Al Mustaqeem Publications

al-Mustaqeem Publications
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Home
Comments
Our Mission
Islamic Thought In the Modern Era of the Islamic Awakening
November 15, 2008
Your Revolutionary Source For Islamic Thought

Posted by islamthought under Uncategorized
Comments Off
We here at al-Mustaqeem Publications are on a campaign to disseminate proper Islamic knowledge and
material according to the thoughts and methodology of the classical orthodox sunni scholars of Islam
who traversed upon the way of the righteous predecessors of the first three generations of the Muslim
Nation.
Our efforts in this campaign is to ensure proper Islamic knowledge is distributed to both Muslims and
non Muslims and to increase Islamic awareness among both parties while recyclying misnomers or any
other distortions that have been alledged in the name of Islam from various groups, political factions,
think tanks, and any other organization that seeks as its endeavor to present Islam in a light other than
the way it is to be understood.
Please understand that we at al-Mustaqeem Publications are the alternative media. We are in direct
contrast to every other viewpoint that is plastered within much of the media outlets. We seek as part of
our endeavor in furthering the cause and advancement of disseminating correct Islamic knowledge and
issues thus causing us to be an alternative source for the overwhelming ideological attack that the
Muslim nation faces from those of the non muslim world, and those within the Muslim nation. If content
concerning a particular issue seems to be one sided, it should be understood that our information as a
whole acts as a counterbalance to the already existing conventional wisdom that has and continues to be
a contaminant in the overall reporting of events and issues common in most of the western world.
To preserve the purity of content within each article, we have formed a seperate page for comments for
anyone interested to comment on a topic. Please refer to the Comments page and adhere to the
stipulations therein.
For access to discussions concerning the topic of Islamic polemics between Islamic thought and western
thought and other additional research material into different subjects, one can utilize our forum at
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/
August 16, 2010
A Reply to A Pseudo Mutakalim, Abdullah bin Haamid Ali on

