The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century

Tag: salmaan

Al-Albaani asked about Salmaan and his advice to the Youth | 3 |


Questioner: O Shaikh! I don’t know … the first question which I asked you, is it a mistake in aqidah? [He’s referring to the question he asked the Shaikh which is mentioned in this post.]

Al-Albaani: Which one?

Questioner: Their saying, ‘If the Prophets and the righteous people waged war against shirk which contradicts Laa ilaaha illallaah up until the Day of Resurrection …’

Al-Albaani: [This saying that the Prophets didn’t wage war against shirk in al-Uluhiyyah but only shirk in al-Haakimiyyah] is the greatest misguidance. And I already answered you about Noah عليه السلام.

Questioner: He also said that.

Al-Albaani: Who?

Questioner: Shaikh Salmaan [al-Awdah].

Al-Albaani: Where?

Questioner: In this book.

Al-Albaani: Show me the book.

Questioner: Page one hundred and seventy.

Al-Albaani [reading from the book]: He says, ‘And that they, i.e., the callers, know that if the Prophets and the righteous people up until the Day of Resurrection, fought against the types of shirk which go against Laa ilaaha illallaah which were only connected to social customs no one except a few would have confronted them or stood in their faces.’

Here the word ‘sha’biyyah’, does it have [a meaning] that is understood in the Arabic language or not?

Questioner: O Shaikh! What I understand, and Allaah knows best, and I could be mistaken in that …

Al-Albaani: We all could be.

Questioner: Social customs are these [things] present among the people, for example like sitting at the graves, performing tawaaf around the graves, taking oaths … amulets … and so on, and Allaah knows best.

Al-Albaani: Yes, yes. But is the call to tawheed limited to this?

Questioner: Is the call to tawheed what?

Al-Albaani: Limited to this only, namely fighting against shirk associated with customs?

Questioner: No, rather shirk in its totality.

Al-Albaani: Okay, so [in the book] he is referring to specific people, he understands, whether rightly or mistakenly, that they are pleased with the rulers and the things they do in opposition to the Sharee’ah, and that they only pay attention to curing the hearts of the public and individuals.

Maybe I have been able to clarify to you what the man meant? Namely, that the call to the truth is not only restricted to rectifying the public and not the rulers, and being happy with what the rulers do and leaving them to do those things which oppose the sharee’ah.

Questioner: O Shaikh! Is the last sentence correct?

Al-Albaani: Let us listen to what the people of Makkah say.

The Meccan Man: I say: the reality is that in many issues the people either go to extremes or fall short. So you’ll either have some people who do not understand the call to tawheed to be anything except Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah alone whilst leaving the people in their major shirk, and as they call it shirk associated with the graves.

Or [on the other hand] you have people who do not like or, who, from the moment a person says, ‘Haa …’ [i.e., as soon as they open their mouth to say, ‘Haakimyyah’] [from the moment a person says], ‘Tawheed includes Haakimiyaah for Allaah the Mighty and Majestic,’ they are sensitive to this issue and will not look at it either closely or from afar, rather they are at war with what is called grave-worship.

And if we are just in this issue the truth will be known, that the call to tawheed, the call to Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah is that judgement be for Allaah alone, and from our reading [we see that] many of the writers, and the truth will be said, by Haakimiyyah sometimes mean total Haakmiyyah, that all of it is for Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, and sometimes by it they mean the politics which they run behind.

So it is from justice and fairness that we say: Tawheed includes both aspects. So if these statements, O my brother, are understood to mean that if the Prophets had just prevented the people from the graves no-one would have opposed them … this is the meaning of the statements, but there is a second point, my brother.

With the permission of our beloved Shaikh: the statements are not taken to mean what the reader has understood, for if that is the case then many people will not understand [the statements correctly], rather the statements are to be understood in light of other statements made by the man, either in other places [in his works] or from his actual stance.

So if the man is well known for [his] complete tawheed and is a caller to it, or [it is well known] that he is a monotheist [muwahhid] and then he says a word or two–they are not to be understood in the worst possible manner, because if it were taken to mean that then he would be an heretic in every meaning of the word, and he would have left the fold of Islaam, and we see that his actual state of affairs is not like that.

So this is a matter worthy [of being mentioned]. And on this occasion [it is fitting that we mention that] taking statements to mean the worst possible meaning is not a principle from those of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.

