام, “…who hears about me …” say that it means, ‘… [who hears about] me truly/my true reality …’ because if we picture some of these Europeans, like the British or the Germans and their like, those who have been affected by the call of the Qadiyanis and who have believed that there are other Prophets after the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and that one of them was sent to Qadian [in India], the one who was initially well-known as Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiyani, and who then changed his name to Ahmad for a reason well-known … so the point is that these Germans and British people who were led astray in the name of the call to Islaam, [being led to believe that] Islaam acknowledges the coming of messengers after the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and that one of them was called Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiyani and that Islam denies the existence of a creation called the Jinn–which have well-known characteristics in the Book and the Sunnah–there is no doubt that these people have gone astray: but did they really hear about him عليه السلام truly? The answer is no.

Thus, this hadith teaches us that:

Firstly, those whom the message does not reach at all will not be punished. They will be dealt with in that well-known manner on the Day of Resurrection.

Secondly, if Islaam’s message reaches them in a distorted manner, altered, changed, and they believe in it, then they will also not be held to account over that.

So, differentiating between fundamentals [usool] and subsidiary issues [furoo] is a deviance from the Book and the Sunnah, for this reason I say that it is obligatory on this brother [you asked about in the question and] who is righteous inshaa Allaah, to rectify his knowledge, at the very least to rectify it in his unjust fatwa.

So the fact that a noble scholar erred in an Aqidah issue like [Allaah’s] Names and Attributes and other such things which some of the Ash’aris and Maaturidis fell into … then it is possible that that could have been based upon their ijtihaad and not because of any evil intent on their behalf–so it is not allowed to make such a statement [as the one mentioned in the question] unrestrictedly except with a restriction [like the following]: whoever comes to know the truth and then deviates from it then he is such and such.

[And following on from this] there is no difference between someone who deviates from what is right in the issue of [Allaah’s] Names and Attributes or anything [else] connected to aqidah and someone who deviates in a legislative ruling.

For example, someone who knows that the truth is that bleeding does not break one’s ablution but who still goes astray and insists [on the opposite] arrogantly [going against] the proofs [then the case is clear], and you can judge the rest based upon this [example].

And how many subsidiary issues there are which the scholars have differed in and whose effect on the community can be much worse than some issues which are only connected to aqidah.

I wonder, do you think those who deny the punishment of the grave like some of the groups found in the Islamic world today, would you say that the harm of denying the punishment of the grave is greater than that fiqh opinion which says that it is permissible for a Muslim girl who reaches the age of discernment to get married herself without her guardians consent, in opposition to the hadith?

Which of the two opinions has a greater effect in corrupting the community? Is it the first which denies the punishment of the grave or this one which denies the condition of the guardian’s consent?

There is no doubt that this [i.e., denying the guardian’s consent] causes more corruption, but this issue is a subsidiary one [furoo] and that other one [i.e., denying the punishment in the grave] is a fundamental [usool], “They are not but [mere] names you have named–you and your forefathers for which Allaah has sent down no authority.” [An-Najm 53:23]

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 635.

1 Comment
April 9, 2012

Asked About Spying on People who Want to Harm the Scholars


 

Questioner: Is it allowed to spy on people who want to harm the scholars or callers of the Ummah? In order to distance this harm from them, is it allowed to spy?

Al-Albaani: I think the question contradicts itself, how did this person who wants to spy come to know that there are people who want to harm the Ummah except by spying?

Questioner: [He and the others present start laughing].

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 674.

2 Comments
April 8, 2012

Is it Allowed to Praise the People of Innovation?


In this post, the Shaikh refers to a, ‘… long answer,’ he gave just before this one was asked, that answer can be found here.

 

Questioner: Is it allowed to praise the people of innovation even if they claim to be serving Islaam and [say] that they are striving for that, like at-Turaabi and those like him?

Al-Albaani: The answer differs according to the circumstance.

If what is meant by praising a Muslim who we assume is an innovator, and we do not say that he is an innovator [and you will have understood this] by that long answer [I just gave, where I said that] we differentiate between the two things inshaa Allaah–so if what is intended by praising him is to defend him in the face of the disbelievers then this is obligatory.

But if what is meant by praising him is to beautify his methodology and to call the people to it, then this is not permissible.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 666.

Leave a comment
April 8, 2012

Differentiating Between Innovations


Questioner: Some people say that someone who innovates a type of innovation which can lead to disbelief [bid’ah ‘mukaffirah’] has left the Ahlus-Sunnah, [but that] someone who innovates a type which can lead to defiant disobedience [bid’ah ‘mufassiqah’] does not leave the Ahlus-Sunnah.  If the proof was established against him and he persisted in it would he [still] be regarded as being from the Ahlus-Sunnah then?

Al-Albaani: Repeat [your question].

Questioner: Some people say that someone who innovates a type of innovation which can lead to disbelief has left the Ahlus-Sunnah …

Al-Albaani: Firstly, what is an innovation which can lead to disbelief and one which can lead to defiant disobedience?

Questioner: An innovation which can lead to disbelief and one which can lead to defiant disobedience.

Al-Albaani: What are they?

Questioner: An innovation which can lead to disbelief would be like if he were to innovate an innovation comprising disbelief like when some of them do not hold that Allaah the Most High rose above His Throne and so on. And an innovation which can lead to defiant disobedience would be like if he were to fall into an innovation connected to worship, like celebrating the Prophet’s birthday, for example.

Al-Albaani: This speech is incorrect, it emanates from [scholastic] theology [ilmul-kalaam].

Differentiating between innovations connected to fundamentals [usool], innovations in the subsidiary issues [furoo], innovations connected to rulings [ahkaam], innovations connected to worship–this differentiation is [in itself] an innovation.

Do you see if there were a man who approached a certain Sunnah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, like the Sunnah for the morning prayer, for example, and read four [instead of two] and insisted on that, which type of innovation would this be?  One which can lead to disbelief or defiant disobedience?

Questioner: According to the categorisation [I asked about] it would be an innovation which can lead to defiant disobedience.

Al-Albaani: This is false and futile speech.

From the things which later generations [khalaf] inherited from the Salaf–and by the term ‘Salaf’ here I don’t mean that technical meaning which we use it with [i.e., the Shaikh is saying that people have taken the incorrect understanding which he is going to mention in the next few sentences, from their fathers, forefathers, ancestors etc., and not from ‘the’ Salaf, i.e., the first three generations of Muslims and those upon their way, i.e., he’s using the term Salaf here with the linguistic meaning]–is to distinguish between mistakes in subsidiary issues [furoo’] and those in the fundamentals [usool], [saying that] mistakes in the subsidiary issues are forgiven while those committed concerning the fundamentals are not … and the authentic hadith, “If a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards. And if he makes a mistake he will have one,” [Bukhari: 7352, Muslim: 1716] this is concerning the subsidiary issues [they say], but as for the fundamentals, mistakes made concerning them are not forgiven–this [saying of theirs] has no origin, not the Book nor the Sunnah, and nor from the statements of the Salaf as-Saalih. That which is found in the statements of the Salaf is a severe threat from all innovation, whether in aqidah or [matters of] worship.

In reality, just now I remembered, ‘Whoever declares a Muslim to be a disbeliever has disbelieved,’ and I add to it that whoever declares a Muslim to be an innovator … to the end.

Because the reality is that in my opinion there is no difference between disbelief and innovations. If a Muslim innovated something and his innovation was made clear to him but he still persisted in it, like the example I gave just now, like denying Allaah’s Ascendancy above His creation, or denying that the Quraan is His Speech or, or … etc., [then] there is no difference between these things at all, not in affirming or negating: i.e., affirming by saying, ‘This is disbelief,’ [is done] with the aforementioned condition, i.e., that the proof has been established … and negating, i.e., [saying] that he is not to be declared a disbeliever, is [also] not done except with the aforementioned condition [i.e., establishing the proof].

I say again that the Mu’tazilah and the Khawaarij are the same in some of their misguidance and different in other things. For example, the Khawaarij are the same as the Mu’tazilah in saying that the Quraan is created, and I just mentioned to you that the scholars of hadith do not declare the Khawaarij to be disbelievers, thus, in our minds how do we reconcile between [those who say that] someone who denies aqidah is a kaafir but someone who innovates something concerning worship is a faasiq [and not a kaafir, even though both have innovated]?

[How can we say this when ] we see that the Imaams of Hadith narrate from the Khawaarij and from the Mu’tazilah even though they oppose the correct aqidah in more than one issue?

So for example, these people who said that Allaah’s Speech is created also deny that Allaah will be seen in the Hereafter, this denial and the one before it cause our previous definition to apply to them, that it is disbelief but that not everyone who falls in to disbelief has the ruling of disbelief applied to them.

