Rabee al-Madkhali, in his Master’s thesis, after differing with Bukhari, Abu Hatim, al-Nasa’i, and al-Daraqutni on the authenticity of a Hadith, comments:
ولو درس أبو حاتم وغيره من الأئمة حتى البخاري دراسة وافية لما تجاوزا في نظري النتائج التي وصلتُ إليها ، لأنني بحمد الله طبّقتُ قواعد المحدثين بكل دقّة ، ولم آل في ذلك جهداً
“If Abu Hatim and other Imams – even al-Bukhari – had studied (this hadith) thoroughly, I do not think they would have reached conclusions no different from my own, because – and all praise is to Allah – I have applied the principles of the muhaddithin with complete precision, and I spared no effort in doing so.”
The actual argument he made for the authenticity of the hadith can – in all honesty – be summarized as follows:
The narrators are very well-known reliable narrators, therefore there is no grounds to claim they erred.
Apparently, al-Bukhari, Abu Hatim, al-Nasa’i and al-Daraqutni were unable to recognize famous trustworthy narrators of hadith.
BTW, for those who don’t know, al-Madkhali’s master’s thesis is – to this day – his most significant contribution to the science of Hadith.
Years after al-Madkhali wrote his thesis, an Indian PhD student at Umm al-Qura by the name of Hamza al-Malibari (now a well-known hadith scholar in his own right) was researching the same hadith and came across al-Madkhali’s thesis in his research. On researching the hadith, he realized just how bad al-Madkhali had gotten it wrong, so he wrote him a polite letter explaining his error.
This, apparently, did not sit well with al-Madkhali, who turned around and tried to get him kicked out of Umm al-Qura. When this failed, he went on to write books against him and to declare him the head of a new evil sect, the Malibariyyah.
In defence of A Shaheed
Syed Qutb Disavowed His Earlier Writings
قال المستشار عبدالله العقيل في مجلة المجتمع العدد 112 تاريخ 8/8/1972 م : (( إن سيد قد بعث لإخوانه في مصر والعالم العربي أنه لا يعتمد سوى ستة مؤلفات له فقط وهي : هذا الدين , المستقبل لهذا الدين , الإسلام ومشكلات الحضارة , خصائص التصور الإسلامي , في ظلال القرآن , ومعالم في الطريق)..
وجواب الأستاذ محمد قطب على رسالة بهذا الخصوص نصها:
( الأخ الفاضل عبد الرحمن بن محمد الهرفي حفظه الله السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته سألتني عن كتاب ” العدالة الاجتماعية ” فأخبرك أن هذا أول كتاب ألفه بعد أن كانت اهتماماته في السابق متجهة إلى الأدب والنقد الأدبي وهذا الكتاب لا يمثل فكره بعد أن نضج تفكيره وصار بحول الله أرسخ قدماً في الإسلام .وهو لم يوصِ بقراءته إنما الكتب التي أوصى بقراءتها قبيل وفاته هي الظلال ( وبصفة خاصة الأجزاء الإثنا عشرة الأولى المعادة المنقحة وهي آخر ما كتب من الظلال على وجه التقريب وحرص على أن يودعها فكره كله ) معالم في الطريق ( ومعظمه مأخوذ من الظلال مع إضافة فصول جديدة ) و”هذا الدين” “والمستقبل” “لهذا الدين” ، “خصائص التصور الإسلامي” ، ومقومات التصور الإسلامي ( وهو الكتاب الذي نشر بعد وفاته ) “والإسلام ومشكلات الحضارة” ، أما الكتب التي أوصى بعدم قراءتها فهي كل ما كتبه قبل الظلال ، ومن بينها ” العدالة الاجتماعية ” ،أما كتاب “لماذا أعدموني ” فهو ليس كتاب إنما هو محاضر التحقيق التي أجريت معه في السجن الحربي ، حذفت منها الأسئلة التي وجهها إليه المحقق وبقيت الأجوبة ، وقد استخرجها محمد حسنين هيكل من ملفات السجن وباعها لجريدة الشرق الأوسط فنشرتها في جريدة المسلمون مجزأة ثم نشرتها في صورة كتاب ، ولما كنا لم نطلع على أصولها فلا نستطيع أن نحكم على مدى صحتها ومن المؤكد أنهم حذفوا منها ما يختص بالتعذيب (وقد اعترفت الجريدة بذلك ) أما الباقي فيحتمل صدوره عنه ولكن لا يمكن القطع بذلك وفضلاً عن ذلك فهذه التحقيقات كلها كانت تجري في ظل التعذيب . هذا جواب ما سألتني عنه . وبالله التوفيق . محمد قطب
حتى لا يقال عن تراجع سيد انه غير مقبول نورد رد سماحة المفتي الشيخ عبد العزيز آل الشيخ على من عقب على كلامه عن سيد قطب وكتابه (في ظلال القرآن)
المفتي : والله أنا أقول طالب العلم إن قرأ به يستفيد ..الطالب يميز ،طالب العلم إذا قرأ في بعض المواضع حقيقة بعض المواضع فيها كتابا جيدا ، حدث أخطاء، ما أقول ما يسلم من الخطأ ،لكن ينبغي الإنصاف والاعتدال وأن لانـحمل ألفاظه فوق ما يـحتمله ، ما نـحمل الألفاظ فوق ما تـحتمله ، ولا نسيئ الظن .والرجل له – يعني – جهاد تعلمون أنه استشهد أو قتل شهيداً رحمه الله ، السائل :أحسن الله إليكم هذا يعقب على كلامكم قبل قليل عن تفسير سيد قطب وهل معناه الدعوة إلى قراءته من قبل المبتدئين في طلب العلم ؟وله كتب كان فيها أخطاء فتراجع عنها ، لأن القرآن ربما أن كتابة تفسير القرآن عدلت منهجه السابق ، والقرآن لاشك أن من اعتنى به وأكثرمن قراءته ينقله من حال إلى حال .. نعم . ا.هـ المحاضرة كاملة من موقع الدعوة الخيرية – كتاب التوحيد-الدرس السادس
The discussion about Musa (عليه السلام) was in his al-Taswir al-Fanni Fi al-Qur’an, a book that he wrote when he was still primarily interested in literature, and he wrote this work from that perspective. Remember, that before becoming an Islamist, he was a nationalist. When he wrote this work, he had not yet entered his Islamist stage. Before his death, he only advised that certain of his books be read, while disavowing his earlier writings, amongst them al-Taswir al-Fanni.
