Archive for the ‘Answering Misconceptions about Salafiyyah’ Category

To differentiate between the Salafi and the claimant to Salafiyya   Leave a comment

This was a statement written by Shaikh Ahmad Al Bazmool entitled: “To differentiate between the Salafi and the claimant to Salafi is the means to protect the youths from splitting“.*

The Shaikh said:*

In the name of Allah the beneficent the merciful.

Verily all praise is due to Allah, we praise him, seek help from him and seek forgiveness from him, and we seek refuge in Allah from the evils of ourselves and our evil actions. Whoever Allah guides no one can lead astray and whoever Allah misguides no one can guide him. And I bear witness that there is nothing worthy of worship except Allah who is alone and does not have any partner and I bear witness that Muhammad is his servant and Messenger. And I proceed:

-The Salafi is the one who implements, and holds unto the book and the Sunnah upon the methodology of the pious predecessors.

-He proceeds upon this in his methodology and all his matters. And his principles are all based upon this.

-And it is possible that he may contradict the truth based upon ignorance and not purposefully. Because he is not immune to mistakes. And this does not remove him from Salafeeyah once he returns to the truth and adheres to it. As Ash Shafi’ee and the other Imams advised that any statement of their’s that contradicts the evidences that we take the evidences and disregard their statements.

And from the most important matters, in my view, that the Salafi youths must pay attention to, is that a person should not be described as a Salafi because he has speech relating to an issue from the issues of Salafeeyah. (Yet at the same instance) we neither know his stance pertaining to other issues of Salafeeyah nor do we know the methodology that he is upon. And it is possible that some of those who oppose (Salafeeyah) may agree with the Salafis (in certain matters).

And the danger becomes established when such a person comes with the guise of a Salafi student of knowledge in front of the youth. Rather, they may even regard such a person as a Salafi scholar. Then after sometime such a person comes and confuses for us other issues. Hence his conditions changes and he wallows in the predicament of his evil desires.And those who change with him are the Salafi youths who surround his orbit.

And for this reason no one should be put in a station above his calibre. It is compulsory to look at a person according to the scales of the scholars. What do they say about him: Do they*reccomend him and praise his knowledge, his religion, his trustworthiness and his methodology. (If that is so) then such a person’s knowledge should be benefited from and knowledge should be take from him except if opposition to the truth appears from him with him continuing upon it without returning (to the truth).

Noting that some of them may*reccomend a person because of what has been made apparent to them from his sound belief. *And then his*condition becomes apparent to them they disparage him. And the reason why*he is*disparaged after he was praised returns to the following reasons:

1. That he was hiding his true condition, and was making apparant that which diffrentiates from what is hidden within him. And the scholar*reccomends him upon what is apparant hence he*reccomends him based upon his outward appearance.

2. That at first he was upright upon the Sunnah and*deserved a reccomendation then opposed the methodology and*rejected*(the truth), and proceeded upon that which opposed the methodology of the Salaf and therefore deserved to be disparaged.

Hence once this is*known it is incorrect to reject the*disparaging remarks a scholar made upon*someone who went astray saying that he*recommended him and praised him*beforehand. And from the statements that every Salafi needs is the statement of the Sahabi Abdullah Ibn Mas’uud who said: “Whoever wishes to take someone as an example let him take such an example from those who have died because one who is alive is not safe from tribulation“.

Hence it is obligatory upon every Muslim to look at what the pious predecessors were upon and hold onto it. And it is compulsory for him to hold onto the scholars who proceed upon the methodology of the Salaf Us Saalih. And it is prohibited to follow someone who has opposed the methodology of the Salaf Us Saalih even if he has a high status either with him or the people.

I ask Allah to favour us with holding onto the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the Salaf Us Saalih. And to provide us with obidience and sincerity. And to distance us from innovations and showing off and saying things to be heard and hypocrisy. And may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon our Prophet and his family and companions.

Allah has named us Muslims Why Ascribe Ourselves to the Salaf?   Leave a comment

This doubt was very beatifully answered by Imaam al-Albaani in his discussion with someone o*!n this subject, recorded o*!n the cassette entitled, “I am Salafi”, and here is a presentation of the vital parts of it:

Shaikh al-Albaani: “When it is said to you, ‘What is your madhhab’, what is your reply?”

Questioner: “A Muslim”.

Shaikh al-Albaani: “This is not sufficient!”.

Questioner: “Allaah has named us Muslims” and he recited the saying of Allaah Most High, “He is the o*!ne who has called you Muslims beforehand.” (al-Hajj 22:78)

Shaikh al-Albaani: “This would be a correct answer if we were in the very first times (of Islaam) before the sects had appeared and spread. But if we were to ask, now, any Muslim from any of these sects with which we differ o*!n account of aqeedah, his answer would not be any different to this word. All of them – the Shi’ite Rafidi, the Khaariji, the Nusayri Alawi – would say, “I am a Muslim”. Hence, this is not sufficient in these days.”

