Upon Clarity | على بيّنة

“A Person Says Beginners Shouldn’t Refute Innovators And Warns Against the likes of Shaykh Aḥmad Bāzmūl — Should we Take From Him?” https://t.me/abulfadhls

https://youtu.be/RHaFQAjgl84?si=3QiNq1GNJgzAw-7V

Shaykh al-Albānī رحمه الله said: “I do not believe that a Salafī—regardless of how low his scholarly level may be—would allow himself to water down the clear and evident truth!” al-Silsilah al-Ḍaʿīfah, 14/1019

Fifthly: The approach and method of the scholars towards an innovator is to wait for a period of time, during which he is observed and monitored, until his repentance becomes sound and his condition is rectified. His repentance is not immediately accepted and he is not simply taken at his word. Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said: “The jurists stipulated, according to one of their two positions, regarding the acceptance of the testimony of the one who has been accused of slander, that he become upright, and they estimated this to be one year, just as ʿUmar dealt with Ṣabīgh ibn ʿAsal when he deferred him for one year. Aḥmad adopted this same position regarding the repentance of one who calls to innovation: that he is deferred for one year, just as ʿUmar deferred Ṣabīgh ibn ʿAsal”… Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah also said: “…ʿUmar, may Allāh be pleased with him, commanded the Muslims to boycott Ṣabīgh ibn ʿAsal al-Tamīmī when he saw him to be among those who followed the ambiguous passages of the Book, until a year had passed and the sincerity of his repentance became apparent, after which he commanded the Muslims to resume relations with him…”… Ṣiyānat al-Salafī min Waswasah wa Talbīsāt ʿAlī al-Ḥalabī, pp. 481–487. (With the removal of certain parts where you find: … )

🛑“He Has Repented — So Why Don’t You Accept His Repentance?” Find Out How the Salaf Understood a Genuine and Correct Retractation! Shaykh Aḥmad Bāzmūl: And this is a new method of repentance, but it is not upon the methodology of the Salaf al-Ṣāliḥ; rather, it is upon the way of the people of deception and trickery. The Salafī scholars are not naïve or gullible people who can be deceived by al-Ḥalabī and his likes from among those who water down the religion and are astray. Therefore, they did not accept Muḥammad Ḥassān’s claim of repentance for the following reasons: Firstly: The obligation upon the one who has opposed the methodology of the Salaf al-Ṣāliḥ and fallen into innovations and newly introduced matters is that he abandons all of them. He does not repent from some while continuing upon others. So whoever is like this, the description of being an innovator remains applicable to him until he repents from all of them… Secondly: Whoever falls into innovation publicly, and the people are affected by his innovation, is obligated to publicly announce his repentance, disassociate himself from his innovation publicly, and call upon those who were influenced by him to return to the truth. This is contrary to what occurred in the private, unannounced telephone call, in which the meaning of publicly announcing repentance is not fulfilled, as Allāh, the Most High, said [what means]: {Except those who repent, rectify themselves and make clear the truth.} [al-Baqarah: 160]. Maymūn ibn Mihrān said: “Whoever sins secretly should repent secretly, and whoever sins openly should repent openly; for the people disgrace others and do not forgive, whereas Allāh, Mighty and Majestic, forgives and does not disgrace.” And this is what happened with Imām Ibn al-Mubārak when one of those who had repented from the doctrine of the Jahmiyyah wanted to sit with him. He stood up and said to him, “Either you get up, or I will get up!” He said, “Why?” Ibn al-Mubārak replied, “Because you are a Jahmī.” He said, “But I have repented.” ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Mubārak replied to him: “Not until you make your repentance apparent just as you made your innovation apparent”… Thirdly: The questions and answers in Muḥammad Ḥassān’s telephone call were unclear and not explicit regarding his repentance and his declaration of disassociation from the innovation and its people. Rather, they contained many possible interpretations, and the intended meaning was obscure… Fourthly: Whoever repents must have signs of withdrawal and repentance become apparent upon him, such as clarifying the condition of the people of innovation, praising the people of the Sunnah, warning against innovations and their people, and praising the Sunnah and its people. This is contrary to the state of Muḥammad Ḥassān, for after his — alleged — repentance, he praised al-Shaʿrāwī and al-Qaraḍāwī, and he remains in the midst of the people of innovation and desires, and he remains upon what he was upon. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah said: “Part of the repentance of one who calls to innovation is that he makes clear that what he used to call to was an innovation and misguidance, and that guidance lies in its opposite. Just as Allāh, the Most High, stipulated regarding the repentance of the People of the Book — whose sin was concealing what Allāh had sent down of clear proofs and guidance in order to mislead the people through that — that they rectify their actions within themselves and make clear to the people what they had concealed from them. He said: {Indeed, those who conceal what We sent down of clear proofs and guidance after We had made it clear to the people in the Scripture — those are cursed by Allāh and cursed by those who curse. Except those who repent, rectify themselves and make clear the truth; those I will accept their repentance, and I am the Ever-Accepting of repentance, the Most Merciful.} [al-Baqarah: 159–160] … Thus are the conditions and realities of repentance to be understood, and Allāh is the One whose aid is sought”…

