Bakr Abu Zayd

al-Allama Bakr Abu Zayd’s Golden Letter of Advice to al-Madkhali

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.


needs editing


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….
[1] 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,    Send article as PDF   

Muhammad b. Hadi al-Madkhali’s Fresh Slanders Against Sh. Bakr Abu Zayd

Sh. Bakr Abu Zayd, may Allah have mercy on him, is universally regarded amongst Ahl al-Sunnah as one of the great scholars of this generation and he was a member of al-Lajnah al-Da’imah, the leading scholarly body for issuing Fatwa in Saudi Arabia. For years, the Madkhalis have slandered him in private – and sometimes in public. In a recent tape Rabee’s protege, Muhammad al-Madkhali, continues that trend:

… the author of this work, al-Tasnif, is Bakr Abu Zayd, and he has passed on to Allah…

As for his book, unfortunately, he aided none but the People of Desires (Ahl al-Ahwa’) by it, and he fell from the time he wrote in defense of Syed Qutb and in refutation of the one who clarified his errors, out of sincerity to the Muslims, and he is our Shaykh, Shaykh Rabee, may Allah preserve him… Rabee bin Hadi al-Madkhali, may Allah preserve him.

After he wrote this book, he fell (i.e. off the manhaj) and he no longer had any standing in the eyes of the Salafis. This is a fulfillment of the words of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, “Men are known by the truth. The truth is not known by men.” (more…)

Khalid al-Anbari – another officially declared Murji

Khalid al-‘Anbari is another one of the leaders of the contemporary Murji sect. He was declared a Murji, and his books were further banned by the leading scholars of our time, including Shaykh ‘Abd al-Aziz Aal al-Shaykh, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd and Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghudayan.

However, the innovators in the West continue to cling on to these misguiding innovators, despite of clear cut warnings from the senior scholars of Saudi Arabia. The Murji centres in the UK who continue to invite Ali Hasan al-Halabi and Khalid al-Anbari include Brixton Mosque, Masjid al-Ghuraba in Luton and SalafiManhaj website.

Muslims are warned against Khalid al-Anbari and all centres that support him and his heresy. Below is the fatwa from The Permanent Body for Research and Legal Opinion against the heretic, Khalid al-‘Anbari, and by extension, all their supporters.


Ibn Jibrin defends Sayyid Qutb

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.

Dictated by
Abdullah b. Abd al-Rahman b. Jibrin
26/2/1417 AH


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.    Send article as PDF   

The Lajna’s Fatwa Against al-Halabi’s Books of Irja’

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    Send article as PDF   
Go to Top