Very Useful Resource: Search Hans-Wehr and Lane’s Lexicon at the Same Time Online and Offline

On the other blog, I mentioned a resource useful for people who need to access Hans-Wehr and Lane’s Lexicon to search for words.  I’m mentioning it here again for people who may not be subscribed to the other blog, and if you’re not, why not do so now?

This is a truly remarkable resource for those who regularly need to use Arabic-English dictionaries. On this page you can search both Hans-Wehr’s dictionary and Lane’s Lexicon at the same time.  What is most useful is the fact that you can type in the base root of the word you’re looking for in Arabic and it will show you the word in Hans-Wehr first and if you scroll down it will then show you where the same word occurs in Lane’s Lexicon. Here’s the link to the post which has the link to the site:

http://giftsofknowledge.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/very-useful-resource-search-hans-wehr-and-lanes-lexicon-at-the-same-time/

And for those of you who would like to use this facility offline, it can also be downloaded for that purpose, here’s the post mentioning that along with the download link:

http://giftsofknowledge.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/update-hans-wehr-and-lanes-lexicon-dictionary-search-can-be-downloaded-so-you-can-work-offline/

Was-Salaam

Principles Concerning Declaring Others to be Disbelievers, Innovators or Open Sinners [Faasiqs] | 3 | Is It Allowed to Say Anything Against Someone Who Takes the Opinion of One Shaikh and You Another?

[Continuing from the second part of this series which can be found here: Al-Albaani Destroys, ‘If You're Not With Us You're Against Us.’]

Questioner: There are some issues, O Shaikh, which some of the people of knowledge with us have differed in, some of them calling those things an innovation and others saying it is permissible, and some of the youth blindly follow and due to the trust they have in the scholar who says that it is permissible, he takes his [i.e., that scholar’s] opinion in the issue, so is it permissible, O Shaikh, to judge this person, like slandering his manhaj or declaring him to be an innovator due to him doing that, and an example of that is acting. Shaikh Muhammad ibn Uthaimeen laid down some conditions for it and holds it to be permissible and Shaikh ‘Abdullaah ibn Jibreen, some Shaikhs like Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid and Shaikh Rabee ibn Haadi say that it is an innovation, what is your opinion, O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: Subhaanllaah! Allaahu Akbar! Your question started as something and ended as something else in my opinion. So are you asking one question or more than one?

Questioner: One question, O Shaikh.

Al-Albaani: Then define your question, because I felt that there was more than one. Define your question.

Questioner: The question is about the ruling concerning an individual who goes by the saying of a Shaikh who declares something to be allowable, [declares it] to be permissible to do that thing, and an example of that is acting.

Al-Albaani: Yes, yes.

Questioner: Is it allowed for me, being that I hold acting to be an innovation and this other person holds the view of, for example, one of the major scholars who says it is permissible, is it permissible for me to slander this person’s manhaj by saying that, ‘This is the manhaj of the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon in this issue,’ or that such a person can be declared to be an innovator because he took the opinion [of another Shaikh] in this issue, bearing in mind that the person is a blind-follower, O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: Is it permissible for a scholar to say anything against someone who opposes his opinion?

Questioner: No.

Al-Albaani: Then this situation is even less permissible.  Is the answer clear?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Okay.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: And you.

Principles Concerning Declaring Others to be Disbelievers, Innovators or Open Sinners [Faasiqs] | 1 |

Questioner: I have a number of questions, may Allaah reward you with good. The first: is establishing the proof against someone a requirement for declaring him to be an innovator or a faasiq?

Al-Albaani: Wallaahi, the answer differs according to the differences found in the countries [the people live in] and in the differences amongst the residents in terms of the presence of scholars who uphold the obligation of educating and da’wah.

Let us give a clear and concise example of that: there is a very big difference between someone who is in the lands of disbelief, a group of people [there] who have newly embraced Islaam, there is no doubt, naturally, that it is not allowed to go ahead and declare such people to be disbelievers or open sinners [faasiqs] or innovators straight away, because they live in an environment where they are new to Islaam and Islamic rulings, this is on one side. [So there is a very big difference between such people and those on] the other side [where there] is a clear Islamic environment, an unadulterated Islamic environment which does not require the proof to be established, because the issue is [already] established by the very nature of this learned, Islamic environment.

These are two totally contrastive examples. So between these two situations there is no doubt that there are a great many examples, some of which will be closer to the first example and others closer to the second, and so on.

