A Lofty Benefit: The Basis, Origin of Every Knowledge and Action
In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy
A Lofty Benefit: The Basis, Origin of Every Knowledge and Action
Imaam Ibnul Qayyim (rahimahullaah) said:
The basis, origin of all theoretical knowledge and every wilfully chosen action are the thoughts (khawaatir) and ideas (afkaar). For they necessitate conceptions (visualisations, imaginations) [in the minds], and these conceptions invite towards iraadaat (i.e. the desires, will, intent for something), and these iraadaat require the occurrence of the action. And the frequent repetition of the occurrence of this action, then leads to a habit. Hence, the rectitude of all of these steps lies in the rectitude of the (initial) thoughts and ideas, and the corruption (of all these steps) lies in them also…[end of quote]
So understand this, and know that the directions taken by the likes of Abu Usamah and Abdul-Qadir and others who associated with Salafiyyah for many years, but without grasping the true realities of the fitan that were to come, and without giving due importance to the manaahij of the Salaf, was due to their general ignorance and lack of perception of historical realities and truths, and facts that pertained to the fitnah of Ikhwaaniyyah, in contemporary da’wah, and in the absence of this, they continued upon flawed perceptions till this day, and this perfectly explains the behaviour that is now emerging from them. Even if from certain angles they knew certain things, they missed the important perspectives by far and as Abu Usamah often speaks about “sophistication”, but unfortunately he himself lacks it, and was not able to grasp matters and gain clear, comprehensive thoughts with respect to them.
Instead of basing perceptions upon a comprehensive understanding of the Usool of the Salaf, the people who went astray did so because they had their perceptions built upon isolated events and occurrences. As an example, the Gulf War, or the fitnah of Safar and Salman, or the fitnah of Ihyaa at-Turaath or the fitnah of al-Ma’ribee. And this is what subsequently determined their behaviour and outlook. This is what we are seeing with Abu Usamah and Abdul-Qadir and their likes. Their mistake and error is known by the fact that this new wave of polemic that has come from them, only came after the fitnah of al-Ma’ribee, which shows that this is a new orientation they have brought that is newly arisen. But even though it is a new orientation, its roots can still be traced to the fitnahs that preceded it like that of Ar’oor and Shayijee and others.
As for the Salafees, then their manhaj has not changed, because their perceptions have not changed, because their perceptions were only ever based upon the Usool of the Manhaj of the Salaf, especially where the fitnah of al-Ikhwaan was concerned. Hence, there is consistency in their stances, their positions, the application of their principles, and this was uniform and remained the same for the fitnahs of Qutb, Safar and Salman, Suroor, Turaath, Ar’oor, Maghraawi and Ma’ribee. The Salafees never changed, there was a natural progression in their views and stances in each of these fitnahs, because in reality, these fitnahs were all connected and stemmed from each other. So in reality, those who brought something new are the followers of al-Ma’ribee, and they know this themselves, because prior to the fitnah of al-Maghraawee and al-Ma’ribee all those who ascribed to Salafiyyah at large, were actually united upon the deviation of Ar’oor and Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq and Safar and Salman and ash-Shayijee and others, they all took the criticisms of the scholars, even if some were found who praised them, and they all knew that something of the manhaj of Ikhwaan was found with these people. So the likes of Abu Usamah know this, and this is actually a hujjah upon them, to show that they are the ones who changed and they are the ones who brought something new, not the other way around. There is no natural progression in their Usool, rather this changed, as is clear. And they got affected, just like their predecessors from the followers of Safar and Salman, or Ar’oor got affected, and thereafter they still thought they were upon Salafiyyah when in reality the ideas and concepts and their general polemic was actually Ikwhaanee in essence.
4. Allaah is not testing the Da’was Salafiyyah by those whom you call Ghullaat, and to whom you ascribe “taqleed” and “baatil principles”, and really, whether you like it or not, or whether you intend it or not, this is actually an attack upon the manhaj of Shaikh Rabee’ and Shaikh Ubaid and Shaikh Ahmad an-Najmee and others. Without you realising, even though you might intend the youth with your speech, then their positions are taken from these scholars who spoke on each of these fitnahs, the fitnah of Safar and Salman, Ar’oor, al-Maghrawee, al- Ma’ribee and who refuted the false principles brought by these Ikhwaanees. But because Abu Usamah and his likes spent the last 6 or 7 years in ignorance and often mocking and laughing at those Salafees who gave importance to issues of manhaj, and who tried to gain baseerah with respect to them, then it should come as no surprise that now, when the fitnah has come to them from the Ikhwaan, by way of Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee, that they are defending what they think to be Salafiyyah, when it is in reality Ikhwaaniyyah. And don’t be surprised that all of the Qutubiyyeen and Surooriyyeen and others, have joined with them, and entered amongst them, in order to fight the Salafees, even if they (Abu Usamah and his likes free themselves from the Qutubiyyeen and Surooriyyeen).
