Answers To Common Misconceptions On Naming with Salafiyyah

MUHAMM7D

Muslim
There are numerous doubts often spread about naming with Salafiyyah and the word "Salafi", some of them coming from sincere people, based upon what they have experienced and other times coming from the devils amongst men, who wish to pass judgement upon the da’wah of truth, see it fall, and have it replaced with their own innovatory ejaculations and hallucinations of the mind. To proceed:

1) Labelling With Salafiyyah is an Innovation

The word "Salafiyyah" was not applied during the time of the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) and his companions – this being due to the fact that the Muslims were upon the correct Islaam and there was no need for a word such as "Salafiyyah" at that time. However, when the tribulations occurred and the sects increased and the Ummah split the Ulamaa of the Ummaah stood to distinguish those upon the truth from those upon falsehood and hence they stated "Ahl ul-Hadeeth" and "as-Salaf".

Abu Haneefah (d. 150H) (rahimahullaah) said: "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation." (Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32)

Based upon this "as-Salafiyyah" is distinguished from all the various Islamic factions due to their ascription to what guarantees for them the correct and true Islaam, which is adherence to what the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his companions were upon, as occurs in the authentic hadeeths.

In addition to that, the word "Salaf" was used by the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) himself. He said to Faatimah, "How excellent a Salaf I am for you." (Muslim, no. 2450).

Imaam Muslim brings in his Muqaddimah to his Saheeh (p.16) the saying of Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak – which he would say in front of all the people, "Abandon the hadeeths of Amr bin Thaabit, for he used to abuse the Salaf".

Shaikh Saalih al-Fawzaan said, "And how can making o*!ne’s madhhab that of the Salaf be an innovation, an astray innovation?! And how can it be an innovation when it is but the following of the madhhab of the Salaf, and following their madhhab is obligatory by the Book and the Sunnah, and truth and guidance?!" (al-Bayaan p. 156).

Hence, ascribing o*!neself to the Salaf, which is but Salafiyyah is not an innovation, rather it is obligatory upon every Muslim to subscribe to the manhaj and aqidah of the Salaf. It can be said, "If labelling with Salafiyyah is an innovation, then so is labelling with Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah". And the objective behind using the term "Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah" is not hidden or unknown. Unfortunately, Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah is no longer sufficient to distinguish between the people of falsehood and the people of truth. Until even the word "Salafi" does not distinguish between the true Salafi, who is actually Salafi in his aqidah and manhaj and between the hizbi (partisan) who wears the gown of Salafiyyah, claiming to be Salafi. His aqidah may be Salafi but his way of thinking is adulterated with Qutubi or Hizbi principles, ideas and modes of thought and behaviour. He will show enmity to the Salafis, mock their Mashaayikh, and yet claim to be upon their way. Yet the viewpoints they take and the positions they hold and their loyalty and disownment indicate otherwise. This is why true Salafis give great importance to learning and knowledge so that the truth is apparent to them and the ignorant pretenders cannot befool them.

2) Allaah Has Named us Muslims, So Why Ascribe Ourselves to the Salaf

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.

3) Calling o*!neself a Salafi is a Blameworthy ‘Tazkiyah’ of o*!neself

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.

4) Salafiyyah Causes Disunity

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.

5) The Salafis Think o*!nly They Are Correct

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.

6) The Salafis Are Arrogant And Have Bad Manners

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":

Questioner:
[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.

7) The Salafis Lack Piety Whereas Other than Them Are Pious and Abstemious

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.
 

ayman

La Ilaha Illa Allah
Staff member
:salam2:
jazakallahu khayran brother for this beneficial post.
:salam2:
 

amatullah sajida

Junior Member
assalam alaykom


i didn't read the whole article. jazak allah kharyan brother.

but these names are usually given to muslim groups having different way of
thinking nowadays like "salafiyeen" as my brother said also there is "ikhwan"
as well as "ajihad alislamy"


but in general those muslim who are on the right path , i.e. no bid'aa. are
following the quran and sunnah and and are usually referred to as
"manhaj ahl asunnah wa aljama'aa" i.e. following the prophet and his
companions.​
 
Hence, the point is that naming with "Muslim" or "Sunni" is not enough.

After some years to call us as a salafi will also not be enough to represent as a muslim of ahlesunnah waal jamaat.

day by day people are mixing all this things.

first it was sunni, then it comes ahle sunnah walla jammat , then salafi and so continue.

Allah knows better how we should call ourself before we die.

anyway that was a benificial thread
 

Mohsin

abdu'Allah
Assalamu-alaikum

:salam2:

I agree with brother Junaid as sooner or later there could be sects amongst them as well then, how will you differentiate ???
 

abdurrahman alb

New Member
selam alejkum

Questions and Answers Concerning ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah

By Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiree Translated by Taariq Preston

All praise is for Allaah. May Peace and Blessings be upon the Messenger of Allaah, upon his family, his companions and upon all those who follow his guidance. To proceed:

Question 1: A questioner directs his questions towards Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiree and says: "When did ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah first begin? Did ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah begin - as some people claim - just two hundred years ago?

Answer 1: Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiree began answering the question by first praising Allaah saying:

"All praise is for Allaah, the Lord of all the Worlds. The good end (or Paradise) is for the pious. I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship in truth, except Allaah, who is alone without partner the true deity of the first creation and the true deity of the last creation. And I further bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger and His chosen, reliable, faithful servant, may the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him and his family and upon his good and pure Companions.

To proceed:

I will first speak about the meaning of (the word) Salafiyyah. What is Salafiyyah?

The linguistic meaning of Salafiyyah refers to those who have preceded us. So the Saalif (the singular of salaf) means predecessor. And the meaning of the verb salafa means to be past, to be bygone, or to precede. And the legal meaning in Islaam of the word Salafiyyah is everyone who preceded us after the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahi ‘alayhi wa sallam) from the Companions and all those who followed them in righteousness and piety, following the Qur’aan and the authentic Sunnah (whoever does that) then he is Salafee.

So based upon this, ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is the da‘wah of the people to act in accordance with that which the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahi ‘alayhi wa sallam) was upon and that which his Companions were upon after him, from worshipping Allaah with sincerity and acting in accordance with the Qur’aan and the Sunnah in worship, as well as in our day to behaviour in our association with others. This is Salafiyyah.

