Kindly list the audios you are not able to download 

Assalaamu alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. 

We implore the visitors to this website to kindly help us to list the audios that they are not able to download in the comment box below. 
Jazakumullahu khairan. 


Categories: Uncategorized | 5 Comments


Muslims are invited to a 2-Day Public Lecture as scheduled below:

Day 1
Topic: What Nullify One’s Islam
Day: Saturday, February 27th, 2016
Speaker: Abu Abdillaah as-Salafi

Day 2
Topic: Signs of the Last Hour
Day: Sunday, February 28th, 2016
Speaker: Ustadh Rosheed Mustopha (Abu A’aishah – Abu Ibeji)

Venue: Km 1, Abeokuta Lagos Expressway, Off Idi Ori Road, Behind The Truth Nursery & Primary School, Opposite Tola Rentals, Ile-Ise Awo, Abeokuta, Ogun State

Categories: Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Lectures are not downloading

Kindly tell us in the comment space provided if any audio is not downloading.

Jazakumullahu Khairan

Categories: Uncategorized | 13 Comments

Audio, Radio and Arabic (audio) Pages Updated!!!

The Audio, Radio and Arabic pages have been updated (26/02/2014), you can now download new lectures.

Categories: Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Ruling with other than the Qur’aan and Sunnah

From the archive (2012), Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Aliyy Jabata talks on Hukmu bighairi Mon Anzalallaahu (Judging with other than what Allaah has revealed). Click here to download the lecture (40MB).

Categories: Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Uploads have started again!!!

Assalam alaiukm wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh



Uploads of lectures have resumed on Visit our “Audio” and “Arabic (Audio)” pages for new lectures.

Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Clarifying the Matter of at-Takfeer (24-11-2014)

Shaykh Muhammad Aliyy Jabata makes clarification about the matter of at-Takfeer in Ilorin. Click here to download the lecture (25MB).

This lecture has been split into two parts of almost the same MB; they are now available under the “Audios” page.
Categories: Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Aqeedah ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah

Shaykh Muhammad Aliyy Jabata gives lecture on Aqeedah ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah at Sabon-Line Oke, Ilorin. Click here to download the lecture (52MB).

This lecture has been split into three parts of almost the same MB; they are now available under the “Audios” page.
Categories: Uncategorized | Leave a comment


Khutbatul Haajjah

Verily all praise is for Allaah (‘Azza wa Jall), we praise Him and seek His aid and ask for His forgiveness, and we seek refuge with Allaah (‘Azza wa Jall) from the evils of ourselves and our evil actions. Whomever Allaah (‘Azza wa Jall) guides there is none who can misguide him, and whomever Allaah (‘Azza wa Jall) misguides there is none who can guide him, and I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta’aalaa) Alone, having no partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) is His slave and His Messenger.

O mankind! Reverence your Guardian-Lord, Who created you from a single person, created, of like nature his mate, and from them twain scattered countless men and women; reverence Allaah, through Whom you demand your mutual (rights) and (reverence) the wombs (that bore you): for Allah ever watches over you. (An-Nisaa 4/1)

O you who believe! Fear Allah as He should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam. (Al-i Imran 3/102)

O ye who believe! Fear Allah, and (always) say a word directed to the Right: That He may make your conduct whole and sound and forgive you your sins: He that obeys Allah and His Messenger, has already attained the highest achievement. (Soorah Al-Ahzab 33/70-71)

As for what follows: Verily the most truthful speech is the Word of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam), and the worst of affairs are the novelties and every novelty is an innovation and every innovation is a going astray and every going astray is in the Fire.

(Saheeh Muslim, Jumu’a 13, 867; Sunan Nasai: Jumu’a 24, III/188)

In shaa Allah, in this write-up, I stated his claims and try to refute him with sayings of our scholars concerning all his doubts.
 He said concerning verses of Q7V172&173 that those verses only establish the knowledge and power of Allaah and that He knew what would become of His slaves. When He punishes them, He would do so with Justice because Allah will not be unjust on the least.