Yes it is true that Sayyid Qutb (Rh) has clearly spoken about Wahdat al-Wujood, but not in the way that they would make you believe. Infact Sayyid (Rh) clearly addresses the issue of Wahdat al-
Wujood and his belief regards to it in the following: –
“The Islamic view draws a distinct line between Creator and creation. The Creator is unique and matchless, which leaves no room in Islamic thought for the idea of “Al-Wahdat al-Wujood” or pantheism. Non-Muslim philosophy relies on the idea to indicate that creation and the Creator are one and the same; that creation is a mere reflection of the Creator and the physical manifestation of its Maker…….” [Fi Dhilal al Quran – Volume 1, Page 122 Eng Trans]
And if no-one believes me that Sayyid (Rh) said this then they can view his statement by going to the following link: –Fi Dhilal al Quran – Syed Qutb – Volume 1 (Surah 1-2) and scrolling to page 122 on the scanned document itself.
“Chancellor Abdullah al-‘Aqil said in “al-Mujtama’a” journal (number 112, date: 1972/8/8):
“Verily Sayyid had sent letters to his brothers in Egypt and to the arab countries that they should not rely on his books except these seven books: “Hadha ad-Din” (This is the religion), “al-Mustaqbal li hadhad-Din” (The future of this religion), “al-Islam wal-Mushkilat al-Hadhara” (Islam and cultural/social problems), “Khasais al-Tasawwar al-Islami” (The characteristics of Islamic conduct), “Fi Thilal al-Quran” and “Ma’alim at-Tariq” (milestones).”
The answer of Ustadh Muhammad Qutb to a mail in this regard as stated below:
“Respected brother Abd ar-Rahman bin Muhammad al-Harfi, May Allah preserve you! Assalamu aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.
You asked me abot the book “al-‘Adala al-Ijtima’iyya” (Social Justice). I should inform you that it was the first book he authored when he was previously deeply interested in the literature and literary criticism. It does not represent his ideas when he had matured in reflection and when his thinking became only for Allah and when he had made a huge step into Islam.He himself did not recommend to read this book, those books that he recommended before his death to read are 1) “Fi Dhilal al-Quran”(especially the first twelve volumes that were revised and it was almost the last thing that he wrote from al-Thilal and he was eager to renew all his thoughts), 2) “Ma’alim fit-Tariq” (It’s mostly taken from “al-Thilal”, but he added some new chapters) 3) “Hadha ad-Din”, 4) “al-Mustaqbal”, 5) “Li hadha ad-Din” 6) “Khasais at-Tasawwur al-Islami” and “muqawwamat al-Tasawwur al-Islami” (and it’s the book that was printed after his death) 7) “al-Islam wal-Mushkilat al-Hadhara”, and as for the books that he discouraged from reading are all the books that he wrote before al-Thilal and amongst them is “al-‘Adala al-Ijtimaiyya”. As for the book “Limadha A’adamuni” (Why did they execute me), it’s not a book, in reality it’s records of an investigation conducted with him in a millitary prison, the questions posed by the investigator were omitted, but only answers were left there. Later Muhammad Husanein Heykal compiled it from the files of the prison and sold it to the newspaper “Sharq al-Awsat” (Middle East) and it was printed partially in the newspaper of muslims and later edited and printed in a book form. Because we couldn’t get the original papers we could not tell how authentic were these papers. They have definitely omitted the records how he was tortured (and the newpaper admitted it) and as for the rest that is contained in these papers we can say that it’s probably from him, but we can not be sure, especially when we know that these investigations were conducted by means of torture. It’s my answer to your question. Wa billahi tawfiq.
The words of Mufti Abdulaziz Al ash-Shaikh about Seyyid Qutbs book “Fi Thilal al-Quran”:
“Wallahi, a student of knowledge if he reads it he can benefit from it… a student who can see mistakes…if a student of knowledge reads some passages from this book, and in reality concerning some passages, this book is very good, there has been mistakes and i dont say that it’s free from mistakes but one should be fair and just and we should not interpret his words and give them meanings that he did not intend. And we should not have prejudice. This man made jihad and as you know he became martyr or was killed as a martyr – rahimahullah –
Question to mufti: as a result from your words that you said before a while, does it mean that you call new students of knowledge to read this book?”
“He has books where he had some mistakes and he left these mistakes, because Quran… probably writing commentary on Quran made him leave his previous minhaj and no doubt that when you reflect upon the meaning of Quranand when you read it frequently, it changes you..”