Questioner: “In that case I say, I am a Muslim upon the Book and the Sunnah.”

Shaikh al-Albaani: “This is not sufficient either”.

Questioner: “Why?”

Shaikh al-Albaani: “Do you find any of those whom we have just mentioned by way of example saying, ‘I am a Muslim who is not upon the Book and the Sunnah’?” Who is the o*!ne who says, ‘I am not upon the Book and the Sunnah’?”

At this point the Shaikh then began to explain in detail the importance of being upon the Book and the Sunnah in light of the understanding of the Salaf us-Saalih…

Questioner: “In that case I am a Muslim upon the Book and the Sunnah with the understanding of the Salaf us-Saalih”.

Shaikh al-Albaani: “When a person asks you about your madhhab, is this what you will say to him?”

Questioner: “Yes”.

Shaikh al-Albaani: “What is your view that we shorten this phrase in the language, since the best words are those that are few but indicated the desired intent, so we say, ‘Salafi’?” End of quotation.

Hence, the point is that naming with “Muslim” or “Sunni” is not enough, since everyone will claim that. And Imaam al-Albaani emphasised the importance of the truth being distinguished from the falsehood – from the point of view of the basis of manhaj and aqidah, and that is taking from the Salaf us-Saalih, as opposed to the various sects and groups whose understandings are based upon those of their mentors and leaders and not that of the Salaf, fundamentally.

Salafiyyah Causes Disunity   Leave a comment


When it is the case that Salafiyyah is the understanding of the Book and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the Salaf of the Ummah and the Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) stated, “And this Ummah will split into seventy-three sects, all of them in the Hellfire but o*!ne”. They said, which o*!ne is this O Messenger of Allaah? He replied, “They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon today” (Tirmidhee, no.2643) – and when it is also the case that the splitting occurred by their abandoning the correct understanding, then Salafiyyah is but the way forward for unity and is not splitting or sectarianism. As Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan said, “As-Salafiyyah (i.e. the Salafis) is the Saved Sect, and they are Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. It is not a hizb (party) from amongst the various parties, those who which are called “parties” today … Hence Salafiyyah is a group of people (i.e. the Salafis) upon the madhhab of the Salaf, upon what the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his companions were upon and it is not a hizb from amongst the contemporary groups present today.” (Cassette: “at-Tahdheer min al-Bid’ah” second cassette, delivered as a lecture in Hawtah Sadeer, 1416H).

Thus, Salafiyyah, is an embodiment of what the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) left for his Ummah, whose night is like its day, pure clarity and anyone who departs from it will be destroyed, that is, he will enter into splitting, differing and fall into the sects that have been threatened with the Fire. Therefore, Salafiyyah which calls to a return to that which the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his companions were upon can never be considered to be splitting.


An extract from the book

compiled from the works of:

Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) | Shaykhul-Islaam ‘Abdul-’Azeez Ibn Baaz (d.1420H) | Imaam Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee (d.1420H) | Imaam Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-’Uthaymeen | Imaam Muqbil Ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee (1421H) | Imaam Ahmad Ibn Yahyaa an-Najmee | al-’Allaamah Saalih Ibn Fawzaan al-Fawzaan | al-’Allaamah ‘Abdul-Muhsin Ibn Hamad al-’Abbaad | al-’Allaamah Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee

The word Hizb is defined in Lisan al-arab as:@ a group of people: the plural ahzab: and ahzab were the armies of the disbelievers which fought against the prophet (Saw) and they were: Quraysh, Ghatfan, and Banu Qurayzah. Allah says,

Before the reader is a compilation of statements from the major Scholars, past and present, regarding the evils of hizbiyyah – bigoted partisanship and blind attachment to personalities. There is no question that these evils have harmed the Muslim nations tremendously. Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee – hafidhahullaah – said, “Anyone who opposes the Salafee methodology is from the deviant sects. Hizbiyyah does not have conditions. Allaah called the previous nations: ahzaab (parties), and when the tribe of Quraysh, and those who were with them, rallied against the Messenger (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam), He (Allaah) called them ahzaab, though they weren’t an organization… So blind attachment to a specific ideology that opposes the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) and unifies and separates because of it is hizbiyyah; this is hizbiyyah even if they are not organized.” We hope this short treatise will serve as a reminder that loving and hating, uniting and separating must be done solely for the sake of Allaah and in accordance with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam) according to the understanding the pious predecessors of this Ummah., and at the head of it, the companions of the messenger of Allah.