As for (answering your question) when did ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah begin, then this requires the explanation of two things:

Firstly, ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is the pure Religion which calls to Tawheed and sincerity of worship. It is the da‘wah or the call to belief in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, the Day of Judgement, and belief in Qadar (pre-Decree). Therefore, ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is the da‘wah of all of the Prophets, from Nooh who was the first Prophet, all the way to Muhammad (sallallaahi ‘alayhi wa sallam) who was the last and final Prophet and Messenger to be sent to mankind. May Peace and Blessings be upon them all. Therefore, the history of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah begins with the first Prophet. It can even be said that ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah begins with Aadam (‘alayhis salaam) because it is the pure Religion. And ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is understanding the Qur’aan and the Sunnah as Allaah and His Messenger (sallallaahi ‘alayhi wa sallam) have commanded us to do so. And it is doing what Allaah and His Messenger have commanded us to do desiring the reward that is with Allaah. And it is staying away from that which Allaah and His Messenger have prohibited fearing the Punishment of Allaah. So the history of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is not something that can be limited to one hundred years or two hundred years or five hundred years. The only thing that can be limited to any specific time period are the activities of certain astray da’wah groups such as the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen and Jamaa‘atut-Tableegh and the Surooriyyah/Qutubiyyah and other than them from the da‘wah groups that have recently arisen. That was the first thing I wanted to explain clearly.

As for the second thing, ad-Da‘watus Salafiyyah was not founded by any specific person. And perhaps this is the reason why people ask when did ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah begin. So I say that adDa‘watus-Salafiyyah was not founded or established by any one specific person. Rather the Prophets and Messengers (’alayhimus salaam) were sent with this Da‘wah by Allaah the Glorified and Exalted. Therefore my son, the origin of the Da‘watus-Salafiyyah is the text (the Qur’aan and the Sunnah) and Ijmaa‘ (consensus of the scholars) and its origin is not based upon a simple notion, concept or opinion. So the leaders of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah are the Prophets (‘alayhimus-salaam) and they are the Imaams of creation. And then, after them are the Companions of the Prophets. And after them are the scholars. Just as we find in an authentic Hadeeth: "The leaders of the Children of Israa’eel were prophets and every time a prophet was killed (halaka), another prophet came after him, and there is no Prophet after me." [1] So Allaah has rendered the leadership of this Ummah in the hands of the scholars.

And the scholars are those who are described and known to have knowledge and they explain matters of religion based upon the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. And they explain and solve any problems or difficulties that they encounter in understanding the texts (of the Qur’aan and Sunnah) by utilizing the Seerah (biographies) of the Salafus-Saalih (Righteous Predecessors) from the Companions (radiyallaahu ‘anhum) and the scholars of the Taabi‘een (the generation after the Companions), as well as the scholars of the three preferred generations which are the best of generations of people as the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

"The best of people are my generation, then those after them, then those after them." [2]

Therefore, it is not correct to say that Salafiyyah is a notion or thought or a concept that someone came up with because ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah was not founded or established by any one individual, rather this Da‘wah is what the Prophets and Messengers came with, then those who came after them from the Companions of the Prophets and Messengers, then those who called to the Religion of Allaah upon knowledge thereafter. They are the ones who call to ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah. So from amongst the Salafees of the Ummah of Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) that Allaah decreed to renewers of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah were four:

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d.241H). He renewed ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah amongst those Muslims who were tested with the statement that the Qur’aan is created. Imaam Ahmad and those with him in spreading ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah - and he was the best of them and most patient of them and the strongest of them - until Allaah healed the Ummah through him. He explained to the people that the Qur’aan was the uncreated Speech of Allaah revealed from Him. And that Jibreel came down with it to Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam).

The second renewer was Shaykhul-Islaam, al-Imaam Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H). Whoever reads his book, and from them is Majmoo‘ul-Fataawaa, then he will see how Shaykhul-Islaam advises with the Sunnah and opposes innovation (in matters of religion) and how he exerted himself in clarifying the Sunnah and educating the people. However, these two Imaams, Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah - may Allaah have mercy upon them both - did not have a country behind them helping them and defending them.

The third renewer of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah was Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab (d.1206H) and with him was his brother in Islaam, al-Ameer Muhammad Ibn Sa‘ood (rahimahullaah). Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab explained the Religion with his tongue and his brother Muhammad Ibn Sa‘ood helped him with the sword and the spear. So a country, founded upon Tawheed, sprang up in the heart of Najd and then there came about some dissension and breaking apart and weakness, until Allaah brought the fourth renewer.

And he was Imaam ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ibn ‘Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn Faysal and those with him from amongst the Imaams of the Da‘wah. And during their time was the fourth revival. And we, all praise is due to Allaah, live under the shade of a country founded upon Tawheed in the shade of the fourth revival, and we ask Allaah to complete this blessing upon everyone. And perhaps here ends our answer to your first question, O gathering of British students.

Question 2: May Allaah preserve and may Allaah reward you Shaykh. The brother asks: Some of the people say that most of the scholars of Islaam had a madthab (school of Islaamic Jurisprudence) that they adhered to, such as Imaam al-Bukhaaree and Ibn Taymiyyah and Imaam Aboo Haamid al-Ghazzaalee, therefore the manhaj (methodology) of the Salafiyyeen today is a methodology that differs from the methodology of the scholars of the past because the Salafiyyeen of today urge the people not to have a madthab. Is this true?

Answer 2: The answer to this question is a multi-faceted answer:

FIRSTLY: What is the difference between simply having a madthab and blindly following or fanatically adhering to a madthab? Is it necessary that we differentiate between the two so that the issue does not remain vague, unclear or confusing. And so the matter becomes very clear, because the person who simply takes a certain madthab, such as the Hanbalee Madthab or the Shaafi‘ee Madthab or the Hanafee Madthab or the Maalikee Madthab is not faulted for not having taken a madthab. In fact, many of the greatest Imaams and scholars of Islaam - who were known for their vast knowledge - took a madthab and were associated with a madthab. Some of them were Ahnaaf (followers of the Hanafee Madthab) and some of them were Mawaalik (followers of the Maalikee Madthab) and some were Shawaafee (followers of the Shaafi‘ee Madthab) and some were Hanaabilah (of the Hanbalee Madthab) and no one disapproved of this. That is because their having taken a madthab or being associated with a particular madthab did not prevent them from seeking daleel (proofs and evidences for issues of fiqh), rather they would use daleel (proofs and evidences) no matter where they came from after ijtihaad (exerting oneself in trying to find the correct answer). And if they did not find the correct answer or the correct answer eluded them, then they would act according to what they considered to be the strongest position in their particular madthab. And they would not rule out or prohibit benefiting from other madthabs. So they were not strict adherents to any particular madthab as will become clear, rather they were simply associated with (muntasib) a madthab. As for the one who strictly adheres to a madthab or fanatically adheres to a madthab such as the one who will never depart from those positions that are a part of his madthab, then he is the one who adheres to a madthab in a blameworthy and disliked manner. And this type of adherence to a madthab is disliked and criticized by the scholars including the Imaams of the four madthabs, because all of them agreed that if anything they said contradicted the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, then it should be rejected. That is because such strict adherence to any particular madthab is actually a form of obscurement and separation from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah! So saying only that which the Imaam of his particular madthab says or saying only that which the people of his particular madthab say is detested and it is blind following. And it is haraam (unlawful) for the one who has the ability to seek daleel (proofs and evidences from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah). I am not going to discuss here what is permissible, impermissible or waajib (obligatory) from taqleed (blind following) because we do not have enough time. So that is the first portion of the answer to your question.