http://islamthought.wordpress.com/
Page 1 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Allahs Speech
Posted by islamthought under Asharis, Creed of Islam
Comments Off
In his work The Speech and Word of Allah (Kalm): In Light of Traditional Discussions.
Abdullah Haamid Ali basically tries to assert in this article that Scholars such as Shaikh al-Islam Ibn
Taymiyah borrowed his beliefs from the Neo-Platonic philosophers and thus claims the following
Ustaadh Abdullah Haamid Ali says
Quote:
Salafis likely dont realize what their view necessitates in that it results from it that Allah has two
attributes of speech as opposed to one. One of them is an attribute of His divine essence, which is
without beginning as His essence is. And the other is an attribute of action or just an act of creation
done by the Creator, which must be created, since it is something that occurs outside of His being.
Unfortunately, the Salafis insist that sounds, letters, and words can be without beginning in spite of the
fact that one letter precedes another, which clearly indicates that they are time-specific.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Slih Al-Uthaymn says after mentioning that Allah has two types of attributes,
which are those of the divine essence (dht) and those that are actions (fil):
Additionally, the attribute may happen to be of the essence and an action [dhtiyya filiyya] at the same
time from two different regards, like speech (kalm). It is while considering its origin an attribute of the
essence, since Allah has everlastingly and continues to be one who speaks (mutakallim). And while
considering the individual incidents of speech (hd al-kalm) it is an attribute of action, since speech
pertains to His will. He speaks when and with what He pleases
Firstly, the above in bold is false. Allahs Attribute of action comes from Allahs Essence = not created
while creation is something separate from Allahs Essence.
As for Allahs speech coming out/emerging from Allahs Essence, this was stated by a number of the
pious Salaf:
Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah said in Khalq Afal al-Ibad :
!"# %& '(# )*+ ./0 1 34 678%9 :4 ;<=! ?>; A>B 1 3>C .D"4 :B GH+ )I'J 'J
;MN9 O"P Q"# !8%RP SA4 !"# !8%R+ !"# %& %H4 SA4! 4 )AJ
!B'UH=! 4'?V WXY Z %DR4] \[ #
Partial translation
Didnt the Quran come out/emerge from Him ((kharaja minhu), so it (Quran) coming out/emerging from
Him (khurujuhu minhu) is not how it comes out/emerges from you if you
comprehend.[1]
Imam Uthman bin Saeed Ad-Darimi rahimahullah said in Naqd Ad-Darimi
;><9 !0 %& !"# [4! #^P %H4
Page 2 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
And the Quran is His Speech that emerged from Him (minhu kharaja), and with it,He Spoke[2]
Yet, according to the stated Aristotelian philosophy which Abdullah Haamid concedes to as the proper
Islamic madhaab in doctrine, he claims that if something happens beyond Allahs actual Self, even if it is
an action from Him, then it must be created, which is the same reasoning that the Jahmiyyah employed
to insinuate that the Quran is created. So here, we see a clear a clear opposition between the orthodox
creed of Imaam al-Bukharee and Haafidh Uthmaan bin Saeed, and to that extension, the ummah, versus
the heterodox creed as espoused by Abdullah Haamid who imitates the stated advocacy and legacy of the
philosophers within the gown of traditionalism
Secondly, this is the reason for his error because he misconstrued what is normally articulated. If we
examine Ibn Uthaymeens statement in light of simple reason and objectivity based on his own quote,
this is what he actually says
Additionally, the attribute may happen to be of the essence and an action [dhtiyya filiyya] at the
same time from two different regards, like speech (kalm). It is while considering its origin an attribute
of the essence, since Allah has everlastingly and continues to be one who speaks (mutakallim). And while
considering the individual incidents of speech (hd al-kalm) it is an attribute of action, since speech
pertains to His will. He speaks when and with what He pleases[3]
The underlined portion represents Ustaadh Abdullah Alis misconception for he viewed or interpreted
that phrasal clause as if Ibn Uthaymeen was speaking about two attributes.
The first repelling of this misnomer is the fact that he started off by saying what he said in bold i.e.
THE attribute meaning singular. He is speaking of the attribute of speech and not that Allah has two
attributes of speech or two separate Attributes.
The second repelling of his not so clever interpretation is the fact that the two sectors of Allahs speech
that Ibn Uthaymeen was commenting upon is merely
1. Ability (that stems from His Will by which He is able to speak whenever He wishes)
2. The Action (whereby Allah becomes al-Faail (the Actor) thereof when He speaks. This is because in
the language of the Arabs, whenever there is a filun (action), then there must be a Faail (an actor))
What Abdullah Ali is trying to do is to try to make the salafi belief as preposterous as his own belief by
insinuating that our belief stems from neo-platonic kalaam. That is a perfect example of the pot calling
the kettle black.
In order to understand this belief, let us implement the principle the ulema are known for using, that
being a thing is made known by its opposite
So in this case, let us contrast this belief with his own jahmi creed.
The Jahmi creed by which Abdullah Haamid Ali subscribes to, claiming it as the creed of ahlu-sunnah,
entails the belief of the first part and negates the belief of the second part.
In other words, they subscribe to the words of Ibn Uthaymeen by saying that It is an attribute stemming
from His Iraada (Will), but they deny that Allah has the Qudrah to ACTUALLY speak when He
wishes because doing such an act automatically regulates Allahs action as created, according to their
own flawed and conjectural delusions that their school of thought was known to apply upon Allah.
Therefore from this disastrous belief of kufr, when being pressed to answer for how Allah spoke to
Musa, the Quran, and whatever else, they had to come up with a scapegoat argument; that argument
Page 3 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
being kalam nafsi. So now we all know that the doctrine of Kalam Nafsi is nothing but a scapegoat
argument. However, that doctrine only cornered them more into the world of kufr. That is because Allah
now has to go to His ATM Kalam Account, make a withdrawal from the kalaam that subsist within
Himself (hence Nafsihi as they say) and then form it in a way that the creation can be affected by it
positively.
The modern day Jahmis are willing to go through all of these loopholes for the sake of the preservation
of their Aristotelian dialectic principles that is deceptively labeled as tanzih (purifying). Because
affirming that Allah actual is a mutakalim as every Muslim concedes to, then that means in their warped
and corrupted logic that
1. It entails sound (and thus created)
2. Entails letters (and thus created)
3. Entails a temporal happening within a point of time; i.e. hadath (and thus created).
So each one of these in their pathetic madhaab entails kufr, and to merely affirm that Allah actually
speaks entails a megakufr as it would engulf all three forms of what they view as kufr.
Now, to continue with the brilliance of Abdullah Ali, he says
Quote:
Upon close reflection, it is revealed that the opinion of the Salafis is not much different from what the
Mutazila say in that Allahs speech is one of His acts, not a quality of His essence. The only difference
is that the Mutazila are shown to be more reasonable by denying that Allah has an eternal attribute
found with His being referred to as speech, since they deny the possibility of something being without
beginning and created at the same time.
The first claim he made here was to insinuate that our creed is almost a match to that of the Mutazilah.
In what regard? He uses as proof from this claim that both (mutazilah and salafis) say that Allahs
speech is one of His acts and not a quality of His Essence
However, that is extremely funny, so much so that I could only conclude that this pseudo Jahmi is either
to dumb or a liar as he made this claim because if we review his own quote of Ibn Uthaymeen, Ibn
Uthaymeen affirms the attribute to be that of the Essence TWICE in the same quote
1. the attribute may happen to be of the essence
2. It is while considering its origin an attribute of the essence,
I find it strange for Abdullah Ali to make this claim that salafis DO NOT consider the Attribute of