“And he who believed said: O my people indeed I fear you a fate like that day of the ahzab (confederates). {Surah Ghafir 40:30.}

The ahzab here are the people of Nuh, Ad, Thamud, and those who were destroyed after them, and the hizb of a person are his companions and followers who are upon his thought, and every people who are similar in words and deeds, then they are ahzab even if they do not meet one another as Ad, Thamud, and firawn were (Called) ahzab, and (Allahs statement),

“Every hizb (party) rejoicing in what is with them” (surah al rum 30:32)

It is every group whose desires are the same (see Lisan-Al arab (cairo dar al hadith 2003 vol 2 pp 42)

Shykh Rabi Ibn Hadi al Madkhali hafizahullah-was asked, “what is the meaning of hizbiyyah, and what does it mean to say so and so is a hizbi, and who are the hizbis and what is their methodology?”

He answered “anyone who opposes the salafi methodology is from the deviant sects, hizbiyyah does not have conditions. Allah called the previous nations: ahzab (parties), and when the tribe of Quraysh, and those who were with them, rallied against the messenger (Saw), He (Allah) called them ahzab, though they wont an organisation, so it is not a condition of hizbiyyah that it be organizes, but if this hizb is organised, it becomes all the more worse.
so blind attachement to a specific ideology that opposes the book of Allah and the sunnah of his Messenger (Saw) and unifies and separates because of its hizbiyyah: this hizbiyyah even if they are not organized, Embracing a deviant methodology and gathering people together upon it is hizbiyyah, whether organized or not, as long as the ideology is in opposition to the book and sunnah, then this is a hizb.

The disbelievers who fought the prophet (Saw) did not have the kind of organization that is present today and still Allah named them ahzab. Why? It was because they joined together upon faleshood to refute the truth.

“The people of Nuh and the ahzab after them denied (their messengers) before these” (surah Ghafir 40:5)

So he called them ahzab. Qurash, Ghatfan, Qurayzah, and other tribes joined together but were not an organization. they joined thogether and Allah called them ahzab, and there is a surah entitled alahzab. So it is not a condition of a hizb that it be organized. When someone holds a false ideology and argues in defense of it and unities based upon it, this is partisanship, and if he organizes and gathers wealth on top of this, he goes further intohizbiyyah and becomes from the deviant sects.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah said: “As for the head of hizb, hen is the head of a group, which forms into a group. So if they are united upon what Allah and his messenger saw commanded, without any addition or subtraction, then they are the believers what is for them is for them and what is against them is against them. However, if they add to that or take away from it, like having a blind attachement to anyone who enters their group in truth or falsehood and turning away from those who do not enter into their party, whether upon truth or falsehood, then this is the separation that Allah and his messenger (SAW) disparaged. Indeed, Allah and His messenger have commanded with the congregation and unity and have prohibited dividing and righteousness and forbade working together upon sin and transgression”

On Dividing the Scholars into the Harsh Group and the Tolerant Group   Leave a comment

 part 1 of 2

A novel way of putting people off the scholars has appeared, which is to categorize the scholars into those who are harsh and those who are lenient (tolerant), and sometimes [the people who claim this] say the scholars of one region are harsh and those of another are tolerant. What is your guidance on this?

He replied, may Allâh preserve and protect him:

This is one of the methods of the enemies of the Salafi Manhaj. Amongst the Salaf there were those who were lenient but they never used to hold it against each other. Rather, they used to respect those who were harsh against the followers of falsehood. You have [for example] Hammâd b. Salamah. Imâm Ahmad used to praise him greatly and suspect the religion of anyone who spoke against him [saying] ‘Whoever speaks against Hammâd b. Salmah, then suspect his religion because he was harsh against the People of Bid’ah. ’ Being harsh against the people of falsehood used to be a virtue according to the Salaf. But since the People of Bid’ah and misguidance have come and taken over the minds of many of the youth, very regrettably, being harsh against the people of falsehood has become a vice and a defect, and being relaxed and flexible [with them] has become a distinction and an honourable trait.

 [You must] adhere to the Salafi Manhaj and take the Salafi position towards the People of Bid’ah. It is not wrong to call them to Allâh wisely and through good exhortation. If they respond, thanks and praise be to Allâh. If they do not, there is no wrong in being harsh against them and … The Salaf were harsh against them, and [in some cases] ordered some of them to be executed … [the Salaf] wrote many works [in refutation of them]. What do you say about them? Read Al-Sharî’ah of Al-Âjurrî, read Al-Sunnah of ‘Abdullah b. Ahmad, read Al-Sunnah of Al-Khallâl. Those [who decry being harsh towards the people of falsehood] have not read these works, they have not read these works and seen the position taken by the Salaf towards the People of Bid’ah and deviation. What should our stance be towards the Jahmîyah, what should our stance be towards the Râfidah and what should our stance be towards their followers and supporters? Many who associate themselves with the Salafi Manhaj got influenced by these currents and became compromised and began to fight against the callers to truth and the Sunnah [by accusing them of being] harsh.

