|Ismail Dhul-Qarnayn||BismiLLahi Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem
wa Salatu wa Salamu ala Muhammad wa Alihi wa Sahbihi
|| A Response to
"Spreading Mischief through the Art of Lying and Deception"
1. IntroductionThis is a small response to a pamphlet that we received called "As-Sunnah Foundation.... Spreading Mischief through the Art of Lying and Deception". Even though the subjects that they bring forward have already been explained in full detail with proof from the Quran, Sunnah and `Ijma, they feel it is incumbent upon themselves to repeat their negative views that are filled with rigidity, misinterpretations and overall ignorance. If one were to read the original debate that was issued, he/she would notice that there is on need for a rebuttal because the proofs were concrete and decisive. The response comes from an organization called Al-Hidaayah Foundation in Sri Lanka from an unknown writer. The original debate was between Ismail Dhul-Qarnayn and Abdur-Raheem Green, so we must ask the question, `"why is there a third party brought into this discussion? Was it is not between two individuals?" And also we must ask, " why is it not Adbur-Raheem responding?"
Inviting a third party into the forum just makes matters even more complicated and confusing. So we are questioning the motive. Is it to cause more confusion? Is this a legitimate response? We dont even know the response of Green because he has not responded to any of the former debate. We dont even know the name of this writer! We dont know the level of his scholarship, where he studied, nor from whom he studied. So we ask the readers of their debate, "How can you take this response that they are writing seriously? ".
We notice that his only attempt is to stain the creditability of the as-Sunnah Foundation of America, and he makes this attempt throughout his letter. With the Help of Allah, the writer is brought into the light so that we may all see his intentions. The writer displays his lack of coherence to the applications of Hukm in Islam throughout his mis-informed letter. This is an example of their constant refusal to acknowledge the wide permissible diversities within Islam.
<< "The Salafi is one who committed to the understanding of Islaam from its original source: the Quran and the Sunnah and from the interpretation of the early generation of Muslims, the Companions and their followers, gave to these sources, in short understanding the Quran and the Sunnah according to the understanding of the Sahaba [ra] and their followers. So by trying to expose the Salafis what or who this organization and others like them, in reality their trying to expose ">>In the writers footnote #2 he writes the hadith: << "The Prophet [saw] said, "The most excellent of Muslims is this generation and those who follow them and those who follow them." [Bukhari]>> We of the as-Sunnah Foundation of America, as well as many other Scholars of the Jamaa`ah, would say that this hadith is the real meaning of what a Salafi truly is, not the explanation that the writer tries to put on others. A SALAFI IS ONE WHO EXISTED DURING THE FIRST GENERATIONS OF ISLAM, PERIOD. And for one to say he is one of them just because he follows them is fooling no one but himself and those who believe him. Nuh Ha Mim Keller gives a good explanation of what is a Salaf and those who claim that they are of them:
"The word salafi or "early Muslim" in traditional Islamic scholarship means someone who died within The first four hundred years after the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), including Scholars such as Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi'i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Anyone who died after this is One of the khalaf or "latter-day Muslims".
The term "Salafi" was revived as a slogan and movement, among latter-day Muslims, by the followers of Muhammad Abduh (the student of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani) some thirteen centuries after the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), approximately a hundred years ago. Like similar movements that have historically appeared in Islam, its basic claim was that the religion had not been properly understood by anyone since the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the early Muslims--and themselves."
From this explanation, we can see why in many issues of fiqh they posses an alien approach to understanding what has been taught by the earlier scholars, for example, prayer, understanding of Quran and Hadith , innovations, madh`habs etc. They label themselves as "Salafi", which is an unnecessary and an almost castrating approach in the aspect of Belief in Islam, in which the Prophet [saw] has cautioned us about. For this is their profile:
1. Their Salat does not match any of the four Madhahib of Ahl as-Sunna wal-Jama`at.
2. In particular, their raising their hands after coming up from Ruku', and crossing their arms between Ruku' and Sujud.
3. Their way of making Tashahhud by moving their fingers up and down during all the Tashahhud. Their pretension of following Sunnat-Al-Mostafa contradicts all Madhahib even though they are using the same Sunnah narrated by Ahmad: "The Prophet PBUH used to move His finger during Tashahhud!"
4. They do not raise their hands for Du`a (supplication).
5. They do not cover their heads during Salat or otherwise, even though it's known for centuries that a man who doesn't cover up his head is Makhrum Al-Muru'a (There is a "breach" in his dignity).
6. They certainly do not wear Turbans, which is a Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, of the Sahaba (raa), and the Taabi'een.
7. Their preaching is based on the premise of using Qur'an and Sunnah ONLY! Meaning that the civilization built by the Moslems for over 13 centuries is not from Qur'an and Sunnah and a return to the source is a must.
8. Among the most likely sayings they might use from the early great scholar of Islam is: "If you see anything that I say contradicting a Sunnah of the Prophet PBUH, throw what I say against the wall and use the Sunnah instead!.." These words were uttered by humble scholars who did not want to show off, but are used nowadays instead as means to bash them. They do not mention, however the fact that the same Imam who said these words also said: "If the Messenger of Allah SWT left my company even for one single night I would count myself among the hypocrites!" That was Abu-Hanifa An Nu'maan Ibn Thabit may Allah SWT be pleased with him. They also say: "They were men and we are men!..", "We know today what they did not know then!"
9. The most moderate among them are those who do not say anything Negative about the 4 imams even though they do not follow any of them in their practices. They follow their own way of learning Salat based on a Famous book: "Sifat Salaat Annabi Salla Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam" by Nasr-Eddine Al-Albani.
10. One of their worst arguments is asking for a Daleel (Scholarly proof concerning religious matters) from Qur'an or Sunnah, which belongs to the Ulamaa (Scholars of Islam). They do not understand that Qur'an and Sunnah are the pillars on which all other Adillah (proofs) are built including Qiyas, Ijma'a, Qawl al-Sahabi, and last but not least Ma`aruf (what people of good morals have agreed upon as being a good practice).
11. For them Asha'aira are not on the right path but deviated from the "Mainstream" of Islamic `Aqidah. Even though they consist of the majority belief of the Muslims.
12. Sitting in a circle of Dhikr (remembrance) is a deadly crime against Islam. [Explained later]
13. Expanding on the attributes of Allah swt in ways that may be interpreted anthropomorphically, as saying, "He is sitting on the throne in person " and "He has two real eyes".
14. Stressing that the Prophet, salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam, is only a man like us, and avoiding praising him except for a bare minimum, and not accepting that he still plays an active role for his Ummah, to the extent of saying, "he is dead".
15. Shamelessly attacking Tasawwuf and Ahl al-Sunna scholars inspite of overwhelming evidence in their favor, even from their own Scholars they claim to follow.
