Salaficentre Appeal 2019
  • Home
  • Abul Hasan al Maribee

Posts Tagged ‘Abul Hasan al Maribee’

The Mubtadi (Abul Hasan al-Maribi) Blames the One who differentiated Between a Wasf (i.e. Description) and Jarh (disparagement)

Shaikh Raslaan (may Allaah preserve him) stated:

And from his (i.e. Al-Maribi) heedlessness is that he blames the one who makes a distinction between a Wasf (i.e. a specific description of a person or something) and Jarh (disparagement). Al-Maribi said: ”Is disparagement anything else other than a description, and is commendation anything else other than description?”

He (i.e. Al-Maribi) – the indigent one- did not know that there are generalities and specifics between disparagement and description. Every disparagement is a description and not every description is a disparagement, otherwise the description ‘Al-A’mash (i.e. the bleary-eyed one) would have been a disparagement against Sulaymaan Bin Mihraan the bleary-eyed, and he was a reliable narrator and a Haafidh.

(And had it been the case that every description is a disparagement), then Al-Ahdabu (i.e. the hunched-backed one) would have been a disparagement against Waasil Bin Hayyaan the hunched-backed, and he was a reliable narrator and a steadfast (person).

(And had it been the case that every description is a disparagement), then Al-Aqra’u (the bald-headed one) would have been a disparagement against Naafi Bin Abbaas the servant of Abu Qataadah, and he (Naafi) was reliable.

(And had it been the case that every description is a disparagement), then Al-A’raj (i.e. the one with lame limbs causing him to limp) would have been a disparagement against Abdur-Rahmaan Bin Hurmooz, the limping one, and he was reliable, steadfast and a scholar.

And the nick name Ad-daal (i.e. ‘the misled one’ was given) to Mu-aawiyyah Bin Abdul Kareem Ath-Thaqafee and he was a truthful person; (but) he was neither misled in his narrations nor in his acts of worship, rather he was misled on the road (i.e. got lost) when he was young and was found; so he was nick-named Ad-daal (the misled one).

The scholars are acquainted with the link between the generalities and specifics between descriptions and disparagement, and likewise between descriptions and commendations. This is an old (affair) that has been firmly in place from the era of the science of scrutinizing narrators and the chains of transmission up to this era of Abul Fitan Al-Maribi (i.e. Abul Hasan Al–Maribi); however he has innovated a methodology for the people in this (affair), such as his lack of making a differentiation between the statement of a critic scholar in the biography of a man and his statement in disparagement against (a man).

In the biographies, the scholars mention what is in favour and against a person even if he is from the leaders of misguidance and a heretic, just as Imaam Dhahabi did in Siyar A’laam An-Nubulaa. Ibn Abee Du’aad—a leader from the leaders of misguidance and an enemy of Imaam Ahmad, and Ibn Sinaa whose state of affairs is well known and those similar to him– were they from those who were exalted in rank (with regards to their adherence to the Book and the Sunnah)? Were they from those exalted in rank (in the first place), let alone from the knowledgeable ones?! (However), these two people (i.e. Ibn Abee Du’aad and Ibn Sinaa) and their likes have biographies in Siyar A’laam Nubulaa (of Imaam Dhahabi). This is with regards to a biography- in it a person is described with what he is, and he is even described with what he is (with regards to) his physical attributes, and none of the scholars in our era have ever said that describing (such a person) with what he is (with regards to) his physical characteristics is (tantamount) to finding fault with Allaah’s creation!

As for disparagement of a narrator – disparagement and commendation, then a man is not mentioned except with what he deserves in relation to knowledge and the science of scrutinizing narrators and chains of transmission. And if he was one who has been declared disparaged (due to being a liar, unreliable etc), then his good deeds are never mentioned, regardless of the extent of his good deeds. (Therefore) compare Imaam Dhahabi’s work in Al-Meezaan and in As-Siyar and you will be acquainted with this knowledge.

Indeed, he (i.e. Abul Hasan Al-Maribi) conveys confusion in these affairs by way of increasing in the innovated speech of Muwaazanah and other than it of corrupt principles. And whenever he is facilitated with understanding, he does not understand. And whenever he is (facilitated) with a return (to correctness), he does not return; rather he refuses, except that he increases upon an evil understanding. [slightly paraphrased and abridged]



The statements of the scholars regarding the bidah of Muwaazanah

Continue Reading

[Part 9: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar’Ruhayli- Shaikh Rabee Begins To Examine and Detail Some of Dr Ibraaheem’s Statements Regarding the Sharee’ah Aims (or Goals) Behind Boycotting]

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

Dr Ibraaheem stated in his defective and deficient advice to Ahlus Sunnah that Hajr (boycotting) is legislated to achieve three legislated goals (Ref 1) based on evidence and affirmed (or confirmed) by the A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon of Ahlus (i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc.) [Ref2]

The first goal (or aim) behind boycotting according to Dr Ibraaheem is carried out by a person for his benefit (or well being), so he boycotts everyone who is harmful to him amongst the Mukhaalifeen, such as Ahlul Bidah Wal-Ma’aasee (the people of bidah and sin)- those who are harmful to a person in the affairs of his religion if he sits with them. The evidence indicating to this (according to Dr Ibraaheem) is found in the Hadeeth narrated by Abu Moosaa Al-Ash’aree in Bukhaari and Muslim that the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi wasallam) said:

The example of a good pious companion and an evil one is that of a person carrying musk and another blowing a pair of bellows. The one who is carrying musk will either give you some perfume as a present, or you will buy some from him, or you will get a good smell from him. But the one who is blowing a pair of bellows will either bum your clothes or you will get a bad smell from him. [Bukhaari 5534 English Translation]

Then Dr Ibraaheem stated that this Hadeeth is a guide from the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) that one should sit with the righteous people due to the benefit that is reached by way of them and a warning against sitting with the evil ones due to the harm received in the affairs of one’s religion by sitting with them.


Shaikh Rabee responded to this above view f Dr Ibraaheem stating that he will elaborate on the noble Hadeeth (i.e. the above one narrated by Abu Moosaa and quoted by Dr Ibraaheem) and will add the rebuke found in Allaah’s speech against the people of deviation and a clarification of their state of affairs that they (people of deviation) intend to cause trials; and [he will also elaborate on this noble Hadeeth] based on the Messenger’s (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) warning against the people of deviation.

Then Shaikh Rabee said: Allaah (The Most High) said:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’an). In it are Verses that are (entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkam (commandments, etc.), Al-Fara’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers, etc.)]; and others are Mutashaabihaat (i.e. not entirely clear in what they indicate, so they are to be referred back to the Muhkamaat to be explained]. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials, etc.), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).

The Messenger (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) said: If you see those who follow thereof that is not entirely clear, then they are those whom Allah has named [as having deviation (from the truth)] so beware of them. [Bukhaari Number 4547]

After quoting the above ayah and hadeeth, Shaikh Rabee stated that we benefit from this ayah, the hadeeth and other evidences that the intent behind rebuking Ahlul Bidah and warning against them is to benefit (or preserve the well-being of) those who boycott them, even if they are scholars. So this should be understood and it is what the pious predecessors understood and applied by boycotting, clarifying ahlul bidah’s misguidance, passing judgements against them and their acts of misguidance.

Then Shaikh Rabee stated that [ووالله – and by Allaah] we cannot reach the level of the Salaf in their application of this affair. And what an enormous difference between us and others (i.e. in this affair of following the Salaf in warning against ahlul bidah and boycotting them); but despite this, they accuse us of extremism and over-stringency! So what is your (i.e. those people who accuse us) view of the pious predecessors, their methodology, their application of this affair and their rulings?!  [Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem Ar’Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal’ pages 29-30.abridged and paraphrased]

[Ref 1] In the footnotes on page 29, Shaikh Rabee made some observations on Dr Ibraaheem’s above statement, but we’ll suffice with the mention of only one of them in order not to lengthen the discussion. Shaikh Rabee observed that Dr (Ibraaheem) limited Hajr (boycotting) to three Masaaqid Shar’iyyah [i.e. that boycotting is legislated in order to achieve three legislated goals (or aims)]. Shaikh Rabee then stated that an important clarification about this will follow later.

[Ref 2]: Shaikh Abdullaah Al-Bukhaari pointed out in his Radd that Dr Ibraaheem gave a picture (i.e. the impression) that Boycotting is legislated to achieve three Maqaasid (goals or aims) only and that these three Maqaasid have been confirmed by the A’immah al-Muhaqqiqoon (i.e. those Imaams of the religion who are well known for their abilities in carrying out research in the issues of the religion with precision, assertiveness, thorough examination etc.).  The use of the phrase A’immah Al-Muhaqqiqoon indicates to a group of people, whom Dr Ibraaheem claims have confirmed his view that boycotting is legislated to achieve three goals (or aims); yet Dr Ibraaheem only quoted Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah. There is no doubt that Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah is one of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah, but is it befitting that we only quote Shaikhul Islaam and then say that this statement have been confirmed (or affirmed) by the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah! It obligatory from the angle of fulfilling trusts in affairs of knowledge that Dr Ibraaheem presents at least a small number of people (i.e. Imaams) to back up his own claims or a small number of Imaams to back up the three goals (or aims) which he claims are the only reasons for boycotting. [See pages 53 and what follows in At-Ta’aqqubaat As-Sareehah Alaa Risaalah An-Naseehah Lid-Doctoor Ibraaheem Bin Aamir Ar-Ruhayli]

Reader: Refer to the links in order to get a fuller picture on the affair of boycotting until we reach the sections where both Shaikh Rabee and Shaikh Abdullah clearly unveiled the unsubstantiated claims of Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli through the understanding and narrations of the Salaf.





Continue Reading

From The Reasons the People of Bidah Are Called Ahlul Ahwaa (People of Desires)

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

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [rahimahullaah] said:

It is well known that the mere [act] of shunning by those who [express their] aversion or the love of those who are agreement is neither an indication of the correctness nor corruption of a statement, except when it is based on guidance from Allaah. Rather merely [utilising] a statement as proof [without guidance from Allaah] is tantamount to following desires. Allaah [The Most High] said:

وَإِنَّ كَثِيرً۬ا لَّيُضِلُّونَ بِأَهۡوَآٮِٕهِم بِغَيۡرِ عِلۡمٍ‌ۗ

And surely many do lead (mankind) astray by their own desires through lack of knowledge. [6:119]

Allaah [The Most High] said:

فَإِن لَّمۡ يَسۡتَجِيبُواْ لَكَ فَٱعۡلَمۡ أَنَّمَا يَتَّبِعُونَ أَهۡوَآءَهُمۡ‌ۚ وَمَنۡ أَضَلُّ مِمَّنِ ٱتَّبَعَ هَوَٮٰهُ بِغَيۡرِ هُدً۬ى مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ

But if they answer you not (i.e. do not believe in your doctrine of Islamic Monotheism, nor follow you), then know that they only follow their own lusts. And who is more astray than one who follows his own lusts, without guidance from Allah? [28:50]

And Allaah [The Most High] said to Dawud [alayhis-salaam]:

وَلَا تَتَّبِعِ ٱلۡهَوَىٰ فَيُضِلَّكَ عَن سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ

And follow not your desire for it will mislead you from the Path of Allah. [38:26]

Allaah [The Most High] said:

فَإِن شَهِدُواْ فَلاَ تَشْهَدْ مَعَهُمْ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاء الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُواْ بِآيَاتِنَا وَالَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِالآخِرَةِ وَهُم بِرَبِّهِمْ يَعْدِلُونَ

Then if they testify, testify not you (O Muhammad) with them. And you should not follow the vain desires of such as treat Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) as falsehoods, and such as believe not in the Hereafter, and they hold others as equal (in worship) with their Lord. [6:150]

Allaah [The Most High] said:

قُلۡ يَـٰٓأَهۡلَ ٱلۡڪِتَـٰبِ لَا تَغۡلُواْ فِى دِينِڪُمۡ غَيۡرَ ٱلۡحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوٓاْ أَهۡوَآءَ قَوۡمٍ۬ قَدۡ ضَلُّواْ مِن قَبۡلُ وَأَضَلُّواْ ڪَثِيرً۬ا وَضَلُّواْ عَن سَوَآءِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ

Say (O Muhammad): “O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Exceed not the limits in your religion (by believing in something) other than the truth, and do not follow the vain desires of people who went astray in times gone by, and who misled many, and strayed (themselves) from the Right Path. [5:77]

So whoever follows the desires of the people after the knowledge Allaah has revealed to His Messenger and guidance which He clarified for His slaves, then he [i.e. such a person] has a similarity [to those regarded as followers of desires]. And due to this, the Salaf named the people of innovation and splitting-those who oppose the Book and the Sunnah [with their innovations]-ahlul ahwaa [the people of desires] because of the fact that they accept what they love and reject what they hate based on their desires without guidance from Allaah.

[Source: Al-Fataawaa 4/189-190. abridged and slightly paraphrased]

Continue Reading

A Trait of Ahlul Bidah- They Pass Judgements in the Deen without Knowledge

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah ( rahimahullah ) said:

When it is the case that the (true) followers of the Prophets are people of knowledge and justice, then the speech of the people of Islaam and the Sunnah about the disbelievers and people of bidah is (carried out) with knowledge and justice and not with conjecture and the soul’s desire. And due to this, the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi wasallam) said: Judges are of three types, one of whom will go to Paradise and two to Hell. A man who knows the truth and judges with it will enter paradise; a man who knows the truth but judges with the opposite of it will enter the fire, and a man who judges for the people based on ignorance will enter the fire.’’ [Reported by Imaam Abu Dawud and others]

And when it is the case that the one who judges between the people in (affairs) of wealth, blood (i.e. murder cases, injury etc.) and honour will enter the hell fire if he is not a just scholar, then what about the one who passes judgements without knowledge-such being the case with ahlul bidah-on religions, the Usool of Imaan, affairs of knowledge related to Allaah, His Names, Attributes and Actions, and the lofty affairs of knowledge.’’


[Al-Jawaabus Saheeh 1/107-108]

Continue Reading

[Part 7.1: Observations on Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli (accompanied by important footnotes on refs 1 & 3 at the end of this article) – Shaikh Rabee Unveils the Reality behind Dr Ibraaheem’s Statement That Refutation against a Mukhaalif Is Fard Kifaayah]

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

Dr Ibraaheem argues that one of the mistakes that are rife is that when a scholar refutes a Mukhaalif, or issues a Fatwa as a warning against a mistake, many of the students of knowledge who ascribe to the Sunnah would seek  from (other) students and the scholars to clarify their stance towards that refutation or fatwa, rather the affair has reached a state in which even the small students of knowledge and the common people are asked to determine their stance towards the refuter and the one refuted; (Ref 1) then based on this, they would determine loyalty, disassociation and boycotting, until maybe some of the students boycott their Shuyookh whom they have benefitted from in knowledge and sound creed for many years; and maybe the trial reaches the houses, so you find a brother boycotting his brother and a son disrespecting his parents; and maybe a wife is divorced and the little children are separated due to this (trial).

As for when you look at the society, you find that they are divided into two parties or more- every party pursues the other with rebuke and making it binding to boycott the other group. All this (fitnah) between those who ascribe to the Sunnah- those amongst whom one group was unable to rebuke the Aqeedah of the other and the soundness of its Manhaj before the occurrence of this differing. The basis of this (problem) is either due to ignorance in exceeding the boundaries of the Sunnah and the principles regarding the manner in Ahlus Sunnah should show disapproval (against a mistake) or due to desires.



Shaikh Rabee responded to the above statement of Dr Ibraaheem, saying that it is (was) obligated on Dr Ibraaheem, those scholars who remained silent and other than them (i.e. those who were knew about the fitnah) to confront this trial or trials and strike at the place it is (was) rooted. The painful situation [which Dr Ibraaheem describes (or described above)] should make him and others them (or should have made him and others) ready to stand up and fulfil this [communal obligation-Fard kifaa’iy) by refuting the initiator of the fitnah]. It is plausible that the cause of this great Fitna and what has come about by way of it resulted from the silence of those who refused to fulfil this communal obligation, whose goal has not been actualised through the refutation issued by one person. (Ref 2)

Then Shaikh Rabee stated that Dr Ibraheem should contemplate on the Fiqh of those Ahlus Sunnah who have preceeded and their togetherness in fulfilling this great obligation! Imam Ibnul Qayyim (rahimahullaah) stated whilst disapproving of Ahlul Bidah in Madaarij As-Saalikeen: And due to this, the Salaf’s and Imaam’s disapproval (or rejection against) it (i.e. bidah) was severe and they spoke out (loudly) against its people from the various regions of the earth. They warned against their fitnah with a more severe warning and did that to an extent that was not the same as their disapproval against lewd acts, oppression and aggression. (That is) because the harm of bidah (on the religion); its destructive (effects on the religion) and negation (of the religion) is more severe.

Then Shaikh Rabee asks Dr Ibraaheem about this Fard Kifaayah in relation to Jihaad; (Ref 3) -that for example Jihaad is from the Furood al-Kifaayaat (Communal obligations), so if one person goes for Jihaad in order to repel a threat faced by Islaam and the Muslims, will the Legislated Islamic goal of this Jihaad be fulfilled by one person; or if hundreds of people went but neither the Legislated Islamic goal is fulfilled nor is the threat repelled, then would it be permissible for the scholars to remain silent in such circumstances; or is it obligated that they exhort the people to go for Jihaad in order to fulfil this communal obligation, for there has to be sufficient numbers of people to fulfil this (Communal) obligation in order to put a stop to the threat face by the rest of the Muslims? And if this sufficient numbers that are required to carry out this obligation is not reached, then indeed all the Muslims are regarded to be sinful in such a case and held responsible for the harm that comes to Islaam and the Muslims. Likewise, this (i.e. the availability of sufficient numbers to fulfil this communal obligation) is the same thing stated regarding the affair of enjoining good and forbidding evil, for there has to be sufficient numbers to prevent the Fitnah, if one, ten or twenty are unable to do so.

Therefore, it becomes clear (from the above example) that many of the students- those who ascribe themselves to the sunnah-who seek from the Scholars to clarify their stances have sought after something appropriate and correct if there is a sound reason for seeking after it. It is not to be regarded a mistake (as Dr Ibraaheem claims) and the mistaken one is the one who declares those students to be mistaken. The silence of the scholars at the time of a need or necessity to clarify the truth is tantamount to concealment of the truth and it is from those grave mistakes that will result in corruption, trials, splitting of the people into two groups, two parties, boycotting one another and so on…..

Then Shaikh Rabee finally stated that it is (was) obligated on Dr Ibraaheem to clarify the affair of the oppressive obstinate one who initiated this dreadful fitnah, which has reached this grave state described by (Dr Ibraaheem), so that the people- especially the common people- would be upon clear-sightedness in their religion, and so that they will hold onto the truth and reject falsehood, and so that their loyalty and disassociation is established upon clear-sightedness. [Bayaan Maa Fee Naseehati Ibraaheem ar’Ruhayli Minal Khalal Wal-Ikhlaal’ pages 62-63]

To be continued…In-Shaa-Allaah


Importinat Footnotes:

[Ref 1] Question to Shaikh Fawzaan: Is it obligatory upon the scholars to clarify to the youth and the common people the danger of partisanship, splitting and groups?


