This user hasn't shared any profile information
Posts by admin
The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, ‘Abd al-Aziz Aal al-Shaykh refutes the followers of Rabi’ al-Madkhali (and him by extension) in a question that was directed to him, in the TV show “Ma’a Samahat al-Mufti” on Al-Majd channel, aired 15/11/2007.
Listen to the conversation by clicking below:
السائل : السلام عليكم ورحمة الله .
الشيخ : السلام ورحمة الله .
السائل : حياك الله يا شيخ عبدالله الغديان
الشيخ : حياك الله .
السائل: كيف الحال
الشيخ : طيب .
السائل : يا شيخ هل هذا صحيح هناك من يقول أنه يوجد علماء الجرح و التعديل في هذا الزمان فهل هذا كلام صحيح “؟
الشيخ الغديان : و الله يا أخي علم الجرح و التعديل موجود في الكتب .
السائل : في وقتنا هذا هل يوجد ؟
الشيخ : لا ، علم الجرح و التعديل عن علماء الحديث الذين نقلوا لنا الأحاديث بالأسانيد موجود في كتب الجرح و التعديل فما نحتاج إلى أحد الحين .
السائل : يا شيخ هناك من يقول أن الدكتور ربيع بن هادي المدخلي حامل لواء الجرح و التعديل ؟
الشيخ :لا أعرفه ، أنا لو يصادفني في الطريق ما عرفته يمكن ، ما علي من أحد .
السائل: بارك الله فيك .
Man: as-Salaamu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullah
Shaykh: ‘Alaykum as-salaam wa-rahmatullah
Man: May Allah give you long life, O Shaykh ‘Abdullah al-Ghudayan!
Shaykh: May Allah give you long life, too.
Man: How are you?
Man: O Shaykh, is it true what some say that there are scholars of Jarh and Ta’dil alive today? Is this correct?
Shaykh: By Allah, dear brother, the science of Jarh and Ta’dil is present in the books.
Man: But is there anyone present in our time?
Shaykh: No. The science of Jarh and Ta’dil as narrated from the scholars of Hadeeth who transmitted Ahadeeth to us along with the chains is present in the works of Jarh and Ta’dil, so we do not need anyone today.
Man: Shaykh, there are those who say that Dr. Rabi’ b. Hadi al-Madkhali is the flag-bearer of the science of Jarh and Ta’dil today.
Shaykh: I don’t know him. If he bumped into me on the street I probably won’t even know him. I don’t care for anyone (making such claims).
Man: May Allah bless you
Click below to listen to the whole conversation:
لا لا ، هذا … عبدالحميد هذا اتركوه لأن هذا هو الذي يقود مذهب المرجئة في المملكة
“No! No! This man… ‘Abd al-Hamid… Leave him, because he is the man who is leading the Madhab of the Murji’a in the Kingdom (of Saudi Arabia)”
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Office of the Presidency of Islamic Research and Legal Verdicts
Some youth call Shaykh Sayyid Qutb a heretic and prohibit the reading of his books, and they say a similar statement regarding Hasan al-Banna, as they also say regarding some of the scholars that they are Khawarij. Their argument is that [they do this] in order to ‘expose the errors [of these men] to the people,’. even though [these youth] are until now [only] students [of knowledge]. I hope for a response so that doubt may be removed from us and others, [and] so that this [phenomenon] will not spread.
All praise belongs to Allah alone. To proceed: It is impermissible to [unjustly] call the Muslims heretics or wicked as is evidenced by the statement of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) “Whoever says to his brother ‘O enemy of Allah,’ and he is not such but that it returns back to him.” While in [another] hadith ‘Whoever calls a Muslim an infidel it returns back to one of them.’ While in another hadith: “A man passed by another while he was doing a sin and he said to him, ‘By Allah, Allah will not forgive you.’ So [Allah] said: ‘Who is he who can pass judgment on my behalf that I will not forgive so and so, I have forgiven him and have nullified your deeds.'”