If one was to see these qualities [and many others we havent mentioned], he would know surely that this is not the way the Early Muslims believed and for this reason their beliefs it should be shunned. Wa Allahu Alim.
For an unknown reason, the writer insinuates that Mr. Green is the victim of backbiting. We ask, `how is this so when Mr. Green was addressed?` It would have been different if we were writing to a third party, claiming that through Mr. Greens speech, he is contradicting the Beliefs of the Ahl as-Sunnah wa Jama`ah, but Ismail Dhul-Qarnayn was addressing Mr. Green himself. The writer mentions a hadith:
<<< ......The Messenger of Allah [saw] said, " When I was taken up to Heaven, I passed by a people whos nails were made of copper and were scratching their faces and breasts,` I asked Jibreel, ` who are these people Jibreel? He replied, ` they are those who eat the flesh of the people and they dishonor them.`
[then he says]
.........So we say how can this organization and others like them that are supposed to be Islamicly based , why go ahead and insult your brothers honor to your hearts content, backbite, slander, spread rumors, insult and criticize?>>>
We will mention again that it is Mr. Green who is addressed, openly. It was addressed in a way that he as well as others can see the mistakes that he made. It obvious that the writer doesnt know the Hukm of Gheebah and some of the Permissibilties of Gheebah due to certain circumstances which Mr. Green qualifies for:
In the Muwatta by Imam Malik:
"Malik related to me from al-Walid ibn 'Abdullah ibn Sayyad that al-Muttalib ibn 'Abdullah ibn Hantab al-Makhzumi informed him that a man asked the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. "What is backbiting?" The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "It is to mention about a man what he does not want to hear." He said, "Messenger of Allah, even if it is true?" The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If you utter something false, then it is slander (buhtan).""
Imam Baji, in his great commentary of the Muwattah, "Al-Muntaqa", (which appears in the bibliography of Root Islamic Education's first edition), after specifying that warning against innovations, or against the claim of an action being related to a prophetic hadith while not being so, and similar types of verbal actions do not constitute backbiting but rather are an obligation of the amr of Allah, and a defense of His Truth. He then goes on to say:
"Isa Ibn Dinar said pertaining to backbiting: "Backbiting does not apply to three cases: An Imam who has overstepped the limits, a fasiq freely exposing his fisq, and an innovator in the deen." [Al-Muntaqa: bab Ma Ja'a Fil-Ghaybah]
And Imam Nawawi elaborates about this in his Adhkaar he says:
" Slander, though unlawful, is sometimes permissible for a lawful purpose, the legitimating factor being that their is some aim countenanced by Sacred Law that is unattainable by other means, this may be for 6 reasons:
And in Warning Muslims of Evil, Imam Nawawi says:
"When someone notices a student of Sacred Knowledge going to learn from a teacher who is guilty of reprehensive innovations in religious matters, or who is corrupt, and one apprehends harm the student thereby, one must advise him and explain how the teacher really is. It is necessary in such a case that one attends to give sincere counsel. Mistakes are sometimes made in this, as the person warning the other may be motivated by envy, which the Devil has duped him into believing is heartfelt advice and compassion , so one must be aware of this."
Imam Nawawi continues, "... And when there is someone in a position of responsibility who is not doing the job as it should be done , because of being unfit for it, corrupt, inattentive or the like, one must mention this to the person with authority over him so he can remove him and find another to do the job properly, or be aware of how he is so as to deal with him as he should be dealt with and not be deluded by him, to urge him to either improve or else be replaced."
So, if the writer wants to entertain the thought that we were backbiting Mr. Green, he may consider the above advice from `Ulama mentioned above. It is clear that Mr. Green mentioned in his speech a number of things that are contrary to the Beliefs of the Ahl as-Sunnah wa Jamaa`ah and this is what we confronted Mr. Green with. He nor anyone else is free from criticism or correction, as long as mistakes like the ones he made that are being taught, spoken or written about. This is where we stand.
Wa Allahu Alim.
Though this topic has been dealt with in full detail, the writer decides to revert to this topic as though it was never discussed in the original debate. This is a clear trick of deception indeed! It would be better for the reader of this pamphlet to first refer to the original debate and he will see that there is no need or any justification for the writer to dig this discussion up, and to do it is clearly an attempt to dissuade the innocent-minded folk from an objective choice in the mattter. The writer says:
<<Yes, indeed it is not Abdur-Raheem but the Prophet [saw] himself who said "Kullu Bidah Dhalaalah", ask even a six year old child who is studying Arabic the meaning of the Arabic word "Kullu" which appears in the above hadith and he would reply "All/Every" so it is the authentic hadith which states that "All/every innovation is misguidance" this leaves no room for the propagators of the so called "Bidah Hasanah" since the Prophet [saw] in his unique way of speech left no room for doubt when he used the word Kullu Bidah- Every/all Bidah.>>
To this we say, "Al-HamduliLLah , Allah didnt leave the Religion of Islam to be explained by six year old children studying Arabic," and that He left us the ` Ulama to explain to us our religion, which the Prophet [saw] advised us to obey. Clearly the writer is not aware about the Traditions/Hadiths or the saying from the `Ulama that refers to Innovations. For the Prophet [saw] said:
"Whoever introduces in Islam a good measure, will have his reward for it and also a reward of those who act upon it without reducing anything from his reward....." [Muslim]
And for the second time we would like to shed light upon this with the explanation of the Scholars whom the `Salafis` themselves claim to follow. So that the writer can weigh his words against these so that he may correct himself and the reader, insha-Allah, may know the conditions concerning innovation so that he may teach it to those who dont know. For what better explanation we can get about what the Prophet [saw] said about innovation than these Scholars:
He also said in Tahzeeb al Asma' wal Sifaat : Bid'a in Shari'a is originating any thing which did not exist during the time of the Prophet (s), and it is divided into good and bad. He also said: Al Muhdathat [plural of Muhdatha]- is originating something that has no roots in Shari'a, in the tradition of Shari'a it's called Bid'a, and if it has an origin within the Shari'a ,then it is not bid'a, Bid'a in shari'a - is disagreeable, unlike in the language where every thing that has been originated without a previous pattern is called bid'a regardless if it is good or bad.
2. Ameer al Mo'mineen fil Hadith (the leader of believers in Hadith) Al-Hafiz, Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani, the commentator on Al Bukhari, whose been agreed upon his high prestige said, "Any thing that did not exist during his (Rasulullahs (s)) time is called Bid'a, but some are Hasan (good) while others are not. "
3. Abu Na'eem narrated from Ibrahim Al Junaid said: I heard Al Shafi'i saying: Bid'a is two (kinds) a praiseworthy (mahmooda) bid'a and a blameworthy (madhmooma) bid'a, and any thing that disagrees with the Sunna is Mazmoom.