5. You find the likes of Abu Usamah, that many of their statements or actions or positions allow many from Ahl ul-Bid’ah to attack the Salafees. This is only because their hearts have resembled each other because the personalities that they got affected by and in whom they placed “ghuluww” (like Safar and Salman, Ar’oor, Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq, al-Maghraawee, al-Ma’ribee) and others, all of them were actually Ikhwaanees, some of them overt Ikhwaanees, and others were covert Ikhwaanees. We ourselves used to experience individuals who would come from Ma’rib, years ago, and we were amazed that they were Takfeerees, defenders of Safar and Salmaan, and we experienced statements of takfeer from them, and their alignment in general was Qutubi, and they had great aversion for the Salafees. And also they would be promoting the book “as-Siraaj al-Wahhaaj Fee Bayaan il-Minhaaj”, which in reality was the new dustoor for the Ikhwaanee Da’wah. So this surprised us that individuals like this have been through the system at Ma’rib with al-Ma’ribee for six months or a year or longer, and this is how they emerged from Ma’rib, going in as Takfeerees, Qutubees and coming out as Takfeerees, Qutubees, but this time with a dustoor for their da’wah. But as for now it is no longer surprising because the reality of this man has become clear to most people.
6. The above assumptions and claims made by Abu Usamah are therefore untrue. Allaah has tested the Da’wah Salafiyyah and the Salafees by the fitnah of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen and their war against the truth, not the other way around. Whoever claims the opposite, then certainly he is ignorant, and perhaps he was never taught the importance of learning history at school. Ikhwaaniyyah came from Safar and Salman, Adnan Ar’oor, Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq, and al-Ma’ribee, and as for al-Maghraawee then he got poisoned by Adnaan Ar’oor, a concrete fact, and it was only a matter of time before his Qutubiyyah began to emerge in his statements. So all of these people got taken by their companionship. The Salaf said, “It is from the fiqh of a man that he looks at who he mixes with and enters upon” or words with this same meaning. There are many of those who ascribe to Salafiyyah but they do not give attention to this fiqh. Which is why in this current fitnah, they have no fiqh.
7. The above expression of Abu Usamah is just one of many expressions in the chain of the evolution of the Ikhwaani polemic against the Salafees. We have heard these and similar meanings, in the slogans that have passed: “The Jews and Christians are Safe from you, but the Muslims are not”, “Murij’ah with the Rulers and Khawaarij with the Callers”, “Takfeerees with the Salafees” and so on, and “Ghullaat” is a natural extension. These came from the direction of Abdur-Razzaaq ash-Shayijee, Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, and Adnaan Ar’oor also played his role in spreading these ideas across Europe and America and elsewhere. So it comes as no surprise to us, that in the past month or so, Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee has actually utilised the books written by ash-Shayijee in the mid-90s to attack the Salafee Scholars, as has been pointed out by Shaikh Rabee. And hence, it comes as no surprise also that those who followed him the West, carry the same underlying concepts in the slogans they are now using against the Salafees.
8. We have just passed by a time in which al-Ikhwaan and their ideas, over a series of decades, had permeated the whole Ummah, and when Shaikh Rabee’ stood up to their falsehood, beginning with their figureheads, and then those who followed them, it set off a series of events and counter-reactions, which with every fitnah that arose (like that of Safar and Salman, then Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq and ash-Shayijee, then Ar’oor, then al-Maghraawee, then al-Ma’ribee and the Mumayyi’ah), made the battle between Salafiyyah and Ikhwaaniyyah more subtle and acute. And thus these same counter-reactions towards those who stood up to this Ikhwaaniyah were often found amongst a people who did not grasp what was taking place during these momentous times, and nor did they grasp the details of the Salafee manhaj, and nor were they stringent and severe in applying and following this manhaj if they did know it. People like Abu Usamah and whoever else allied with Al-Maghraawee or al-Ma’ribee are a representation of this faction of people, and there are varying degrees and levels amongst these types of people, with some of them more severe than others.
9. Shaikh Rabee’ is an Imaam of the Sunnah, just like Imaam Ahmad at his time, because what he has done in this age, is similar to what Imaam Ahmad did in relation to the Mu’tazilah and the Jahmiyyah who had permeated the whole Ummah. Look at what Usamah al-Qoosee said before this fitnah broke out. Unfortunately, he is amongst those who has been caught up in this fitnah and the Ulamaa have spoken about. But just look at what he said within the last two years, before this fitnah broke out:
“Shaykh Rabee’ in our view is a mihnah (trial, test), in this time of ours, Shaykh Rabee’ is a mihnah, just like Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah), and naturally, Imaam Ahmad is greater than Shaykh Rabee’, but this is because one era differs from another era. So Imaam Ahmad during his time, then his example is Shaykh Rabee’ in our time, so we say, Shaykh Rabee’ is not just an individual, Shaykh Rabee’ in our view, is a (complete) manhaj, Shaykh Rabee’ is the Carrier of the Flag of Jarh and Ta’deel in these times, as has been said by Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa).