Yes it is obligatory to clarify the danger of partisanship and dividing and splitting so that the people can be upon insight and understanding because even the common people are being deceived.  How many of the common people in this time have been fooled by some of the groups because they believe that they are upon the truth? So it is a must that we clarify to the people, the students and the common people, the danger of these parties and sects because if they remained silent [i.e. the scholars] then the people would say, “The scholars were aware of this and they remained silent.” Due to this innovation would enter upon them. So it is necessary to clarify these matters when these things appear. The danger for the common people is greater than the danger [posed] to the students because if the scholars remain silent the common people will think that this is correct and that this is the truth. [Al-Ajwibah Al-Mufeedah (page 131)

Question to Shaikh Rabee: What do you say concerning an individual who advises others to abstain from listening to refutations, and when he was asked about the reason for him adopting this stance he said, “The person who asked me about this was a common person and he is unable to recite the Quran properly”. What are your comments upon this, may Allah bless you?


If he is a layman then he is to be taught the Islamic creed and to be warned from the people of innovations. The majority of the common people these days have become supporters of the people of innovation. So it is necessary to warn them against them (i.e. the people of innovation). Say to him, “So and so is upon such and such innovations and you listening to him will harm you”. This is so that they will not read (his works), listen to his tapes and that he is cautious about his speech. Meaning that this layman needs someone to warn him and he is to be reminded of the principle: “This knowledge is religion so look at whom you take your religion from.” During these times the common people are targeted by the people of innovation and will say to you, “do not let them read the books of refutations. No. No.” This (approach) will expose them to ruin. Fataawa Fadeelah Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ Al-Madkhalee (1/273)

Question to Shaikh Rabee: Is it permissible for us as students of knowledge to be silent about the innovators, and to cultivate the youth and the students upon the way of the Salaf without mentioning the names of the innovators?


By Allah, the innovators are to be mentioned by their traits and by their names if there is a need for this. If so and so has put himself forward for leadership and leading this nation and the youth and he is leading them towards falsehood, then he is to be mentioned by his name. If there is a need then he is to be mentioned by his name and it is necessary to mention him by his name. As it relates to this, one of the Salafis in Egypt used to teach and he would just mention general (descriptions without specifying names) and the people did not comprehend these generalities.  After this he began to explicitly mention the names of the groups and individuals and they said (i.e. those who attended the lessons), “O Shaykh, why did you not teach us like this in the beginning?” He responded by saying, “I delivered to you many lessons and I would say this and I would say that (i.e. general descriptions without names).” They said, “By Allah, we did not understand.”

Fataawa Fadeelah Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ Al-Madkhalee (1/277)

[Ref 2]Amazing indeed is the affair of Dr Ibraaheem Ar-Ruhayli, for not only did he argue with these ambiguities in order to play down the affair of Al-Halabi and others, but now we see him on stage with the followers of Al-Maribi, Al-Halabi etc So all those ambiguous arguments which he claims was an advice to Ahlus Sunnah is nothing else but a cover to justify his blameworthy stances. Shaikh Rabee, Shaikh Ubaid, Shaikh Muhammad Bin Haadi, Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaari and others established the evidences against the innovators (Al-Halabi and Al-Maribi) based on what this Fard Kifaayah necessitates, but Dr Ibraaheem’s ambiguous utilisation of Fard Kifaayah in relation to warning against deviants has finally manifested, for indeed we find that he has been invited by the staunch followers of Al-Maribi and Al-Halabi at Luton. Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) stated: And Imaan is known about a man, just as all the states of his heart are known by way of his (outward) allegiances, enmities, his rejoicing, anger, hunger, thirst, and other such affairs. For these matters have certain outward binding necessities (lawaazim dhaahirah) and the outward matters necessitate inward matters. And this is a matter known, the people know this concerning the one that they have experienced and tested (jarraboohu wamtahinoohu)… [minhaaj-as-sunnah 8/475] [Translation:]




Continue Reading



0161 317 1481


2 Dudley Street
Cheetham Hill
M8 9DA

(C) 2012 The Salafi Centre of Manchester | 2 Dudley Street, Cheetham Hill, Manchester, M8 9DA
The Quran and Sunnah Upon The Understanding of The Salaf

Pin It on Pinterest