So the point of giving this example is to show that it is not allowed to make a statement, whether positive or negative, about that question, so it should not be said that, ‘[The proof] has to be established,’ and nor that, ‘It doesn’t have to be established.’ The answer differs according to the differing states of the people he wants to declare to be disbelievers or faasiqs or innovators.

And the foundational principle here is that it is not allowed to declare Muslims to be disbelievers, and following on from that, [it is not allowed] to declare them to be faasiqs, and following on from that, [it is not allowed] to declare them to be innovators except after the proof has been established due to the well-known aayah and authentic hadiths which have a similar meaning, the well-known aayah being, “… And never would We punish until We sent a messenger …” [Israa 17:15] “… that I may warn you thereby and whomever it reaches,” [An’aam 6:19] likewise is his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام, which Imaam Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Abu Hurairah, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, who said, “Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم said, ‘There is no man from this Ummah, Jew or Christian, who hears of me and then does not believe in me except that he will enter the Fire.’

So I say: the foundational principle is that the proof be established [before delivering a verdict] against these three types of people [i.e., the three types being, declaring someone to be a disbeliever, or innovator or open sinner], this is what the ruling centres around. After [understanding] the examples we have given the issue is that whoever knows or is certain that the proof has been established against such and such a person then based upon that it is permissible to declare him to be a disbeliever, or a faasiq or an innovator, and if that is not the case then it is not permissible. This is the answer.

Questioner: Okay, O Shaikh, if a Muslim scholar established the proof against a person, whether that be declaring him to be a disbeliever, or an innovator or a faasiq, is it then obligatory upon a person to follow that scholar or does he have the option of establishing the proof himself?

Al-Albaani: It’s not a condition [that he has to establish the proof himself], rather what is obligatory is that he be convinced that the proof has been established on the person who is to be declared a disbeliever, or innovator …

[The second part of this series of questions has already been translated and can be found here: Al-Albaani Destroys, ‘If You're Not With Us You're Against Us.’]

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 778.

Al-Albaani asked about al-Banna | 18 | A Mention of Some Important Principles

Questioner: In the past we read in some hadiths that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم uncovered his thigh and that when the Companions came to see him, Abu Bakr, then Umar [he didn’t do anything, but] when Uthmaan entered he covered it, can’t it be understood from this that uncovering the thigh is permissible?

Al-Albaani: This incident cannot be used to establish a stance to be adopted as part of one’s life, may Allaah bless you, it is limited to this occurrence, we’re talking about social life in general, which the Muslim youth has to live by.

Questioner: I’m with you on that.

Al-Albaani: Be patient. When the Messenger عليه السلام would sit with his Companions and travel with them, pray with them, were his thighs uncovered? Obviously, the answer is no.

These people are uncovered and they pray like that especially when, during games, prayer time comes by and they want to pray.

[And the point I’m going to mention now] is knowledge which we must revive: that the common approach the Messenger عليه السلام took in his life is what we take, as for something he would do whose occurrence was rare, then it is possible that in most cases such a thing has a reason or situation which required the Messenger عليه السلام to leave the norm, and what we are talking about now is an example of that.

So far be it for the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم to be among his Companions and to enter the mosque or to sit somewhere whether while travelling or resident with his thighs uncovered. Yes, there is no doubt that this incident [which you mentioned] did occur, but from a fiqh perspective does this show that it is permissible for a Muslim to leave his thighs uncovered during his life in general? This may or may not prove that in specific circumstances it is permissible, like the situation [which I am about to mention and] which is not regarded as being the Messenger’s صلى الله عليه وسلم norm, do you know it?

That he was sitting with his legs hanging over the side of a well, and the weather in Medinah was hot, so he was cooling himself down, and in order to do wudoo part of his thigh was uncovered , this incident does not represent the Prophet’s عليه السلام life, it represents that particular situation he was in.

Yet having said that, there is a knowledge-based point here [which we need to understand]. When the Prophet عليه السلام performed an action and he explained that Allaah’s Legislation for the Ummah is different to that, and in the words of the scholars of fiqh: if his statements oppose his actions then which of them are given precedence?

His statements are given precedence over his actions. Because a statement is universal legislation, it may be possible that an action was carried out due to a particular excuse or due to it being a characteristic exclusive to him, and it is [also] possible that it occurred before a legislative ruling about it was revealed.

For example, we have a hadith in which it is mentioned that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم gave a sermon to the people while he was wearing a ring made out of gold, are we now going to say, ‘It is permissible to wear a ring made out of gold,’ because the Prophet wore it? No, he wore it at a time when it was permissible.