Al Imam Al Bayhaqi narrated in Manaqib Al Shafi`i may Allah be pleased with him that he said: Al Muhdathat ( innovations) are two kinds, what contradicts the Book, the sunna, the Athar ( transmission) or ijma' (unanimous agreement) is a Bid'a of deception, while a good innovation does not contradict with any of these things.
4. Sultan al Ulema' Al Izz bin Abdussalam, may Allah be pleased with him said, at the end of his book (Al Qawa'id): ((Bid'a is divided into, Wajiba (obligatory), Muharrama (forbidden), Mandooba (recommended), Makrooha (disagreeable), and Mubaha,(permissible), and the way to know which is which is to match it against the Shari'a, if it falls into the category of Ijab (obligation) it is wajiba, or Tahrim (forbidden) it is muharrama, or Nadb (recommendation) it is manduba, or Makrooh (disagreeable) it is makrooha,or Mubah (permission) it is mubaha.))
The writer continues...<< Of course the word innovation used in this and other ahadith refer to the innovations in the Religion , and not outside of it, this is clearly seen and understood from the following hadith , in which the Prophet [saw] said, " Whoever innovates into this affair of ours, something we have not commanded, is to be rejected............ >>
These hadiths can be found easily in Riyadhis-Saaliheen and if he was to turn the page just once he will find the hadith [the first one] stated above in the chapter "Inventing New Ways of Virtue and Vice" that "Whoever introduces in Islam a good measure, will have his reward for it and also a reward of those who act upon it without reducing anything from his reward". The writer is providing an example for us of how one who doesnt have the Knowledge or the Hukm of a certain Science, can interpret sayings out of context with irrelevant meanings and childish conclusions.
In the book Takhlees l-Ikhwaan it is mentioned," So take notice, may Allah be Merciful to you, of the divisions of innovation and preserve them carefully in your memory that you may realize not every innovation is objectionable. There are those which are highly recommended in which there is reward for it. There are those who are allowed, in which there is there is neither reward nor punishment. Then there are those which are obligatory in which there is a reward for discharging it and punishment for it being neglected. There are those which are reprehensible in which there is a reward for leaving it and there is no punishment for doing it.
"O my Brother--may Allah guide you--be in opposition to heretical innovation and make a distinction between what which is abominable [in order to object to it] and between what is approved [in order not to object to it] . This is so that you may be safe with your Lord from being associated with objectionable things by only objecting to that which is clearly objectionable. For whoever objects to that which is not permissible to object to, it is as though he had done the same thing objectionable thing act he was attempting to prohibit or even worse. For this reason have tried to relate in this book the differences of opinion in order that you may avoid objecting to that which there is a difference of opinion.
Ibn Abdus-Salam said, Among these innovations are those which are obligatory like the preliminary sciences to understanding the Book of Allah and the sunnah of His Messenger- such as grammar , eloquence and the like. This is because the preservation of the Shari`ah cannot be achieved except by these........."
So now we would like to mention some of the innovations that are in the Religion that is accepted , which is contrary to the belief of the writer. And with this, the reader will grasp a firm understanding of the Scope of Accepted Innovations:
And some of the examples of the Sahaba:
These are some of the developments instituted by the Prophets Companions, the scholars, and the honorable members of his nation, which did not exist during the time of the Prophet, and which they deemed good. Are they, then, misguided and guilty of bad innovation?
So we ask the writer, " Is it that your understanding of the Scope of Innovation is far superior to those Scholars whom we have mentioned, that we should leave their interpretations and follow your understanding of it? For these Scholars that we have mentioned, are the exact Scholars that the modern-day "Salafis" love to claim that they follow: the Salaf. If you follow them (the Salaf), you must also agree what light they have shed regarding something they have knowledge of. So the reader is a witness to this and he will see either :
4. Their Staunch Rejection on doing Dhikr Aloud: In this chapter, they claim that we have lied about brother Greens comment on Dhikr with the tongue, he says on the Charter [when we said],`Green contends that there is no Dhikr by the Tongue` and his comments are: << This is a evil and vile accusation against Brother Abdur-Rahman never did he say this , the reader is advised to obtain the audio tape entitled `DhikruLLah, by Abdur-Rahman and listen to it completely , no where will one find Abdur-Rahman saying that there is no Dhikr of the tongue, but if by Dhikr of the tongue it is by making Dhikr audibly then this is not allowed according to the authentic Hadeeth found in both Saheeh Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim, it is reported that once when the Sahabah [ra] were saying Allahu Akbar loudly , upon hearing this the Messenger of Allah [saw[ said, "O People, Be kind to yourselves , for you are not calling upon a deaf or absent one , but you are calling upon an All-Hearer and Seer" [then he says] ..This hadeeth provides sufficient proof to any Muslim desiring to seek the truth in this regard to stop making Dhikr audibly. Allah also said in the Noble Quran:
"And Remember your Lord by your tongue and within yourself, humbly and with fear and without loudness in words in the mornings and in the afternoons and be not of those who are neglectful" [ Soorah Al-Araf ,205]>>We cant help but notice that the topic of this subject in the original debate was addressing Dhikr with the Tongue Aloud, not just Dhikr with the Tongue and if the writer would have read the our response, he would know what was being addressed. But the writer is saying that we are lying about the accusation and then he goes on to prove that Dhikr Audibly is not allowed? Why is he trying to prove a point that he said did not exist! The reader should obtain for himself the original debate, because Dhikr Aloud is what was addressed, not just the saying that `Abdur-Raheem says there is on Dhikr with the Tongue`. For us , Dhikr with the tongue and Audibly are the same, and the proofs were given in the original debate. The writer cannot find it within himself to admit that fact.
1.Uqba ibn `Amir said, "The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said of a man named Dhu al-bijadayn: innahu awwah, He is a man who says ah a lot. This is because he was a man abundant in his dhikr of Allah in Qur'an-recitation, and he would raise his voice high when supplicating." [Ahmad in his Musnad]
2. Allah said of the Prophet Ibrahim: "Verily, Ibrahim is awwah and halim" (9:114, 11:75), that is, according to Tafsir al-jalalayn: "Crying out and suffering much, out of fear and dread of his Lord." [halim = merciful, gentle.] The Prophet prayed to be awwah in the following invocation: rabbi ij`alni ilayka awwahan, "O Allah, make me one who often cries out ah to you." [Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah , and Ahmad ]
3. The Prophet used to supplicate thus: "O my Lord! help me and do not cause me to face difficulty; grant me victory and do not grant anyone victory over me; devise for me and not against me; guide me and facilitate guidance for me; make me overcome whoever rebels against me; O my Lord! make me abundantly thankful to You (shakkaran laka), abundantly mindful of You (dhakkaran laka), abundantly devoted to
You (rahhaban laka), perfectly obedient to You (mitwa`an ilayka), lowly and humble before You (mukhbitan laka), always crying out and turning back to You (awwahan muniban)!...."
