Author: Abdullah Jallow

The True Faqeeh [A person bestowed with understanding in the religion]

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy


Shaikh Muhammad Baazmool (hafidha-hullaah) stated:

Indeed, the Salaf did not designate the name faqeeh, except to the one whose knowledge was accompanied by action, as when Sad bin Ibraaheem was asked, ”who amongst the people of madina was most superior in understanding”, he said, ”the one with more taqwah.”   Farqad As Subkhee asked Hassan al Basree about some affair, so he answered him. Then he (farqad) said, ”Indeed, the fuqahaa are in opposition to you”. So Al Hassan said, ”may your mother be bereaved of you O Farqad, and have you seen a faqeeh with your eyes? Rather a faqeeh is one who abstains from the dunyah and has a fervent desire for the Afterlife.  He is one who has insight in his religion and is constant in the worship of his Lord. He neither speaks ill of the one above him nor does he mock at the one below him, and he does not look for a gain from knowledge Allaah has bestowed upon him”.  Some of the Salaf said: Indeed the faqeeh is the one who neither makes the people despair of Allaah’s mercy nor does he make them feel secure of Allaah’s plan, nor does he call to the Qur’aan and desires what is in opposition to it.

[Source: Al-Haqeeqatus Shar-iyyah Fee Tafseeril Qurýaanil Adheem Was-sunnatil Nabawiyyah. (Page: 138-139]

The Reality of Philosophy – ibn Taymiyyah

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy


Sheikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said:

”Philosophical logic is like the flesh of a camel at the top of a mountain. It is not easy to climb the mountain, nor is the flesh good enough to justify climbing, nor is the path leading to it easy to follow.’’   He (rahimahullaah) also said: ”There are no philosophers upon right guidance”  He (rahimahullaah) also said: ‘’Islaam does not have philosophers’’[1]

[1]Source: Naseehat Ahl Eemaan Fee Radd alaa Mantiq al Yunaan. (page:157)

The Means And Their Outcomes – ibn Taymiyyah

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy


 Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said:

‘’The performance of good deeds has praiseworthy outcomes internally and externally, and likewise sins have (evil outcomes internally and externally). Allaah (The Most High) created the means to this and the means to that, just as He (The Most High) made poison a means to falling ill and death.  The means towards (performing) evil have their means to preventing their occurrence.  Repentance and righteous actions wipes away evil deeds and calamities in the worldly life are an expiation for evil deeds.’’

Source: Tareequl Wusool Ilaa Ilmul Ma’mool Bi-Ma-rifatil Qawaa-id Wad-Dawaabit Wal-Usool; by Imaam as-Saa’di (rahimahullaah)

Sifatun Nuzool [Allaah’s Descent To The Lowest Heaven (In a Way That Befits His Majesty) During The Last Third of The Night]

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy

The student should memorize the text of some of the ahaadith transmitted in this subject matter, in order to protect himself, rebut the falsehood of the people of falsehood, the false explanations and distortions of the people of falsehood.

Continue reading

The Correct Belief About Yajooj Wa Majooj [Gog And Magog]

In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy

Taariq Suwaydaan’s False Belief on Gog and Magog

Taariq Suwaydaan said: ”Despite (the) many narrations, there is not to be found an authentic evidence-neither with myself nor other than me- with regards to who Gog and Magog are precisely; but looking at the ahaadith about them and their description, it has become clear to me–and Allah knows best– that they are the people of China.’’

Shaikh Ahmad At-Tuwayjiree replied to Suwaydaan saying:

”This is the likes of what Taariq Suwaydaan stated that Gog and Magog are the people of China. The statement that Gog and Magog are the people of China is a statement that is in opposition to the evidences in the Kitaab and the Sunnah, and it is a mockery of the Aqeedah of pious predecessors. And before I begin refuting this corrupt statement O noble reader, I will begin with an introduction pertaining to the Aqeedah of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa-ah regarding Gog and Magog.  Allaah (subhaanah) said:

”Until when he reached between two mountains, he found, before (near) them (those two mountains), a people who scarcely understood a word. They said: O Dhul-Qarnain! Verily Gog and Magog are doing great mischief in the land. Shall we then pay you a tribute in order that you might erect a barrier between us and them? He said: That (wealth, authority and power) in which my Lord established me is better (than your tribute). So help me with strength (of men), I will erect between you and them a barrier. Give me pieces of (blocks) of iron; then, when he had filled up the gap between the two mountain-cliffs, he said: Blow; then when he had made them (red as) fire, he said: Bring me molten copper to pour over them. So they (Gog and Magog) could not scale it or dig through it. (Dhul-Qarnain) said: This is a mercy from my Lord, but when the Promise of my Lord comes, He shall level it down to the ground. And the Promise of my Lord is ever true. And on that day (i.e. the day Gog and Magog) will come out, We shall leave them to surge like waves on one another; and the Trumpet will be blown, and We shall collect them (the creatures) all together” Qur’aan 18:93-99

And Allaah (subhaanah) also said:

”Until when Gog and Magog are let loose (from their barrier), and they swoop down from every mound. And the true promise (Day of Resurrection) shall draw near (of fulfilment). Then (when mankind is resurrected from their graves), you shall see the eyes of the disbelievers fixedly staring in horror. (They will say): Woe to us! We were indeed heedless of this-nay, but we were (polytheists and wrong-doers)” Qur’aan (21:96-97)

So these two places in the Book of Allaah show clear evidences regarding the appearance of Gog and Magog before the establishment of The Hour; and their appearance is from the signs of the Hour before its establishment. There is to be found in the Sunnah many narrations showing, making it clear and clarifying this (affair). Amongst these evidences is the hadeeth of Hudhaifah bin Usayd Al Ghaf-faaree (radiyallaahu anhu) in (saheeh Muslim No: 4/2225) (Abu Dawood 4/115)

Hudhaifah bin Usayd said, ”We were sitting in the shade of the chamber of the Prophet (sallal-laahu alayhi wasallam) discussing, and he said, what are you discussing? They said, we are talking about the Hour. He (sallal-laahu alayhi wasallam) said: The Last Hour will not come until there appear ten signs before it: the Smoke, the appearance of ad-Daj-jaal, the Beast, the rising of the sun in its place of setting, the coming forth of the descent of Eesaa the son of Maryam, the appearance of Gog and Magog, and the three Subsidences, (one in the West, one in the East, and one in the Arabian Peninsula), and at the end a fire will issue forth from the Yemen and drive the people to their place of assembly. (Abu Daawood 4/115)

After quoting few more ahaadith, Sheikh Ahmad At-Tuwayjiree then stated on page 12…

Indeed this statement that Gog and Magog are the people of China is in opposition to what is firmly established in the texts that their appearance is NOT TO BE until after the descent of Eesaa, (alayhis salaam), and after the killing of Daj-jaal. It is also established in the texts that (Gog and Magog) will not live except for a short time after their appearance, and the people of China HAVE BEEN UPON THE STATE THEY ARE IN AT PRESENT FOR LONG PERIODS.

Indeed, the saying that Gog and Magog are the people of China is in opposition to that which Allaah (Jalla-Wa-Alaa) has stated in relation to what He (Jalla-Wa-Alaa) informed (us) about Dhul Qarnain, that he (Dhul Qarnain) constructed a huge IRON BARRIER between Gog and Magog and the people; and that they (Gog and Magog) are not able to penetrate it up until the coming close of the Hour. Also the statement of Taariq Suwaydaan that Gog and Magog are the people of China is against what As-Saadiq Al Masdooq (Muhammad- sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) has stated, that Gog and Magog excavate everyday (to make a hole through the barrier) till they are about to see the rays of the sun, then the one in charge of authority over them would say, ‘’Go back; we will dig it tomorrow.’’ Then Allaah makes it as strong as it was till Allaah intends to send them upon the people, when they will dig it till they see the rays of the sun and the one in authority over them would say, ‘’Go back we will dig it tomorrow if Allaah wills and they will say, ‘’if Allaah wills.’’ They will return to it and will find it in the same condition they left it. They will dig and come out to the people and drink the whole water and people will fortify themselves in their forts against them.

Sheikh Ahmad states after relating this narration:  And this is not what takes place with the people of China, rather they move when they wish and to any place as they wish. There is neither a barrier preventing (them) nor a blockage restraining (them).

