Part 7.1: Ali Halabi’s Long Journey [False Utilization of Rifqan Ahlus Sunnah Bi-Ahlis Sunnah


Page 2 of 2

Additional Realities

It is also important to know that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin was not aware of the full details of the dispute and refutations that took place between Maribi and Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadee. Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin made this clear to Shaikh Rabee that he has not read the refutations; rather he sees this affair as one that will pre-occupy a person away from knowledge. Likewise, Shaikh Abdul Muhsin himself acknowledged that he only came to know of Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmi’s advice about the treatise Rifqan Ahlis Sunnah Bi-Ahlis Sunnah a year after his death. Reader: This is a manifest proof showing that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin has not read the refutations in the dispute between Maribi and Shaikh Rabee. Therefore, how can Halabi and others utilise Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin’s treatise to justify their stances? Indeed, the best of statements mentioned in this affair is that of Al-Allaamah Ubaid Bin Abdillaah Al-Jaabiree (may Allaah preserve him) as follows:

Firstly: When asked about Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin’s treatise, Shaikh Ubaid said: ‘’I say: The one who knows is a proof against the one who does not know.’’ The Shaikh also went to say that those who spoke against Abul Hasan al-Maribi have carried that out with proofs and manifest clarifications. They have clearly refuted the statements and actions of Abul Hasan al-Maribi. Therefore, it is obligatory to accept the refutations of the one who carried that out with proofs, and if not the (rejecter of such proofs) is a person of desires.

Secondly: As for the scholar who has not come across what those who refuted with evidences came across, then indeed such a scholar is not harmed at all; but we do not follow him in (that affair). This is something well-known in the history of the previous scholars. For example, Imaam Shaa-fi’ee held Ibraaheem Ibn Muhammad Bin Abee Yahyah to be trustworthy and praised him; but the scholars before Shaafi-ee and those after him criticised Ibraaheem and they said that he is not reliable as stated by Shaafi-ee. Therefore, neither was Ibraaheem benefitted by Imaam Shaafi-ee’s praise of him nor was Imaam Shaafi’ee harmed by the criticisms against Ibraaheem.

Finally: Some of the Major scholars (i.e. Shaikh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaami, Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh Ubaid, Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadee and others) refuted the statements and views of the two political activists Salmaan and Safar, even though the Imaams Abdul-Azeez Bin Baaz, Uthaymeen and the Major scholars in the permanent committee did not speak, because they did not come across the mistakes of Salmaan and Safar. And it was not until after 4–5 years that the government and the committee of major scholars came to know of reality of Salmaan and Safar, and took action against them. Likewise, Imaam Albaanee used to praise Salmaan and Safar at a time in which some Major scholars used to refute them, but when their affair became manifest to him, he acknowledged the early refutations of those scholars.

Conclusion

Reader, may Allaah bless you. Indeed, the above short discussion clearly shows that what Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin intended by his treatise was not the same thing intended by the Hizbiyyoon Halabi, Maribi and others. The Shaikh’s treatise was a warning against unjustified boycotting and declaring others innovators without right. It was a treatise against the transgressions and exaggerations of Faaleh Al-Harbi.

However, the deceitful Hizbiyyoon Halabi, Maribi and those similar to them utilised the Shaikh’s treatise for their own corrupt aims; rather they even utilised it to cover up the likes of Adnaan Ar’oor, whom Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin saw as one to be boycotted and warned against.

Likewise, we come to know of the fact that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin was unaware of the full details of the dispute between Shaikh Rabee and the innovator Abul Hasan Al-Maribi. So the Hizbiyyoon once again utilised this incident to cover up Maribi’s evil state of affairs after he was clearly refuted for his innovations and false principles. All praise be to Allaah! Shaikh Ubaid gave some excellent examples of what may lead a scholar to praise an individual who is not deserving of praise. Excellent indeed are the example given by Shaikh Ubaid about Imaam Shaafi’ee and Ibraaheem Ibn Muhammad Bin Abee Yahyah and others.

However, the people of hizbiyyah and corrupt alliances seek to obscure the detailed refutations of the scholars, whilst holding onto unjustified praises in order to defend the innovators and their false principles. For a brief discussion about criticism and praise, see link:[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWPR3Eacn4k&feature=plcp]

Also see link: http://www.themadkhalis.com/md/articles/nvskb-why-shaykh-rabee-was-correct-and-shaykh-abdul-muhsin-al-abbaad-was-wrong-yet-both-are-rewarded.cfm

Page
  • 1
  • 2

Salafi Centre Appeal 2020

Search

Newsletter

Follow Us

Donate

Back to Top

More Articles

Basics

Aqeedah

Manhaj (Methodology)

Fiqh (Rulings & Jurisprudence)

Women & Family

Innovations in Islam

Share The Knowledge
Shares