A Series of Refutations upon The False Claims of Spubs

Abu Khadeejah Stated: He loves to be excessively praised and encourages it.

This is in fact an indirect revilement upon The Imam, Ash-Shaykh Muqbil, as by this Abu
Khadeejah is alleging that ash-Shaykh Muqbil selected an individual who loves to be praised to
succeed him in his centre.
Ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooreee has already refuted this doubt prior to this false claim of Abu
Khadeejah.
Ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree, may Allah preserve him said: "By Allah oh my brother I do not
enjoy being praised neither from before nor afterwards and Allah is a witness and observes the
hearts, some poets would come with some poetry which I would browse over and erase (i.e.
some words) from it which deserves to be removed while some poets, I am shy to say to him
come and let me check your poetry whereas perhaps he could be an old poet while a poet has
with him zeal to defend (the truth) ..., therefore a slip and a error can a occur , Allah has said :

No person earns any (sin) except against himself (only)
So it is upon us to advise..."
Ref: http://aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=17476
Abu Khadeejah Stated: In his presence his muqallids (blind-followers) liken him to the Prophet
(salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) and Abu Bakr (radhi Allaahu 'anhu) - they declared him to be the
Imaam of Mankind and Jinn.
As for what they wrote regarding the exaggerations of some of the poets for ash-Shaykh Yahya
such as the statement "If They Were to Melt Yahya al-Hajuri His Flesh Would Dissolve into the
Book and the Sunnah!" and "Imaam of the Men and Jinn" and other than that, then that has
been clarified here and on other sources prior to this statement of the writer:
An Excerpt from the aforementioned link:
Ash-Shaykh AbdulHameed al-Hajooree said: As for us we retract from them two and theyve
been erased from the edition with the knowledge that those who uttered it have retracted as
well. Also that Abu Zaid Al-Hajoori has retracted at that time and posted his retraction on the
website Aloloom Assalafiya along with that he invited them to repent like him, and he said in his
writing to his brothers in Indonesia: << I didnt intend by it except the leader of both men and
Jinn in our time and in our land(Yemen) and with it I make Taubah (repent) to Allah>>

"as for Abu Muslim Al-Hajoori he said: I only intended by that line the strong adherence of
Shaykh Yahya, may Allah preserve him, to the Book and Sunnah and his severance upon who
oppose it ,whereas that is from the angle of the statement of the Prophet CC CC C C C C C C C CC CC C C C C C
CC C C C C C C Ammaar's mashaash (i.e. blood, flesh, all parst of his body) was filled (i.e. mixed) with
eeman <5888 Saheeh Al-Jaami Al-Albani> and viewing that these lines of poetry have caused
a wrong meaning, and some who are polluted by the fitnah have already made use of it to
slander Dammaj and Shaykh Yahya may Allah preserve him. Thus I retract from it and I ask
Allah to forgive me and repent to him and praise is to Allah, The Lord of all mankind. "
Written by Abu Muslim Ahmed ibn Mohammed ibn Al-Husain Al-Hajoori al-zaakari, in Dar
Ahadith Dammaj 2 Rabee II 1430/ 28 March 2009>>
Below is the retraction of the poet from the statement "The Imaam of Mankind and Jinn" (which
is in poetry form):

***

( ***)
***

***
"O Abdurrahmaan al-A'dani***I am not extreme, whereas you may disparage me
As well I have retracted from the expression*** (The Imaam of Mankind and Jinn in Yemen)
Likewise retract too and announce it***.(to the end of the poetry)"
This retraction was just posted on the website Aloloom in the year 2008 let alone that the
brother retracted from his exaggeration of praise for ash-Shaykh Yahya before the year 2008.
http://www.aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=94
The Noble Brother Abu Musab Husayn al-Hajooree said: "This nickname (i.e. Imam athThaqalayn) was found in the scholars of the past whereas they werent rebuked as Shaykh
Yahya has been rebuked by the new hizbi party, the people of annoyance and stubbornness.
Al-Allamaah as-Sanaanee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in the book entitled Irshaad
an-Naqaad (20): "...Then a fatwa was given by another faqeeh by the nickname the Muftee athThaqalayn, whereas he permitted a hanafi getting married to a shafi and he based the reason
being that the rulings of (marriage) pertaining to the people of the book is to be applied to her..."
While al-Allaamah as-Sanaanee, may Allah have mercy upon him, did not rebuked this
nickname (as they rebuked it).
Ref: http://aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=2721
Side Note: The poet who brought mentioning of the nickname Imam ath-Thaqalayn "Imaam of
the Men and Jinn", only intended by such a nickname that which is confined to this era and to
Yemen.

While he openly made repentance from that statement prior to all these recent attacks against
Shaykh Yahya which was clarified on more than one website.
Likewise Ash-Shaykh AbdulHameed , may Allah preserve him, clarified, the error of adding such
erroneous exaggerations of those poets to the appedix of one of his books - being that he
thought the poetry was already examined -, the aforementioned correction and retraction is
found on his website which was posted in the year 2009:http://alzoukory.com/play.php?
catsmktba=111
Also the aforementioned appedix of the poetry was added to the book after Shaykh Yahya
already gave a preface to the book, whereas ash-Shaykh Yahya did not approve that
appedix ,so he not to be held responsible for it.
Add to the old aforementioned retraction a new poetic retraction by Abu Zaid Al-Hajooree
regarding the statement Imam Ath-Thaqalain, whereas he mentioned therein that Shaykh
Yahya was the one who advised him about that statement. This was taken from the Arabic
section of Aloloom.

***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***

For the audio click the link. - http://alzoukory.com/play.php?catsmktba=1413
Abu Khadeejah Stated: They have ghuloo (excessive veneration) for him and he encourages
it.
Ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree has already explained this false accusation: ...Some of the
(exaggerated) words could be read while I am preoccupied with papers, whereas I can (also) be
busy with those seeking permission to be dismissed (from the lesson), by Allah some of them

(i.e. words) we werent paying attention to...while we bring notice to (it) once I become aware of
it or informed about it whereas I bring notice to it then
Ref: http://aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=17476
Another Side Note: It is common between poets that they exaggerate in their poetry, whereas
there are many examples of poets who have exaggerated for several amount of scholars
although such exaggerations are not correct but why are Spubs not rebuking them as they have
rebuked the poets who have exaggerated for Shaykh Yahya???
Abu Khadeejah stated: ...liken him to the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) and Abu Bakr
(radhi Allaahu anhu)..."
The below lines of poetry was read in the presence of Ash-Shaykh Muqbil, in the city of Saah of
Hadramout,the poetry is entitled: Glad Tidings Oh Saah.