You know that the major Companions used to drink wine, and there is a very unusual story which is not well-known amongst the people, it is reported in Sahih Bukhari. The Companions were in a house, drunk, when Ali came and knelt his camels down by the house. His uncle Hamzah came out and cut open their stomachs, when Ali saw that he was extremely upset and went to the Prophet عليه السلام and told him what had happened. The Prophet عليه السلام came to his uncle and reprimanded him for what he had done.

What was Hamzah’s stance? He said a statement which was such that had he said it after alcohol was made forbidden it would have caused him to have committed disbelief and would have caused him to have left the religion, he said, ‘Aren’t you but the slaves of my father?’ Hamzah is saying to his cousin and his Prophet, ‘Aren’t you but the slaves of my father?’ Why? He didn’t understand, he was drunk.

[Here is the full text of the hadith from Bukhari: “Narrated Ali, ‘I got a she-camel in my share of the war booty on the day (of the battle) of Badr, and the Prophet had given me a she-camel from the Khumus. When I intended to marry Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle, I had an appointment with a goldsmith from the tribe of Bani Qainuqa' to go with me to bring Idhkhir (i.e. grass of pleasant smell) and sell it to the goldsmiths and spend its price on my wedding party. I was collecting for my she-camels equipment of saddles, sacks and ropes while my two she-camels were kneeling down beside the room of an Ansari man.

I returned after collecting whatever I collected, to see the humps of my two she-camels cut off and their flanks cut open and some portion of their livers was taken out. When I saw that state of my two she-camels, I could not help weeping. I asked, “Who has done this?” The people replied, “Hamza bin Abdul Muttalib who is staying with some Ansari drunks in this house.” I went away till I reached the Prophet and Zaid bin Haritha was with him. The Prophet noticed on my face the effect of what I had suffered, so the Prophet asked. “What is wrong with you?” I replied, “O Allah's Apostle! I have never seen such a day as today. Hamza attacked my two she-camels, cut off their humps, and ripped open their flanks, and he is sitting there in a house in the company of some drunks.”

The Prophet then asked for his covering sheet, put it on, and set out walking followed by me and Zaid bin Haritha till he came to the house where Hamza was. He asked permission to enter, and they allowed him, and they were drunk. Allah's Apostle started rebuking Hamza for what he had done, but Hamza was drunk and his eyes were red.

Hamza looked at Allah's Apostle and then he raised his eyes, looking at his knees, then he raised up his eyes looking at his umbilicus, and again he raised up his eyes look in at his face. Hamza then said, “Aren't you but the slaves of my father?” Allah's Apostle realized that he was drunk, so Allah's Apostle retreated, and we went out with him.”]

Questioner: He was drunk, yes.

Al-Albaani: Yes. This was at a time in Islamic history when the legislation was still being prescribed.

For this reason, when a statement comes from the Prophet عليه السلام which opposes his action then his statement is what is relied upon because it is in the legislation, as for his actions then it is left to him عليه السلام [he may either do something] out of an excuse/specific reason, or because it is something particular to him alone, or it may have been before he made a statement about it, before something was legislated, as in the story of the alcohol and things like it.

From this type of incident is the fact that the Prophet عليه السلام was sitting at the edge of a well, with his legs hanging over the side, when Abu Bakr entered and Umar but he didn’t change the way he was, until when Uthmaan came he did so.  So Sayyidah Aa’ishah said that so and so and so and so entered and you did not change the way you were but when Uthmaan entered you covered yourself? So he replied, ‘Should I not feel shy in front of someone who the Angels feel shy of?’

So it is possible that [1] this was before the Prophet عليه السلام said, ‘The thigh is awrah,’ and it is possible that [2] it was after he said it but that he had an excuse and it is possible that [3] there was no [specific] excuse and that it was just something exclusive to him.

Whatever the case, I was talking about some of the Islamic jamaa’ahs, how can they live with no connection between themselves and Islaam, what is the reason? It is because they have not studied Islaam.

I do not mean that it is upon every individual Muslim to become a scholar and to taken it upon himself to carry out the duty of purification [tasfiyyah], no, this must be done by the people specialising in it. So where are the specialists in these groups such that they can be nurtured upon this foundation of purification?

Take Hizb at-Tahrir for example which wants to establish an Islamic state … look at Hasan al-Banna he made a [particular] statement which is as though it is revelation from the sky but along with that his group do not implement it. That statement was, ‘Establish the state of Islaam in your hearts and it will be established for you in your lands.’