How do we reconcile between the fact that we find the Imaams of Hadith and the Imaams of the Salaf like Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim ruling that the Khawaarij and the Mu’tazilah are misguided no doubt, [and between the fact that] they do not declare them to be disbelievers who have apostatised from their religion? [This is so] because they hold that there is a possibility that, firstly, the issues was unclear to them and secondly that the proof was not established against them.

Let’s go back to the root of our first topic, that these people are innovators, but that we do not know whether they wilfully intended that innovation, [nor do we know if] the proof has been established against them … etc., this is the manhaj of the scholars–they declare the Mu’tazilah to be misguided, and the Khawaarij, and the Ash’aris, in more than one issue, but they do not declare them to be disbelievers, and nor do they declare them to be outside the fold of Islaam due to the possibility of what we just mentioned, which goes back to two things which I will remind you of: the first, that they did not intend to innovate or [fall into such] violations, and secondly, that we do not know if the proof was established against them or not.

Thus, their reckoning is with Allaah and we go by what is apparent from them–which is Islaam, and they died upon Islaam and were buried in the Muslim graveyards, and thus, they are Muslims.

So differentiating between innovations which can lead to disbelief [bid’ah ‘mukaffirah’] and innovations which can lead to defiant disobedience [bid’ah ‘mufassiqah’] is terminology which emanates from the scholars of theological rhetoric, and secondly, there is no proof for it whatsoever.

And I will finish this topic by reminding you [of the point I’m making] with a hadith which proves what I just mentioned: that not everyone who falls into disbelief becomes a disbeliever.

I’m referring to the hadith of Bukhaari reported by the two venerable Companions, Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri and Hudhaifah ibn al-Yamaan, who said that Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said, “A man used to do sinful deeds, and when death came to him, he said to his sons, ‘After my death, burn me and then crush me, and scatter the powder in the air, for by Allaah, if Allaah has control over me, He will give me such a punishment as He has never given to anyone else.’ When he died, his sons did accordingly. Allaah ordered the earth saying, ‘Collect what you hold of his particles.’ It did so, and behold! There he was (the man) standing. Allah asked (him), ‘What made you do what you did?’ He replied, ‘O my Lord! I was afraid of You.’ So Allah forgave him.”

So now let us ask, did this man disbelieve or not?

Questioner: He disbelieved.

Al-Albaani: He disbelieved? But Allaah forgave him?

Questioner: He didn’t disbelieve [then].

Al-Albaani: Didn’t you see what he said, ‘… if Allah has control over me …’ he didn’t disbelieve?

Questioner: According to this statement, [then] yes [he disbelieved].

Al-Albaani: I didn’t restrict it [to being based upon that statement alone], I said did he disbelieve or not?

We know from the Noble Quraan that Allaah does not forgive associating partners with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whoever He wills. How do we reconcile [between these two things]?

We do so based upon what we just said before: [that] Allaah does not forgive associating partners with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whoever He wills–He does not forgive someone who associates partners with Him intentionally and deliberately.

What do you think about this condition/stipulation?

Questioner: Good.

Al-Albaani: Good. But is it present in the aayah?

Questioner: It’s not.

Al-Albaani: Did we conjure it up based upon our desires?

Questioner: No.

Al-Albaani: This is how the Sharee’ah is, it is not taken from one aayah or one hadith, but rather from a group of what has been reported in the issue [at hand].

For this reason, it is not only in issues of fiqh that we must gather all the texts in order to know the abrogating from the abrogated, the general from the specific, the unrestricted from that which restricts/limits, and so on–rather aqidah has a greater priority in that by far, so when the scholars explain this aayah, “Indeed, Allaah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills …” [An-Nisaa 4:48] they normally do not mention such detail, but when problems and doubts occur, it is there that the scholar is compelled to make clear the knowledge that he has.

So this man left a will which I cannot picture there being an equivalent to, in its injustice, oppression and misguidance: [he told them to] burn him so that he could get away from His Lord, and Allaah says, “And he presents for Us an example and forgets his [own] creation. He says, “Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?” [Yaa Seen 36:78] yet despite that, our Lord forgave him, because disbelief had not taken root in this person’s heart.

He pictured his sins before Allaah the Mighty and Majestic and his fear of Him and the fact that when he reaches Him, the Mighty and Majestic, He would punish him severely, this inclination and dread blinded him from seeing the correct aqidah, and so he ordered that [that] wrongful will [be carried out], and the hadith is clear, ‘Go, for I have forgiven you.’

So for example, [although] we believe he did fall into Wahdatul-Wujood, it is not fitting for us to picture that Sayyid Qutb did so intentionally and that he firmly set his heart onto it–unlike Ibn Arabi, the one who misguided millions of Sufi Muslims. Maybe this Sufi ideology, occurred to him [i.e., Qutb] while he was imprisoned and he didn’t grasp the issue based upon knowledge, and so he wrote that phrase which I was one of the first to criticise.

We do not judge him to be a disbeliever, because we do not know if disbelief took root in his heart or not, or whether the proof was established against him, especially when he was in prison–how could it have been?

For this reason we do not connect the fact that a Muslim falls into disbelief with him being a disbeliever, we do not bind these two issues together, this is the first matter and it has been repeated in order to warn [you]. Secondly, we do not differentiate between innovations in aqidah or innovations in worship, both of them are either misguidance or disbelief.

And maybe in this much there is sufficiency, O Abu Abdur-Rahmaan.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 664.

1 Comment
April 6, 2012

Is There an Established Date for the Israa and Mi’raaj?


 

Questioner: Do you recall anything concerning the likely date of the Prophet’s night-journey [Israa] and his ascension [mi’raaj]?

Al-Albaani: There is nothing established concerning it.

Questioner: There’s nothing established until now?

Al-Albaani: Not at all.

Questioner: And the hadith which says that it was on the 18th of Rabee’ul-Awwal, what is its grading?

Al-Albaani: It’s a mu’addal narration.

Questioner: ‘Mu’addal’ meaning weak [da’eef]?

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 594.

1 Comment
April 3, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | End | Praying Behind Someone who May Have Some Shirk


Questioner: In addition to the brother’s question, if the Imaam has some form of shirk, like making amulets or making fun of the Prophet’s Sunnah صلى الله عليه وسلم like the beard or shortening the thawb and so on …

Al-Albaani: Yaa Akhi, the issue of the beard and other such issues, that sin is on him, but as for shirk then that is the dangerous thing, but we, Ahlus-Sunnah, have to know that not everyone who falls into shirk has the ruling of being a mushrik applied to him, and that is because shirk is divided into [differing] categories, two of which concern us now: shirk [which one believes] from the heart [shirk qalbee], and spoken shirk [shirk lafdhi].

So if a Muslim who prays and fasts falls into spoken shirk, this spoken shirk may reflect shirk of the heart and [yet] it may not. So it is not allowed to judge this person who has committed shirk in a statement to say that he is a mushrik at heart except after having asked him about it in detail and sought clarification from him.

So if we were to assume that his shirk is from the first type, then he is a Muslim, who has for him and against him whatever we [as Muslims] have for us and against us. And maybe you have heard the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وآله سلم saying to that man who heard one of his sermons and, wanting to express his obedience to him, said, ‘Whatever Allaah and you have willed!’ So he عليه السلام said, ‘Have you made me a partner of Allaah’s? Say, ‘Whatever Allaah Alone has willed.’’

So this is shirk, but spoken. He should have said, ‘Whatever Allaah willed and then you willed,’ but he made a mistake and said, ‘Whatever Allaah and you have willed!’ and so made the Prophet a partner by making him a peer of his Lord.

Also from this type is that a man from his Companions صلى الله عليه وآله سلم saw a dream in which he was walking in some of Medinah’s alleyways when he met a Jew, and so said to him, ‘How excellent a people you would be if only you never committed shirk with Allaah by saying, ‘Uzair is the son of Allaah.’ So the Jew said, ‘How excellent a people you would be if only you never committed shirk with Allaah by saying, ‘Whatever Allaah and Muhammad have willed!’

Then he went on a little and met a Christian, and so said to him, ‘How excellent a people you would be if only you never committed shirk with Allaah by saying, ‘Jesus is the son of Allaah.’ So the Christian said, ‘How excellent a people you would be if only you never committed shirk with Allaah by saying, ‘Whatever Allaah and Muhammad have willed!’

In the morning he went to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and told him about his dream, so he said, ‘Have you related it to anyone?’ He said no and so the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام delivered a sermon to the people, saying, ‘O People! Oftentimes I would hear one of you say, ‘Whatever Allaah and Muhammad have willed!’ Verily, do not say, ‘Whatever Allaah and Muhammad have willed!’ but say, ‘Whatever Allaah Alone has willed …’ and in another narration [there occurs], ‘… whatever Allaah has willed and then you willed.’