I remember, O Shaikh, that …

Al-Albaani asked about Salmaan and his advice to the Youth | 2 | Those Who Rush into Issues which the Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and His Students Would Take Their Time Over


Someone Else: O Shaikh! The state of affairs concerning what goes on amongst the youth in many parts of the world is very bleak. We don’t doubt that there are people who have deviated, that are mistaken, that are innovators. [But] many times the confrontation has become personal, a confrontation over mere gossip [qeel wal-qaal] and the youth do not understand the wasted time that that entails nor the great antagonism that it foments between them. This is something they do not notice.

We don’t doubt that the truth is with them, but when I ask many of the youth how much Quraan they have memorised they will say, ‘Three Juzz,’ and if I ask them how long they have been debating this issue, they will say, ‘Three years.’

For three years they’ve been sitting, [discussing things like], ‘Zaid [i.e., so and so] is reliable, he’s not reliable, he’s a kaafir, he’s not a kaafir, he’s an apostate, he’s not an apostate, he said what he said, he’s a deviant, he’s not a deviant.’

Maybe he is [in fact] a deviant or mistaken or misguided, [but] they think that if someone comes to advise them telling them that this is a waste of time, most of them will think that the person advising them is with those deviants, and this is something strange, when all he wants is to advise them.

[You’ll find] a youth, a seventeen year old, who hasn’t memorised anything except a little–[but] he’ll be discussing very deep issues which the Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and his students would take their time and deliberate patiently and carefully over. But these youth will rush to such issues. So we want some direction concerning things like this.

Al-Albaani: Many times I’m asked, ‘What is your opinion about so and so?’ and I understand from the questioner that he is either for the person he is asking about or against him. And maybe the one he is asking about is from our brothers, and maybe he is from our old brothers about whom it is said, ‘He has deviated/strayed.’

So I advise the questioner, my brother, what have you to do with Zaid, Bakr and Umar? [Trans. note: i.e., like saying Tom, Dick and Harry]. Remain on the right course as you have been commanded [cf. Surah Hud 11:112].

Learn knowledge.

This knowledge will enable you to distinguish between the righteous person and the sinner, between the one who is correct and the one who is mistaken and so on. Thereafter, don’t hate your Muslim brother just because–I don’t say just because he made a mistake–rather I say [don’t hate your Muslim brother] just because he has deviated/strayed, but has strayed in an issue or two or three but in other issues he has not deviated.

We find in the Imaams of Hadith people whose hadiths they would accept [yet] in their biographies it will be said that he was a Murji’ee, a Khaariji, a Naasibi and so on. These are all faults and misguidance but they had a balance which they stuck to and they would not let the weight of one fault outweigh many good deeds, or [they would not let the weight of] two or three faults outweigh all of the good deeds [the person has] the greatest of which is the testimony that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah.

I say, for example, regarding Salmaan [al-Awdah] and people like him: some of our Salafi brothers accuse them of being from the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon. I say: I don’t know whether he is from the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon. But would that the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon were like him. The Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon fight the call to tawheed and say that it splits the Ummah and divides the [united] word. As for these people, as far as I know, and the people of Makkah know their mountain passes best, they call to tawheed and study tawheed, isn’t that so?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Thus, if only the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon were like that. And maybe some political activity is found among them [i.e., among Salmaan and people like him], and they have something which resembles revolting against the rulers … and so on.

Yes, the Khawaarij were like that, the real Khawaarij which the scholars have no doubt were the ones referred to in the Prophet’s عليه السلام saying, “The Khawaarij are the dogs of the Fire,” the ones who this refers to are those who rebelled against Ali and as is mentioned in the famous hadith of the two Sahihs, “… they will leave Islaam like an arrow darts through the game’s body …” they [i.e., those who rebelled against Ali] are the ones intended here.

Yet along with this, they [i.e., the scholars of hadith] would narrate hadith from them and regarded them as Muslims. So they left their misguidance and made clear their good deeds, and this is by way of 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].

So these people, if they have strayed, and I don’t think it is a deviation in aqidah, but rather in methods … whatever the case we ask Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, that He makes us a balanced nation, which does not go to extremes or fall short.

Questioner: O Shaikh! …

Al-Albaani asked about Maududi and Salmaan and his advice to the Youth | 1

Continuing from the same recording made in 1993.