Allahs Speech (kalaam) to be from that of His essence when the belief of the salafis is exactly the
opposite.
To continue with the stifling words of Abdullah Haamid Ali, he says
Quote:
All of this must be considered with regard to the similarities between the two sects, since if Uthaymn
said speech pertains to His will. He speaks when and with what He pleases, then the true attribute
of Allah is not speech. It is His will, while speech is merely an action that originates from Allahs will.
In this quote of his, he tries to befuddle the truth with a kalaam inconsistency. The reason he makes Ibn
Uthaymeens words obsolete is because in his madhaab, the attribute of kalaam is not connected with
Page 4 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
His Will. If that is not what they have articulated, then it sure was pointed out here. His madhaab fails to
realize that to actually be a mutakalim, the person being described as mutakalim has to actually speak
OR AT LEAST HAVE THE ABILITY to speak. The moniker of Mutakalim cannot be applied except
with the ACTION and ABILITY to speak. However in the jahmi madhaab, the moniker of Mutakalim
is applied to Allah in the format that Allah within His OWN SELF is constantly speaking within His own
self. In other words, He is never shutting up in His Own Self but he cannot ACTUALLY speak, but He
merely makes a withdrawal from His Kalaam account called Nafsi and so whenever He decides to
Speak, all Allah does is to make a withdrawal of His Speech that subsist within Himself (i.e. Kalam
Nafsi) to whomever He is trying to address rather than ACTUALLY speaking to them like Allah did
with Musa.
So this Abdullah Ali attempts to render our creed as a non affirmation of kalaam but an affirmation of
His Will while rendering His entire Attribute of Kalaam as merely being an action which can only make
sense to a mind that lives in the above world that I have just described.
So Abdullah Haamid continues
Quote:
Another Salafi shaykh known as Muhammad Khall Harrs states after declaring that Allahs attributes
are of two different categories (attributes of the essence and attributes of action); he states about the
latter:
The second (category) is Attributes of Action to which His will and power pertain at all times. And the
individual incidents of those attributes of actions occur by His will and power, even though He has
always been characterized as doing them without beginning; meaning that their general category (naw)
is without beginning (qadm), while their individual occurrences (afrd) are created and emergent
(hditha). So He Glory to Him has everlastingly been a doer of whatever He wants. And He has
everlastingly and continues to say, speak, create, and manage all affairs. And His actions occur one by
one in accord with His wisdom and His will.
[Sharh Aqda al-Wsitiyya li Shaykh al-Islm Ibn Taimiyya: Dr al-Fikr]
So here, Harrs, acknowledges the created and uncreated act of Allah by stating that their general
category (naw) is without beginning (qadm), while their individual occurrences (afrd) are created and
emergent (hditha).
Firstly, the bold part is from the translator. Shaykh al-Harras rahimahullah did not say created, he said
haditha which Abdullah bin Hamid translated as created, which is not the
intended meaning of the shaikh with the word Haditha. We do not say created but there is nothing in
the aqeedah of ahlu-sunnah that entails hadath as something that is created.
This is because from the creed of the philosophers, of which Abdullah Haamid is the advocate and
proponent of its madhaab, is that everything that is a hadath MUST be created. WE, the people of Islam
and the Sunnah say that may be true or untrue, but its truth can only subsist within the properties of this
world and creation. In other words, you do not accuse Allah or His attributes of being created whenever
HE does a new occurrence LIKE
speaking to Musa
or like
getting angry on the Day of Judgment unlike every before
or
ar-Rahman alal arsh istiwaa
Page 5 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Nor do you try to do back flips in maintaining a cohesive argument by juggling Aristotelian dialectic
with the Islamic itiqaad by negating His attributes or rendering far fetched interpretations so as to keep
in towing line with the madhaab of the philosophers.
So Abdullah continues with is treacherous behavior
Quote:
This conclusion was adopted from Shaykh al-Islm Ibn Taimiyya who borrowed the idea from the NeoPlatonic and Aristotelian philosophers who believed that the universe has no origin. They said, Its
general category is without beginning. But its individual occurrences and particulars are emergent
(hdith) and created.
Here, he performs a satanic lie and an absurd baseless conclusion. The lie is that he subscribes to is that
that Shaykhul-Islam rendered and believed the universe to be eternal. That may be his misconstruing
between that and the issue with infinite regress, for someone like Abdullah Haamid who posses as a
mutakalim, he ought to know the difference between the two as there is a fundamental difference
between holding the position of affirming infinite regress of occurrence VS the eternality of the universe
then he likened his lie with an issue that has no connection, that being the saying of the philosophers
about its general category. because the philosophers were speaking about the universe, and the
subject that is being discussed here is Allahs kalaam, NOT the universe. Here, he is insinuating that Ibn
Taymiyyah borrowed that principle from the philosophers and then applied it to Allah, which in reality is
the hallmark of later day asharism.
Then, finally, Abdullah Haamid ends with a brilliant conclusion
Quote:
This is like saying, the general category of man is uncreated even though each individual person born
in history came to being in a later time. So man is without beginning from one regard and with
beginning from another.
And it is surprising that both Ibn Taimiyya and Harrs would use this type of argument to justify their
belief in the uncreated-created (qadm-hdith) speech of Allah in spite of the fact that the scholars of
Islam have declared the philosophers with this type of thinking to be unbelievers.
Firstly, you could render this qiyaas[4] in a world where Allah and man were the same, however, the
subject at hand i.e. Allah, and man, are different and thus the qiyaas you have made is inapplicable.
Allahs Speech is uncreated and When He speaks with it, He actually speaks whether you dislike the fact
that it is hadath. UNLIKE Allah, man, on anything else, their category does have an origin, and
therefore a beginning. To render a qiyaas like this one is inapplicable even in the world of deductive
reasoning because one of the principles of deductive analytical reasoning is that the two things being
compared is that they must match or have the similar properties. This is why the ulema refuted the
qiyaas of Iblees because when he defied the command of Allah, his qiyaas was in comparing the creation
of man and the creation of himself. And this is the exact same Ibleesic style qiyaas that Abdullah Haamid
Ali has made. However, since he is a follower of one of Ibleess madhaab, then of course it would be
easy for Abdullah Haamid to succumb and resort to such an argument.
Secondly, after reviewing your words created-uncreated I am being forced to apply a greater level of
Page 6 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
skepticism now for you have interpreted hadath as CREATED. Hadath does NOT mean created, it
means new occurrence and your school of thought has philosophically induced from the word that it
means created but in reality this is not what it means. According to this new quote, we now understand
that the Shaykh Muhammad Khalil al-Harris did NOT use the term created rather it was your faulty
logic that deceptively translated the term hadath AS created which is simply untrue academically,
grammatically, and theologically.
Lastly, the scholars of Islam declared the philosophers disbelievers NOT because of this type of
thinking as you claim, but because of your type of thinking, by rendering these attributes, if affirmed, as
being or entailing anthropomorphism. That was why they were made takfeer of. For you to insinuate a
different reason for their takfeer is plain and simple dishonesty.
[1] Khalq Afal al-Ibad
[2] Naqd Ad-Darimi
[3] [Al-Qawid al-Muthla: Idrt al-Buhth al-Ilmiyya wa al-Ift wa Al-Dawa wa al-Irshd p. 25].
[4] Analytical deduction
July 30, 2010
Abu Hasan al-Qushayree on Tafweed: A Reply to an

