The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

BDH050016 @ [Link]

Version 2.5

The Crime of Tamyee upon the Salafee Manhaj

Part 10: Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah on the Basis Upon

This quote was posted on [Link] recently, and after verification it has been quoted in full
here.
BDH050016 @ [Link]

The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

Translation:
Question: And he - rahimahullaah - was asked, about the testimony against the
sinner and innovator: Is it permissible (to be made) by use of istifaadah [that
information which becomes spread and abundant] and what is (already) famous
(and well-known), or is it necessary (for one) to directly hear and see (before
making a testimony against them)? And if it is the case that the use of the
widespread, well-known information is sufficient for this, then which of the
Scholars have tended to this (view)? And what is the angle of this being a proof?
And the one who calls to innovation is it permissible to cover him? Or is making
testimony (about his condition) imperative so that the people can beware of
him? And what is the limit of innovation by which a person becomes amongst
Ahl ul-Ahwaa?
So he replied: That on account of which a witness (shaahid) and other than him
is disparaged, for those matters that impair his adaalah (integrity), and his deen,
then a person can testify to such, when the one using him as a witness knows of
such by way of istifaadah (abundant transmission, that which is well known and
spread). And that becomes a qadhan shariyyan (a Shariyyah revilement upon the
persons integrity or deen), as has been explicitly stated by various factions from
amongst the Jurists, from the Maalikiyyah, the Shaafiiyah, the Hanbaliyyah and
BDH050016 @ [Link]

The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

others, in their major and lesser books. They explicitly stated2 regarding when a
man is disparaged with a jarh mufsid (a jarh that renders his integrity and deen to
be corrupt), that the jaarih (originally) disparages him on account of what he
heard from him or what he saw from him, and then this matter became spread
and abundant (amongst the people).
And regarding this, I do not know of any dispute between the people. For all of
the Muslims in our time testify for the likes of Umar bin Abdul-Azeez and alHasan al-Basree and their likes, to be from the people of justice and religion, on
account of what they did not know except through istifaadah (that which
became well known and spread). And they testify concerning the likes of alHajjaaj bin Yoosuf and al-Mukhtaar bin Ubayd and Amr bin Ubayd and
Ghaylaan al-Qadariyy and Abullaah bin Sabaa ar-Raafidee and their likes, with
oppression and innovation, on account of what they did not know except
through istifaadah (that which became well known and spread). And it is
established in the Saheeh from the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) that a
funeral procession passed and the people praised the deceased. The Prophet
said, It has been affirmed to him. Then another funeral procession passed and
the people spoke badly of the deceased. The Prophet said, It has been affirmed
to him. Umar bin Al-Khattab asked (Allahs Apostle (sallallaahu alaihi
wasallam) ), What has been affirmed? He replied, You praised this, so
Paradise has been affirmed to him; and you spoke badly of this, so Hell has been
affirmed to him. You people are Allahs witnesses on earth.
This is when the intent is to make tafseeq of him in order to reject his testimony
(as a witness) and his authority (as one in charge of the affairs).
But as for when the intent is to warn from him and protection from his
evil, then it can be sufficed with what is less than this3 (i.e. less than
istifaadah), just as Abdullaah bin Masood said, Consider the people by
their companions, and it reached Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radiallaahu
2

This is in reply to the part in the question, And what is the angle of this being a proof?, in
other words the angle of proof in this, the saying of these Fuqahaa is that the jarh originally
started with what a man saw himself or heard from the one being disparaged, then this jarh
became spread and known. Thus that which originates like this, and becomes widespread,
then these Fuqahaa consider the use of that to be an acceptable Shariyy revilment.
3

This, and wha t follows, contains a refutation of the people of Tamyee from a couple of
angles:
a) Refutation of those claiming that before warning from someone everyone must be in
agreement regarding the persons deviation
b) Refutation of those who claim that judging a person by his companionship and
intimate friendship is from the Imtihaan that is a bidah (refer to article BDH050015
for more clarity on this).
BDH050016 @ [Link]

The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

anhu) that young men would gather with a particular man, so he forbade
from sitting with him.
So when a man walks along with and mixes with the people of evil, he is
warned against.
And the caller to innovation deserves punishment by unanimous agreement of
the Muslims, and his punishment is death sometimes and what is less than it at
other times. Just as the Salaf killed Jahm Ibn Safwaan, and al-Jad bin Dirham
and Ghaylaan al-Qadaree and others. And if it was considered that he does not
deserve punishment, or it is not possible to punish him, then it is vital that his
innovation be explained, and warned against, because this is from the
generality of commanding the good and forbidding the evil, that which
Allaah and His Messenger commanded4.
And the innovation by which a person becomes from Ahl ul-Ahwaa is that
which becomes well known amongst the people of knowledge of the
Sunnah to be in opposition to the Book and the Sunnah5, such as the
4

Refuting the caller to innovation and refuting him and exposing him is commanding the
good and forbidding the evil, thus the refutation of Suroor, and Aroor and al-Maghraawee
and al-Maribee and other Ikhwaanees, was from enjoining the good and forbidding the evil,
within which tahdheer minal-bidah wa ahlihaa (warning from innovation and its people)
enters into.
5

Pay careful attention to this! For Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq and Abul-Hasan alMaribee have both attempted to argue that a person is only made tabdee of when he falls
into the well known historical innovations and they rely upon this speech of Shaykh ul-Islaam.
And this particular matter has been refuted by the people of knowledge.
Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq said in his cassette Kashf ush-Shubuhaat,
From the principles concerning the boycotting of the Innovator, is that his bidah
should be from one of the five (well-known) innovations: a) at-Tajahhum (rejection of
the Sifaat), b) al-Irjaa (expelling actions from Imaan), c) ar-Rafd, d) al-Qadar, e) alKhurooj, and also like Secularism, Atheism and Heresy (involving disbelief).

Shaykh Bin Baaz replied, This is not correct. Refer to page 16 of Al-Ulamaa
Yatawallawna Tafneed ad-Daaawee as-Siyaasiyyah al-Munharifah Li-Abdur-Rahmaan AbdulKhaaliq (The Scholars Take To Refuting the Deviant Political Claims of Abdur-Rahmaan
Abdul-Khaaliq), compiled by Abu Ahmad as-Salafee, published by al-Furqaan (UAE), (2nd
edition,1422H/2001CE).
So Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq and his ideological descendant and fellow-countryman,
Abdul-Hasan al-Maribee try to restrict tabdee and tahdheer, and hajar to these specific
innovations. But what we find in the speech of Shaykh ul-Islaam is, And the innovation by
which a person becomes from Ahl ul-Ahwaa is that which becomes well known
amongst the people of knowledge of the Sunnah to be in opposition to the Book and
BDH050016 @ [Link]

The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

the Sunnah, and this is in every time, because innovations did not stop in history, they
continued to arise and develop and emerge. So the speech of Shaykh ul-Islaam is very precise
and it covers what occurred in the past and what is yet to happen, in every time, where the
people of the Sunnah declare something to be an innovation in opposition to the Book and
the Sunnah. Hence, the scholars of the Sunnah in our times have declared what the Ikhwaan
and Jamaaat ut-Tableegh and Hizb ut-Tahreer, and the Qutbiyyeen, and Surooriyyeen and the
Jamaaaat of Takfeer, and the Modernists, and the Secularists, the Khalifites and other than
them, it has become well known amongst the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah in this time, that they
are upon innovation (and some of them disbelief). Hence, these groups and those upon them,
when they subscribe to that which the Scholars of the Sunnah of this time have explained to
be innovation and what opposes the Book and the Sunnah, then they are from Ahl ul-Ahwaa,
as a general ruling. So you can see the talbees (deception) played out by the likes of al-Maribee
and Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, when they try to keep people in a time-warp and
restrict tabdee and tahdheer to age-old innovations (which no doubt still exist today) but their
intent is to limit and restrict what Ahl us-Sunnah do in every age of separating Sunnah and its
people from Bidah and its people, and also their intent to protect the people of Innovation
and silence the Salafiyyoon from speaking about them and warning from them).
And here (quoted from NDV180009) is proof that Abul-Hasan al-Maribee al-Ikhwaanee is
upon this same falsehood as well. Al-Maribee said in the cassette in which he entered alIkhwaan and Jamaaat ul-Jihaad to be from al-Firqat un-Naajiyyah:
And even if there are many differences in the way of dawah to Allaah, the Mighty and
Majestic, and in the way of establishing the Islamic Khilaafah5 upon the earth, then your
are not able to count these differences to be from the destroyed sects. This is because the
usool (foundations) of the destroyed sects have been explained by the Scholars, and they
have explained the usool of the Jahmiyyah, the Qadariyyah, the Mutazilah, the Khawaarij,
the Murjiah, the Shiah, the Rawaafid, the Nawaasib and other than that. They have
explained all of this.
Hence, the one who differed with me for example, in the issue of elections, then which
sect shall I enter him into? Shall I call him a Jahmee? Shall I call him a Raafidee? Shall I
call him to be from the Khawaarij? I am not able to do that. Since, he will affirm the
usool of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaaah to you, and he will say, I affirm that this affair is
an error, and is in opposition to the religion, however it is from the angle of leaving an
obligation for that which is more obligatory than it, or which is the lesser of the two
harms.
So it is true that he has erred in using the principle, and he is in error, and it has not been
submitted by him that he has placed this principle in its proper place. However alongside
his error, has he held onto a foundation (asl) from the foundations of the destroyed
sects?

And Shaykh Rabee refuted this Ikhwaanee by saying: If you hold that a person does not exit
from the ranks of Ahl us-Sunnah except when he holds onto a foundation from the
foundations that you have mentioned, the foundation of the Rawaafid, the Khawaarij,
then what do you say about those who speak with Hulool (Divine Indwelling) and WahdatulWujood (Unity of Existence), and what is you saying concerning the Soofee paths which are
more than sixty different tareeqahs, and you are not able to call a single one of them as
Khawaarij or [Link] what is your saying concerning the one you are not able to call
a Jahmee, but he believes in the theory of Darwin, and believes in Socialism, and believes in
Secular Thought, and alongside that he prays and acknowledges the Islamic beliefs.
BDH050016 @ [Link]

The Crime of Tamyee Upon the Salafee Manhaj

innovation of the Khawaarij, and the Rawaafid, and the Qadariyyah, and the
Murjiah. For Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak and Yoosuf bin Asbaat and others
besides them said, The foundations of the seventy-two sects are four: the
Khawaarij, the Rawaafid, the Qadariyyah, and the Murjiah. It was said to Ibn
al-Mubaarak, And the Jahmiyyah?, he said, The Jahmiyyah are not from the
Ummah of Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam).
And the Jahmiyyah are the negators of the attributes, those who say, The
Quraan is created, and Allaah will not be seen in the Hereafter, and
Muhammad was not raised to His Lord and Allaah has no knowledge nor
power, nor life, and what is like that, as is said by the Mutazilah and the
Philosophers and whoever followed them.
And Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee said, They are two groups, the Jahmiyyah
and the Raafidah. So these two groups are the most evil of Ahl ul-Bida, and the
Qaraamitah Baatiniyyah, such as the Nusayriyyah and the Ismaaeeliyyah entered
from amongst them, and from amongst them the Ittihaadiyyah connected, and
they are like of the type of the faction of the Firawniyyah.
And the Raafidah in these times, alongside their rafd, are Jahmiyyah Qadariyyah,
for they added to ar-Rafd, the madhhab of the Mutazilah, then they sometimes
also exit to the madhhab of the Ismaaeeliyyah, and their likes from the people of
zandaqah (heresy) and ittihaad (the belief of divine union).
And Allaah and His Messenger know best.

Where is this so called taseel (laying down foundations) that you claim? There are found so
many innovations which if found in the time of the Salaf, then perhaps they would have
passed a more severe judgement upon them than the one they passed upon the people of
innovation contemporary to them. However, the faqeeh (understanding person) is the one
fixes his eyes upon the scales of balance of the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) which
does not change in time or place, [which is], Whoever is upon what I and my companions are
upon. Rather the scales of balance (meezaan) of Allaah, Verily this is My Straight Path,
so follow it, and do not follow the other paths as they will separate you from His
pathSo how many paths are there which oppose the Straight Path of Allaah, and which
the Ikhwaan have followed. And remember his (sallallaahu alaihi wasallams) saying, You will
certainly follow exactly in the ways of those who came before you, until if they were to enter
into a lizards hole, you would have followed them. (Refer to NDV180009)
So beware O Sunni! Beware from those who invent false principles into the Salafee Manhaj.
BDH050016 @ [Link]