... ---
---
--- ...
"If you were to see Shaykh (Muqbil) while he is in his Centre Daarul Hadeeth you will come to
know the reality--- if you were to visit daarul hadeeth you would say this is Ibn Abaas or Umar
(Bin Khataab) ---Or this is Imam ash-Shaafie and Maalik or this is (Ahmad) bin Hanbal ,the
ideology has resembled"
Another poet said about Shaykh Muqbil ...he memorized all chains of hadeeth and all authentic
narrations, he has possessed all (high) status and all positions...
Also another poet said: "...I asked Imam ash-Shafie and Maalik and Nuymaan CC C C C C C and al-Imam
Ibn Hanbal. They all said (Muqbil) Ibn Haadee is our successor in the hadeeth of the Chosen
Prophet the Best of Messengers..."
Reference: The appedix of the written biography of Shaykh Muqbil regarding himself, print
Daarul Aathaar.
Side Note: The reason we cannot rebuke ash-Shaykh Muqbil for
the poets for him, is the same reason we cannot rebuke Shaykh
perhaps while the poet was reading those exaggerated words
Muqbil, the Shaykh was preoccupied with papers or with other
person from following up each word in the poetry.

the exaggeration of some of

Yahya al hajooree , which is
in the presence of Shaykh
things which may distract a

Bearing in mind that some of those poets that Spubs are now attacking are from the students of
Ash-Shaykh Muqbil, who have wrote some poetry praising Shaykh Muqbil, so is Ash-Shaykh
Muqbil bin Haadee a hadaadee too???

Also you may even found such exaggerations found with some of the poets who praise Shaykh
Rabee, for example a poet said in his praise for Shaykh Rabee':

---
Rabee, no one resembles Rabee---You are not able to (find) an equal for him if you wished
Whereas ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree advised the poets not to exaggerate in words and not
to over praise him as found on this thread, while Ash-Shaykh Saeed Daas also brought this to
mentioning in the following poetry:

***




If it wasnt for him disliking to be praised the horizon of the earth would shine via my ink of
praise
So why does Spubs conceal these texts of poetry from the public???
Spubs have recently mentioned some lines of poetry against Shaykh Yahya which was recited
on the return of Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree from Hajj some years back, where Ash-Shaykh
Yahya rapidly openly advised those poets regarding such exaggerations ,which Ash-Shaykh
Yahya brought to notice at that time, as found on the below transcription:
...I have a request for my fellow brothers which I hope they carry out, while by the will of Allah I
have a good thought for them, it is not to allow our love for each other leads us to exaggerate in
words, may Allah reward you, by Allah I dislike the likes of theses exaggerations from the core
of my heart, also may Allah bless you, we are not equivalent to anything rather who from us is at
a higher level than Ibn Qataan and to the Imaams, they are in reality are the bearers of the
religion, we are not except people who benefit from them, we learn basically under their books,
the books of research of defects of hadeeth , their opinions, their narrations, we ask Allah to
show mercy upon them and make us tread their path upon the Book of Allah and Sunnah of the
Messenger CC C C CC C C CC C C -, this is what I request from my fellow brothers , may Allah bless
you...We should not allow our love for each other to leads to a degree where a person says in a
poetry , which he places us in the position of those who you are aware of, not (Imam) Ibn
Qataan nor other than him, we are merely students of knowledge...

Also below is another advice by Shaykh Yahya al-hajooree which he gave to the poets
regarding such exaggerated poetry lines which spubs are now using against Shaykh Yahya,
while Shaykh Yahya at that time has already advised regarding them, as found on the below
transcription:
May Allah reward you and may Allah pardon me and you, by Allah...by Allah we are less than
that, we are merely students of knowledge, we ask Allah to pardon us and look down up our
short comings, by Allah we confess to Allah our weakness and powerlessness, we ask Allah to
accept our repentance, while we are those who fall short and commit sins. Our brothers , may

Allah preserve them, have a high level of good thoughts for us, while by no means we are not at
this level, by no means we are not at this level, I will benefit you, take it from me directly, I am by
Allah not at this level, we are merely students of knowledge, in dire need for Allah, weak ones,
we ask Allah, the lord of mankind to look down upon our short comings, and to pardon our
brothers (i.e. the poets), Allahs aid is sought and may Allah reward you.
http://aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=1198
So why has spubs concealed the aforementioned advice of Shaykh Yahya for those lines of
poetry???
Spubs stated: Abu Hatim Sa'eed bin Di'aas al-Yaafi'ee recited the following lines upon Yahya alHajuri's return from Hajj in 1428H: ... And he (al-Hajuri) has the forbearance (kindness) of alMaahi (the Eraser [of falsehood, shirk]), the Messenger. And (he, Yahya) has of Ali, his bravery
and vigour...
Here Spubs are attempting to deceive the public that the lines of poetry that they have been
using against Shaykh Yahya, is by Shaykh Saeed bin Daas which is not true, as it is by an
individual who has become from the followers of Ubayd al-Jaabiree, once Shaykh Yahya
advised him regarding his extremism , as you can notice below that this particular issue has
already been addressed by the noble brother Abu Musab Husain al-Hajooree , where he
comments on the following accusation of Arafaat:
Arafaat said: The twelfth principle: The Extremism (that people have) towards Al-Hajooree's
personality, and he (i.e. ash-Shaykh Yahya) is one that is pleased with it, and takes it as his
Manhaj.
"I say: I swear by the everlasting existence of Allh you have lied! He is not pleased with
extremism towards him or other than him. And his advice and articles to those that have had
extremism towards him (i.e. ash-Shaykh Yahya) or towards other than him are widespread in
tapes, and quoted in treatises as a refutation against the oppressive Fitnah makers like yourself
(oh Arafaat). And some of them who possess extremism, (then) the Shaykh has disapproved of
this from them and anger becomes apparent on his face from what he hears from them, like
Abdullah Al-Qaadhee, he is the one whose poetry you have narrated in your insignificant little
papers, saying:

***
And he (al-Hajooree) has the forbearance (kindness) of al-Maahi (the Eraser [of falsehood,
shirk]), the Messenger. And (he, Yahya) has of Ali, his bravery and vigour.
He (i.e. Abdullah al-Qaadhee) has become infatuated and has joined your Hizb, so look at
where the returning point of the extremists is. So is it feasible to say that you have excused him
(Abdullah Al-Qaadee) from this extremism so that you may actualize what you want from
accusing the Shaykh and the Daar with Ghuloo, or is it that you are an abode for the infatuated
ones? And both of the two are bitter.

Some from amongst them (i.e. the poets) tongue may slip with a word, and would then retract
from it, and perhaps the Shaykh would sometimes not pay attention to focusing on the poem
and would be preoccupied with an affair, especially when these poems are being read and the
Shaykh is looking over the questions (passed forward to him), so by that the attention of the
Shaykh is preoccupied and therefore he does not notice this word and if he was to he would
surely rebuke it as he has rebuked other than it."
Ref: A Refutation upon Arafaat in what he Perpetrated from Ignorance, Treachery and
Tampered statements in: The Immediate Clarification 31
Abu Khadeejah stated: He claimed that the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) erred in the
ways and means of da'wah! i.e. that he erred in the wasaa'il of dawah. That shows both his
ignorance and misguidance.
This is a foul attempt by Abu Khadeejah to tamper Shaykh Yahyas speech out of context
whereas the words of Shaikh Yahyaa were misconstrued, while incorrectly posed to Shaikh alFawzaan and others by the followers of Saalih al Bakri, and now by the new hizb group of alMar'ee.
Shaikh Yahyaa pastly refuted the likes who spread such doubts such as az-Za'aabee whereas
Ash-Shaykh Yahya completely refuted the ignorant claims on this subject. As found here in PDF
Form (Translated in English).
What Shaikh Yahyaa said was consistent with what the scholars of Ahl As-sunnah have
mentioned regarding this issue based on the texts, and they have clarified the ijtihaad of the
Noble Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu'alayhi wasallam:
The Fatwa Committee has stated: Yes the messengers and prophets make mistakes however
Allah, The Most High, does not acknowledge (leave) them upon it rather he clarifies for them
their mistakes as a mercy to them and their nations and pardons their errors and accepts from
them their repentance
Number of the Fatwa #6290
Likewise Ash-Shaykh Albany, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: We say that if he (the
Messenger alayhi as-salaatu was-salaam) were to perform ijtihaad then be mistaken (in his
judgment) then how promptly he would be corrected by the revelationIf it comes the likes of
the statement of Allah, The Most High,:

**
He frowned and turned away
So therefore this is a prime example (that the prophet perform Ijtihaad however was corrected
by revelation) so how do we say that the messenger does not perform ijtihaad, while here he
has indeed perform ijtihaad however he was not acknowledged (left) upon (the error)

**
"But what could tell you that per chance he might become pure (from sins)? Or that he might
receive admonition, and that the admonition might profit him?"
Reference: Silsilatul Huda wan Noor #306
And in the tafseer of Al-Imam ash-Shinqeeti, is the following statement: ...The scholars have
considered the speech of al-Junayd to be correct the good deeds of the pious are bad deeds to
al-Muqarraabeen (i.e. the close servants to Allah) or what is intended is similar to what has
come in the Quran of some of his (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) acts of Ijtihaad and in the way of
dawah whereas his (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) ijtihaad is unaccepted, therefore it affects him
greatly, similar to the story of Ibn Umm Maktoom whereas he was disciplined for it:

**
He frowned and turned away
And its likes even if it is after the descending of this surah, except that it is (all) from one
angle...
Ref: Adwaa al-Bayyaan (677/8) taken from the second refutation of Husayn al-Hajooree upon
Arafaat (1)
Ash-Shaikh Yahyaa stated in his radd of Za'aabee regarding the aforementioned verse which
Ash-Shaykh Albany mentioned:
This is from the means of Dawah, the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon
him, turned his attention to some of the chiefs of Quraysh, he, may the peace and blessings of
Allah be upon him, gave them admonition and enticed them to accept Al-Islam...
Al-Qattaan, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated in his tafseer of Surah Abasa": "...As for
who considered himself independent by his wealth and strength from Allah then you are giving
him attention with enthusiasm , so he may accept Islam while you are showing him importance
in conveying your dawah to him..."
Ash-Shaikh Yahyaa stated in his radd of Zaaabee: As for the word 'mistake', then in this affair
the scholars agree, those (scholars) that venerate the messenger, may the peace and blessings
of Allah be upon him, with due veneration, and they venerate his legislation as a clarification
from them for the true legislation, they are those who take this from the Quran and the Sunnah,
and that is not in contradiction with his status and his lofty position, may the peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him.
Abu Khadeejah stated: Shaikh al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullaah) was read some of al-Hajooree's
sayings and he responded: "This is wicked speech, don't learn from him."
As for what Spubs have quoted regarding an old audio clip of Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan then
its likes has already been clarified to the degree that even Muhammad bin AbdulWahaab al-

Wasaabee previously said: ...This man who brought forward the question to Shaykh al-Fawzan
what is apparent to me is that he from those have severe hatred for Shaykh Yahya, may Allah
preserve him, whereas he brought forward a general question while such matters should not be
presented with such generality (especially) in the public lessons, rather the Shaykh (i.e. alFawzaan) should be asked in a tranquil sitting while he (i.e. the questioner) should mention who
he is referring to ,this is what is appropriate for him to do, from the view point (i.e. of the
questioner) , from another view point what is apparent to me is that Ash-Shaykh al-Fawzaan
hasten in the answer (i.e. of the question)...so it is upon Shaykh al-Fawzan to re-examine (the
issue) ...What is requested from Ash-Shaykh al-Fawzaan to review this issue and to know that
the people of innovations and desires have widely spread this speech of his, they have become
delighted by it, whereas they began to make copies of it, in order to refute Ash-Shaykh Yahya alHajooree...
Side Note: The aforementioned refutation of Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree regarding this issue was
posted and highly praised on the website of Sahab on the year 2004, as found on this thread:
http://www.sahab.net/foru /**********?showtopic=38937 , however on the other hand we find
spubs making foul attempts to dispraise this well-prepared refutation of Shaykh Yahya alHajooree, and Allah's aid is sought.
Abu Khadeejah stated: He claims that the "majority of the Sunnah is revelation". Majority?!
Rather ALL of the Sunnah is revelation for the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) did not
speak from his desires. None of us should be in doubt with respect to this deviation.
This is another impudent attempt by Abu Khadeejah to tamper Shaykh Yahyas speech out of
context; nevertheless I will quote below the exact speech of Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree along
with its full context to allow the readers to make a comparison between Shaykh Yahyas speech
to the following quotes of the scholars:
Al-Imam ash-Shaatibee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Verily the hadeeth is either by a
revelation alone or either by an ijtihaad of the Messenger (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) which is
correctly approved by the revelation...
Ref: al-Muwaafaqaat (335/4).
Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Ibn Battah stated as in
what he wrote to Ibn Shaaqilaa of answers to numerous of matters , whereas he said and the
proof that his (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam) sunnah and his commands had indeed within it of
that which is not by revelation ,which it was by his opinions and judgements, whereas he was
indeed admonished regarding some of them , if he was commanded (i.e. by Allah) for them then
he would have not been admonished regarding them, and from this perspective is his
judgement pertaining to the captives of (the battle) of Badr...al-Qaadhi said (Imam) Ahmad has
indeed pointed towards the correctness of what Abu Abdillah Ibn Battah has stated...
Al-Musawwadah page :(507)
The Author of the book al-Mahsool (366/4) The fifth angle of it is that some of the acts of
Sunnah which are ascribed to the Messenger (salallaahu 'alaihi wassallam), if all was from the
revelation then there wouldnt be an extra benefit for such an addition...