Ashari Mufawwid
Posted by alboriqee under Asharis, Creed of Islam
Comments Off
Salafi argument
Quote:
the meaning of the word yad when applied to Allah is that it is an attribute of Allah that subsists in His
essence and has performed the function of creating Adam and will perform the function of rolling the
heavens and the earth on the Day of Judgment and has performed other functions. This is a real and
literal attribute in the sense that it exists in reality.
Ashari Mufawwid Argument
Quote:
this is not meeting the conditions of providing a meaning to a word. We also agrees that Allah has a
yad that performs these functions, but that we dont know the meaning of the word yad, for it could be
Allahs power, mercy or something that we dont know.
Mufawwid also said that
Quote:
we negate the literal meaning of the word and by literal we mean an organ.
Page 7 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Salafi response
Quote:
when we affirm literal we mean real in existence and actual.
Muffawid Ashari response
Quote:
We have failed to provide a meaning of the word yad. organ is meaning and not kayfiyyah and that
kayfiyyah has to be related to something we could imagine. So for example, the Prophet said that we
cant imagine what is in store for paradise, yet the Quran talks about rivers. We dont know the
kayfiyyah of the paradise river, but we know its meaning since we could relate it to something that we
know. However, with Allahs yad, then I ask, what are we relating it to?
Conclusive question for Salafis
Quote:
What is the meaning of the word yad when ascribed to Allah? Give me a definition. I always see
Salafis saying that we know the meaning, but not the kayfiyyah, but I never see a Salafi actually
providing the meaning (the only instance I have seen is for istiwaa).
Says Abu Hasan al-Qushayree, the one responsible for the tumult he has caused to the Muslims in the
Islamic history known as Fitnah al-Qushayriyyah
So he says
How is it possible for one to say that there exists in Allahs Book, that which cannot be known by the
creation, and none knows its meaning (tawil) except Allah? Is this not from the greatest of slanders
against prophet-hood, to suggest that the Prophet SallAllahu alaihi wa-sallam did not know the
meaning (tawil) of the texts pertaining to the Attributes of Allah Taala, and called the people to know
what cannot be known? Doesnt Allah say (weve sent it down) in clear Arabic language? Otherwise,
according to what they claim, they should say Allah lied when He said: in clear Arabic language, since
they do not know (the meanings). Otherwise, where is this clearness (as expressed in the Quran)?
If it was in the language of the Arabs, how can he claim that this is something the Arabs do not know?
He also says:
To attribute to the Prophet SallAllahu alaihi wa-sallam that he called to a Lord, described with
Attributes that are incomprehensible, is something heinous, which no Muslim can imagine! For
ignorance with respect to Attributes leads to ignorance with respect to that which is described (i.e.
Allah). And the saying of one who says: His rising is an Attribute of His self, the meaning of which is
incomprehensible; the Hand is an Attribute of His self, the meaning of which is incomprehensible; the
Foot is an Attribute of His self, the meaning of which is incomprehensible is simply camouflaging
modality (takyif), anthropomorphism (tashbih) and a call to ignorance If the opponent now says: The
apparent meanings (dhawahir) have no interpretation (mana) at all, then that is to render these texts
defunct, and there was no benefit in these texts reaching us, for they are all useless, which is
impossible This is also contrary to the Madhab of the Salaf who believed in passing them on upon
their apparent meanings (ala dhawahir).
Page 8 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
recorded in Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin 2/110

My personal address to the Ashari Mufawwid
1. The first contention of the Mufawwid is
Quote:
this is not meeting the conditions of providing a meaning to a word. We also agrees that Allah has a
yad that performs these functions, but that we dont know the meaning of the word yad, for it could be
Allahs power, mercy or something that we dont know.
Then what you are seeking in reality is a hadd i.e. a definition, and in the shariah, there is a difference
between mana (meaning) and hadd (definition).
This is because the apparent meaning of yad is yad, and to quarantine it i.e. define it into one of these
things is providing a hadd for it since the meaning of hadd (definition) in the shariah is
a definition is to include and exclude from the object being defined
What the mufawwid is actually performing here is that he is transforming kayf and passing it on as
mana. If it was Allahs power, Mercy, etc, then Allah would have SAID SO which brings us back to
the statement of al-Qushayree, his own Imaam in his creedal madhaab.
So when he says this is not meeting the conditions for providing a meaning just substitute the word
meaning with kayf and we have a more accurate reality. This is because meanings are known
irrespective of subject, But in the manner in which it is will only be known based on who the subject is
being refered to with such an attribute.
2. The Mufawwid said
Quote:
we negate the literal meaning of the word and by literal we mean an organ
We ask to this Mufawwid, if organ is the meaning of hand, then do you negate the hands of Angels?
Do Angels have organs?
This is the stump that the mufawwid dead ends upon.
The primary meaning of yad is organ WHEN THE SUBJECT IS HUMANS. However, when the
subject is something else, that primary meaning is no longer relevant because the actual subject has
changed.
3. Muffawid contention
Quote:
We have failed to provide a meaning of the word yad. organ is meaning and not kayfiyyah and that
kayfiyyah has to be related to something we could imagine. So for example, the Prophet said that we
cant imagine what is in store for paradise, yet the Quran talks about rivers. We dont know the
kayfiyyah of the paradise river, but we know its meaning since we could relate it to something that we
know. However, with Allahs yad, then I ask, what are we relating it to?
Page 9 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Incorrect. What we have failed to provide is the nature of yad, not meaning. When YAD is being
discussed between a stretch of various SUBJECTS, then saying organ is meaning is an academic
dishonesty because organ, when all subjects are being discussed with regards to yad, is actually
modality (kayfiyyah) and not mere meaning.
Yes, Kayfiyyah has to be related to something we could imagine, but when we have no imagination of
the subject, then we do not negate that there is a kayfiyyah, we just negate the knowledge of it.
Therefore his question
with Allahs yad, then what are we relating it to
is an inapplicable question and it is a question that is equal or similar to the question How did Allah
istiwaa which essentially brings me back to my initial contention which is that what this Muffawwid is
seeking is the modality (kayf) of the Attribute Yad rather than the meaning.
In other words, he is basically saying the same question as the questioner told to Maalik How did Allah
istawaa only with a different choice of words.
We CANT relate it to anything because we have nothing to relate to Allah and we were prohibited from
doing this, and no one on the planet has called our inability to do so as having no meaning for this
makes sense to no one.
lastly
4. Addressing the conclusive question
Quote:
What is the meaning of the word yad when ascribed to Allah? Give me a definition. I always see
Salafis saying that we know the meaning, but not the kayfiyyah, but I never see a Salafi actually
providing the meaning (the only instance I have seen is for istiwaa)
Yad is Yad. Hand. Thats the meaning, just as isawaa ala is rising or ascending. What else is there to say?
This is another problem, the seeker is seeking a hadd (definition) which is different than mana in the
shariah. we are not to define the Attributes because this would constitute going into tawil which may
essential entail tahreef, and tateel, all based on the action of takyeef, which is by asking for a definition
of Yad.
More importantly, definitions that exist in the human experience are definitions pertinent to humans. we
dont have definitions applicable to aliens, angels, jinn, etc. So if we do not have definitions for any of
these creatures, then how in the world could people require us to provide a definition of Yad for Allah
which essentially brings us BACK to the statement of al-Qushayree and the rest of the salaf who used to
say that we affirm them and pass them on WITHOUT MODALITY.
This is our creed and this is our methodology.
July 28, 2010
The Perils of Ghaflah (Heedlessness)