So if the shirk of this person who you say is a mushrik is spoken, then he is a Muslim, and if it is revealed that his shirk is from the heart, then, too, we are not allowed to rush into declaring him to be a disbeliever as long as he testifies that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah except after the proof is established against him. If it is and he still persists on his shirk and misguidance then he is cast aside.

Without such a clarification it is not allowed to declare to be a disbeliever a Muslim who testifies that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah let alone one who prays the five daily prayers and leads the Muslims in that.

So we must pay heed to this detail.

Do you have anything else?

Questioner: And if he makes amulets?

Al-Albaani: It’s a mistake, O brother, this is a mistake, but we say that you must differentiate between disbelief in action [kufr amali] and disbelief that one actually believes in [kufr I’tiqadi], spoken disbelief and disbelief of the heart. [Making amulets] is haraam there is no doubt in that, but it is not allowed to declare him to be a disbeliever based only on these actions [i.e., without establishing the proof against him as the Shaikh mentioned above].

Questioner [asking a question on a different topic now]: After the tarawih prayer I heard them say, ‘Subhaanal-Malikil-Quddoos.’ Has this been reported from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم?

Al-Albaani: Yes. This is an authentic Sunnah reported in Sunan an-Nisaa’i with an authentic chain of narration.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: And it is obligatory on us to revive these Sunnahs by virtue of the fact of the many things which are said in various countries and each country has its own customs and habits, the people have killed off the Sunnah.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 574.

End

Leave a comment
April 3, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 9 | A Question from Holland: Brothers who Boycotted the Mosques Because the Imaams Oppose the Sunnah in Some Issues


Questioner: … when I said to you that a group of our brothers in a city in Holland boycott the mosques and that they were waiting for a fatwa from you such that if you said to them that it was permissible they, inshaa Allaah, would be totally ready to go to any mosque, and the reason they don’t go is because, as I mentioned to you, there are people of innovation there and that some of the Imaams there shave their beards and wear their thawbs below their ankles and other such things.

Al-Albaani: Ya’ni, this question is not connected to the Jamaa’ah of Takfeer and Hijrah?

Questioner: It’s as though they have left some of that thinking but other remnants from it still remain, from which is boycotting the mosques and not praying in them, and not establishing the Friday prayer.

Al-Albaani: If these people who have boycotted the mosques are from the Jamaa’ah of takfeer then the answer has preceded, but if they are from another group who have not been affected with their ideology then such people are very widespread in the Islamic world, such that they hold that it is not correct to pray behind people who oppose [the Sunnah] or innovate or things such as that.

So according to what we believe, this [stance of theirs] is taking the legislation to extremes and has no basis.

I don’t know if I mentioned some of the legislative texts in that [previous] gathering or a different one, from which is his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام about the Imaams, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”  [Bukhaari, no. 694]. Do you remember if we mentioned this hadith?

Questioner: No, you didn’t mention it …

Al-Albaani: We didn’t mention it …

Questioner: I went over the tape [and you never mentioned it].

Al-Albaani: Ok, it is the answer, i.e., it is not allowed for any Muslim to keep away from praying in a mosque as long as a Muslim Imaam is leading the prayer [there], even if in that Imaam’s ideology, aqidah, behaviour and manners, there is some deviation from the [correct] legislated rulings [in those areas].

So as we all know, Islaam always and forever orders unity, oneness, and being distant from the causes of disunity, such that the issue reached the level where the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام said a hadith like this which is express in showing the correctness of the prayer of someone who prays behind an Imaam even if that Imaam has shortcomings in some areas, so he صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said, as occurs in Sahih Bukhari, reported by Abu Hurairah, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said, ‘They will lead you in prayer. If they do so correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”

So if I had an opinion, or order, or piece of advice to direct to these people who you mentioned [in the question], then we order them with the Prophet’s order صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم who said what you just heard about the Imaams, “They will lead you in prayer. If they do so correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”

This is the answer.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 523.

Leave a comment
April 2, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 8 | Following the Imaam if He is Mistaken


Questioner: If the Imaam performs the Qunut supplication in the morning prayer, raising his hands, and the one praying behind him knows that he performs the Qunut in the morning prayer, does the one praying behind him have to raise his hands in order to follow the Imaam?

Al-Albaani: Yes. Because of the previous hadith, and in reality this is a precise/detailed issue, because in the first part of that hadith he عليه السلام said, ‘The Imam is only there to be followed, so when he says, ‘Allaahu Akbar,’ then you should say it, and when he recites, then listen, and when he bows then you should bow, and when he says, ‘Allaah has heard the one who praised him,’ then say, ‘Our Lord, all praise is for you,’ and when he prostrates then you should prostrate, and if he prays standing then pray standing, and if he prays sitting then you should pray sitting.’

This hadith is a very great text concerning the fact that the praying person has to follow the Imaam even if it means that he has to leave a pillar of the prayer, not just something obligatory or sunnah [but a pillar even], because we all know that from the pillars of the prayer, without which the prayer is not correct, is to pray whilst standing, as He, the Most High, said, ‘… and stand before Allaah, devoutly obedient.’ [Baqarah 2:238]

If a man performed an obligatory prayer whilst sitting when he could have done so standing, then his prayer is null and void, this is in contrast to the optional prayer which the Legislator has permitted one to pray sitting, but He made its reward equivalent to half of the one who prays whilst standing.

As for [praying] the obligatory prayer whilst sitting if one is not ill or does not have any other excuse, then such a prayer is null and void.

Yet even though that is the case [and to show how important following the Imaam is], if the Imaam prayed whilst sitting out of illness then all of those who are following him, even though they are healthy, have to pray whilst sitting along with him as a realisation of this general principle, that, ‘The Imam is only there to be followed …’

And the circumstance relating to this hadith is that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was riding an animal of his one day when he fell off and hurt a vein in the middle of his arm. The time for midday prayer approached and so he led them whilst sitting, since due to the severity of the impact he عليه السلام wasn’t able to do so standing. He عليه السلام noticed that the people behind him were praying standing, since firstly, this was what [in normal circumstances] was ordained for them and they always used to pray behind him عليه السلام standing, so he signalled for them to sit which they did and then he عليه السلام said, ‘You were almost about to do what the Persians do before their greats, they stand before their kings. ‘The Imam is only there to be followed, so when he says, ‘Allaahu Akbar,’ you should say it …’ until the end of the hadith.

So we notice here that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ordered his Companions who were strong and healthy to sit down, because he was. He was the one who couldn’t stand and so was excused, those following him were able to stand, but the Wise Legislator deemed them to be excused from having to pray standing in order to follow the Imaam who, due to a valid excuse, was praying sitting.

For this reason, we say that when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, ‘… when he bows then you should bow and when he prostrates you should prostrate …’ he did not do so to mean that following the Imaam was only to be limited to these things, but rather it was to give an example [of the things he is to be followed in], and there is a difference between those things being mentioned by way of limitation and between being mentioned as some examples, i.e., the Prophet عليه السلام mentioned them as examples to affirm the principle that, ‘The Imam is only there to be followed …’

And we know, for example, that when an Imaam forgets [to sit for] the first tashhahud and stands, it is upon some of those following him to remind him by saying, ‘Subhaanallaah!’  So if he remembers, he goes back and this has some elaboration which maybe I can mention soon, and if the Imaam doesn’t remember and stands, then he will have left this [first] tashhahud, [he will have left] the sitting for the first tashhahud and what is to be read therein mistakenly–but we [i.e., the people praying behind him] follow him in that mistake [i.e., we have to stand up with him and can’t remain sitting to recite the tashhahud], because he has an excuse [i.e., forgetfulness].

And in a similar way, elimate each issue where difference has occurred between the Imaams, so if the Imaam is performing a prayer in which he opposes the Sunnah while believing himself to be upon the Sunnah, then we do not oppose him.

But as we mentioned earlier, if he left the Sunnah out of negligence/disregard then following him is not applied here, because he is not following the Sunnah and not following an Imaam, here we oppose him because he has opposed the Sunnah and his Imaam, so he is a negligent, lazy person who does not have an excuse.

So the principle is that he [i.e., the Imaam] is followed in whatever breach he has an excuse for, and if he doesn’t [have an excuse] then no, the Sunnah.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 75.

Leave a comment
April 2, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 7 | A Question from America: Can A Group of Brothers Establish the Prayer at Home if the Imaam is Upon Innovation?


Al-Albaani: Wa alaikum salaam.

Questioner: Is his eminence, the Shaikh present?

Al-Albaani [out of humility]: The old, aged, Shaikh is present.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good, O Shaikh.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Questioner: Can we ask some questions, O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: We called you yesterday and didn’t find you, so the brother al-Khateeb gave us some answers about the issue.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: And he asked us to call you today, so we are here in the city of Arlington in Texas, in the US, and we have a Mosque here with an Imaam …

Al-Albaani: He [i.e., al-Khateeb] explained the issue to me, so listen to the answer.