 I have written [refutations] and I am the harshest one. I wrote during the time of Ibn Bâz, Al-Albânî and Al-‘Uthaymîn. I refuted the Ikhwân Al-Muslimûn, (the Muslim Brotherhood) Al-Tablîgh (Tablighi Jamat) and all the People of Bid’ah and those scholars supported these writings and supported Rabî’. None of them opposed him and none of them said … Al-Albânî said a statement praising Rabî’, “[Shaykh Rabî’] is the bearer of the standard of Jar<span>h</span> and Ta’dîl in this era.” Hmm, what do you think about this? Then [Al-Albâni] said [Rabî’] has some harshness in him. These compromisers rejoiced and flew with the quote [spreading it everywhere]. I contacted Shaykh Al-Albânî and said, “Why O Shaykh do you accuse me of being harsh?” He said, “By Allah this is what I personally think.” I said, “O Shaykh, this harms the Salafi Da’wah and it harms me.” So the Shaykh apologized – Allah have mercy on him. Shortly afterwards, I sent him [my book] Al-‘Awâsim mimmâ fî Kutub Sayed Qutb min Al-Qawâsim, which is the harshest book I have written. [Shaykh Al-Albânî] read it and supported it because it was the truth, and said, ‘You have spoken the truth, so continue and do more O Shaykh Rabî’,’ or words to that effect, Allah have mercy on him. Ibn Bâz never … He used to say, “Refute the People of Bid’ah with wisdom and good exhortation.” He never used to oppose me, and by Allah he wrote to me saying, “It has reached me that you have refuted Al-Mawdûdî – Allah have mercy on him, and I hope you can send me a copy of this refutation.” He never used to object. Shaykh Al-Tuwayjirî used to refute and refute harshly the People of Bid’ah, and Shaykh Ibn Bâz used to support him and recommend his books. Hmm, he never once said – and [Shaykh Al-Tuwayjirî also] used to refute Al-Albânî – Allah bless you … Shaykh Ibn Bâz never silenced him, he would never say to him, ‘be silent,’ he would never say, ‘you are harsh,’ Allah bless you. Al-Fawzân used to refute the People of Bid’ah during the time of Shaykh Ibn Bâz, and he never said, ‘be silent,’ Allah bless you. Rather he would support him … there are so many writings [Shaykh Ibn Bâz] recommended of Shaykh Al-Tuwayjirî and he praised my books and my methodology (manhaj), Allah have mercy on him. All of these Mashâikh used to be supportive.

This is the manhaj in which we have become weak. We are not on the same level as we used to be during their time, rather we have become weak but despite this they say we are harsh, and they say Ibn Bâz [was not like you]. By Allah, Ibn Bâz used to fight the People of Bid’ah and support those who fought them and praise those who fought them, Allah bless you. Bring me one proof that Ibn Bâz silenced one person who refuted the People of Bid’ah. Did he silence Al-Fawzân? Did he silence Al-Tuwayjirî? Did he silence Rabî’? Did he silence Al-Albânî? Not one of them. Likewise, all the scholars used to support and aid those who speak the word of truth and refute what is wrong. [People] asked Shaykh Al-‘Uthaymîn, they said, ‘People say such-and-such about Shaykh Rabî’.’ He said, “This is because he clarifies the condition of their icons and leaders.” And he supported me time after time…

 After Ibn Bâz, Al-‘Uthaymîn and Al-Albânî had gone, they said, ‘these [remaining Shayks] are harsh.’ By Allah they lied, by Allah they were only seizing the opportunity. The death of these scholars was an opportunity for them to pounce on the Salafi Manhaj and upon its followers, tearing them apart with principles and methodologies of the falsest and most corrupt kind. They tore apart the Salafi youth across the world and planted in their minds [this idea] that this group are harsh and extreme. How can this be…? The scholars never criticized [the scholars who used to refute.] How can we assert the Salafi manhaj [in this way] when [the scholars] were the harshest against the People of Bid’ah?