SECONDLY: The questioner said that the scholars of old had madthabs and he mentioned examples of the scholars of old such as Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Bukhaaree and al-Ghazzaalee. As for al-Bukhaaree, then he never associated himself with any particular madthab in any respect. Rather he was mujtahid (one capable of deducing legal rulings after thorough research) (rahimahullaah). And he was an Imaam from amongst the scholars of Hadeeth and there were many other scholars like him who did not associate themselves with any particular madthab both before him and after him. As for Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, then whoever obtains his books and reads them and studies them earnestly and he is knowledgeable about the different sayings or opinions related to issues of fiqh, then he would see that Shaykhul-Islaam was mujtahid mutlaq (one absolutely capable of deriving rulings after thorough research), despite the fact that he was associated with (muntasib) with the Hanbalee Madthab. So he would offer as the strongest opinion, that which was in accordance with the daleel (proofs and evidences), even if it was from the statements of Imaams of other madthabs such as the Maalikee, Shaafi‘ee and Hanafee Madthabs.

THIRDLY: The third thing which I want to explain to you, O my sons, is that in the opinion of many of the people of knowledge, there is nothing wrong for the one seeking knowledge of the Religion or for one who is in the early stages of learning, there is nothing wrong with reading books of fiqh in one particular madthab with the condition that he read the book with a very knowledgeable scholar who explains the daleel for the various opinions in the madthab. [3] And then if he becomes mature and knowledgeable, and he has the ability to differentiate between the various statements regarding issues of fiqh and he has the ability to ascertain the strongest opinion along with its proofs and evidences, then it is no longer permissible for him to rigidly remain upon one particular madthab. Rather it is waajib (obligatory) to seek the truth based upon daleel (proofs and evidences) however, if he is unable to come to a conclusion based upon daleel (proofs and evidences) that are available to him, then there is nothing wrong with taking the position of the madthab he is associated with.

FOURTHLY: It seems from the end of the question, that there is a malicious plot against the Salafiyyeen. It is as if the questioners are saying that the Salafiyyeen do not respect the scholars or the Imaams and this is rash and unbalanced and foolhardy speech. It is not possible in this time of ours to blame all of the Salafiyyeen for the mistakes of some of them. Some of the Salafiyyeen have made mistakes, but to blame all of the Salafiyyeen for the mistakes of a few of them is unacceptable. Because included in the fundamental principles of Salafiyyah is love for the people of knowledge and respect for the people of knowledge and knowing and understanding their precedence and superiority and they do not regard anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as being free from mistakes.

So it is as Imaam Maalik said:"In speech there is the acceptable and the rejected, except for the inhabitant of this grave (referring to the grave of the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam))" [4]

And Aboo Haneefah and ash-Shaafi‘ee and Ahmad and others ordered the refutation of that which contradicts the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. And it is obligatory to return matters of difference of opinion to Allaah and His Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as Allaah the Exalted says in His Book:

"O you who Believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger and those in authority over you and if you disagree about anything, then return it to Allaah and His Messenger if you are indeed believers in Allaah and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for a final determination." [Sooratun-Nisaa 4:59]

The scholars have said that the returning of an issue to Allaah means returning to His Book. And they have said that returning to His Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) means returning to the Messenger himself during his lifetime, and returning to his Sunnah after his death. So whether we differ in Usool (primary matters of Islaamic Jurisprudence) or furoo‘ (secondary matters of Islaamic Jurisprudence), then it is obligatory for us to return to the Book of Allaah and to the Sunnah of His Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And whenever there is a clear text regarding in issue, even in furoo‘, then it is obligatory to understand this issue in accordance with the text and to leave all of the other sayings and opinions regarding the issue. It is authentically reported that ash-Shaafi‘ee said:

"The Muslims of my time were of unanimous opinion that the one who comes across an authentic Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), then it is not permissible for him to disregard it for the statement of anyone else from amongst the people." [5]

And scholars other than ash-Shaafi‘ee have said the same thing. So the scholars have denounced pure opinion. I will relate as an example, the comment of the great Imaam and great taabi‘ee (member of the generation after the Companions), ‘Amr Ibn Sharaaheel ash-Sha‘bee who said:

"Be warned against comparison or estimation by analogy. I swear by the one in whose Hand my soul is in, if you start using qiyaaas (comparison by analogy), then you will begin making the unlawful, lawful ad the lawful, unlawful. So that which reaches you from that which was preserved by the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah, then take hold of it."

So perhaps I have answered the question, so let us move on to the next question.

Question 3: May the blessings of Allaah be upon you Shaykh. With reference to the answer to the pervious question, as for the person who cannot find a knowledgeable scholar to study a madthab with, should he read the books containing the legal rulings of the major scholars of today and take from them what apparently agrees with the daleel?

Answer 3: For the beginner, it is not good for him to look into the lengthier books of fiqh. Rather, it is better for him to contact the people of knowledge or the most trustworthy people around him and the most superior of them. He should contact them and ask them for a legal ruling (fatwaa).

Question 3B: Do you mean the knowledgeable scholars of today?

Answer 3B: Yes, such as Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen and Shaykh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee. And there are many others besides them for the one who has the ability to look into their books of fataawaa, then there is no harm. But as for the one who does not have the ability, then it is better for him not to do so. And if he is at a medium level of learning, then it is permissible for him to look at and read the books of fataawaa.

Question 4: May Allaah reward you and may Allaah preserve you. The questioner asks, what is Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah? And is Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah a category unto itself from amongst the well-known categories of Tawheed? And who was the first person to call to Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah?