Any Imaam who leads the Muslims [in prayer], in any place, whether in a mosque or a musalla, or a house, or any other place, as long as the Muslims praying behind him hold that that Imaam is a Muslim, then their prayer behind him is correct–whatever their opinion about him is, whether in relation to aqidah or in terms of manners and actions.

So as long as his violation in aqidah or manners does not lead them to believe that he has disbelieved and left the fold of Islaam, then their prayer behind him is correct, due to his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام about the Imaams who lead you in prayer, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”  This hadith is in Sahih Bukhari, what does it say? “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”  [Bukhaari, no. 694].

But in addition to this, if those who are being led in prayer are discontent with their Imaam in something related to aqidah or manners, then  I advise that they try to replace him with someone else, someone better than him, if that is within their ability, and if it isn’t, then Allaah does not burden any soul with more than it can bear.

So it is either within your control or power to distance this Imaam of yours from being the Imaam and to bring someone better than him … this is something obligatory on you, or if the other case is true [i.e., it is not within your power], then your prayer behind him is correct as I told you before.

And through this legislated ruling it is possible for the Muslims to come together despite their differences and for them not to cut off or turn away from each other, has the answer become clear for you?

Questioner: It’s clear.

Al-Albaani: Good, what else do you have?

Questioner: It’s not allowed after … [tape unclear] … to pray on our own, is it allowed?

Al-Albaani: If the mosque, if the congregation is in the mosque and not outside it and the mosque has an appointed Imaam and an appointed muezzin behind whom the Muslims are gathered, yes.

Questioner: There is an appointed Imaam but not an appointed muezzin.

Al-Albaani: There is an appointed Imaam but not an appointed muezzin? This is something we cannot picture except in the land of disbelief which you live in. For this reason, it is upon you to emigrate from there.

As for the legislated ruling [Transl. note: the person’s question seems to have been about repeating the prayer in the mosque], then repeating the prayer in a mosque which has an appointed muezzin and Imaam who the Muslims gather behind, then here it is not allowed to split the congregation with a second congregational prayer and then a third and so on. But if the two conditions [i.e., the presence of both an appointed Imaam and muezzin] or one of them is not met as you mentioned, then fleeing that country is obligatory.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Questioner: Your eminence, Shaikh, in this situation, is it allowed to establish the congregation at home and not in the mosque, three or four brothers, for example, praying in a house?

Al-Albaani: Which situation do you mean?

Questioner: I don’t understand [your question], O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: Which situation do you mean, you said, ‘In this situation …’

Questioner: In the situation where an Imaam has such things and such characteristics as lying and other things, we, for example, in … [unclear] …we are not innovators who would establish [a second, third etc.] congregation in the mosque, but, for example, we will establish it in a house, for example, three or four brothers or a number of brothers establish it in a house and do not pray behind that Imaam, and we pray the congregation in a house on our own, is that allowed or not?

Al-Albaani: Why won’t you pray behind him [i.e., the Imaam in the mosque]?

Questioner: Ya’ni, our prayer [behind him] is permissible even if he has those characteristics?

Al-Albaani: By Allaah, what did I just speak about [i.e., wasn’t my whole answer about that]?

Questioner: Yes, may Allaah reward you with good, O Shaikh, can I ask you a second question?

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 442.

Leave a comment
April 1, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 6 | ‘To pray behind every righteous person or wicked sinner’


 

Questioner: Many of the practising brothers who are keen in sticking to the Sunnah frequently ask about praying behind Imaams who are innovators, from the Ash’aris or, if the term is correct, the extreme Sufis, those who say that it is permissible to seek succour from other than Allaah in those things which only Allaah is capable of, and that leaving off praying behind them will at most times lead to an abandonment of the Jamaa’ah, because most of the Imaams with us are from the people of innovation, except for a few.

Another Person: Allaah’s Aid is sought.

Al-Albaani to someone who entered the gathering: Welcome.

Questioner: So what do you say, may your excellence continue.

Al-Albaani: We’ve answered this more than one time, [saying] that prayer …

Questioner: Yes.

Someone who enters: As-Salaamu alaikum.

Al-Albaani: Wa alaikumus-Salaam wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu.

I hold, and knowledge is with Allaah, following on from what those who came after inherited from the Salaf, that it is legislated to pray behind every righteous person and wicked sinner, and to pray over every righteous person and wicked sinner and that the prayer performed behind such Imaams is correct.

As long as we, or at the very least as long as the one who is praying [behind that person], holds–and we stipulate the [following] condition–that whatever innovation or innovations the Imaam is upon, he has not left the fold of Islaam and [has not left being regarded as from amongst] the Muslims.  He is an innovator, but without doubt and for a surety, not every innovator is a disbeliever, this is for sure. And if the situation is as such, then the one giving the the question [which you put] must place a check there and he must be precise, and this is what I am doing, so I say:

If the one praying behind an Imaam who is an innovator, whether that Imaam is a Sufi, or a Maaturidi, or an Ash’ari or … or, and so on to whatever other names the groups and parties have, if the one praying [behind such a person] holds that this Imaam who is an innovator has not left [the state of] being a Muslim, then the previous principle is employed, ‘To pray behind every righteous person or wicked sinner.’

And if he holds the opposite, that the Imaam has disbelieved, then it clearly goes without saying that praying behind him is not allowed.

But at the same time we warn [the people] from rushing to issue fatwas declaring a [single] Muslim to be a disbeliever, let alone Muslims, just because they fell into an innovation even if this innovation, as they say today, is one connected to aqidah. So one must take one’s time and be patient and not rush into issuing fatwas declaring others to be disbelievers.

Yet at the same time, we say that it is upon a Muslim to choose that the Imaam he prays behind is upon the Sunnah and correct aqidah and worship and manners, if he is able to, and if not, if the situation is that he has to choose between praying alone at home or praying behind that Imaam who has his innovations, then praying behind that Imaam is more fitting than praying alone …

Questioner: In order to preserve what is good …

Al-Albaani: Yes, thereafter along with that I say that if the person really is asking this question out of piety and devoutness, then I say, the door to devoutness is vast, when you come back from the mosque pray it again with your family.

Questioner: As occurred with some of the Salaf in times past.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: He said, ‘Those who delay the prayers from their appointed times …’

Al-Albaani: It is as such, [delaying] the prayer from its time. This is our answer in this issue.

Questioner: And the one he prayed behind the Imaam would be counted as optional.

Al-Albaani: Optional, yes.

Questioner: May Allaah bless you.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 754.

2 Comments
March 31, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 5 |


 

Questioner: What is the situation with an Imaam who leads the people in prayer and is upon innovation, and all the time whenever we advise him he does not listen, in fact he hates us and is spiteful towards us, is it allowed to pray behind him or not, or does the innovation differ in terms of its … being whatever it is, ya’ni … [i.e., does praying behind him depend on what type of innovation he is upon]

Al-Albaani: Namely, whether it is an innovation which makes one a disbeliever or not?

Questioner: Whether it is an innovation which makes one a disbeliever or not, may Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: Firstly, I don’t know whether you were present at the previous sitting where we spoke about the Shee’ah?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: And that it is not allowed for a Muslim to rush to declare the Shee’ah or others to be disbelievers just because they are Shee’ah, do you remember?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: So it is even more the case that it is not allowed for us to declare someone who at the very least is regarded as being from us and amongst us, from the Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, to be a disbeliever except if we see open and manifest disbelief from him.

Especially when, my brother, we live, as I think is clear to you from the previous gathering and this one–and I hope that we are able to have another such gathering or sittings and that is in Allaah the Mighty and Majestic’s Hands–[so I think it is clear] that you understand well that the people are as described by the Lord of the Worlds, “But most of mankind know not …” [Al-A’raaf 7:187]

For this reason it is not allowed for a Muslim to rush into declaring an individual from the Muslims to be a disbeliever as long as he is praying, and you now put forward a question about an Imaam who leads the people in prayer, so, in an authentic hadith it occurs that–and for this reason we encourage the Muslim youth to study the Sunnah and everyone who doesn’t study the Sunnah is in misguidance but the extent [of just how misguided] differs totally [from individual to individual]–in the authentic Sunnah it occurs that [the Prophet said], ‘I have been prohibited from killing those who pray.’

Is it not an analogy a fortiori [qiyaas awlawi] that [consequently] we say that I have been forbidden from declaring the Muslims to be disbelievers, this is an argument a fortiori, like His Saying, the Most High, “And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him, and to parents, good treatment. Whether one or both of them reach old age [while] with you, say not to them [so much as], ‘uff,’ and do not repel them …” [Israa 17:23] to the end of the aayah, so is it allowed for a son to hit his father? It is even less permissible, saying ‘uff’ is haraam so hitting him with your hand is even more severe in harm, this is called qiyas awlawi.

