Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmee’s Refutation of Ibn Jibreen’s Request Not To Publish A Refutation al-Ikhwaan and Hassan al-Bannaa
The Shaikh, Ibn Jibreen got involved with the Qutubiyyah such as Salmaan al-Awdah in the Mis’ari affair (the setting up of CDLR). This changed his perceptions towards some of the Innovators such as Sayyid Qutb and Hassan al-Banna, making him think that they were scholars like the scholars of the past, like Ibn Hajr and an-Nawawi and their likes, who were from Ahl us-Sunnah but erred in certain areas. This whole farce (of al-Mis’ari, Doc. Fitnah) was lambasted by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen who called it a route to evil and mischief and the likes. However, what is important is that the Shaikh’s involvement with these people influenced his outlook.
This led the Shaikh to find fault with Shaikh Rabee’ and his refutations of Sayyid Qutb and the Qutubiyyah – and led him to utter baseless statements against the Shaikh. Rather, the Shaikh opposed what the rest of the scholars, had unanimously agreed upon, which was the praise and commendation for Shaikh Rabee’ in his refutations and expositions of Sayyid Qutb, and also of the Qutubiyyah like Safar and Salman and others who raised the flag of extremist Irjaa’ towards the Mockers of the Messengers, Revilers of the Caliphs, Mukaffirs of the Companions and Utterers of statements of] Kufr and Apostasy. It also led the Shaikh to write letters to other scholars, such as the noble Shaikh, Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee, asking them not to write books in refutation of Hassan al-Banna and the defunct, bankrupt, brotherhood
The refutation of Shaikh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee is the most powerful, and uses some harsh language (bearing in mind that the Shaikh is senior to Ibn Jibreen) in outlining the great injustice of Ibn Jibreen in his accusations.
The book is called “Radd ul-Jawaab ‘alaa Man Talaba Minnee ‘Adam Tab’ al-Kitaab” (The Return of the Reply To The One Who Requested Me Not To Print the Book). This is 40 pages long, in A4. Shaikh Ibn Jibreen had requested from the Shaikh that he does not print his most excellent work entitled “Al-Mawrid al-Adhb az-Zulaal Feemantuqida Alaa Ba’d al-Manaahij ad-Da’awiyyah Min al-’Aqaa’id wal-A’maal” (The Cold Sweet [Flowing] Spring Water [That Quenches (the Thirst)] Concerning What Can Be Criticised Of Beliefs and Actions Of Some of the Methodologies of Da’wah).
This book is a detailed, reference-filled, authoratitive refutation of the overall methodologies of Jamaa’at ut-Tabligh, and Ikhwaan ul-Muflisoon, with details of their history, founders, developments, deviations and many other issues. It also contains an excellent and detailed refutation of Hassan al-Bannaa and Muhammad Ilyaas, and their great deviations and heresies, and who were far astray from the aqeedah of the Salaf. The book is 340 pages in total. So Ibn Jibreen requested the Shaikh not to print this book, as he claimed that Shaikh Ahmad had wronged Hassan al-Bannaa.
So the Shaikh replied with a powerful reply, that needs nothing in addition to it, illustrating the baseless accusations of Ibn Jibreen, and establishing the heresies of Hassan al-Bannaa and his speaking with “wahdat ul-wujood”, and who uttered the Shirk Akbar in the form of poetical compositions, and his praise of the propounders of “wahdat ul-wujood”, and his statement that their is no religious dispute between the Muslims and the Jews, and his taking part in the gatherings at the tombs of Zainab and others, and his witnessing the Major Shirk with his own eyes and not rejecting it, and his travelling 20 miles to the graves of ad-Dasooqee and as-Sinjar and then returning a whole 20 miles, and his efforts to unite between the Sunnis and the Raafidah Shi’ah, and his enacting the bay’ah and calling people to make bay’ah, and to request obedience (that is only given to the wali ul-amr of the Muslims), and his tafweedh of the Attributes of Allaah, the most wicked of all of the sayings of the negators of the Attributes and much more.
The Shaikh finishes by asking Ibn Jibreen 25 questions which he ought to answer, about the so called good effects of Hassan al-Bannaa.
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): Introduction
Introduction and background to the Rejecters of the Sunnah and their late spokesman, Ghulam Ahmad Perweiz, and an overview of the contents of the book.
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): On the Necessity of the Sunnah
Looking at the necessity of depending upon the Sunnah for the sound and correct understanding of the Qur’aan with numerous excellent examples and illustrations.