“Kitab at-Tawhid”, sixth lesson
Shaikh Nasir ad-Din al-Albanis words about Sayyid Qutb:
السؤال الأول- وكلا السؤالين واردة من كتاب ( في ظلال القرآن)- ذكر صاحب كتاب (في ظلال القرآن)، في أول سورة (طه)، بأن القرآن ظاهرة كونية كظاهرة السماوات والأرض..
فما رأيكم في هذا الكلام، مع أنه صادر بكاف التشبيه يا شيخ؟؟
فأجاب الشيخ: محمد ناصر الدين الألباني-رحمه الله-:
نحن -يا أخي- قلنا أكثر من مرة أن سيد قطب- رحمه الله- ليس عالماً، وإنما هو رجل أديب ، كاتب، وهو لا يُحسن التعبير عن العقائد الشرعية الإسلامية، وبخاصة منها العقائد السلفية، ولذلك فلا ينبغي أن
ندندن حول كلماته كثيراً، لأنه لم يكن عالماً، بالمعنى الذي نحن نريده؛ عالماً بالكتاب والسنة، وعلى منهج السلف الصالح.
فهو في كثير من تعابيره، يعني تعابير إنشائية..بلاغية.. وليست تعابير علمية، وبخاصة تعابير سلفية..ليست من هذا الباب..
فنحن لا نتردد باستنكار مثل هذا التعبير، وهذا التشبيه، أقل ما يُقال فيه: أنه لا يعني أنه كلام الله حقيقة- كما هو عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة..أو أنه كلام الله مجازاً- كما هو عقيدة المعتزلة-..
كلام خطابي شعري..
لكن أنا لا أرى أن نقف كثيراً عند مثل هذا الكلام، إلا أن نُبيِّن أنه كلام غير سائغ شرعاً، وغير معبِّر عن عقيدة الكاتب للقرآن الكريم، هل هو كلام الله حقيقة أم لا ؟ هذا الذي أعتقده، وهذا هو الجواب عن السؤال الأول.
السؤال الثاني- وهو في نفس الكتاب- وذلك في بداية سورة ( النبأ)، أو بالأصح: مقدمة سورة ( النبأ) ، قال عن القرآن، وكلمة في القرآن، أنه( تموجات موسيقية)؟؟
فقال الشيخ الألباني-رحمه الله-: نفس الجواب.
فقال السائل: هذا يقودنا يا شيخ إلى بعض التساؤل: نرى في كثير من كتابات بعض الكتّاب، أو من المنتسبين للعلم..
فقال الألباني-رحمه الله-: عفواً قبل ماتكمّل، ماذا فهمتَ أنت من قوله: تموجات؟؟ هل هو يعني الكلام الصادر من رب العالمين، أم هو من جبريل-عليه السلام-، أم من نبينا الكريم؟؟ ما تفهم لا هذا ولا هذا
ولا هذا !!.. ولذلك أنا بقول: كلام خطابي شعري، لا يُنبي عن رأي الكاتب وماذا يعنيه.. هكذا الحقيقة أكثر الكتّاب عندما يكتبون، يكتبون عبارات إنشائية خطابية، لا تعطي حقائق كونية واقعية.. طيّب كمّل.
فقال السائل: مع قولكم هذا يا شيخ-بارك الله فيكم- نرى كثير من الكتّاب، أو من طلاب العلم الذين تأثروا حتى بمنهج المحدثين، أو لهم مثلاً في علم الحديث، أو في علم بعض الأمور تأثروا بمنهجه..
فقال الشيخ الألباني-رحمه الله-: وما هو منهجه؟ وهل له منهج؟
فقال السائل: نعم، وهو التأثر بكتابات أبو الأعلى المودودي، في كلماته ،كثير من الكلمات، مثل كتابه(العدالة الاجتماعية)، وكتابه( التصوير الفني في القرآن)..
فقال الشيخ الألباني-رحمه الله-: هذا أسلوب أدبي، ليس أسلوباً علمياً.
فقال السائل: لا، هناك منهج خاصة في التكفير؛ تجهيل الأمة، وتكفيرها، وخاصة في كتاب( العدالةالاجتماعية).. وذكر عنه أيضاً صاحب كتاب: ( الأعلام) للزركلي، ذكر عنه هذا، وأنه كان –يعني- اتخذ
هذا المنهج وهو تجهيل الأمة بكاملها، تجهيل كل مَن حواليه، فتأثر بهذا المنهج كثير من الشباب الآن ،فأصبحوا يدعون لكتبه، ويدعون لآرائه، ولجميع ما كتبه، فما رأيكم يا شيخ في هذا؟؟
فقال الشيخ الألباني-رحمه الله-: رأينا أنه رجل غير عالم وانتهى الأمر!! ماذا تريد- يعني- أكثر منهذا؟!! إن كنتَ تطمع أن نكفِّره، فلستُ من المكفّرين، ولا حتى أنتَ أيضاً من المكفّرين..
