A Discussion between Sheikh Al-Abaani and Naasir al-Umar on the Manhaj of Salman al-Awdah

( Naasir al-Umar: If you permit me, o sheikh! I would like to call attention to two points, the issue that they say sheikh Salman is a Sururi or Ikhwaani; I know that he is not an Ikhwaani; I can almost swear on that.

Sheikh al-Abaani: [ Do you me] he is not a Sururi nor an Ikhwaani?

Naasir al-Umar: Yes, I can swear on that.

Sheikh al-Albaani: But there is middle way to the matter.

Naasir al-Umar: Yes.

Sheikh al-Albaani: This is what I hope we shall benefit from you either positively as I hope or positively if he is.
We are sorry [ to say],he may not be an Ikhwaani. However, his manhaj may be Ikhwaani. Firstly, do you differentiate – in agreement with me- between the two matters?

Naasir al-Umar: Of course, it is possible; this may apply to a person.

Sheikh al-Albaani: Permit me, do you agree with in separating between the two issues?

Naasir al-Umar: Yes, I do.

Sheikh al-Albaani: May Allah bless you. If you swear that he is not an Ikhwaani- And you have not been charged to swear- there is no need for that. However, the important matter is not for him not to be an Ikhwaani. Rather, the important matter is for his manhaj not to be Ikhwaani.
Here is the question. Don’t you feel that his manhaj is Ikhwaani?

Naasir al-Umar: By Allah! Not at all, o sheikh.

Sheikh Al-Abaani: This spoils [things] for us.

Naasir al-Umar: There may be issues from which it may be understood that he agrees [ with them] such as the statement that sheikh read. The matter is a matter of manhaj and not nomenclatures. Names may be changed and the methodologies remain.

Sheikh Al-Abaani: For this [ reason]- may Allah bless you- do not be too enthusiastic with your statement “I can swear that he is not an Ikhwaani” as nothing can be benefited from this.

Naasir al-Umar: even methodology wise.

Sheikh al-Abaani: What is important is for his manhaj not be the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon.
Let me give you now an example so as to clarify my question ; and consequently you explain to me the reality that you feel in our brother Salman.

I will give you an example of one of our Salafi brothers whom I can categorically say he is not an Ikhwaani. However, his manhaj is Ikhwaani. He is a Salafi. I believe you know him well. And he is Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq. Do you know him?

Naasir al-Umar: I know him.

Sheikh al-Abaani : Good, he was my student in the Islamic University. He used to be Ikhwaani. Later, he became Salafi- so to say- in the university. He was among the best youths who were aware of the lessons and the syllabi etc.
I can say- as you have said about Salman- that he ( Abdur-Rahman Abdulkhaaliq) was not an Ikhwaani. However, his manhaj was the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon .
What about this?
Firstly, he became partisan and indiscriminately gathered people. Don’t you know this?

Naasir al-Umar: Yes, I do.

Sheikh al-Abaani: Good, this partisanship and indiscriminate gathering is not upon the Salafi methodology which we call to. Is it ?

Naasir al-Umar: No, it is not.

Sheikh Al-Abaani: Hence, if we say that Salman that is being discussed now in this statement or another is not an Ikhwaani- And we truthful. However, that doesn’t take him out of being Ikhwaani manhaj-ed. So there is caution here that he is not an Ikhwaani. However, his manhaj is the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon.

Now I am asking, do you feel that he indiscriminately gathers the people, gathers the youths and instill in them enthusiasm similar to the enthusiasm that Al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon instill in their supporters and followers and so on.

I said in the previous sitting that the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon is
” Gather indiscriminately and later educate” but later there won’t be anything. It is only blind gathering. No education and nothing.
The evidence is a century has almost gone on al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon in different countries while they are still on the military order ‘makaanaka raawih’ i.e, stand still and move. Why? Because this is how their manhaj inspires them. They don’t make progress not in knowledge, nor aqeedah، nor, morals. They remain the way they are completely. You can’t find a brother from al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon that follows the Sunnah at least on the surface. You see one of them emulating Hasan al-Bannaa; he takes from his beards and makes it like that of the non Arabs or the people of the Magrib. They are concerned about emulating Hasan al-Bannaa; they don’t have in mind following the leader of the Prophets, alayhim as-salaatu was-salaam.

Now, is there any indiscriminate gathering?
This happened in Kuwait before the incident fell on them. So Abdur-Rahman and those around him busied themselves with other than educating the group and training them islamically as a result of this partisanship and this indiscriminate gathering of people. And this is part of the traces of blind training. You can hear now the problem which saddens the heart of every Muslim, what our brothers in Algeria fell into. Our brothers in Algeria had enthusiasm. However, they never had the principle” Educate and later gather people.”
Rather, they gathered around them millions [of people]. However, most of them do not understand, most of them do not know except this heat from the youths ” We want it to be a Muslim state” And whoever hastens to get something before its due time, he shall be denied it as you know.