Page 10 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Posted by alboriqee under Sociology, Spirituality

Comments Off
The Perils of Ghaflah
Ali al-Boriqee
!" $%&*)( + ,-./0 $%& ,3 4%5 6 $%8 :;,<" 6 ()*"

><)?! /*8
(<3
,BC3 6 D)E 4F.%& HI"
The most accurate comparative etymological meaning of al-Ghaflah in the English language would be
the term heedlessness. It is a sub-category of wantonness but is oriented more within the realm of faith
with regards to the servants (humans) in relationship to their meeting with their Lord.
Ghaflah is a horrific disease of the heart and is the basis for which most of the various forms of
misguidance throughout humanity have emanated from.
Lexically, heedlessness (Ghaflah) is to be heedless of Allah, particularly, being heedless with regards to
the accountability of our actions. In support of this, Allah says in the Quraan
LNC<Q+ D%ST >U 4V 4W3,IE ,Y-%" CZ[

(The thing) that draws near towards mankind (closer and closer) is their accountability (in reaping what
we have sown with our own hands), and yet they turn away (paying a blind eye) in heedlessness[1],
Unfortunately, ghaflah is an attribute that has become rampant in todays Muslim behavioral pattern so
much so that anyone who raises themselves beyond the yoke of this affliction and into the arena of being
cautious and operating under the cognizant reality of meeting Allah have been deemed by the foolish and
the heedless as an extremist or overbearing harsh or other derogatory terms which neutralize such
a person in such a way that it is depicted of them that they operate in backwardness or my personal
favorite intolerant of others. We as Muslims need to educate ourselves regarding the nature of ghaflah
and to take into consideration the decisions of Allah and His Messenger more seriously.
The Symptoms of Ghaflah
From amongst the symptoms, in fact I would say the ultimate sign of Ghaflah, is taking lightly the orders
of Allah, or His Messenger, or both. There are three different levels of this, one of them (and it is the
lightest form) is nearly excluded from Ghuflah but not absolutely, and is focused on our demeanor and
character of our prophet alaihi salatu salam, the other two are linked to Ghuflah and the most extreme of
them is the basis from which ghaflah resides in.
Allah says in Suratul-Hujaraat in the first two ayaat
4.%& ].)5 Y6 Y Y6 L`Ya"! L5 Y6( d :3 L+e(à f L-+ gdhY" ,WQd ,d
Page 11 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
4Fi<3 CWjB L`",3 !" CWja f e>/Y-" L8 lLU 4FaL8 L<UCa f L-+ gdhY" ,WQd
C<ma f 4Z0 4F",)& n/*a o</"
O you who believe! Make not (a decision) in advance before Allah and His Messenger (!A>B 1 3>C
;>?), and fear Allah. Verily! Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.
O you who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet (;>?! A>B 1 3>C), nor speak
aloud to him in talk as you speak aloud to one another, lest your deeds should be rendered fruitless while
you perceive not.
In these two pivotal ayaat, we can deduce three aspects of taking light of the orders of Allah or His
messenger
1. Raising our voices (this is literally and is linked towards the behavioral etiquette as being ignoble
and an improper characteristic and this is not fully linked to ghaflah but can be a sign of ghaflah
2. Raising our decisions in advance before the decision of Allah and His messenger. This is more
serious in nature and is linked to ghaflah. However, there is one more attribute which is worse than
these preceding two attributes and is the epitome of ghaflah and it can be kufr in Allah. This is
because this characteristic was in regard to advancing an opinion before a shari opinion is
established, but even those who fell into this attribute (once) were all cognizant that once Allah
and His Messenger decree a matter, absolute faith and conviction must be meted out in their
hearts. Ibn Katheer records in his tafseer that the sabab (reason for the cause of the revelation of
this ayah) was due to an incident in which he states that Al-Bukhari recorded that Ibn Abi
Mulaykah said, The two righteous ones, Abu Bakr and Ùmar, almost earned destruction when
they raised their voices before the Prophet who was receiving the delegation of Bani Tamim. One
of them recommended Al-Aqra` bin Habis the member of the Banu Mujashi` while the other
recommended another man. Nafi` (a subnarrator) said: I dont remember his name. Abu Bakr
said to Ùmar, `You only wanted to contradict me, while Ùmar said, Ì did not intend to
contradict you. Their voices then became loud, thereupon Allah the Exalted sent down this Ayah
3. However, what is worse than these two and is the haven for misguidance and the mass production
of ghaflah that entails kufr is to raise our opinions over the decisions of Allah and His
Messenger If Allah corrected the actions of those who merely
1. raised their literal voices or
2. advanced their viewpoints before a revelational command
then what about the ignominy of raising our viewpoint and opinion as being above the view of Allah and
His Messenger.
So how is this connected to Ghaflah? If the mind can allow itself to entertain that their viewpoint must
be adhered to or can allow itself to judge the scriptural ordainments to be irrelevant based on their
reasoning that my opinion is more relevant to my situation, then such a corrupted and defiled soul will
automatically view the ordainments and judgments of Allah or His Messenger as mundane. Since the
wretched person goes on about life under this auspice, he becomes the full embodiment of ghaflah for a
mind that can live with this philosophy cannot be a mind by which their thoughts are reflecting on the
hereafter, much less being mindful of their meeting with Allah.
A practical example of Ghaflah is embodied in much of todays modern day thinking which has
unfortunately become todays conventional wisdom. When people highlight remarks like allow the
people to do what they want. A mind that is convinced that it can do as it is pleased without
repercussions is not only a mind bereft of any intellect, it resides in the crux of ghaflah. This statement is
Page 12 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
only said by a people who are unmindful about the essence and reality of both deeds (actions) and faith,
much less the hereafter. This reality was theoretically and exponentially explained by the greatest of
mankind, Muhammad ibn Abdillah, Abul-Qaasim alaihi salatu salam in a hadeeth narrated by Bukharee
regarding the hadeeth of Safeena.
The example of the one who stands for the Deen of Allah and the one who has left it are like the people
in a boat, some of whom occupy the upper deck and some occupy the lower deck. Whenever those in the
lower deck need water, they have to go to the upper deck to retrieve it. So some of them said, why dont
we make a hole in our deck so we do not harm the people of the upper deck? If the people do not stop
them, they will all fall and be failures, but if they stop them they will all be saved
This Hadith has also been reported in another narration that the prophet (saw) said,
The example of the one who stands for the Hudud of Allah and the one who compromises the Hudud of
Allah
It is Saheeh and has many narrations. The prophet (saw) has given us this parable explaining the reality
of people in the society that they are living in and their role in it.
The Hadeeth mentions the fact that people in any society must live together and put up with each other,
that each people have needs that need to be fulfilled such as the need of the people of the lower deck to
take water. The example of the ship is like people in a society where some people wish to engage in bad
deeds by making a hole in the bottom of the ship and this Hadith explained that the people of the upper
deck MUST either do their duty and stop them or if they ignore them and the crisis, then destruction will
face everybody.
So the Hadeeth teaches us that there is no society free from corruption and each corrupted person
justifies their corruption by any argument which is claimed rational, whether by claiming it is
relieving others of hardship or that it is freedom or modernity. Therefore the people in that society
must prevent them from their corruption and save everybody from the anger of Allah and if they fail to
do so the anger of Allah and punishment will reach everyone. Allah (swt) says
And fear an affliction which may not smite only those of you in particular who are unjust; and know
that Allah is severe in requiting (evil). [EMQ Anfaal: 25]
The Hadeeth says that there are people who want to stand to the Hudud (rights) of Allah and some
people who want to compromise it. Those who compromise the hudood of Allah only put them to
compromise due to their heedlessness of the hereafter, taking light the statements of Allah and His
Messenger which is rooted in ignorance.
Such are the people of Islam and the Sunnah who preserve the rights of Allah in contrast to those who do
not preserve the boundaries in which Allah bound us through His injunctions.
Furthermore, Ibn Masud radhiyallahu anhu narrates that
The believer sees his sins as if he were sitting at the foot of a mountain which he feared would fall upon
him, but the faajir[2] sees his sins as a fly that landed on his nose -he merely waves it away with his
hand.[3]
The Dangers of Ghaflah
I say, the greatest and most eminent threat for someone inflicted with Ghaflah is the delusion paradox in
Page 13 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
which they become residents of, which is that since their minds are heedless of where they are going
thereby they only occupy their minds with this world. Since this is the case, then such people utilize a
form of measuring (of what Allah is pleased with and what He is not) in thinking that the blessings of
material wealth is a sign of Allahs pleasure upon a person. Thus they morph into materialists rather than
remaining muminoon because the basic essence of the muminoon (believers) is that Allah describes
them as to why they are believers in that He explains in some powerful words
4"
:`YZ)%e" (V !.U sd f ,ZF" t"
L`S-d 4V,-[ ,Y)+ HYy" L).`d s.z",3 L-+{d gdhY"
Alif Laam Meem
This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil).
Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them;
The point being that they believe in the unseen as well and they do not operate their lives on the atheistic
premise of reducing reality to only what we can see or perceive.
So regarding this subject, they know and understand that Allahs actions is not restricted to merely this
cursory world perception (hayaatu-dunya).
Allah addressed this warped psyche when He says
4WIS0| V}a ,.0Q(" ,.*"> U ,W3 4W3eh<." Y6( dCd ,)Y0 4Vf f 4W"L+ t/j<a HU
CU,B 4V
So let not their wealth nor their children amaze you (O Muhammad ;>?! A>B 1 3>C); in reality Allahs
Plan is to punish them with these things in the life of this world, and that their souls shall depart (die)
while they are disbelievers.
( _06`4 6? , At-Taubah, Chapter #9, Verse #55)
And the messenger of Allah salallahu alaihi wa sallam has stated
If you see that Allaah is giving a person everything that he wishes whilst you see that that same person is
committing a masiyah (disobedient act) know that Allaah is gradually going to bring him to
punishment.[4]
So ghaflah actually acts as a deceptive veil placed in the eyes of the one afflicted with it. Once it is
veiled from its true vision, it is then locked in into being preoccupied with the glitter of this life as
opposed to what lies in store for us after it.
The Cures
Theoretical (conceptually)
Haafidh Shamsu-Deen Ibnul-Qayyim has laid out a powerful utility in which he highlights the
Page 14 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
conceptual thinking of those who are not afflicted with the disease of heedlessness (ghaflah).
Lusts were granted in abundance to humans, but those who believed in the unseen turned away from
them, while those who follow their lusts were caused to regret.
The first category are those in which Allah says,
L*%S; 4V t "4We3Y ge+ (V $%& t"

which means, they are on (true) guidance from their Lord, and they are the successful. (Surah Baqarah
2:5)
However, the other category, are those to whom Allah says,
L+CjQ+ 4FY0 H.%[ L<YZ)a L%B

which means, (O you disbelievers)! Eat and enjoy yourselves (in this worldly life) for a little while.
Verily, you are the Mujrimun. (Al-Mursalat 77:46)
When the successful ones are aware of the reality of this worldly life being sure of the inferiority of its
degree, they overcame their vain desires for the sake of the Hereafter. They have been awakened from
their heedlessness to remember what their enemies took from them during their period of idleness.
Whenever life becomes bitter, they remember this verse, in which Allah says,
&(La 4Z-B hY" 4F+Ld hV..

which means, This is your Day which you were promised. (Al-Anbiya, 21:103)
Thus, Ibnul-Qayyim is demarcating the salient feature of those who are heedful in contrast to their
counterparts that
1. the successful are successful because they are aware of the reality of this worldly life thereby
being cognizant of the inferiority of this life in contrast with what comes after. And more
importantly,
2. the key and pinnacle aspect that wards off heedlessness is believing in the unseen
As Ibnul-Qayyim denotes in the beginning; for which we had already established previously.
Another cure was rendered by the Messenger of Allah in a powerful hadeeth narrated by Tirmidhee in his
sunan under the Book of Piety (kitabu-zuhd) that
" Y6 L5 ,d ,-%Ù !/-? >U CY [( ,Ù C.yE $%& 4Y%5! .%& Y6 $Y%8 Y6 L5 ,0
L
Y4 Cj *a YZ5 sBCB Yf ,.0Q("> U ,0 ,+ ,.0Q(%" ,+ "> ,+ ,Ù , t" ,0hYa
,WBCa
Sayyidina Abdullah radhiyallahu anhu narrated that Allahs Messenger (salallahu alaihi wa sallam) slept
on a reed mat. He got up and its marks were impressed on his body. We said, 0h Messenger of Allah, if
we could fetch for you a bed! He said, What have I to do with the world? I am not in this world but
like a rider who shades himself under a tree only to move onward and leave it.[5]
Page 15 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
This hadeeth inculcates upon the mind that our behavior with regards to how we live in this life is merely
that of a traveler on a journey. This likeness is exemplified by the expression that the traveler takes rest
under a tree for a certain period of time only to then move onwards towards his actual destination while
leaving behind that place of rest. The people who suffer from heedlessness need to remember this reality
and to constantly remember the extent of our stay here in this life.
[1] 'AD=b 6? , Al-Anbiya, Surah 21 ayaa 1 [My personal translation of the ayah]
[2] A person of vices and corruption and displays it openly
[3] Mutafaka alai (agreed upon by both Bukharee and Muslim
[4] This was related by Ahmad and Bayhaqi. Haafidh al-Iraaqi declares it hasan and al-Albanee declares
its isnaad saheeh
[5] Recorded also by Ibn e Majah 4109, Ahmed 3709
June 21, 2010
Alaamah Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd Decimates the Corrupt