Either we reject the Manhaj of the Salaf and follow the People of Bid’ah or we say we are Salafis and we follow the path of [those Salaf] in taking the decisive and resolute positions towards the People of Bid’ah. Yes, call to Allah with proofs and conclusive arguments, explain and clarify; if there is a heretic in front of you, a Râfi<span>d</span>î, <span>S</span>ûfî, grave-devotee, whatever. Call to Allah with wisdom and good exhortation, and with proofs and conclusive arguments. But when we come to write about the beliefs of the Râfiah, amongst whom there is lying, sinfulness and extremism, we don’t mention these things. We come to the Sûfîs, amongst whom there is lying, sinfulness and extremism, but we don’t mention these things…if you mention this lying and treachery and sinfulness they say you are harsh. A Sûfî, Ikhwânî … Hizbî Thrîrî who transgresses, lies, betrays, who has problems that Allah has explained, which have been explained […audio cuts off…] [the scholars of the Salaf used to say] ‘So and so is a liar, he is like this and he is like that’ Allah bless you; they used to state it clearly. Look in the books of Jarh and Ta’dîl, in the books of ‘Aqîdah, we cannot reach the level [the Salaf reached] in their Jihad against the People of Bid’ah and Shirk. By Allah we cannot reach that level now, why? Because now there stand against us those who associate themselves with the Salafi Manhaj [but] fight against this opposition [to the People of Bid’ah] and describe it as harshness.

 We ask Allah to unite the hearts, and I advise the youth – and by Allah I have tens, rather, hundreds of advices to the Salafî youth on this – I advise them to unite together and be brothers to each other and employ the loftiest manners and behaviour when dealing with each other, Allah bless you. They should employ patience, forbearance and wisdom. In my lessons, lectures and tele-links, in which they call me from every place, by Allah I encourage them to come together. But these people who have stood in opposition to this Manhaj are the ones – by Allah – who tear the Salafi youth apart across the world, in the East and West. They tear them apart and plant within them false beliefs, and then accuse us of causing schism. By Allah I bring the youth together, and my books and recordings, which have been transcribed, all bear witness that I try to unite the youth.  

 In Algeria, Morocco, in Yemen, Shâm (Syria, Jordan(, Palestine, in all places I try to unite the youth who I know to be Salafîs, I try to bring them together in every way I can, but they [the opponents to this manhaj] cause splits and division. Never is the voice of schism and division raised except that they support that sinful voice, Allah bless you. We free ourselves in front of Allah from what these people slander us with. I have already said to you, wisdom is indeed needed, but … about the Râfi<span>d</span>ah, and People of Bid’ah, you clarify their condition, do not wrong them or lie about them, but explain the reality of their affair…

Dividing the Scholars into the Harsh Group and the Tolerant Group -part 2


Translated by Abû ‘Abdillâh Owais Al-Hâshimî

False Accusation against The Way of Salaf: Some Statements of Modern Authors Against the Methodology of the Salaf   Leave a comment

False Accusation against The Way of Salaf: Some Statements of Modern Authors Against the Methodology of the Salaf
Some of the modern authors have said, “The methodology of the Salaf regarding the Attributes is taking the texts as they come, yet believing that their apparent meanings are not actually intended.”
 This statement, if taken unconditionally, contains a point of scrutiny. The wording, “their apparent meanings” is somewhat vague and needs clarification.
 If what is intended by “their aparent meanings” is what is evident from the texts of the attributes befitting Allaah without making Tashbeeh, then this is exactly what is intended.
 Whoever say that this is not intended meaning then he is misguided if he actually believes, that and he is a liar or mistaken if he attributes this meaning to the Salaf.
 If what is intended by “their apparent meanings” is what is evident to some of the people in that the apparent meaning is to make Tashbeeh of Allaah with His creation, then this is definitely not true and it is not the apparent meaning of the texts because the similarity of Allaah to His creation is something impossible. 
 And, the apparent meaning of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, would never be something impossible. Whoever thinks this is what is meant by “their apparent meanings,” then his mistake is to be clarified to him. It is to be clarified that the apparent meaning as well as the detailed meaning is to affirm the Attributes in a manner that befits Allaah and is specific to Him.
In this way, we would be giving the texts their right in wording and meaning, and Allaah knows best.
 (Explanation of a Summary of al-’Aqeedatul-Hamawiyyah of Ibn taymiyyah) (rahimahullah) explained by Imaam Muhammad ibn Saalih al-’Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) 

Medinah, 28 Shawwal 1431 / 7 October 2010

Shaykh Rabî’ b. Hâdî ‘Umayr Al-Madkhalî – Allâh preserve and protect him – was asked the following question after a recent lecture he delivered in Masjid Al-Qiblatayn, Medinah.


Note: this translation is from a transcript of the question and answers, ‘…’ denotes where the audio is not clear and some words are missing, according to the transcript.