https://youtu.be/4q_SRIQ35DM?si=7msED-bm4BPq_Jko

https://youtu.be/gWbVCIj343o?is=2jAjjg48Kx-OLB_O

Shaykh Sulaymān ar-Ruḥaylī حفظه الله said: We stated: ”(On the condition that it is free from a stronger opposing proof).” This is because whenever a stronger opposing proof exists, diverting the wording away from its apparent meaning (taʾwīl) becomes completely invalid, regardless of how many evidences one may present. A clear example of this is the Attributes of Allāh, the Mighty and Majestic. The Salaf unanimously agreed that they are to be affirmed upon their apparent meanings.[1] Therefore, no one has the right to divert them away from their apparent meanings (taʾwīl)—neither with a proof he assumes to be evidence nor without proof. Such taʾwīl is never correct, even if its advocate were to bring a hundred proofs. For example, if someone were to divert the meaning of the Hand of Allāh to mean the Power of Allāh, and then presented a hundred linguistic proofs from the Arabic language showing that the word hand can be used to mean power, we would still not accept this taʾwīl, nor would we describe it as correct or acceptable. This is because it is opposed by something far stronger: the consensus of the righteous Salaf—may Allāh be pleased with them—upon not diverting these texts away from their apparent meanings. This is a principle that must be recognised and understood, for it is of the utmost importance in the subject of taʾwīl. Taʾwīl is impermissible whenever there is a prior consensus affirming the apparent meaning of a text. No one has the right to divert a text away from its apparent meaning when the early generations unanimously affirmed that meaning. Rather, every taʾwīl that contradicts the consensus upon the apparent meaning is false, regardless of whatever evidences its advocate may present, for such evidences are not accepted. [1] See: Jāmiʿ Bayān al-ʿIlm wa Faḍlih (2/929) and at-Tamhīd (7/145), both by Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr; al-Iqtiṣād fī al-Iʿtiqād (p. 51) by ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Maqdisī; al-ʿUlūm wa al-Ḥikam; Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā (3/46); and Minhāj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (2/639), both by Ibn Taymiyyah. Source: Taqrīb al-Wuṣūl ilā Fahm al-Uṣūl min ʿIlm al-Uṣūl, p. 506.

https://youtu.be/6vd9faWgWIM?si=I_NFsgbh5e2VkJFw

The Hidden Thief: Why So Many Miss Fajr Shaykh Dr. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-ʿUmaysān حفظه الله