Hence, may Allah bless you, it is not necessary when we exonerate a person from being an Ikhwaani. Rather, what is important is to exonerate his manhaj from being the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon.

You can’t find a Salafi among the leaders of Al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon as I have told you about ‘Isaam al-‘Attaar. He was a Salafi in his aqeedah but does not call to it. While we know that Salman and his brothers overthere are – maa shaaa Allah- calling to Islam and Sunnah and the methodology of the Righteous Predecessors.
However, if the manhaj of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon finds its way to them through indiscriminate gathering, say ‘ Allahu Akbar ‘ over the Salafi manhaj and it shall become a forgotten issue.

So, I hope now to understand from you an answer that agrees with the reality of the man that even in his manhaj he does not gather the youths indiscriminately. Rather, he educates and teaches them as it is obligatory upon every caller.

Naasir al-Umar: What I know from sheikh Salman is that he is not an Ikhwaani and his manhaj is not the manhaj of the Ikhwaan. Rather his manhaj is according to the manhaj of the Ahlus-sunnah wal Jamaa’ah and the manhaj of the Salaf of this Ummah in his teaching and knowledge.
What I know, o sheikh, and the last news that got to me is that he told sheikh Abdul-Azeez- and he gave him permission- that he would commence the launching of competition on the memorisation of Sunnah on the method of memorisation of the Noble Quran. Sheikh Abdul-Azeez agreed to that.
He has a number of his students memorising the two Sahihs. He has seven classes in a week, most of them are on hadith and Sunnah. He doesn’t have a general class except one in a week. And that is the one that we see and listen to its cassettes.
Hence, I say sheikh Salman does not belong to al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon nor does he have their manhaj. This is what I know about him.

Sheikh al-Albaani: Nevertheless, these statements do not concur.

Naasir al-Umar: O sheikh, I said not long ago that there might be some errors mistakenly. But I am sure if you discuss with sheikh Salman, he would explain his view and other than what we have understood from him will be clear to us.

Sheikh al-Albaani: Nevertheless, it appears it is not only in this statement. Rather, there are a lot of this)

[Silsilatatu al-Hudaa wan-Nur, Cassette 600b, from minute 1:17:26]

Note:

Sheikh al-Albaani left this world 21 years ago and Salman al-Awdah has not ceased from the indiscriminate gathering and incitation against the authorities.

Written by: Sheikh ‘AbdulGaniy Juma’h, Hafidhahullah.

Stick to the way of the Companions

We would continue to differ as long as we subject the deen to the intellect, since our background and orientation differ ,likewise our reasoning.

But alhu sunnah, despite the distance between them. You would always see them saying the same thing, their usool is the same, waLlaahi many of us have not met each other before and we barely know each other, but when we talk, you would think there is someone dictating to us what ti say , yes we have truly have someone dictating what to say to us.

I can’t deny this fact that there is someone dictating to us that we can’t oppose, if we oppose him we are thrown out of the party of Allaah, and left to with disgrace and humiliation, who is this person dictating to us ? It is the prophet, we try as much as possible to be in line with what he brought and taught the companions, how do we know what he taught the companions ? We know through the companions, they are the ones who passed the Quran and Sunnah to us, and they did not pass it to us to bend its injunctions to the direction of or whims and Caprices, rather they explained both to us in great details , so explanation they make, we regard it as what they heard from the prophet , as long as no one contradicts them on it. So we are blind followers of the prophet alhamduliLlah, he is the one dictating to us , we would sacrifice anything to defend what he preached and left the companions upon.

As for those who follow the invented ideologies of their group, like the jabatiyyah, who follow Muhammad Ali jabata, or the ikhwanul muslimoon with his three branches who follow the delusions of Hassan Albanna sayyid Qutb and Muhammad surur , or the neo-sufi who called themselves tablighs who follow a Sufi Ash’ari man called khandalawi , and others, these people have deviated from the true guidance of the prophet, and they have forsaken the correct meaning of the texts of the Quran and sunnah for their own whims, they would also quote the Quran and hadith, but according to their own delusions and fantasy , just like the jabatiyyah groups would always claim the word of the prophet
كل بدعة ضلالة “
Every innovation is misguidance “

Means all innovators are disbelievers, this is because they have interpreted this hadith in a way which the companions never did , the word misguidance encompasses sins and disbelief, so how can rbey restrict it to disbelief? The only evidence they would provide to strengthen this claim is their intellect and not evidence from the way the companions understood that hadith, but we know the companions never made takfeer on all innovators since they use to pray behind the khowarij, which shows they did not make takfeer on all innovators, .

