albaanee | The Albaani Site

April 1, 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 900.

2 Comments

March 4, 2013

Al-Albaani on Boycotting | 1

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

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

Questioner: No, it does not hold.

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

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

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

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

Al-Albaani: Now it’s clear.

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

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

Questioner: Disassociation?

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

Questioner: Warning, ya’ni, against him.

Al-Albaani: What?

Questioner: Warning against him and his da’wah.

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

Questioner: … so that I understand …

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

Questioner: He boycotts him.

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

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

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

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

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

The next post.

2 Comments

February 28, 2013

Shaikh ’Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbaad’s Obituary of Al-Albaani

Shaikh ’Abdul-Muhsin al-’Abbaad said, “All praise is due to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds, and may He praise and send peace upon His Slave and Messenger, our Prophet Muhammad and upon his Family and all of his Companions.

As for what follows:

We remember the statement of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم in the hadith whose authenticity is agreed upon, reported from ’Abdullah ibn ’Amr ibn al-’Aas, may Allaah be pleased with them both, that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Verily, Allaah does not take away knowledge by snatching it, snatching it from men’s hearts, but He takes away knowledge through the death of the scholars.” This noble hadith shows the importance of knowledge and the greatness of the rank of the scholars, and that losing them and their going away [through death] is nothing but a taking away of knowledge, and that Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, does not take it away from the hearts of men whereby a person has it and then becomes someone who does not, but He takes it away through the death of the scholars, and he has said, عليه الصلاة والسلام, “And indeed the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets. And verily the Prophets do not leave behind a dinar or a dirham for inheritance–but rather they leave behind knowledge. So whoever takes hold of it, has acquired a copious share.”

This is the rank of the scholars, and this is the status of the scholars who the Chosen Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم described as being inheritors of the Prophets.

And how excellent an inheritance it is–beneficial knowledge: legislated knowledge taken from the Book of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, and the Sunnah of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, because this is true knowledge, that of the Book and the Sunnah.

And as is known and mentioned in the statements of some of the people of knowledge: the passing of the scholars is an occasion of a gap in the Religion and a loss for the Muslims when those scholars who are referred to, who are benefitted from, who direct and give insight and enlighten them, leave, indeed that is a huge loss for the people.

And from that which has taken place in the last few days is the passing of the formidable scholar, the illustrious Hadith authority, the ’Allaamah, the Shaikh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani, may Allaah have mercy on him and forgive him.

He was, truly, a magnificent scholar and well-known Hadith authority, who made enormous efforts in serving the Sunnah and in protecting the Hadith of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and clarifying the sources of those hadiths and the books that mentioned them, and clarifying their grading in terms of authenticity and weakness.

From those books [which Shaikh al-Albaani gave tremendous attention to] is the very book that we study [i.e., which Shaikh ’Abbaad teaches in the Prophet’s Mosque], Sunan Abu Dawud, for he expended great effort on it and others, devoting his attention to mentioning what he declared to be authentic and weak. So his efforts are enormous, and his service to the Sunnah distinguished and the student of knowledge cannot do without referring back to his books and his works, for verily there is abundant good in them, and profuse knowledge.

The passing of a scholar like this is in reality a loss and calamity upon the Muslims, and we ask Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, to whom belongs what He took and what He gave to replace [the loss] with good for the Muslims, and to grant them success to attain that in which lies their well-being and happiness, and that He aids the students of knowledge to give due attention to attain, seek, and become acquainted with it, indeed, He, the One free of all defects and the Most High, is Munificent, Generous.

And as is known, his books are great and renowned, and the majority of libraries will not be devoid of them or some of them, for they are in the tens, some large, others small and some medium in size.

In short, the passing of such a scholar, may Allaah have mercy on him, is a great loss for the Muslims, so we ask Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, to replace [it] with good for them, and that He aids the students of knowledge to acquire beneficial knowledge and action upon that knowledge, indeed, He, the One free of all defects and the Most High, is Munificent, Generous.

