MUST READ! Some Good Advice from Shaykh Abdul Aziz Ar Raajhee

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

Asalamo`Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakaatuh,

Shaykh Abdul Aziz Ar Raajhee (may Allah preserve him) said:

وكذلك أيضًا ذُكر لي : إن هناك الآن تحزبات كثيرة بين الشباب، وانقسامات، وإن كثيرا من الشباب ديدنهم تفريق الناس وتصنيفهم فيقولون : أنت تبع الحزب الفلاني، أنت إخواني، أنت سلفي، أنت سروري، أنت كذا، وصاروا ينشغلون، ، وصار بعضهم يكفرون الحكام، ويكفرون العلماء، بل وصاروا يكفرون بعضهم بعضا ويبدِّعون هذا، ويفسقون هذا، وصار همهم وشغلهم الشاغل هذا ، هذه من المصائب ومن البلايا، هذا في صالح العدو.
والواجب على الشباب أن يتقوا الله ? وأن يقبلوا على طلب العلم، ويتركوا هذه التحزبات، والحكم على فلان وفلان، فأنت لست ملزما بهذا اتركه لأهل العلم.

فالشباب أضاعوا الأوقات وأخلوا بدينهم ، ضعف دينهم وإيمانهم بسبب هذا العدوان على العلماء وعلى الحكام ، لحوم العلماء مسمومة، لا يجب على الإنسان أن يتكلم في العلماء بغير بصيرة، أهل العلم وأهل البصيرة، من اجتهد منهم فله أجران، ومن أخطأ فله أجر، فلا يجوز للصغار من الطلبة أن يتكلموا فيهم، وأن يأكلوا لحومهم وأعراضهم.

“It was brought to my attention that there are now many different groups and sects amongst the youth today and that their primary objective is to separate people and categorize them and then say: “you follow the sect of such and such!” or “you are Ikhwaani!” or “you are Salafi!” or “You are Suroori!” or you are such and such and this is what they are completely preoccupied with. They even declare government officials to be disbelievers as well as some of the scholars and declare one another to be disbelievers and declare one another to be innovators or sinners and this is what they are preoccupied with and this is a calamity which is in the best interest of our enemies! It is
incumbent upon these youth to fear Allah and to engage in seeking knowledge and to abandon this sectarianism and issuing rulings on one another, for this is not your responsibility and you should leave this to the people of knowledge.

These youth have wasted their time and their religion with this behavior and more importantly,they have weakened their religion and their faith because of their transgressions against the scholars and government officials. The flesh of the scholars is poisonous and it is not befitting for an individual to speak about the scholars without sound knowledge and wisdom (i.e. baseerah). The people of knowledge and understanding, those who exercise due diligence in arriving at the truth from amongst them, they will receive two rewards when they are correct, while those who err from amongst them will receive one reward and thus it is not befitting for the young inexperienced students of knowledge to speak about them and eat at their flesh and their honor.”
[Translated by Shadeed Muhammad]

 

[Ershad]

Wa'alaykkum assalam wa rahmatullah

Baarakallahu feek. Let us leave it to people of knowledge. A similar advice - http://www.athaar.org/imp_advice.html . (Too long to post)

+ Advice to those who write online - http://www.athaar.org/advice.html

 

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

Misconceptions some salafis have regarding following a madh-hab

by shaykh Yusuf al-Ghafees1​

Translated by: Hisham Assing


The article in Arabic:
http://audio.islamweb.net/audio/index.php?page=FullContent&audioid=138061#138064
​

He said in his explanation of shaykhul-Islaam's statement from al-Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah:

...And this is why they are called ahlul-Kitaab was-Sunnah and ahlul-Jama'ah because the Jama'ah is united body which is the opposite of division even though the word Jama'ah could mean a united body of people.​

