Breaking News
Home / Clarifications / Shaykh Sālim at-Taweel (hafidhahullāh) A SECOND LETTER TO SHAYKH ’UBAYD AL-JABIRĪ
picture of pen writing

Shaykh Sālim at-Taweel (hafidhahullāh) A SECOND LETTER TO SHAYKH ’UBAYD AL-JABIRĪ

“A question: when did you start to see change from me? If you knew that I was at the beginning stages of deviation why did you not advise me? By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, I do not ever remember you advising me, I have not even met you in the last few years and there has not been any contact between us whatsoever! Is it not from my right over you that you advise me before you expel me from the Sunnah?”

 

All praise is due to Allāh, there is no transgression except on the oppressors and the final destination is for the pious; and may prayers and peace be upon our Prophet, and on his family and all of his companions, to proceed:

 

This is the second letter which I send to Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jābirī, may Allāh preserve him and make him noble in the two abodes. I send the letter for three reasons:

One: as some new words about me have emanated from the Shaykh, may Allāh grant him success.

Two: his words, may Allāh forgive him and his parents, were not sent to me specifically or directly rather they were distributed widely.

Three: some brothers, may Allāh guide them, have not ceased from defaming me for they still strive to cause unrestricted doubt and have sought assistance from a Yemeni brother called ’Ādil Mansūr al-Bāshā and then an Egyptian brother called Khālid ’AbdurRahmān, another Egyptian called Hani’, a Saudi called Ahmad Bāzmūl, then Shaykh Muhammad bin Hādī and then finally they sought the assistance of Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jābirī, may Allāh preserve him. By Allāh’s Permission they will not harm except themselves. For that reason, I viewed it appropriate to write this letter and distribute it in the hope that Allāh will provide me with sincerity and accuracy and make it beneficial for whomever he wills from His servants. The text of the letter is as follows:

From Sālim bin Sa’d at-Taweel to the honourable Shaykh ’Ubayd bin ’Abdullāh al-Jābirī, may Allāh preserve him.

As-salāmu alaykum wa rahmatullāi wa barakātuhu,

To proceed:

Your letter reached me, and may Allāh’s Mercy reach you, which was as follows:

Questioner asks: may Allāh show goodness to you, [if] a person says: “I view that from those who are ascribed to the group Jam’iyyat Ihyā Turāth people of virtue, knowledge and religiosity, this is how I regard them and Allāh will take them to account and I do not commend anyone before Allāh. They have people of the Qur’ān such as so and so…” and he mentions a number of them, what are your comments on these words? BārakAllāhu feekum.”

Answer [from Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jābirī]:

“The person who says such words is argumentative and this is of the second falsehood of falsehoods from him which have been presented in these gatherings, the last one was maybe presented last Sunday…the principle with Ahl us-Sunnah is that the one who allies himself to the people of innovation and does not take them to account and does not support those who step up to them is to be regarded as being from them. This is even though he may apparently be a person of righteousness and act according to the Sunnah – for this does not save him from falling into innovation himself. We have spoken about the group of Ihya ut-Turāth in many instances in Kuwait and here we have spoken about them as I deem sufficient, so whoever wishes can refer to that, it [Ihyā ut-Turāth] is within the divisions of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

End of the words of the noble Shaykh.

I say, and by Allāh alone I seek aid and upon him I rely and turn to:

One: you should know O noble Shaykh ’Ubayd, may Allāh preserve you, that my words which you were asked about I wrote years ago in an article and it was in relation to one of the brothers from Ihyā ut-Turāth who accused me of defaming all who ascribed to their Jam’iyyah without exception. Thus, I wrote those words which were transmitted to you and the brothers did not ask you or safeguard to record your answer except after you spoke about brother Ahmad Bāzmūl! Their intent could have been to avert the people from listening to what you said about brother Ahmad Bāzmūl, and this is not far off based on my experience with them.

 

Two: some of the brothers in Kuwait and elsewhere totally hid your words about Ahmad Bāzmūl and they did not disseminate it so as to protect their companion Bāzmūl and cover him.