https://youtu.be/SY_Q_wtwhuw?si=jicDhpbm2ba2t7uc

https://youtu.be/SY_Q_wtwhuw?si=jicDhpbm2ba2t7uc

It is for this very reason that the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah have repeatedly warned against strengthening the platforms of the people of innovation by attending them, promoting them, partnering with them, or increasing their credibility amongst the Muslims. Indeed, the Salaf would often recognise a person’s orientation through his companionship, his gatherings, and those whom he chose to accompany and defend. It was said to al-Awzāʿī رحمه الله: “Indeed, there is a man who says: I sit with the people of Sunnah and I sit with the people of innovation.” So al-Awzāʿī replied: “This is a man who wishes to make the truth and falsehood equal.” (Al-Ibānah al-Kubrā of Ibn Baṭṭah, 2/456) Likewise, al-Barbahārī رحمه الله said in Sharḥ al-Sunnah: “If you see a man sitting with a person from the people of desires, then warn him and make him aware. If he continues to sit with him after having come to know, then beware of him, for indeed he is a person of desires.” Commenting upon this, Shaykh Rabīʿ رحمه الله said: “This is from the scales of Ahl al-Sunnah. The one who sits with the people of innovation will, in most cases, be from them. A person may be deceived by what outwardly appears to be Sunnah and therefore sit with them or with some of their individuals because it may be hidden from him that this companion of his is an innovator. Therefore, by way of sincere advice, he is warned, but he is not declared an innovator nor abandoned from the outset. Rather, sincere advice is offered to him. If he accepts, then all praise belongs to Allah. But if he persists in accompanying the people of desires, then know that he is a person of desires.” (ʿAwn al-Bārī Sharḥ al-Sunnah lil-Barbahārī, 2/345) Similarly, Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān رحمه الله narrated: “When Sufyān al-Thawrī arrived in Basrah, he began to investigate the affair of al-Rabīʿ ibn Ṣubayḥ. So he asked: ‘What is his methodology?’ They replied: ‘His methodology is the Sunnah.’ He then asked: ‘Who are his close companions and associates?’ They replied: ‘The people of Qadar.’ So Sufyān said: ‘Then he is a Qadarī.’” (Al-Ibānah al-Kubrā of Ibn Baṭṭah, 2/452) Thus, the Salaf did not merely examine slogans, claims, titles, and outward affiliations. Rather, they looked carefully at companionship, alliances, partnerships, platforms, and those with whom a person chose to stand. Accordingly, the recent promotion of Ibn al-Qayyim College (IQC), established in partnership with Green Lane Masjid and promoted by Muhammad Abdurazzaq—may Allah guide him—deserves to be viewed through this very Salafī principle. Green Lane Masjid has long been criticised by Salafī scholars for its association with the people of innovation and their methodology. Over the years, it has repeatedly served as a platform for hosting, promoting, and giving prominence to callers and speakers from the people of innovation, becoming a place in which their ideas are afforded legitimacy and a means by which their methodologies are spread amongst the Muslims. Likewise, its leadership has been known for maintaining ties with, praising, and defending individuals from the people of innovation rather than warning against them in accordance with the methodology of the Salaf. Therefore, the issue is not simply the establishment of a college, nor the pursuit of Islamic education itself. Rather, it is the dangerous message conveyed through such cooperation with an institution that has long been criticised for serving as a platform through which the people of innovation are welcomed and their methodologies gain acceptance. How many young Muslims may now enrol believing the institution represents pure Salafiyyah simply because they witnessed this partnership? How many students will lower their guard, assuming that no Salafī would cooperate with such an institution were there genuine errors within it? These are exactly the consequences that the Salaf feared. Falsehood often spreads, not through the strength of its arguments, but through borrowed credibility. 🖋 Abū Zakariyyā Aḥmad Al-Ḥudaydī 🗓 17 Muḥarram 1448 AH