See what the Muffasiroon and our scholars commented on those verses then we will ask Aboo ‘Aamir (kadhaab) to give us his salaf that explained them as he did?
Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa) says (interpretation of the meaning) “And (remember) when your Lord brought forth from the Children of Adam, from their loins, their seed (or from Adam’s loin his offspring) and made them testify as to themselves (saying): “Am I not your Lord?” They said: “Yes! We testify,” lest you should say on the Day of Resurrection: “Verily, we have been unaware of this.” Or lest you should say: “It was only our fathers aforetime who took others as partners in worship along with Allâh, and we were (merely their) descendants after them; will You then destroy us because of the deeds of men who practised Al-Bâtil (i.e. polytheism and committing crimes and sins, invoking and worshipping others besides Allâh)?” (Soorah Al-Araf 07/172-173)

Imaam Shawkaanee (Rahimahullaah) explains this in this following manner: “We did this so that you would not use “not knowing” as an excuse or so that you would not blame your ancestors for this and so that you would not excuse yourselves with either of these. In the past they had used both excuses. “We were a generation after them” for this reason we could not reach haq, and did not know the truth. “Are you going to destroy us for those who did acts of Baatil?” Because of our ancestors; we are not to blame for our inability of research and our content with our pasts. With this hikmah Allah has taken human beings as descendents of Adam (‘alayhi salaam) and has made them witnesses of their own attestation and state: We did this, so they do not make these statements so that they do not embrace these Baatil evidences and attach themselves to such invalid excuse and present it.

Imaam Tabari (Rahimahullaah) explains this Ayah in the following manner: “Our Almighty Rabb states: “We made you witness ”those who state Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa) is their Rabb. The purpose is so that you would not say you did not know on the Day of Judgment. And so you would not say Without doubt we did not know this. We had been not aware of this. Or without doubt our ancestors had performed Shirk and we are a generation which came after them…
With an ignorance originating from our ignorance we had followed their path.” (Tafseer Tabari, 2/713)

Ibn Kathir (Rahimahullaah) states: “Allah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa) stated that He brought the descendants of Adam (‘alayhi salaam) out of their fathers’ loins, and they testified against themselves that Allah is their Lord and King and that there is no deity worthy of worship except Him. Allah created them on this Fitrah, or way…Also some from among the Salaf and khalaf had stated the following: Without doubt what had been meant by this witnessing is to inform that they had been created with a fitrah of Tawhid and inclined to Tawhid.” (And later begins to provide evidence to proof the truthfulness) “These scholars have stated: What had been meant by witnessing is that the evidence that, they had been created inclined to Tawhid is the fact that Allaah (Tabaaraka wa ta’aalaa) had made this witnessing a Hujjah regarding Shirk. If this incident had occurred in reality everyone would remember it so that it could be evidence towards them. If perchance it is said: Rasuulullaah informing of the matter is sufficient proof for its occurrence. The answer to this would be without doubt the disclaimer Mushrik disclaim everything the Rasul brings, this and others. Since this testifying had been made an independent Hujjah, the fitrah they had been created upon is a fitrah inclined to acknowledge Tawhid. For this reason He says: “lest ye should say” meaning so that you would not say this on the Day of Judgment “we were never mindful” of Tawhid (unaware. Or lest you should say: “It was only our fathers aforetime who took others as partners in worship along with Allah.” (Tafsir Ibn Katheer)

Ibn Qayyim (Rahimahullaah) states: `and made them testify concerning themselves, “(saying): “Am I not your Lord” This means they must state His rububiyyah. An acknowledgement as such that it will be evidence against themselves. Without doubt this statement is such that it will have been brought to them by the tongues of the Rasul. Like in the following Ayah: “Their messengers said: “Is there a doubt about Allah, The Creator of the heavens and the earth?” (Ibrahim 14/10) “If thou ask them, who it is that created the heavens and the earth. They will certainly say, “Allaah”.” (Luqman 31/25) “Say: “To whom belong the earth and all beings therein? (say) if ye know!” They will say, “To Allaah!”” (Al-Muhminoon 23/ 84-85) There are many similar ayahs in the Qur’an. In these ayahs proof has been provided against them that they had been created with a fitrah that they would acknowledge their Rabb and Creator, also with this opportunity they are invited to do Ibadaah only to Allaah without any Shirk. In reality this is a method particular to the Qur’an. One of these is the statement of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa) in Surah Araf: (interpretation of the meaning) “When thy Lord drew forth…lest you should say on the day of judgment of this we were never mindful.” Here a conclusion has been drawn with their statements against them regarding their Shirk in rububiyyah and Ibadaah to another. This way it has been requested that they do not present an excuse of not knowing or of imitating Baatil. The reason for this is because there are two principles of deviation: 1- either not knowing haq 2- or either imitating the deviators.” (Ahkamu Ahl dhimma 2/527)