And even though he, may Allaah have mercy on him, had some opinions which we regard as being mistakes, they are however obscure in the sea, or seas, of that which he was correct in and [are overwhelmed] by the good and benefit he brought about for the Muslims in serving the Sunnah of al-Mustafaa, صلوات الله وسلامه وبركاته عليه. We regard those issues that emanated from him to be mistakes in which he strove to come to a legislated ruling [mujtahid] and [thus] he will be rewarded for his ijtihaad, but let that not make a person belittle or make slight of his vast knowledge, of his copious knowledge, of his tremendous service, of his massive benefit–for he, in truth, is from the unique scholars of this time and from those who have made strenuous efforts in the service of the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

In the first half of this year, 1420 AH [1999 CE], the Muslims lost a great scholar, a Rabbaani scholar, we regard him as such based upon what is apparent to us and we entrust the reality of his situation and ending to Allaah, and that [scholar] was his excellency, the Shaikh, the ’Allaamah ’Abdul-’Aziz ibn Baaz, may Allaah have mercy on him, and in the second quarter of the same year this great scholar, the famous muhaddith, the Shaikh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaani passed away, may Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, have mercy on him. And in between [the time of] both of their deaths, the Shaikh ’Atiyyah Muhammad Saalim, may Allaah have mercy on him, who used to teach in the Prophet’s Mosque, passed away. So we have lost these three scholars and we ask Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, to forgive all of them, to overlook their sins and to raise their ranks.

Indeed these two scholars, in our opinion, are from the major, expert, investigative scholars who had a superior concern and resolute determination [in serving the Sunnah] and abundant good came about at their hands, huge benefit came to Islaam and the Muslims because of them–so may Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, reward them with the best reward, forgive them, overlook their sins, and seal all of our deaths with a blissful ending, indeed He, the One free of all defects and the Most High, is Munificent, Generous.”

Al-Asaalah Magazine, no. 23, pp. 13-14.

2 Comments

January 25, 2013

Is it Allowed to Perform Ruqya on Someone Possessed by a Jinn Through a Cassette Recording?

Questioner: Is it allowed to perform ruqya [reciting aayahs/supplications on someone who is poisoned/possessed by Jinn, etc.] through a cassette?

Al-Albaani: Is it allowed to perform ruqya what?

Questioner: … through a cassette?

Al-Albaani: … through a cassette?

Questioner: Cassette.

Al-Albaani: … cassette.

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Is the adhaan allowed? Is the iqaamah allowed [through a cassette]? If you are in doubt such that I should answer you [I will], and if you know that the answer is that it is not allowed [to call the adhaan or iqaamah using a cassette] then the answer is the same [concerning ruqya]–it is not allowed.

For this reason I said on some occasions that I think, and Allaah knows best if the report is true, that sometimes a single [unified] adhaan is played on tape–if this report is true [and people are actually doing that] then I say that I fear a day will come when the people will pray behind a cassette [recording].

Al-Huda wan-Noor, 616.

2 Comments

January 25, 2013

What Has Been Attributed to Imaam Ahmad Concerning Seeking The Prophet’s Intercession صلى الله عليه وسلم

Questioner: It is reported from Imaam Ahmad that he used to permit intercession [tawassul] through the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, what is the authenticity of that [report]? And what is your opinion [concerning this]?

Al-Albaani: As for the authenticity of that according to the method employed when checking hadith, [then] we are not able to establish it, and it is not possible for us to establish [the authenticity] of every statement relayed about an Imaam of the Muslims according to the method of the scholars of hadith.

But we cannot but rely on the scholars who have preceded us in time and knowledge, and we can only but rely on them in the statements and narrations they relay to us–until a mistake in their reporting that becomes clear to us … [about] Imaam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him, permitting intercession through the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

I remember reading that a long time ago in the Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah’s book, ‘At-Tawassul wal-Wasilah,’ he narrates that [statement] as being one of Imaam Ahmad’s, and his authority in that was the hadith of the blind man.

And as I just said: as long as Ibn Taymiyyah is narrating that, and he is someone who is trusted and relied upon in that which he narrates, then we maintain that which he narrated until the weakness of what he is narrating is established with us, this is regarding the answer to the question.

But I want to mention something important, in my view, concerning statements such as this: it does not harm us whether or not this statement is confirmed from Imaam Ahmad, both matters are equal before us–that is because we are not ‘Ahmadees’ [i.e., blind followers of Imaam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him], but rather as I just said: we cherish these Imaams and hold them in high esteem and benefit from their knowledge and methodology, but we do not surrender the command of our aqidah or our pillars to them except those to whom it becomes clear to us have the truth with them.