 

Three: they regard your words about Bāzmūl to be “fitna” about which there should be silence and they have advised that “there should be no entry into the issue” and that “words on it should be left to the ’Ulama”!? And they have said “preoccupy yourself with seeking knowledge and leave speaking about Bāzmūl”!?[1] I do not know why the words you mentioned about Bāzmūl are “fitna” that “should be left to the ’Ulama” while your words about anyone else are distributed widely, preoccupied with away from seeking knowledge and not left to the ’Ulama?! I do not know who are the ’Ulama who will comment on your word? And I do not know when there will be inspection of your ruling on him? And I do not know when the final ruling will be distributed!? SubhānAllāh, fitan is only when matters have become confused and rights neglected as Shaykh al-’Allāmah ’Abdul’Azeez bin Bāz (rahimahullāh) stated in Majmū’ al-Fatāwā wa’l-Maqālāt, vol.7, p.363:



[1] [Translator’s note, ’AbdulHaq]: another exquisite example of the double-standards and playing of games by such elements of ghulū, they encourage all and sundry to “take a position” on Shaykhs they do not agree with, then when of their own teachers is rebuked and criticised, even by another of the Shaykhs whom they blindly follow, they reject all of it and then revert back to the stance of “do not get involved”!? This is even though over the last thirteen years or so when disputes among Ahl us-Sunnah occurred the ’Ulama such as the Jordanian Mashayikh, the Muhaddith of Madeenah ’AbdulMuhsin al-’Abbād al-Badr, al-’Allāmah Fawzān and Shaykh ’AbdusSalām Burjis (rahimahullāh) were advising not to be involved in disputations among people of the Sunnah, these very same individuals rejected all of that in favour of instilling fitna, forcing the youth to take positions and wasting time with such disputes. There has now even been referral to unknown individuals in order to deflect the words of Shaykh ’Ubayd about Ahmad Bāzmūl and deny the matter completely. Thus, there is selectivity on which disputes to enter into and exaggerate and which to discreetly sweep under the carpet when appropriate.

It pleases me to inform you that the ahādeeth related to fitan and warning from it are taken by the people of knowledge to apply to tribulations wherein the rightful one is not known from the wrongful, the believers are warned from such tribulations and this is what the Prophet (sallAllāhu ’alayhi wassallam) intended when he said: “…the one sitting is better than the one standing, and the one standing is better than the one walking, and the one walking is better than the one running.” As for the tribulations wherein the rightful is known from the wrongful, and the oppressor from the oppressed, then this is not included within the aforementioned hadeeth. Rather, the Divinely Legislated evidences from the Book and Sunnah indicate the obligation of supporting the rightful one over the wrongful and the oppressed over the transgressor and oppressor.

End of his words, may Allāh have mercy on him.

 

Four: if they really wanted to maintain unity in word and not incite fitnah they would not have distributed your words about the Mashāyikh of Yemen and they would have striven to make rectification. Yet unfortunately, they mention that which is for them and do not mention that which is against them.

 

Five: noble Shaykh ’Ubayd, may Allāh grant you success to all good, I mentioned in my previous words unto you that you have known me for 21 years and yet within one week you have spoken about me twice and possibly within the upcoming days you will speak about me again with new words.

A question: when did you start to see change from me? If you knew that I was at the beginning stages of deviation why did you not advise me? By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, I do not ever remember you advising me, I have not even met you in the last few years and there has not been any contact between us whatsoever! Is it not from my right over you that you advise me before you expel me from the Sunnah and attach me with others?

 

Six: noble Shaykh, if it is the case that you do not want to advise me for any particular reason, then why do you not at least verify what has been transmitted to you? Did Allāh not Say,

“O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.”

{al-Hujurāt (49): 6}

 

Seven: when the questioner relayed the question to you he did not mention the name of the Mashāyikh whom I praised in my original article! Perhaps there was a specific intent in that, Allāh knows better. Thus, I want to mention the names of them for a very important intent:

 

Eight: the Shaykhs were: Shaykh Hamūd an-Najdī, Shaykh Dāwud al-’As’ūsī, Shaykh Faisal Qazār al-Jāsim,[1] Shaykh Ibrāheem al-Ansārī.

[1] [TN]: Shaykh Faisal announced his departure from Ihyā ut-Turāth eighteen months ago.

 

Nine: noble Shaykh ’Ubayd, may Allāh make you happy in this world and the next, are those four Shaykh innovators? Either you regard them as “innovators”, which if so inform me of their innovation which has expelled them from the sphere of Ahl us-Sunnah, or they are from Ahl us-Sunnah. Thus, why do you consider my praise of them to be “a falsehood from falsehoods”? It is not hidden from you that there is no problem according to the Divine Legislation, intellect and custom in rightfully praising a Sunni Muslim Muwahhid.

 

Ten: I have never ever in my life stated that those aforementioned Shaykhs are innovators and I will not change my view regarding them. Thus, I have not had a previous view about them and then a later view, or an old view and then a new. My view on them for about a quarter of a century, or more or less, has been that they are Muslim Muwahhid brothers, they are not prophets and they are not infallible. I reject from them what appears to me to be an error and I advise them and criticise them, and they advise me and criticise me and I do no preoccupy myself with them.