Hizb at-Tahrir do not go by this piece of wisdom at all, [instead] they say, ‘We will establish the state first and then afterwards the state will rectify the populace.’  Subhaanallaah!  This is in opposition to logic and the Sunnah of the Prophet who spent long years nurturing a few individuals until a core and the foundation of the Muslim jamaa’ah was formed.

Likewise that which comes under this topic, “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allaah an excellent example …” [Ahzaab 33:21] … you will find members of Hizb al-Tahrir … in all groups you will find people who are good and sincere and so on, but as a group they are extremely far from implementing the Islaam which is known as Islaam [i.e., the basics]; as for implementing that pure Islaam, then how far they are from it.

[The founder of Hizb al-Tahrir] Taqiyud-Deen’s books, may Allaah have mercy on him, are full of weak hadiths which have no basis, and upon them he built his ideology and established his group, such that when explaining the hadith that, ‘There is no obedience to the creation in disobedience of the Creator,’ he said it means: there is no obedience to the creation if that person who is ordering the disobedience believes that what he is ordering is actually disobedience, but if he is ordering it as a result of his own ijtihaad [and does not hold it to be disobedience] then it is not disobedience and it is obligatory to obey him.

And based upon this he made it obligatory on every individual in his group to obey their Amir and to submit to him, and not to place knowledge, i.e., the Book and the Sunnah, as a judge over him, since, ‘It is the Amir’s opinion.’

Questioner: By way of ijtihaad.

Al-Albaani: By way of ijtihaad, yes. And a debate took place between me and them, many, many debates, one of them was when we were brought together in the Al-Haskaa Prison in Syria, about fifteen of them, and so I gave them the following example.

Interjector: Should I record this, O Shaikh? [i.e., the person recording the sitting is asking whether the Shaikh wants this part where he mentioned the prison to be recorded, since it is something personal].

Al-Albaani: Yes.

One of them, very zealous, came and so I said to him, ‘What do you say about his saying عليه السلام, ‘Everything which intoxicates is alcohol and all alcohol is haram,’ and ‘Whatever intoxicates in large amounts, then a small quantity of it is haram?’ He said, ‘Of course, these are authentic hadiths and I believe in them.’

I said to him, ‘What do you say, aren’t there some Imaams of the Muslims from the past who performed ijtihaad and said, ‘The alcohol whose [consumption in] small quantities is forbidden is only that which is derived from grapes, as for the alcohol which is made from other things then only the amount which intoxicates is forbidden,’ namely, if a person were to drink two bottles, three, and stayed sober then this is halaal but if he took a sip and got drunk then it is forbidden.’ I said to him, ‘What is your opinion about the scholars who say that?’ He said, ‘Yes.’

The point is I said to him, ‘If our Lord tested the Muslims with an Amir ruling over them who held this opinion, what would you do?’ He said, ‘I would obey him.’

He would obey him even though he believes this is haram, why? Because the hizb told him that, ‘If the Amir believes that it is haram he will not order you to commit a sin.’ Thus, they twisted the hadith which states that, ‘There is no obedience to the creation in disobedience of the Creator,’ [to mean that] there is no obedience to someone who orders one to commit an act of disobedience if he holds it to be a sin, as for if he does not hold it to be a sin then you have to obey him.

This has all been attributed to Islaam in the name of Islaam, and in the name of setting up an Islamic state.

And Allaah’s Aid is sought.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 200.

Al-Albaani asked about al-Banna | 17 | He was not a Scholar Either and a Mention of Blind Hizbiyyah

Questioner: I read [a transcription of] this tape, the topic being the Book and the Sunnah, a topic which in reality there has been much debate and argument over, and the centre of the argumentation and debate is this: some of the brothers in the Islamic world will say to you, ‘I take from the Book and the Sunnah as explained by one of the Imaams,’ for example, Hasan al-Banna, may Allaah have mercy on him.

Al-Albaani: Who?

Questioner: Hasan al-Banna.

Al-Albaani: Okay, yes.

Quesrtioner: You will find his followers now, namely, we’ve heard people say, ‘My brother, I only completely take what Hasan al-Banna said,’ okay, my brother, go back to the Book and the Sunnah … following on from that he will not take from the Book and the Sunnah, and there are many who say such things … okay, all of you say, ‘the Book and the Sunnah,’ [but] come and sit with one of them and the first thing they do is fight, okay, then where is the Book and the Sunnah amongst you?