[Source: Page 6-35 ”Idaaha Wal Bayaan Fee Akhtaa-I Taariq Suwaydaan


Students And Refutations – Shaikh Ahmad As-Subay’ee

Question: Shaikh, I have a question concerning the issue of refuting the one who has erred. Is it incumbent upon the student of knowledge or the well-grounded student of knowledge to refer back to the scholar or senior scholars before warning against a specific individual, hizbee group/organization or innovators (in general)? Does he have to refer back to the scholar before warning?

Answer: Shaikh Rabee’ (may Allah Preserve him) was asked about this and his answer can be found on Sahab (i.e. and perhaps you know of it. So he was asked about this issue, and he answered it and his answer was correct. This issue is not one (meaning it’s not the same across the board and in every situation). There are issues that are obvious, clear, and apparent of which the student of knowledge could clarify if he has the ability to do so; so one aspect would be linked to one who’s disapproving and clarifying level of knowledge, another to his ability and another to his resolve to be patient upon enduring harms. Another consideration would be his contemplation on the specific positive and negative ramifications which would necessitate decisive and specific actions, statements and judgments. So contemplation on the benefits and harms which (would translate into) direct and decisive action (is required); this would be established by the refutation or the one making the refutation. Especially, if the issue is a knowledge-based issue that the people of knowledge have already spoken about. In this case, there would be nothing preventing (the student of knowledge from boycotting and warning). Boycotting and warning are taken from the Islaamic legislation (i.e. from the Sharee’ah). [end of quote]

The following is a question raised to our noble shaikh Ahmad an-Najmy رحمه الله concerning the role students of knowledge play in clarifying the truth:

إذا فيجب على طلاب العلم أصحاب المعرفة ، الذين عرفوا المنهج السلفي ، وعرفوا المناهج الأخرى ، يجب عليهم أن يبينوا لغيرهم ، وأن يقولوا ،وأن يتكلموا ، وأن يلقوا الخطب ، وأن يوضّحوا في كل مقام ،وفي كل مناسبة الحق ،الذي يجب أن يتّبع والباطل الذي يجب أن يترك ، ويجتنب ، أما الذين سكتوا عن بيان الحق للناس ، فإنهم لا يعذرون بسكوتهم ، ولو قالوا : نحن لسنا معهم ، فإنهم لا يعذرون ، حتى ولو قالوا : نحن لسنا مع أهل هذه الأحزاب الضّالة عن طريق الحق ، إلا أن ينكروا ماهم عليه من الضلال .

“Therefore, it is binding upon the students of knowledge – the people of understanding – the ones who know the salafi methodology, and they know concerning the other methodologies, it is binding upon them to clarify to others, and that they state and speak and deliver sermons (khutba) and that they clarify in every situation and at every suitable opportunity the truth, the truth which is binding to be followed and the falsehood that is binding to be abandoned and avoided. As for those who are silent upon clarifying the truth to the people then they are not excused due to their silence and even if they say “we are not with them” (i.e the hizbiyyoon, as is apparent upon reading the text of the full question which relates to the groups). So they are not excused even if they say “we are not with the people of these misguided groups from the truth, except that they reject and rebut that which they (the misguided groups) are upon in terms of misguidance)”.

Author: Shaikh Ahmad As-Subay’ee (hafithahullah)

Continue reading

The Importance of Marriage

Kitaab An-Nikaah, Saheeh Bukhaari Vol: 7; Hadith Number:5065

 Chapter: The Statement of the Prophet (sallal’laahu’alayhi’wasallam)

 ‘Whoever is able to marry, should marry, for that will help him lower his gaze and guard his modesty (i.e. his private parts from committing illegal sexual intercourse etc.).’ And should a person marry (even if) he has no desire for marriage?

Narrated ‘Alqamah:

“While I was with Abdullaah, uthman met him at Mina and said, ‘O Abu Abdur-Rahmaan! I have something to say to you.’ So both of them went aside and uthmaan said, ‘O Abu Abdur-Rahmaan! Shall we marry you to a virgin who will make you remember your past days? When Abdullaah felt that he was not in need of that, he beckoned me (to join him) saying, ‘O Alqamah’ Then I heard him saying (in reply to uthmaan), ‘As you have said that, (I tell you that) the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) once said to us, ‘O young people! Whoever among you is able to marry, should marry, and whoever is not able to marry, is recommended to observe fast as fasting will diminish his sexual power’.

Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) explains: “Therefore, getting married is the correct (thing to do) as an obligation upon the one who has shahwa (sexual desires) even if he is not in fear of falling to Zinaa, and this is with regards to the one whose situation allows him to get married. This (also shows) Uthman’s righteous moral conduct and that the elderly person can get married as long as he has the strength for sexual relations; and those mainly intended in this hadeeth are the young people, because in most cases they possess greater desires and are more in need of that (fulfilling their desires).” [Source: Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min At-Taleeqaat Al-baaziyyah Alaa Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree Volume 4; Hadith No:5065; Footnote Number 2]

The Importance of Marrying Someone with Deen

 Narrated Abu Hurairah (radiyallaahu-anhu): The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said:

‘A woman is married for four (reasons/things); her wealth, her family status, her beauty and her religion. So you should take possession of the one with Religion, otherwise you will be a loser’ [Bukhaari Vol 7. No:5090]

Narrated Sahl:

“A man passed by Allaah’s Messenger, and Allaah’s Messenger asked (his companions), what do you say about this man? They replied, ‘If he asks for a lady’s hand, he ought to be given her in marriage; and if he intercedes (for someone), his intercession will be accepted; and if he speaks, he will be listened to.’ Allaah’s Messenger kept silent, and then another man from the poor Muslims passed by, and Allaah’s Messenger asked (them), ‘what do you say about this man?’ They replied, ‘If he asks for a ladyýs hand in marriage, no one will accept him, and if he intercedes (for someone), his intercession will not be accepted; and if he speaks, he will not be listened to’. Allaah’s Messenger said, ‘This poor man is better than so many of the first as to fill the earth'” [Hadith No:5091]

Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) explains: This clarifies that what matters is the religion (of a person) and not wealth and status……and all those (men) were from the Sahaabah.

Narrated Said Bin Jubair (radiyallaahu-anhu):

“Ibn Abbaas (radiyallaahu-anhumaa) asked me, ‘Are you married?’ I replied, ‘No’ He said, ‘Marry, for the best person of this Ummah (i.e. Muhammad) had the largest number of wives.'”

Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) explains: If a person marries (several women) in order to protect himself from (Zina) and for an increase in numbers of children; then there is no problem in this; but not for playing about.  And Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah stated in Majmoo Al-Fataawaa: And if the need for divorce is not called for, then the proofs necessitates that it is forbidden as demonstrated by the narrations and the fundamental principles; but Allaah has permitted divorce out of mercy from Himself due to the slaves need of it at times; and He made it forbidden in (certain) instances.  [Source: Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min At-Taleeqaat Al-baaziyyah Alaa Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree Volume 4; Hadith Number:5069. Footnote Number 3]

Chapter: To Marry Virgins Vol 7 Hadith Number:5077

Narrated Aisha (radiyallaahu-anhaa):

“I said, ‘O Allaah’s Messenger! Suppose you landed in a valley where there is a tree of which something has been eaten and then you found trees of which nothing has been eaten, of which tree would you let your camel graze?’ He said: ‘I will let my camel graze of the one of which nothing has been eaten before.’ The sub narrator added: Aisha meant that Allaah’s Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) had not married a virgin besides herself.”

Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz stated: ‘In this is an encouragement to marry a virgin/virgins; for she has not been put to any trial by the people and this is more likely to (bring about) harmony between her and her husband; except when the need calls for other than that'(i.e. when a man marries other than a virgin as occurs in the story of Jaabir when he married a matron in order that she can help look after his very young sisters).