Manhaj of Faalih al-Harbi and the Clear Salafis
Posted by islamthought under Extremism
Comments Off
The following is take from Fadheelatu-Shaykh Abdul-Mushin al-Abbadds book al-Hathu alaa Ittibaa
is-Sunnati wat-Tahdheeri min al-Bidai wa Bayaani Khatarihaa . This book came to reinforce the salafi
manhaj (methodology) concerning how the people of the Sunnah are suppose to behave in their manhaj
regarding warning and refuting and it came as a severe blow when his initial advise to the salafis was
dismissed by the extremist at salafitalk and their leaders like spubs and troid.
So he says
And close to the bida[1] of testing the people by personalities[2] is what arose during this time of a
small band (fiatun qaleelah)[3] from Ahl is-Sunnahs infatuation[4] with the tajreeh of some of their
brothers from Ahl is-Sunnah, and the tabdee of them, as well as what resulted from that of
abandonment (hajr), severance of mutual relations (taqaatu) between them, and cutting off the path of
benefit from them. And that tajreeh and tabdee, from it is what is built on thinking what is not an
innovation (bidah) is a innovation[5]. From the examples of that is that the two honorable shaikhs,
Abdul-Azeez bin Baaz and Ibn Uthaimeen, may Allah have mercy on them both, had delivered a
verdict to a group (jamaaah) in favor of its entry into a matter, seeing the benefit in that entry. From
those whom those two muftis did not please with it (i.e., the verdict) is that small band, for that group
took exception of that. And the matter does not stop at this extent, rather the blame transfers to whoever
cooperates with it in delivering lectures and he is described as one who liquefies the Salafee
methodology (manhaj) although these two honorable sheikhs used to deliver lectures to this group by
way of telephone.[6]
From that also is the occurrence of warning from attending the lessons of an individual because he
does not speak about so-and-so (fulaan al-fulaanee) or such-and-such group (al-jamaaat alhttp://islamthought.wordpress.com/
Page 16 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
fulaaniyyah).[7] Arrogance may have taken possession of that individual[8] from my students in the
Faculty of Shareeah at the Islamic University who graduated from it in the year 1395-1396H, and his
ranking was 104th from his group, their number reaching 119 graduates. He is not known for being
occupied with knowledge, nor do I know of him having registered knowledge-based lessons, nor
writings with respect to knowledge big or small.
The bulk of his merchandise is tajreeh, tabdee and tahdheer against many from Ahl is-Sunnah[9]. This
jaarih does not reach the ankle of some of those who he disparages due to many of their benefits in their
lessons, their lectures and their writings. And the amazement does not end when an intelligent person
hears a tape containing a recording of a long telephone conversation between Madeenah and Algeria by
him. In it, the one asked eats the flesh of many from Ahl is-Sunnah and in it, the one asking squanders
his wealth without right. And the one asked about them may increase the number in this tape to thirty
individuals, among them the minister (wazeer), the senior (kabeer) and the minor (sagheer), and among
them a small band not mourned. Indeed, saved from this tape is whoever was not asked about in it but
some of those who were saved from it were not saved from other tapes by him. Its whale is the network
of Internet Information. What is obligatory upon him is to cease from eating the flesh of the scholars and
students of knowledge. And what is obligatory upon the youth and the students of knowledge is that they
not incline towards those tajreehaat and tabdeeaat that harm and do not benefit, and that they become
occupied with beneficial knowledge that returns to them with good and praiseworthy outcome in this
world and the hereafter.[10]
al-Haafidh Ibn Asaakir, may Allah have mercy on him, has said in his book, Tabyeenu Kadhib ilMuftaree (pg. 29),
And know O my brother! May Allah guide us and you to His pleasure (mardaah) and may He make
us from those who dread Him and fear Him as He should be feared that the flesh of the scholars, may
Allahs mercy be upon them, is poisonous and Allahs custom with regards to tearing the curtains from
their shortcomings is known.
And I have mentioned in my treatise, Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnati bi Ahl is-Sunnah, a large sum of verses,
ahaadeeth and narrations regarding guarding the tongue from the backbiting of Ahl is-Sunnah, especially
the people of knowledge from them. And in spite of that, it did not please this jaarih and he described it
as not being fit for distribution. He warned against it and whoever distributed it[11]. There is no doubt
that whoever becomes acquainted with this jaarih and studies the treatise will find that this ruling is in
one valley and the treatise is in another valley, and that the matter is just as the poet said:
The eye may deny the suns light due to an inflammation (conjunctivitis)
And the mouth deny the taste of water due to an illness
As for the jaarih students statement for the treatise, Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnati bi Ahl is-Sunnah: So for
example, regarding speech that the methodology of Shaikh Abdil-Azeez bin Baaz and the methodology
of Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen are contrary to the methodology of others from Ahl is-Sunnah, this is a
mistake, no doubt. He means they did not increase in the number of refutations but they would refute the
transgressor, this, if correct, differs from the methodology of Ahl is-Sunnati wal-Jamaaah, and it is an
attack (tan) on the two shaikhs in reality and on others of whom it is possible that this speech can be
said about.
So the answer to it is from (a number of) angles:
The first angle: is that it is not in the treatise that Shaikh Abdul-Azeez bin Baaz, rahimahullah, did not
increase in the number of refutations, rather his refutations are many. It has been mentioned in the
Page 17 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
treatise (pg. 51), That the refutation should be with kindness (rifq), gentleness (leen) and a strong desire
(raghbatun shadeedah) for the welfare of the mistaken person, where the mistake is clear and evident.
One should refer back to the refutations of Shaikh Abdil-Azeez bin Baaz, may Allah have mercy on
him, in order to benefit from them with respect to the way that the refutation of them should be done.
The second angle: is that I did not consider mentioning the methodology of Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen,
may Allah have mercy on him, with respect to refutations, for indeed, I do not know of writings small
or big by him with respect to refutations. I asked one of his students who were closely connected to
him about that. So he informed me that he does not know of anything by him of refutations. And that
does not diminish him, for indeed, he was occupied with the establishment of knowledge, its distribution
and writing.
The third angle: is that the methodology of Shaikh Abdil-Azeez bin Baaz, may Allah have mercy on
him, differs from the methodology of the jaarih student and those who resemble him[12] because the
methodology of the shaikh is characterized by kindness, gentleness and the desire for the benefit of the
one being advised (mansooh) and helping him to the path of security (tareeq is-salaamah). As for the
jaarih and whoever resembles him, then they are characterised by harshness (shiddah), alienation
(tanfeer) and warning (tahdheer). Many of those who they disparage in their tapes, Shaikh AbdulAzeez would praise them, call them and urge them upon calling (dawah) and teaching the people. And
he would urge upon benefitting from them and taking from them. [13]
In short, I did not attribute the lack of refutation of others to Shaikh Abdil-Azeez bin Baaz, may Allah
have mercy on him. As for Ibn Uthaimeen, then I did not consider him with mention with respect to the
affair of refutations and that what the jaarih mentioned corresponding to what is in the treatise. And it is
the clearest of indications of his stumbles and his lack of certainty. And if this was from him with respect
to written speech, then how is the situation regarding what there is no writing for it?!
As for the statement of the treatises jaarih, I, in fact, have read the treatise and I know the position of
Ahl is-Sunnah regarding it and hope that you saw the refutations by some of the scholars and shaikhs.
And I do not think the refutations stop at that. Certainly, there are those who will refute also, because it is
just as the poet says:
A presenting brother came, his spear
(jaaa shaqeequn aaridun rumhuhu)
Indeed, your uncles children, they have spears
(inna baniyya ammika feehim rimaah)[14]
So: aaridun (presenting), what is correct is aaridan (which changes the first line to: A brother came
presenting his spear).
So the answer: is that Ahl as-Sunnah, those who he meant, they are the ones whose methodology differs
from the methodology of Shaikh Abdil-Azeez, may Allah have mercy on him, which I will point out
shortly. He, with this speech, incites the determinations of whoever does not know them to discredit the
treatise after he incited whoever he knows. And I, in fact, did not present a spear. On the contrary, I
presented an advice that the jaarih and whoever resembles him did not accept, because the advice for the
one being advised resembles the remedy for the disease. And from the ailing are those who use the
remedy, even if it was bitter, because of what he hopes of benefit. And from those who are advised are
those whose desire turns them away from the advice, not accepting it. Rather, they warned from it. And I
ask Allah to grant the people success (tawfeeq), guidance (hidaayah) and security (salaamah) from the
devils deception (kaid) and his deceit.
Page 18 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Three have joined the disparaging student: two in Makkah and Madeenah[15], they are both from my
students in the Islamic University of Madeenah. The first of them graduated in the year 1384-1385H and
the second in the year 1391-1392H. As for the third[16], then (he is) in the extreme south of the country.
The second and the third have described whoever distributes the treatise as being a mubtadi[17] and this
is tabdee by wholesale and the public at large. And I do not know if they know or if they do not know
that the scholars and students who they do not attribute to innovation. And I hope for my supply of
observations from them that they built this general heretication upon, if they exist, for further
examination.
Shaikh Abdir-Rahmaan as-Sudais, the imaam and khateeb of al-Masjid il-Haraam, has a sermon
(khutbah) delivered from al-Masjid il-Haraams minbar. In it, he warned from Ahl is-Sunnahs
backbiting of one another. We should turn the glances to it, for indeed, it is important and beneficial.
And I ask Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, that He guides the people to that which He is pleased with, to
comprehension of the religion, establishment upon the truth and being occupied with that which
concerns, away from that which does not concern. Indeed He is the Guardian of that and the Master over
it. And may Allah send prayers, peace and blessings upon our Prophet, Muhammad, and upon his family
and companions.
[1] innovation
[2] In other words Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd has declared here is that it is a heresy for people to test
other peoples adherence to salafiyyah based on the personality of another individual since the basic
fundamental regarding this is that this is the actions of the hizbis (biased partisans) and those who view
the people of the sunnah under this hizbi context are themselves hizbis for being involved in this bida.
[3] He is referring to those who followed Faalih al-Harbi which was Spubs, Troid, and the partisan blind
followers who followed them like Salafitalk, and later on he adds Shaykh Rabee, Shaykh Ubayd alJaabiree, and Ahmad bin Yahya an-Najmee into this band of fitnah makers may Allah forgive these
shiyookh, particularly Shaykh Najmee for he was the senior most scholar of all of those mentioned and
he has passed away recently.
[4] This infatuation is a description of a disease in the heart of these individuals where their only thrill
under their claim to salafiyyah is to see people destroyed through refutations and criticism. This
infatuation has resulted in virtually forming and centering their tawheed on the salafiyyah of an
individual rather than actual tawheed
[5] Another character trait of the hizbis who act like this is to assume something as an innovation when it
is not an innovation. And how this can come about is due to a confounded ignorance that they have and
this ignorance is further preserved when these biased partisans cut off all the avenues and roads to
knowledge by declaring every person who can offer it to the ignorant as an innovator or in current
times he is not clear which was another innovation which Shaykh Khaalid ar-Raddadee refuted and
particularly he refuted Spubs for being the advocates of this bidi theory that they brought into the salafi
manhaj.
[6] The shaykh was more than likely referring to Ihyaa at-Turaath
[7] This direct mentality is reflective of the entire framework of hizbiyyah that Spubs and Troid educated
their blind followers upon may Allah guide them and us.
[8] Translators note: Here the shaikh, may Allah preserve him, is referring to none other than Faalih bin
Page 19 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Naafi al-Harbee. Throughout this portion of his reply, he refers to Shaikh Faalih as the disparager, alJaarih. .
[9] And just like Faalih, spubs and troid followed suit in this direct behavioral syndrome that turns the
actual salafi off from them and whatever they have to offer and deceives the gullible ignorant who have
no clue about what the salafi manhaj is.
[10] Thus it is preferable on the shaykhs words to stay away from dealing with those whose methodology
entails this methodology explained by the shaykh, and those who defend this methodology
[11] The misguided Faalih, refuted the shaykhs book, and those who went along with his misguidance
was spubs and troid and have never recanted to this day for it and thus their dhalaala (misguidance) and
corruption remains upon their heads until they recant, and part of the salafi manhaj of recanting when it
entails the effect of others is the official three actions that a person must do for tawbah ALONG with
openly declaring to the public their guilt and wrongdoing for that action.
[12] Meaning those who followed Faalih al-Harbi like spubs and troid
[13] Thus in a nutshell, Abdul-Muhsin has negated those who act in this anarchic behavior to be
different, opposite, and on a different manhaj than Shaykh Bin Baz, an to that extent the rest of the salafi
shiyookh of ahlu-sunnah.
[14] Translators note: This quote taken from Faalih can be found on one of the Ghulaat Boards. This
post was put up by Spubs entitled, Speech of Shaykh Faalih on Rifqan Ahl us-Sunnah.
[15] Translators note: The two referred to here are Shaikh Rabee al-Madkhalee and Shaikh Ubaid alJaabiree, respectively. They both collaborated in spreading this corrupt methodology to the youth
[16] Translators note: This third person being referred to is Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee.
[17] Refer to footnote #2 to find these statements by Shaikh Ubaid and Shaikh Ahmad.
May 23, 2010
Ibnul-Juwaynee Annihilates The Secular Liberal Basis of Man