“....What we mean by this statement is that sometimes some salafi brothers because of their enthusiasm to precisely follow the salafi madh-hab and to distinguish it from innovations, they restrict the salafi madh-hab to such a degree that it dictates that most of the people of Ahlus-sunnah wal-jama'ah cannot be included in it. This is why you find them including subsidiary issues (مسائل فرعية) in the madh-hab of the salaf. For example, some of them would say the salafi way to pray is that you place your hands on your chest when raising from ruku' or that the salafi way is that you place them on the sides2; this is incorrect. One cannot ascribe this to the salaf. Yes this is what some of them did, hence one should ascribe these acts to them on an individual basis. Even if it was said that this is the opinion of the majority of them– (as with) the issue of women giving zakaat on their jewelry – the majority of the salaf from the fuqahaa and the muhaditheen are of the opinion that they are not obligated to give zakaat on their jewelry. Thus no one has the right to say it is from the rulings of the salaf that women are not obligated to give zakaat on their jewelry. Even though Maalik, as-Shaafi'ee, Ahmad, and the scholars of hadeeth are of the view that it is not an obligation. Except that there exist a difference of opinion and this is with Abu Hanifah, the scholars from al-Kufa, and other than them. The point of the issue is wherein the salaf differed and one of the scholars gave precedence to a particular opinion, if a person ascribes this opinion to some of the imaams of the salaf, then this is his right. However one cannot say this is from the distinguishing characteristics of the salafi madh-hab, for this would mean that that particular imaam or those imaaams (who differed) were not salafis in the true sense.

He then went on to say, “The salaf we said are the sahabahs, the three praiseworthy generations and those who follow them. Now one finds some brothers follow certain fiqh opinions and they consider anyone who follows these opinions to be salafi and those who do not then they are not considered salafi. Some of them may even sometimes say; he is salafi in 'aqeedah but not salafi in fiqh. This categorisation is incorrect, for indeed the issues that should be ascribed to the salaf are those issues where there exists 'ijmaa (consensus)3. These are the matters that shaykhul-Islaam affirmed (in his fatawa i.e.), and lack of properly understanding these two issues (i.e. issues of fiqh wherein there are valid differences of opinion and issues of ijmaa') is what lead to the division amongst the salafis. Hence every group of salafis claims what they are upon is the complete truth, and this stems from a particular understanding that is based on ijtihaad, however they made it (that particular ijtihaad) to be from the principles of salafiyyah. Whereas the truth of the matter is that issues of ijtihaad has nothing to the with appellation of salafi. Salafiyyah is based on aqeedah and usool, as for differences in ijtihaad, then this falls under the hadeeth, “Whenever ruler makes an ijtihaad and he is correct he gets two rewards and if he is incorrect he gets one reward.”4​

 

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

Praiseworthy and blameworthy following of a madh-hab
​

If a person were to say: The way of the salaf is that they approved of following a madh-hab. No one would be able to object to this. Thus there is a difference between saying the way of the salaf is that they approved of following a madh-hab and saying the way of the salaf is that they made it an end goal and highly encouraged it. We are only speaking about it from the angle of their approval.

The reality of following a madh-hab is that it is something that is done from the point organizing one's approach to seeking knowledge and not as an act of worship. So whoever ascribes himself to Imaam Ahmad as an act of worship, for example as some of the Shi'ah and some of the Sufis do when they ascribe themselves to particular individuals, then no doubt this is an innovation. However, the one who ascribes himself to Imaam Ahmad because this is whom he took his knowledge from and not Imaam as-Shaafi'ee per se, or he read his books but he did not read the books of the Shaafi'ee madh-hab, or he believes that Imaam Ahmad is more knowledgeable about the sunnah. Or the one who knows from the life of Imaam as-Shaafi'ee that he took his knowledge from both the fuqahaa and the muhaditheen, that he had a vast understanding of the Arabic language, and he sees that his principles of fiqh are closer to the evidences, thus he becomes a Shaafi'ee. Likewise the one who becomes a Hanafi because he follows the fiqh of Imaam Abu Haneefah. Therefore the issue is one of properly structuring one's approach to 'ilm. As with the statement of the Messenger (عليه الصلاة والسلام), “If you obey Abu Bakr and Umar you will be guided.”5 Why should we obey Abu Bakr and Umar? Is it because they have the ability to legislate (in the religion)? No, but this is in order for one to properly structuring his approach to 'ilm; that the one who has less 'ilm follows the one with more 'ilm.