The explanation of Baghawi is: “If it is said, how can a testification, not remembered be relevant evidence against someone? It will be answered: Without doubt Allah had established many evidences regarding the truth of the oneness of Allah and the matters His envoys had informed of. Regardless of this whoever denies this is a stubborn invalidator and will mean that Hujjah had been presented to him. Furthermore their forgetfulness and not being able to remember especially after the message had been given to them by the miracle proprietor messenger does not nullify relying on this evidence. In the Ayah the following is stated: “Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them.” This means O ye Mushrik we made you promise so that you would not say: for certain our fathers before us performed Shirk and broke their promise and we are a generation who came after them which means we are their dependents consequently we complied with them. So that you would not make this your excuse shield and say “wilt Thou then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?” Or are You going to punish us for the Baatil deeds and ignorance of our ancestors? As you see after Allah had informed of the promise regarding Tawhid it is not possible for them to defend themselves with such statements. “Thus do We explain the signs in detail” Meaning we announce the ayahs so that servants will think thoroughly. “and perchance they may turn” they may return from Kufr to Tawhid. {Tafseer Baghwee}

 He also mentioned hadith of ‘Aisha in Sahih Muslim that she asked the prophet: Does Allah know what people hide? The prophet answered Yes!

This is a wrong quotation and the hadith cannot be used as hujjah for him as you will see below:

“Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a Hadith of Rasulullah) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was Aishah who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to spend the night with me, he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi (graveyard). He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) stood there and he stood for a long time. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) ran and I too ran. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O Aishah, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: Tell me or (Allah) the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Rasulullah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allaah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it, Yes! He said: Jibril came to me when you saw me. He called me and he concealed it from you. I responded to his call, but I too concealed it from you (for he did not come to you), as you were not fully dressed. I thought that you had gone to sleep, and I did not like to awaken you, fearing that you may be frightened. He (Jibril) said: Your Lord has commanded you to go to the inhabitants of Baqi (to those lying in the graves) and beg pardon for them. I said: Rasulullah, how should I pray for them (How should I beg forgiveness for them)? He (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: Say, Peace be upon the inhabitants of this city (graveyard) from among the Believers and the Muslims, and may Allah have mercy on those who have gone ahead of us, and those who come later on, and we shall, Allah willing, join you.” (Muslim; Ahmad)

According to his claim; here mother of the believers, Aishah (radiyallahu ‘anhaa) is asking whether Allah knows everything. To deny that Allah knows everything is like denying that He is capable of all things. Nevertheless, her question did not make her a disbeliever. Although she doubted regarding the ‘Ilm of Allah but she did not become Kafir because she was ignorant.


This Hadith narrated from Aishah (radiyallahu anha) in the Sahih of Muslim under the heading Kitab’ul Janaiz, Bab ma yuqaalu inda dukhuulul Qabr (bab #35) Hadith # 103 (974) it also has been narrated differently by Nasai (Kitabul Janaiz and Kitabu Ashratun Nasai), Ibn Hibban (7110), Abdu’r-Razzak (III, 570-571), and Ahmad (VI, 221).

In all narrations there is no question Aishah (radiyallahu anha) asks Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). On the contrary her statement is in the matter of “Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it.” This word at the beginning of this statement mahma is Hurufu shartiya (conditional proposition) and not an inquiry proposition. Along with this the word naam (yes) which comes in the continuation of the Hadith in Sahih Muslim was part of the statement of ‘Aisha and not that of the prophet (Sala llaahu ‘alaayhi wasallam) as claimed by Aboo ‘Aamir Jaahil.

Imaam Nawawi (Rahimahullaah) stated: “Aishah said: ‘Whatsoever the people conceal, yes Allah will know it.’ It is as such in usool. This is Sahih. It is as when she was saying when people would hide from him (i.e. the prophet) Allah would teach him, her nafs approved this and in continuation she said naam.” (Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 7/44)

From the beginning to the end of this Hadith where is the doubt in Aishah (radiyallahu anha)’s acts? Whereas her statement of ‘Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it’ is a statement which is a statement of Ilm. Let alone as Nawawi had stated it is as such in usool also.

 He mentioned the hadith regarding the man who ordered his sons to burn and scatter his ashes after his death and that Ibn Taimiyyah said in Majmu’a al-Fatawa that this man thought that if the things he willed from his children had been done Allah would not have the Qudrah to gather and resurrect him. Again this man thought that when anything had been scattered in such manner Allah would not be able to turn it into its old form. Each of these is the denial of the Qudrah of Allah and his resurrection. This is Kufr but the man was excused due to his ignorance.