Al-Albaani: Why do they fight? Because they are hizbis who are not united. Thereafter, [this statement that], ‘Hasan al-Banna is on the Book and the Sunnah,’ this term, ‘The Book and the Sunnah,’ is one which is only made up of a few words but the entire life of a Muslim, every aspect of it, comes under it.

And all claim Laylaa’s love
but Laylaa doesn’t acknowledge it for any of them

Hasan al-Banna, is not a man of knowledge, he was just a man of da’wah, and Allaah benefitted the Muslim youth through him by saving them from the cafe’s and cinemas and so on, there is no doubt or uncertainty about that.

But where are the books of Hasan al-Banna which show his knowledge? His father whose name was Abdur-Rahmaan has some books which show [us] his knowledge, but his son Hasan al-Banna doesn’t have anything other than a few small booklets. These small booklets are like a methodology for his da’wah but they do not show us that the man was a scholar.

So he [i.e., the person you mentioned in the question] will say to you that, ‘I am on the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of Hasan al-Banna,’ this is proof that his eyes are closed and that he has submitted to the desire of blind hizbiyyah [simply] because, ‘he is Hasan al-Banna.’

Hasan al-Banna has a small book about words of remembrance [adhkaar].

Questioner: Al-Ma’thuraat.

Al-Albaani: It’s called, ‘Al-Ma’thuraat,’ very small, I don’t know have you seen it? One of the heads of the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon in Syria put it to me to check this book and have it printed with a knowledge-based checking, because he trusted me as someone who specialises in the science of hadith.

I told him I would do so but that I feared my efforts would go to waste. He asked why and so I told him that it was his religious and knowledge-based sentiments which made him make such a suggestion, that I should check Hasan al-Banna’s book, but that the way of hizbiyyah will not let it pass for when it is said to the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon that here is Hasan al-Banna’s book with al-Albaani’s checking, they will put an end to it, because it is very hard and painful for them to see a book by al-Banna with the checking of al-Albaani, why?

Because there is bigotry and blind partisanship … and [indeed that is what happened,] the book was not printed except as Hasan al-Banna, may Allaah have mercy on him, composed it [without al-Albaani’s checking]. What’s in this book? It contains [hadith] from books of the scholars of old, and fiqh of some of the hadiths about adhkaar and ma’thuraat, as far as I can tell, [but] not according to the principles of [the science of] hadith–because he was not from the people of hadith, his father was from the people of hadith somewhat, but he wasn’t. Whereas Ahmad Shaakir was also an Egyptian [but] he was an Imaam in this field of knowledge.

So Hasan al-Banna selected [content for his book], ‘Al-Ma’thuraat,’ as he liked, not based upon knowledge, yet even so you will find people who are bigoted for Hasan al-Banna, this bigotry did not come about due to knowledge at all, [but rather] from blind hizbiyyah, and I said recently that you will see major [members] of the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon cut off the connection between themselves and the Messenger عليه السلام and [instead] make their connection with Hasan al-Banna …

So you will find that amongst the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon the religious one or the one who does not want to shave his beard will let a small one grow and make it just like that of Hasan al-Banna. Yaa Jamaa’ah, where are you in relation to the Messenger who is the example [that should be followed] and he is the one about whom our Lord said in the Noble Quraan, “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allaah an excellent example …” [Ahzaab 33:21] The defect is that they are not acquainted with the Messenger’s life.

Questioner: For who?

Al-Albaani: Sorry?

Questioner: For who, “… an excellent example for anyone who …”

Al-Albaani: Aah, may Allaah bless you, “… for anyone whose hope is in Allaah and the Last Day …” [Ahzaab 33:21]

So they cut off from the Messenger عليه السلام due to their turning away from studying the Sunnah and due to their preoccupation with politics, sociology, economics, and their calls which are nothing but shouting.

Leave the Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon and look at ‘Shabaab Muhammad,’ [they are even] further and further away, their religion is sport and football and basketball, and I don’t know which other such sports there are, would that it were in the way of clinging to the Sunnah and strengthening the foundation, because the Prophet عليه السلام said, “The strong believer is more beloved to Allaah than the weak one, and in all there is good.”

It is not from Islaam that the Muslim imitates the disbelievers, it is not from Islamic manners that he uncovers his thigh, it is not from Islamic manners that he wears the uniform of Jewish scouts, you can’t unless you uncover your thigh, what is this blind following?

It is a confirmation of his saying عليه السلام regarding the ignorant amongst the Muslims, “You will certainly follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit, so much so that even if they entered a lizard hole, you would follow them.”