 

Eleven: I have never ever in my life heard any Shaykh make tabdī’ of those aforementioned Shaykhs. Even the brother Muhammad al-’Anjarī, Ahmad Bāzmūl, Ahmad Subay’ī, Fawwāz al-’Awdī, Zayd bin Hulays, Tāriq bin Husayn, Khālid ’AbdurRahmān al-Misrī – all of those do not make tabdī’ of the Shaykhs of Jam’iyyah Ihyāt Turāth, according to what I know, unless they make tabdī’ secretly and Allāh knows the secrets and it is possible for you noble Shaykh to ask them and certify from them yourself.

 

 

Twelve: noble Shaykh, it is not hidden from you that tabdī’ of a Muslim and expelling him from the Sunnah is not an easy matter. Innovation is the qareenah of shirk and it is the worst of affairs, every innovation is misguidance and all misguidance is in the fire, thus your statement noble Shaykh that:

…the principle with Ahl us-Sunnah is that the one who allies himself to the people of innovation and does not take them to account and does not support those who step up to them is to be regarded as being from them. this is even though he may apparently be a person of righteousness and act according to the Sunnah – for this does not save him from falling into innovation himself.

I say: it is understood from your words noble Shaykh, and I hope that I am wrong in my understanding, that you make tabdī’ of the aforementioned Shaykhs along with me aswell with them! This is a very severe matter indeed, as Imām Ahmad stated: “expelling people from the Sunnah is severe”, as relayed by al-Khallāl in as-Sunnah, vol.2, p.373, no.513. Indeed, even if it is said about the right of a Muslim: “O immoral one, O sinner” it is less than saying about him: “O innovator, O misguided one”.

 

Thirteen: noble Shaykh ’Ubayd, at this point I will transmit unto you the words of the Imām of Ahl us-Sunnah, the father of the’Ulama and students of knowledge, the real teacher and kind father whom the Ummah lost and after him strangeness increased, the honourable Shaykh ’Abdul’Azeez bin ’Abdullāh bin Bāz (rahimahullāh). He stated:

The Prophet (sallAllāhu ’alayhi wassallam) stated: “all of the children of Ādam makes mistakes, and the best of those who make mistakes are those who repent.” Likewise, the statements of the ’Ulama, Mālik (rahimahullāh) said: “there is none of us who has his statement accepted or rejected except for the one in this grave [i.e. Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ’alayhi wassallam)].”

     Every scholar has errors, so it is obligatory to bring attention to his errors in a good way however he is not to be warned from when he is from Ahl us-Sunnah rather he is to be guided to good and taught good and advised with rifq in his da’wah to Allāh, Mighty and Majestic, and should be notified of his mistake. The people should be called to take knowledge from him and to gain understanding from him so long as he is from Ahl us-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah.

      And a mistake does not necessitate that he be warned from however his error is to be brought to attention as every person has mistakes, this is with the consideration of what is preponderant with him and what he is known of from good creed. Thus, it is obligatory on the preachers to Allāh to have insight, be gentle, not be hasty in their affairs, to know the truth, not warn from the people of knowledge and to be cautioned against the ways of animosity and enmity. Rather, they are to maintain all ways of unity among Ahl ul-’Ilm and Ahl us-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah in their da’wah to Allāh and their exhortation to the people to good. This is so that the preachers to Allāh increase and spread and so that the people want the da’wah and take from them. if the people hear that this one warns from that one and that one warns from this one, this wastes the da’wah and makes people have bad thoughts.

End of his words, may Allāh have mercy on him, from a lecture given by the noble Shaykh at one of the Jam’iyyat ul-Khariyyah in Kuwait via the phone on 10/10/1416 and can be found on the Shaykh’s official website. If only you were to compare your words noble Shaykh [’Ubayd] about Ahl us-Sunnah with the guidance of Shaykh al-’Allāmah ’Abdul’Azeez bin ’Abdullāh bin Bāz, may Allāh have mercy on him.

 

Fourteen: the ’Ulama could differ about a man, some may make tabdī’ of him and some not, and it is not just that they do not make tabdī’ of him but they actually greatly praise him. So it is not a necessity to attach all who do not make tabdī’ of whoever you view to be innovator to him and consider him to be an innovator like him. If we did that then we will enter into a series of tabdī’ and so that my words become clear I will put forth an example of that with Shaykh Bakr Abū Zayd (rahimahullāh). You noble Shaykh [’Ubayd] make tabdī’ of him as is understood when you said about him: “a blazing Ikhwānī Qutbī who is not appropriate to praise”.

