Morjiah Not Salafis

'Ali al-Timimi

as-Salamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu:

al-Hamdulillah was-Salatu was-Salamu ala Rasulillah:

Over the past few years I have written in this forum on a few occasions in defense of the aqida of Ahl as-Sunna from the onslaught of this contemporary movement of Irja' that disguises itself as Salafiya. (Indeed, the fatwa by the Permanent Council last year against the book written by Murad Shukri refers to this group espousing Irja' as calling themselves the Salafis of Jordan.)

The "rabid" (in reference to the hadith of the 73 groups which describes the spreading of desires amongst them as a person bitten by a rabid dog penetrating every joint and vein.) followers of this group in the West - many of them not possessing either knowledge of Arabic or sharia sciences - have over the years claimed many things about me: from forging Sh Ibn Baz's signature to the Kuwaiti declaration (which I translated and read in the lecture entitled a Word of Advice to the Salafis of the UK) to more recently being an agent of the US government and an associate of Kabbani in fighting Ahl as-Sunna.

Many times brothers and sisters have contacted me asking me to defend myself and rebut these allegations. I would remind them that first of all none of us youth should defend himself as none of those involved - especially me - are of any importance to be a topic of discussion let alone to go about defending one's self. Secondly, that we should be people of the manhaj of Ahl as-Sunna.

This manhaj means that we defend the aqeeda as it is aqeeda and not because it is esposued by certain personalities.

Secondly, this manhaj means that we recognize the truth because it is truth not because so and so said it. And hence we should double and redouble efforts in learning our religion.

Thirdly, part of this manhaj is not arguing with Ahl al-Bid'a. If we recognize that those who we are in dispute with are not from Ahl as-Sunna in these matters then we should not argue with them but rather present the truth clearly and with good manners (something which they do not display.)

Fourthly, it is only a matter of time before the truth becomes manifest. If we are upon the truth then we should be certain that this truth will become apparent as falsehood by Divine decree must vanish and only the truth must remain.

This latest fatwa by the Permanent Council against the book by al-Anbari is just further proof to the above and is part of a chain of evidences against this group. Among the more notable evidences:

1. Sh Bakr Abu Zaid's letter against Sh Rabi' al-Madkhali's book against Sayyid Qutb in which he cautions Sh Rabi not to pass out his good deeds by twisting the words of the dead. 2. Sh Ibn Jibrin's fatwa against Sh Rabi's works against both Sayyid Qutb and Abdurrahman Abdulkhaliq in which he reminds us that Ibn Baz interceded for Sayyid Qutb that he not be executed. 3. The tape by Sh al-Albani regarding Sayyid Qutb in which Sh al-Albani mentions that parts of Sayyid Qutb's tafseer where Divinely inspired and that all Salafis should read a chapter of Milestones and his description of Sh Rabi's book against Sayyid Qutb (when a passage of which was read to him) as ignorance. 4. The econium of Sh Ibn Baz to the declaration of the Kuwaiti students of knowledge. 5. The econium of Sh Ibn Baz to Sh Abdurrahman Abdul-Khaliq's book as-Sirat in which Sh Ibn baz calls for the printing and distribution of the book even though the book has a section entitled Tawhid al-Hukm. 6. The fatwa by The Permanent Council against Murad Shukri's book Ihkam at-Taqrir describing the book as passing off the beliefs of the astray Murji'a as those of the Salaf and Ahl as-Sunna and calling its author and publisher (Ali al-Halabi) to repent and banning the distribution of the book. 7. The latest fatwa by The Permanent Council against al-Anbari's book. 8. Sh al-Albani's agreement with Sh Salman al-Awda's distinction between al-Firqa an-Najiya and at-Ta'ifa al-Mansura. This issue which is one of ijtihad was used by Sh Rabi to write a whole book against Sh Salman. 9. The book al-Insaf by Sh Bakr Abu Zaid against this group's attack of the scholars and the du'at.

And much, much more... which I have decided not to mention out of consideration of this already lengthy e-mail as it is.

Truly this group is as they have been described: They are Khawarij with regards to the du'at (preachers); Murji’a with regards to the rulers; Rafida with regards to the jamaa'at (Islamic groups); and Qadariya with regards to the Jews, Christians, and infidels.

I ask my brothers and sisters who have fallen into this fitna that they reconsider some of their positions and repent from these astray beliefs. I also request of my brothers and sisters who have been preserved from this fitna not to rejoice at the error of their brethren but rather to thank Allah for guiding them and use this opportunity to wisely and gently bring our brothers back to the truth. Let us not forget that the overwhelming majority of these brothers/sisters remain staunch supporters of tawhid and sunna who have been deluded into this fitna thinking that they are defending Allah's religion. While in reality they are only defending a throne which cares less for them or their leaders. May Allah forgive us our transgressions and bring us to His Truth gently.

Akhookum,

Ali

PS. Re: The book recently condemned by The Permanent Council was used extensively by Ali al-Halabi in his book at-Tahdhir min Fitna at-Takfir. When Dr Abu Ruhayyam debated him (in that infamous tape where you hear Ali al-Halabi shouting), Abu Ruhayyam wrote a small booklet entitled Tahdhir al-Umma min Ta'liqat al-Halabi ala Aqwal al-A'imma (A warning to the umma regarding the remarks appended by al-Halabi to the statements of the scholars.)

Ali al-Halabi in his defense two short essays and a lengthy book entitled Saiha Nadhir bi Khatir at-Takfir (A Warning Shout regarding the Danger of Takfir), in which he admits the following:

1. He says (footnote to page 6) his original book "Tahdhir al-Umma" was reviewed by many among whom "al-Akh ash-Shaikh Murad Shukri."

This is interesting as when the fatwa came out last year by the Permanent Council condemning Murad Shukri's book on Takfir (Ihkam at-Taqrir) as hiding the beliefs of the Murji'a under the guise of Ahl as-Sunna and the Salaf and further banning the book and requesting the author and the printer (Ali al-Halabi) to repent. Ali al-Halabi remarked that he made a mistake by printing this book and giving this unknown, i.e. Murad Shukri, a platform. let us not forget that Ali al-Halabi not only printed the book but wrote an econium to it. Moreover, by his own admission, cited above he had Murad Shukri read and review his own book on Takfir. Hence, the question that should be asked if Murad Shukri was an unknown then why is he reviewing Ali al-Halabi's book? Obviously the relationship is even deeper.

2. Regarding the current book condemned by The Permanent Council, al-Anbari's al-Hukm bi Ghayr Ma Anzal Allah wa Usul at-Takfir (Judging by other than what Allah has sent down and the fundamentals of charging a Muslim an infidel), al-Halabi also writes in his book Saiha an-Nadhir (p. 52), "our meritorious brother, Abu Muhammad Khalid ibn Ali al-Anbari may Allah give him success in his enjoyable book, al-Hukm bi Ghayr Ma Anzal Allah wa Usul at-Takfir." And then in the note on that page, al-Halabi writes, "It is a great, useful, and enjoyable book which I quoted from a number of times in at-Tahdhir."

3. On the note to page 93, al-Halabi cites in full Abdullah as-Sabt's editorial which appeared in the now defunct newspaper al-Muslimun (26 Dhul-Qadah, 1417 AH, issue no. 635) entitled Kalimat Haqq Urida biha Batil (A true word used for falsehood). He refers to Abdullah as-Sabt as "ash-Shaikh Abdullah as-Sabt may Allah grant him success."

The point is that Abdullah as-Sabt's editorial was written against Sh Abdurrahman Abdulkhaliq's book as-Sirat. as-Sabt used Ali b. Abi Talib's statement "A true word used for falsehood," which was said when the Khawarij called for Judgment belonging to Allah alone in reference to Quranic aya. This was said by them regarding the human arbitration to end the dispute between Ali and Mu'awiya (may Allah be pleased with them both). Hence Abdullah as-Sabt's imagery is that like the first Khawarij is Abdurrahman Abdulkhaliq. However, we all know that Sh Ibn Baz - may Allah be merciful with him - just prior to his death praised as-Sirat and called for its printing and distribution. This would imply that either Ibn Baz is himself among the Khawarij if Abdullah as-Sabt;s reasoning is wrong or Abdullah as-Sabt himself is not upon the Sunna in this matter.

I write these words as a few years ago when one of the extreme followers of this group defended its position using this book and Ali al-Halabi's book, I pointed out - wa lillahil-hamd - that both books deviated and twisted the statements of the scholars. Well here is the Permanent Council's fatwa against the source book. It is only a matter of time that the second book to receives public condemnation from Ahl as-Sunna. Even though Dr Abu Ruhayyam's two essays are sufficient for those who discern the truth by the Quran and Sunna and not by the statements of those who see the truth only through the eyes of those whom they blindly follow.

And Allah knows best.