The exact speech of Shaykh Yahya where he stated: The Ijtihaad of the prophet is success
granted from Allh, so the Sunnah is Tawqeefiyyah (restricted to the texts) and Tawfeeqiyyah
(success granted from Allh). As for it being upon Tawqeef (i.e. it being restricted to the texts),
then this is upon a (specific) proof, that Allah has ordered him with. And as for it being upon
Tawfeeq (success granted from Allh) then the revelation agrees with it.
And this establishment is good; within it is the status of the prophet and the status of his
Sunnah. For the origin of what the prophet came with is revelation from The Lord of all that
exists, from it is the Qurn, and all of it is revelation, and from it is the Sunnah and most of it is
revelation. And I have clarified, that from the Sunnah there is that which is Tawqeefi, i.e.
revelation from Allah, and from it there is that which he made Ijtihaad within and his Lord
granted him success concerning that (particular) Ijtihaad and his lord affirmed it for him; the one
who honoured him with this degree, the degree of Ijtihaad and increased him in honour by way
of his establishment of that matter.
And it is for this reason that I said: As for it being upon Tawqeef (i.e. it being restricted to the
texts), then this is upon a (specific) proof, that Allah has ordered him with and all of this is great
praise, veneration for him, and an extolling of his status.And as for it being upon Tawfeeq
(success granted from Allh), then the revelation agrees with this. End of quote
Ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree, may Allah preserve him, previously said in his refutation of azZaaabee: As for the noble messenger, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him,
then Allah is responsible for his welfare, He protects him and his legislation with revelation, to
the extent that it (i.e. his Shareeah) had reached the highest of perfection and completion,
which no other legislation from the legislations of the heavens has come with.
Reference here.
The Noble Brother Husayn al-Hajooree comments by saying: So what is all of this strange
tampering with the context of the Shaykh's speech; that which affirms that the Sunnah is
restriction to the texts and success granted from Allh, his speech returns back to the fact that
all of his Sunnah is revelation, either restricted to the texts or direction from Allh as you can
see, (however the messenger said) If you are not shy, then do as you wish
Reference here.
Read more regarding this topic here.
Side Note: Ash-Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, may Allah preserve him, his speech pertaining to
this matter, is not in opposition to the aforementioned quotes of the scholars due to the fact
Shaykh al-Fawzaan only intends to criticise those who say the sunnah does not return back to
the fact that all of it is revelation, as he rebuked that statement in his sharh of Masaail alJaahiliyyah (226) where he said: ...And the statement of the one who said verily the sunnah is
not revelation from Allah rather it is merely Ijtihaad from the messenger
Likewise on the old audio clip for Shaykh Fawzaan - which Spubs are deceiving the public to be
new - , therein Ash-Shaykh al-Fawzaan said: ...And as for the affairs of the legislation, then
they are tawqeefee...

The Shaykh clarified what he intended by the word tawqeefee, as he said right after it: they are
revelation from Allaah...
So Shaykh al-Fawzaan only intends to criticise those who say the sunnah does not return back
to the fact that all of it is revelation.
And as for Shaykh Yahyas speech then it is as the brother Husayn al-Hajooree said: ...the
Shaykh's speech; that which affirms that the Sunnah is restriction to the texts and success
granted from Allh, his speech returns back to the fact that all of his Sunnah is revelation, either
restricted to the texts or direction from Allh as you can see...
The aforementioned source, print daarul baseerah.
Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al 'Uthaimeen said regarding the explanation of Allah's
statement: " And whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah..."
And then there is an issue. Is it upon the Messenger (CC C C C CC C C C CC C C C )to make Ijtihaad? The
answer: Yes. his sunnah is of two types. That which is based on Ijtihaad and that which is based
on revelation..."

CC CC CCCC CC CC )CCCC CCCC CC CC _ CC _CC CC CCCC CC

) :80 (

:
Shaykh Rabee' Ibn Haadee Al-Madkhalee - May Allah distance him from the Shayaateen from
mankind - mentioned in his treatise: explanation of the Hadeeth; "The Religion Is Advice"
All of the Sunnah or most of it is revelation, Allah glorified and exalted be He said in praise of
the messenger may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family:

nor does he speak of (his own) desire; it is only a revelation revealed [An-Najm 3-4]
Abdullah Bin 'Amr Bin Al-'Aas used to write everything that he heard from the prophet - may the
peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family -, so the Quraish forbade him from
doing so and said: Is it that you write everything that you hear whilst the messenger of Allah may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family- is but a human that talks
whilst he is angry and whilst he is joyful? He said: So I refrained from writing and mentioned it to
the Messenger of Allah - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - so
he indicated with his finger towards his mouth and he said: Write, for by The One in who's hand
my soul is in, nothing exits from it (i.e. my mouth) except it is truth

[footnotes by Fawaaz Al-Jaza'iree: Reported by Ahmed and Ibn Abee Shaybah and Abu
Dawood and Ad-Daarami, and the Hadeeth is Saheeh]
And the verse is how you have heard it...:

nor does he speak of (his own) desire; it is only a revelation revealed [An-Najm 3-4]
...And the Hadeeth coincides with the verse
The Sunnah, if it is not all revelation, then most of it is revelation that was revealed, and from
that (revelation) is the Ahadeeth Al-Qudsiyyah... end of that which was intended from the quote
Spubs stated: And as for the bold statement that "we do not take the saying of anyone, even the
Messenger, except with proof," this was made by one of the followers of al-Hajuri and affirmed
by al-Hajuri, and this is a type of boldness and disrespect of the Messenger of Allaah
(sallallaahu alayhi wasallam),
This is a ludicrous crime by Spubs, from several angles:
Firstly: the speech of the writer has been altered and distorted, whereas the exact speech of the
writer will be mentioned below.
Secondly: the writer consciously marked his speech pertaining to his sentence ...this is the
messenger of Allah... with an arabic semicolon (i.e. )to separate between the aforementioned
sentence and the sentence after it.
Thirdly: as the saying goes CC C C C C C

CC C C C C C CC C C C C C ( the imposition of a statement is not a

statement - on its own -), as you may notice that some great scholars generally praised the
book of Abul Hasan al-Maribee entitled (As-Siraaj Al-Wihaaj) while it was later clarified by
Shaykh Rabee and others the errors of that book however such errors was not ascribed to
those great scholars nor said that they affirmed such errors!!! Due to the possibility that they
may have browsed through the book briefly, or browsed through the majority of it or other than
that from the legitimate excuses.
Fourthly: in what spubs distributed that ash-Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan spoke against the
statements of Shaykh Yahya, therein it was stated in the question posed to Shaykh al-Fawzan
regarding the so called statements of Shaykh Yahya:
...says that the saying of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and whoever is less than
him is not accepted except with an acceptable evidence...
The below refutation by Husayn al-Hajooree regarding Arafaats statement pertaining to this
issue will show the reader this ludicrous crime by spubs was all built upon deception and
trickery.

Arafaat said: I say: look at the ignorance of this writer! Is the writer and the one giving an
introduction for him ignorant that the Messenger does not speak except the truth, and he does
not say except the truth, may my mother and father be sacrificed for him. The messenger does
not say or do (anything) which is in relation to the religion except (that which is in accordance) to
revelation from Allh the Most High. And look at the repulsiveness of his statement his
statement is not accepted except with a proof!! Or (with a) justifiable evidence!!
The Noble Brother Husayn al-Hajooree said: I say: Firstly, (about) your statement: And look at
the repulsiveness of his statement: his statement is not accepted except with a proof!! Or
(with a) justifiable evidence!!, i.e. the statement of the Prophet , then this is a lie against him
(i.e. the writer of this article), or (it is the case that) you are purposely trying to act like you do
not understand correctly (in order to) deceive (others), that is because the brother said: this
is the messenger of Allh , and at this point the speech of the brother ended, and the
meaning of it is- this is the messenger of Allh who had said what had preceded, then he said:
as for other than him i.e. other than the Prophet . - And the letter Faa (corresponding to:
'as for') in his statement: Fa Man1 is Istinaafiyyah (A faa used for renewing a sentence).
(Then he said) his statement is not accepted except with a proofat the same time we have
reverence for the one that says this, if he is from the scholars of the Sunnah, his
statement is not accepted except with a proof, and this is something that every Muslim
knows, the fact that the statement of the Messenger of Allh is a proof and an evidence (in
itself), Allh the most high says:

And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad ) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids
you, abstain (from it), and fear Allh. Verily, Allh is Severe in punishment. (Al-Hashr 59:7)
And he also said:

And let those who oppose the Messenger's (Muhammad ) commandment (i.e. his Sunnah legal
ways, orders, acts of worship, statements, etc) beware, lest some Fitnah (disbelief, trials,
afflictions, earthquakes, killing, overpowered by a tyrant, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be
inflicted on them. (An-Nur 24:63)
And other than that from proofs.
(So the term) 'FaaHadha' is from the things that connect (the sentences together) by word and
separates (the sentences) by meaning, a Master project has been authored concerning this
(subject), which is entitled: (That which is Connected by Word and is Separated by Meaning in
the noble Quran), from Surah Yaseen to the end of the noble Quran, and read what As-Suyooti,
may Allh have mercy upon him, has clarified concerning this subject in Al-Itqaan, page 276/1
Daar Al-Hadeeth print.

Secondly: Not every article that the Shaykh gives an introduction for becomes one of his
statements, because perhaps he may flick through an article quickly, or flick through majority of
it and then give permission for its distribution, otherwise impose this imposition upon those that
had given an introduction to the book of Abul-Hasan (As-Siraaj Al-Wihaaj) due to what is in it
from error, ...
Abu Khadeejah stated: He falsely accused the Sahaabah (radhi Allaahu 'anhu) of initiating the
bid'ah of irjaa.
This fabrication was originated in the fitnah of Abul Hasan al-Maribee; almost ten years ago,
Abu Khadeejah transferred it into his "gun Barrel" without ascribing it to his exemplars and
thought his hands had become filled with attainment against Shaykh Yahya.
The Noble Brother al-Husayn al-Hajooree, may Allah reward him, stated in his refutation on the
fabrications of Arafaat. I say: Speech has preceded concerning this in the article: The
statements of Ash-Shaykh Yahya in what he was criticised for from affairs of which the following
is the summary of: This is from among the fabrications that he has been accused with, he
merely narrated from Ibn Abil-Izz Al-Hanafee, may Allh the most high have mercy upon him in
his explanation of At-Tahaawiyyah, page 324 print Al-Maktab Al-Islaami, without any addition
or decrease, and neither did he accuse the honourable companion with that, may Allh be
pleased with him, for he (i.e. Ash-Shaykh Yahya) said: Abil-Izz said: Indeed the doubt that had
come upon the Murjiah had occurred to some of the earlier ones,...and they are Qudaamah bin
Abdullah (his name is actually Qudaamah Bin Madhoon) and his companions to end of the
quote.
So they became overjoyed (thinking that they could defame ash-Shaykh Yahya) by this
statement and added some words to it!! From them is their statement: The first one to profess
Al-Irjaa was Abdullah Bin Madhoon and in another narration of theirs Uthmaan Bin Madhoon,
and from them is their statement: Indeed there are from the Sahaabah those that fell into AlIrjaa and other than that from statements that are based upon the narrating of lies and
fabrications. And all of these statements are accusations upon him (Shaykh Yahya), that which
the narrator is incapable of affirming from a tape or a book, except perhaps narrating from
something that is based upon Qeel1 and what will make you come to know what Qeel is?
And Ash-Shaykh Yahya, may Allah the most high grant him success, rebukes all of these
statements as we have heard from him a long time ago, the most that the Shaykh had within his
speech which is actually affirmed is that he quoted from Imaam Abil-Izz, may Allah the most
high have mercy upon him, especially the fact that he was teaching the explanation of AtTahaawiyyah (at the time of saying this statement), so he is merely quoting here and not saying
(it from himself) and he was merely relaying speech from an Imaam (at the point of when he
was reading this) not finding faults.
And since some time ago, perhaps a year ago, he looked into this issue (deeper) and refrained
from engaging in it, and some of his students gathered a compilation (of narrations concerning
the affair) at the time and read the summary of it to him (i.e. Ash-Shaykh Yahya), so this student
had concluded that this statement of Imaam Ibn Abil-Izz, may Allah the most high have mercy
upon him, is incorrect and that he (Imaam Ibn Abil-Izz) had erred in his relaying of it from
Shaykh Al-Islam, may Allah the most high have mercy upon him (return back to Majmoo AlFataawa, volume number 11, page 403 and that which is before it). So he (Ash-Shaykh Yahya)

retracted from this statement, especially (seeing) that he had researched and then ordered his
students to look into the chains of these narrations, then it had become clear that many of the
additional wordings and narrations were not affirmed! Despite this, these people are still
becoming overly rejoiced with their lies, exaggerations and distortions, to the extent that they
have extracted the issues from the taking place of research, looking into (affairs), deeming
issues to be correct and wrong to the dictionary of revilements, fountain of lying and a sea of
defamation!!

Say (O Muhammad to mankind): "Each one does according to Shakilatihi (i.e. his way or his
religion or his intentions, etc.), and your Lord knows best of him whose path (religion, etc.) is
right." (Al-Isra 17:84)
A Side Note: Ibn Abil-Izz said in his Sharhu of At-Tahaawiyyah : ...in opposition to the Murji'ah,
whereas their (i.e. the Murjiahs) doubt, had occurred to some of the earlier ones... (page 252,
print Daarul Gadd al-Jadeed)
Ash-Shaykh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaami , may Allah have mercy upon him, quoted the
aforementioned statement of Abil-Izz then commented saying:
From the Sahaabah (radhi Allaahu 'anhum) rather from the foremost to accept to Islam, due to
their misunderstanding of the verse and their misinterpretation.
As found here in audio form in the Shaykh's explanation of Sharhu At-Tahaawiyyah .
So lets see if Spubs are going to attack ash-Shaykh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaami, as they
attacked Ash-Shaykh Yahya???
Spubs stated: He falsely accused some of the Sahaabah (radhi Allaahu 'anhum) of participating
in the killing of Uthmaan (radhi Allaahu anhu)."
Why has the criticism of Spubs pertaining to this statement not come except after ash-Shaykh
Yahya removed that statement from the new print of his book almost seven years ago, does that
not prove that they hold tight to moss???
The Noble Brother Husayn al-Hajooree, may Allah reward him, said: I say: The Shaykh, may
Allh preserve him, removed it due to the statement of Shaykh Al-Islaam: secondly, because
the best of the Muslims, not(even) one of them are considered to have shed the blood of
'Uthman, neither did they kill him or order his killing; rather a group from the mischief makers of
the land killed him, mobs from the villages and people of Fitnah... End of his statement.
The historians have mentioned some of the companions that shared in the killing of 'Uthman, as
is in 'Taareekh Al-Madeenah' of Ibn Shabbah and others. So when the Shaykh, may Allh
preserve him, saw that the chains were not authentic, he removed it from the second print, and
the truth is more deserving of being followed. This in itself is knowledge based implementation,
if a ruling is built upon something that is not affirmed and it is known that it is not affirmed, then
the ruling which is built upon it is likewise to be considered not affirmed.