No one denies this, even Ibn Hazm fell into using this analogy sometimes even though he totally rejects [the use of] analogy [qiyaas]. The point is that it has been authentically reported that he عليه السلام said, ‘I have been prohibited from killing those who pray,’ so it is even more correct to [say that] I have been forbidden from declaring those who pray to be disbelievers.

May Allaah forbid it, but when we see open disbelief from someone who prays, whether he is an Imaam or not–and that [is something which] in reality [would] need to be researched specifically–then maybe it would be correct for me to say … rather, then it would not be permissible to declare him to be a disbeliever even if we saw open disbelief from him except after having established the proof against him, and [if] after having done so he [still] was not deterred or inhibited [from that disbelief], it is then that you would not pray behind him and it would not be permissible for you to deal with him as a Muslim.

As for the generality of those who pray now, whether the Imaams or the followers, then the foundational principle is that they are Muslims and it is not allowed to declare them to be disbelievers.

As for the prayer, then no matter what you don’t like about his prayer, whether you are right [in that] or mistaken, your prayer behind him is correct, i.e., let us assume that he prays incorrectly, he is the one who is incorrect in his innovation and you are correct in your judgement that he is an innovator but you have not declared him to be a disbeliever alhamdulillaah, even with this your prayer behind him is correct.

And you will not find this answer in the books of the madhhabs at all, if you have studied one of those madhhabs that are followed today, like the Hanafi [madhhab], or the Shaafi’i one …  the agreement/contract of the Muslims would be dissolved and that which befell the Muslims of the previous generations would befall the Muslims of today, these are tragedies which happened in past Islamic history, and it has been reported that a bigot, and I don’t want to mention which madhhab [he was from], came to a mosque in which the Muslims were praying but not according to his madhhab, so he said, ‘Isn’t it time that this church closed its doors?’

It’s a mosque, the Muslims are praying in it according to one of the four madhhabs, not shee’ah, not khawaarij, not Zaidiyyah and so on, [they were praying according to] one of the four madhhabs, so this bigot says, ‘Isn’t it time that this church closed its doors?’

Similarly another of them who was a Qaadi judging according to the Sharee’ah, so he thought, said, ‘If it were up to me, I would have taken the jizyah from the Shaafi’is,’ just like that.

If we now wanted to implement some of the subsidiary issues present even till today in some of these books, [the result would be that] a Shaafi’i wouldn’t pray behind a Hanafi, and nor a Hanafi behind a Shaafi’i, because from the Hanafi texts [it is stated that], ’It is disliked to pray behind someone who opposes the madhhab.’

[Addressing those present] have any of you studied Hanafi or Shaafi’i fiqh so that we can discuss this issue with him?

‘It is disliked to pray behind someone who opposes the madhhab,’ in fact it could be nullified if the one praying behind a certain Imaam knows that the Imaam’s ablution is not correct and they gave examples of that, [like] if a Hanafi saw a Shaafi’i perform ablution completely and then he touched his wife then such a person’s ablution would be broken, sorry, I made a mistake …  if there were a Hanafi who performed ablution and then touched his wife, his ablution according to the Hanafi madhhabs is correct, but not so according to the Shaafi’i one.

So the Shaafi’i does not hold the prayer to be correct behind him because he regards the ablution to have been broken.  And the total opposite is true if the Hanafi were to perform ablution and then he bled, according to his madhhab his ablution would have been broken, such a prayer would be invalid in the eyes of someone who holds that view. So if there was a Hanafi who adopted the madhhab of Imaam ash-Shaafi’i that no matter how much blood comes out then the ablution is still correct, [a person who holds the other view] will not pray behind him.

Questioner: The Maaliki madhhab or the Hanafi madhhab?

Al-Albaani: No, I’m saying that now we’re talking about two madhhabs, the Hanafis who hold that if someone bleeds, no matter how little, the ablution is broken but if he touches a woman his ablution is sound, and conversely you have the Shaafi’is who say that touching a woman breaks the ablution but bleeding, no matter how plentiful, does not.

Salvation is found in embarking on the ship of salvation, the Sunnah.

Listen now to the answer from the Sunnah.

He عليه الصلاة والسلام said concerning the Imaams who lead us in prayer, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.” [Bukhaari, no. 694].

No answer or ruling more comprehensive then this can be found.

So I wanted to show that through such meaning and such a ruling it is possible to bring the Muslims together.

Wallaahi, as for [one person saying], ‘Your madhhab is such and such but my madhhab says this,’ then this is division which we have been prohibited from, “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.” [Rum 30:31-32]

Perhaps you have obtained your answer, inshaa Allaah.

Let us have another question …

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 539.

2 Comments
March 29, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 4 | Al-Albaani Asked About Praying Behind the Quburis [People Who Fall Into Shirk Connected to the Graves]


 

Questioner: Another cassette reached us which had some of your statements regarding the fighting in Afghanistan and your fatwa about the permissibility of praying behind the grave-worshippers [Qaburis], so the people differed [after hearing this fatwa of yours], O Shaikh.

Al-Albaani: “… and they will not cease to differ, except whom your Lord has given mercy …” [Hud 118-119], this is the text of the Noble Quraan, “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.” [Hud 118-119]

So differing is something very normal and there is no escape nor deliverance from it except by sticking to the Book and the Sunnah, for this reason, if some differing does occur then two things are obligatory on those who have differed:

The first is that this differing should not be a cause for disunity [and that it should not be] differing which leads to disunion/separation.

The second thing is that they should return to Allaah and His Messenger in that [issue], as Allaah the Mighty and Majestic said in the Quraan, “… and if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allaah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allaah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” [Nisaa 4:59] And I believe that in many issues [people either] go too far or fall short.

In many issues there is excessiveness and negligence. Many of our brothers who cling to the Sunnah hold that one should not pray behind innovators but I say: these innovators, in our ruling about them based upon what is apparent to us, are either disbelievers or Muslims. So if they are disbelievers then praying behind them is not correct unanimously. And if they are Muslims then the prayer behind them is correct even if they are from the innovators or are misguided in some issues which they have left the Sunnah in.

And we have a hadith in Sahih Bukhari from Abu Hurairah, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, where he said that Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said concerning the Imaams, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.” [Bukhaari, no. 694].

And another hadith also from Sahih Bukhari that a ruler in one of the cities, I think it was Medinah, during the time of the Amawis, his name was Uqbah ibn al-Walid as far as I recall, led the people in the morning prayer one day with four rak’ahs [instead of two]–because he was drunk, having drunk alcohol, so he didn’t know what he had prayed, and from his misguidance was that after he gave salaam to end the prayer he said [to the people], ‘Shall I give you some more [i.e., make it even longer]?’ He prayed four rak’ahs for fajr and yet along with that he said, ‘Shall I give you some more?’

The hadith is in Sahih Bukhari, [and Imaam Bukhaari is] the one who narrates the hadiths exactly as they are, and he didn’t relate to us that those Salaf repeated the prayer which that man led them in as four rak’ahs, why? Because of that first hadith [I mentioned to you, i.e.,], “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.”

This is from one angle. The other angle is that there is no doubt that many of these innovators wanted what was correct but missed it, for this reason our obligation is to try to direct and guide them and not to take them as our opponents and enemies. And this issue is contingent upon what I mentioned just now: that as long as they are Muslims then they have the same rights as us and the same responsibilities.

And if they leave the fold of Islaam and become disbelievers like those who believe in Wahdatul-Wujood, for example, then it is not correct to pray behind them, but such people are not called innovators. The innovators are those like the Khawaarij, the Mu’tazilah, the Murji’ah–the Imaams of Hadith used to report hadith from them with the condition that they be truthful in that which they were reporting and had memorised their narrations and they did not declare them to be outside the fold of Islaam but gave them the ruling they deserved which was that they had left the Sunnah.

For this reason we do not become enthusiastic in warning the people from praying behind innovators, rather, many times I am asked openly, ‘Imaam so and so seeks intercession with the Awliyaa and the righteous, should we pray behind him?’ I say: yes, has he left the fold of Islaam through that … [tape cuts off here] …

And through this method, in my view, it is possible to bring together the views and differences [found] amongst the Muslims. As for if we were to pass the judgement that the one who innovated one innovation or many in Islaam has left Islaam then the distance [caused by] differing will increase between us and the Muslims, and this, without doubt is not allowed.

This is my opinion concerning praying behind the innovators, I don’t know if you have any comments that we can listen to and benefit from?

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good, O Shaikh.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Questioner: Because … your old or previous stance … and it was a stance which … ya’ni, was strong concerning them, this became the foundation of those youth with us, it became a foundation which is difficult for them to leave.

Al-Albaani: The previous stance? What was it?