So my brothers and sisters this is how dangerous and detrimental it is to jettison the understanding of the companions for our own faulty and corrupt understanding, people, people now bend verses and hadith to defend alien ideologies, even ideologies like feminism which originated in Europe, I have seen a Christian also trying ti defend Christianity with verse of the Quran, we should ditch this act and stick to the explanation of the companions.

In this way, the ranks of the Muslims would be united, and their hearts would be ignited, the Muslims can only stand against the oppressions they suffer in the hands of their adversaries when they bow to Islam and stop making Islam bow to them.

Written by: A Slave Of Allaah, Hafidhahullah.

Some Events A Lot of People Have Dabbled into without Adequate Information

Praise be to Allāh the Lord of world; may the blessing and peace be upon the Prophet, his household and companions all together.

To proceed:

The events and happenings unfolding around the world generally and the Islamic world specifically are not hidden from most people, although their level of awareness may vary from one person to another.

On 21, November, 2017 , as I have mentioned on many occasions, one of the younger mashaayikh called my attention to a post written by one Abu Mazeedah against the Saudi government and the Saudi senior scholars in defence of the al-Ikhwān al-Muslimun. He also told me that a lot of brothers from among the students of knowledge had written rejoinders to the post, but to him, those rejoinders did not really address the shubhaat raised my that man. Although I had opened a Facebook account years before that time, I initially declined the request of this brother of ours that I write a rejoinder for several reasons: one, I had not made a single post on my wall before then. Yes, I would come on Facebook some times, read some posts by some people, pass some comments if necessary; two, I discovered that people would not really address issues on which they differed, rather they would abuse one another. And this personally to me is detestable, and more importantly our religion doesn’t support this except when necessary; three, the disscussants on Facebook or other platforms hardly submit to the truth even when it is clear to them and this to me is a share waste of precious time, more so our religion frowns at this.

Around 12:00 a.m after our brother had spoken with me, I checked my phone and I saw that he had sent the write-up by that man to my WhatsApp. When I read it, I felt I had to change my stand because the post contained some shubhaat that needed clarification. This I did by writing series of rejoinders on the post and other ones written by the same person. And I don’t think anyone who is truly a Salafi will have any problem with the fact that I defended those scholars with evidences available to me as he had defended the Ikhwānis and those upon their manhaj incarcerated by the Saudi authorities. I don’t think a serious Salafi would prefer we leave the youths with those shubhaat!!

Let’s take a walk further down memory lane.Some months before the incident of Abu Mazeedah, I was invited to participate in a seminar in Ilorin. I eventually declined the invitation whe I was told the topic I was to discuss. The topic was “the specious arguments of the sects that differed with Ahlus-sunnah”. Much as this topic sounds very interesting, I don’t know how a Salafi preacher today would discuss this topic without talking about the Ikhwān.
To cut a long story short, I didn’t honour the invitation because I felt the main organizer ,i.e. the prof would not like me to mention the Ikhwān and he might rejoin me which might also prompt me to want to do a counter rejoinder and they might not even give me the opportunity to do so and this might make me very displeased. So I had to inform sheikh Sarumi and Imam Qamar as both of them were the ones that suggested my name to the committee set up by the prof. Initially they both objected to my refusal to participate but after lengthy discussions with each one of them, they left me with my decision.

To cut a long story short, what I feared eventually happened in the seminar. The lecturer [ sheikh Ibn Raaji] who eventually treated the topic that was earlier given to me,mentioned the Ikhwān and how they are not from among the people of Sunnah. This didn’t please some of the doctors seated; they came to the defence of the Ikhwān.

When it was the turn of Sheikh AbdurRauf Ballo, another lecturer on that day, to present his lecture, he buttressed the position of sheikh Ibn Rāji.

Some months later,a brother produced some short clips which contained the opposing views of those doctors and the other lecturers

Prior to this seminar organized by the prof and the other one organized by Haadhaa Bayaanun Linnaas, our mashaayikh in Markaz had always defended the prof. It was only two persons, one is out of Markaz now, that would speak against him based on what they knew of his manhaj.

However, when we watched the video of the Ilorin seminar organised by the prof and saw their stand on Ikhwān, we felt this stand of theirs could pave way more for the Ikhwāni dawah in Lagos and coud also affect some adherents of the Salafi dawah in Lagos.

Knowing full well that the Ikhwāni dawah believes in protests against the authorities, struggling for political power, even if it leads to compromising as many Islamic principles as possible, we felt it was a duty on us to caution our brothers from the new direction of the prof, reason being that we were the ones who recommended him to our brothers in our own area by inviting him in year 2009.