Answer 4: Firstly, I will affirm what the people of knowledge have affirmed many generations before our time, and that is because many people maintain/allege that the division of Tawheed into three categories is something that Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab (rahimahullaah) made up. And some people go back a little further and say that it is something that Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah made up. So they see that the division of Tawheed into the categories of Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah and Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat is simply technical terminology (istilaah) brought about by these two scholars, or that Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab followed Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in this, or they simply connect this to Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab. And they claim that there should be no dispute in matters of technical terminology. However, the truth regarding the division of Tawheed into three categories is that the scholars derived these categories of Tawheed several generations before Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah. Therefore, this categorization of Tawheed into three categories is not something that Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah came up with, nor is it something that Shaykhul-Islaam Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab came up with. [6] Rather it is, according to what we know, something that Aboo Haneefah talked about and then his students followed him in this, such as Aboo Yoosuf. So whoever reads the works of these scholars will find that Tawheed was divided into three categories and these are the well-known categories today: Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah, Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah, and Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat. And these are three categories of Tawheed and no one fully appreciates that except the Salafiyyeen, Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa‘ah; may Allaah make us and you from amongst them. The scholars established these categories of Tawheed based upon thorough study and thorough examination of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. And Tawheed is the singling out of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic for worship, He alone has the ability to create and provide for His creation. And He alone has dominion over all things and He alone is the Manager of all affairs. This is the meaning Ruboobiyyah. And also from the categories of Tawheed is the singling out of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic for worship and commanding the worship of Allaah alone and prohibiting the association of partners in worship with Allaah. This is Tawheedul-‘Ibaadah or Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah. And the third category of Tawheed deals with the characteristics of Allaah the Glorified and Exalted, such as Hearing, Seeing, the two Hands, the Leg, the Foot, the Face, the Descension, the Ascension and His Highness over all of creation. These are all characteristics of Allaah so this matter of the division of Tawheed into three categories is not simply one of 'technical terminology', rather it is a matter which has been agreed upon and firmly established by thorough study and examination and continued acceptance over the generations. So verily the division of Tawheed into three categories is something which has been agreed upon. Having said that, it becomes clear to you that Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah and making it a fourth category of Tawheed, arguing that the three categories of Tawheed are only technical terms and that there is no dispute in matters of technical terminology is something new. Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah is a newly invented terminology, invented by the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen who started their claim in Egypt upon the hands of Hasan al-Bannaa. And it is said that he took the term from someone before him, I think his name is Ahmad as-Sukkaaree or another person, I forget his name now.

So the purpose behind this additional category is the Takfeer (declaring a Muslim to be a disbeliever) of the sinful rulers of the Muslims. Pay attention, the purpose behind this additional category of Tahweed is to make the Takfeer of the sinful rulers of the Muslims. As for the first person who spoke about al-Haakimiyyah without saying ‘Tawheed’ al-Haakimiyyah, rather calling al-Haakimiyyah ‘Tawheed’ and rendering it from the categories of Tawheed is something invented by the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen. As for the first person to present al-Haakimiyyah and openly come out with it, even though he did not call it Tawheed, but he openly proclaimed it called to it in front of the masses of the people. He was a man called Dhul-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemee and he shouted it in the face of the leader of creation (sayyidun-naas), Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Pay attention, he shouted it and openly proclaimed it in the face of who? In the face of the leader of creation, Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And here is an example for whoever will take it for bad manners and shamelessness and impudence. And I will summarize the hadeeth for you in which the story of Dhul-Khuwaysirah is found. The Hadeeth is in Saheehul-Bukhaaree as well as other collections of Hadeeth. ‘Alee (radiyallaahu ‘anhu) sent some gold to the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) from Yemen, so the Prophet divided the gold between four men. So some of the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah said, are you going to give the four men and leave us with nothing? So the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) replied:

"I am only trying to develop intimacy and friendship with them."

That was because they were new in Islaam and they were important influential men such as Ibnul-Warqah, Ibnul-Haabis, and ‘Uyayyin Ibn Hasan whose previous name was Zayd al-Kheel. So the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) wanted to develop intimacy and friendship with them through giving gifts in order to strengthen their Islaam so that they would become firm in Islaam, and so that they would help with the spreading of Islaam within their respective tribes as well as the neighbouring tribes. So the Companions of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) understood that and their hearts were pleasant and agreeable, they understood what the Messenger of Allaah was doing. So they were silent after that. However, Dhul-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemee said:

"O Muhammad, be just!"

And in one of the narrations of the Hadeeth, he said:

"By Allaah, you did not make this division of wealth seeking the Face of Allaah!"

So ‘Umar (radiyallaahu ‘anhu) said:

"O Messenger of Allaah, give me permission to strike his neck with the sword."

And ‘Umar wanted to do this in order to honour and protect the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). However, the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) replied:

"No. From the progeny of that man will come a people who will read the Qur’aan, yet it will not go below their necks." [7]

Therefore, the origin of al-Haakimiyyah first started with Dhul-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemee, the founder of the Khawaarij. And you have seen the rude and unseemly manner in which he addressed the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). After that, the Saba’iyyah followed Dhul-Khuwaysirah in this and the Saba’iyyah are followers of ‘Abdullaah Ibn Sabah who was known by the name Sawdaa’ (the blackened one) and he was a Jew from Yemen who outwardly pretended to accept Islaam, but inwardly he remained a disbeliever. He hated Islaam and entered into it in order to try to destroy it from within. He roused and agitated the weak minded against ‘Uthmaan (radiyallaahu ‘anhu) by exploiting some mistakes that ‘Uthmaan made. So he combined and enumerated these mistakes and he exaggerated and over-emphasized these mistakes under the pretense of commanding the good and forbidding the evil. So he used to say to his followers: 'Command the good and forbid the evil, until you win over the common folk.'

This culminated into the eventual assassination of ‘Uthmaan (radiyallaahu ‘anhu). After that, the Khawaarij followed in the footsteps of Dhul-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemee, there came the people of Nahrawaan who seceded from the authority of ‘Alee (radiyallaahu ‘anhu). [8] And there are many ahaadeeth that criticize and despise them and there are many ahaadeeth that command to fight against them and kill them and that they are evil game and that they pass through Islaam like an arrow passes through a game animal. And some of the scholars have even said that the Khawaarij are disbelievers. And if these ahaadeeth are not mutawaatir (concurrent narrations), then they are mashhoor (famous) ahaadeeth. So you have come to know Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah. It only remains to be said, where is Haakimiyyah with reference to Tawheed? We say that Haakimiyyah is not a separate category of Tawheed, rather it is part of Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah and Tawheedul-‘Ibaadah. This means that there is no ruling or governing except with the Laws of Allaah. And it is part of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah or a part of worship in as much as the ruler rules his people by the Laws of Allaah hoping to get closer to Allaah the Glorified and Exalted and to please Allaah. So therefore, it is a form of worship.

