Very few people are given the grace, wisdom and sincerity to differentiate between an individual being resolute in praising and proudly choosing the blessed way and methodology of the Salaf on one hand and arrogantly eulogizing oneself personally on the other hand. One is praise-worthy firmness and the other is blameworthy self-righteousness.

Many people innocently confuse the first for the second. Some, however, deliberately make the first look like the second when people ascribe themselves to it and that is either to disparage the methodology itself because it is antithetical to their own chosen way or simply to disparage some individuals associated with it and with whom they have a running feud.

In all situations, we say as Sheikh Al-Albaanee said without mincing words:

إذا سئلنا عن مذهبنا ومذهب مخالفنا؟ قلنا وجوبا: مذهبنا صواب يحتمل الخطأ ومذهب مخالفنا خطأ يحتمل الصواب وإذا سئلنا عن معتقدنا ومعتقد خصومنا قلنا وجوبا: الحق ما نحن عليه والباطل ما عليه خصومنا” (من كتاب الحديث حجة بنفسه)

“When asked about our way in comparison with the ways of others, we say: ‘Emphatically, our way must be the authentic way with the possibility of error (from us), and the way of the others is the erroneous way with the possibility of correctness (in some of their actions).”

However, just as our brother, Ibnu Abdillah As-sudaisiy said, it is from the whispering of Shaytan for any individual to think that he is personally better than other Muslims. As for our chosen path of Salafiyyah, it is as Al-Albaanee describes it above, certainly the best, and saying that one is seriously committed to it after choosing it is no arrogance or self-praise (تزكية النفس); otherwise, we should not have chosen it.

Written by: Sheikh Murtado Adedokun, Hafidhahullah.


When the three sheikhs of Salafiyyah, Abdullah Bun Baaz, Al Albaanee and Ibnu ‘Uthaymeen who were all giants and contemporaries disagreed on matters of the Deen, it was easy to know by reading their individual works on the disputed matter even if it was as little as where to place the hands on rising from the rukoo’ or the legal ruling on the face veil. Once it was clear to them what a man had said and intended by his saying, no special conferences for permission were first held to reassure one another that a refutation was not being done to pull down somebody or cause disunity in the Salafee ranks even though Bun Baaz remained the exalted grand mufti of the Kingdom till death.

To all three, as to the earlier blessed scholars before them, the truth was more sacred and they were not intoxicated by their own personalities nor overwhelmed by others the fear of displeasing whom would seal the lips to maintain misconceived “salafi unity”. What colossal personalities indeed they all were till death! May Allah forgive them all.

No doubt, the uproar and discontent that greets every semblance of disagreement with any popular daa’iyah on our local terrain of Salafee da’wah cannot all be from our greater praise-worthy concern for the truth, especially when there has been no insult of any kind to the person being refuted, and more especially when it is noted that the strange principles of first holding a tryst on every item of disagreement is often violated by those who advocate it and whose personalities we often seek to massage with our misplaced indignation that ends up fanning unfortunate embers.

Truly, some matters are insignificant enough to be overlooked, but once a daa’iyah has chosen to make a big issue and point of public focus of them, they may not remain so and that may justify appropriate responses before they snowball into worse than an appropriate refutation would cause. However, we get to see the refutations before the worse evils that might follow otherwise.

To all advocates of unity and harmony, let us all meet at the ground of the truth. As far as we’re concerned, those we refute remain very much our brothers. A person does not become less of a brother by refutation as by how he takes it. May the prime position of the truth never dwindle in our eyes.

Weitten by: Sheikh Murtado Adedokun, Hafidhahullah.

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]


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.