لكن ماذا تريد إذاً؟؟!! يكفي المسلم المنصف المتجرِّد أن يُعطي كل ذي حق حقه، وكما قال تعالى:\” ولا تبخسوا الناس أشياءهم ولا تعثوا في الأرض مفسدين\”. الرجل كاتب، ومتحمس للإسلام الذي يفهمه، لكن الرجل أولاً ليس بعالم، وكتاباته (العدالة الاجتماعية) هي من أوائل تآليفه، ولما ألّف كان محض أديب، وليس بعالم، لكن الحقيقة أنه في السجن تطوّر كثيراً، وكتب بعض الكتابات كأنها بقلم سلفي ليست منه.. لكن أنا أعتقد أن السجن يُربّي بعض النفوس، ويُوقض بعض الضمائر، فكتب كلمات، يعني يكفي عنوانه الذي يقول: (لا إله إلا الله، منهج حياة)، لا إله إلا الله منهج حياة.
لكن إذا كان هو لا يفرِّق بين توحيد الألوهية، وبين توحيد الربوبية، هذا لا يعني أنه لا يفهم توحيد الربوبية، وتوحيد الألوهية، وأنهما يجعلهما شيئاً واحداً.. لكن يعني أنه ليس فقيهاً، وليس عالماً، وأنه لا يستطيع أن يُعبّر عن المعاني الشرعية التي جاءت في الكتاب وفي السنة، لأنه لم يكن عالماً.
فقال السائل: ألا ترى –ياشيخ- مع هذا التأثر وهذه الأمور التي كتبها ، أن يُرد عليه؟
فقال الألباني- رحمه الله-: نعم يُرد عليه، ولكن بهدوء وليس بحماس..يُرد عليه، وهذا واجب.. ليس الرد على المخطيء محصوراً بشخص أو أشخاص.. كل من أخطأ في توجيه الإسلام بمفاهيم مبتدَعة، وحديثة ولا أصول لها في الكتاب ولا في السنة، ولا في سلفنا الصالح، والأئمة الأربعة المتبَعين؛ فهذا ينبغي أن يُرد عليه..
لكن هذا لا يعني أن نعاديه.. وأن ننسى أن له شيئاً من الحسنات!!
يكفي أنه رجل مسلم، ورجل كاتب إسلامي- على حسب مفهومه للإسلام كما قلتُ أولاً-،[غير واضح] وأنه قُتل في سبيل دعوته للإسلام، والذين قتلوه هم أعداء الإسلام..
– The first question – and both questions are taken from his book “Fi Thilal al-Quran”, the author of the book mentioned in “Fi Thilal al-Quran” in the beginning of the surah “TaHa” that “The Quran is a cosmic phenomenon like the phenomenon of the Skies and the Earth”. What is your opinion about these words, considering the fact that he made here a sufficient analogy (tashbih), o Shaikh?
– My brother! We said it more than once that Sayyiq Qutb – rahimahullah – was not a scholar, he is a man of literature, writer and he is not knowledgable in terminology related to Islamic Shari’a, especially the words related to salafi aqida. That’s why it’s not appropriate to give so much attention to some separate words, because he was not a scholar, a scholar in a meaning that we intend , i.e.a scholar of Quran and Sunnah who was upon the minhaj of the righteous salaf.
The most of his words are… I mean literary, eloquent words and they are not terms related to islamic knowedge, let alone salafi terminology…his words are not of this type..
And we do not hesitate to reject such expressions and this analogy; I say what is to be said: it does not mean that it’s the word of Allah in a literal meaning – as it’s the belief of Ahl as-Sunnah – and it doesn’t mean that it’s the word of Allah in a figurative meaning – as in the doctrine of mu’tazila…
These are eloquent and poetic words…
But I dont see it necessary to concentrate on such words, but we just explain that using such expressions is not allowed in Shari’a. And it doesnt state clearly what is the authors belief regarding the Noble Quran, i.e. is it the true word of Allah or not?! That’s what i believe and it’s the answer for your first question.
– The second question – and it’s from the same book – and it’s in the beginning of the surah Naba’, or to be more correct: it’s in the introduction to the surah Naba’; where he said about Quran: that it’s “musical waves”!!!
Shaikh al-Albani said:
– The same answer!
– O Shaikh! It leads us to some questions: we see on many writings of some writers or those who claim to have knowledge…
Shaikh al-Albani interrupts:
– Sorry! Before you continue–what did you understand from his word “waves” ? Does it mean that it’s the word coming from Allah or it’s from Jibreel – peace be upon him – or it’s from our nobel prophet? What do you understand? not the first and not the second and not the last!!! That’s why I tell you: These are eloquent poetic words and it doesnt give information about the authors belief and what he intended… it’s the reality of many writers when they write, they wrote literary and eloquent words and it doesn’t give you true reality…OK, continue…
– With these words of you, o Shaikh – barakallahu fikum – we see many writers and students of knowledge – and there are even people who are versed in the field of hadith – they are affected by his minhaj…
– And what is his minhaj? Has he got a minhaj?
– Yes, and it’s affection to writings of Abu ‘Ali al-Mawdudi…he cites his words, in many places, like in his book “al-‘Adala al-‘Ijtimaiyya” and his book “at-Taswir al-Fani fil-Quran”…
It’s a literary style and not an academic islamic style…
-No, he has a special minhaj regarding takfir! He call the whole Islamic nation a nation of jahiliyya and he regarded them as kuffar, especially in his book “al-‘Adala al-‘Ijtimaiyya”…and al-Zirikli, the author of the book “al-‘Ilam” mentioned about him the same. He had this minhaj and it’s calling the ummah a naton of jahiliyya, he considered all the people around him ignorant and now many of the youth are affected by this minhaj and they began calling to his books and they call to his beliefs and to all his writings. And what is your opinion about that, o Shaikh??