With this I say, Sayyid Qutb and Hasan al-Banna are among the scholars of the Muslims and among the people of da’wa. Allah has brought benefit by them and through them He has guided many people. They both have efforts [for Islam] which should not be denied. For this reason Shaikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Baz interceded on behalf of Sayyid Qutb when the order for his execution was given. [Ibn Baz] was gentle in his intercession, but President Gamal [Abdel Nasser] did not accept [Ibn Baz’s] intercession, may Allah send upon him [i.e. Abdel Nasser] what he deserves. When both men [i.e Hasan al-Banna & Sayyid Qutb] were killed, each was referred to as a martyr, as each was killed unjustly. This is borne witness to by those close [to them] as well as by the general public. As it was widely spread in the papers and books without anyone ever objecting. Moreover, the scholars have received their books [with acceptance]. No one has attacked them for more than the [last] twenty years. If some [heresy proceeded] from them, then [these mistakes] are similar to an-Nawawi, as-Suyuti, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn ‘Atiyah, al-Khatabi, al-Qastalani and the likes of many of them. I have read what Shaikh Rabi al-Madkhali has written in his refutation of Sayyid Qutb and I found that he has placed statements where they do not exist. For this reason Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid, may Allah perserve him, refuted him. Likewise, [al-Madkhali’s] unjust attacks of Shaikh ‘Abdur-Rahman [‘Abdul-Khaaliq] and his [twisting ‘Abdur-Rahman ‘Abdul-Khaaliq’s words] in order to find errors which would make [‘Abdur-Rahman ‘Abdul-Khaaliq appear] misguided, even though [Shaikh Rabi] befriended him for a lengthy period of time and he never found any such errors [in the past].
And the eye of pleasure sees every fault insignificant,
But the eye of hatred always finds fault.
Abdullah b. Abd al-Rahman b. Jibrin
1) Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb are scholars of Islam
2) Both aforementioned figures are remembered as martyrs
3) They have never been attacked since the last twenty years (of writing this fatwa)
4) Their mistakes are similar to those of the well-respected classical scholars, such as al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajr
5) Rabi’ al-Madkhali has been unjust towards them both and have quoted them out of context
6) Bakr Abu Zayd has adequately refuted Rabi’ al-Madkhali regarding Sayyid Qutb
7) Rabi’ al-Madkhali has attacked Abd al-Rahman ‘Abd al-Khaliq in a similar fashion, despite of having known him for a long time.
Click below to listen to the whole conversation:
Farid al-Maliki said addressing Rabi’ al-Madkhali:
– Wait for a moment, O Shaikh! I heard you saying one day – and Allah, his Angels and the whole mankind witness for that – and we were in the airport and you said: “Shaikh Ibn Baz has back-stabbed the Salafi Da’wah immensely!” O Shaikh! If I were to pick up the phone in Saudi Arabia and say to people that “Shaikh Rabi’i attacked Ibn Baz! Shaikh Rabi’i attacked Ibn Baz!”, how would you react to it? Would you accept it from me?”
– What was my intent? Do you know my intent?
– I understood your intent, that’s why I didn’t spread it further! But if I went ahead and said that “Shaikh reviled Ibn Baz”, what would be your reaction?”
– Really, this is baseless!
– Listen! Listen! What was my intent?
– I know your intent, O Shaikh! I know your intent!
– And what’s my intent?
– Shaikh (i.e. Ibn Baz) doesn’t know what is going on!
– Inform me what do I mean by “back-stabbing”? What did I mean?
Farid al-Maliki:– When you met with Shaikh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (Ibn Baz), he praised Salman and Safar and you became angry and mentioned these words. So I assumed of you that you were angry!
-Listen! Listen! What i said stays between you and me! Don’t mention it in public!
– Wallahi, Shaikh…
– From first time and second time, stop here! Look at me! It’s between you and me! You want the conversation that is between me and you, between Tarhib and us, you want to spread about me now, don’t spread it – barakallahu fik -now you should listen to me…”
قال فريد فريد المالكي مخاطبا ربيع المدخلي :
” لحظة يا شيخ، أنا يا شيخ سمعتك يوم – والله يشهد والملائكة والناس أجمعين – ونحن في المطار ؛ قلت ياشيخ : الشيخ ابن باز طعن في السلفية طعنة شديدة؛ لو أنا يا شيخ مسكت التلفون داخل المملكة ، الشيخ ربيع يطعن في ابن باز الشيخ ربيع يطعن في ابن باز ، هذا يا شيخ ويش رأيك فيه ؟! ترضى هذا مني؟!
فرد عليه ربيع قائلاً : وأنا وأش أقصد ، عرفت أنا وأش أقصد ؟!