Whereas the noble brother Husayn al-Hajooree has already clarified the doubts pertaining to
this issue in his refutation entitled (The Intelligible Clarification upon Some of the Lies and
Mindlessness of Mustafa Mubram) which is in PDF form here (Translated to English).
Spubs translated the following speech of Shaykh Yahya regarding this matter: I say: This saying
that I say that the Companions participated in the killing of Uthmaan, this occurred becase Ibn
Katheer and a group of the people of knowledge mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr alSiddeeq (radiallaahu anhu), and specifically this one only, then they mentioned this, and we
investigated the issue and found that within (the matter) are (reports) whose chains are not
established and we said, it was in the context of the investigation, not that we actually affirm that
they participating in the killing of Uthmaan, however in the context of the research, in
accordance with what was mentioned by Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaayah wal-Nihaayah and Ibn Sa'd
in al-Tabaqaat, then when Shaykh al-Islaam indicated that the chains of narration are not
established, we did not say this except upon the (basis of) the apparentness of statements. As
for it being said that we speak with this, then never, refuge is from Allaah, the Companions did
not participate in the killing of Uthmaan, rather the Khawaarij killed him.
Then Spubs stated: As for al-Hajuri's claim regarding Ibn Katheer, then this is a lie ,for Ibn
Katheer does not mention that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr was a companion....
Ibn Katheer has mentioned Muhammad bin Abee Bakr from being from the companions, as
found on his statement below: ...it is not authenticated upon any of the companions...however
some of them (i.e. sahaabahs) use to wish that he (i.e. Uthman bin Affaan) removes himself
from the rulership, such as Ammaar bin Yaasir and Muhammad bin Abee Bakr and Amr bin alHamq and other than them
Ref: al-Bidaayah (7/221):
As for what spubs quoted from Ibn Katheer pertaining to this issue, then it was in the following
context ,where Ibn Katheer said: ...The likes of this person( i.e. Abdullah bin Abee Talhah) is
befitting to be considered from the sigaar as-Sahaabah; merely for the reason of him eye
witnessing (the Prophet), for verily they (i.e. some of the scholars of hadeeth) have considered
Muhammad bin Abee Bakr as-Sadeeq from them (i.e. sahaabas), but he was born in the area of
the tree in the time of al-Ihraam during Hajjatul al-Wadaa, so he was (only) present for
approximately a hundred days prior to the passing away of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi
wasallam) while they did not mention that he was brought to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi
wasallam) nor that he saw him, Therefore Abdullah bin Abee Talhah is foremost to be
considered from the sigaar as-sahaabahs than Muhammad bin Abee Bakr, Allah knows best.
So as you can see he is merely affirming the companionship of Abdullah bin Abee Talhah and
proving that he is foremost to be considered from the sigaar as-sahaabahs if Muhammad bin
Abee Bakr is considered from the sigaar as-sahaabee.
Spubs stated: Muhammad bin Abi Bakr did not have companionship with the Messenger of
Allaah and is not affirmed by the Scholars as being counted as a Companion,
Ibn Hajar has mentioned Muhammad bin Abee Bakr in his book (al-Isaabah) along with the
sahaabas and Ibn Abdul Barr and others from the scholars of hadeeth.

While Ibn Katheer mentioned in his aforementioned speech: ...verily they (i.e. some of the
scholars of hadeeth) have considered Muhammad bin Abee Bakr as-Sadeeq from them (i.e.
sahaabas)...
Spubs stated: ...then went on fabricate a lie against Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaah) claiming that
he affirmed this matter when Ibn Katheer said nothing of the sort.
Ash-Shaykh Yahya said in the aforementioned speech of his: "....then they (i.e. Ibn Katheer and
others) mentioned this..."
"...we said, it was in the context of research, not that we ourselves establish that they
participatied in the killing of Uthmaan, rather in the context of research, according to what Ibn
Katheer mentioned in al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah..."
Here Ash-Shaykh Yahya is merely saying that Ibn Katheer and others brought mentioning of it,
(i.e. in the context of research not actually affirming it).
Whereas even Spubs stated this, where they said: ...that Ibn Katheer himself after mentioning
what some of the historians mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr participated in the killing of
Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu)"
Spubs stated: ...and he began to throw the blame upon the Scholars (like Ibn Katheer, alDhahabi, Ibn Hajar, Ibn Sa'd and others), making it appear that this is what they mentioned and
he merely spoke on the basis of that.
As for al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, Ibn Sa'd and others then have indeed brought mentioning of this
matter in some of their books, as been made clear on this PDF here.
Spubs stated: ...where he removed this section from his book without any clarification or
repentance and without any explanation as to why he removed that section.
This statement of Spubs reminds us of the following statement of Mubram where the Noble
brother Husayn al-Hajooree already clarified:
Mubram said: And he has been sufficed by removing the passage from his book, and printing it
again without repentance (for what he had previously said)
Husayn al-Hajooree commented saying: I say: Oh you small ignoramus, if an 'Aalim says that a
Hadeeth is affirmed or that it lacks affirmation, due to its fame or by way of Ijtihaad, and then is
mistaken in regards to that, or he deems the one who quoted it as being reliable. Then if the
opposite of what he said becomes clear to him, is repentance incumbent upon him in that
instance?!! Or is it sufficient for him to turn towards to that which became clear to him regarding
that Hadeeth, just as Imaam Al-Waadi'ee did when quoting Hadeeth which he thought to be
authentic, then their defects became apparent to him so he moved them from his Saheeh
Musnad to his book Defective Hadeeth. And likewise as Al-Imaam Al-Albaanee did - may Allah
have mercy upon him when he retracted from Hadeeth that he had judged with authenticity or
deemed them to be weak, then the opposite of that became manifest to him (i.e. that he had
erroneously graded the Hadeeth), as is in the book Taraaji'aat Al-'Alaamatil-Al-Albaanee
Feemaa Nassa 'Alayhaa Tasheehan wa Daafan, and (also) many others from the Imaams that