So I said: Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) in his Majmua al-fatawa shows consistency in his views regarding this matter, but in Jaami’ur Rasaahil his evaluations differ. He said for as much as in the matter regarding the Takfir of the Jahmiyyah after he informs of Allaah (Subhanahu wa Ta’aalaa) having lifted the responsibility of the Ummah in situations such as forgetting and being mistaken he had lengthily mentioned this Hadith and after explaining this Hadith was mutawatir, he explains that the man had generally knew Allah, the day of Akhirah, that Allah would resurrect after death and will reward or punish, yet out of the “severity of his fear” he had said such things. Later he resembles the incident of the man in the Hadith to the individual who had lost his camel in the desert and said “I am your Rabb and you are my slave”: “Surely he had fallen into mistake due to the severity of his fear. Just like when the man who had lost hope found his camel and made a mistake due to the severity of his joy.” (Ibn Taymiyyah, Jaami’ur Rasaahil 1/159)

Imam Ahmad narrated this Hadith from Abu Hurayrah (radiyallahu anh) and from Ibn Mas’ud (rahimahullaah) with the addition “He did absolutely nothing good except for Tawhid”. Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud narrated “This man did absolutely nothing good except Tawhid…” Abu Hurayrah (radiyallahu anh) has also narrated the same from Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). Especially in the narration of Abu Hurayrah (radiyallahu anh) it is repeated twice. At the beginning and at the end: It was narrated by Abu Hurayrah, Al-Hassan and Ibn Sirin from Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam), who said: “There was a man among them who lived before you who did nothing good (in his life) except practice Tawhid… Allah forgave him (due to his fear of Allah). He did nothing good except practice Tawhid.”

It is undoubtedly clear that he was certain of his Lord and he was therefore a Muhmin. In one narration the man said: “Oh Lord Out of fear of you (did I do all this).” In another narration of the Hadith he says “By Allah if my Lord is able to put me together again then He will torment me with a torment such as He has not inflicted on anyone before.” He feared from Allah for this reason he was forgiven. “Fearing Allah is one of the highest statuses. It is among what Imaan necessitates. Regarding this matter Allah ta’aalaa stated: “Be ye not afraid of them, but fear Me, if ye have Faith.” (al-i Imran 3/175) “therefore fear not men, but fear me” (al-Ma’idah 5/44) “Those truly fear Allah, among His Servants, who have knowledge” (al-Fatir 35/28)”

Ibn Battal al-Maliki wrote, “Allah forgave him due to the intensity of his fear of Him. The easiest way to draw nearer to Allaah is with fear.” (Sharh Ibn al-Battal, 19/254)

 He also mentioned about the incident of Dhaat Anwat that the companions fell into an error of creed out of their ignorance but the prophet did not expel them from Islam for he excused them due to their ignorance.


This is exact wording of the hadith: Tirmidhi reported, that Abu Waqid al Laythi said: “We went out with Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) on a campaign against Hunaiyn, while we had barely left our old paganism for Islam. It was the practice of the unbelievers to hang their arms and armor on a tree called Dhat Anwaat. When we passed by a similar tree, we asked Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam): “Wouldn’t you establish for us another Dhat Anwaat, just as they have one?” Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) answered: ‘Allahu Akbar! You have now spoken exactly like Banu Isra’il did to Musa: ‘Make unto us a god just as their gods!’ Certainly you are an ignorant people. Must you follow exactly the same patterns as those that went before you?” (Tirmidhi; Ahmad, Musnad; Ibn Abi Asim, Kitab As-Sunnah; Ibn Hibban, Sahih)

It is clearly stated in the hadith that those companions that asked the question were NEW IN ISLAM. How could it be possible that those Sahabah did not know that making Du’a to Dhat Anwaat had been Kufr? Since Du’a is the most common act of worship, it is also the most common act of Shirk! This type of Shirk had been very popular among the Arabs and Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) had been mostly against this type of Shirk during his dawah of Tawhid. When the name of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) had been mentioned, it came to the minds of everyone was the denial of Ibadaah to the idols. If they had not known this Shirk they could not have been or become Muslim, hence a condition of becoming Muslim is knowledge of Shirk and the rejection of it.

Due to this Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) pointed out their mistake in such a strict manner, comparing their statement with the one from Banu Israel. The use of the letter “Kaf” on its own in this Hadith however does not mean in the Arabic language ‘to be completely identical’ to something; one item may also differ from the other in a few points. The implication of this partial comparison from Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) for the Sahabah (who were new in Islam) was to show them the degree of the falseness of their request and thereby to frighten them away from it strongly.