Thus, if the report from Ibn Taymiyyah about Imaam Ahmad allowing that … and that his proof in that was the hadith of the blind man, and then upon studying the hadith of the blind man it becomes obvious that it does not denote seeking the intercession of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم after his death, because the blind man was only seeking intercession through the supplication [du’aa] of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم as is well-noted in that same book of Ibn Taymiyyah’s [we] just mentioned, and as I further clarified in my book [entitled], ‘At-Tawassul Anwaa’uhu wa Ahkaamuhu,’ … and the hadith of the blind man all centres around seeking intercession with the rank of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, so it is not permissible for us to say that it is permissible to seek intercession through the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم now, because we cannot inform him what it is we need him to supplicate to his Lord for us is, and, for example, when he supplicates while in the state of barzakh we cannot know that he has [actually] supplicated, so the issue in the hadith of the blind man is connected to when he was alive عليه السلام and it has no connection to [after] his death.

Al-Fataawa al-Kuwaitiyyah, pp. 45-47.

Leave a comment

January 25, 2013

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

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

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

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

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

A believer truly sees his mistakes and faults through others.

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

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

Leave a comment

January 23, 2013

Is it Correct that We will See the Jinn on the Day of Resurrection but They will not See us?

Questioner: Is it correct that we will see the Jinn on the Day of Resurrection but they will not see us, i.e., the opposite of how it is in the dunyaa?

Al-Albaani: That is not correct.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 326.

Leave a comment

January 23, 2013

Is it Possible for One’s Qareen to Become Visible?

Questioner: Everyone has a [jinn] companion [qareen], is it possible for the qareen to become visible to the eye [whether in their] true form or another?

Al-Albaani: Allaah knows best. It is possible that the jinn can manifest itself in different forms, this is something unequivocal. As for the question [specifically] about the qareen [assigned to every individual] then I don’t have an answer, since nothing has been reported to us in this regard.

Questioner: Is it true or [just something] imaginary that after a person is murdered it [i.e., his qareen] becomes visible?

Al-Albaani: No, that’s a myth.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 215.

Leave a comment

January 23, 2013

Is it Possible for a Person to See his Jinn?

Questioner: Is it possible for a person to see his jinn?

Al-Albaani: No, it is not possible.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 323.

Leave a comment

December 12, 2012

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

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

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

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

Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor, 1/219.

1 Comment

December 9, 2012

Al-Albaani and Fame

Shaikh Abu Islaam Saalih Taa Haa said, “A man one day invited the Shaikh to visit him in his house and announced the visit on some media outlets and so a large number of people gathered to see the Shaikh and listen to him. When the Shaikh came to know of that he refused to go to the invite. I later asked him about his reason for not going, and he said, ‘Showing off destroys a person.’

Al-Aqeedah Awwalan Law Kanu Ya’lamun, pp. 14-15.

1 Comment

December 8, 2012

‘This is a Gift Which No-one Except al-Albaani will Give to You.’

Shaikh Abu Islaam Saalih Taa Haa said, “He used to teach us humbleness, and an example of his humility and fine behaviour towards me is that many times he would visit us after Fajr prayer and would bring a modest gift with him, may Allaah have mercy on him, and sometimes say, jokingly, ‘This is a gift which no-one except al-Albaani will give to you,’ due to [both] the modest nature of the gift and his [own] modesty.”

Al-Aqeedah Awwalan Law Kanu Ya’lamun, p. 22.

3 Comments

December 6, 2012

Al-Albaani and Turning up on Time

Shaikh Abu Islaam Saalih Taa Haa said, “Shaikh al-Albaani, may Allaah have mercy on him, used to teach us to be precise for appointments. An example of that is when I would invite him to visit me or if I accompanied him to an invite, he, may Allaah have mercy on him, would not turn up late or early for the set engagement.

Once I invited him over at 1 pm and he arrived in his car before that by a quarter of an hour, and remained seated in it and did not get out until the time was due … I was not aware of the Shaikh’s presence, it was the people who accompanied him who told me about that [later]. When I asked the Shaikh about that, he said, ‘Because before the [set] time you’re busy preparing for the guest’s arrival at [that] specified time … if we were to come in before it, we’d divert you from your preparation for your guests.’

So may Allaah have mercy on our Shaikh, how precise his understanding was! And how keen he was to act upon the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

And when he, may Allaah have mercy on him, was invited to a place he would not take anyone with him unless the host had permitted him to. One time I invited him saying, ‘Our Shaikh! I invite you to lunch with me tomorrow,’ and by that I meant him and his wife, Umm al-Fadl. The next day he came alone so I said to him, ‘Where is Umm al-Fadl?’ So he replied, ‘You didn’t mention to me that I should bring Umm al-Fadl with me. And we stick to being precise in what is said.’”

Al-Aqeedah Awwalan Law Kanu Ya’lamun, pp. 17-18.

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 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 18^th 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

Tag: albaanee