بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Shaikh Ubaid (may Allaah preserve him) said: ”Abdul Maalik has become confounded, disorderly and erratic.”
Shaikh Rabee (may Allaah preserve him) said: ”Abdul Maalik is with Al-Halabi and Al-Maribi.”[a]
Shaikh Abdullaah al-Bukhaari (may Allaah preserve him) said: ”Abdul Maalik is sick and deviated.” [b]
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
False Principle Number One
Making it a condition that there has to be Ijmaa (consensus) before Tabdee is accepted
Abdul Maalik Ar-Ramadaani (may Allaah guide him) stated about the Tabdee against Eed Shareefee (may Allaah guide him): [العلماء ما أجمعوا على تبديعه حتي يقال هذا الكلام ] ”The scholars do not hold a consensus on the Tabdee against him (i.e. they do not hold a consensus that he is an innovator) in order for you to speak with this statement (i.e. saying that he is an innovator).”’ [End of quote] [1]
There is no basis for this view of Abdul Maalik. The scholars of Ahlus Sunnah have not made it a condition in the science of Jarh Wat-Tadeel that there has to be consensus before a person is declared an innovator; rather a single aalim is enough. Al-Haafidh Ibn Salaah (rahimahullaaj) said: ”They (i.e. scholars) differed as to whether Jarh and Tadeel is affirmed by way of the statement of one person or there that has to be a second person? Amongst them are those who say: It is not established (or affirmed) except by way of two people just as (the case) in Jarh Wat-Tadeel in giving witnesses (or testimonies). And from them are those to say:- and this is the correct statement chosen by Al-Haafidh AbuBakr Al-Khateeb and other than him-It is established (or affirmed) by the statement of one person because numbers is not a condition for the acceptance of a khabar. It is not a condition for disparaging or commending its narrator as opposed to giving witness (or testimony).” End of quote [2]
So where is the so called Ijmaa claimed by Abdul Maalik (may Allaah guide him) in this affair?! Consider the statement of Shaikh Ubaid (may Allaah preserve him) when he stated: ”Abdul Maalik has become confounded, disorderly and erratic.” The Shaikh also said: ”At present he is a follower of Ali Halabi and he (i.e. Abdul Maalik) is not to be referred to.” [3] Rather Abdul Maalik (may Allaah guide him) stated: [أنا من المتأثرين بعلي حسن االحلبي ومشهور حسن آل سلمان] ”I am from those influenced by Ali Hasan Al-Halabi and Mash-hoor Hasan Aala Salmaan.” [4] He also says that he is in agreement with Ali Al-Halabi in what Al-Halabi (Al-Murji Al-Mubtadi) has written in his depraved book titled Manhajus Salafi [5]
To be continued….In-Shaa-Allaah
—————————————————————————————————————-
References:
[a] http://masjidfurqan.co.uk/2014/11/22/1-the-haal-of-abdul-malik-ar-ramadaani/
[b]http://masjidfurqan.co.uk/2014/11/23/3-the-haal-of-abdul-malik-ar-ramadaani-shaikh-abdullaah-al-bukhaari-clarifies/
[1] See 9 in the Pdf on this link: http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=127155
[2] Muqaddimah Ibn Salaah. Page: 98-99]
[3] http://masjidfurqan.co.uk/2014/11/22/1-the-haal-of-abdul-malik-ar-ramadaani/
[4] http://masjidfurqan.co.uk/2014/11/22/2-the-haal-of-abdul-malik-ar-ramadaani/
See other rebuttals of this false principle propagated
by Abdul-Maalik, Al-Halabi and Al-Maribi and their obstinate followers
http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=11548
http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=7515
More Articles