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Aah.

Questioner: Sorry Shaikh, could I ask you a quick question?

Al-Albaani: Please do.

Questioner: In the past we read in some hadiths that …

The Difference Between Inspiration [Ilhaam] and Revelation [Wahy]

From Jaabir, may Allaah be pleased with him, who said, “When the time of the Battle of Uhud approached, my father called me at night and said, “I think that I will be the first amongst the Companions of the Prophet to be martyred. I do not leave anyone after me dearer to me than you, except Allah’s Apostle’s soul and I owe some debt and you should repay it and treat your sisters favourably (nicely and politely).” So in the morning he was the first to be martyred and was buried along with another (martyr).” [Bukhaari]

Shaikh al-Albaani said, “It should be known that this is not to be considered as having knowledge of the Unseen, for no-one except Allaah knows the Unseen, and nor is it from the category of Allaah showing His servants some of the Unseen as many ignorant people think it is, for Allaah the Most High said, “[He is] Knower of the unseen, and He does not disclose His [knowledge of the] unseen to anyone except a Messenger He has approved of.” [Jinn 72:26-27] [i.e., Jaabir's father was a Companion not a Messenger]

Rather [this incident] comes under the category of truthful inspiration [al-Ilhaam as-Saadiq], and the difference between it and revelation [wahy] is that inspiration [al-Ilhaam] is not safe from error or the fact that it may not materialise, unlike revelation [wahy] which is always infallible.”

Tahqiq Mishkaah al-Masaabih, 3/1674.

Al-Albaani asked about Sayyid Qutb | 16 | He was not a Scholar

 

Questioner: The first question, both questions, are regarding the book, ‘In the Shade of the Quraan.’  Its author [i.e., Qutb] mentioned at the beginning of Surah Taa Haa that the Quraan is a cosmic/universal phenomenon like the phenomena of the heavens and the earth, what is your opinion about this statement, bearing in mind that he uses the particle of comparison [i.e., the word ‘like’], O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: We, my brother, have said more than one time: that Sayyid Qutb, may Allaah have mercy on him, was not a scholar. He was just an author, a writer and he didn’t know how to express the legislated Islamic creed, especially the Salafi beliefs from it.

For this reason, it is not fitting that we drone on about his statements too much, because he was not a scholar with the meaning of the word that we want, [i.e.,] a scholar of the Book and the Sunnah upon the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih. Many times his expressions are stylistic rhetoric and are not scholarly/knowledge-based ones, and are especially not Salafi expressions, not being from this type at all, and we do not hesitate to condemn expressions such as those nor such tahsbeeh.

The least that can be said about it [i.e., the expression you asked about] is that he did not mean that the Quraan is literally Allaah’s Speech as is the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah and nor does he mean that Allaah’s Speech is metaphorical, as is the creed of the Mu’tazilah. [His statements are] rhetorical, poetic speech.

But I do not hold that we should stop too much at such statements, except to clarify that it is speech which is not permissible in the sharee’ah, and that [at the same time] it is not expressing the creed of the author regarding the Noble Quraan, i.e., is it the actual Speech of Allaah or not?

This is what I believe and this is the answer to the first question.

Questioner: Okay, O Shaikh, the second question which is also about the same book, at the beginning of Surah Naml he said about the Quraan and its words/sentences that they are, ‘musical undulations?’ [tamowwujaat musiqiyyah]

Al-Albaani: Same answer.

Questioner: Same answer?

Al-Albaani: Same answer.

Questioner: Okay, this leads us, O Shaikh, to some questions, we see in many of the writings of some authors or those associated to knowledge …

Al-Albaani: Sorry, before you carry on, what did you understand when he said, ‘undulations [tamowwujaat]?’ Does he mean the Speech that emanated from the Lord of the Worlds? Or from Jibreel عليه السلام? Or from our noble Prophet عليه السلام? You will not understand that or that or this [i.e., neither one of the three from that statement of his].

For this reason I say that it is rhetorical, poetic speech, which does not tell us much about the author’s opinion or what he means.

This is the reality; when many authors do write, they pen down expressions of stylistic rhetoric which do not give [us] solid/realistic information [lit: ‘existential answers’ [about what exactly it is they mean]].

Okay, carry on.

Questioner: Even though you say that, O Shaikh, may Allaah bless you, we still find many writers or even [people] from students of knowledge who are influenced by the methodology of the scholars of hadith or who [have some knowledge], for example, in the science of hadith or have knowledge in some issues, [we find that even such people] have been influenced by his [i.e., Qutb’s] methodology.