The Salafis Lack Piety Whereas Other than Them Are Pious and Abstemious   Leave a comment

And this too is a very old doubt which has been answered by the Salaf themselves, those of old. And we merely leave you with their words:

Ibn Abbaas (d. 68H) said: “Indeed the most detestable of things to Allaah are the innovations.” (Reported by al-Bayhaqee in as-Sunan al-Kubraa 4/316)

Ibn Umar (d. 84H) said: “Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good.” (Reported by Abu Shaamah no. 39)

Sufyaan ath-Thawree (d. 161H) said:”Innovation is more beloved to Iblees than sin, since a sin may be repented from but innovation is not repented from.” (Reported by al-Laalikaa’ee no. 238)

Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee (d. 204H) said: “That a person meets Allaah with every sin except Shirk is better than meeting Him upon any o*!ne of the innovated beliefs.” (Reported by al-Bayhaqee in al-I’tiqaad p.158)

Al-Layth bin Sa’d (d. 175H) said: “If I saw a person of desires (i.e. innovations) walking upon the water I would not accept from him.” So Imaam as-Shaafi’ee then said: “”He (al-Layth) has fallen short. If I saw him walking in the air I would not accept from him.” (Reported by as-Suyooti in al-Amr bil ‘Ittibaa wan-Nahee anil Ibtidaa’.)

Yunus bin Ubaid said to his son, “I forbid you from fornication (zinaa), stealing and drinking wine. However that you meet Allaah with any of these sins is better to me than that you meet him with the view of Amr bin Ubaid and the associates of Amr (i.e. the Mu’tazilah).” (al-Ibaanah 2/466).

Sa’eed bin Jubair said, “That my son accompanies a sinful and cunning scoundrel who is a Sunni is more beloved to me than that he accompanies a devoteful and worshipful Innovator.” (al-Ibaanah no. 89).

Imaam Al-Barbahaaree said, “However, if you see a person whose manner and opinion is despicable, he is wicked, sinful and oppressive, yet he is a person of the Sunnah, accompany him and sit with him, since his sin will not harm you. If you see a man who strives hard and long in worship, is abstemious, being continual in worship, except that he is a person of innovation, do not sit with him, do not listen to his words and do not walk along with him, since I do not feel safe that you will not eventually come to be pleased with his way and go to destruction along with him.” (Sharh us-Sunnah no. 149).

Imaam Ahmad said, “The graves of Ahl us-Sunnah from those who committed the major sins are like gardens. And the graves of Ahl ul-Bid’ah from amongst their abstemious pious o*!nes are hollow and empty. The sinners of Ahl us-Sunnah are the Awliyaa’ (Friends) of Allaah and the abstemious pious o*!nes of Ahl ul-Bid’ah are the Enemies of Allaah.” (Tabaqaat ul-Hanaabilah 1/184).

Consider well, O Sunni, what our Pious Forefathers have left for us as a legacy and as an admonition. When it is the case that Innovations in aqidah and manhaj are the cause of splitting and differing, and lead to the emergence of sects, and these sects have been threatened with Fire, and when it is also the case that Shaytaan beautifies the Innovations and makes them appealing and to be guidance and light, then the People of Innovation and Adulterated Principles are more dangerous and harmful than a sinful, villain from Ahl us-Sunnah. For you know of your crime with the latter and can repent from it and amend your ways, but when you take as your friend Adnaan Ar’oor the Qutubist Politician, Mohammad Qutb the Takfiri Khariji, Mohammad Suroor the Takfiri Qa’dee, Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq the Shurocrat and Sworn Bannaawi, then you think them to be upon guidance and you think their adulterated principles and innovatory methodologies to be the truth embodied and you think that these principles and methodologies are a deliverance for the Ummah, and so you affiliate yourself with them and show loyalty and disownment for their sake and thus fall into the Fire., the while you think yourself to be a rightly guided “Salafi” (!!), yet you are nothing but a hizb (sect) from amongst the ahzaab, upon other than the Manhaj of Nubuwwah

The Salafis Are Arrogant And Have Bad Manners   Leave a comment

And this is a very subtle matter, requiring careful thought and deliberation. As for bad manners, then this is often due to the upbringing and nature of the individual, his characteristics and his personality, and it is not necessary a reflection of the base and foundation, the aqidah and manhaj of the Salaf, which is nothing but the truth. So a person may be in need of correcting his manners and calling with wisdom (that is the Sunnah) and beautiful argumentation, so that his invitation is more readily accepted. But this is not pretext for rejecting the validity and correctness of the way of the Salaf and ascribing o*!neself to it, since that is the o*!nly way of deliverance. So we make a difference between what sometimes occurs from some of the Salafis of bad manners, and between what is actually a knowledge-based manhaj that is derived from the Book and the Sunnah. The blame is upon the individual and not the base and foundation. The same can be said about every other Muslim, regardless of what astray methodology or heretical belief he subscribes to, amongst them are those with evil manners and bad habits. But a manhaj or aqidah is judged according to its agreement or disagreement with what the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his Companions and the Salaf were upon, fundamentally, not by the behaviour of its people. Refer also to the next doubt for more clarification.