Made Legislations
Posted by islamthought under Islamic Law, Sociology, human rights, progressive islam
Comments Off
Bismillah ar-Rahmaan ar-Raheem
asalamu alaikum warahmatullah
When I first came across this quote, I almost melted from the sheer power of his words and what further
added a basis for my feeling is how his words are SO RELEVANT to our modern times more so than
many statements that are advocated unfortunately today, quite ironic indeed, that someone almost a
thousand years ago can bring an intellectual statement more relevant and accurate than over half of
todays population. I forgot to post this long ago when I first came across it so I wish to bring this to the
Page 20 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
fore inshallah
I present the following for the benefit of the Muslims, the ahlu-sunnah wal-athar to utilize against the
people of kufr, secularism, and progressive onslaught against Allah Azawajal and His shariah.
The celebrated Imaam Ibnul-Juwaynee has stated a superb and excellent reality concerning a group of
heretics of his time.
In conclusion, whoever thinks that the shariah may be derived from what people agree upon , of reason
or from the opinions of wise men, has rejected the shariah and has taken this principle as a means to
reject the shariah.
If this is acceptable, then it would be acceptable to stone the unmarried fornicator who commits
fornication in our times based on this argument. Likewise it would be permissible to execute a person on
the basis of suspicion. Likewise, it would be justifiable to kill a person whom it was feared would betray
the ummah if there were signs and indications to that effect. Likewise it would be permissible to increase
the rate of zakaah if there appeared to be a need to do so
These arguments have no strong foundation. If they were to form the foundation of religion then you
would find that everyone who has some rational power would take his own ideas and thoughts as
shariah and thus ideas and thoughts would take the place of the revelation sent to the messengers.
These ideas and thoughts would vary according to time and place, thus the shariah would have no
stability
[Al-Ghiyaathi by al-Juwaynee p 220-221]
This is directly referring to democratically inclined ideologies in spite the fact that democracy was not
fully formed and its lexical name was not yet known
These words stated over 900 years ago are more than necessary to apply in todays political, ideological,
and academic climate concerning the advocacy of philosophical views pertaining specifically to secular
and democratic principles. It is also a proof for the illegitimacy of substituting or replacing the shariah
with other than it as a legal code, primarily basing such laws on whims and ideas of people.
Next Page
Search
1.1. Our Blog Pages