فريد المالكي : أنا فاهم قصدك ، لشان كدة مانشرت ! لكن لو أنا رُحت وقلت : الشيخ طعن في ابن باز ، ما رأيك ياشيخ في هذا ؟!
واش رأيك ياشيخ في هذا ؟!
فقال ترحيب الدوسري : فعلاً هذه دعوى عريضة !!؟
فقال ربيع المدخلي : أسمع ، أسمع ، أنا قصدت أي شيء !؟
فقال فريد المالكي : أنا عارف قصدك ياشيخ ! أنا عارف قصدك!
فقال ربيع المدخلي: ويش هو قصدي؟
قال فريد المالكي : الشيخ ما يعلم مو داري بالموضوع .
فقال ربيع المدخلي: لكن تخبرني ويش هو الطعن اللي قلته أنا إيش اقصد؟
فقال فريد: لمّا التقيت بالشيخ عبدالعزيز ، وأخذ يمدح في سلمان وسفر ورد ، فأنت غضبت يا شيخ وذكرت هذه الكلمة أنا أقول الشيخ كان غضبان. ( أي الشيخ ربيع وهذا إحسان ظن من فريد) .
فرد عليه ربيع المدخلي :اسمع، اسمع أنا اللي أقوله بيني وبينك ، لا تقوله لأحد قدام الناس ،
فريد المالكي : والله ياشيخ …..
فرد المدخلي مقاطعا : …… من أول مرة وثاني مرة توقف، شوفني أنا، بعدين بيني وبينك! ، أنت تبغي الكلام اللي بينك وبين ترحيب بينك وبينو ، وأنت الآن تنشرني في المجالس ، فلا تنشرني – شوف بارك الله فيك – الآن انت اسمعني….” انتهى
1) Farid al-Maliki swore by Allah, calling Him, the angels and the mankind to witness, that Rabi’ al-Madkhali accused Ibn Baz of back-stabbing Salafiyya.
2) Rabi’ al-Madkhali does not dispute this, but instead asks if Farid understands why he said it and what his intention was.
3) Farid confirms that this was because Ibn Baz had praised Salman and Safar to Rabi’ al-Madkhali, and in turn Rabi’ al-Madkhali lost his cool and said what he said.
4) Rabi’ al-Madkhali then asks him not to spread this amongst people but to keep it only to himself.
In the name of Allah – the Most Merciful – the Dispenser of Mercy
Fatwa Number: 21517 and Dated: 14/6/1421 AH
Praise be to Allah alone, and the Salaah and the Salaam be upon the one after whom there is no prophet… And as for what follows:
For verily, The Permanent body for research and legal opinion was informed about what was mentioned to the eminent General Mufti from some of the sincere ones about the requests for a legal formal opinion specifically for the secretariat general of the Council of Senior Scholars with number: 2928 and dated: 13/5/1421 AH. And number: 2929 and dated: 13/5/1421 AH, regarding the two books: “at-Tahdheer Min Fitnatit-Takfeer” [Warning from the tribulations of Takfeer] and “Saihatun-Nadheer” [An Outcry of the Warner] by their compiler – ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabi, and that they [the two books] are calling to the Madhhab of Irjaa [by claiming] that al-‘Amal [action] is not the condition for the correctness of Imaan, and he attributes this to Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and basis these two books upon distorted reports from Sheikh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah, al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer and others than them two – May Allah have mercy upon all, as well as the desire of those sincere ones for an explanation to what exists in these two books so that the readers may acknowledge the truth from falsehood… and so on…
And after the study carried out by The Body of the two aforementioned books and the examination of them, it has become clear to The Body that the book “at-Tahdheer Min Fitnatit-Takfeer” compiled by ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabi, in what he appended to the statements of the Scholars in his forward as well as his footnotes, comprises of the following:
1 – Its author based it [the book] upon the false, innovated Madhhab of the Murji`ah, those who encircle al-Kufr, with the Kufr of Juhood [rejection], Takdheeb [denial] and al-Istihlaal al-Qalbee [making permissible that which is forbidden – in the heart, only] as it [appeared] on p.6 f.2 and p.22 and this is contrary to what Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah are upon, that al-Kufr occurs by al-I’itiqaad [belief], by al-Qawl [statements], by al-Fi’l [actions] and by ash-Shak [doubts].