As for arrogance, then sometimes this may occur from an individual, in which case he is censured, yet in other cases it is perceived to be arrogance, though the individual does not have any arrogance but o*!nly love for the truth, being certain in that truth – but he is understood to have arrogance by his counterpart or opponent or the o*!ne that he is inviting. And it can often be the case that arrogance is actually o*!n behalf of the o*!ne who does not accept the truth of what is being said by the o*!ne who subscribes to the Salafi aqidah and manhaj (and who is not a false pretender from amongst the biased partisans!!). Remember this, for this is often the case. As the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Arrogance is rejection of the truth, and looking down upon the people”. Many of those who claim the Salafis are arrogant, then refuge is from Allaah, in truth they are the arrogant o*!nes for they do not accept the true call and the correct da’wah, out of arrogance, and then they accuse the Salafis of being arrogant. So remember this, for every coin has two sides.

Consider, a Salafi may be inviting a person to the truth, in a matter in which he knows that he is correct. He is harsh and insists that he is correct and so he is accused of being arrogant, though the o*!nly reason he has exhibited this behaviour is his love for the truth and upholding the truth. Even though we may say that his action is incorrect and misplaced and his great zeal has led him to behave inappropriately, either due to lack of knowledge or due to bad manners. So it is upon him to correct all of that. Otherwise the o*!ne being invited ends up not accepting the truth o*!n account of the way it was presented.

So we say that arrogance may sometimes be exihibited, and this returns back to the individual, not the manhaj or aqidah he subscribes to. Indeed, we can say that many of the Sufi Heretics are indeed arrogant in their claim of sure deliverance from the Fire and their requesting submissive obedience from their herd of followers – thinking themselves to be above the people. And we can extend this to all of the sects and groups of innovation. Arrogance is found everywhere and is not a referent point for whether a person’s manhaj and aqidah is correct or not. Rather the manhaj and aqidah itself is the referent point, and all of that is thrown against what the Salaf were upon.

We leave you with the remainder of the discussion between Imaam al-Albaani and the questioner concerning naming with “Salafiyyah”:

[Continuing from where we left off]
“Alright, I will submit to you and I say to you: Yes (I agree about summarising with saying ‘I am Salafi’), yet my belief is what has preceded, since the first thing that a person thinks of when he hears that you are a Salafi is that he recalls much of the experience he has had and which has involved severity which leads to harshness, all of which sometimes occurs from the Salafis.”

Shaikh al-Albaani: “Lets accept that your words are correct. If you said ‘I am a Muslim’, will not a person’s think of a Shi’ite Rafidee, or a Druze or an Ismaa’eeli (and incline to him).”

Questioner: “It is possible, however, I will have followed the noble verse, “He has named you Muslims”.

Shaikh al-Albaani: “No my brother! You have not followed the verse, since the verse means the correct form of Islaam. It is necessary that you address the people according to their level of understanding… so will anyone understand from you (when you say ‘I am a Muslim’) that you are indeed a Muslim with the desired meaning in the verse (of correct Islaam)? As for the various cautionary matters you have mentioned, then these are sometimes correct and sometimes they are not correct. Since your saying about harshness, then this can sometimes occur from individuals, yet this is not representative of a methodology that is tied to knowledge and belief. Leave aside individuals for now, we are actually talking about manhaj (methodology). This is because when we say Shi’ite, or a Druze, or a Khaarijee, or a Soofee, or a Mutazilee, the various cautionary matters you raised come into play (and can apply to them aswell). Hence, this is not the subject of our discussion. We are investigating a name which gives evidence to the madhhab of an individual and by which he worships Allaah… Are not all the Companions Muslims?”

Questioner: “Naturally.”

Shaikh al-Albaani: “However, there was amongst them, o*!ne who stole, or fornicated, but this does not allow any of them to say, ‘I am not a Muslim’, rather he is a Muslim and a Believer in Allaah, as a chosen way, however he sometimes opposes his chosen way, because he is not infallible. And it is for this reason that we – may Allaah bless you – are speaking about a word which indicates our aqidah and our thought and our starting point in our lives and which relates to the affairs of our religion by which we worship Allaah. As for the issue of so and so who is harsh and so and so who is lax and too soft, then that is an entirely different issue…. I wish that you would reflect upon this concise word (i.e. Salafi) so that you do not persist upon the word ‘Muslim’. And you know that there is no o*!ne who will understand what you really intend (by using the word ‘Muslim’ alone) ever…” End Quote (Cassette “I am a Salafi”).

And inshaa’allah, this explains our intent and the important differentiation that we had alluded to earlier in replying to this doubt.

The Salafis Think only They Are Correct   Leave a comment

We have to make a distinction between that which is being ascribed to – which is the way of the Salaf – and the o*!ne who is ascribing himself to this. In absolute terms, that which is being subscribed to, that is the way of the Salaf, is nothing but the truth embodied, in both general specific terms, in issues of aqidah and manhaj, usool and furoo’ – and no-one denies or negates this save a heretic.