Questioner: Shaikh it was the categorical stance towards the innovators, even with us our stance regarding the innovators [became such] that everyone who seeks intercession is an innovator, everyone who seeks succour [with the Awliyaa] is an innovator, in fact, it reached such an extent that everyone who doesn’t move his finger in tashahhud [is an innovator] … i.e., a stance which was not good in this affair …

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: So it has become, O Shaikh, ya’ni, the foundation of the youth’s stance is that there should be severity towards the grave-worshippers, towards those who seek intercession [through the righteous etc.], total severity.

Because frankly, O Shaikh, the situation of the grave-worshippers where we are is clear and manifest, and their seeking aid from other than Allaah is clear and none of them hide it, in fact they show enmity to the Ahlus-Sunnah through that, indeed they sometimes plot against the Ahlus-Sunnah, as is present now, and this has resulted in problems, so when they [i.e., those youth] heard this fatwa [of yours], the reality was that some of them were looking left and right [not knowing what to do], except that, alhamdulillaah, the stance of the people of knowledge with us was clear and they understood what you meant, O Shaikh, so alhamdulillaah, they clarified the situation.

Al-Albaani: Whatever the case, may Allaah bless you. What you mention concerning your country is in all countries, i.e., that the people of innovation fight the Ahlus-Sunnah.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 337.

1 Comment
March 29, 2012

When Can a Person Say, ‘I have established the proof against so and so?’


Questioner: When can I say, ‘I have established the proof against a certain person?’

Al-Albaani: Firstly, it is obligatory here that both people are taken into consideration, the one establishing the proof and the one it is being established against. If the one establishing the proof really is a scholar of the Book and the Sunnah, then this is the first condition.

The second is that he be eloquent and clear in what he says such that he is able to present the knowledge that he has to the people in a clear Arabic tongue, if he is an Arab, and if he is a non-Arab then similarly the situation does not go beyond what we mentioned of being capable of clarifying [what is required], as the Quraan indicated in His Saying, “And We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to state clearly for them …” [Ibraaheem 14:4] i.e., if the one establishing the proof has been granted eloquence and clarity in his language or in the language of his people and as we mentioned before has knowledge, it is then that he is able to say, ‘I have established the proof,’ [but] this is [only] regarding that which is in relation to him–the other side remains.

[Namely,] does the other person [against whom the proof is being established] have the understanding and perception and mental preparedness to accept–sorry, I made a mistake, [let me say this] so that you understand it clearly–is he mentally prepared to understand and not [just] accept, because the proof may be clear and plain, but is still not accepted by the one who turns away, or the mushrik, the kaafir.

But I want to repeat what I mean to say again, so: if he has the ability to understand the proof, then if the first condition is met in that person who is trying to establish/clarify the proof, and thereafter it becomes evident to this person that the one against whom the proof is being established has grasped the topic through his proofs and his clarification, at that time it is possible that he can say, ‘I have established the proof against so and so.’

I personally find it difficult to picture that the statement of a person that, ‘I have established the proof against so and so,’ is in agreement with reality, it is difficult for me to picture this situation. Because I don’t find–rather I can hardly imagine that the conditions [I mentioned earlier] be met in the one establishing the proof and the one it is being established against, for the issue may be defective on one of the two sides, and thus it is not correct to say, ‘I have established the proof against so and so,’ this is from one aspect.

The other aspect is [to ask] what is the point of the saying of the one who claims that, ‘I have established the proof against so and so?’ Is it to declare him to be a disbeliever? Declaring him to be a disbeliever … nothing will be the decisive boundary between him and disbelief except the sword, so if he chooses disbelief over the sword then he is a kaafir without any doubt, but as for us where today we live in a state of confusion and freedom which has no bounds, and a person is free to say and do whatever he wants, so we say what is the purpose behind saying, ‘I have established the proof against someone?’ is it to declare him to be a disbeliever? You can’t say that, ‘I have established the proof against him and so he is a disbeliever,’ because what we just mentioned stands in the way of that.

Thus, nothing remains except to entrust this person’s affair to Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, for He is the One who knows the reality of the one establishing the proof and the one it is being established against, i.e., [He is the One who knows] whether the proof has been established against the person or not. And your Lord is the One who knows what is in the breast of man and so He is his judge.

As for us, then we go by what is apparent from any Muslim who declares that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah and that Muhammad is His Messenger.

Only in an extremely rare case can I picture that [on one side] there is a real scholar of the Book and the Sunnah and that on the other there is the one who the proof is being established against and who has actually had the affair conveyed to him and has understood it but who then opposes it and disbelieves, such a person would be the one concerning whom it would be possible to say, ‘He has disbelieved.’  Even though in our society there is no major benefit which comes about through this, because the Sharee’ah laws are not implemented, this is what I have.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 24.

Leave a comment
March 26, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 3 | The Ruling on Praying in Mosques Which Have Many Innovations in Them and on Praying Behind an Imaam Who is an Innovator


Questioner: What is the ruling on praying in mosques which have many innovations in them, and following on from that, [what is the ruling on] praying behind an Imaam who is an innovator?

Al-Albaani: This is a question which is asked very often these days, and even though from one angle it shows signs of something good from another it bodes evil.

It shows signs of being something good in that those people who are keen on [implementing] the Sunnah are increasing day by day, alhamdulillaah, and they have started to pay attention to the many innovations found in the mosques and Imaams and muezzins and so on and for this reason they avoid praying in those mosques that are full of innovations and [avoid] following the Imaams who oppose the Sunnah in many of the things they do in their prayers.

So this is something good–but for how long will we carry on asking questions like this?

And I always and forever repeat two things: the first is related to following [i.e., praying behind] an Imaam who is an innovator and that it is from the Sunnah to pray behind every righteous or sinful person, this is a point of creed, mentioned in the aqidah of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, [i.e.,] praying behind every righteous or wicked person, which is something contrary to what the Shee’ah do.

For the Shee’ah do not hold it to be valid to pray behind anyone except–[and here] I will not only say that they do not hold it to be valid to pray behind anyone except the Shee’ah–no, they are even more misguided than that, [for they say that prayer is not valid] except behind an infallible Imaam and naturally in their eyes such an Imaam can only be from the Shee’ah, from the Ahlul-Bait.

So the Salaf laid this principle down for us: that we even pray behind a wicked sinner, why?

Because in many hadiths it has been reported that prayer behind the tyrannical or oppressive Imaams is permissible, like his saying عليه السلام reported in Sahih Muslim, “There will be rulers over you who delay the prayer from its correct time, so if you meet them, pray the prayer at its correct time and then pray it with them, for it will be an optional prayer for you.”

And in another hadith which is more important, encompassing and greater, he said about the Imaams, “If they lead the prayer correctly then they and you will receive the rewards, but if they make a mistake, then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin will be theirs.” [Bukhaari, no. 694]. [Thus] what concern is it of a person’s when he is praying behind an innovator whether he [i.e., the Imaam] is praying according to the Sunnah or opposing it?

If he [i.e., the Imaam] is correct in his prayer then the reward is for him and us and if he makes a mistake then the sin is on him and the reward is for us, so we gain in both situations, just like [a person using] a saw, [whether  he] pushes forward with it or pulls it back [on what he is cutting, either way it will cut and so he gains].  If we pray behind a Sunni Imaam then the reward is for us and if we pray behind an innovating Imaam then the reward is [still] for us–but his innovation is on his head and none of its sin reaches us. I always and forever repeat this regarding following these Imaams.

So this is an issue which I have constantly addressed and have mentioned that each Muslim is required to distance himself from praying in mosques that are decorated and full of innovations–but Allaah’s Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم spoke the truth when he said, ‘Indeed Islaam began as something strange and will return to being strange …’ nowadays it is rare that you will find a mosque which does not have an innovation or decorations by which they seek nearness, so they think, to Allaah, the Blessed and Most High.

If both types of mosque were present [i.e., ones with decorations and innovations and others without], I would have said that you should not pray in those mosques that are decorated and which have those innovations for it has been established from Ibn Umar, may Allaah be pleased with him, that he entered a mosque to pray the midday prayer when [all of a sudden] he was taken aback by a man calling out and saying, ‘The Prayer! The Prayer!’ after the actual call to prayer had been announced, so Ibn Umar said to the person with him, ‘Let us leave this mosque for there is innovation in it.’

If we wanted to copy this action of Ibn Umar’s in this age of ours we would have to stick to our houses for hardly a mosque can be found except that it is decorated … the carpets/prayer rugs and the images they are full of is enough, sometimes they have forbidden images, either they will have a forbidden image like a horse or something like that, a lion, or two crosses or something which resembles that.  So there is hardly any mosque except that it has that which distracts [a person]–but, ‘Some evil is less than others [in severity].’

If the matter centres around us praying on our own at home and praying in decorated mosques in which the Imaams are innovators then we repel the greater evil with the lesser evil, especially when we are not responsible for that greater evil and nor did it emanate from us, it having done so from those other people.