So the one who speaks about Shaykh Rabee’ in our view, then he is not a Salafee, he is not a Salafee, even if he claims that, then he is not a Salafee. We do not declare him a disbeliever, but he is not a Salafee. Because if he was a Salafee then he would have [words unclear] that Shaykh Rabee’s manhaj is Salafee, pure and clear, clear, with no impurities… ,the problem with Shaykh Rabee’, the only problem is that Shaykh Rabee’ is truthful, he does not lie, nor does he fabricate, and nor does he compromise (flatter)…”
So we ask, whose manhaj has changed throughout the fitnahs of Safar and Salman, Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq, at-Turaath, ash-Shayijee, Ar’oor, al-Maghraawee, al-Ma’ribee and others? Did Shaikh Rabee’ change? The problem with Usamah al-Qoosee and those like him is what he himself mentioned, which is that they unfortunately compromised with and flattered Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee when they should have sat back and not spoken and remained with the Scholars who are old enough to be their fathers, if not grandfathers. Had they done this, then we would not be having this conversation, but what Allaah wills occurs and this is just a purification period for the true Salafi manhaj from the effects of Ikhwaaniyyah.
10. So we as clear firm Salafees, by Allaah’s permission, say that Shaikh Rabee’ remains a mihnah, because he is from those scholars who are most experienced in this field, and they are more grounded in this knowledge than others, and this is apparent to anyone open-minded person who has been reading their works and listening to their cassettes for almost the past decade.
11. As for those who do not understand these affairs, and who are from that faction of people alluded to ealier, who became susceptible to the counter-reactions of the Hizbiyyeen to the scholars clarifying the manhaj, then it is only natural that they were led to making accusations of “taqleed” and so on, and this will become clear as we continue to comment upon the speech of Abu Usamah, if Allaah wills. And similarly, the accusation of “ghuluww” that you see being made against the Salafees who are with these Shaikhs, then even though it is not explicitly intended, it implicitly includes these Shaikhs. Because Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee’s war was against Shaikh Rabee’, and this is why he authored the book “as-Siraaj al-Wahhaaj”, which he has openly admitted. And thus, when we see Abu Usamah and Abdul-Qadir and others bringing these accusations of “ghuluww” and so on, then know that their predecessor is Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee and his intent was to pull down Shaikh Rabee’ and his brothers from the Scholars of the Salafee manhaj who were instrumental in exposing some of the Ikhwaanee imposters before him (like Ar’oor). Hence, when we see the likes of Abu Usamah and Abdul-Qadir and those upon their Ikhwaanee manhaj uttering this speech, then know that even though they may not explicitly intend these Shaikhs, then whether they know it or not, they have taken this speech from the Ikhwaanees who actually intended Shaikh Rabee and others. And this is only a result of their ignorance and their entering into issues of which they have no knowledge.
12. Compare between the angle that the likes of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, Abdur-Razzaaq ash-Shayijee, Ar’oor, and Ali Timimi and others came from, and you will note that al-Ma’ribee and Abu Usamah and his likes are a continuation of their tradition, because all of them collectively, got taken by way of the Ikhwaanees. Because those people came out with the slogans, “Salafiyyah Jadeedah (New Salafiyyah)”, i.e. attacking the Salafees of bringing a new manhaj and new principles, and “distortion of the concepts of Sunnah and Salafiyyah to support the New World Order” and “not distinguishing between bid’ah and mubtadi” and similar rants, and on this pretence, did ash-Shayijee and others write their books, attacking the manhaj of Shaikh Rabee’, claiming it was new, and was devised. They all came out to attack the Jarh that relates to the Innovators because they were upon corrupt methodologies themselves.
And lo and behold. What do we see from Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee. He is from them, he is an Ikhwaanee, and hence, when you look at the way he came out, by Allaah it was identical. The claims of needing to correct the usool, and make a new ta’seel for the manhaj and so on, the accusations of Haddaadiyyah, laying down principles to accommodate the groups and sects, trying to revise the field of jarh of the innovators and so on. Which is why you see him and the Mumayyi’ah in general, they have great similarities with those who came before them. When you look at their speech, their slogans, their polemic, subhaanallaah, it is parallel to those who came before them who got taken by way of the Ikhwaan. By Allaah, it is not therefore amazing at all to the Salafees, that in recent months, Al-Ma’ribee has been employing the books and claims of the likes of ash-Shayijee to attack the Salafee manhaj. So this is the actual mess that Abu Usamah and his likes are caught up in. But as we said earlier, one who is not taught history, will not understand the fiqh of the waaqi’.
13. We request that the likes of Abu Usamah and those upon his way, spend some time out to research and write a 5,000 word essay on the similarities between the manhaj of Ar’oor, ash-Shayijee and Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribee, and then to present it to us Monday morning, and explain to us whether there are any broad essential differences, in their usool and in the way they have come out to attack the Salafee manhaj? If they do this, it might open up their eyes a little, and make them realise the baatil that they are upon.