Question 5: May Allaah reward you, Shaykh. May Allaah preserve you. The questioner asks saying that some of the people say that the correct methodology is unclear so as a result of this, it is required for the Muslims to unite and overlook their differences. Is this correct?

Answer 5: This issue has been misunderstood and the reality or the true state of affairs has been turned upside down. The statement stems from one of two thing, ignorance or deviation. It is not possible that the statement could have come either one of the two types of people, either a deviant following his own desires, or an ignorant person who does not know the methodology of the Salaf. As for the deviant, then there is no might or power except with Allaah, but as for the ignorant person, then we advise him to ask Allaah for forgiveness and repent to Allaah for this statement because the methodology of the Salaf is derived from the texts of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, as well as the consensus (ijmaa‘) of the Muslims. And I believe that this question, or this da‘wah is from the Ikhwaanul-Muslimeen or connected to those who go along with them from the people of innovation. And this question arises out of one of the fundamental principles of the Ikhwaan. And this fundamental principle of theirs is that we should work together upon that which we agree and excuse one another for those things upon which we disagree. This principle is both weak and evil and it is an innovation in the Religion which requires the nullification of prohibiting evil, and that it is enough for a person to associate himself to Islaam or call himself a Muslim. Even if he was a Raafidhee [9] or even if he was a Jahmee [10] and even if he was a grave worshipper and even if he slaughters or sacrifices for other than Allaah and even if he takes oaths in other than the name of Allaah and even if he supplicates to other than Allaah. So if you think about this principle, and it is in and of itself proof of its sinfulness, and you consider it in light of the current reality and all of those who claim to be Muslims, then you will find that the majority of the Muslims do not agree upon anything except the statement laa ilaahah illallaah (There is no deity worthy of worship except Allaah). However, as for the meaning of laa ilaahah illallaah and acting in accordance with the statement laa ilaahah illallaah, then there is no one who understands its correct meaning and who is acting in accordance with its meaning except for the one whom Allaah has guided to the Salafee methodology, the methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa‘ah.

Question 6: May Allaah reward you Shaykh! The questioner asks, what is the opinion of the knowledgeable scholars of Usaamah Ibn Laadin? And what is their opinion about his return to Afghanistan and his outspokenness against the government of Saudi Arabia and the scholars of Saudi Arabia? May Allaah bless you.

Answer 6: I refer you with reference to this issue to our scholars, the likes of Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen and their brothers from the people of knowledge and the leaders of ad-Da‘watus-Salafiyyah and the knowledgeable scholars who are able to make judgements and rulings about issues such as this (rusookhul-qadam). Someone like me however, is not asked about the ruling or judgement upon Usaamah Ibn Laadin.

Question 7: May Allaah reward you Shaykh. The last question is, and forgive us for taking so much of your time. Allaah says about the martyrs (shuhadaa’) that they are alive and not dead, so therefore, is it permissible for us to seek intercession from them? And what is the legal ruling (hukm) upon the one who does that out of ignorance?

Answer 7: Ignorance is an excuse and ignorance is known, however if the truth comes to him, them he should leave that which he was upon from mistakes and begin to practice the truth (yaseeru ‘alal-haqq). As or the martyrs being alive, then it is the life that occurs after death but before the Day of Resurrection (hayaatul-barzakhiyyah) and only Allaah knows how that life actually is. As for the asking of intercession from them, then intercession does not take place until the Day of Judgement, so intercession is not sought from anyone in the world (dunyaa), ever. Even the leader of creation (sayyidul-khalq), the Messenger of Allaah (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) does not have the ability (laa yumlik) in the world, so intercession is sought from Allaah on the Day of Resurrection. And no one will be able to intercede with Allaah, except after two conditions have been filled:

FIRSTLY: Allaah must be pleased with the one being interceded for (ar-ridhaa ‘anil-mashfoo‘). And Allaah is not pleased with anyone, except the people of Tawheed. Just as we find in the authentic Hadeeth narrated upon the authority of Aboo Hurayrah (radiyallaahu ‘anhu) who said:

"Who will be the most fortunate person to gain your intercession on the Day of Judgement O Messenger of Allaah?"

He (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) replied:

"The one who says laa ilaahah illallaah sincerely from his heart." [11]

SECONDLY: The second condition is the permission of Allaah for the shaafi‘ (intercessor), none can seek the intercession of Allaah, except with His permission. So therefore, it is a mercy from Allaah for the one who receives intercession and it is an honour for the one who intercedes. This is the intercession that is firmly established. [12]

Question 8: What is the meaning of the verse:

"Who is he that can intercede with Him, except with His permission?" [Soorah Yoonus 10:3]

Answer 8: The meaning here is that no one can intercede, except after His permission. The one who wishes to intercede will go to Allaah on the Day of Judgement and he will ask permission from Allaah to intercede and if he is granted permission, then he can intercede. And some intercession on the Day of Judgement is specifically for the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And some intercession on that day will be open to others besides the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). For example, it is firmly established by proofs from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah that the Angels will be granted intercession. Likewise, the righteous people will be able to intercede and a man will be able to intercede for his father and his mother and a woman will be able to intercede for her father and her mother and her husband. However, the intercessor must meet the two previously mentioned conditions. That is, Allaah must be pleased with the one being interceded for and secondly, the intercessor must have His permission. And the intercessor must be someone who is close to Allaah and whom Allaah is pleased with and he must be from the people of piety (taqwaa). And the first ones to be able to intercede with Allaah are the Prophets and then after them the people of faith (eemaan) and taqwaa and those whom Allaah has brought close to Him. And those who have a good station with Allaah (ahsanu mithwaa ‘indillaah) are able to intercede provided that the two previously mentioned conditions are met.

However, in this worldly life, intercession should never be sought from anyone. And seeking intercession from anyone in the worldly life (dunyaa) is shirk. Allaah the Glorified and Exalted says in His Book:

"And they worship besides Allaah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allaah." [Soorah Yoonus 10:18]

So Allaah called seeking intercession from anyone in this worldly life, shirk.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you Shaykh and may Allaah preserve you. And may Allaah send prayers upon Muhammad. We took this sitting on Thursday, the 2nd of Rajab in the year 1419. May the peace and blessings and rewards of Allaah be upon you.

Footnotes:

[1] Related by Muslim (6/17).

[2] Related by al-Bukhaaree (no. 2652) and Muslim (no. 2533).