When Mere Association Becomes an Endorsement of Falsehood — A Reflection on Ibn al-Qayyim College (IQC) and Its Partnership with Green Lane Masjid! My dear brothers and sisters, the methodology of the Salaf was never founded upon personalities, institutions, prestigious names, or outward appearances. Rather, they weighed every individual, every gathering, and every institution against the scales of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the understanding of the righteous predecessors. They understood that falsehood is not only spread through speech, but often through association; that the mere presence of an individual alongside deviation can become a bridge by which countless hearts are led astray. The masses frequently attach the truth to men instead of attaching men to the truth. Thus, when they witness a person of perceived Sunnah standing beside the people of falsehood, they naturally conclude that such a platform must be sound, for, had it not been so, he would never have associated himself with it. It was for this reason that the Salaf warned with remarkable clarity and exceptional severity against lending credibility, honour, or legitimacy to the people of innovation—even unintentionally—for they recognised that a single public association can mislead multitudes more effectively than a thousand speeches. One of the most profound illustrations of this principle is the famous incident concerning the noble Tābiʿī, Muslim ibn Yasār رحمه الله, during the tribulation of the rebellion of Ibn al-Ashʿath. After the fitnah had come to an end, Muslim ibn Yasār would praise Allah, saying to Abū Qilābah رحمه الله that although he had accompanied the people who had rebelled, he had not participated in the fighting. The narration reads: Ayyūb narrated from Abū Qilābah, who said: Muslim ibn Yasār said to me: “I praise Allah before you that I did not shoot a single arrow during it, nor did I strike with a sword.” I said to him: “Then what of the one who saw you standing between the two ranks and said: ‘This is Muslim ibn Yasār. He would never fight except upon the truth,’ so he fought until he was killed?” Thereupon, by Allah, he wept until I wished that the earth would split open and swallow me. (Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, 4/513) Ponder, O noble Muslim. Muslim ibn Yasār’s intention was simply to thank Allah that he had not shed blood. His meaning was: “I went out with them, but I neither shot an arrow nor struck with a sword.” However, Abū Qilābah رحمه الله directed his attention to something far more frightening than carrying a weapon. He reminded him that he was a scholar known amongst the people, a man whose standing and reputation were recognised. What of the man who merely saw him standing amongst the ranks and concluded: “By Allah, Muslim ibn Yasār would never stand in this position unless the truth were with them”? Acting upon that assumption, he entered the fitnah, fought, and was either killed himself or killed others. Thus, Abū Qilābah taught him that his mere presence amongst them had become a means by which others were deceived. They did not examine the evidences; rather, they attached the truth to the reputation of someone they deemed highly. When Muslim ibn Yasār realised the gravity of this reminder, he was overcome with remorse and wept so intensely that Abū Qilābah later said he wished he had never spoken those words to him because of how deeply they affected him. Reflect carefully upon this incident. Muslim ibn Yasār neither fought, nor drew his sword, nor loosed an arrow, nor shed a drop of blood. Yet the Salaf considered the possibility that others had entered falsehood simply because they had seen him standing there to be an affair worthy of tears. This demonstrates the immense concern the Salaf had for protecting the religion from confusion and safeguarding the hearts of the people from attaching themselves to the people of innovation. For how many people enter falsehood, not because they studied it, but because they saw someone they trusted standing beside it?

https://youtu.be/GNDXVMJWEJw?is=4mT9Riy0ObNEu90n

https://youtu.be/duQw0xngEG4?is=Qvn1oyPXo3MGjXIa

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ Āl al-Shaykh said: It is therefore essential for the student of knowledge that the meaning of the two testimonies (ash-Shahādatayn) be clear in his heart and clear in his mind; that he understands them so well that he is able to explain them in the simplest of words, and in a variety of ways. This is because the greatest matter to which people are called is that which the two testimonies indicate. So the student of knowledge should train his tongue to explain the two testimonies using different expressions. He should memorise the evidences that establish their meaning, along with their explanation. If he disciplines himself in this manner, then, by the grace and mercy of Allah, he will see that doors will be opened for him in attaining knowledge of Tawḥīd and in expressing it eloquently. Sharḥ Thalāthat al-Uṣūl, p. 159.

Allah, the Exalted, said: {أولئك الذين هدى الله فبهداهم اقتده} [سورة الأنعام] {They are those whom Allah has guided, so follow their guidance.} (Sūrah al-Anʿām, 6:90) 💎 Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn (may Allah have mercy upon him) said: Allah said: {Follow their guidance}, and He did not say: “Follow them.” This is because what truly matters is the methodology, not the individuals. Therefore, do not become fanatically attached to a caller or a reformer if he deviates from the truth. The truth is not determined by the number of men who follow it; rather, it is determined by its conformity to the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Source: Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ (4/379)

https://youtu.be/ThxoLKFtR80?is=oI-cLx5hMpYMggMs