2 – His distortion while conveying from Ibn Katheer – May Allah have Mercy upon him – from “al-Bidaayah an-Nihaayah” [The beginning and the end] 13/118, when he mentioned in the footnote on p.15, conveying from Ibn Katheer: “That Jankeez Khaan claimed regarding al-Yaasiq that it is from Allah, and this is the reason for their Kufr”, but when referring back to that passage [in the book we come to know that], what he attributed to Ibn Katheer – may Allah have Mercy upon him – was not found.
3 – Attributing an unfounded statement to Sheikhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah – may Allah have mercy upon him – on p.17-18 when the aforementioned compiler of the book, attributes to him, that the ruling on the Mubaddal [the one who replaces the Sharee’ah of Allah with other laws] according to Sheikh al-Islaam is not Kufr [Akbar], unless if [the replacement of the Sharee’ah] occurs with Ma’rifah [acknowledgement], I’tiqaad [belief] and Istihlaal [making permissible that which is forbidden], and this is merely a baseless statement attributed to Sheikhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyah – May Allah have Mercy upon him – as he was the propagator of the Madhhab of the Salaf of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and their Madhhab is what has preceded, whereas this [i.e. Alee Hasan’s Madhhab], indeed it is the Madhhab of the Murji`ah.
4 – His alteration of the intent of the eminent al-‘Allaamah ash-Sheikh Muhammad bin Ibraahim – May Allah have Mercy on him – in his article – Tahkeem al-Qawaaneen al-Wadha’eeyah [Ruling by man-made laws], when the compiler of the aforementioned book claims that the Sheikh places a condition of Istihlaal al-Qalbee [making permissible that which is forbidden – in the heart], whereas the statement of the Sheikh is as clear as the sun in his aforementioned article to the mainstream of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.
5 – His comments upon the statements of those whom he mentioned from the people of knowledge, by implying a meaning from their statements which do not carry that meaning, as it appeared on p.108 f.1, p.109 f.21 and p.110 f.2.
6 – As there exists in the book showing insignificance to ruling with other than the laws of Allah, and especially on p.5 f.1 with a claim that having concern for the realisation of Tawheed in this issue has similarities with the Shee’ah – ar-Raafidhah – and this is a grave error.
7 – And by examining the second piece of work – Saihatun-Nadheer, it is found that it [the book] is as if a continuation of the aforementioned book [Fitnatut-Takfeer] – and its condition is as has been mentioned. For this reason, verily, The Permanent Body views that these two books, it is not permissible to publish them, nor propagating them, nor circulating them, due to what they contain from falsehood and distortion. And we advise their author to fear Allah regarding himself, and regarding the Muslims and especially their youth, and that he strives to gain Shara’ee knowledge first-hand from the Scholars, those trustworthy in regards to knowledge and correctness of their belief. And that knowledge is a trust, and it is not permissible to propagate it, unless it is in accordance to the Book and the Sunnah. And to uproot the likes of these opinions and the despicable method of distorting the statements of the people of knowledge. And it is known that to return to the truth is a virtue and a nobility for a Muslim.
And Allah is the granter of success, and the Salaah and Salaam of Allah be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his followers and his companions.
The Permanent body for research and legal opinion
Head Abdul ‘Azeez bin ‘Abdullah bin Muhammad Aal ash-Sheikh
Member ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Gudeyaan
Member Bakr bin ‘Abdullah Abu Zaid
Member Saalih bin Fawzaan al-Fawzaan
1) ‘Ali Hasan based his works on the heretical Murji doctrine
2) ‘Ali Hasan distorts statements of scholars and attributes to them what they never said
3) ‘Ali Hasan belittles the Kufr of ruling with man-made laws
4) It is Haram to publish or promote ‘Ali Hasan’s view on Iman and Kufr, for it is essentially a Murji view
5) ‘Ali Hasan al-Halabi is admonished and advised to fear Allah and to learn Islam from the scholars first-hand, implying that he neither fears Allah nor has he studied from scholars first-hand.
6) Aforementioned views are shared by Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Aal al-Shaykh, Shaykh ‘Abdullah b. al-Ghudayan, Shaykh Bakr b. ‘Abdullah Abu Zayd and Shaykh Salih b. Fawzan al-Fawzan