were before them. Then if this is incumbent upon him (to repent), then revise that for us Oh you
thorough investigator of the sources!!
As for mankind, they repent to Allah glorified and exalted be He, and seek his forgiveness from
that which they have knowledge of from their sins, and from that which they do not have
knowledge of. How excellent is this commendable act, the messenger of Allah said: By Allah, I
seek forgiveness from Allah and I repent to Him more than seventy times a day. It was
extracted by Al-Bukhaaree from the path of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him. And in
Saheeh Muslim on the authority of Al-Agharr Al-Mazanee, may Allah be pleased with him: The
messenger of Allah said: Oh you people, repent to Allah, for verily in one day I repent to Allah
more than one hundred times.
A Side Note: Why has Spubs not ascribed such an error to Ash-Shaykh Muqbil ,while he has in
fact given an introduction to the aforementioned book and praised it, or does spubs erroneous
principle only apply for Shaykh Yahya???
Br. Moosa added: Now let me put the exact statement of Ibn Katheer in Arabic so that everyone
can see the deception of SPUBS regarding the Suhbah (companionship) of Muhammad Ibn
Abee Bakr.
"C C C CC C C C C C C C C CC C C C C CC C C
C ,CC C C ,C C C C C C C C C ,C C C ,CC C C C C C
,"
Bidayah Wan Nihayah (page 1116 Bait Al Afkaar Ad Duwaleeyah)
Translation: As for what some mention regarding some of the companions giving him
('Uthmaan) up and being pleased with his murder then this is not authentic from any one of the
companions. Rather all of them disliked it and cursed those who did it. But some of them wished
that he removed himself from leadership such as 'Ammar Ibn Yasaar, Muhammad Ibn Abee
Bakr, and 'Amr Ibn Himq and other than them.
Shaykh Mohammed Bin Saalih Al-'Uthaymeen mentioned in his book: 'Sharh Nuzhatin-Nadhr
Fee Tawdeeh Nukhbatil-Fakhar' Dar-Al-Athaar print page 250
In explanation of the statement of Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr regarding who is classed as a companion
Al-Haafidh said: "he is the one who met the prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be
upon him and his family - whilst believing in him and died upon Al-Islaam, even if he feel into
apostasy according to that which is most correct.
Shaykh Al-'Uthaymeen said: "his statement [whilst believing in him] meaning: (believing) in the
messenger - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - encompasses
he who believed in him in literally (CC C C C )and he who believed in him by way of judicial valuation
(CCCC C C C C C ). as for the one who believes in literally; then that is clear that it is the one who met the
messenger -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - whilst he was
someone who could differentiate and who possessed intellect and thus believed in him. as for
the one who believed by way of judicial valuation; then it is the one who met the prophet - may

the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family- whilst he did not reach the age of
differentiation, however he was born to two Muslim parents; just like Muhammad Bin Abee Bakr.
For indeed Muhammad Bin Abee Bakr was born in the year of the farewell pilgrimage, and the
messenger- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - was at DhulHulaifah when his mother Asmaa bint 'Umays gave birth to him so therefore there is no doubt
that he did not reach the age of differentiation in the lifetime of the prophet - may the peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - because between his birth and the death of the
messenger - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - was merely
months. Then due to this he is classed as a companion, because he believed in the messenger
- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - by way of judicial valuation
and that incorporates he who believed in the prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be
upon him and his family - before he was even sent as a messenger - before he was informed the example of which is is Waraqah Bin Nawfal, the one whom Khadijah came to with the
messenger of Allah - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - and he
informed him of that which he saw, thus he believed in the messenger - may the peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him and his - and said: ' indeed that was the archangel which came
to Musa'." end of his statement
And Haafidh Bin Ahmed Al-Hakami mentioned in his book Daleel Arbaabil-Falaah LiTahqeeq
Finnil-Istilaah Dar Al-Imaam Ahmed print page 185:
Q-77: "How many categories do the companions split into?
A: Twelve different categories:
. and the twelfth category: he who saw the messenger of Allah whilst he was a small child.
end of his statement
And 'Ali Bin Abdullah At-Tabreezi [Died 746] mentioned in Al-Kaafi under the chapter: categories
of the companions
I say: Abu Abdillah Al-Haafidh made them into twelve categories:
...and the twelfth category: those young children and the infants who saw the messenger of
Allah - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family on the day of the
conquest (of Makkah) and the farewell pilgrimage and other than that, they are counted
amongst the companions, the like of: As-Saaib Bin Yazeed, Abdullah Bin Tha'labah, Abut-Tufayl
'Aamir Bin Waafilah and Abu Juhayfah. end of his statement
and likewise Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr said in the introduction to his well-renowned book, and UmmulBaab, Al-Isaabah Fee Ma'arifatis-Sahaabah:
"and they unrestrictedly refer (to the companions) as he who saw the prophet - may the peace
and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family -, then he is a companion. this is understood
to be the one who reached the age of differentiation, then the one who did not reach the age of
differentiation, then the attribution of sighting (the messenger may the peace and blessings of
Allah be upon him and his family) is not affirmed. Yes, we hold it to be true that if the prophet may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - saw him, then he is classed

as a companion from that angle, as for the angle of narration then he is classed as a Taabi'ee."
end of his statement
As-Sakhaawee said in Fathul-Mugheeth, Maktabah Mustafa Baaz print 4/89:
(speech regarding the companionship of the young one who did not reach the age of
differentiation)
"As for the young one who did not reach the age of differentiation, like Abdullah Bin Al-Haarith
Bin Nawfal and Abdullah Bin Abee Talhah Al-Ansaaree and other than them from those whom
the prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family - made Tahneek
for and supplicated for them, and also Muhammad Bin Abee Bakr As-Sadeeq the one who was
born before the passing away of the prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon
him and his family - by three months and some days, for then even if the attribution of sighting
(the messenger may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) is not correct
then it is true that the prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his
family - saw him. Thus he is a companion from that angle specifically." end of his statement
And 'Alee Bin Abdillah At-Tabreezi mentioned in Al-Kaafi:
"(The definition of a companion and his boundary)
Then Know that they differ in regards to the definition of a companion. For that which is well
known from the way of the people of Hadeeth is that every Muslim who saw the messenger of
Allah may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family then he is from the
companions.
Al-Bukhari said in his book As-Saheeh: he who accompanied the prophet - may the peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him and his family or saw him from amongst the Muslims then he is
from amongst his companions.
The reason why Al-Islaam was made a condition is to remove the one who saw him whilst he
was a disbeliever and then embraced Islaam after he passed away, like Shurayh and Abdullah
Bin Sarjis according to the research concerning them and other than them.
As-Sam'aani mentioned that this is from the linguistic angle and what is apparent is that it
consists of the one whom accompanied him and sat with him for a long period by way of
following him and taking from him.
And he said: and this is the way of the scholars of fundamentals (Al-Usool)
I say: that which is preferred with the majority of scholars of fundamentals is just like (which is
preferred) amongst the people of Hadeeth.
And on the authority of Ahmed Bin Hanbal: indeed the companions of the messenger of Allah may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family is everyone who
accompanied him for a year or a month or a day or an hour or he who saw him, then he is
(classed as being) from the companions.