Al-Albaani: And what is his methodology? Does he have a methodology?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: What is it?

Questioner: It’s [his] being influenced in his statements, in many statements, by the writings of Abul-A’laa al-Maududi, like in his book, ‘Social Justice [in Islaam],’ and his book, ‘At-Tasweer al-Fanni fil-Quraan …’

Al-Albaani: This is a literary style/way [of writing] it is not a scholarly/knowledge-based method/manner [of writing].

Questioner: There is a specific methodology regarding declaring people to be disbelievers [takfir], like slandering the Ummah and declaring [the Muslims in] it to be disbelievers, especially in the book, ‘Social Justice in Islaam.’ The author of the book, ‘Al-I’laam,’ mentioned this about him, az-Zarkashi …

Al-Albaani: Az-Zirikli.

Questioner: Az-Zarkashi or Az-Zirikli.

Al-Albaani: Az-Zirikli …

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albaani: Yes.

Questioner: He [i.e., Az-Zirikli in his book Al-I’laam] mentioned this about him [i.e., Qutb], that he used to take up this methodology of slandering the entire Ummah, declaring all those around him to be ignorant. So many of the youth have now been influenced by this methodology and they have started calling to his books and his opinions and everything that he has written, so what is your opinion, O Shaikh?

Al-Albaani: Our opinion is that the man was not a scholar, I said that to you already. What more do you want from me? If you wish for me to call him a kaafir then I am not from those who declare people to be kaafirs, and you are not either?

Questioner: … O Shaikh, I …

Al-Albaani: Listen, I testify along with you, but what do you want?

It is enough for the just, impartial Muslim that he gives every person his right, and as He, the Most High, said, “… and do not deprive the people of their due and do not commit abuse on the earth, spreading corruption.” [Hud 11:85]

The man is a writer, passionate for the Islaam that he understood, but he is not a scholar, and his book, ‘Social Justice,’ is from the first things he wrote, and when he did so he was nothing but an author and not a scholar.

But the reality is that in prison he progressed a lot and wrote some pieces which are as though they are written by the pen of a Salafi and not from him. I believe that prison nurtures some souls and awakens some conscience [in people]. So he wrote some words whose title is enough [to show what I just said], i.e., ‘Laa ilaaha Illallaah A Way of Life.’

But if he doesn’t distinguish between Tawhid al-Uluhiyyah and Tawhid ar-Rububiyyah then this does not mean that he doesn’t understand Tawhid ar-Rububiyyah and Tawhid al-Uluhiyyah and that he considers them to be one thing. It means that he is not a faqih, and that he is not a scholar and that he is not able to express the legislated meanings which have come in the Book and the Sunnah.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good.

Al-Albaani: And you, inshaa Allaah.

Questioner: Don’t you see … ya’ni, this affect and these things that he wrote, ya’ni, that he should be answered/refuted, for example?

Al-Albaani: Yes he should be answered/refuted, this is obligatory, but answering a person who has made a mistake is not limited to a person or people: everyone who makes a mistake in understanding Islaam, understanding it with innovated and newly-invented meanings which have no basis in the Book, nor in the Sunnah nor from our Salaf as-Saalih and the four Imaams who are followed–then it is fitting that such a person is answered/refuted.

But this does not mean that we treat him as an enemy or that we forget that he has some good deeds, it is enough that he is a Muslim, and that he was an Islamic author [writing] according to his understanding of Islaam as I said initially, and that he was killed in the way of his call to Islaam and that the ones who killed him, they are the enemies of Islaam.

As for [the fact that] he had deviated in many or a few issues in Islaam, then it was my belief before this revolution against him was fomented–I was the one who was boycotted here by the Muslim Brotherhood [Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon] under the assumption that I had declared Sayyid Qutb to be a disbeliever, and I was the one who showed some people that he used to agree with the [belief of] Wahdatul-Wujood in some of what he wrote in the same tafsir [mentioned in the question], but at the same time, I do not deny that he was a Muslim and that he was zealous for Islaam and for the Muslim youth and that he wanted to establish Islaam and an Islamic state. But the reality is:

Sa’d led the camels to water while being completely wrapped up
[with only his hands sticking out].

This is not how, O Sa’d, the camels are taken to water.

Questioner: Are his books to be warned against?

Al-Albaani: Those who do not have correct Islamic education are warned against his books.

Questioner: May Allaah reward you with good and bless you.