Questioner: There is a question, O Shaikh. What do you say about someone who has opposed the Imaams of Islaam in a particular issue which they have united upon and the proof has been established against him but he does not turn back, rather, add to that the fact that he praises some of the Sufis and mufawwidah, praised the one who goes by the saying of Jahm regarding the Quraan and slanders some of the Companions, in fact, some of the Messengers, calling them Imaams and harsh. In fact, he praises some of the heretics who have permitted apostasy and have vilified the aqidah and the Prophet عليه السلام and the Companions and the People of Hadith, and says that there is a lot of good in them, and calls their aberrations and misguidance ijtihaad, saying, “… even though we are wary of some of their ijtihaad …” So is such a person an innovator and should we single him out and say that so and so is an innovator to warn the Ummah and out of sincerity to Allaah, His Book, His Prophet, the Imaams of the Muslims and their general folk?

Al-Albaani: He mentioned this in a book?

Questioner: In various places.

Al-Albaani: Not in a book?

Questioner: In some books too.

Al-Albaani: Okay, books like?

Questioner: He’s the one who praised this …

Al-Albaani: Don’t digress, don’t digress.

Questioner: The man who said these things, said them in some of his books like Al-Adaalah al-Ijtimaa’iyyah or Fee Dhilaal al-Quraan [i.e., Sayyid Qutb] but the one who praised him and called him a mujtahid and so on did so in a tape, in some tapes, and also another person like this guy has a book called Al-Khilaafah wal-Mulk and he has another book in which he spoke about some of the Prophets, about Noah, for example, saying that when he said, “…My Lord, indeed my son is of my family …” [Hud 11:45] that emotions of the days of ignorance over took him, and that when Yusuf said, “… Appoint me over the storehouses of the land. Indeed, I will be a knowing guardian …” [Yusuf 12:55] that he was a dictator looking to set up a dictatorship like Mussolini in our time.

Al-Albaani: Who is the one who says this?

Questioner: In the book Al-Khilaafah wal-Mulk … Maududi …

Al-Albaani: Who is he?

Questioner: Maududi …

Al-Albaani: Maududi. And who is the one who praises these statements?

Questioner: Wallaahi, one of the callers praised them …

Al-Albaani: Ya’ni, backbiting, [you said], “One of the callers …” if you name him it’s backbiting?

Questioner: No, inshaa Allaah, it’s not backbiting. Shaikh Salmaan praised him.

Al-Albaani: I’m saying: did he praise the statements or the person saying them?

Questioner: He praised them, wallaahi, in a tape.

Al-Albaani: Listen. Did you understand what I said?

Questioner: Okayrepeat the question to me …

Someone else: The Shaikh is saying, “Did he praise these statements or the person who made them?”

Questioner: No, the one who made them.

Al-Albaani: So if he praised the one who made them I may praise him too, does that mean I deem everything he says to be correct?

Questioner: No it doesn’t.

Al-Albaani: So what do you mean by this question?

Questioner: We heard in some cassettes that one of the Shaikhs went to him and spoke to him saying that so and so, i.e., Maududi, has said such and such, so he [i.e., the person they went to] said, ‘Wallaahi, if I were asked on the Day of Judgement [about him], I will say he is an Imaam and a Mujaddid.’ So this issue had us unsettled and we said we would ask the Shaikh [i.e., al-Albaani ] about it.

Al-Albaani: Look, my brother.

I advise you and the other youths who–it seems to us are on a crooked path, and Allaah knows best–to stop wasting your time in criticising each other, saying so and so said this, and so and so said that, and so and so said this.

Because, firstly, this has nothing to do with knowledge whatsoever. And secondly, this way fills one with spite and brings about malice and hatred in the hearts.

It is only upon you to seek knowledge.

For knowledge is the thing which will uncover whether these statements of praise about a certain person are referring to that person who has many mistakes? And whether, for example, it is correct for us to call him a person of innovation? And therefore, whether he is an innovator?

What have we to do with delving deeply into such issues?

I advise that you do not delve deeply into such issues to this extent because the reality is that we now complain of this division which has arisen between those who attribute themselves to the call of the Book and the Sunnah, or as we say, the Salafi Da’wah.

The greatest cause of this division, and Allaah knows best, is the soul which is the persistent enjoiner of evil [cf. Surah Yusuf 12:53] and it is not the difference in some ideological opinions.

This is my advice.

Another questioner: O Shaikh! …

%d bloggers like this: