Tag: refutations

Beautifying The Affair of Misguided Personalities [Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd]: Brief Rebuke Against Ignorant Heba Yosry at Al-Arabiya News

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

Heba Yosry [may Allaah guide her and restrain her tongue] stated:


The Ancient Muslim Tradition of Ibn Rushd! Ignorant Heba Yosry’s statement is a beautification of the affair of these three misguided personalities of old – Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd. Indeed, Heba is informed of the fact that beautifying the affair of those who opposed the authentic Sunnah of the Messenger [peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him] is a mighty sin, and may Allaah protect us and her from its evil consequences. Ali Bin Abee Taalib [radiyallaahu-anhu] said: Allaah’s Messenger [sallal laahu alayhi wasallam] told me four things: “Allaah has cursed the one who slaughters [i.e. an animal as sacrifice] for other than Allaah. Allaah has cursed the one who curses his parents. Allaah has cursed the one who shelters a Muhdith. Allaah has cursed the one who alters the landmarks”. [Reported by Imaam Muslim 1978]

“The word Muhdith pronounced with a kasrah under the Daal means a culprit, perpetrator; and pronounced with a Fat-hah on the Daal (Muhdath) means an affair innovated in the religion, sheltering and being pleased with it]”. (1) Those who shelter Ahlul Bidah Wal Ma’aasee [The People of Bidah and Disobedience] and aid them; those who stop the one who establishes the legislated Islamic punishment against the innovator [i.e. such as preventing the Muslim ruler from punishing the innovator or the scholar who refutes him]. Those who establish Bidah and support it. (2) This innovation includes that of the Jahmiyyah, the Mutazilah and others. So, whoever shelters an innovator is cursed and likewise the one who aids him [is cursed]. In this is a warning against Bidah and newly invented matters in the religion. The Prophet said, “Beware of newly invented matters in the religion, for every innovation [in religious affairs] is misguidance”. The apparent meaning of this hadeeth [is that this is the case regarding bidah], even if it is a small bidah. (3)

Imaam Fudayl Ibn Iyaad [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said, “Whoever honours an innovator (in religious affairs) has assisted in the demolition of Islaam”. Al-Allaamah Saaleh Al-Fawzaan said, “That is because innovation (in religion) is contrary to Islaam. If you give support to an innovator (in religious affairs), then indeed you have assisted in the demolition of Islaam, because Islaam is the Sunnah and the Sunnah is Islaam. So it is obligated on a person that he does not honour the people of religious innovation, and that he neither praises nor commends them. (4)

Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr [may Allaah have mercy upon him] stated regarding the science of criticism and commendation, “Recommendation is accepted from the one who is acquainted with its reasons and not from the one who is unacquainted with it, so that one may not give a recommendation solely based on what is apparent straight away without experience and examination. Also, it is obligatory that disparagement and commendation are not accepted except from a person who is trustworthy and cautious, and disparagement is not accepted from one who exceeds the limits in it, because he disparages with what does not necessitate rejection of the narration of a Muhaddith, just as recommendation is not accepted from the one who solely holds on to the apparent (affair of a person) and then gives a commendation”. (5)

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said, “The one who speaks about the religion without knowledge and out of ignorance (is guilty of) lying and sinning. The one who intentionally speaks to oppose the truth is threatened with entry into the fire of hell, as opposed to the affair of the one who speaks based on permissible Ijtihaad, for indeed he strives, fears Allaah as much as he is able, desires to seek knowledge as much as he was able, speaks for the sake of Allaah, knows the stronger proof and speaks based on that. This person is given two rewards if he is correct; but if he is mistaken, he receives one reward. A Mujtahid can be correct or mistaken”.(6)

The above quotes should suffice Heba and her ilk – that they are not to speak in religious affairs based on mere opinion and thus beautify the affair of misguided personalities, such as the likes of Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd and their ilk. Now, let us briefly examine the affair of these misguided personalities in the light of history.

Shaikh Shamsuddeen Al-Afghaanee [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said:

Allaah [The Most High] guided mankind through Muhammad [peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him] and the clear manifest evidences given to him [peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him] – a guidance that could not be described by those who were well versed in the art of descriptions and [a guidance] that surpassed the knowledge of those with great perception. And by way of this guidance, Allaah [The Most High] opened the eyes of the blind ones, the ears of the deaf ones and the hearts of the heedless ones. Allaah [The Most High] united them on one religion-[the religion of Islamic monotheism] – and prior to that they were in complete disunity, enmity towards one another and followed corrupt creeds. Allaah united their hearts, and thus they became true brothers in Islaam by way of this great blessing. Thereafter, everything worshipped besides Allaah, such as graves, trees, stones and idols ceased to exist and all worship was established for Allaah alone. [Many] people followed the true Religion of Islamic monotheism and worshipped Allaah alone, except those whom Allaah willed that they were to remain as people of polytheism, hypocrisy and followers of the altered and distorted previous scriptures. The darkness of polytheism was dispelled and the banner of Tawheed was raised in the lands-amongst the Arabs and non-Arabs. Allaah’s Messenger [peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him] passed away, whilst Islaam was established and in authority-superseding all other ways of life and creeds. Then the rightly guided khulafaa of the Messenger [Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan and Ali (may Allaah be pleased with them)] continued to adhere to the path of the Messenger [sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam] until the two powerful and great nations at the time-Rome and Persia-ended up in humiliation, degradation and in a state of fear after they had been in a state of security, and thus Caesar was restricted and besieged, and khosrau [or Chosroes] was subdued and destroyed. When the enemies of Islaam saw that they were unable to do away with this religion, they implanted their disbelieving agents within it – those who pretended to be Muslims in order to kindle confusion, trials and tribulations, and spread polytheism by exaggerating the status of the pious people and exalting their graves through [beliefs and practices] that were not ordained by Allaah. So, the Ummah [Islamic Nation] was put to trial through the plots of the [atheist, heretic and hypocrite] Abdullaah Bin Saba, who claimed Uloohiyyah for Ali Ibn Abee Taalib [i.e. that Ali (the cousin of the Prophet) had the right to be worshipped besides Allaah]. Abdullaah Bin As- Sabah’s followers were known as the Saba’iyyah and later on they were known as the Rawaafid (shiites), the ismaaliyyah (shittes), the nusayriyah (shiites) and other than them amongst the Baatiniyyah. They worshipped the graves and its inhabitants, and built places of worship and shrines upon those graves. So, through these practices, they revived the (corrupt ancient practices) of those Jews, Christians and the idol worshippers (who deviated from the straight path of the Prophets and Messengers of Allaah). This is how the practices of the worshippers of graves in this Muslim Nation manifested itself through the practices initiated by the rawaafid (shiites). [NB: The majority of the rawaafid Shiites presently live in Iran & Iraq, and their leader is Khumeini]

Secondly: The books of Greek philosophy that propagated the ideas of grave and idol worship were translated into Arabic, so many of those who attributed themselves to Islam busied themselves with these books, such as the likes of Al-Farabi (a) Ibn Sina Al-Hanafi (b) Naseer At-Toosee –an advocate of disbelief and polytheism (c) and other than them amongst those who played tricks with Islaam, just as Paul played tricks with Christianity. They were influenced by the ideas of the Greek Philosophers, so they became callers to grave worship through Greek Philosophy. The practices of these people was rife within the ranks of the people of rhetoric amongst the Hanafi Maatooreediyyah (d) and the Ash-ariyyah Kullaabiyyah due to busying themselves with the Books of the Philosophers. They became callers to grave worship and callers to the creed of the Jahmiyyah at the same time, such as the likes of Taftaazaanee Al-Hanafi [The Philosopher of the Maatooreediyyah and Grave worshipers] and Jurjaanee Al-Hanafi [a caller to superstition]

[a] Al-Farabi: He said that philosophy is more perfect than Prophet hood. Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said about him, “Misguided- a disbeliever”. Ibn Sinaa adopted his books and ideas of disbelief. [Majmoo Al-Fataawaa 2/67—86] [Dar At-Ta’aarud 1/10] [Ighaathatul Luhfaan 2/372-373]

[b] Ibn Sinaa: Imaam Ibnu Salaah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said about him, “He was a devil amongst the human devils”.’ [Fataawaa Ibn Salaah 1/209] [Ar-Radd Alal Mantaqiyyeen by Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah 278-279] [Ighaathatul Luhfaan by Imaam Ibnul Qayyim 2/373-380] [Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah by Imaam Ibn Katheer 12/43] [Source: Juhoodu Ulamaa Al-Hanafiyyah Fee Ibtaal Aqaa-id Al-Qubooriyyeen’ of Shaikh Shamshud-deen As-Salafi Al-Afghaanee’ Vol 1 page 19-25]

Question to Al-Allaamah Saaleh Al-Fawzaan [may Allaah preserve him]: “What is your view regarding the one who praises Ibn Sinaa and places him within the ranks of the Muslim scholars?”

Answer: “Either this person is ignorant and is unaware of Ibn Sinaa’s state of affairs, therefore it is not appropriate that he should speak, rather it is obligated on him to keep quiet; or he is aware of Ibn Sinaa’s state of affairs and disbelief, so he affirms that for Ibn Sinaa and thus the ruling that applies to Ibn Sinaa is applicable to him, and Allaah’s refuge is sought, because he affirms Ibn Sina’s disbelief and praises him. This is very dangerous. But some people praise Ibn Sinaa only due to the fact that he was a physician – praised due to a worldly science. And amongst the disbelievers, there are those who are more proficient than him in this field; but why do they mention Ibn Sinaa in particular? They say that because he attributes himself to Islaam and this is a credit to the Islaam. Therefore, we say: Islaam is free from Ibn Sina and not in need of him. He is not to be praised because he is a Baatini, a philosopher, Mulhid. [At-Taleeqaat Al-Mukhtasar Alaa Qaseedah An-Nooniyyah 3/1328]

Read: Why Ibn Sina, You Exceedingly Shrewd Kafir! Thank You For Supporting Our Aristotelian Metaphysical Creed and Backing Us (Ash’aris) In Our Saying That ‘Allaah Is Not Within the Creation Nor Outside Of It: http://www.asharis.com/creed/articles/mrsit-why-ibn-sina-you-exceedingly-shrewd-kafir-thank-you-for-supporting-our-aristotel.cfm

Understanding the Battle Between the Philosophers (Aristotle, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi) and the Mutakallimoon (Jahmiyyah, Mu’tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash’ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) Initiated By Jahm bin Safwaan: http://www.asharis.com/creed/articles/ledrs-understanding-the-battle-between-the-philosophers-aristotle-ibn-sina-al-farabi-a.cfm

[c] Naasir At-Toosee: He was a magician and a minister of the Tartars. He rejected the ‘resurrection’. For further details, see: As-Sawaa-iq Al-Mursalah of Imaam Ibnul Qayyim (rahimahullaah) 2/790; 3/1077-1078

[d] Followers of the Jahmi Abu Mansoor Al- Maatooreedi Al-Hanafi [For further details, see the Book of Shaikh Shamsud-deen al-Afghaanee titled: ‘Al-Maatooreediyyah’ 1/205-376]

Thirdly: A people who were more dangerous and misguided than the aforementioned groups emerged amongst the Muslims with a manifestation of asceticism. They appeared in the garb of righteousness – with tearful eyes, long flowing beards, elevated turbans, carrying large rosary beads and pretended to be calling to the Sunnah of the Prophet [sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam], whilst they secretly practised the disgraceful acts inherited from false religions. They attempted to mix blatant lies with the Qur’aan and the authentic narrations in order to corrupt the clear evidences found in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. These deviant heretics are known as the Hulooliyyah, Ittihaadiyyah Grave Worshipers (I)], such as the likes of Hallaaj (309AH), Ibnul Faarid (632AH) Ibn Arabi (638AH), Ibn Sab’een (669AH) etc [Source: Juhoodu Ulamaa Al-Hanafiyyah Fee Ibtaal Aqaa-id Al-Qubooriyyeen’ of Shaikh Shamshud-deen As-Salafi Al-Afghaanee’ Vol 1 page 19-25] [Source: Juhoodu Ulamaa Al-Hanafiyyah Fee Ibtaal Aqaa’id Al-Qubooriyyeen’ by Shaikh Shamshud-deen As-Salafi Al-Afghaanee’ Vol 1 page 19-25]

(I) Hulooliyyah and Ittihaadiyyah (i.e.Wahdatul Wujood); see link for further details: http://www.salafitalk.net/st/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=8&Topic=3528

Ibn Rushd: Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said, “He [i.e. Ibn Rushd] responded to al-Ghazaali, but a response in which he made many mistakes and what is correct was with al-Ghazaali. He attributed some of his arguments to Ibn Sina and not to his predecessor (Aristotle), and the mistake in it he attributed to Ibn Sina. And in some of his arguments he spoke ill against al-Ghazaali and accused him of having little fairness because he [Ibn Rushd] based his views on corrupt rhetoric”. [Minhaaj as-Sunnah 1/255]

Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] also said, “He [i.e. Ibn Rushd] was one who followed the statements of Aristotle the most”. [Bayaan Talbees Al-Jahmiyyah 1/120] Read here about the deviant Aristotle: http://www.asharis.com/creed/articles/lxtuo-ibn-taymiyyah-compared-with-the-philosophers-exposing-abu-adam-al-naruijis-acade.cfm

Al-Allaamah Muhammad Amaan Al-Jaami [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said, “That which no two people would differ about is that Ibn Rushd is a big and dangerous philosopher”. [Al-Aql Wan-Naql Inda Ibn Rushd. Page 16]

Shaikh Ash-Shuyookh Ibn Hamawiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said: When I entered the city, I enquired about Ibn Rushd and it was said that the Khaleefah Ya’qoob did not allow him to leave his house nor was anyone allowed to go to him, because of the many bizarre statements that were transmitted from him and the rejected sciences that were attributed to him. He died in Maraakesh whilst confined in his house. [Siyah A‘laam An-Nubala 21/310]

Read on this link to see one of Ibn Rushd’s blunders as a result of his philosophy – a quote by Shaikh Abu Iyaadh [may Allaah preserve him] from Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him:

Therefore, we remind Heba that she refrains from beautifying the affair of misguided personalities. Allaah [The Exalted] said: [إِنَّا نَحۡنُ نُحۡىِ ٱلۡمَوۡتَىٰ وَنَڪۡتُبُ مَا قَدَّمُواْ وَءَاثَـٰرَهُمۡۚ وَكُلَّ شَىۡءٍ أَحۡصَيۡنَـٰهُ فِىٓ إِمَامٍ۬ مُّبِينٍ۬ – Verily, We give life to the dead, and We record that which they send before (them), and their traces, and that which they leave behind], and all things We have recorded with numbers (as a record) in a Clear Book. [Surah Yaa Seen. Verse 12] Imaam As-Sadi [may Allaah have mercy upon him] stated that this verse makes clear to you the lofty station of calling to the path of Allaah, guidance to His path through every means and the path that leads to it; and the lowly status of the caller to evil and a leader in it, and that he is the most degraded human being, one who has committed the severest crime and the greatest sin. [Tafseer As-Sadi]

As for misguided caller to falsehood – Amr Khaalid, then indeed we are not in need of elaborating on his affair; rather we suffice ourselves with what Al-Allaamah Ubaid Al-Jaabiri [may Allaah preserve him] stated. Listen here: https://safeshare.tv/x/ss611371720ba0c

[Ref 1: Al-Mulakh’khas Fee Sharhi Kitaab At-tawheed. page 97 by Shaikh Saaleh Al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullaah)]

[Ref 2: An Excerpt from At-taleeqaat Al-Baaziyyah Alaa Ar-Rasaa’il Al-Aqadiyyah. pages 250-251.slightly paraphrased]

[Ref 3: Al-Qawlul Mufeed Alaa Kitaab At-tawheed. page 1/222. Shaikh Uthaymeen (rahimahullaah)]

[Ref 4: Source: It-haaful Qaaree Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharh As-Sunnah Lil Imaam Barbahaaree. Vol 2. page: 323]
[Ref 5: Nuzhah An-Nadr Sharh Nukhbah al-Fikr Fee Mustalah Ahl Al-Athar. page 66]
[Ref 6: Al-Arba’oona Hadeethaa Fee Usoolil Fiqh. pages 32-33]

Agencies In Maiduguri [Nigeria] Use Your Brains Before Reporting About Islaam And Those Who Falsely Claim to Represent It!

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

Agencies in Maiduguri wrote in the Guardian UK:

Indeed, it is very important that these writers either seek knowledge in order to stop speculating or at least refrain from manifesting their repugnant ignorance in this subject matter. Firstly, why did they use the word Militant and attributed it to Islaam, especially whilst addressing the affair of misguided innovators. If indeed this attack was carried out by terrorists from Boko Haram or those upon their ideology, then no mention of Islam should be made in relation to it. The person who calls them Islamist militants is either very ignorant of what Islaam is or he is deliberately seeking to make a haphazard or desperate attempt to distort Islaam’s image. The word Militancy means ‘The use of confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause’.  Then let us let us briefly look at what Islaam says about violence in support of a political or social cause. Indeed, it is well known that terrorists rebel against governments and this is something completely forbidden in Islaam. Imaam al-Barbahaaree (d. 329H) said, “Whoever rebels against a Muslim ruler is one of the Khawaarij, has caused dissent within the Muslims, has contradicted the narrations and has died the death of the days of ignorance”. [Sharhus-Sunnah] [p.42]

The terrorists -Khawaarij -are a group who first appeared in the time of  Alee. They split from his army and began the grave innovation of takfeer [declaring Muslims, rulers or the ruled, in their view guilty of major sins, to be unbelievers]. The Prophet warned against them in many authentic narrations, “They are the dogs of Hellfire”. He also informed us that they would continue to appear until the end of this world, saying, “A group will appear reciting the Qur’aan, it will not pass beyond their throats, every time a group appears it will be cut off, until the Dajjaal appears within them”.

Imaam Al-Barbahaaree (d.329H) also said, “It is not permissible to fight the ruler or rebel against him even if he oppresses. This is due to the saying of the Messenger of Allaah to Aboo Dharr al-Ghifaaree, “Have patience even if he is an Abyssinian slave”, and his saying to the Ansaar, “Have patience until you meet me at the Pool”. There is no fighting against the ruler in the Sunnah. It causes destruction of the Religion and the worldly affairs. [Sharh-us-Sunnah. p. 43]

Abu Bakr al-Aajurree (d.360H) said in ash-Sharee’ah (p. 28): “It is not fitting for the one who sees the uprising of a khaarijee who has revolted against the Imaam [leader], whether he is just or oppressive – so this person has revolted and gathered a group behind him, has pulled out his sword and has made lawful the killing of Muslims – it is not fitting for the one who sees this, that he becomes deceived by this person’s recitation of the Qur’aan, the length of his standing in the prayer, nor his constant fasting or his good and excellent words in knowledge when (it is clear to him that) this person’s way and methodology (madhhab) is that of the Khawaarij”.

It is authentically reported from the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) in the hadeeth of ‘Iyaad ibn Ghunum who said, “The Messenger of Allaah said, ‘Whoever desires to advise the one with authority then he should not do so openly, rather he should take him by the hand and take him into seclusion (and then advise him). And if he accepts (the advice) from him then (he has achieved his objective) and if not, then he has fulfilled that which was a duty upon him’”. [Reported by Ahmad (3/403) and Ibn Abee ‘Aasim (2/521) with a saheeh isnad].

And even when the Muslim rulers are sinful and oppressive, we neither fight them nor incite rebellion. See here: https://www.abukhadeejah.com/the-tyranny-of-the-rulers-a-reason-for-rebellion/

Therefore, after acquainting Agencies in Maiduguri with the above authentic Prophetic texts and the statements of the upright scholars of Islaam, then no sane person would mention Islaam whilst reporting the satanic deeds of the terrorists if it is ascertained that they were the perpetrators; rather whoever deliberately attaches their Militancy to the word Islaam cannot be considered anything else but either a wicked slanderer or an ignorant idiot in this particular subject matter- either such a person should refrain from speaking or he follows his vain desires and thus utters that which manifests his repugnant ignorance, as some of the scholars of Islaam stated, “Silence beautifies a scholar and conceals the [ignorance of] an  ignorant person”. And Imaam Abdullah Ibnul Mubaarak said, “If speech is from silver, then silence is from gold”, meaning, “If speech in obedience to Allaah is from silver, then silence [in order to refrain from] disobedience is gold’’.[Ref 1] Or maybe such a writer or speaker is upon the ideas of King Louis IX, who in the year 1250 was captured whilst on a crusade against the Muslims of Egypt; then he was imprisoned and later released after paying a large ransom. However, whilst in prison he utilised his time to think about ways in which to plot against Islaam and the Muslims, so shaytaan inspired him with the following plots: Firstly: The war in the battlefield between the Christians of the west and the Muslims should be replaced with a war based on ideas and cultural supremacy. Secondly: Prepare the West to corrupt the creed of the Muslims and distort the image of Islaam in the world. [Ref 2]

[Ref 1:  Jaami-ul Uloom Wal-Hikam: page: 155]

[Ref 2:  خطة لويس التاسع  – page 6]

Why do Some Scholars Refute by Name and Why do Others Refute Generally – Explained and Answered by Shaykh Rabee with Additional Benefits from Shaykhs Uthaymeen, Ahmed An-Najmi & Shaykh Fawzaan

We want to understand the following issue, It is well known that the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah are united upon (the importance) of refuting the people of innovation – All Praises belong to Allah – however some scholars refute specific individuals by name and some refute the people of innovation generally (without names).(1)

Shaykh Rabee (hafidahullah) responds,

Is there anyone from the Salaf who made it binding not to refute individuals by name and would rebuke those who do refute individuals by name?! This is worthless empty speech, the Scholar will sometimes refute generally, if he sees there is a benefit in doing so, and if he sees that he should specify and name this individual and expose his condition and clarify (2) his deviations, then he warns against him, with writings (written refutations) and sermons (oral refutations) etc.

Therefore, this categorisation is an error, i.e. that we claim the Salaf did not refute specific individuals without exception; never throughout their lives; nor did they mention specific individuals; this is not the case, this is a lie upon the Salaf from this view point. Yes this (refutation upon a) specific individual sometimes it is general and sometimes it is specific in accordance to the need and the over riding benefit in doing so. (3)

Fataawa fee Al-Aqeedah wa Al-Manhaj of Shaykh Rabee Dar Al-Minhaaj pgs. 25-26

(1) Shaykh Fawzaan (hafidahullah): The principle related to this [i.e. mentioning names] is about warning against mistakes and deviation, after identifying it as such. If the affair requires making known the name of an individual among the obstinate opponents so that beguilement does not occur through their [affair] – especially those individuals with deviated views or deviation in behaviour and methodology, and they are well known among the people and the people have a good opinion of them- then there is no harm in mentioning them by their names and their methodology warned against… The people must be warned, because [employing] silence will be harmful to the people. His affair has to be unveiled

(2) Shaykh Uthaymeen (rahimahullah): If we see an individual who has an ideology/concept opposing that which the Salaf were upon, then it is obligatory for us to clarify that so that people are not deceived by him.

(3) Shaykh Ahmed An-Najmee (rahimahullah): When something happened the Prophet (sallal-laahu-alayhi-wasallam) used to say: “What is wrong with a people (who did or say such and such)?! This is correct; but is this said about the leaders of misguidance – those who call the people to affairs of misguidance and the people are put to trial through them; is this said about them? No, these ones must be mentioned; they must be made known and they must be known, so that the people are cautious about them.

Refutations of Ahlus Sunnah – Shaykh Ubayd Al-Jābirī

Refutations of Ahlus Sunnah – Shaykh Ubayd Al-Jābirī

Ahlus Sunnah, their refutations are knowledge based, their refutations are knowledge based (repeated for emphasis), with evidences (which are followed i.e. authentic and relevant) to clarify the truth. And refutation of falsehood (is done) with evidences so that they are left and avoided.

Do you understand this?

These are your principles.

Shaykh Ubayds commentary on his explanation of Book of ‘Itisaam from Sahih Al-Bukhari, 2nd lesson: 15th November 2017

Are Ahlus Sunnah Always Pre-Occupied with Refutations? Sh. Rabee’

What the people of desires say about Ahlus Sunnah (is that) their preoccupation with refutations is not correct; no, they (i.e. Ahlus Sunnah) are busy with beneficial knowledge, then they would refute the people of bidah when there is a need. This is (a sign of) nobility about them because this (refutation against Ahlul bidah) is (an act of) sincerity to Allaah and to His Book; (sincere advice) to the Muslim rulers and their common folk, and a path they (i.e. ahlus sunnah) traverse upon the path of the salaf with regards to protecting the religion.

[Source: جهود العلامة ربيع المدخلي في نقض شبهات الحزبينPage 79]

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. http://www.Sahab.net) 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