[3] Muhammad ‘Eed al-‘Abbaasee says concerning Shaykh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee: "It is worth mentioning that this is the opinion of our teacher (hafidhahullaah) himself. He has mentioned, more than once, that what is obligatory on people in this age of ours, is that they start with learning fiqh by way of one of the four madhaahib, and that they study the religion from its books. Then, they should progress gradually in knowledge… Thus, our shaykh is of the view that this is the correct path, which it is possible to pursue in this age. [This is] because pursuing the obligatory path which the Salafus-Saalih were upon is impetuosity, and not possible today, because mujtahid scholars are not present among the people, and so they cannot teach them the fiqh of the Book [i.e. Qur’aan] and Sunnah. Thus, there are only two choices before people: Either they should be left without learning and understanding, and thus in blind aimlessness, or they should learn their religion and gain understanding of its regulations by way of one of the four madhaahib. And, I do not doubt that this [latter] path is less harmful and less evil than the first path, and thus we advise people towards it and support it." Refer to Bid‘atut-Ta‘assubil-Madhhabee (2/112).

[4] This is well known among the later scholars to be a saying of Maalik. Ibn ‘Abdul-Haadee declared it authentic in Irshaadus- Saalik (227/1); Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr in Jaami‘ul-Bayaanil-‘Ilm (2/91) and Ibn Hazm in Usoolul-Ahkaam (6/145, 179) had narrated it as a saying of al-Hakam Ibn ‘Utaybah and Mujaahid; Taqiyyud- Deen as-Subkee gave it, delighted with its beauty, in al- Fataawaa (1/148) as a saying of Ibn ‘Abbaas, and then said: "These words were originally those of Ibn ‘Abbaas and Mujaahid, from whom Maalik took them, and he became famous for them." It seems that Imaam Ahmad then took this saying from them, as Aboo Daawood has said in Masaa’il of Imaam Ahmad (p. 276): "I heard Ahmad say, 'Everyone is accepted and rejected in his opinions, with the exception of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam)."

[5] Related by Ibnul-Qayyim in I‘laamul-Muwaqqi‘een (2/361) and by al-Fulaanee in Eeqaadhul-Hammaam (p. 68).

[6] To see the fallacy of this misconception and for an explanation of the three categories of Tawheed, refer to al-Ibaanah ‘an Sharee‘atil-Firqatin-Naajiyah (p. 693-694) of Ibn Battah (d.387H); Kitaabut-Tawheed of Ibn Mandah (d.395H) and al-Hujjah fee Bayaanil-Mahajjah (1/85, 1/111-113) of Abul-Qaasim al-Asbahaanee (d.535H).

[7] Refer to Fathul-Baaree (12/283-302) and Muslim (no. 2316).

[8] Refer to al-Maqaalaatul-Islaamiyyeen (1/168) of Imaam Abul-Hasan al-Ash‘aree and al-Bidaayah (8/22-24) of al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer.

[9] For an exposition of the Rawaafidh, refer to: Maqaalaatul-Islaamiyyeen (1/65), al-Farq baynal-Firaq (no.21) of ‘Abdul-Qaahir al-Baghdaadee and Talbees Iblees (pp.94-100) of Ibnul-Jawzee.

[10] For an exposition of the Jahmiyyah, refer to ar-Radd ‘alal-Jahmiyyah by Imaam Ahmad and also ad-Daarimee and al-Ibaanah (p.141) of Abul-Hasan al-Ash‘aree.

[11] Related by al-Bukhaaree (1/79).

[12] Refer to Sharhul-‘Aqeedatut-Tahaawiyyah (p. 229-233) with the checking of Shaykh al-Albaanee and Sharhul-‘Aqeedatil-Waasitiyyah (2/168-179) of Ibnul-‘Uthaymeen and Sharhul-‘Aqeedatil-Waasitiyyah (p. 120-123) of Saalih al-Fawzaan.
 

abdurrahman alb

New Member
selam alejkum

In the verdict of the Permanent Committee, No. 1361 (1/165) there occurs, "Salafiyyah is an ascription to the Salaf, and the Salaf are the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and the Imaams of Guidance from the the first three generations (may Allaah be pleased with them), those whose goodness has been testified for by Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), "The best of people are my generation, then those who follow after them, then those who follow after them, then there will come a people whose testimony will precede their oath and their oath will precede their testimony." Reported by Imaam Ahmad in his Musnad and also by al-Bukhaari and Muslim. And "the Salafis" (Salafiyyoon) is the plural of "Salafi", which is an ascription to the Salaf, and its meaning has already preceded. And they are the ones who traverse upon the minhaaj of the Salaf, from amongst the followers of the Book and the Sunnah, those who call to them both, and to acting upon them, as a result of which they are from Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah."

There also occurs in their reply to the question, "I want the explanation of the word ‘Salaf’ and also who are the Salafis?", the following, "The Salaf [i.e. the Salafis] are Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, the followers of Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) from amongst the Companions and whoever follows their methodology until the Day of Judgement, and when the Messenger (sallallaaahu alaihi wasallam) was asked about al-Firqah an-Naajiyah (the Saved Sect), he said, "They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon today…" (Fatwaa No. 6149, 2/164).

Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen states, "Who are the Ahl ul-Athar? They are the ones who follow the aathaar, they follow the Book and the Sunnah and the sayings of the Companions (radiallaahu anhum). And this does not befit any group (firqah) amongst the sects except the Salafiyyeen, those who adhere to the path of the Salaf…" which occurs on the first tape of his explanation of "al-Aqeedat as-Safaareeniyyah".

Likewise the Noble Shaikh stated in Sharh ul-Aqeedat ul-Waasitiyyah (1/123), "...There is no doubt, however, that one of them is truly Ahl us-Sunnah - but which one? Is it the Ash'arees, the Maatureedees or the Salafis? Whichever of them agrees with the Sunnah is considered to be Ahl us-Sunnah, whilst whichever of them opposes is not. So we say: The Salaf are Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah, and this description cannot be true for anyone else besides them… Rather Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah are those who hold to what the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his Companions were upon, and to the aqidah of the Salaf - until the Day of Judgement – and they are the Salaf."

Shaikh Saalih al-Fawzaan said, "And the Salaf and whoever follows their way never cease to distinguish between the Salaf and their followers from those who are other than them from the Innovators and Astray Sects, and they call them (i.e. the followers of the Salaf) Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, the Followers of the Salaf, and their works are full of this, when they refute the sects in opposition to the sect (firqah) of Ahl us-Sunnah and the Followers of the Salaf." (al-Bayaan p.130).