If we hold back from the congregational prayer then we have sinned and opposed the Saying of our Lord, “And establish the prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow [in worship and obedience].” [Baqarah 2:43]

This is a point we must not forget, “And establish the prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow [in worship and obedience].” And what is that point [which we must not forget]? ‘Establish the prayer …’ i.e., perform it perfectly, ‘… and bow with those who bow …’ i.e., with the Muslim congregation.

So if we leave the congregational prayer in those mosques–[bearing in mind that] we are not responsible for the decorations in them or for the incorrect way that some of the Imaams perform the prayer therein, we are not responsible for both of these wrongs–but if we pray at home we will be responsible for having opposed our Lord’s Saying, i.e., ‘… and bow with those who bow …’

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 190.

Leave a comment
March 25, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 2 | The Ruling Concerning the Youth Boycotting Those Mosques in Which the Imaams Fall Short in Implementing the Sunnah


Questioner: There are some youth in Morocco and Poland and other countries who boycott the mosques of the innovators, for example, [those who perform innovations such as] sending salaah on the Prophet of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم in unison, reading the Quraan in one voice, they do not give due attention to the Prophet’s Sunnah صلى الله عليه وسلم …

Al-Albaani: Like?

Questioner: … straightening the rows during prayer, saying Aameen loudly, and they also recite the Quraan in unison [as I mentioned above] and other things too.

Al-Albaani: From the mistakes of these Imaams boycotted by that group [of youths] you are speaking about is that they [i.e., those Imaams] do not establish the Sunnah, correct? [i.e., that is what you’re asking, right]?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: This [itself] is something which is considered to be in opposition to the Sunnah: i.e., boycotting a mosque because of the shortcomings of the Imaams of these mosques in implementing the Sharee’ah rulings and their lack of due concern for the Prophetic Sunnah does not make it permissible for those keen on following the Sunnah to boycott those mosques–except if it is to leave a mosque which has innovations like those [you mentioned] for another mosque which does not.

As for boycotting in the manner described in the question, i.e., a total boycotting of all mosques, then the example of that is like someone who builds a palace but destroys a whole country in doing so.

Since establishing the prayer, establishing the five prayers with the Muslim congregation in the mosques is an obligation, and it is not permissible for a Muslim to turn away from or to be complacent in carrying it out except for a legislated excuse.

It is no excuse whatsoever that mosques should be completely abandoned because some of those who pray there, even if it be the Imaam himself, oppose the Sunnah in many or a few matters–except if it is like what I just mentioned, that a person leaves a mosque which is close to him and goes to another because it is free of innovation, this is something obligatory on those who want to cling to the Sunnah.

This is because in this day and age, if a Muslim wanted to go into such fine detail with the Imaams of the mosques he would have to seclude himself from all of the people, because you will hardly ever find a mosque today which is established on the Sunnah from all angles, this is something impossible.

And that is because firstly, all of the mosques, or most of them, are built with tainted money, and are built in a manner which opposes the Sunnah. You will hardly find a mosque today except that it is decorated and embellished, even Makkah and Madinah, as you know.

So if these people don’t want to pray in a mosque which has an innovation in it, where will they go? They will have to leave all the congregations of the Muslims and will remain in the corners of their homes, praying there. And as such many hadiths would apply to them about the one who opposes the jamaa’ah dying the death of the days of ignorance.

For we find an excuse for a person who leaves a certain mosque to go to another which has less innovations, I do not say that this other mosque does not have any innovations, this does not exist today, but as was said of old, ‘Some evil is less than others [in severity].’

So it is possible that a Muslim can find a mosque close or far from him which establishes the prayer on the Sunnah, but [still] it will be full of engravings and decorations, but he has no say in that.

So today the Muslim [should be] as the Prophet عليه السلام said in some authentic hadiths, ‘Be moderate and aim to do good …’ [Sahih Muslim, no. 7117], as for trying to find the Prophet’s Mosque as it was in his time عليه السلام, then he will not find it today–so will a person then isolate himself from the people by staying in his house and severing his ties between himself and the Muslims in the most sacred and pure of Allaah’s places as is mentioned in an authentic hadith that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said about the best and worst of places, ‘The best places are the mosques and the worst are the markets.’

So if a Muslim wants a mosque which does not have a single breach of the Sharee’ah, it will mean that he will leave the best of places, i.e., the mosques–and this is not allowed, because as you know the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله سلم, and I will not prolong this too much, encouraged and stressed that one should pray with the Muslim congregation in the mosques, rather, Allaah the Mighty and Majestic ordered that in the Noble Quran when He said, “And establish prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow [in worship and obedience].” [Baqarah 2:43]

Thus, these people who stay away from or who boycott praying in the mosques–they are not doing so based upon any knowledge, for if they were upon knowledge they would have known the principle that when a Muslim is presented with two evils, he chooses the lesser of the two.

So they either pray in these mosques which they have no control over, except for ordering the good and forbidding the evil, they can’t change the evil there with their hands but they can say a good word–so if they leave off praying in these mosques and do so in their houses it would mean that they would have left the legislated principle which [as I just mentioned is that] when a Muslim is presented with two evils, he chooses the lesser of the two.

But I [also] said that if there is a mosque which opposes the Sunnah less [than another] and a Muslim goes there leaving the one close to him, then this is something we order and encourage as far as we are able to do so.

It may be that one of these beginners in knowledge may have read, for example, the narration which occurs in Sunan Abee Dawud that Ibn Umar entered a mosque and heard a man calling out to the prayer, saying, ‘The prayer! The prayer!’ … in Syria after the call to prayer is given they open a window and [a person calls out and] his voice can be heard in the street, saying, ‘O worshippers, the prayer! O worshippers, the prayer!’–when the muezzin said, ‘Come to prayer! Come to success!’ was it in vain [such that this man now has to say these extra words after the call to prayer?] [Calling out with these extra words after the adhaan] is a correction of the One who laid down the Sharee’ah [i.e., Allaah], for this reason [going back to that narration of Ibn Umar], when he entered the mosque and heard that man calling out, he said, ‘This is a mosque which has an innovation in it,’ and he left it.

But this does not mean that one should leave all mosques, but rather that one should go to a mosque which does not have innovations [if he can find one], for this reason these people [mentioned in the question] were only overcome due to their lack of knowledge and their extremism in following the Sunnah and worship, and the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, sincerely advising his Ummah, ‘Indeed, for every action there is some vigor, and each [instance of] vigor has a certain time, so whoever’s period [of vigor] is towards my Sunnah then he has been rightly guided, and whoever’s is towards an innovation, then he has gone astray.’

They flee from some innovations which they do not have the power to rectify and instead fall into a bigger innovation which they do have the power to change, and thus they fell into the madhhab of Abu Nawwaas who said, ‘And cure me with the disease [itself] …’

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, no. 574.

3 Comments
March 24, 2012

Advice Must Be Accompanied with Proof


 

 

Al-Albaani: He has to advise him, why wouldn’t he advise him?  But he can’t just advise him with mere claims, [saying], ‘Why do you do that? That is not allowed.’  This is not enough because maybe he will greet you with a similar response and say, ‘Why do you do such and such?  That is not allowed.’

So when you want to advise him and do so by reminding him of that which has been narrated from the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم sayings and actions–then the advice will [indeed] be advice, done in the legislated manner.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 79.

Leave a comment
March 24, 2012

Praying Behind the People of Innovation | 1 | There is a Distinction Between Praying Behind Innovators and Mixing with Them


Questioner: How do you deal with a dissenter [i.e., someone who opposes the Sunnah], between those who are too lenient which can lead to tamyee’ in practising the Sunnah, and those who are too harsh/strict which can lead to that which we have heard you mention many times, i.e., the lack of establishing the proof against the dissenter and other things, and I say this so as to not tire you by repeating what you have already mentioned.

But a doubt crops up based upon some actions of the Salaf, like the statement of some of them, ‘The hearts are weak, and sitting with the innovators snatches them away …’ and likewise, the fact that Imaam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him, would drive the people away from al-Haarith al-Muhaasibi.

Al-Albaani: Yes, yes.

Someone Else: He prohibited that his books be read.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: … and dealing with this dissenter according to the scale of his good and bad deeds, i.e., there is a principle which says, ‘We look at the person’s good and bad actions,’ [but] then we have the statements of some of the Salaf regarding driving the innovators away even if they have some good deeds?

Al-Albaani: Yes. That which I hold, and Allaah knows best, is that the statements of the Salaf, are related regarding a Salafi environment, i.e., an environment that is full of strong faith and the correct following of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Companions.