As for the o*!ne who subscribes himself to the Salafi Way, then in the basis of his ascription – which is to that which cannot err – then he is correct in that, and what is in opposition to this, is but error and misguidance. We mean here from the point of view of the generality of aqidah and manhaj and the usool of the religion. This is because the aqidah and the manhaj and the usool of the Salaf of all the ages is the same and they are united upon all of that.

Hence, o*!ne who is a Salafi and is true in his ascription to the Salaf and who proceeds upon knowledge and action, imitating their way, then he is correct in all of that inshaa’allah. And this person will either know the way of the Salaf in general terms, and he knows it to be correct, even though he may be ignorant of its particulars, yet he is still correct in considering their way – and his way of following and imitating them – to be the truth and whatever is in opposition to it, to be falsehood. Or he will know the way of the Salaf in both general and specific terms, in terms of aqidah and manhaj and usool and furoo’ and he will be correct in the majority of that which he holds o*!nto and acts upon, and all of this is dependent upon his sincerity in learning and his zeal for acquiring knowledge and acting upon it.

As for the individual being correct in every single issue from the subsidiary matters, then if o*!ne makes that claim, then he is in error. Since it is not possible for any o*!ne to be correct in every single subsidiary issue of the religion, since firstly, it is not possible for him to have knowledge of all of that, and secondly, when the Imaams of the past did not attain that, it is hardly likely that any of the followers of the latecomers will ever reach that. Hence, in the subsidiary matters it is possible for the Salafi to be in error, yet that does not negate his being correct in his aqidah and manhaj, and in general terms to be upon that which takes him out from being within the seventy-two sects of innovation and misguidance.

However, it is often the case that the o*!ne subscribing to the way of the Salaf and making an outward display of that is in fact upon the astray methodologies, yet he proclaims orthodoxy and pleads a sound aqidah and manhaj. Though he may be of sound aqidah, he may upon an adulterated manhaj. In this situation, such a o*!ne is not correct or truthful in his ascription, since he has a manhaj other than that of the Salaf, and this is determined by looking and seeing: Does he defend Sayyid Qutb? Does he subscribe to the view and scandal of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq? Does he praise Mohammad Qutb and take him as a guide and leader. Does he defend and aggrandise Hasan al-Bannaa? Does he speak with the terms and phrases of the Innovators, “al-Ummah al-Ghaa’ibah” (The Absent Ummah), “Shabaab us-Sahwah” (The Youth of the Awakening), “Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah”, “al-Muwaazanah” and other such phrases which have become the slogans of the Innovators. So we look and see, what other affiliations does he have, who does he mix with, who does he talk to, what are the books that he refers to, and in this manner we come to know of his true orientation in his manhaj, and from this we come to know whether he is an imposter, claiming the way and manhaj of the Salaf, yet upon other than it.


Calling oneself salafi is blameworthy Tazkiyah of oneself   Leave a comment

And this doubt has been answered by our Mashaayikh: Allaamah, ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ibn Baz – the [former] mufti of Saudi Arabia was asked: What do you say about the o*!ne who calls himself ‘Salafi’ or ‘Athari’? Is this is a tazkiyah (purification) of his own self? So he replied – may Allaah have mercy upon him – “When he is being truthful [in his claim] that he is Salafi or Athari then there is not harm in that, [this is] similar to what the Salaf used to say, ‘So and so is a Salafi’, ‘So and so is Athari’. This is a tazkiyah (commendation) which is necessary, a tazkiyah that is obligatory.” (Cassette: Haqq ul-Muslim 16/1/1413 Ta’if)

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan was asked “Is the o*!ne who gives himself the title of ‘as-Salafi’ considered to have set up a ‘hizb’?”. To which he replied, “There is no harm in labelling o*!neself with Salafiyyah when it is in truth. However, if it is merely a claim then it is not permissible to label o*!neself with Salafiyyah, whilst o*!ne is upon a manhaj other than that of the Salaf.” (Al-Ajwibah al-Mufidah p.16)

As for those who wish to discourage others from ascribing themselves to the Salaf and claim that it is a tazkiyah (self-praise) then their machinations are not hidden from us. Rather, Shaikh ul-Islaam refuted this false claim centuries ago and made it obligatory to accept the ascription of a person to the Salaf – and held it to be by unanimous agreement – since the aqidah and manhaj of the Salaf is nothing but the truth. But when it is the case that the manhaj of these people (the false claimants) is adulterated, then it should come as no surprise that they wish for the people to detach themselves from the Salaf – since that is the o*!nly way that their falsehood can remain undetected.