He also said, "And how can making one’s madhhab that of the Salaf be an innovation, an astray innovation?! And how can it be an innovation when it is but the following of the madhhab of the Salaf, and following their madhhab is obligatory by the Book and the Sunnah, and truth and guidance?!" (al-Bayaan p. 156).

And he also said, "And so he described this one sect to be the one that follows the manhaj (methodology) of the Salaf, and which traverses upon it, so he said, "They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon today…". So he indicated that there is a Salafi Jamaa’ah which has preceded and that there will be a Jamaa’ah which comes after, who will follow the former one in its way and methodology, and that there will be groups in opposition to it and who have been threatened with Hellfire." (al-Bayaan p. 133).
 

Mohsin

abdu'Allah
Imaam al-Albani on Tawhid ul-Hakimiyyah

Source: Al-Muslimun no 639 (trans. Dawud Burbank)
http://salafipublications.com/

Shaikh Muhammad Naasiruddeen al-Albaanee was asked, "Our Shaikh, may Allaah bless you, the scholars of the Salaf, may Allaah have mercy upon them, mention that Tawheed is of three types: 'ar-Ruboobiyyah,' 'al-Uloohiyyah' and 'al-Asmaa was-Sifaat,' so is it correct for us to say that there is a fourth Tawheed that is 'Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah' or 'Tawheed of Judgement?' So he replied:

"'Al-Haakimiyyah' is a branch of the branches of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah, and those who focus their attention upon this newly invented saying in the present age use it as a weapon not to teach the Muslims the Tawheed that all of the Prophets and Messengers came with, but rather as apolitical weapon. So if you wish I will establish for you what I have just said, even though this question has repeatedly been answered by me, many times - or if you wish we will continue upon our topic.

I have said in similar circumstances, as support for what I have just said, that usage of the word 'al-Haakimyyah' is part of the political da'wah that is particular to some of the parties present today; and I will mention here something that occurred between myself and someone who gave the khutbah in one of the mosques of Damascus. So on the day of Jumu'ah he gave a khutbah which was all about judgement/decree being for Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. But this person made an error with regard to a matter of fiqh. So after he had finished the prayer I went forward to him and gave him 'salaam,' and said to him, 'O my brother, you did so and so, and that is contrary to the Sunnah.' So he said to me, 'I am a Hanafee, and the Hanafee madhhab says what I have done.' So I said, 'Subhaanallaah! You have given khutbah that judgement/decree is just for Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, but you only use this word to attack those rulers whom you think are Unbelievers because they do not rule according to the Islamic Sharee'ah. But you have forgotten about yourselves - that Allaah's decree/judgement covers every Muslim. So why, when I say to you that the Messenger did so and so, why do you say, 'But my madhhab is such and such.' Then you have contradicted that which you call the people to.'

So if it were not for the fact that they use this saying as a tool for political propaganda of theirs, then we would say, 'This is our merchandise that has been returned to us.'

So the da'wah that we call the people to contains 'al-Haakimiyyah' and other than 'al-Haakimiyyah': Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheed of worship - that which you concentrate upon enters within it. We are the ones who propagated what you mention whilst you are focusing upon 'al-Haakimiyyah,' the hadeeth of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan, that when the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam) recited this ayah to his noble Companions:
They (the Jews and the Christians) took the Rabbis and learned men as lords besides Allaah. Soorah at-Tawbah (9):31

then 'Adiyy ibn Haatim at-Taa'ee said, 'By Allaah, O Messenger of Allaah, we did not take them as lords besides Allaah.' So he said, 'When they made something lawful forbidden for you, had you not used to declare it forbidden; and when they made lawful something forbidden, had you not used to take it as being lawful?' He said, 'As for that, then it did used to happen.' He said, 'Then that is your taking them as lords besides Allaah.'

So we are the ones who propagated this hadeeth, and then it reached the others. Then they advanced one part of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah or worship, with this innovated title for political aims.

So I do not see anything (wrong) in a terminology such as this if only they had not left it as mere propaganda without their acting as it requires. So it is, as I have just mentioned, a part of Tawheed of worship - but you will see them worshipping Allaah in whatever manner each of them feels like, and if it is said, as we have just mentioned in the incident of the man who gave the khutbah, 'that someone is acting contrary to the Sunnah,' or 'this is something contrary to the saying of the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam),' then he says, 'My madhhab is such and such.'

That judgement/decree is for Allaah alone is not just a proof against the Unbelievers and the mushriks, but also against anyone who transgresses against Allaah by contradicting what came from Allaah in His Book, and from His Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam) in his Sunnah. This is what I have as a reply to the likes of this question."

Taken from 'al-Muslimoon,' no. 639, 25th of Dhul-Hijjah 1417H which corresponds to Friday the 2nd of May 1997.
 

Aisya al-Humaira

الحمدلله على كل حال
:salam2:,

I'm bumping this thread for the year 2012.

Just tonight. . a friend of mine asked an Ustaadh about the Salafi. And guess what? They (my friends) aren't Salafi but some of them knew that I am. They were saying like. . Aisya. . Salafi.

And one thing that bothers me about what has been said was: Salafi holds on to the naas and daleel. Everything needs to have daleel. And in my mind at that time was: "Isn't that a *good* thing? To hold on strongly to the Qura'an and Sunnah?"

Seriously, more and more education/enlightment needs to be reach out to the people. The misconception about Salafi ["Wahabi", as mostly will claim] are still widely spread in my community.

Educating the people to learn the deen based on the understanding of the Salaaf; the earliest generations when the Qura'an and Sunnah were given to would have come as top priority, as of now.

:wasalam:
 

Ershad

Junior Member
Assalamu Alaikkum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu,

This is very very important for everyone to read. Many people have misconceptions about this.
 

Amir_of_spain

Junior Member
Asalam wailkium

I used to bump into alot of Salafis brothers back in my old University days. I found them to be knowledgeable but also arrogant, completely rejecting people/groups who use other methods/styles to learn and practise Islam. It was other the salafi way or no way.
They always insisted one must learn Islam from a Scholar and that dawah should be given by knowledgable brothers who were well grounded in the Arabic language. Their following of their Shiekhs was something close to how joe public follows their favourite football player or singer/artist. This meant if you mentioned Shiekhs who were not from a salafi background they would just disregard them and see them as inferior. They also would not criticise the Saudi Royal family/government, primarily because the royal family funds the salafi movement, causes, masjids. 2 popular salafi scholars who much later on in their life realised that there is room for other 'opinions' other than the 'traditional salafi method' way are Shiekh Yasir Qadhi and Shiekh Usama Hasan.