And [this issue you mentioned] is totally like that of boycotting, where a Muslim boycotts another to educate and discipline him, this is a well-known Sunnah. But my conviction, and how many times I’m asked about this, is that I say: our day and age is not right for boycotting, our day and age is not right for boycotting the innovators, because that means that you will have to go and live on the peak of a mountain, that you isolate yourself from the people and seclude yourself from them.

And that is because if you do boycott the people due to their sins or innovations then you will not have the effect which the Salaf used to have when they made those statements encouraging the people to avoid the people of innovation. There is no doubt that that is something which is derived from the directions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم amongst which is his well-known saying, “The example of a good companion (who sits with you) in comparison with a bad one, is like that of the musk seller and the blacksmith’s bellows (or furnace); from the first you will either buy musk or enjoy its good smell while the bellows will either burn your clothes or your house, or you get a bad nasty smell thereof,” [Bukhaari], the well-known hadith, this is like what is mentioned in some places, ‘Your friend pulls/draws you [to whatever he/she is upon],’ ‘Your friend pulls/draws you [to whatever he/she is upon].’

But accompanying/associating with innovators is one thing and distancing yourself from them to such an extent … like that which is asked about often, for example [people will ask], ‘So and so is a Sufi who uses the Prophets and Messengers as intermediaries [instead of calling upon Allaah directly themselves],’ and so on, ‘… and he leads the people in prayer, should I pray behind him?’ I say: pray behind him, so this is one thing and [actually] accompanying and associating with him and benefitting from him is something else.

And I think that which will support me in this distinction and which comes together/agrees with the guidance of the Salaf stated in those words I just mentioned, is that it has reached us that from the aqidah of the Salaf as-Saalih is to pray behind and over every righteous person and sinner, so it will be from harshness that we take these statements to drive the people away from praying behind these Imaams [who lead the prayers in the mosques], Imaams amongst whom it is very rare to find those upon the Sunnah.  The result of doing so would be that the people would have to stick to their houses and suspend the Jamaa’ah of the Muslims, such a thing goes against the statement of the Salaf that it is from aqidah to pray behind every righteous person or sinner.

But what is correct is that we warn these people from mixing with the people of innovation and the Sufis due to what we just mentioned in the hadith and [due to] the example which is a summary of the hadith, that, ‘Your friend pulls/draws you [to whatever he/she is upon].’

This is my opinion, and Allaah knows best.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 511.

Leave a comment
March 12, 2012

Selling Books and Tapes of Those Who Do Not Adopt the Salafi Methodology


Questioner: I work with Islamic cassettes, and I wanted to ask some of the people of knowledge about the responsibility of distributing the tapes of some of those people who do not adopt the methodology of the Salaf, they ascribe, for example, to some of the groups that we are aware of in the Islamic world, like the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon or the Tablighis and so on.

Some of them [i.e., the people of knowledge] ruled that I should not record or distribute these tapes at all and others said [that I should] choose those which I see to be valid and which do not openly oppose the methodology of the Salaf.

I’m still confused even now, and I ask Allaah the Mighty and Majestic to remove this confusion through what you see to be correct and through your direction in this issue, may Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: I have no doubt that the second opinion which you related from some of the people of knowledge is the correct one, because, ‘Wisdom is the believer’s objective, he takes it from wherever he hears it,’ even though this is a weak, inauthentic, hadith which some people in certain countries have become attached to, writing it on plaques and hanging it in prominent places in [their] sitting rooms on the basis that it is a hadith which is established from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, but it is not established, [so even though this hadith is weak] it is sufficient for us that it really is a wise saying, and thus we act upon it and do not show bigotry towards our madhhabs, learning a lesson from the bigotry of those of the other madhhabs.

So we are the followers of the truth wherever that truth may be, and from wherever it comes, so wisdom is the believer’s objective, he takes it from wherever he hears it.

So when you come across an article or a piece of learned research from one of those groups which, unfortunately, does not adopt the methodology of the Salaf, but which contains a reminder by using Allaah’s aayahs … [using] some authentic hadiths of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, then there is nothing which prevents one from distributing these pieces of research through recordings–as long as they do not contain that which opposes the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih.

And this is a problem which in reality is not confined to recordings but goes beyond that to written works which are more widespread than this recorded material.

So is it correct for a book distributor or seller to print that which is not in accordance with the methodology of the Salaf, and is it permissible for him to sell such books? The answer is that maybe no book is free of certain conflicting statements, and it is the following two things that have to be taken into consideration:

The first is that the book, or tape, is not something which is calling to a methodology which opposes that of the Salaf as-Saalih.

Secondly, that that in it which is correct be more than its mistakes, for as Imaam Maalik, may Allaah have mercy on him, said, “There is none among us except that he rejects [things that other people may say or do] and has his speech rejected, except for the person of this grave, i.e., the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم).” So for this reason these two principles must be taken into consideration concerning recorded material and printing books and selling them.

And if you were asking about recordings which do not contain any opposition to the Salafi methodology then I do not see any objection whatsoever to distributing them just because the one talking in them is not Salafi in his methodology but rather is a khalafi, or a hizbi, or similar to that. This is what knowledge and fairness demands, and what the attempt to bring together the differences present today, unfortunately, between the Islamic groups demands. This in summary is my answer to what you asked about.

Questioner: As a completion of this issue, some of those who hold that such things should be prevented say that by distributing the statements or tapes of people such as these there is a recommendation [tazkiyyah] of their methodology as though it is an approval of everything that they say.

Al-Albaani: I think there is exaggeration in that statement. If we were to assume that a man wrote a book in which he gathered hadiths about the words of remembrance [dhikr] from Sahih Bukhari, all the while not being someone who is Salafi in methodology, how can such a statement be applied to him? And what is the relation between distributing this material and supporting his methodology? No, by distributing this book of his we are supporting our methodology because he tread our way by choosing that which is authentically reported from our Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, so I think that such a statement is an exaggeration, and Allaah knows best.

Fataawaa Jeddah, 9.

1 Comment
March 10, 2012

Calling to the Truth is Coupled with Answering Those who Spread Falsehood


Questioner: We see many of the people who attribute themselves to the Salafi methodology constantly attacking the Salafi methodology and its representatives.

Al-Albaani: And its?

Questioner: And its representatives from the Imaams of the Salaf, like Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: Constant in this attack, not letting up. And along with this practice of theirs we do not hear an outcry or uproar about this aversive action. But when the issue comes to a head and such criticism reaches this dangerous level, objections [to what they say] arises [but then], for example, [you will hear people say], ‘So and so attacked you and so you defended yourselves by refuting him,’ and those people will reject your refutation and call out saying that there is no time to split the ranks [by answering those people who speak speak against the Salafi methodology], you have experienced this in Syria, they say, ‘This way of doing things is too harsh and you have to use wisdom and tact,’ and that, ‘The enemies of Islaam are the Communists and Ba’athists, and the Naseris …’ and so on.

So we see that this group is constant and unrelenting [in its attack] in books, commentaries and in such and such, so what should we do? Is it from wisdom that we do not criticise their scholars at all? And that we try to clarify the truth without it?

Or as part of da’wah, when the situation reaches such a level, should we clarify the extremism and enmity and deviation [that is directed at the Salafi methodology and scholars], i.e., should we employ both means or give precedence to being silent and [just] continuing in our da’wah [without correcting them] …?

Al-Albaani: No, that is not enough. We have to combine both calling to the truth and answering those who spread falsehood, those who fight the truth and its callers, and this is something very clear from what I have said before. So [we must] make the truth known along with using wisdom and beautiful preaching.

Questioner: People now think that that isn’t wise.

Al-Albaani: We’ve gone back to ‘the people’ again. What have we got to do with the people?

We have to know the truth and get closer to Allaah the Mighty and Majestic by calling to it. All of us are familiar with His Statement, the Blessed and Most High, in Surah al-Asr, “By time. Indeed, mankind is in loss. Except for those who have believed and done righteous deeds and advised each other to truth and advised each other to patience.” [Al-Asr 103]

So we have to call to the truth and be patient in that, not becoming weary or fed up, no matter what the enemies plot against us, or refute us with, or attribute to us in terms of harshness and even khurooj and so on–it doesn’t trouble us since our Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, said to His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, “Nothing is said to you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) except what was said to the Messengers before you.” [Fussilat 41:43].

What are we–we who think that we are callers [to the truth]–what are we in comparison to our Prophet عليه السلام?

Nothing whatsoever.

So if the disbelievers and those people who are misguided speak as a matter of course about the Prophets, and our Prophet عليه السلام is from them too, then we must prepare ourselves for the fact that we will hear many things from those who are astray, we have to prepare ourselves [for that], and be patient in our call so that we will be rewarded, as He, the Most High, said, “Only those who are patient shall receive their rewards in full, without reckoning.” [Az-Zumar 39:10].

And Allaah’s Aid is sought.

Questioner: Jazaakumullaahu khaira.

Al-Albaani: Wa iyaakum.

Leave a comment