However, whenever a person blindly adheres to the opinion of Imaam Ahmad or Imaam as-Shaafi'ee, we say he is wrong. But to say that a salafi is someone who does not follow a madh-hab, this is not correct. Therefore when it comes to following a madh-hab there are the two extremes and middle path. Thus whenever those who follow a madh-hab and become fanatical in their adherence to their madh-hab to the point that they refuse to look at the evidences and their main concern is only to defend their madh-hab, then no doubt this is a bidah that took place amongst the latter generation of some of the fuqahaa.

The shaykh then finalized his comment on this particular issue by stating, “The truth is that the eminent scholars from the salaf such ibn 'Abdul-Bar, Shaykhul-Islaam, those before them and those who came after them from the contemporary scholars of recent times such as shaykh Muhammad 'Abdul-Wahaab and the shuyookh of the da'wah, they all followed a madh-hab6, but very distant from diehard madh-hab fanaticism. Indeed what they did was choose the fiqh principles of Ahmad, or as-Shaafi'ee, or Abu Hanifah. The point is that when speaking about following a madh-hab it must be a balanced statement. It is not permissible to support a madh-hab based on partisanship, nor is it permissible to object to (the concept of following) a madh-hab. This does not mean that following a madh-hab is a sunnah that the Muslims must adhere to, rather there must be ijtihaad because the ummah is in need of ijtihaad for there are issue that have occurred that the fuqahaa of the past have never discussed. What is meant is that these issue should be approached in the correct manner. Thus making ijtihaad does not negate following a madh-hab, and likewise being salafi does not contradict following a madh-hab. For indeed the imaams of those madhaahib are the imaams of the salaf and many of their prominent followers were upon the aqeedah of the salaf.”

http://audio.islamweb.net/audio/downloadmp3_.php?audioid=138061



___ Footnotes___

1 He is a former [FONT=times new roman,serif]member of the Standing Committee for Research and Fatwa, an affiliate of the Commission of Senior scholars.[/FONT]​

2[FONT=times new roman,serif] Meaning this is how the salaf as a whole used to pray.[/FONT]


3A[FONT=times new roman,serif]n example the shaykh gave of this point is the ijmaa' of the salaf that eemaan consists of a firm belief, statements, and actions, whereby the one who states or believes otherwise would be contradicting the madh-hab of the salaf as it relates to the definition of eemaan. [/FONT]

4[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Al-Bukhaaree (6919) and Muslim (1716)[/FONT]

5[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Muslim (1594) [/FONT]

6[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan states his explanation of Kitaabb at-Tawheed, “And here you have the imaams from the great scholars of hadeeth who used to follow a madh-hab. Shaykhul-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim were Hanbalees, imaam an-Nawawi and ibn Hajr were Shaafi'ees, imaam at-Tahaawi was a Hanafi, and imaam ibn 'Abdul-Bar was a Maaliki. Following a madh-hab from one of the four madhaahib is not a misguidance whereby some can be critcised for ffollowing it. Nor does it mean that a person lacks knowledge. In fact the one who goes outside of the realm of the statements of well qualified fuqahaa and he is unqualified to make ijtihaad, he is the one who is considered misguided and on the fringe.” ('Ianatul-Mustafeed: 1/7) [/FONT]

Source

 

[Ershad]

Jazakallahu khayr. I think most of these points were discussed in the old Taqlid thread. But, nevertheless, a good reminder.

al-Fawzan:

Fiqh-differences do not split Ahl-us-Sunnah. Ahnaf, Hanabilah, Shafi’iyyah and Malikiyyah are all brothers. They love each other and marry each other. (Sharh-ud-Durrah, p. 69)

Imâm Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr:

The narrations that forbid Taqlîd, are not in regards to the laymen. The laymen are obliged to follow their scholars blindly when something happens. None from amongst the scholars say anything else.” (al-Jami’ 2/228)

Source

 

[strive-may-i]

Assalaamu Alaikum Brother and Sister,

Most often people segregate to analyze, but forget, by segregating they are knocking on doors of division...

Jazakallahu khayr. I think most of these points were discussed in the old Taqlid thread. But, nevertheless, a good reminder.

al-Fawzan:

Imâm Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr:

Source