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): Amongst Those Who Have Defended The Sunnah
A list of the various people of both past and contemporary times who have spent efforts in defending the Prophetic Sunnah from the Astray Heretics
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): The Ruling on the Rejecters of the Sunnah
Looking at the Rulers of the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah, past and present, that the Rejecters of the authority of the Sunnah are disbelieving apostates, outside the fold of Islaam
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): The First Doubt
Analysing the first of the doubts of the Perweizites and Rejecters, which is that there was no methodology defined by the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) for the safeguarding of the Sunnah.
Smashing the Brains of the Perweizite Deceivers (Rejecters of the Sunnah): The Second Doubt
Smashing the second brainless doubt which is that the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam’s) explanation of the Qur’aan is not required and redundant, since the Qur’aan itself is all comprehensive and has not left anything out
Refutation of the storyteller Muhammed Husein Ya’qoob – Shaykh Khaalid bin ‘Abdir-Rahmaan [Video|Ar-En Subtitles]
The daa’iyah (caller) Muhammed Husein Ya’qoob محمد حسين يعقوب is a storyteller from the storytellers. He doesn’t clarify Tawheed or ‘Aqeedah (creed). This is why all his tapes are about affairs where no two persons differ about or clash. But why doesn’t he speak about the worshipping of graves? Why doesn’t he speak about the Shirk (polytheism) of the graves? Why doesn’t he clarify these issues; the Tawaaf around the graves and the slaughtering for other than Allaah? If he goes through it, he goes through it momentary.
When you want to know if someone is from Ahl-us-Sunnah or from Ahl-ul-Bid’ah, then look; if he clarifies Tawheed and refutes falsehood and the people of innovation, then know that he is a Sunni! And if he is silent about the people of innovation and fears the people or he is soft with a blameworthy softness, then know that he is a storyteller from the storytellers! Na’am. We haven’t found with this man (i.e. Husein Ya’qoob) any effort in destroying innovations, nor any effort in refuting the people of falsehood nor any effort in dividing the [three] foundations of Tawheed and refuting that which negates it. The Prophet – salla Allaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – said, when he was about to die:
“May Allaah curse the Jews and the Christians, for they took the graves of their Prophets as places of worship. So don’t take graves as places of worship, for verily I prohibit you from that.”
Where are the tapes of this man clarifying these issues? You don’t and won’t find them. He is a storyteller from the storytellers.
تزكيات العلماء للشيخ خالد بن عبدالرحمن القليوبي المصري
Translation and Video Courtesy: Yâsîn Abu Ibrâhîm
Scholar: ´Allâmah Ahmad bin Yahyâ an-Najmî
Reference with audio-file: http://www.sahab.net
Reference: Darulhadith, Sweden
What is your opinion on the following persons: Muhammad al-Maghrâwî, Abû Ishâq al-Huwaynî and Husayn Ya’qûb?
That which I know of regarding Muhammad al-Maghrâwî is that he is a Takfîrî. Abû Ishâq al-Huwaynî as well, who’s one of the friends and followers of Abûl-Hasan [al-Ma’ribî]. I do not know of Husayn Ya’qûb.
Bismillaah Al-Hamdulillaah wa salatu wa salaamu ‘ala rasulullaah
Noble Shaikh Muhammad ibn Hadee. Ahsan Allaahu ilaikum.
We have heard how the caller Muhammad Hassan is “blessing” the revolt and calls for it. What do you and the religion say about it? What is the ruling on defending and justifying and explaining his words while backbiting each and every one who condemns him and all others who call for these revolts and demonstrations?
Answer by Shaikh Muhammad bin Haadi al-Madkhalee (hafidhahullaah):
All Praise is for Allaah, Lord of all that exists. And may the peace and blessings be upon Muhammad, his family and all his companions. To proceed:
There are no doubts that the one who calls towards these revolts and demonstrations, and explains them in a great (praiseworthy) way has been unjust. Because he has applied these noble descriptions on these disgusting, forbidden, unjust and sinful actions.
I have listened to Muhammad Hassan’s speech, and it is very sad that this man whom is called a “Da’iyah” (a “caller”) is speaking in this forbidden way.
Allaah (Jalla wa ‘Ala) says:
وَلْتَكُنْ مِنْكُمْ أُمَّة ٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَأُوْلَائِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining Al-Ma’roof and forbidding Al-Munkar. And it is they who are the successful. (Aali ‘Imran, ayah 104)
This call of his [Muhammad Hassan's] is not a call towards good, and neither is it a call enjoining what is right or forbidding what is wrong. Rather, he calls toward what is Munkar (forbidden). And refuge in Allaah is sought from this. I’ve heard how he says that he has personally witnessed this, and stood with the protesters on “Liberation Square.”
He also says: ‘Don’t listen to these destroyers who bad-mouth and abuse this blessed and noble revolt that you’ve tried to recover your statutory and equitable rights whom only are condemned by a denier.’
This is very odd!
Our Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said:
A Muslim must listen and obey in that which he loves and hates – as long as he is not ordered with disobedience (to Allaah). If he is ordered with disobedience, then he should neither listen nor obey [in that matter].
He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) also said:
After me, there will be unequal distribution of property, and matters that you will condemn. Then they (the companions) said: O Messenger of Allaah! What do you command us to do? He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: You must fulfill your duty… [The shaikh explained: Meaning, listen and obey the rulers.] And ask Allaah for that which is yours.
Whereas, this man (Muhammad Hassan) said: “to recover your statutory and equitable rights whom only are condemned by a denier.” Does this man submit to the words of the Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) ? Does he traverse upon the way of the Salaf of this Ummah, from amongst his (salallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) pure and upright companions, and the pious and the best Salaf? No! I swear by Allaah that he is not traversing upon their way.
Rather, he is traversing upon the way of the westerners and the non-Muslims, whom are in support, and calling towards these demonstrations and justifies them.
For English Translation click on “CC”
There are many questions in regards to the execution of Sadaam and the issue of Takfeer upon him ?
Well Sadaam used to be upon the Ba’thist partisanship and it is a kaafir partisanship. Then his situation changed when he testified in the two testimonies.
Yet this won’t suffice until he denounces himself from the kaafir Ba’thist party.
Once he denounces himself from the kaafir Baa’ith partisanship then his Islaam will be correct and if he didn’t then his Islaam isn’t correct.
Then we take into account that he did denounce himself and we don’t know. Or we take into account that he didn’t denounce himself, and we will leave this matter to Allaah.
We don’t call him this or that.
And Allaah He is the One that will take command over his situation.
Now, if the christian accepts Islaam right now. The christian that accepts Islaam, will be asked to testify أشهد أن لا إلـﮧ إلاَّ اللـَّـﮧ و أشهد أن مُـכـمَّــدْ رَسُــولُ اللـَّـﮧ and Essa is the slave and Prophet of Allaah.
So that he denounces himself from his previous kaafir religion.
Because his kaafir religion testifies that Essa is the son of Allaah. So his Islaam will not be correct until he denounces himself from his kaafir religion.
He (Sadaam) used to be upon the kaafir Baa’ith party. If he indeed did denounce himself from the kaafir Baa’ith party. Then his Islaam is correct.
As for if he does testify in the two testimonies and he is upon something else besides Islaam, then this will not benefit him.
Lets say if he does testify in the two testimonies and he insults Allaah, wa Rasool Allaah, or he denies the obligation of the Salaah, or he denies one of the Angels, or denies the Resurrection. Then this will not benefit him.
It is a must that he testifies in the two testimonies and he must not commit any actions that are not legislated in Islaam. He also must denounce his previous kaafir religion. Naa’am
The Fatwaa of Shaykh Ibn Baaz states that Sadaam is a kaafir even though if he testified in لا إلـﮧ إلاَّ اللـَّـﮧ, performed Salaah and observed Fasting – because he didn’t denounce himself from the Baa’ith party.
Naa’am correct. This is correct.
If he didn’t denounce himself then this will not benefit him.
Just what has been previously stated, if he testified in the two testimonies of Islaam and he is not upon Islaam, then this will not benefit him.
Then whats the importance of the two testimonies if he insults Allaah and the Rasool ? He then performs Salaah and observes fasting, will this benefit him ?
Some of the brothers ask, some of the Algerian brothers and others ask – some of the people if they become angry they insult Allaah. Wa AlAyatha biAllaah
That’s them asking questions – and they perform Salaah and observe fasting.
This will not benefit them – Wa AlAyatha bi Allaah This isn’t Islaam. We Ask Allaah To Grant Us Peace And Good Health
Fatwas of Ibn Baaz Vol. 6 page 122
Q 6: Is it permissible to curse the ruler of Iraq (i.e. Saddam) taking into consideration that some people say as long as he says the two testimonies of Islam, no one should curse him? In addition, is he regarded a disbeliever? What is the opinion of Your Eminence on those who say that Saddam is a disbeliever?
A: He is a disbeliever even if he utters the testimonies of Islam or offers Salah (prayer) and Sawm (fasting) as long as he does not disavow the principles of atheistic Ba`thism and declare his repentance to Allah from them and what they call for.
This is because Ba`thism involves disbelief and aberrance. He is regarded as a disbeliever, unless he declares so.
A similar case to this is that of `Abdullah ibn Ubay, who is regarded as a disbeliever despite that he used to perform Salah with the Prophet (peace be upon him) and said the testimonies of Islam. This did not help him owing to his disbelief and hypocrisy.
Accordingly, those who say the testimony of Islam amongst the advocators of disbelieving doctrines such as Ba`thists, communists and the like while offering Salah, which are done for worldly purposes, these things will not save them from disbelief as they are based on hypocrisy. Allah prepared for the hypocrites a severe torment in the Hereafter as indicated in Allah’s Saying, Verily, the hypocrites will be in the lowest depth (grade) of the Fire; no helper will you find for them.
Saddam claims that he is Muslim and says that he fights in the cause of Allah but this does not avail him or clear him from hypocrisy. He must declare that his repentance is to Allah of what he believed in and proves this with actions, so as to be regarded as a true believer. Allah (Glorified be He) said, Except those who repent and do righteous deeds, and openly declare (the truth which they concealed). Repentance involves both verbal and actual reform. If one of these elements is not fulfilled, a person is not truthful in his repentance. Accordingly, if Saddam is truthful in his claims of Islam, then he must disavow Ba`thism, leave Kuwait, return rights to their owners, declare his repentance of Ba`thism and its principles of disbelief and misguidance. I recommend those Ba`thists to return to Allah in repentance and adopt real Islam with its principles in word and action, outwardly and inwardly. They should be on the straight path of the religion of Allah and believe in Allah, His Messenger, and the Hereafter if they are truthful.
However, pretense and hypocrisy is of no value to Allah or the believers. Allah (may He be Exalted and Glorified) says: Verily, the hypocrites will be in the lowest depth (grade) of the Fire They (think to) deceive Allâh and those who believe, while they only deceive themselves, and perceive (it) not! In their hearts is a disease (of doubt and hypocrisy) and Allâh has increased their disease. A painful torment is theirs because they used to tell lies. And when it is said to them: “Make not mischief on the earth,” they say: “We are only peace-makers.” Verily! They are the ones who make mischief, but they perceive not. And when it is said to them (hypocrites): “Believe as the people (followers of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, Al-Ansâr and Al-Muhajirûn) have believed,” they say: “Shall we believe as the fools have believed?” Verily, they are the fools, but they know not.
This is the situation of Saddam and the like of those who declare Islam hypocritically and deceptively while they affect Muslims with kinds of harm and injustice and adhere to the atheistic Ba`thist belief.
Refutation Of Sadaam Hussien – Abu Khadeejah
Listen / Download Mp3 (Time 1:44)
Scholar: Imâm Muhammad Nâsir-ud-Dîn al-Albânî
Source: Silsilat-ul-Hudâ wan-Nûr (229)
Reference: Maktabah Darulhadith, Sweden
Question: Is it true that you had a dialogue with Abû Ishâq al-Huwaynî in which you said that he is your successor?
Imâm al-Albânî: No, I have not said that to him.
Scholar: Imâm Muhammad Nâsir-ud-Dîn al-Albânî
Source: Silsilat-ul-Hudâ wan-Nûr (320)
Translation & video by: http://aFatwa.com
Question: Last time I was in Kuwait, and likewise from some brothers in Saudi Arabia, I often heard how they say that some persons will be your successors. Their evidence are some of your cassette tapes or occasions where you praise some brothers. What do you say to these brothers?
Shaykh al-Albânî: I hope that I am succeeded by people who are better than me. I have however not mentioned anyone and neither will I do that. What is the purpose of it all?
Questioner: They want that a certain individual gets attention.
Shaykh al-Albânî: Allâh knows better about that. They alleged that I had said so about our brother [Abû Ishâq] al-Huwaynî. But I have not said it and I will neither say it.
Questioner: It is said that you have mentioned Shaykh Muqbil.
Shaykh al-Albânî: Yes, I have praised him. But I did not say that he is a successor.
Yusuf Estes and the Shiite
[Moosaa Richardson Hafidahullah]
Yusuf Estes has openly published and invited his followers to read Iranian Shiite literature on his “IslamNewsRoom” website as recently as August 2012. His private claims that he has retracted such deviance are baseless. After promoting the writings of a Raafidhee Ayatollah, from the most deviant of the Shia sects, he only removed the article after he was exposed. He spoke not a word against the Shia after openly propagating their writings.
Additionally, his private advice to Muslims at that time included references to the Ayatollah, Muhammad Hadi Marifat, a senior Iranian Raafidhi figure, as one of “the true scholars of Islam”. This has been documented clearly on pp.52-58 of the highly informative PDF: Yusuf Estes and the Quran. Ahlus-Sunnah, be warned of this two-faced man.
Amazingly, Yusuf Estes’ descriptions of the Shiite can be accurately summarized in the following few points:
- They follow the Quran and Sunnah.
- Their Iranian “Ja’fari” Math-hab is one of the five legitimate math-habs in Islam, which Muslims are allowed to ascribe themselves to.
- Their ascription, ”Shiite”, is valid linguistically (while Sunni and Salafi are not).
- Their scholars (i.e. Ayatollahs) can be referred to as “true scholars of Islam”.
- Speaking against them causes headaches and division in the Ummah.
- He has studied under Shiite scholars and benefitted from them. (on Peace TV)
Yusuf Estes Excludes Himself From Ahlus-Sunnah
Despite all the double-talk and confusion being spread by this man, one thing can be clearly understood from Yusuf Estes – He is definitely not a Sunni, by his own explicit admission (as quoted above):
When I come back to the country, they’ll ask me, ‘Are you a Sunni?’ I say, ‘No, I am not.’
The Muslims are grateful to Yusuf Estes for being clear on at least one issue. May Allah guide him.
The Scholars Warn the Muslims Against Yusuf Estes
Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jaabiree, retired professor from the University of al-Madeenah, warned the Muslims against Yusuf Estes, describing him very accurately as:
He is either astray, leading others astray, or he has lost his mind. [Source]
Another scholar, Shaykh ’Abdur-Rahmaan Muhyiud-Deen, former Mufti at the Prophet’s Masjid, said:
Astray, leading others astray… he does not know about Islam… Satan has spoken upon his tongue…[Source]
Please do not take the deviations of Yusuf Estes lightly. Many of his errors are extremely dangerous, reaching the level of disbelief in Allah’s Religion. Protect yourself by reading the articles here on this website, and help protect your brothers and sisters in Islam by recommending this website. May Allah bless and protect you.
Enable Captions to read the english translation in the above Video
The Transcript of the above Video:
Whomever has his car blocking the street, go and remove it.
The questioner asks we want from you to explain the situation in Libya from the Shariah (legislated) perspective, and also to utilize the Salaaf Methodology to answer the question, and the refutation of the transgressors.
The situation in Libya isn’t the first of its kind to occur in history, in our present time and era.
As you know the country of Libya from the time the Senussiyyah kingdom collapsed at the hands of al Gadaafi which revealed his kufur and his apostasy on different occasions.
The man denounces the Sunnah. What does he denounce ? The Sunnah.
He then said that he doesn’t denounce the Sunnah. He latter said that he denounces the speech of the Sunnah and not the actions of the Sunnah.
Then he said that he denounces the actions and speech of the Sunnah – as he plays around.
An instance came where he mocked the Hijaab and labeled it as being from the works of the shaytaan.
Meaning he (shaytaan) is the reason why Adaam and Huwaah were forced to conceal their naked bodies, thus the reason for the Hijaab.
He also said what ? This and that, him and her, he said she said. What type of nonsense speech is this ?
This is the speech of the empty headed Gadaafi. He also has from his own rhetoric, that prove his hereticism and his kufur in Allaah.
Our Shaykh, Shaykh Rabee’ said that he describes him as being from the rulers of the Faatamee that thought he controlled the will of Allaah.
He used to be from the lunatics from amongst the rulers.
He used to think that he was a god and with that, he used to ride a donkey even though he had different breeds of horses. He had everything. He used to ride what ? A donkey.
At one instance he forbade women from going out in the day time. They were only allowed to go out at night time. He denied his people to sell and buy in the day time, and to sell and buy in the night time.
At one instance he forced the christians and the jews to accept Islaam. Whom ever didn’t accept Islaam he killed them.
So a lot of them entered Islaam in hypocrisy then he allowed them to return back to the kufur once more.
This is how it was with him, he had different moods.
Another instance he went to the markets. He went to denounce the evil, meaning the ones that cheat the people.
Do you know how he used to denounce the evil ?
He used have from his servants, one of his flimsy servants, walk with him in the market.
If he saw someone that was cheating the people he would order his servant to rape him.
This is evil. He commits evil in name of denouncing the evil. He is a lunatic. This is strange. Indeed he has committed many strange and weird things. He is a criminal. Read more…