– We think that this man was not a scholar and this issue ends here! What do you want more than that???? If your so covetous of me to make takfir upon him and I’m not from those who make takfir, and your not one of them either…But what do you want???? It’s sufficient for a muslim who is fair and rightful to treat everyone justly, as Allahu Ta’ala said: “”And withhold not things justly due to men, nor do evil in the land, working mischief.” The man is a writer, enthusiastic about Islam which he understood. But firstly this man is not a scholar and his book “al-‘Adala al-‘Ijtimaiyya” is amongst his first books. When he wrote this book he was just a man of literature, not a scholar. But the reality is that he changed a lot while he was in jail and he wrote some books as if these books were written by a salafi, and not by him…But I believe that the life in prison educates some souls and clears up conscience of some people. He wrote some books and titles of these books are sufficient: “La ilaha illa Allah, minhaj al-hayah” (la ilaha illa Allah, formula of life)…
But if he didn’t make diffirence between “tawhid al-uluhiyyah” and “tawhid ar-rububiyyah”, it doesn’t mean that he had not understood “tawhid ar-rububiyyah” and “tawhid al-uluhiyyah”, but he considered these two in one…it means that he was not a faqih and not a scholar and he was not able to use the terms that came with Quran and Sunnah, because he was not a scholar.
– O shaikh, don’t you think that with all this affection and all these things that he wrote, we should refute him?
– Yes, he should be refuted, but with clear guidance, not with zeal..he should be refuted and it’s important. Refutation of one who err is not limited to a person or personalities.Every person who make mistakes when he writes about Islam with innovated methods and without bases from the Quran and Sunnah and our righteous salaf and four imams that are followed, should be refuted.
But it doesnt mean that we become hostile to him…and that we forget all his good qualities!!! It’s sufficient that he is a muslim and he is an islamic writer – as much as he understood from Islam as I said earlier – (unclear words) …and he was killed for his calling to Islam and those who killed him were enemies of Islam.
listen to above http://www.islamgold.com/rmdata/136_…sayed_qotob.rm
قال أحد الحاضرين: الكتابين هذين أحدهم بعنوان ( مطاعن سيد قطب في أصحاب رسول الله)، واعتمد فيه على الطبعة السادسة
عام64 قبل أن يموت سيد قطب في سَنَة..
فقال الألباني: الله يهديه، يا أخي شو بيفيد الكتاب هذا؟
A person said to Shaikh al-Albani:
“These two books titled as “Muta’an Sayyid Qutb fi Ashabi Rasulillah” (Sayyid Qutbs abuses of the prophets companions) and he relied on the sixth edition year 1964 before Sayyid Qutb died in the year…”
Shaikh al-Albani said: May Allah guide him! O brother! what is the benefit of this book?”
The above mentioned book is Rabi’i al-Madkhalis book, if I guess right!
Shaikh al-Albani, about “Milestones”…
فكنت أتمنى سؤال واحد فقط، هل قلتم مرة أن ( معالم في الطريق) هو توحيد كُتب بأسلوب عصري؟
فقال فضيلة الشيخ محمد ناصر الدين الألباني-رحمه الله-:
أنا أقول إنه في هذا الكتاب فصل قيّم جداً، أظن عنوانه: ( لا إله إلا الله، منهج حياة).. هذا الذي أقوله..
وأنا قلتُ آنفاً، ومثل ما يقولوا عندنا بالشام [غير واضح] الرجل ليس عالماً، لكن له كلمات عليها نور، عليها علم..مثل: منهج حياة..
أنا أعتقد إن العنوان هذا كثير من إخوانا السلفيين ما تبنوا معناه، أنه (لا إله إلا الله)منهج حياة.
Someone asked shaikh:
I would like to ask you only one question: Did you say once that the book “Milestones” is tawhid that is written in the style of the century!
Shaikh al-Albani – rahimahullah – said:
I say that in this book there is a chapter which is very valuable, I suppose the title is “La ilaha illa Allah, minhaj hayah”… that’s what I say and I said it earlier, as people usually say in Sham where I live …(unclear words).. this man was not a scholar, but he has some words full of wisdom (noor), full of knowledge…like “minhaj hayah”.. I believe this title, many of our salafi brothers do not adopt it’s meaning that is “La ilaha illa Allah” minhaj hayah…
Rabi’ al-Madkhali, in his conceitedness and naivety sent one of his lousy refutations against Sayyid Qutb to one of the leading scholars of Saudi Arabia, the Shaykh, the Allama, Bakr Abu Zayd – may Allah shower him with mercy – expecting him to back his unjust criticisms.
al-‘Allama Bakr Abu Zayd, much to Rabi’s disappointment, shred his book to pieces by writing this scathing attack on al-Madkhali, which eventually became public and a thorn in the neck of every living Madkhali.
The Madkhali deviants claim that Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd retracted the letter and further cursed anyone who distributed it. However, there is no truth to this claim, especially if it cannot be traced back to Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd and is claimed by none other than the people of bid’a. The fact of the matter is that the letter was published decades ago and Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd had ample opportunity to write a retractation – but he did not – until the day he passed away, may Allah have mercy upon him.