[Source: Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min At-Taleeqaat Al-baaziyyah Alaa Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree Volume 4; Hadith Number: 5077; Footnote:3]

Chapter: The Marrying Of A Young Lady To An Elderly Man

Narrated Urwa:

“The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) asked AbuBakr (radiyallaahu-anhu) for Aisha’s hand in marriage. AbuBakr said, ‘But I am your brother.’ The Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said, ‘You are my brother in Allaah’s Religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry'” [Hadith No:5081]

Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) explained: “(So) this shows that brotherhood for Allaah’s Sake and friendship does not prevent (a person from marrying the daughter of his friend). What is forbidden for a brother is to marry (those) relatives forbidden for him.” [Source: Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min At-Taleeqaat Al-baaziyyah Alaa Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree Volume 4; Footnote Number:1]

The Characteristics of the Pious Wife by Shaikh Abdur-Razzaaq

Some Beneficial Points Taken from A Small Risaalah Titled: ‘‘The Characteristics of the Pious Wife’’ Written By Shaikh Abdur-Razzaaq Bin Abdul Muhsin Al-Badr (may Allaah preserve both the father and his son).

After praising Allaah and sending the peace and blessings of Allaah upon the Prophet, his family and companions, Shaikh Abdur-Razzaaq (hafidha-hullaah) stated:

Continue reading

Reality of “Jarh” and “Tadeel” (criticism and praise of individuals) according to the People of Sunnah

Khateeb Al-Baghdaadee

Khateeb Al-Bagh’daadee (rahimahullaah) reports that ahlul ilm are in AGREEMENT that when both Jarh and Tadeel are combined in a person, then the Jarh Mufassar (detailed) is given precedence [1]

Al-Haafidh Ibnu As-Salaah

Al-Haafidh Ibnu As-Salaah (rahimahullaah) said:

When both Jarh and tadeel are combined in a person, then the Jarh is given precedence; because the who makes Tadeel gives information about that which is apparent of the person’s state of affairs, but the Jaarih (the one who criticizes) gives information about that which is hidden from the one who makes Tadeel.[2]

Al Haafidh Ibn Katheer

Al –Haafidh Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaah) said:

And what is correct is that the Jarh is given absolute precedence if it is Mufassar [3]

So know O Sunni Salafi! Indeed the ulama have come with Jarh Mufassar against Abul Hasan Al Maribee, Muhammad Al-Maghraawi, Muhammad Hasan and their likes; so this is what is given precedence according to the scholars of ahlus sunnah wal jamaa-ah. However, the hizbiyyoon still cling to general praises of some of the scholars. So they say, ‘’Shaikh Abdul Muhsin has praised Abul Hasan’’. What is the answer to this O Sunni Athari?

Shaikh Muhammad Umar Baazmool (hafidha-hullaah) Clarifies

Question: What are the rules concerning the principle of the Jarh Mufassal that takes precedence over the Ta’deel. And when the Jarh Mufassal conflicts with the Ta’deel Mufassar, does the Ta’deel Mufassar take precedence over the Jarh Mufassar?

Shaikh: The scholars have textually written that the Jarh is given precedence over the ta’deel, and they say concerning the one whose adaalah (integrity) is established, meaning that the scholars have textually written down that he has integrity and that he is trustworthy, then nothing can be accepted (in criticism of him) except the jarh mufassar. So their saying leads to the fact that the person whose adaalah is not established and the scholars have not textually stated his trustworthiness, that the jarh mujmal (i.e. not clarified) is acceptable regarding him. As for the one whose integrity is established then nothing is accepted about him except the jarh mufassar. Then they say that when the jarh mufassar conflicts with the ta’deel mufassar, such as what you have asked in the question, they say that the jarh is not rejected except when the one making the ta’deel mentions the reason why the jarh was made and then refutes it. Such as for example the one making the jarh, did so upon a man because of his aqeedah. So the one making the ta’deel said, yes, he used to be upon this belief but he abandoned it and did not return back to it. Or the one making the jarh says that he did not memorise this scroll, but he used to narrate from it from memory. So the one making the ta’deel says, yes, he used to be like that but then he returned and heard from his Shaikh again, and so his usool became grounded again concerning that scroll, and then he did not narrate except from his usool (that he revised). So when the one making the ta’deel mentions the reason why the jarh was made and also refutes it, then this (ta’deel mufassar) is accepted but with an (additional) condition that it is not known about this man who is being spoken about that he fools around, follows his desires and deception. Because some people may give ta’deel mufassal to someone whom the scholars have made jarh mufassal of, and the one who has had jarh made upon him by the Scholars with tafseel, it has become established concerning him that he is from those who play games and follow the desires, from the people of deception, those who do not submit to the truth and do not return to the truth. So then, that speech of the one who made ta’deel, even if it was mufassal concerning him, then we do not accept it due to what we have come to know about the condition of this man. Allaah knows best.