Surprisingly, the first person to caution his own listeners against the prof and another doctor was the one who had defended the prof among us most and whose wives would also attend the other doctor’s lectures- and that was sheikh Sa’eed Hamzah, and this goes a long way to tell us that the matter isn’t personal as some people have always presented it-

A lot of people then weren’t pleased with this refutation of his among them was one of the younger mashaayikh in Ikorodu who was very bitter about it. He had a discussion that lasted about an hour with me on this. He frowned seriously at calling the prof a sururi. On that day I said to him, “Let’s keep aside whether it is right to use that word for him or not. Are you saying we should keep quiet and not discourage who cares to listen from among our Salafi brothers from attending gatherings to which the prof and his likes invite the Ikhwāni preachers ? He could not give me a direct answer.

On December 24, 2017, we organized a seminar on the matter of the Ikhwān where in we cautioned people from falling for them and falling for those that are defending them. This,however, did not go down well with some brothers among whom was the brother mentioned earlier who later convinced others against us. He also succeeded much later in winning another brother who had before then had very tough position on the prof, although the brother fell for him based on another issue.

Some weeks after our seminar ustadh Ibrahim Oganija also wrote a refutation on one of the doctors which he posted on Facebook. When I saw this, I gave him a call and told him his write-up was somehow harsh.
During this period I received so many calls asking me to caution our people.

A day or so later someone wrote a rejoinder to that of ustadh Oganija blasting us all in the Markaz. I got to know this when the person sent it to me on WhatsApp. On seeing it,I read it and later gave him a call asking him why he had sent this to me. Initially he told me it was social media. Then said to him ” What do you mean by social media? We are not on the same WhatsApp group” Then he said to me ” Is it not one of you that wrote refutation against Dr Sharaf ?” I replied him ” But I am not the one that wrote it.” Then he apologised to me on that. After this I tried to explain to him what had led to all that; this led to serious discussion between both of us.
About two hour later the person called me to inform me that he recorded our conversation to share with his ikhwah who also had similar position to his.

Some days later, I tried to speak to our brothers in markaz that I had received so many calls on those refutations done by the sheikhs, Sa’eed Hamzah and Ibrahim Oganija. I then suggested that any person amongst us who intended to do any refutation in which the name of markaz would be mentioned, should carry others along. All those present agreed. However sheikh Oganija was not in the sitting but I communicated the message to him. But to my surprise, his response was that no body could force his opinion on him if his opinion differs from theirs. On reading this reply of his, I didn’t bother to write any further message to him on the matter.

Some weeks later, he decided to hold a lecture on the TMC and some dakaatira with the theme:
THE MUSLIM CONGRESS ” TMC” “As I Know Them” and with the topic:
(Some mistakes & innovations that take ” TMC” out of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaaha And the relationship between some Dhakaatir and The Muslim brotherhood in Nigeria ( TMC& Tadhomun)
” which is the reason for our division now”)

He sent the handbill containing this information to markaz’s WhatsApp group. The asaatidha on seeing this reacted disaprovingly to it with different comments viewing it as something that could cause fitnah as it was too direct.
I personally did not write any comment on it for two reasons; one, he had said no body could force their opinion on him in my last chat with him; two, it was not hidden from him that weeks before that we held a seminar the handbill of which did not bear the name of any particular jamaah in Nigeria not even the name of al-iKhwan al-Muslimun that we intended to talk about.

When we met two or so days later I suggested to the members present that we write a disclaimer exenorating us from that program of his that carried that big theme and topic. When we did this and ustadh Oganija saw it on Facebook, he felt we had embarrassed him with that.
The issue is, he should not expect us to share in the repercussions of any unguarded action by him as was the case when he attacked baba Lagege, the blame was not borne by him alone despite the fact that we advised him then not to do that, but he accused me then specifically of being too lenient. People’s blame was not limited to him because people felt we were friends and I must have supported his action. The Same can be said of the refutation he posted on Facebook about Dr Sharaf.
Concequently he gathered his students and addressed them. After that we saw some of his students coming online to abuse us. This was also countered by some brothers.

To cut a long story short, it is this event that led to the severance of the relationship between me and him contrary to what some people are saying.

I do refutations when I deem it necessary. However, I avoid making it too direct particularly where I think it could cause trouble. I avoid abusing people as much as I can in my refutations. And this can be seen in my rejoinder to a doctor who, in a seminar held some months ago, was bold to refute me; he even mentioned my name; he connected me to sheikh ar-Rayyis and not only that even connected me wrongly to a lecture he did on ” the methods of al-Ikhwaanal-Muslimun in misleeading the youths ; he also ascribed me to following the methodology of sheikh Rabee’ and sheikh Muhammad Amaan al-Jaamii.
I watched the video of this doctor and did some clarifications on his specious argument without mentioning his name nor abusing him. This has been my way which I would not leave in order to please anyone. Yes, I am strict when it comes to upholding the truth. However, that doesn’t mean I should be abusing people in order to present it. I avoid abuses as much as possible unless when I think it is necessary.

May Allāh unite us all upon that which pleases him

Written by: Sheikh ‘AbdulGaniy Juma’h, Hafidhahullah.