The Golden Letter From al-‘Allamah Bakr Abu Zaid to Rabi’ al-Madkhali
The respected brother, Shaikh Rabee bin Hadee Al-Madkhali,
Assalamu Alaikum wa ramhatullahi wa barakatuh…
I draw your attention to your request from me to read the book attached: “Adwa’ Islamiyyah ‘Ala ‘Aqeedat Sayyid Qutb Wa Fikrih.” (Islamic lights on the Aqeedah & Ideas of Sayyid Qutub)… If there are any concerns over it? And whether these concerns mean that this project should be discarded and never be dealt with again? Or Is it considered from that which can be edited and qualified to be printed and distributed to serve as a reward for you on the day of Judgment, and as a guidance to those whom Allah wills from his servants. Thus I say the following:
1- I looked at the first page, the contents page to find the following titles regarding Sayyid Qutb: The foundations of kufr, atheism and heresy; belief in pantheism; belief in the createdness of the Quran; belief that it is permissible for other than Allah to legislate; the exaggeration in glorifying the attributes of Allah; that he does not accept Mutawatir Ahadeeth; he doubts in matters of Aqeedah which one must be certain about it; he makes wholesale Takfeer on societies, etc, from such topics that makes the believer’s hair stand on end.
I felt sorry for the Muslim scholars around the world who failed to notice these enormities. And how can one reconcile between this and the fact that his books are widespread on the horizon like the sun, and the generality of the scholars benefit from them, including yourself in some of your writings. I therefore, began to compare the topic headings with the contents, and discovered that they are contrary to the title headings. All in all, I found them to be provocative, geared towards making an average read attack Sayyid Qutb – may Allah have mercy on him. I hate for you, myself and every Muslim to sin and indulge in blameworthy things. It is a great deception on a person for him to grant all his good deeds to the one he hates and is an enemy to.
2- I looked and found that this book lacks: the basis of the scholarly research, the Manhaj of criticism, the trust of quoting (from others sources), the trust of knowledge, (and) not transgressing on others.
Regarding the etiquette of dialogue, the goodness of the approach, and the strength of introducing the material, then the above have nothing to do with this book by any mean… the proofs are:
First, I saw that you depended in quoting old editions of the books of Sayyed Qutb, like the books: Fee Thilaal Al-Qur’an, Al’Adalah Al Ejtima’eyyah, while knowing, as in the margin of page 29 and other (places), that there are some revised editions that came afterwards. It is obligatory according to the basics of criticism and the trust of knowledge to criticize – if it was about the contents of the last edition of any book because the changes in it (i.e. the last edition) abrogates the previous ones. This thing, inshallah, is not hidden from your basic information, but it is probably a mistake of a student who prepared this information for you who was not aware of that. It is well known that there are many similar situations for the people of knowledge, for example the book, Al Rooh, of Ibn Qayyim, when many scholars looked into it they said: it is probably issued during his early life. This also happened in many cases. The book (of Sayyed Qutb) Al’Adalah Al Ejtima’yah was the first (book) that he (Sayyed Qutb) authored about Islamic issues.
Second, the topic in the index of this book: Sayyid Qutb allows other than Allah to legislate, made my hair stand on end. I rushed to this topic before anything else. What I found out is just a single quote from lots of lines in his book, Al’Adalah AlEjtima’yah. His sayings do not confirm this provocative topic. Let us suppose that there is a general or vague sentence, why do we turn it into a takfeeri (blasphemy) matter against him to destroy what Sayyed Qutb based his life upon and what he dedicated his pen for: the da’wah towards the monotheism of Allah “in ruling and legislating,” rejecting the man made laws, and confronting those who committed that (legislating and ruling by other than Allah’s rule). Allah loves justices and fairness in every thing; and I do not see inshaallah except that you are about to go back to justice and fairness.
Third: One of the provocative topics is your topic: Sayyed Qutb believes in Wahdat Al-Wujood. Verily, Sayyed Qutb, may Allah have mercy on him, said something not clear (that might make the reader think that he believes in Wahdat Al-Wujood) using the style (of literature) in commenting on Surat Al-Hadeed, and Surat Al-Ekhlaas, and based upon it the accusation that he believes in Wahdat Al-Wujood was made. You did something good when you quoted his saying in commenting on Surat Al-Baqarah, and his (Sayyed Qutb) clear rejection to the idea of Wahdat Al-Wujood. From these quotes (Sayyed Qutb wrote): “and from here we find that there is nothing in the true Islamic ideology called the idea of Wahdat Al-Wujood.” To add, in his (Qutb) book: “Muqawwimat At-Tasawwur Al-Islami” there is a clear response to those who belief in Wahdat Al-Wujood. Therefore, we say may Allah forgive Sayyid Qutb for these vague statements that he expanded upon using his literal style; and what is vague does not overcome the clear cut statements from his saying.
Thus, I wish that you rush into deleting this hidden takfeer of Sayyed Qutb, and I feel sorry for you.
Fourth, I say clearly to you with all respect, that under these topics: the contrary of what Sayyed Qutb commented on the meaning of La Ilaha Illah Allah, to the scholars and the people of language; and that he (Qutb) is not clear about (tawheed) Ar-Ruboobiyah and Al-Uloohiyyah. I say to you, my beloved, that you have destroyed, without making sure, all of what Sayyed (Qutb), may Allah have mercy on him, confirmed from the aspects of Tawheed and what it necessates and confirms, which occupied the major aspect of the long life of Sayyed Qutb. All what you (Rabee Al-Madkhali) said is nullified by one word: that the monotheism of Allah in legislation and ruling is from the necessities of the word of Tawheed. Sayyed, May Allah have mercy on him, emphasized on this a lot when he saw the corrupted courage to dismantle the legislations of Allah from courts and other places, and replacing it with man-made laws. Without a doubt, this is a great courage (the courage of changing the rules of Allah) that the Ummah never experienced before 1342 Hijri.