To read more on ‘Udhru bil Jahl fil ‘Aqeedah, Sheikh Ahmad bn Yahya an-Najmee (‘alayhi rahmatullaah) in Fath Rabbil Wadood fil Fataawaa wa rasaaheel wa rudood explains on this and stated that there is no excuse of ignorance in ‘Aqeedah (creed).

Conclusion: We are aware that some of our salaf saalih held the view that there is excuse of ignorance in creed but that does not call for speaking against each other among them. This is because the only difference among them is that they will only establish the hujjah for its victim before they declare him/her as kaafir. Then we should also know that there are other conditions of Takfeer which must be fulfilled and prevention of takfeer which must be absent before anyone can be declared a Kaafir. This is because it is not everybody that falls into kufr, shirk, bid’ah that will be called Kaafir, Mushrik and Mubtadi’ respectively. As for Aboo ‘Aamir (kadhaab), he saw the other view as erroneous and declare salafee brothers as Takfeereeyoon.

I did this with permission of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa), so that seekers of the truth will be able to uphold it tenaciously and hold on to the kitab and sunnah upon the understanding of our pious predecessors (Salaf Saalih).

Written by:
Sulaimaan bn ‘Abdilghaffaar
(Aboo ‘Abdir Rahmaan).

Categories: Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Refutations of Ishaaq bin AbdirRaheem Aboo ‘Aamir

Alhamdulillah Rabil ‘Aalameen, wa salatu wa salam ‘alla nabiyyinaa Muhammad (sala laahu ‘alayhi wasalam).

Allaah (Subhaanahu wata’aalaa) says in Glorious Quran (interpretation of the meaning) “Say (O Muhammad – sala lahu alayhi wasalam): This is my way; I invite unto Allah (i.e. to the Oneness of Allah – Islamic Monotheism) with sure knowledge, I and whosoever follows me (also must invite others to Allah i.e. to the Oneness of Allah- Islamic Monotheism with sure knowledge). And Glorified and Exalted be Allah (above all that they associate as partners with Him). And I am not of the Mushrikoon {Q12V108}.  Ibn Kathir in his Tafseeril Quraanil ‘Adheem commented on this verse as thus: Allaah (Tabaaraka wa ta’aalaa) orders His Messenger (Sallaa llaahu ‘alayhi wasallam) to say to mankind and the Jinns that this is his way, meaning, his method, path and Sunnah, concentrating on calling to the testimony that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah alone without partners. The Messenger calls to this testimonial with sure knowledge, certainty and firm evidence. He calls to this way, and those who followed him call to what Allah’s Messenger called to with sure knowledge, certainty and evidence, whether logical or religious evidence. See other tafaaseer like Adwaahul Bayaan of Imaam Shinqeetee and Tafseer of Imaam Naasir Sa’adee to know what scholars commented on this verse. This is because all what you put in your write up is devoid of sure knowledge but comprises of lying about others, things they free themselves from.

You started by the definition of bid’ah and the commentaries of scholars on hadith that states that “all innovations are misguidance and all misguidance leads to hellfire” as stated by the prophet (sala laahu ‘alayhi wasalam).

Sheikh Muhammad bn ‘Ali Jabata (hafidhaullaah) has never denied the statement of scholars on that hadith as he is well aware of that, but what we are telling you is that there is no single evidence to buttress it. Then, another thing you don’t know is that he never do tabdee’ of anybody that do taqseem (division) of bid’ah into Muffasiqah and Mukaffirah. What he normally says is that we should all shun innovations and that there is no evidence for such taqseem (division). We all know that his daleel comes from that popular hadith in which the prophet (sala laahu ‘alayhi wasalam) states that “beware of newly invented matters in religion, for every newly invented matters in religion is bid’ah (innovation) and all bid’ah is misguidance and all misguidance leads to hellfire (Muslim & Nasaahee).

You asserted that Sheikh Jabata said all innovators are outside the fold of Islam without excuse.

This is a blantant lie from your side as he always makes sure that all conditions of Takfeer must be fulfilled and the prohibitions must not present. Sheikh Jabata (hafidhaullaah) always used statement of all salafees scholars but what he always says is that their statement should be supported with evidences before it can be acceptable from them. He never has a stand in any issue that there is no one among the scholars that will be his salaf, this is because he never claims to be a mujtahid as you always repeated. You can refer to his tapes and bring out anyone of them to support your baseless assertions.

I told you that lying is a major sin in Islam and that you should verify anything concerning anybody before you write about it. You said Jabata said there is no excuse of ignorance in all matters.

