Tag: hizbiyyah

What is the Meaning of Hizbiyyah and What is The Ruling Upon It? Shaykh Ubaid Al Jaabiree

A questioner from Germany asks:

“What is the definition of Hizbiyyah and what is its ruling?”

Watch the video for the answer.

Your question O my child from Germany is composed of two parts. The first: concerning the meaning of hizbiyyah and I say you have done well for asking this question. So hizbiyyah is to unite and side with an individual, individuals or a group other than Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah. And it’s possible (the people of hizbiyyah) side themselves with a number of groups. So you find one of them for example, uniting with Jamā’atu-Tablīgh, Jamā’atul-ikhwān, Jamā’atul-jihād or other than them from the present day da’wah affiliated groups that are all deviated and misguide people.

I say this without any reluctance, as this is what I profess as my religion before Allāh.

So you find him (a person of hizbiyyah) making his friendship and allegiance towards those who side with him, a groups of people, a single individual or various individual persons.  He builds his allegiance and enmity based on them.

It was this that Shaykhul-Islām – may Allāh have mercy upon him – signified with his saying, “And whosoever raises for the people a man for whose sake friendship and enmity is formed, then he is  from those who have divided their religion and split into sects” and with this detailed explanation – if Allāh wills – I think you have understood the meaning of hizbiyyah. It is taken from (the word) tahazzub (to form partisanship).

As for the second part and that is your question concerning its ruling – it is an innovation and misguidance. So whoever sides himself with other than the Salafis – and they are the People of Hadīth (prophetic narrations), Ahlul- Athar, (people of narrations), the Victorious Party, the Saved Sect, the People of Sunnah and Jamā’ah (unity).

So this is the reality of despicable hizbiyyah and (one who falls into it) is from those who have divided their religion and split into sects.

The One Who Violates the Honour Of The Scholars, Falls Into One Of These Three- Shaykh Fawzaan

Shaikh Saaleh Al-Fawzaan [may Allaah preserve him] said:

None violates the honour of the scholars who are upon the truth, except one of three [people]: Either a hypocrite known for [his] hypocrisy, or an evil sinner who hates the scholars because they prevent him from his sinful [acts] of disobedience, or a misguided hizbi who hates the scholars because they neither agree with his hizbiyyah nor with his deviated views.


 Al-Ajwibah Al-Mufeedah page 51 and Muhaadaraat Fil Aqeedah Wad-Dawa 2/190]

Which Solution does Ridiculous Naveed Ayaaz [Madeenah Dot Con/Islaam Nelson] desire for Us?!

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

Ridiculous Naveed Ayaaz stated: ”I have learnt that such individuals, and their peers in Birmingham, do not desire a solution….” [See full statement here: salaficentre.com/?p=12607 ]

Question to Shaikh Zaid Bin Haadee al-Madkhalee (rahimahullah):

Is there a difference between the verdict against a person that he is from Ahlul Bidah and the verdict that he is a Mubtadi (innovator)? And does the verdict against a person that he is not a Salafi or that he is a hizbi necessitate that he is a Mubtadi (innovator)? Can you please shed light on this affair?

Answer:

Firstly, you should know:

Indeed Ahlus Sunnah are people who possess fear of Allaah.  They neither make Takfeer, Tafseeq (i.e. declare a person a sinner) and Tabdee (declare a person an innovator) except against the one who deserves it based on the evidences in the Book and the Sunnah, and the understanding of the pious predecessors of this Ummah.

Secondly, you should know:

The people of desires and misguidance are (categorized into) those who are followed and those who follow; Indeed, those who are followed are the ones who set up the various principles of innovation and they call to their innovation and misguidance, and they will carry their burden of sins and the burden of the sins of those whom they misguided without knowledge, as it is clearly stated in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah.

As for the followers of a leader from amongst the people of desires, then in most cases they are of two categories:

The First Category:

Those who possess knowledge, but they harbour evil intentions; so they yield to Satan, desires and the urge of the evil soul. They follow the people of misguidance and oppose the callers to guidance (in that which) Allaah sent His Messenger Muhammad (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) with.

The Second Category:

Their share of knowledge is little, so the people of desires take advantage of them and they become (part) of their group. They convince them that what they call them to is the manifest truth and that what their opponents are upon is falsehood. And they convey to them a huge (number) of shubuhaat, in order to deceive them and submerge them into misguidance.  As for those who are followed—those who set up the principles of bidah and call the people to their bidah and misguidance–then indeed they are attributed to the bidah they innovated and call the people to, and for them there is no honour.

As for the followers of the people of desires, it is as I have stated that they are of two categories in most cases. They are to be called to the Sunnah and to cling to it, and that they (should) reject the bidah they have been deceived by and have yielded to. And if they respond to the call of truth through knowledge and action, and reject that which the people of desires and innovation call them to, then this is what is desired and it is a praiseworthy aim. If they reject the advice of the advisers and bargain with falsehood at the expense of truth, and give preference to innovation over the Sunnah, then they deserve to be assigned the term innovator.

[For further details, see Al-Ajwibah Al-Athariyyah Anil Masaa-il Al-Manhajiyyah, Khamsoona Su’aalan Wa-Jawaaban: page: 18-19:]


 So we say to ridiculous Naveed: This is the solution! It is what we have established based on the verdicts of the scholars against the three figure heads of Bidah and Dalaalah [Halabi, Maghraawi, Maribi], and their staunch follower Abu Usaamah.  As for those who are deceived by Masjid As-Sunnah’s admin, we will do our best to refer them to the students of knowledge whenever they seek clarification, and may Allaah free them from the deceptions of  the dishonest hizbiyyoon.  Aameen.

[الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ]—we neither established our stances based on the reckless methodology of the Hajaawirah nor the repugnant hizbiyyah of Ihyaa Turaath, Greenlane, Al-Maghrib Institute, Suhaib Hasan and their associates; rather we only followed the verdicts of the scholars of Ahlul Athar- founded upon the knowledge based proofs against Ma’ribi, Halabi, Maghraawi and their staunch follower Abu Usaamah.

Likewise, after Masjid As-Sunnah’s admin persisted upon misguidance and obstinacy, and proclaimed their support for Halabi, Maghraawi and Maribi, we followed the verdict of Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadi Al-Madkhali (may Allaah preserve him) against them. [Video: http://salaficentre.com/2012/06/verdict-upon-masjid-as-sunnah-committee-in-manchester-shaikh-rabees-tele-link-in-2003-2/

Therefore, neither should Naveed turn a blind eye to the facts nor expect us to follow his false assumptions and desires. Neither can the solution be based on the desires and false assumptions of those who are ignorant of the precise methodology of Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jamaa’ah in dealing with the innovators and their staunch followers, nor can it be based on the solutions of those who attack the people of Salafiyyah and do not differentiate between the upright-knowledge based stances of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah from the corrupt, deceitful and false stances of the Mu-mayyi-een.

How very revealing is Naveed Ayaaz’s true state of affairs! He has the audacity to accuse the Salafiyyoon of not having a desire for a solution, yet he shows no shame in allying himself with a people who have persisted in their defence of three foremost figure heads of ahlul ahwaa wal-bidah(people of deisres and bid’ah)!  How very revealing it is of him, that Naveed Ayaaz is very eager to make silly and slanderous remarks against the Salafiyyoon, yet he expects to be considered a serious and responsible graduate! Indeed, Naveed must grow up and refrain from uttering such slanderous and absurd accusations. As Ibn Abdi Rabbihi (rahimahullaah) said: ”Choosing speech is more difficult than authorship, and indeed it is said: The choice of a man (in speech) is in harmony with his intellect.” [Source: quoted by Shaikh Muhammad Bin Umar Saalim Baazmool in Manhajul Bahthi Al-Ilmiy Wa-Kitaabah Fee Uloom Ash-Sharee-ah: page: 17]

And Allaah knows best

Note: We do not declare anyone an innovator or a Kaafir, except those whom our scholars have declared to kuffaar or innovators.


For those who do not know, then see the verdicts of the scholars on:

  • Halabi

http://salaficentre.com/2012/07/the-mufti-shaykh-ghudyaan-shaykh-fawzaan-and-shaykh-bakr-abu-zayd-on-grave-mistakes-of-halabi/

http://www.manhaj.com/manhaj/categories/kp-the-false-principles-of-ali-hasan-al-halabi.cfm

http://salaficentre.com/2013/03/the-categories-of-people-in-the-fitna-of-halabi-al-mubtadi-a-question-to-brixton/

  • Maribi

http://salaficentre.com/2012/08/verdict-against-abu-usaama-and-verdicts-against-his-shaikh-al-maribi-both-treated-like-ahlul-bidah/

  • Maghraawi

http://salaficentre.com/2014/04/naveed-ayaaz-madeenah-comislam-nelson-an-ally-of-some-of-those-who-defend-a-khaarijee-takfeeree/

  • Refuting falsehood

http://www.manhaj.com/manhaj/articles/utjea-shaykh-saalih-al-fawzaan-the-true-and-real-fitnah-is-leaving-alone-the-people-of-falsehood-and-evil-and-remaining-silent-about-them.cfm

And to conclude then a reminder for Naveed to be mindful of this! http://salaficentre.com/2013/03/shaikh-abdullaah-al-bukhaari-re

 

Catastrophe of Logic: Concealed Identities Marooned

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله و الصلاة و السلام على رسول الله و على اله و صحبه و من والى

It is with great regret that an individual, or indeed several individuals, have engaged in behaviour that is not only a disgrace and degradation to themselves, but rather also a pitiful humiliation of their intellects; we refer to a certain individual/s unwavering blind infatuation with Masjid Sunnah of Cheetham Hill, Manchester, who has unashamedly engaged in degrading activities with regards to sending emails in the most “cowardly” fashion as Shaikh Hasan al-Banna recently mentioned. The author of those “articles” – if indeed they can be termed as such – littered them with unadulterated confusion on affairs relating to Salafiyyah, as well as his gross disorientation regarding the noble Shaikh Rabee’ and noble Shaikh ‘Ubayd, in addition to dubious use of language, indicating we are dealing with an individual of limited intellectual ability.

If the author was confident that his opinions and speech were correct and supported with evidence, he would not find a need to distribute his speech in the manner of cowardice witnessed, rather he would be able to identify himself by name or at least organisation – which in this instance is blatantly Masjid Sunnah. It is therefore somewhat bewildering that this same author claims others write behind the disguise of “SalafiCentre”….. quite clearly we would say to this individual – in a simplified manner in order that his mental capabilities are not overwhelmed – that the Salafi Centre is a well-known established masjid founded upon the authentic teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah and understanding of the Salaf of this Ummah…there is nothing hidden or concealed about the Centre, we assure this individual that al-Markaz as-Salafi is in full view in Cheetham Hill. Therefore there is no disguise or concealment if the source of the article is known to be from the SalafiCentre.

In any case, the intent presently is not to engage with an unknown and cowardly individual of limited intellectual capacity – and it is he himself who has demonstrated the restricted nature of his intellect through statements of the most disgraceful, disgusting and repulsive nature against the race of one of the brothers. In fact, such is the abhorrent and loathsome nature of the statements that it is actually perplexing that any sane adult could have the ability to degrade and dishonour himself to such a pitiful and sorrowful state. Perhaps he will honour us by providing an email with statements of the scholars advocating racism? Perhaps he feels he is superior to the brother he abused due to the differential in skin colour and country of origin? No doubt this cowardly unknown “adult” will feel the pain of the lacerations caused by such words since they are representative of his despicable reality even if he considers he is unknown.

Certainly all honourable and respectful readers will recognise the wasteful nature of engaging in any affair with a racist let alone affairs of the religion, if and when this racist recognises that Islam does not permit such racist views perhaps then progress may be achieved. In any case, the intent here is to highlight a surprising revelation presented to us by Abu Bilal of Masjid Sunnah several weeks prior to the present day.

Quite clearly the individuals from Masjid Sunnah have actively engaged themselves in attempting to hold their events in as many Masaajid as possible, perhaps under some deluded notion that masses of numbers will strengthen their battle against the salafiyyeen….and potentially therefore facilitate their deviance in continuing to defend innovators the likes of al-Halabi, al-Ma’ribi, al-Maghraawi and the hizbiyyeen (Abu Usaamah etc) who have had their realities clarified by the scholars on multiple occasions….by the likes of Shaikh Rabee’, Shaikh Zaid bin Haady, Shaikh Ahmed an-Najmy etc [no doubt we will await for this individual/s of limited intellectual capacity to provide some disgrace of an email in an attempt to prove that the likes of Shaikh Zaid and Shaikh Ahmed rahimahullah are just “normal scholars of no importance or significance” therefore – within the bounds of his restricted mind – accepting their evidence-based speech upon the figureheads of deviation is not necessary, when in reality it is the evidence that proves the affair not the name of the scholar or his rank].

It is upon one such “recruitment” visit that Abu Bilal of Masjid Sunnah disclosed some rather sensitive information. In an amazing turn of events he disclosed that the cowardly individual of limited intellectual means is not actually a representative of Masjid Sunnah whatsoever. We intend of course the one who is otherwise apparently known as a “dawa man” to some for reasons that have not yet remotely become manifest, since all attempts to discover any form of connection between his emails and the dawa have failed dramatically to date. Abu Bilal even claimed he does not receive the emails and was shocked to learn the type of speech this disgraced and degraded miskeen was utilising in his emails, at one point he replied “subhaanAllah” in shock and amazement when certain speech was quoted to him from the emails. He blatantly declared Masjid Sunnah’s innocence of this individual/s activities and clarified that he is a “loner” working independently and not affiliated in any official capacity to Masjid Sunnah. He also clarified through his speech that this miskeen of limited intellectual means has actually lied in his emails in certain places; for example the claim that our brother Abdullah was being referred to in a question concerning “certain people posting articles on the web and causing discord”. Abu Bilal declared this to be completely incorrect and false and clarified that it was simply a general question put forward that he innocently read out not intending any one particular individual. Allaahu Akbar, certainly that will be a blow to the already depleted intellectual facilities of the miskeen cowardly individual known as “dawa man”….even his own “people” are abandoning him in terms of clarifying to us that he lied in his attempt to associate questions and answers to specific individuals and that they do not endorse his views!

Since it appears the activities of this “dawa man” [and in reality the title itself is a misrepresentation, since it is far more accurate to attribute the emails sent by this “man” to a child of perhaps 6, arguably 7 at most, since by then most children would have recognised the incorrectness and pathetic nature of racism, therefore rendering him a “dawa child”, however that is a separate topic and not the discussion here] have reached a level whereby he is now belittling the Jarh Mufassar [i.e. detailed knowledge-based factual criticisms of the scholars against the innovator al-Halabi and other than him due to his blatant lack of understanding and comprehension of the affairs of the religion]. Therefore, it was incumbent to inform the community that even Abu Bilal of Masjid Sunnah has in fact clarified that they do not endorse him or some of his falsified claims that certain brothers were intended by certain questions….all of this verified by Abu Bilal himself.

Of course there is one other possibility that remains….although disturbing yet possible. It is possible Abu Bilal is fully aware of the activities of this “dawa child” and is in agreement with them and was in fact attempting to deceive us with those statements, in a non-euphemistic manner, he was lying. The persistence of Abu Bilal to conceal the identity of the cowardly “dawa man” is cause for concern, particularly as he was left speechless when questioned on the identity of this individual and instead desired not to disclose that information but rather attempted to divert the conversation into an alternate direction.

We therefore seek clarification from Masjid Sunnah; is this individual a representative of the masjid or not? If the response is “yes he is a representative” or any variation of that phrased in any manner to indicate the endorsement of this individual and his emails, then it will clarify the lying nature of Abu Bilal, if however the response is “no he is not”, then that will put an end to the issue as it will be clarified that this individual is an independent who has too much time for the laptop, when instead he should perhaps utilise that time to improve his mental facilities in order that perhaps he may recognise that racism is unacceptable and learn the religion.

In conclusion, although it is clearly recognised that certain individuals have become accustomed to lying, since the hizbiyyoon are often left to resort to this evil at times in order to continue their defence of refuted figureheads, such as the likes of Abul-Hasan al-Ma’riby – a fact that has now been completely verified by Abu Bilal himself, i.e. that certain members of Masjid Sunnah do continue to defend the innovators such as Al-Ma’riby [although he himself declares he views al-Ma’riby to be an innovator], however upon their deviated methodology he attempted to justify the position of being able to continue to defend the likes of these individuals – in any case we hope this habitualisation to lying has not overcome Abu Bilal himself and he will not attempt to deny the above statements he uttered upon his own tongue that Allah is aware of… or as we have experienced on many an occasion prior to this, attempt to claim he intended something completely different to what was understood now that this embarrassing exposition has appeared.

This possibility [ i.e. that covertly Masjid Sunnah are in support of the coward “dawa man” although publicly must maintain a stance of “honour” and therefore disassociate themselves from him] is strengthened by the fact that Masjid Sunnah will recognise they cannot have a despicable individual of this nature officially associated to themselves, since that would bring about ruin to their “reputation” and futile attempts to gather the masses upon the distorted methodology they find themselves practicing in terms of having no understanding – or purposeful denial – of the sciences of al-jarh wa ta’deel and affairs relating to when refutations are given precedence over appraisals etc.

If it became known that Masjid Sunnah defends a disgraceful and abusive racist it would result in a damaging blow to the credibility they so desperately strive to achieve amongst the community in order to provide themselves the ability to “convince” others that they are upon the correct methodology.

If it became known that Masjid Sunnah defends an ignorant, time-wasting “stalker”, [since multiple complaints have been received from brothers and sisters that this unknown coward has somehow gained access to their emails and has begun a forced military occupation of their inboxes with his almost weekly filth – such as his racism – without their consent], then that would cause profound destruction and give rise to damaging and detrimental consequences in relation to their quest to disseminate their flawed practices.

Is it the case that the “dawa man” was born from a perverse Masjid Sunnah arrangement whereby they devised he could be as abusive, racist and ridiculous as he wished whilst they would be able to declare their innocence of him since his identity would be unknown; or is it the case that he genuinely is an isolated miskeen with no connection to Masjid Sunnah and nothing other than his laptop for company?

We find ourselves at a crossroads; Masjid Sunnah must now choose their path.  Either they acknowledge he is a racist loner not endorsed by them whatsoever hence administering the proverbial blow to the face of “dawa man”… Or that they admit they endorse him and defend him and his opinions and emails and therefore seal their own disgraceful fate… Or they attempt to divert away from the issue whilst persisting upon concealing his identity…in which case they should be informed that the proverbial fence they attempt to sit on is in a precarious position not possible to maintain stability upon.

We ask Allah to keep us firm upon learning and implementing the pure methodology of the Qur’an and Sunnah upon the understanding of the Salaf as-Saalih and to distance us from desires and doubts, the likes of which the hizbiyyeen have fallen victim to, leading them to despicable stances in terms of defending the innovators and people of desires whilst utilising the scholars to conceal themselves behind.

Major Scholars past and present on Shaykh Rabee

  • Shaykh Muqbil bin Haadi Al Waadi’ee
  • Shaykh Abdul Mohsin Al-Abbad
  • Shaykh Al-Uthaymeen 
  • Shaykh Abdullah Al-Ghudyaan
  • Shaykh Al Luhaydaan 
  • Shaykh Bin Baaz
  • Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Marzooq al-Banna

This article is not a definitive compilation of all the statements of praise on Shaykh Rabee, but has been compiled in order to dispel the lies and deceptions of those who revile Shaykh Rabee bin Haadi Al Madkhalee. Some people say that Shaykh Rabee is not respected by the Scholars or that he is not held in high regard, or even that he has been warned against!

Well to them we say; read this article, Fear Allah and rectify your tongues. The article is not comprised of my statements or statements of fulaan or fulaan, rather in this article are a handful of statements from the major scholars past (may Allah have mercy on them) and present (may Allah preserve them) concerning the status of the Shaykh – and we do not praise anyone over the praise of Allah. Verily Ahlul ilm know the status and rank of ahlul ilm.

Before we begin let us take heed from this reminder from the noble Shaikh Zayd al-Madkhalee (hafidhahullaah) who said:

“…The one who belittles the righteous scholars, criticizes them, and describes them with that which they are free from, then he has been afflicted with the disease of doubt and the disease of lust. And the distinguishing sign of the people of bid’ah was that they would find fault with the righteous scholars…” – http://www.sunnahpublishing.net/modules/Manhaj/sittahtranslation.pdf

BaarakAllaahu feekum


 

 Shaykh Muqbil bin Haadi Al Waadi’ee

 

Shaykh Muqbil said in Tuhfatul-Mujeeb, “Shaykh Rabee is a sign from the signs of Allaah (aayah min aayaatillaah) in knowing the Hizbiyyeen, not like the ayatollahs of Iraan, the Dajjaalleen…

Shaykh Muqbil also said, “Whomever Shaykh Rabee’ says is a Hizbee, then the days will soon reveal that he is a Hizbee…”


Shaykh Abdul Mohsin Al Abbad on Shaykh Rabee

The following is a summary translation taken from sahab.net – http://www.sahab.net/forums/showthread.php?t=355344

Questioner: A rumor has appeared and it is being carried by some people with sick hearts, claiming falsely that you have spoken ill of Sheikh Rabee in a lesson from one of your lessons. And we dont believe that they want by this except to set the Scholars in opposition against one another. So what is your statement concerning this? And what is your instruction to these people? Therefore we would like to take a tape and spread it to clarify their falsehood.

Sheikh Abdul Muhsin Al Abad:

“Sheikh Rabee is from those who are busy with knowledge during this time period, and he has efforts which are good and tremendous in working with the Sunnah. And also he has authored works, so he has authored works which are good and tremendous and beneficial.And I do not criticize him, nor do I warn from him, and I say he is from those Scholars whom are well grounded and if he is busy with knowledge you find in him many benefits.

Therefore I consider Sheikh Rabee to be from the Scholars, those whom should be listened to, and from those Scholars whose benefit is great.

(Taken from a tape, from the Sheikhs explanation of forty hadith) – http://salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=6447


 

Shaykh Uthaymeen on why people speak about Shaykh Rabee

The questioner asks:

ما هي نصيحتكم لمن يمنع أشرطة الشيخ ربيع بن هادي المدخلي بدعوى أنها تثير الفتنة وفيها مدح لولاة الأمر في المملكة ، وأن مدح الشيخ ربيع للحكام نفاق ؟ .

What is your advice concerning the one who forbids the cassettes of Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee [from being distributed] with the claim that they cause fitnah and that they contain praise of the Wullaat ul-Umoor of the Kingdom, and that his praise of them emanates from nifaaq (hypocrisy)?

To which the Shaykh responds:

رأينا هذا غلط وخطأ عظيم ، والشيخ ربيع من علماء السنَّة ومن أهل الخير وعقيدته سليمة ومنهجه قويم ، لكن لما كان يتكلم على بعض الرموز عند بعض الناس من المتأخرين وصموه بهذه العيوب ، أعرفت ؟

We consider this to be a great error and mistake. Shaikh Rabee’ is from the Ulamaa of the Sunnah, and from the people of goodness. His aqidah is sound and his manhaj is strong and sound. However, when he began to speak about some of the symbolic figureheads of some of the people, from amongst the latecomers they began to tarnish him with these faults. Do you know [this] now?

http://www.themadkhalis.com/md/articles/epluy-shaykh-ibn-uthaymin-the-people-began-to-tarnish-shaykh-rabee-with-faults-after-he-spoke-about-some-of-their-symbolic-figureheads.cfm

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullaah) said,

“Indeed we praise Allaah, Free is He from all imperfections, the Most High, that He makes it easy for our brother, the Doctor, Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee to visit this region. [So that] the one to whom certain matters are not apparent may come to know that our brother, may Allaah grant us and him success, is upon Salafiyyah, the way of the Salaf. And I do not mean here that Salafiyyah is a hizb (party) which is set up to oppose the Muslims outside of it,but I mean by Salafiyyah, that he (i.e. Shaikh Rabee’) is upon the path of the Salaf in his Manhaj. Especially in the field of actualising Tawheed and throwing aside (i.e. refuting, clarifying) what opposes this [manhaj]. And all of us know tht Tawheed is the basis for which Allaah sent the Messengers upon them be peace and prayers…

The visit of our brother, Shaikh Rabee bin Haadee to this region, our city, Unaizah, no doubt will have a good effect and it will also become clear to many of the people what used to be hidden from them due to the scare-mongering and rumour-mongering and also letting loose the tongue [of discord]. And how numerous are those who are remorseful about what they said concerning the Ulamaa, when it becomes clear to them that they (the Ulamaa) are upon the truth.”

Then one of those present at the gathering says, “There is a question concerning the books of Shaikh Rabee’?”

To which the Shaik replied,

It is apparently clear that this question is not in need of my answer. And just as Imaam Ahmad was asked about Ishaaq bin Raahawaih – rahimahumullaah – and he replied, “Someone like me is asked about Ishaaq! Rather, Ishaaq is to be asked about me.” And I spoke at the beginning of my speech about that which I know about Shaikh Rabee’, may Allaah grant him success, and what I mentioned has never ceased to be what I hold about him in my soul, up until this time. And his arrival here and his words that have reached me, then no doubt, they are such that they will increase a person in his love for him and in his supplication for him.” End of quote. (Cassette: “Ittihaaf al-Kurraam Bi Liqaa al-Uthaimeen Ma’a Rabee al-Madhkhalee wa Muhammad al-Imaam”)

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=1761


 

 Shaykh Ghudyaan meeting with Shaykh Rabee

The following is a summary translation taken from sahab.net – http://www.sahab.net/forums/showthread.php?p=564579

(Sultan bin Muhammad bin Saalim Al Juni) said

“I was a companion with our Sheikh, Sheikh Rabee during his meeting with the major scholars in Taif in the year 1427 (Islamic year)

So I will mention when we went to the Noble Scholar Sheikh Abdullah Ghudayyan, may Allah preserve him.

So we entered upon him in his office and we gave him the greetings, so he stood and shook Sheikh Rabees hand, gave us the greetings, and sat us down with him.

So he began to speak with Sheikh Rabee with delight and gentle, polite humor.

Then the talk was surrounding the minhaj, so Sheikh Rabee said, We warn from mistakes in the minhaj that oppose the book and the Sunnah and oppose the minhaj of the Salafi Salih that some of the callers fall into, so that the people will not be deceived by them.

So Sheikh Ghudayyan said, I am with you in this oh Sheikh Rabee.

And before Sheikh Rabee sought permission to leave, Sheikh Ghudayyan requested some of Sheikh Rabees recent books so he could look at them, so Sheikh Rabee promised to send this to him.

Then Sheikh Rabee sought Sheikh Ghudayyans permission to depart, so he gave us permission to leave. And we left with the same, rather we left with more happiness, delight and peace of mind than we had when we were greeted.”

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=9&Topic=7585


 

Shaykh Saalih Al-Luhaydaan on those who warn against Shaykh Rabee 1426 hijri/2005

Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan (may Allaah preserve him):

“No doubt, this is oppression and a wrongful form of aggression.  We do not know of any contradictions to the Sharee’ah by Shaykh Rabee’.  And we do not of any of the well-known scholars to warn against (him). 

Full Arabic audio with English translation below:

Shaykh Saalih Al-Luhaydaan 1431 hijri/2010

Question:

أقرأ وأسمع في بعض المجالس حملة تطعن في فضيلة الشيخ الدكتور ربيع بن هادي المدخلي والتحذير منه والأخذ عنه وأنه ليس من أهل السنة والجماعة مما جعلني في حيرة من أمري فما حكم ذلك نرجو التوضيح وجزاكم الله خيرا

The Shaykh’s Answer:

لا شك أنه من أهل العلم وهو من تلامذة شيخنا الشيخ عبد العزيز في المدينة وكان من الأساتذة في جامعة المدينة ولا أعرف عنه انحرافا لا في عقيدة ولا في أخلاق بل ظني فيه أنه حسن وأنه من أهل الخير ومن المكافحين لدعاة الفتنة

ثم إني أنصح الشباب أن يتجنبوا الوقيعة في أهل العلم ويكفوا ألسنتهم وأن يحرصوا على تقييم أنفسهم ثم إذا رأوا في أحد فيما يظنون عيبا فليفتشوا أنفسهم ولينظروا فيها فإذا وجدوا عيوبا فيحرصون على إصلاحها …

Original source: Sahab.Net, translation (taken from the one posted on ST, with corrections made to it):

I read and I hear in some sittings a campaing slandering the noble scholar as-Shaikh Rabee’ ibn Hadee al-Madkhalee and warnings against him, in addition to taking from him (knowledge), and that he is not from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, which made me become confused in my affair (of seeking knowledge). So what is the ruling upon this, please clarify? Jazakumullaahu Khair.

He (Sheikh Saalih) answered:

There is no doubt that he (Shaikh Rabee’) is from the people of knowledge, and he is from the students of our Shaykh, Shaykh Abdul ‘Azeez (Ibn Baaz) (when they were) in Madinah, and he (Shaykh Rabee’) used to be from the teachers of Madinah (Islamic) University. I do not know any deviations of him neither in Aqeedah nor in Akhlaaq (mannerism), rather my perception of him that he is good and that he is from the people of goodness, as well as being from those who battle the callers to fitnah.

Thereafter I advise the youth is to stay away from reviling the scholars, and to withhold their tongues (from reviling the scholars). Also let them (the youth) strive to assess themselves (to improve themselves). And then if they saw what they thought is a fault in someone, then let them investigate their own souls (first), and let them look into them, so if they saw faults (in their own souls), they should be eager to rectify them …

http://www.themadkhalis.com/md/articles/briud-shaykh-salih-al-luhaydaan-praises-and-defends-shaykh-rabee-on-21012010ce.cfm


 

Shaykh Saalih Al-Luhaydaan 1432 hijir/2011

Quote:

Second matter: Ash-Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadee Al Madkhalee is from the people of knowledge and what an excellent man! …..

…Rather, if they presented this matter to Shaykh Rabee’ it would become apparent to them, that he does not intend this dangerous path and dispelling methodology, rather the intent is those lenient ones, the warners and those who say: we facilitate all the people from all walks of life and each one of us acts upon what he believes and we excuse whatever others believe! No, the matter is not like that as well. It is obligatory that the truth be dominant upon various people and their ways and it is Allaah whose help we seek.

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=6&Topic=5527&srow=41&erow=60


 

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Marzooq al-Banna praise of Shaykh Rabee

How long have you known sheikh Rabee?

Since 1382h/1383h until now.

quote:

…by Allaah I would not have believed it if all the people told me for my experience of knowing Rabee while even as a student and until now I have not known him ever to lie.

quote:

Is Sheikh Rabee from the Kibaar al Ulamaa?

Who is in this time similar to him? He knows the reality of most of the callers. Who is like him? He knows with proof and evidence. He doesn’t speak about anyone except with the proof. That is why I say about Rabee Haadee is similar to Yahyah ibn Ma’een in this time. You must forgive me son I have become old I forget, now I am 90 years. Shiekh Ibn Baz rahimahullaah is the Umar ibn AbdulAziz in this era. And sheikh Nasrud Deen al Albaani rahimahullaah is the Ibn Taymiyyah of this era. and Sheikh Uthaimeen rahimahullaah  is the Shaf’ee of this era. By Allaah, the most knowledgeable of our scholars in this time ibn Uthaimeen rahimahullaah and the most generous is Sheikh AbdulAziz ibn Baz rahimahullaah, And the most knowledgeable of those differences between people and knowing the truth is Sheikh al Albaani rahimahullaah, and the most knowledgeable ones of Rijaal (men) with proof and evidence is Sheikh Rabee Haadee May Allaah protect him. And May Allaah protect his intellect.

When sheikh al Albaani rahimahullaah showed the errors of Sayid Qutb and Abdullah Dawaish rahimahullaah no one moved but when Sheikh Rabee may Allaah be pleased with him, showed the misguidance of Sayid Qutb and he clarified it from his (Sayid Qutb’s) books and his situation in the past, the world was against Rabee. He said it with openness and evidence.

So may Allaah reward him and make him firm and may Allaah keep him alive to remove those who wear the clothes of salafiyyah in order to fight it. We ask Allaah to show their state and clarify them and keep their evil away from us.

http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=6&Topic=322


 

Shaykh bin Baz leter to Shaykh Rabee asking him to refute an individual who made taweel of Allah’s attribute and to clarify the truth to the Muslims.

The letter has an official letter head for “the Office of the General Muftee of the Kingdom”, is dated 24/7/1415H and begins with the subject heading:

Regarding the speech of the one-called Nazih Hammad on the Noble Qur’an Radio [program].

The letter is addressed from Abdul-Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz to the

His respectfulness, the Noble Brother, the Esteemed Shaykh, Dr. Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhali, may Allaah grant him safety, Ameen.

After giving salutations, the Shaykh mentioned that he was informed by Dr. Muhammad bin Sa’ad ash-Shuway’ir of Shaykh Rabee’s hearing of the speech of the one called Nazih Hammad which was broadcast on the Noble Qur’an Radio [program] on 12/6/1415H between 7am and 8am and that he spoke about the Ta’weel of the attributes of al-hayaa and al-ghadab.

Then the Shaykh said:

For this reason, I ask from your excellence to expect reward in refuting him and clarifying the truth to the Muslims, because I have not heard this speech (directly).

May Allaah grant your excellence success in every goodness and multiply your reward, for He is all-Hearing, ever-Near…

Then the Shaykh gives his salutations and places his official seal at the end of the letter.

http://www.themadkhalis.com/md/assets/images/bin-baz-requesting-rabee-to-refute.gif

Part 4: Ali Halabi’s Long Journey (may Allaah guide him)

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

Abul Wafaa Ibnu Aqeel (rahimahullaah) said: ”Whoever pronounces his creed based upon proofs, then unsteadiness will not remain with him due to the differences of opinion regarding the state of affairs of men.’’

 

Ali Halabi (The Innovator) and the Fitnah of Abul Hasan Al-Maribi (The Innovator)

Between pages 20-25 in Arabic PDF (revised and read by Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadee al-Madkhalee), the author discusses the Fitnah of Abul Hasan Al-Maribi and the two facedness of Ali Halabi during the Fitnah, which finally led him to deviation. So we will abridge and paraphrase the discussion. For further details download PDF here: http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=122127

There came about the fitnah of Al-Maribi and his innovations in opposition to the methodology of the Salafus Saaleh (i.e. the pious predecessors). However, before the Fitnah of Al-Maribi became manifested, there were observations on his book titled [Siraaj Al-Wahhaaj], and this took place during the lifetime of the three Imaams [Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz, Muhammad Nasiruddeen Al-Albaanee and Muhammad Bin Saaleh Al-Uthaymeen (rahimahumullaah)].  

Al-Maribi was already promoting his innovations on the subject matter of passing judgments against deviated individuals and the position towards those in opposition to the Book, The Sunnah and understanding of the pious predecessors.  He wished to make this book of his a methodology for the salafis in this time, so he embark upon seeking the recommendations of the major scholars, especially from Imaam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah). Imaam Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) passed the book to the present Mufti Al-Allaamah Abdul Azeez Aala Shaikh (hafidha-hullaah) who carried out his observations on the book and referred them back to Imaam Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah). However, Imaam Bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) passed away and Abul Hasan did not obtain what he wanted. Indeed Allaah has full control and power over His Affairs.

Indeed, it was Al-Maribi who kindled the fitnah between the salafis after the fitnah of Adnaan Ar’oor. He intended by way of his book a warning against the methodology of Al-Allaamah Rabee Bin Haadee Al-Madkhalee (hafidha-hullaah), which he described as excessive. The evidence showing Al-Maribi as the initiator of the Fitnah is due to the fact that he defended the people of falsehood and innovations in his book, especially the leaders of Ikhwaan Al-Muslimeen, which he titled: A defense of the people of Ittibaa [i.e. a defense of the people who follow the correct path of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah].

Al-Maribi himself said that he rejected/disapproved the methodology of Shaikh Rabee in his book Siraaj al-Wahhaaj few years ago before the clear and final manifestation of his differences with Shaikh Rabee, and that this book of his was written in the year 1418AH and has been reprinted thrice.  Al-Maribi also acknowledged that Shaikh Rabee did refute him in his Book titled: ”Intiqaad Aqadee Alaa Siraaj Al-Wahhaaj, and that Shaikh Rabee himself said: ”Indeed, when I received the book (Siraaj Al-Wahhaaj), I knew that he (Al-Maribi) intended me (i.e. a warning against me in a number of descriptions in relation to extremism, which he said I fell into.”

Shaikh Fawzaan’s Verdict On Ikhwaan Al-Muslimeen

All praise is due to Allaah, and salaat and salaam upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and his companions.

My view with regards to the Muslim Brotherhood is that they are partisans (Hizbiyyoon) who covet the attainment of ruler ship; and that they do not give concern to calling to the correcting of the creed (Aqeedah).

And they do not distinguish between their followers, between the Sunni (person upon the Sunnah) and the bid’ee (person upon innovation).

As for the speech (found) in an audio recording that has come from me, then it is a slip of the tongue and does not change my stance in the slightest.

Written by Saalih Ibn Al-Fawzaan Al-Fawzaan


Translated by: Hasan Somali

Source: http://www.albaidha.net/vb/showthread.php?t=38314

The Arabic Text

” الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلاة والسلام

على نبينا محمد وعلى آله وصحبه

رأيي في الإخوان المسلمين أنهم حزبيون يريدون التوصل إلى الحكم ولا يهتمون بالدعوة إلى تصحيح العقيدة ولا يفرقون في أتباعهم بين السني والبدعي .

 وما جاء في الكلام الشفهي المسجل عني فهو سبق لسان لا يغير من رأيي فيهم شيئا”.

كتبه

صالح بن فوزان الفوزان

26/5/1433هـ.

Part 3: Ali Halabi’s Long Journey

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

Ali Halabi’s Unsteady Stance towards Passing Judgments on Individuals and Deviants

[Adnaan Ar’oor and Muhammad Al-Maghraawi]

Discussion in pages 16-20 in the Arabic PDF. Download PDF here:

http://www.ajurry.co…07&d=1351203443

Before the death of the three Mashaa-yikh [i.e. Imaam Bin Baaz, Imaam Al-Albaanee and Imaam Muhammad Ibn Uthaymeen(rahimahumullaah)], Adnaan Ar’oor together with his companion Ahmad Sallaam newly invented a number of principles and fundamentals in the affair of passing judgements against individuals and the manner of dealing with the Mukhaalifoon. And for that reason, they embarked upon a number of seminars and study sessions in order to attract the salafi youth in Britain and other than it, and they called them to accept those false principles.

In their gatherings, they raised objections against Shaikh Rabee’s methodology of criticism, refutation, his stances towards the one in opposition and in the science Jarh Wat-Tadeel. They warned the youth against the methodology which they described as extreme, excessive harshness and defamation. They defended Sayyid Qutb and portrayed him to the youth as one of the best amongst those who spoke in the (affairs) of Manhaj. Shaikh Rabee opposed them and clarified the corruption of their principles and methodology and the falsity of their fundamentals and what they advocated. So they were infuriated and announced a fierce battle against Shaikh Rabee. This affair was the beginning of the Fitnah of these people and not what some think due to ignorance and deceit, that it was Shaikh Rabee who initiated the Fitnah and war with these ones.

And through a number of deceptive ways, Adnaan Ar’oor attempted to obtain the statements of the three Mashaa-yikh (Imaam Bin Baaz, Imaam Al-Albaanee and Imaam Ibn Uthaymeen) to support his falsehood and dispraise the methodology Shaikh Rabee was defending. He (Adnaan) did not reach what he wanted, because the scholars realised his plots and tricks.

And it was transmitted in a statement of Imaad Taariq Al-Iraaqee in the internet forum Kullu As-Salafiyyeen, which is under Ali Halabi’s supervision: [The Stance of our Imaam Al-Albaanee Towards Shaikh Rabee Al-Madkhali’s Refutation Against Adnaan Ar’oor, transmitted by our shaikh Ali Al-Halabi]; Imaad said: I came across a section from the speech of our Shaikh Al-Halabi in which he transmitted the stance of Shaikh Al-Albaanee towards Shaikh Rabee’s reproach against Adnaan, that when I (Ali Halabi) mentioned some of Shaikh Rabee’s proofs against Adnaan to Shaikh Al-Albaanee and Adnaan reply, he (i.e. Shaikh Al-Albaanee) said: These affairs are true, it is incumbent upon Adnaan to reply to them with clarity, and abstract speech is not enough or merely saying this is general and that is detailed and this is all inclusive and that is specific and so on, this neither rectifies nor is it of benefit in the likes of this affair.

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.


References:

[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)

[See-link:] http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=23&Topic=1113%5D