Fifth: from the topics of the index: “Sayyed Qutb confirms the belief that the Quran is created, and that the speech of Allah is just the will”… When I went back to the pages that talk about that, I did not find a single letter where Sayyed Qutub, may Allah have mercy on him, declared this saying: “The Quran is created.” How do you easily accuse with these takfeeri matters? The only sentence that I noticed is his (Qutb) saying: “They cannot author from it—the Muqat’ah letters—a book similar to this book because this book is created by Allah and not by the humans”… There is no doubt that this sentence is wrong, but does this sentence make us rule that Sayyed Qutb confirms the kuffri saying that the Quran is created? O Allah I cannot tolerate the burden of this! This reminded me of a similar saying of Shaikh Muhammad ‘Abdulkhaliq ‘Atheemah, may Allah have mercy on him, in his book’s introduction: Studies on the style of the Noble Quran, that is printed by the Islamic University of Imam Muhammed bin Sa’ud. Do we accuse all people by the saying that the Quran is created. O Allah No.
What we mentioned so far is sufficient in talking about the subjective perspectives, and this is the important matter.
Talking about other perspectives:
1- The original copy of this book lies in 161 pages written by hand. These writings are different. I do not know of a single page written by you as usual, unless your handwriting differed from usual, or I missed up something, or you gave the job about Sayyed Qutb to some of the students, and each student wrote what he found under your supervision, or by your dictation. Therefore, I cannot confirm that this book belongs to you except by what you wrote on it that it is authored by you, and that is enough in considering it to belong to you.
2- Even though there are differences in the handwritings, there is a common trend; This book has the common trend of the disturbing manner, the continuous anger, the same jump on the sentence to generate huge mistakes, rushing into conclusions where there is a possibility to prove otherwise, and depending on the vague sentences and leaving the clear ones, which is a solid rule that do not accept any argument about it….This is considered as betraying (violating) the Manhaj of criticism (named): Al’Haydah Al’Elmiyah.
3- Regarding the style of literature, if we were to compare it with the style of Sayyed Qutb, then this style is of descending style. The style of Sayyed (Qutb) is high. If we considered it as your (Rabee’s) style, then it is very elementary, and does not suit a student of knowledge who has great degrees. So there should be a balance between the literal taste, the ability of using the language and clearly presenting the matter, and the beauty of presenting; or otherwise the pen should be broken ( i.e. otherwise do not bother writing it).
4- The common trend was the trend of anger and frightening which overtook the scientific Manhaj of criticism, thus your response lacked the etiquettes of dialogue.
5- This book from its beginning tells the end has an offensive trend and narrowness in mind and lack of patience in the sentences… why?
6- This book creates a new hizbiyah that establishes the trend of making tahreem here, and nullifying it there; and to call this a bid’ah and that person a Mubtadi’, to call this deviancy and that person a devient… whithout enough proofs. This also generates ghuroor (i.e. deception) of being religious, being proud to the extent that when one of them does that he (thinks that he) gets rid of a huge burden from his back; and that he is saving the Ummah from falling from an edge; that he is considered of a high example of Wara’ (fearing Allah) and gheerah (jealousy) on the rulings of Shari’ah. This (Judging) without making sure, is a way of destruction, even if it is considered as a high constructed building, its destiny is destruction and disappearance with the winds.
These are six aspects that this book enjoys, which made it not enjoyable. This is what I see regarding what you requested. I apologize for being late to respond to you, but I used not to read the books of this man (Sayyed Qutb), even though it is popular amongst the people. However, the dangerous remarks that you talked about made me do lots of readings into his books, and I found in his books many good things, a great faith, clear truth, exposing the plans of the enemies of Islam, and some mistakes in the contents and saying some things that I wish he never said. He nullifies lots of these things in other places, and to be perfect is hard. This man was a great writer and a great criticizer, and then he moved towards serving Islam through the great Quran, the noble Sunnah, and the beautiful Seerah. This shaped his attitude regarding the issues of his time. He insisted on his attitude (to continue what he is doing) for the sake of Allah. He also clarified the issues about his past. It was requested from him to write some words of apology, and he said his faithful and famous word, that “I will not use the finger which I raise for shahad’ah (i.e calling to Tawheed) to write something against Tawheed…” or a word close to this.
Therefore, the obligation of everyone is to make du’a for him that Allah forgive his sins, to benefit from his knowledge, to clarify his mistakes, and that his mistakes do not make us not benefit from his knowledge, or to abandon his books. Consider, may Allah protect you, his situation like the situation of those of the salaf like Isma’eel Al-Harawi and Al-Jilaani, and how Shaikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah defended them, even though they fell into many awful mistakes, because the basis of their approach was to defend Islam and the Sunnah. Look to the (book), “Manazil Alsa’ereen”, and you will find strange things that cannot be accepted; however, you find Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, making excuses for him and not accusing him, as he clarified it in the book “Madarij As-Saalikeen”. I also expanded on this matter in the book “Classifying the people between doubts and certainty,” and I put some rules regarding it.