This is taken from the word Suhbah (i.e. companionship), there is no differing in (the
permissibility) of unrestrictedly applying it upon the one who had very little companionship or the
one who had a lot, like the one who visited (for example).
For if a man swore that he did not accompany Zayd, then he has broken that oath if he
accompanied him even for one moment.
For if they say: the companions of Jannah, the companions of Hadeeth, and they only intended
by them he who stuck to Hadeeth with perseverance for a long period, (or if they say) it has
been narrated by Sa'eed Bin Al-Mussayib that he did not count amongst the companions except
for he who was with the messenger of Allah - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him
and his family for a year or two and fought a battle or two with him.
Then we say: if that is affirmed then it is built upon a specific customary (definition) amongst a
certain group. However there is no negligence upon the terminology, it is not permissible to
ascribe that unrestrictedly otherwise it would necessitate that Jareer Bin Abdullah Al-Bajali and
whoever else enters into this with him from those whom are missing this condition is not
counted amongst the companions, whilst there is no differing in him being counted as a
companion.
Then if it is said: does this determine that the newcomer and the eye witness (i.e. saw the
Prophet - may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) is (only) a
newcomer and an eye witness and not a companion?
I say: the intent (is him) not being a companion specifically, meaning one who was constantly in
his presence, and negating that which is specific does not necessitate the negation of that which
is general, and Allah knows best. end of his statement.
Mohammed Bin Shaykh 'Alee Bin Aadam Al-Ethiopi said in his explanation of Alfiyyatus-Suyooti
Ibn Taymiyyah print after mentioning the five different opinions regarding the definition of a
companion, upon arriving at the statement of Sa'eed Bin Al-Musayyib: "Al-'Iraaqi said: this is not
authentic from Ibn Al-Musayyib, for within the chain of narration is Mohammed Bin 'Umar AlWaaqedi, and he is weak in Hadeeth. End of his statement.
This is to know that Spubs do not know what they are speaking about.
More and more SPUBS are exposing themselves to be from those who lie.
Abu Khadeejah stated: He falsely accused Uthmaan bin Affaan (radhi Allaahu 'anhu) of
innovating into Islaam
This is a blatant lie upon ash-Shaykh Yahya, whereas ash-Shaykh Yahya stated in his book
(Ahkaamul Jumah) in the year 2002: Some of the stubborn ones may say: if you indeed say
this (first) athaan is an act of innovation, so was Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, an
innovator by performing that?
We say, may Allah forbid, for verily Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, was a rightly guided
caliph...however he performed an ijtihaad...Uthman was mistaken in this ijtihaad of his, so he is
rewarded for his ijtihaad and for his good intention...

Page 315, print: Sharqain.

This fabrication against Ash-Shaykh Yahya has been clarified in depth as found on this PDF
Form here (Translated in English).
Also Ash-Shaykh Muqbil, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Not every person of innovation
is an innovator, for 'Uthmaan, may Allah be pleased with him, ordered with the first Adhaan of
Az-Zawraa'1, and if Abdullah Bin 'Umar entered a Masjid that the first Adhaan was being called
in he would abandoned it and say: Verily it is a Masjid of innovation. Nevertheless, he did not
say that 'Uthmaan is an innovator, rather 'Uthmaan made Ijtihaad, so whoever comes after
'Uthmaan, and the proof becomes apparent and he (still) blindly follows 'Uthmaan upon this (i.e.
the first Adhaan), then he is to be regarded as an innovator because: blind following in itself is
an innovation.
[Ghaaratul-Ashritah 2/99]
Spubs stated:...he claims and Abu Dhar al-Ghifaree was a Takfeeree"
This fabrication was refuted almost ten years ago, let me quote below what was said regarding
this false accusation against Shaykh Yahya at that time:
We say, this, may Allah grant you success, is a great fabrication and a dangerous form of
ignorance, he did not say it and the one that narrated this to you is incapable of ascribing it to a
book or a tape, that is if he has with him a truthful narration, and there is no might or strength
except with Allah. How is this so? When the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah in that which relates to
sinning is well known, and he has a illustrious defence of the honourable companion; Abu Dharr,
may Allah be pleased with him, in his book: Radiance upon the Book; the rectification of the
Ummah (page 565-568 under the 83 Hadeeth) Daar Al-Aasimah print, which he authored more
than five years ago (before 1418 i.e. 1996).
Spubs stated:...as was al-Barbahaaree affected by a takfiri mentality.
That was not the exact statement of Ash-Shaykh Yahya, rather ash-Shaykh Yahya mentioned
what Ash-Shaykh Muqbil stated:
Ash-Shaykh Muhammad bin Hizaam, may Allah preserve him,said that he personally heard ashShaykh Muqbil say: Al Imaam Al-Barbahaari had some statements of extreme takfeer in his
book Sharhus Sunnah, so I do not allow anyone to teach it here (damaaj) except ash-Shaykh
Yahya al-Hajooree, due to these statements of extreme takfeer End of quote.
Also al-Imaam Hamad bin A'teeq, may Allah have mercy upon him, who is from the great
scholars of Najd, has made a tahtheeb, meaning an abridged and rectified version to the book
Sharhus Sunnah,whereas he erased the likes of those statements and this version has been
published and is present with us.
Abu Khadeejah stated: Yahyah al-Hajooree falsely claimed that the Sahaabah who fought at
Badr sinned twice! This was in his false tafseer of an Aayah in Soorah Aali 'Imraan.

Ash-Shaykh Yahya used the word "disobeyed" as found in the verse 152 of Soorah Aali 'Imraan,
where Allah, The Most High said:

C C C C C CC C C CC CC C CC C

Which the translation is: "And Allah did indeed fulfil His Promise to you when you were killing
them (your enemy) with His Permission; until (the moment) you lost your courage and fell to
disputing about the order, and disobeyed after He showed you (of the booty) which you love..."
Whereas Ash-Shaykh Yahya uttered the word (the battle) of Badr which was a slip of the tongue
,as Shaykh Yahya himself stated in a previous tape that he intended the word (the battle) of
Uhud, as this was clarified prior to the attacks of Spubs.
If Spubs are building their attacks upon statements based of the slip of tongue then let them
attack their Shaykh Ubayd al-Jabiree where he said:
...This has many examples, as the likes of the captives of (the battle) badr, for verily Allah azza
wajal consulted the companions, he consulted Abu Bakr and Umar...
As you notice Ubayd al-Jabiree uttered that Allah azza wajal consulted the companions which
is an erroneous statement, however what is understood that it was a slip of the tongue whereas
Ubayd al-Jabiree intended the Messenger of Allah, so are Spubs going to attack their Shaykh
Ubayd al-Jabiree upon this slip of the tongue???
As for the matter if "IS IT APPROPRIATE TO SAY THE FOLLOWING PHRASE: THE
COMPANIONS DISOBEYED ALLAH IN THE BATTLE OF UHUD?"then this was clarified in the
following audio by Ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree (Translated to English):
Abu Khadeejah stated: He claimed Qaabeel the son of Aadam was a kaafir apostate!
This is another deception from Abu Khadeejah, which has already been clarified that Shaykh
Yahya al-Hajooree is merely saying similar to what some of the scholars have said:
Al-Maawardee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: There is a difference of opinion if (i.e.
Qaabeel the son of Aadam) was a disbeliever when he killed his brother or he was merely a
wrong doer, some have said he was a disbeliever and others have said rather he was an evil
man, wrong doer.
Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

(
) .
...That he (i.e. Qaabeel the son of Aadam) was not a disbeliever when he made a sacrifice
however he disbelieved (i.e. apostated) afterwards...

Such quotes have been clarified prior to the attacks of Spubs, as found on this thread: http://
aloloom.net/vb/showthread.php?t=17533
This matter with no doubt is a matter of a difference of opinion between some of the past
scholars, whereas if Shaykh Yahya or others from the modern scholars were to select an
opinion (in search of the truth) from these opinions then he should not be called a hadaadee for
that!!!