Al-Albaani: And you, inshaa Allaah.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 814.

Visiting the Prophet’s Grave عليه السلام After Every Prayer

The Shaikh was asked a question about whether a visitor to Medinah is allowed to go to the Prophet’s grave صلى الله عليه وسلم after every prayer, so he said:

Al-Albaani: If what you mean is every time someone prays, then we say no; but it is permissible [for the visitor] to do that sometimes and likewise it is not permissible for the residents of Medinah to visit it constantly after every prayer as is the case nowadays, for in doing so they are taking his grave عليه السلام as a place of festivity [Eed], and established hadiths have been reported which prohibit taking his grave عليه السلام as a place of festivity.

But a person who does that sometimes whether he be a resident or a visitor to Medinah–then let him do it sometimes and not repeatedly.

Questioner: Wouldn’t Ibn Umar do that?

Al-Albaani: Not all the time, he would, for example, upon returning from a journey, go to the Prophet’s grave عليه السلام and give him salaam and to Abu Bakr and his father, but as for him making that his habit as the innovators do–then far be it for him to do such a thing.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 97.

The Companions and the Time they Found the Body of the Prophet Daanyaal عليه السلام

Questioner: The story which the ‘Imaams of the Da’wah’ report in some of their books, that some of the Companions found the body of the Prophet Daanyaal and so dug thirteen graves for it [such that they would bury him in one of them] so that the people would be unable to locate it, how far is this narration authentic?

Al-Albaani: Firstly, at the start of your question you mentioned, the ‘Imaams of the Da’wah,’ who are you referring to with that phrase?

Questioner: Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab’s grandchildren.

Al-Albaani: But nowadays it usually refers to the Tablighi Jamaa’ah.

Questioner: I didn’t mean that.

Al-Albaani: You didn’t mean that but your wording gave that false impression, that’s why, according to what I understood [when you used that term], I found it strange that you attributed that to them because those people [i.e., Jamaa’atut-Tabligh] do not give important to such noble issues at all.

Questioner: True.

Al-Albaani: [Anyway], what is important is that this narration has an authentic, established basis, having many paths of narration. Right now I do not recall whether the particular details that you mentioned are correct. But what is important is that they really did find [his body] and then dug [the earth] and caused a river to flow over him [i.e., over the grave] such that it was not possible to go to it and glorify it or for it to be worshipped instead of Allaah the Blessed and Most High, this is established.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 304.

When he comes, Imaam Mahdi will not be able to do More than what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did

Shaikh al-Albaani said, “O my brother Muslim, know that many of the Muslims today have strayed from the truth in this issue. From them are those who hold it to be a settled fact that an Islamic state will not be established except with the emergence of the Mahdi! And this is a myth and is misguidance which the devil throws into the hearts of many of the masses, especially the Sufis among them–and there is nothing in the hadiths of the Mahdi which indicates that at all.

Rather, all of those hadiths do not go beyond the fact that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم gave glad tidings to the Muslims of [the coming of] a man from his household, and he described him with outstanding characteristics, the most important of them being the fact that he will judge by Islaam and spread justice amongst mankind.

So in reality, he is one of the revivers which Allaah sends at the head of every one hundred years, as is authentically reported from him صلى الله عليه وسلم. So just as that [i.e., the emergence of a reviver at the head of every one hundred years] does not necessitate the abandonment of striving to seek knowledge and acting upon it to revive the religion, then likewise, the emergence of the Mahdi does not mean relying totally on him [tawaakul] without making preparations and without taking steps to establish Allaah’s rule on earth.

Rather the opposite of that is correct. For indeed the Mahdi’s efforts will not be greater than those of our Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم who spent twenty-three years working to establish the foundations of Islaam and its state–so what can the Mahdi possible do if he emerged today and found the Muslims split into sects and groups, and [found] their [bad] scholars, except for a few of [the good ones among] them, to have been taken as heads by the people! He would not be able to establish the nation state of Islaam except after uniting their word and uniting their ranks, under one banner, and this without doubt requires a long time which Allaah knows best as to just how long.

So both the Legislation and the intellect demand that the sincere Muslims carry out this obligation such that when the Mahdi does come, he will not be required except to lead them to victory and if he doesn’t come [in their time, then at the very least] they will have fulfilled what was obligatory upon them, and Allaah says, “And say, ‘Do [as you will], for Allaah will see your deeds, and [so will] His Messenger …’”” [Tawbah 9:105]

As-Saheehah, 4/42-43.