In conclusion, I advise the brother in Allah, not to print this book “Adwa’ Islamiyyah..”. It is not permissible for this book to be distributed or printed because of what it has of the exaggeration, and the training of the youth of the Ummah to slander the Ulama’ (scholars), and to put down and disregard their virtues. Forgive me, may Allah bless you, if I was harsh in my sentences, but it is because of what I saw from your exaggeration, because I want the good for you, and because your eagerness to know what I have about him. This is what my pen wrote, and may Allah correct the way of all of us..
Wa assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi Wa barakatu….
 Wahdat al-Wajood is the belief in pantheism; that everything, including the Creator is One, i.e. that Allah is everywhere and in everything. Ahlus-Sunnah affirm that Allah is above His Throne, above the seven heavens. For more information, see the article “Where is Allah?”
The respected brother, Shaikh Rabee bin Hadee Al-Madkhali,
Sheikh Ar-Râjehî: As-salam ‘aleikom
Questioner: Walaikum assalaam Wahamatattali wabarkatuhu
Sheikh Ar-Râjehî: Hayâkoum ALLAH
Questioner: Sheikh is this an appropriate time to ask a question?
Sheikh Ar-Râjehî: yes!
The questioner: the question – in sha Allah : We are French brothers residing in Egypt and we have a weekly lecture – by the grace of Allah – with Shaykh ‘Abd Ar- Rahman Al Barrak – ALLAH preserve him – via the Internet, on the explanation of the “Book of Tawheed.” This is a great blessing, we thank and praise Allah for that.
And now, here is a French brother, who does not attend the course, contacted Abu Omar Osama Al Utaibi and asked: Is it permissible for me to attend the lectures of Sheikh ‘Abd Ar- Rahman Al Barrak and is he a bearer of the da’wa salafiyya!
And he [Utaibi] replied: “Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahman Al Barrak is a well-known person of knowledge, but the problem is that it is influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, and he has false stetemnets like allowing demonstrations/protests in Bahrain, and approved of some reprensible things. Abdur-Rahman Al Barrak is sent by the “Muslim Brotherhood”, which is why come from him reprehensible matters in Aqeedah and Manhaj. That is why it is not appropriate to attend his classes and it is necessary to warn against him … “.
We want from your eminence – advice for this kind of fitan because they are spread much in the countries of Europe … AllahuMusta’aan.
The answer of His Eminence Sheikh ‘Abd Al-Aziz Ar Râjehî:
“The Sheikh ‘Abd Al-Rahman Sheikh Barrak is well-known, is our Sheikh, is known for his knowledge and virtues, is amonsgt of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah. And there are no remarks about him, but Abu Omar, it is on him that there are remarks. This Abu Omar, it is on him that there and remarks and (who has) errors.
As for Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahman, it is known, he teaches the belief of Ahl as-Sunnah wa al Jama’a for 60 years. He is a known teacher of the people of Sunnah and is our shaikh. But this Abu Omar, it is on him that there and remarks and (who has) errors in Aqeedah, he replied, and we replied back on him.
Is that clear? Continue with the eminent Sheikh ‘Abd Ar-Rahmân Al Barrâk; continue your course on tawhid, you are on a good and that will be beneficial for you in’sha’ALLAH… Is that clear?
– The questioner: “! Yes, it is clear yā Sheikh May Allah reward you well”
Sheikh Ar-Râjehi: “Abou ‘Omar, it is on him that there are remarks!!! Do not listen to his words! He has errors and has been refuted since years, Is it clear? ”
Shaykh ’Abdur Rahman bin Nasir Al-Barrak was born in the town of Bukariyyah in the region of Qasim in the year 1352 H. His father passed away when he was only a year old and at the age of ten he was afflicted with an ailment in his eyes which resulted in the loss of his eyesight.
He completed memorizing the Qur’an by the age of ten and began his pursuit of knowledge at the age of twelve by attending the lessons of various scholars. Some of his teachers include: Shaykh Abdul ’Aziz Bin Baz, Shaykh Muhammad Al-Amin Al-Shanqiti, Shaykh Abdur Razzaq Afifi and many others.
He has held many teaching positions at various institutions throughout his life. He retired as a professor from the College of Usul al-Din (Islamic Theology) at the Imam Muhammad Bin Saud University, Riyadh in 1420 H. During this time he taught Aqidah (Islamic Creed) and supervised many graduate theses. He continues to teach the various disciplines of Islam in mosques across Riyadh with most of his lessons being in Masjid Al-Khulayfi.
Quixotism as a term or a quality appeared after the publication of El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha in 1605. Don Quixote, the hero of this novel, written by Spanish author Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, dreams up a romantic ideal world which he believes to be real, and acts on this idealism, which most famously leads him into imaginary fights with windmills that he regards as giants.
Already in the 17th century the term Quixote was used to describe a person that does not distinguish between reality and imagination. The poet John Cleveland wrote in 1644, in his book The character of a London diurnall:
“The Quixotes of this Age fight with the Wind-mills of their owne Heads”
The recent campaign by Moosaa Richardson and co. to save the Ummah from the Fitnah of Khalq al-Qur’an has been an embodiment of this phenomenon, but really, every major Madkhali worth his weight has a bit of Don Quixote in him.
The Don Quixote of Salafiyyah bravely wages war against the Fitnah of Khalq al-Qur’an. Here he is bravely riding off into the sunset with his brave sidekick Sancho Panza after thoroughly refuting the Jahmiyyah. God be with you, Don Quixote! Many are the windmills from which you have saved the Ummah!
The inside scoop on Madkhalism from someone who saw it up close:
Click ‘CC’ for subtitles.