Many proofs were given about Dhikr with the Tongue in the former debate and we feel there is not need to go any further about this discussion in this response. For it is clear the writer only intends plain deception. The way he refutes Dhikr Audibly is to mention only what he believes and making the reader believes that it is the writer only that has proofs. Because the writer is not listing our opinions so that it could be weighted against his. And we would like to REPEAT the following hadith and the meaning of it. This can be found in the former debate and the reader will notice that there wasnt any reason to open this discussion again, as the writer felt to compelled to do:
In Bukhari and Muslim: The Prophet said that Allah has angels roaming the roads to find the people of dhikr, i.e. those who say La Ilaha Illallah and similar expressions, and when they find a group of people (qawm) reciting dhikr, they call each other and encompass them in layers until the first heaven -- the location of which is in Allah's knowledge. (This is to say, an unlimited number of angels are going to be over that group. He didn't say: "when they find one person." Therefore it is a must to be in a group to get this particular reward.) Allah asks His angels, and He knows already (but he asks in order to assure it and make it understandable for us) "What are my servants saying?" (He did not say "servant," but `ibadi, "servants" in the plural.) The angels say: "They are praising You (tasbih) and magnifying Your Name (takbir) and glorifying You (tahmid), and giving You the best Attributes (tamjid)." (Can you say that all this is a lecture or a study group?
Can you say that this is silent? Rather, this is saying "Alhamdulillah" and all kinds of other dhikr.) Allah says: "Have they seen Me?" The angels answer: "O our Lord! They did not see You." He says: "(They are praising Me without seeing Me,) what if they see Me!" The angels answer: "O our Lord, if they saw You, they are going to do more and more worship, more and more tasbih, more and more takbir, more and more tamjid!" He says: "What are they asking?" Angels say: "They are asking Your Paradise!" He says: "Did they see Paradise?" They say: "O our Lord, no, they have not seen it." He says: "And how will they be if they see it?" They say: "If they see Paradise, they are going to be more attached and attracted to it!" He says: "What are they fearing and running away from?" (When we are saying, "Ya Ghaffar (O Forgiver), Ya Sattar (O Concealer)," it means that we are fearing Him because of our sins. We are asking Him to hide our sins and forgive us.) They say: "They are fearing and running away from hellfire." He says: "And have they seen hellfire?" They say: "O our Lord, no, they did not see hellfire." He says: "And how will they be if they see fire and hell?" They say: "If they see your fire, they are going to be running from it more and more, and be even more afraid of it." (Now listen to this carefully:) And Allah says: "I am making you witness (and does Allah need witnesses? He needs no witness since He said: "Allah is sufficient as witness." Why make the angels witnesses? Does Allah change His word? "Making you witness" here means, "Assuring you") that I have forgiven them." (Why has Allah forgiven them? Because, as the beginning of the hadith states, they are a group of people reciting the Names of Allah and remembering Him with His dhikr.) One of the angels says: "O my Lord, someone was there who did not belong to that group, but came for some other need." (That person came for some other purpose than dhikr, to ask someone for something.) Allah says: "Those are such a group that anyone who sits with them -- no matter for what reason -- that person will also have his sins forgiven."
The late Imam Ahmad Mashhur al-Haddad (d. 1416/1995) said in his book Miftah al-janna (cf. trans. Mostafa Badawi, Key to the Garden, Quilliam Press p. 107-108): This hadith indicates what merit lies in gathering for dhikr, and in everyone present doing it aloud and in unison, because of the phrases: "They are invoking You" in the plural, and "They are the people who sit," meaning those who assemble for remembrance and do it in unison, something which can only be done aloud, since someone whose dhikr is silent has no need to seek out a session in someone else's company.
This is further indicated by the hadith qudsi which runs: "Allah says: I am to my servant as he expects of Me, I am with him when he remembers Me. If he remembers Me in his heart, I remember him to Myself, and if he remembers me in an assembly, I mention him in an assembly betterthan his..." (Bukhari and Muslim) Thus, silent dhikr is differentiated from dhikr said out loud by His saying: "remembers Me within himself," meaning: "silently," and "in an assembly," meaning "aloud."
Dhikr in a gathering can only be done aloud and in unison. The above hadith thus constitutes proof that dhikr done out loud in a gathering is an exalted kind of dhikr which is mentioned at the Highest Assembly (al-mala' al-a`la) by our Majestic Lord and the angels who are near to Him, "who extol Him night and day, and never tire" (21:20). The affinity is clearly evident between those who do dhikr in the transcendent world, who have been created with an inherently obedient and remembering nature, namely the angels, and those who do dhikr in the dense world, whose natures contain lassitude and distraction; namely, human beings. The reward of the latter for their dhikr is that they be elevated to a rank similar to that of the Highest Assembly, which is sufficient honor and favor for anyone.
And with this, we would like to end with the opinion of Ibn Taymiyya on meetings of dhikr. In his book Majmu`at fatawa:
Ibn Taymiyya was asked about people that gather in a masjid making dhikr and reading Qur'an, praying to Allah and taking their turbans off their heads (leaving their heads bare) and crying, while their intention is not pride nor showing off but seeking to draw closer to Allah: is it acceptable or not? He answered: "Praise to Allah, it is good and recommended according to Shari`a (mustahabb) to come together for reading Qur'an, making dhikr, and making du`a'." wa Allahu Alim.5. Movement in Dhikr This is another claim that the writer felt it was necessary to claim that we meant deception. For by now the reader can see from the former chapters their deceptions in their clear contradictions, and this chapter is no different. In this chapter, the writer says Br. Abdur-Rahman Green did not mention Movement in Dhikr, but then the writer goes on to state that :
<< " See how evil is the accusation as regards to Bro. Adbur-Rahman Green saying that no movement during Dhikr is allowed, the he clearly explains in the same lecture to mean INNOVATIVE PRACTICES AMONG THE SUFIS, WHERE THE PEOPLE TOGETHER AND START DANCING AND SWAYING AND TURNING AROUND IN CIRCLES WHILE DOING DHIKR .">> If one was to read our response to this, he would clearly see what was our aim about certain practices of Dhikr. In the last debate we said,
The Meaning of Group Dhikr:
The writer displays his complete avoidance of the reply that we have issued. And it is clear, that if he would have faced the earlier debate with an open heart free and an objective mind set, a lot of time could have been saved from responding to subjects that were already discussed. The writer says that we have wronged brother Green. Green by implying that he said that the only Dhikr is a group where knowledge is being taught:<<Subhan`Allah how low people stoop to insult .a servant of Allah, actually Abdur-Raheem quotes the famous scholar of Tafseer, Imam Al-Qurtubi [ra] said, " Gathering of Dhikr are the gatherings of knowledge is discussed knowledge and admonition , those in which the word of Allah and the sunnah of His Messenger [saw] stories and accounts of the righteous predecessors.>> The writer must be considering that no one read the first debate. Because not only do we recognize this saying of Imam Qurturbi, we noted that Bro. Green only quoted Imam Qurtubi. This was our last reply to the speech quoting the saying of the Imam Qurtubi:
[Bro. Green said] <<Al-Kurtubi said the most excellent scholar who wrote one of the most famous tafseers of the Qur'an, he said gatherings of Dhikr are the gatherings of knowledge and admonition.. Those in which the word of Allah and the sunnah of his Messenger (saw) stories and accounts of the pious predecessors and the Salafusala. >>
[our response was] "We ask Mr. Green this question, do the Angels gather around the Throne and give speeches or do they Give Dhikr? When the Prophet (saw) lifted the veil for the Companions to hear the pebbles making Dhikr, did they hear a speech, or did they hear Dhikr? Did not Allah inform us that All of Creation does their own form of Dhikr, but we are not aware of it? And if one is sitting alone say 'Allah , Allah' and someone comes and joins him, is this aloud? Are the other Creations of Allah allowed to do Dhikr in a Gathering and His (swt) best of creation are forbidden to do so? We seek refuge in Allah from such ignorance.
This saying by Imaam Al-Kurtubi doesn't apply in any way that the only type of group Dhikr is the place where knowledge is discussed. We say, that Dhikr has many meaning, from Recitation of the Quran, Prayer and etc., and we don't put limits in it."
So we ask the reader and the unknown writer, "Where in this reply did we say that the meaning was exclusively Br. Greens?" We stated who said it and where it came from and from this proof, the writer must admit that his only intent is to attempt to stain the credibility of the Ahl as-Sunnah Foundation of America. He makes this attempt throughout his letter. But with the Help of Allah, the writers deception is brought into light so that we may all see may all see his Intentions. Like we said before. Wa Allahu Alim.
[his response] " Again another lie is attributed to Abdur-Raheem, what can we say other than to repeat our request to the reader to obtain the tape and listen carefully and know for yourself what exactly does Abdur-Raheem say."We say to this, " If the reader wants to obtain a copy of the tapes he should do so, after which he should read the response to it." And with this combination, we believe the reader will be Guided to a Way of Salvation. And he will shun this Doctrine that has been banned by our Great `Ulama throughout our Blessed history, until the words of the Prophet [saw] were proven true:
1. "The confusion [fitna] comes from there (and he pointed to the East =Najd in present-day Eastern Saudi Arabia)."
2. "A people that recite Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through the religion (of Islam) like the arrow passes through its quarry. They will no more come back to the religion than the arrow will come back to its course. Their sign is that they shave (their heads)."
3. "There will be in my Community a dissent and a faction, a people with excellent
words and vile deeds.
4. "A people will come out at the end of times, immature, foolish and corrupt. They will hold the discourse of the best of creation and recite Qur'an, but it will not go past their throats. They will passes through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. If you find them, kill them, for verily whoever kills them will have his reward from Allah the Day of Judgment."
5."There will be people in my Community whose mark is that they shave (their heads). They will recite Qur'an, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its target. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation."
6. "The apex of disbelief is towards the East [Najd]. Pride and arrogance is found among the people of the horse and the camel [Bedouin Arabs]."
7. "Harshness and dryness of heart are in the East [Najd], and true belief is among the people of Hijaz."
8. "O Allah, bless our Syria and our Yemen!" They said: "Ya Rasulallah, and our Najd!" He didn't reply. He blessed Syria and Yemen twice more. They asked him to bless Najd twice more but he didn't reply. The third time he said: "There [in Najd] are the earthquakes and the dissensions, and through it will dawn the epoch [or horn] of shaytan."
9. A version has, "The two epochs [or horns] of shaytan." Some scholars have said that the dual referred to Musaylima the Arch-liar and to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.
10. Some versions continue with the words: "And in it [Najd] is the consuming disease," i.e. death.
11. When `Ali killed the Khawarij, someone said: "Praise be to Allah Who has brought them down and relieved us from them." Ali replied: "Verily, by the One in Whose hand is my soul, some of them are still in the loins of men and they have not been born yet, and the last of them will fight on the side of the Antichrist."
Wa Allahu Alim.
<<It would be sufficient here to quote a few authentic Ahadeeth, so that the reader could (sic) draw his own conclusion (sic) as to whether the use of amulets is idol worship (Shirk) or not.
Abdullaah ibn Masood (May Allah be pleased with him) quoted the Prophet (s) as saying, "Verily spells, talismans and charms are Shirk" [Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume-3, Hadeeth # 3874, Page # 1089 English Translation and authenticated in Saheeh Sunan Abee Dawood, Volume-2, PP 736-737, #3288 by Shaikh Al-Albaani]
Uqbah ibn Aamir reported that a group of ten men approached Allahs Messenger (s) to pledge their allegiance to him, he accepted the oath of allegiance from nine of them, but refused one, when they asked him why he had refused one of them, he replied: "Verily, he is wearing an amulet", the man who was wearing it put his hand into his cloth pulled it off and broke it, and then made the oath. The Prophet (s) then said, "Whoever wears an amulet has committed Shirk" [Collected by Ahmad and authenticated in Saheeh al-Jaami as-sagheer, Volume-2, Page-1092, Hadeeth # 6394 by Shaikh Al-Albaani]. From the above Ahadeeth it would be clear that the use of amulets has been strictly forbidden by the Prophet (s) consequently amulets or talismans represent a clear deviation from the prophetic way.>>To this, we say this, " No, in this answer you give it is not sufficient to quote only a certain hadiths." For this is easy for one to believe it is shirk when he uses his proofs from the collections of the modern day Salafi Scholar: al-Albani. But al-Albani, who is known for missing many points and has caused much confusion and contradictions in his collections. Since the writer was aware of the hadiths we presented, we wonder why he defended Abdur-Raheem in this verdict. We cannot look into anyones heart, but from what we have seen we have to question the writers motives, because this discussion was clearly put to end in the former debate, yet the writer felt compelled to revive it. How can he revive it when ample proof was given? We will insha-Allah present a little of the same hadiths given in the last debate. And the reader will realize that this discussion should not have been brought up and the writers intention must be taken into account:
"And We reveal of the Qur'an what is a healing and a mercy for the believers, and the wrong-doers are not increased except in loss" (17:82)
It has been said that he who does not seek cure through the Qur'an, Allah does not cure him.
The scholars interpret that verse in two ways however: The first is that cure is for the hearts, by the removal of ignorance and doubt which hinder the understanding of miracles and matters pointing to Allah Almighty;
The second, that cure is for outward diseases, through the use of healing verses [ruqya] and seeking refuge and the like.
Qurtubi [whom Bro. Green referred to earlier as an excellent scholar] then lists instructions for making a kind of ruqya called nushra: various verses are recited over a clean container which is then filled with water; the water is then used for wudu' by someone who already has a valid wudu', and who also soaks his Head and limbs with it but does not use it for ghusl or istinja'; it may be drunk; he then prays two rak`as at the conclusion of which he asks for healing, and so for three days. Qurtubi cites Ibn `Abd al-Barr's statement whereby the Prophet's condemnation of nushra concerns whatever contradicts the Qur'an and Sunna, not what conforms to it.
Qurtubi continues: "The Prophet said: Cure for my Community is in but three verses of Allah's Book, a mouthful of honey, or cupping. He also said: Ruqya is allowed as long as there is no idolatry [shirk]; and if you can help your brother, help him.
Malik ibn Anas said: To hang writings of Allah's Names upon oneself is permitted for healing and blessing but not for protection against the evil eye [see Abu Hayyan, Tafsir al bahr al-muhit 6:74]. `Abd Allah ibn `Amr used to hang a protective invocation taught by the Prophet around the necks of his young children. (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi - hasan)
The Prophet and the Companions hated the pagan kind of ruqya or talisman or necklace (tamima, qilada). Istishfa' or seeking blessing with Qur'an is not shirk, whether hung on oneself or not. Whoever cites the hadiths whereby the Prophet said: "Whoever hangs something (upon oneself), he is left to it for protection" (Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, and Ahmad, all with a weak chain), and that of Ibn Mas`ud's removal of his wife's pendant saying: "Ibn Mas`ud's family have no need of shirk" (al-Hakim and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih).... then this was all as a prohibition of what the people of Jahiliyya used to do in wearing amulets and pendants, thinking that they protected them against calamity, whereas only Allah protects, relieves, and tests, and He has no partner. So the Prophet forbade them what they used to do in their ignorance.
`A'isha said: "Whatever is worn after the descent of calamity is not an amulet (laysa min al-tama'im)."... As for seeking cure (istishfa') with the Qur'an whether worn on oneself or not then it is no shirk at all: the Prophet said: "Whoever hangs something (upon oneself), he is left to it for protection." Therefore who hangs Qur'an is certainly taken under Allah's protection, and He will not leave him to other than Him. Wearing a ruqya is accepted by: Ibn al-Musayyib, ad-Dahhak, Ja`far as-Sadiq, and Ibn Sirin."
We ask, "How did he miss the explanation of Imaam Nawawi in his in al-Majmu' sharh al-muhadhdhab?:
One may adduce as evidence for their permissibility [amulets (ta'wiz) containing protective or healing words (ruqya, hijab)] the hadith of `Amr ibn Shu`ayb, from his father, from his grandfather [`Amr ibn al-`As], that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) used to teach them for fearful situations the words: a`udhu bi kalimatillah al-tammat min ghadabihi wa sharri `ibadihi wa min hamazat al-shayatina wa an yahdurun = I seek refuge in Allah's perfect words from His wrath, from the evil of His servants, from the whispered insinuations of devils, and lest they come to me. `Abd Allah ibn `Amr [in Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud: `Abd Allah ibn `Umar] used to teach these words to those of his sons who had reached the age of reason, and used to write them and hang them upon those who had not.
The hadith is related in Abu Dawud, Nawawi included it in his Adhkar . Even Albani included the hadith in his Silsila sahiha (#264).
Awf ibn Malik said: We would use ruqya in Jahiliyya, so we said: "O Messenger of Allah, what do you say about this?" He replied: "Show me your protective words (a`ridu `alayya ruqakum), there is no harm in ruqya as long as it contains no shirk." [Muslim and Abu Dawud ]
Among the Companions it is established that `Abd Allah ibn `Amr used to make his small children wear ta`wiz and he certainly would not have done it if it consisted in shirk or led to it. This is confirmed by the Tabi`in who accepted the unconditional wearing of ta`wiz by both adults and children such as Sa`id ibn al-Musayyib, al-Dahhak, Ja`far al-Sadiq, and Ibn Sirin, and among those of later times Malik ibn Anas, as related by Qurtubi. Neither the latter nor Imam Nawawi objected to it, nor did the narrators of `Abd Allah ibn `Amr's report such as Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, Ahmad, and Abu Dawud.
Wa Allahu Alim.
This chapter is claim by the writer is another example of his deception, that we have purposely mislead those who may not have read the debate. That if one would have read it before, he would know our intentions clearly were to reveal the proofs of the Permissibilities of Visiting the Graves of the Awlia. But the writer attempts to injects the fallacy of claiming that we meant that bro. Green is saying visiting graves in general is shirk. Then he takes upon himself to "prove" that visiting the graves of the Awlia is not allowed from a discussion that he claims did not take place in the original debate. With this he states that visiting the graves of ones loved one is permissible :
<<It is reported authentically from the Prophet (s) that he said, "Visit the (graves), because it softens the heart, brings tears to the eyes and reminds of the next life, but dont say anything false" [Mustadrak al-Haakim, Volume-1, P-376 and authenticated in Ahkaamul-Janaaiz, P-180 of Shaikh Al-Albaani].
Also the Prophet (s) said " I used to forbade (sic) you from visiting graves, but now you may visit them, for in visiting them there is a reminder of death " [Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume-2, Hadeeth # 3229, Page-919, and also in Saheeh Muslim, Volume-2, Hadith # 2130-1, Page # 463, English Translation, the wording quoted is that found in Sunan Abu Dawud]
The above ahadeeth show that visiting graves is recommended in Islaam in order to help the living reflect on the shortness of this life and the closeness of the next and that such a visit may benefit one from being reminded of his own death.>>
As if it was never discussed nor addressed, the writer states his that the Visitation of the Graves of the Awlia is shirk. And he does this by not quoting from a Hadith, like he did above, but he uses his own opinion [like bro. Green] without any proof what so ever. And one must know, that the rationalization that is used by the modern day salafi is something to be rejected. With their logical conclusions based on innappropriate use of verses and hadith they have lead many astray. They become their own Imams and Scholars to a point that they are not in need of any Scholar. He says:
<<The Prophet (s) himself allowed visiting graves (whether of the pious or otherwise). Brother Abdur-Raheem never ever said that visiting the graves of the pious is Shirk, but yes indeed he did say the following, here we quote him << Going to the graves of the pious and calling upon them (making duaa to them and through them to Allah) then this is Shirk, since Allah has ordered us that we should call upon Him Alone, and because making duaa is an act of worship (Ebaadah) which should only be directed to Allah >>
We must revert time and time again to the same suggestion to the reader throughout this letter: that it will be beneficial for him to obtain the original debate, something that the writer does not wish to suggest [?]. And we would like for the readers to know there is a reason that the writer only states his own opinion and avoids presenting our opinions on the matter. This is a form of censure in the most detested way. For this to be declared a fair debate, both sides should be presented so that the reader can decide for himself. Not in a way where the victors write the history . For now we will state our proofs, since he has already stated his. Most of it is from the original debate and again the reader will notice that this discussion should not have been re-opened. Like the above discussions. Like we said before:
"Some people think that if a duaa from one of the saliheen is answered while he is alive then he cannot help you if he is dead. As if the `aabid, sheikh or saint is the origin of the help. But it is always Allah who is the source of the baraka and never a human being. So to think that Allah can only give when that saint is alive and when he is dead, Allah does not give anymore, Is to say that the source is the person and not Allah in the first place! But in reality it is Allah who is giving help in both cases: life or death."
It is essential to understand that it is not, in reality, the Prophet or the Awlia who is the ultimate object of supplication, nor is he the one who grants it, but he is the best means of forwarding it to Allah and for its being granted by Allah. This is clear in the Prophet's prayer to Allah, in his words, "through Your Prophet and the Prophets before me" and "through those who ask" in the following two hadiths:
On the authority of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, may Allah be pleased with him: He relates that the Messenger of Allah said: "The one who leaves his house for prayer and then says: "O Allah, I ask you by the right of those who ask you and I beseech you by the right of those who walk this path unto you that my going forth bespeak not of levity, pride nor vainglory nor done for the sake of repute. I have gone forth in the warding off your anger and for the seeking of your pleasure. I ask you, therefore, to grant me refuge from hell fire and to forgive me my sins. For no one forgive sins but yourself." Allah will accept for his sake and seventy thousand angels will seek his forgiveness."
It is related in Musnad Ahmad 3:21, Ibn Majah (Masajid), al-Mundhiri in al-Targhib 1:179, Ibn Khuzayma in his Sahih, Ibn al-Sani, and Abu Nu`aym. Ghazali mentions it in the Ihya and `Iraqi said: "It is hasan." Nawawi mentions only Ibn al-Sani's two chains in the Adhkar and says they are da`if (weak). However, Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani says it is hasan in al-Amali al-masriyya (#54) and also in the Takhrij of Nawawi's book, explaining that the latter neglected Abu Sa`eed al-Khudri's narration and omitted to mention Ibn Majah's.
The Prophet also said on the authority of Anas ibn Malik: "O Allah, grant forgiveness to my mother, Fatima Bint Asad, and make vast for her the place of her going in [i.e. her grave] by right of thy Prophet and that of those prophets who came before me" and so on until the end of the hadith.
Imam Kawthari mentioned in his Maqalat mentions Shafi`i's tawassul through Abu Hanifa in the beginning of his Tarikh Baghdad with a sound chain.
Haytami also said in his book al-Sawa`iq al-muhriqa li ahl al-dalal wa al-zandaqa: "Imam Shafi`i made tawassul through the Family of the Prophet [Ahl al-bayt] when he said:
Al al-nabi dhari`ati wa hum ilayhi wasilati
arju bihim u`ta ghadan bi yadi al-yamini sahifati
The Family of the Prophet are my means and my
intermediary to him. Through them I hope to be
given my record with the right hand tomorrow.
al-Khatib relates that al-hafiz Abu Nu`aym said: considered it incumbent upon all Muslims to invoke Allah for Abu Hanifa in their prayer due to his preservation of the Prophet's Sunan and fiqh for them. This is explained by the fact that among Abu Hanifa's merits that are exclusive to him is his standing as the first in Islam to have compiled a book of fiqh.
Ibn al-Jawzi in his Sifat al-safwa lists examples of tabarruk and tawassul is recommended. Among them:
Abu Ayyub al-Ansari: "al-Waqidi said: It has reached us that the Eastern Romans visit his grave and seek rain through his intercession when they suffer from droughts." 1:243. Mujahid said: "People would uncover the space above his grave and it would rain."
Ma`ruf al-Karkhi (d. 200H): "His grave can be seen in Baghdad, and one seeks blessings with it. Al-hafiz Ibrahim al-Harbi (d. 285H) -- Imam Ahmad's companion -- used to say: "Ma`ruf's grave is proven medicine."" 2:214 Ibn al-Jawzi adds: "We ourselves go to Ibrahim al-Harbi's grave and seek blessings with it." 2:410
Al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi also relates Ibrahim al-Harbi's saying about Ma`ruf al-Karkhi: "Ma`ruf's grave is proven medicine." Siyar a`lam al-nubala' 9:343.
Abu al-Hasan al-Daraqutni said: "We used to seek blessings from Abu al-Fath al-Qawasi's grave." 2:471.
Abu al-Qasim al-Wa`iz: "His grave can be seen in Ahmad ibn Hanbal's cemetary and it is sought for blessings." [Notice on `Abd al-Samad ibn `Umar ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq] 2:482
Al-Hafiz Abu al-Qasim Ibn `Asakir says in Musnad Abi `Uwana (1:430): "Abu `Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn `Umar al-Saffar said to me that the grave of Abu `Uwana in Isfarayin [near Naysabur] is a Place of visitation for the whole world (mazar al-`alam) and a Place for obtaining blessing for the entire creation (mutabarrak al-khalq)."
Let it be known, that the writer of this book As-Sunnah Foundation spreading Mischief through the Art .., whoever he may be, is guilty of the same crime that he imputes to us. He has stated the facts we presented in ways other than they were intended. Our clear intentions were to expose the contradictive statements made by Bro. Abdur-Raheem Green. The debate was addressed to him and to claim that we had engaged in the act of backbiting and slander him, is nothing but a effort to avoid the questions that were brought up. We ask that the writer who displays his knowledge in such a flamboyant manner, to reveal himself and stop hiding behind the publications of Al-Hidaayah Foundation. If he truly represents them, as well as the Believers he is trying to inform, no great feat and no difficulty will be on him to identify himself. It would have given the writer some credibility if he had mentioned both sides if his intention is to debate us. It would have been more worthy for him to state why he did not address the proofs that were presented, but instead avoided them. When he claims that they do not go for debates we ask, "why was this letter written?"
This Deen is not explained by children or masked writers. Rather, it is preserved with the `Ulama and preserving it should be left for them. And this leaves others to deal with their daily lives and leave the knowledge to the Scholars. For Imaam Al-Ghazali said (ra) `It is incumbent upon the Muslims to be occupied with his worship and his livelihood and to leave knowledge to the scholars. What he meant here is that the common Muslim should leave the knowledge to the Scholars regarding discussion and disputes , but not regarding seeking knowledge.
And we say that every Muslim falls into one of these 6 categories:
1. The Mujtahid of the principles
And many/most are of the last two categories and its get thinner as the stages increase, like air when one climbs a mountain. And the opinions that we have stressed in this letter, did not reach below the level of the Scholar and we kept our opinions to ourselves. And the Scholars that were mentioned, are the ones that those who wish to refer themselves as Salafi, claim to follow.
O People of Sri Lanka, protect your Religion Islam by following the Righteous Scholars. And leave those who are victims of their own desires about Fiqh and Aqidah. Follow the Scholars whom Allah [swt] has commanded for us to do. For if we neglect this command, we doom no one but ourselves. Allah says:
and our Prophet [saw] had said:
O good people of Sri Lanka, follow those who are mentioned above for you will be saved from the misinformed masses and the self-imposed scholars. For the Prophet [saw] said , "The Scholars of my Nation are like the Prophets [saw] of Israel." What better guidance do we need, except those who know the Sunnah of our Prophet better than we? O people of Sri Lanka, dont be fooled by fancy words and flashy speech. For the Prophet [saw] said, " Some speech is Enchantment." They impress you with their words and their supposedly superior knowledge, for the Prophet [saw] has mentioned them as though He said it yesterday. And it is that their Worship and their Fasting gives you a since of inferiority, but it is all show and their actions dont go past their lips. For their appearance pleases you, but the smell of what is in their hearts is enough to kill. Beware of the evil scholars and their helpers who believe that they possess the knowledge for guidance:
Zayd ibn Hudayr reported that `Umar [ra] said, Do you know what can destroy Islam? I said, no. He said, it is destroyed by the errors of the scholars, the argument of the hypocrites about the book and the opinions of the misguided ones. [ Mishkat Masabih]
Imaam Ghazalli said in his `Ihya:
"Allah says: The hypocrites will remain in the lowest abyss of Hell [ 4-145] as they refused to accept truth after they have acquired knowledge. " and also in this book he said, "Some learned men will suffer such intense agonies of torture that the inmates of Hell will seek refuge on seeing their tortures.
O People of Sri Lanka, may Allah Bless and bring back the Peace you once again, just as before the Fitna arrived. Ameen. Beware of the scholars who claim only to assist you by giving their sincere guidance, but they will just come short of declaring Kufr if you believe something different then what they believe. Shun their `Aqeedah that has been banned throughout our Islamic heritage, and adhere to the beliefs of the Jamaa`ah, which you were all grasping to before the coming of the self-appointed "saviors". With holding onto the Jamaa`ah we will save ourselves and our families:
Surah al-Imran (3:103):
"And hold fast, all of you together, to the rope of Allah and be not divided."
Imam Sayf ad-Din al-Amidi (d. 631/1233; Rahimahullah) said in his al-Ihkam fi usul al-ahkam (The proficiency: on the fundamentals of legal rulings, pg. 295) with regard to the above Qur'anic verse: "Allah has forbidden separation, and disagreement with consensus ('Ijma') is separation." Hence, if Allah has forbidden separation then surely we must all unite
on the unanimously accepted `Aqeedah of our pious predecessors. And I have already quoted
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (Rahimahullah) as saying: "This unanimity (in `aqeedah) was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (Allah's mercy be upon them) and the scholars who followed their path."Ibn Kathir interprets the injunction, 'and do not be divided' to mean strict adherence to unity among Muslims. He reports on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said, 'God will be pleased with three acts from you, and wrathful with three others. He wishes that you worship Him alone without associating any thing with Him; that you hold fast all together to the rope of God and be not divided; and that you show loyalty to those whom God has set in authority.' (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, II, pp. 83-4). And other verses like:
1.Surah al-Imran (3:105): "And be not like those who separated and disputed after the clear proofs had come unto them: For such there is an awful doom."
2.Surah Al-An'am (6:159): "As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou has no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did."
3. Surah Al-Mu'minun (23:52-53): "And verily this Ummah of yours is a single Ummah and I am your Lord, so keep your duty unto Me. But they have broken their religion among them into sects, each rejoicing in its tenets."
4. Surah Al-Rum (30:32): "Those who split up their Religion, and become Sects, each sect exulting in its tenets."
5. Surah Al-Nisa (4:115): "He that disobeys the Apostle (Muhammad) after guidance has been made clear to him and follows a way other than that of the believers, We appoint for him that unto which he himself hath turned, and expose him unto Hell - a hapless journey's end!"
And with the explanation of this, we will in closing mention a few hadiths. For it is clear that from the above verses that adhering to the Majority is our way of salvation and a protection from being lead astray. They are not of the Jamaa`ah because they are the ones who separated in their beliefs. And our Prophet [saw] had said: Abu Dawood (Rahimahullah) has quoted the well known Hadith concerning the division of the Muslim Ummah into seventy- three sects in his Sunan (3/4580, English ed.):
Abu Amir al- Hawdhani said, "Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with him) stood among us and said, 'Beware! The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood among us and said': 'Beware! The People of the Book before (you) were split up into 72 sects, and this community will be split up into 73, seventy-two of them will go to Hell and one of them will go to Paradise, and it is the majority group (Jama'ah).'
Another version of the above Hadith has been reported by Hafiz Ibn Kathir (Rahimahullah) in The Signs Before The Day of Judgement (pg. 14): "Awf ibn Malik reported that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said, 'The Jews splitinto 71 sects: one will enter Paradise and 70 will enter Hell. The Christians split into 72 sects: 71 will enter Hell and one will enter Paradise. By Him in Whose hand is my soul, my Ummah will split into 73 sects: one will enter Paradise and 72 will enter Hell.' Someone asked, 'O Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him), who will they be?' He replied, 'The main body of the Muslims (al-Jama'ah).'
Shaykh Abdal Qadir al-Jilani (d. 561/1166; Rahimahullah) stated in Hadith in Ghunyat at-talibeen: "The Believer should adapt himself to the Sunnah and to the Jama'ah. The Sunnah is the way shown by Rasulullah (Peace be upon him). The Jama'ah is composed of the things done unanimously by the Sahaba who lived in the time of the four caliphs called Khulafa' ar-Rashidin (and others in their path). A Muslim must prevent the increase of the men of bid'ah and keep away from them, and should not greet them (as given in many Hadith on this issue). Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah), the Imam of our Madhhab, said that greeting a man of bid'ah meant loving him since it had been declared in a Hadith, 'spread the greeting (salaam)! Love one another in this way!" He also said (pg. 143): "The title, Ahl as-Sunnah, which the innovators have expressed for themselves is not appropriate for them."
Ibn Taymiyya hit the right point when he described those who are the real Sunni's in
his Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyyah (pg. 154):
Wa Allahu Alim.
Peace and Blessing on the Prophet and his Family and His Companions.