I will be very happy if you can produce a tape where he said this. What he normally says is that apart from the generally acceptable Dawaabit takfeer among the scholars (i.e. compulsion, forgetfulness and mistakes), there is excuse of ignorance in Ahkaam (Laws and Fiqh) but he does not take excuse of ignorance in ‘Aqeedah (creed). The daleel for that among others is in Q7V172 & 173 and the ahaadith that confirms that the prophet’s parents are in hellfire, you can check Sahih Muslim for that. They both died before the prophet (Sala llaahu ‘alayhi wa salaam) was raised as a messenger, so who established the hujjah for them before they were condemned to fire?

Let me now throw more light on issue of Bid’ah because it is as if you people believe that Bid’ah Muffasiqah is like sins of which the doer will remain muslim no matter the number of times he/she does it.

Sheikh Muhammad bn ‘Abdul Wahaab (Rahimahullaah) in his book called Fadlul Islam has a chapter which he named al bid’ah ashadu minal kabaahir. So Sheikh brought the ayah where Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa) says (interpretation of the meaning) “Verily, Allâh forgives not that partners should be set up with Him (in worship), but He forgives except that (anything else) to whom He wills; and whoever sets up partners with Allâh in worship, he has indeed invented a tremendous sin” (Suratu Nisaahi Q4V48) as hujjah to show that bid’ah is more harmful than the major sins.

In Sharh Fadlul Islam by Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Azeez bn ‘Abdillaah bn Baz (Rahimahullaah), he was asked under the chapter I quoted before that, can we put Bid’ah under the wishes of Allaah as we do with sinners if it is not Mukaffirah? Sheikh bin Baz answer was NO; bid’ah does not fall under the wishes of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa). This is because bid’ah is more dangerous and harmful to its perpetrator than sin. Can you explain why Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdilwahaab (Rahimahullaah) used that ayah as evidence to show that bid’ah is more dangerous than sin? Having it in mind that the Sheikh also brought some ahaadith to differentiate between Bid’ah and major sin. In another Sharh of the same book, its name is ‘Ilaamul anaam bi Sharh kitab Fadlul Islam, Sheikh Saalih Fawzan wrote the Taqreez of this book.

The author stated under the same section that Bid’ah is the same thing as Shirk that is why the Sheikh used the ayah as evidence. The author later did the taqseem of bid’ah into three categories but no daleel to buttress that. This is why I told you that we are aware of the taqseem and we don’t wage war against anybody because of that, but our assertion is that all bid’ah is misguidance and all misguidance lead to fire.

This is why it is reported on the Imaam of Daar-ul-Hijrah (Madeenah), Imaam Maalik Ibn Anas, may Allaah have mercy on him, that he said: “Whosoever introduces into Islaam an innovation, which he deems is good, then he has claimed that Muhammad (saws) has betrayed (the trust of conveying) the Message. Read the saying of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic: “This day I have completed your Religion for you, and I have perfected My favor upon you, and I am pleased with Islaam as a Religion for you. [Surat-ul-Maa’idah: Q5V3] So whatever was not (part of) the Religion on that day, is not (part of) the Religion on this day. And the last part of this ummah (nation) will not be rectified, except by that which rectified its first part.

This was from the understanding of Imaam Maalik, the Imaam of Daar-ul-Hijrah, such that he plainly stated in a clear Arabic language that whoever introduces into Islaam just one innovation and then claims that it is something good, he has in fact claimed that Muhammad (sallaa llaahu ‘alayhi wasallam) betrayed the Message. And whoever makes this claim, he does not believe (truly) that “Muhammad is His slave and messenger.” As it is very clear in the words of this noble Imaam (Rahimahullaah), it (the innovation) is “not (part of) the Religion on this day.

Is it not a major kufr to believe that Muhammad (sallaa llaahu ‘alayhi wasallam) has betrayed (the trust of conveying) the Message?

The prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates anything in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), that is not part of it will have it rejected.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 2697; Muslim, no. 1718). According to a version narrated by Muslim, “Whoever does anything that is not in accordance with this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), will have it rejected.”

If I decide to refute all your statement, it can turn into writing a book but I just write this as a Naseehah so that “those who were to be destroyed might be destroyed after a clear evidence and those who were to live might live after a clear evidence. And surely Allah is All- Hearer, All- Knower” (Q8V42).

Written by:

Sulaimaan bn ‘Abdilghaffaar

(Aboo ‘Abdir Rahmaan)

Categories: Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Blog at