Arabic
Comments
Creed of Islam
Current Events
Extremism
Hadeeth Sciences
Heresiology (Sects)
Intelligence Reports
Islamaphobia
Islamic History
Islamic Law (Shariah)
Page 21 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Jihad
Knowledge
Promotions
Science & Technology
Sociology
Spirituality
The Qur'an
Wahhabism & Salafism
WikiIslam
Women of Islam
1.2. Addressing The Heretics of Islam

Shiism
Sufism
The Asharite Theological School
The Khawaarij
The Progressives and the Modernists, the Neo-Murjia
1.3. Our Replies To The Think Tanks

Addressing Policy Exchange
Addressing The Combating Terrorism Center At Westpoint
Addressing The Hudson Institute
Addressing The Qulliam Foundation
Addressing The Rand Corperation
1.4. Our Replies to the Extremists

Addressing the Clarion Fund Radicals
Addressing The Modernist Phenomenon
Addressing the Protagonists of Dhimmitudeism
1.5. Our "Sticky" Section

Analyzing the Rand Think Tank
Ideological Divide From Islam to the West
Islamic View of Secularism
Lessons In Islamic Legal Theory
Refuting Asharism
Salafism: Greatest Weapon Aganst Extremism
The Fallacy of "Salafi Jihad"
The Fallacy of Salafi "Trends"
The Legal Aspects of Jihad
1.6. Sunni Thought

Page 22 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Above The Throne.com

Ahlu-Sunnah
Ahlul-Hadeeth
al-Baseerah
al-Ibaanah
al-Muflihoon
Aqidah.com
Ash'aris.com
Call to Islam
Darul-Kitaab wal-Hikmah
Fatwa Islam
Fatwa Online
Islam Life
Jurisprudential Publication of Saudi Jurists
Live from Medinah
Madkhalis.com
Maturidis.com
QSS of Canada
Rasoolullah.net
Salafi Manhaj
Spirituality
Sunnah as-Saheeha
Sunni Press
Takfeeris.com
Tasfiya wa Tarbiya Publications
The FIKS E-Learning
The Wahhabi Myth
Understand Islam
1.7. Genuine News

Counter Punch
Global Intel
If Americans Knew
Information Clearing House
Iranian News
Obsession With Hate
Peace Times
Representative Press
Sweet Liberty
The Middle East Research And Information Project
Ummah Pulse
Watching America
What Really Happened
1.8. Polemics
Ahlul-Bayt
Call To Monotheism
Page 23 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Islamaphobia
Islamaphobia Watch
Islamic Awareness
Islamic History
Islamophobia Watch
Misconceptions about Islam
Muslim Responses
Obsession With Hate
Rasoolullah.net
Sacred Freedom
Salafi Manhaj
Sociology
The Wahhabi Myth
Ummah Pulse
Zionist/Crusade Watch
1.9. Blogroll
Ahlul-Kahf
Rasheed Gonzales
Um Abdullah
2.0. The Think Tank Watch List

Center of Counter Intelligence
Combating Terrorism Center
Counter Terrorism Blog
Global Security
Information Warfare
Middle East Strategy At Harvard
Militant Islam Monitor
Policy Exchange
Rand
The Hudson Institute
The Jamestown Foundation
The Quilliam Foundation
2.1. The Extremist Watch List Section

"Radical" Islam
Act for America
Clandestine Radio
Dhimmitude
Dhimmi.org
Femi-Naziism
Future Jihad
Gate of Vienna
Jihad Watch
Pipeline News
Page 24 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
Project for the New American Cntury

Terrorism "Awareness"
The Heritage Foundation
United Against Islamic Supremacism
Walid Phares
What the West Needs to Know
Archives
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
February 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
Top Posts
Qira'aat of the Qur'an
Recent Posts
A Reply to A Pseudo Mutakalim, Abdullah bin Haamid Ali on Allahs Speech
Abu Hasan al-Qushayree on Tafweed: A Reply to an Ashari Mufawwid
The Perils of Ghaflah (Heedlessness)
Alaamah Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd Decimates the Corrupt Manhaj of Faalih al-Harbi and
the Clear Salafis
Ibnul-Juwaynee Annihilates The Secular Liberal Basis of Man Made Legislations
Meta
Register
Log in
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
Page 25 of 26
09/09/10 4:31 PM
WordPress.com
Categories
Select Category
September 2010
M T WT F S S
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30
Aug
Blog Stats
13,078 hits
Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: Connections by www.vanillamist.com.
Page 26 of 26

Al Mustaqeem Publications

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Al Mustaqeem Publications

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

al-Mustaqeem Publications

Your Revolutionary Source For Islamic Thought

August 16, 2010

A Reply to A Pseudo Mutakalim, Abdullah bin Haamid Ali on

July 30, 2010

Abu Hasan al-Qushayree on Tafweed: A Reply to an

recorded in Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin 2/110

July 28, 2010

The Perils of Ghaflah (Heedlessness)

Posted by alboriqee under Sociology, Spirituality

!" $%&*)( + ,-./0 $%& ,3 4%5 6 $%8 :;,<" 6 ()*"

LNC<Q+ D%ST >U 4V 4W3,IE ,Y-%" CZ[

4.%& ].)5 Y6 Y Y6 L`Ya"! L5 Y6( d :3 L+e(`a f L-+ gdhY" ,WQd ,d

L*%S; 4V t "4We3Y ge+ (V $%& t"

L+CjQ+ 4FY0 H.%[ L<YZ)a L%B

&(La 4Z-B hY" 4F+Ld hV..

June 21, 2010

Alaamah Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd Decimates the Corrupt

May 23, 2010

Ibnul-Juwaynee Annihilates The Secular Liberal Basis of Man

1.1. Our Blog Pages

1.2. Addressing The Heretics of Islam

1.3. Our Replies To The Think Tanks

1.4. Our Replies to the Extremists

1.5. Our "Sticky" Section

1.6. Sunni Thought

Above The Throne.com

1.7. Genuine News

2.0. The Think Tank Watch List

2.1. The Extremist Watch List Section

Project for the New American Cntury

Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: Connections by www.vanillamist.com.

You might also like

!" $%&)( + ,-./0 $%& ,3 4%5 6 $%8 :;,<" 6 ()"