Question: There are those who reject the statements of the Salafee Mashaayikh that refute Abul-Hasan with the claim that the Mashaayikh give him tazkiyah, and amongst them is Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad and the Mashaayikh of Jordan and Shaikh Ibraaheem ar-Ruhailee. So what is your saying O Shaikh?

The Shaikh replied: I say that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad is from the Major Scholars and he is of a high tabaqah (rank, level) with us here in the Kingdom. As for the remainder (of those that were mentioned) then they are students of knowledge. They are not from the Scholars. They are from the students. And what is clear to me is that Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin has not come across all of the speech that the Scholars have mentioned concerning the jarh (of Abul-Hasan). And the principle is that the one making the jarh (the jaarih) is given precedence over the one making the ta’deel (the mu’addil). Meaning, I will inform you by applying this principle and see. What is correct? If a narrator from the narrators of hadeeth was declared trustworthy by Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal and a person who was less than Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal made jarh of him with a jarh mufassar, would you accept the saying of this jaarih or would you reject it? What would be upon you? Questioner: I will not accept O Shaikh. Shaikh: You would not accept it? Questioner: Yes (I would not accept it). Shaikh: No (this is wrong), what is correct is that you accept the words of one who makes Jarh… because the one who makes the jarh has additional knowledge with him, he has additional knowledge. Hence, we say, in the application of this principle the jarh is given precedence over the ta’deel. For a man can come and some from the scholars declare him trustworthy, then another scholars comes from amongst the scholars of hadeeth, who is less than those major scholars and he makes jarh of him with a jarh mufassar. We say that we accept this jarh and those scholars, alongside their greatness, the condition of this narrator did not become clear to them what had become clear to this one who made the jarh. Likewise, we say in the issue of Abul-Hasan, those who made jarh of Abul-Hasan, they made jarh of him with a jarh mufassar, in their jarh, they depended upon expressions of his that are written in his books and those in his cassettes that are heard in his lessons and his lectures, and they relied upon his numerous positions (on certain issues).

My brother, all the sons of Adam make mistakes, and the best of those who make mistakes are those who repent. There is no one who is free from error. However, the people of deviation and desires, when they err and are advised they do not return and they persist upon their falsehood, and show stubbon resistance and follow their desires over their intellects, Shaitaan beautifies (matters) for them, and their souls that command the evil beautify (matters) for them, that if they were to return their position in the souls of the people would diminish, and the people will no longer place trust in their knowledge anymore, and their followers will not return to them. Shaitaan beautifies to them that their recantation, and their submission to the truth and their clarity in this recantation, and their adherence to the Sunnah that has become clear, he beautifies to them that this will weaken their standing and it will reduce their worth. Then the desires run through them and the Shaitaan runs through them, and plays with them in these matters. No one returns safe from innovations and desire except those upon whom your Lord bestows mercy.

Questioner: What is the correct position against the one who defends Abul-Hasan and who supports him?

Shaikh: The correct position against the one who defends Abul Hasan is the (same) position towards the one who defends the Ahl ul-Bida’. We say: He is to be advised, this one who defends Ahl ul Bida’, and who supports them. So either he returns, or otherwise he is given the treatment (that is given to Ahl ul-Bida’) of warning against him and keeping away from him and from sitting with him and from listening to him. And Allaah knows best.

So understand this well O Sunni Athari! We hold onto the correct manhaj positions by the tawfeeq of Allaah, and we ask Him (subhaanah) by His Greatest Name to guide us, and also guide those who seek to demolish these principles.


[1] Siyaanatu As-Salafi Min Waswasati Wa Talbeesaat Ali Al-Halabi; [page: 132]

[2] Siyaanatu As-salafi Min Waswasati Wa Talbeesaat Ali Al-Halabi; [page:132]

[3] Siyaanatu As-salafi Min Waswasati Wa Talbeesaat Ali Al Halabi; [page:134-135]

[4]Posted on Salafitalk (may Allaah reward its maintainers) by brother Naasir-ud-deen (hafidha-hullaah)