In summary, these are good brothers, nice brothers because their intention is initially good, but after gaining some knowledge they simply end up being like clones of their individual teachers/shiekhs'. Pushing their views across and not accepting or liking (tolerating) other practises/groups/ideas from the wider Islamic community. The don't have room for other thoughts and they simply get too attached to their inner circle of (elite) friends who agree with them.
 

Salem9022

Junior Member
Asalam wailkium

I used to bump into alot of Salafis brothers back in my old University days. I found them to be knowledgeable but also arrogant, completely rejecting people/groups who use other methods/styles to learn and practise Islam. It was other the salafi way or no way.
They always insisted one must learn Islam from a Scholar and that dawah should be given by knowledgable brothers who were well grounded in the Arabic language. Their following of their Shiekhs was something close to how joe public follows their favourite football player or singer/artist. This meant if you mentioned Shiekhs who were not from a salafi background they would just disregard them and see them as inferior. They also would not criticise the Saudi Royal family/government, primarily because the royal family funds the salafi movement, causes, masjids. 2 popular salafi scholars who much later on in their life realised that there is room for other 'opinions' other than the 'traditional salafi method' way are Shiekh Yasir Qadhi and Shiekh Usama Hasan.

In summary, these are good brothers, nice brothers because their intention is initially good, but after gaining some knowledge they simply end up being like clones of their individual teachers/shiekhs'. Pushing their views across and not accepting or liking (tolerating) other practises/groups/ideas from the wider Islamic community. The don't have room for other thoughts and they simply get too attached to their inner circle of (elite) friends who agree with them.


Yasir Qadhi and Usama Hassan are not Salafi. I dont even know if Usama Hassan is a Muslim since he believes in Darwinism.

Also just because one studied in Madina University doesn't mean they are Salafi. All sorts of people come and study in Madina in Makkah. There are different Departments in the Universities. If you go there to study Arabic, that doesnt mean you know are now the master of Fiqh or Hadeeths. There are special departments for each.

This is the Refutation by Sheikh Muhammad Naasir Al-Barraak of Usama Hassan
[yt]JJm-FCCjdbg[/yt]
 

thariq2005

Praise be to Allah!
A point of note...

The label 'salafi' should not be taken as something legislated in this religion. For anything to be legislated there has to be evidence from the Qur'aan and Sunnah. We have even Ash`aris in our time who claim to be upon the methodology of the Salaf as well. So, if you are calling yourself Salafi- this is one thing... but if you obligate others or recommend others (like one will be rewarded) to call themselves Salafi- then this is another thing. We had deviants even in the past- like the Jahmiyyah (during the time of the Salaf), Mu`tazilah, Ashaa`irah etc. Yet scholars did not tell people to call themselves Salafi, Athari etc.

What is important is that we follow the salaf in their `Aqeedah, Fiqh, Knowledge, `Ibaadah, Manners etc. Labels mean nothing without knowledge and action.

Think about yourself... and ask yourself as to when was the last time you prayed Qiyaam al-Layl. Yet there is hardly a report from even 'ONE' of the salaf that they did not pray their Qiyaam al-Layl. So, if you are a person who calls himself 'Salafi' but yet you fail to pray Qiyaam al-Layl- then think again about the label you ascribe yourself to.

Obviously, I am not saying it is haraam to call yourself Salafi or anything. All I am saying is that, we should not take this method of labeling as something legislated by the Qur'aan or Sunnah.
 

Ershad

Junior Member
Assalamu Alaikkum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu,

Brothers, a thing to ponder upon is what is our call. I want to add something br. Thariq pointed out. This "salafi" term is often used by some muslims who claim to be salafi muslims, to criticize other muslims who are not much knowledgeable. Knowledge is a good thing. But, something more important is acting upon the knowledge. A very upsetting trend is some people make "salafi" look like a esoteric group. Don't create hate and problems among the muslims based on this, don't isolate muslims reserving yourself to "salafis". Everyone makes mistakes. Remember, before you realized salafiyyah is the true path, you were making mistakes too. Have some compassion towards muslims who probably weren't taught, or had no clue who they were supposed to follow etc. Some "salafis" say that we are the only ones who are guided on the straight path. Beware! Even the sahabaah were afraid and used to pray to Allah for guidance, even though they were on the right path. There might be people who have no knowledge about the term "salafi" but would be still following the Qur'an and the Sunnah as they should be doing. So when you meet a muslim, don't ask them "why aren't you a salafi?" or tell them " you should be a salafi, if not, you are not my friend and I don't listen to you". This is some of the behaviour I found disturbing.

And regarding refutation, let the Ulemaa' take care of it when they see there is a purpose for it. We should stick to the Ulemaa' who we know are reliable. I am uncomfortable with any scholars in the west. Not that I am saying they are wrong. I am afraid for myself as I could get carried away. So, I stick to the Ulemaa' who are referred, praised and acknowledged by the whole Ummah. Alhamdulillah, we have translations of the works of those Ulemma. So, why should we go for other sources? Lets not get into refutation business because it sometimes causes division and problems between us brothers. We have to only care about right knowledge and right actions. We don't have to talk about people. It then becomes useless after a point.

I hope I didn't say anything wrong. May Allah guide us all.

Wassalamu Alaikkum
 

Hard Rock Moslem

I'm your brother
:salam2:,

I'm bumping this thread for the year 2012.

Just tonight. . a friend of mine asked an Ustaadh about the Salafi. And guess what? They (my friends) aren't Salafi but some of them knew that I am. They were saying like. . Aisya. . Salafi.

And one thing that bothers me about what has been said was: Salafi holds on to the naas and daleel. Everything needs to have daleel. And in my mind at that time was: "Isn't that a *good* thing? To hold on strongly to the Qura'an and Sunnah?"

Seriously, more and more education/enlightment needs to be reach out to the people. The misconception about Salafi ["Wahabi", as mostly will claim] are still widely spread in my community.

Educating the people to learn the deen based on the understanding of the Salaaf; the earliest generations when the Qura'an and Sunnah were given to would have come as top priority, as of now.

:wasalam:

Dear sister,

Well said. From the day 1 of my reversion I was told to follow Qur'an and Sunnah. But "many" in our community including "some ustaadh" not walk the talk. Forget about the old generation, mostly their mind have been fixed. the young one seem to be very receptive about going back to the original teachings. Alhamdulillah. It is not about being "wahabbi or salafi", it is about going back to "Qur'an and Sunnah".
 
Top