Perhaps you intend by “Qutbī”, innovator, then what if he is “blazing”?! If my understanding is wrong, I seek Allāh’s forgiveness and I repent unto Him. Yet other ’Ulama praise Shaykh Bakr Abū Zayd and as is not hidden he was of the senior scholars of an official organisation put into the position by the leader with consultation of the senior scholars. Of those who also praised him were: our Shaykh, Ibn ’Uthaymeen (rahimahullāh) who said about him:

“Our brother, Shaykh Bakr Abū Zayd is from the senior scholars and is well-known for decisiveness and meticulousness…as he has occupied many positions and all of his actions indicate that he is suitable for those positions. Now he is on the Lajnah of Fatāwā which is headed by the honourable Shaykh ’Abdul’Azeez bin Bāz in Riyadh and with the Council of Senior Scholars. We ask Allāh to grant us and him success. Moreover, his language within his writings indicates his dexterity in the Arabic language and thus sometimes dictionaries are needed to comprehend the terminologies which he utilises. Yet this is not difficult for him. This indicates that Allāh has granted him a natural instinct in the Arabic language when many ’Ulama of his time do not grasp it. to the extent that you would even say that these chapters are the like the Maqāmāh of al-Harīrī which is well-known to most of you as being a good Maqāmat containing admonitions and many words which a person can benefit from.”

End of Shaykh ’Uthaymeen’s words from the introduction to Hilyat Tālib ul-’Ilm.

 

Fifteen: it is not hidden from you noble Shaykh ’Ubayd that Shaykh Rabī’ bin Hādī al-Madkhalī, may Allāh preserve him, rebutted Shaykh Bakr Abū Zayd (rahimahullāh) with an academic and beneficial response which has been published and printed. Yet with that he uttered his famous words that he does not make tabdī’ of Shaykh Bakr Abū Zayd! Shaykh ’Ubayd, if only you would think about the Muslim youth who hear these rulings and weighty words from you which you have said much about the people of knowledge, such as “misguided, a waste, innovator, Ikhwānī, Qutbī, heedless” and the likes. While there are other ’Ulama who praise them, have good thoughts about them, advise students of knowledge to benefit from them. I say O noble Shaykh, you should reflect on the small students of knowledge and non-Arabs and what will happen to them and among them when they hear of these contradictions among the ’Ulama.

 

Sixteen: Likewise, Shaykh al-’Allāmah, Sālih bin Fawzān al-Fawzān, may Allāh preserve him, gave some words to the students of knowledge wherein he warned them from saying “so and so is not Salafi” and his words are famous in this regard when he was asked:

“Of late there has emerged name-calling via saying ‘so and so is not Salafi’ and ‘so and so is not from the Salafis’ – so are such expressions considered to be tabdī’? And does there have to be proof established on him?”

Answer from al-’Allāmah Sālih al-Fawzān:

By Allāh I warn from such name-calling such as this, all praise is due to Allāh the children of the Muslims and the students of knowledge by Allāh’s Will all of them are upon goodness and upon the creed of the Salaf even though among some of them is deficiency or ignorance, this does not expel them from Salafiyyah. These words are not permissible, these words are not permissible among brothers, students of knowledge and the children of the Muslims within the lands of the Muslims. These words are not permissible. There has to be mutual advice, if you have any observations on your brother advise him, as for you to degrade him via names and say that he is not from the [way of the] Salaf and not from Salafiyyah then maybe you yourself do not know what Salafiyyah is yet as some of them claim Salafiyyah yet do not know what it is…if you were to ask him about Salafiyyah and what it is he will not know.

End of his words.

 

Seventeen: noble Shaykh ’Ubayd, may Allāh preserve you, the Islamic world produced notable Imāms who Ahl us-Sunnah did not differ on, such as Shaykh al-’Allāmah ’Abdul’Azeez bin Bāz, Shaykh al-’Allāmah Muhammad Nāsiruddeen al-Albānī, Shaykh al-’Allāmah Muhammad bin Sālih al-’Uthaymeen and Shaykh al-’Allāmah Muqbil bin Hādī al-Wādi’ī, may Allāh have mercy on them – and according to your classification none [credible] came forth from those scholars, or some of them, except for a number which can be counted on one hand!?

 

Eighteen: you should know noble Shaykh that some of those who spread your words say that the Council of Senior Scholars contains Qutbīs and innovators, and there is no doubt that these words weaken the council and makes the people doubt in it as our Shaykh Ibn ’Uthaymeen (rahimahullāh) stated.

 

Noble Shaykh I have not yet ended my letters to you, for I shall write a third by Allāh’s Will.

 

All praise is due to Allāh firstly, finally, apparently and inwardly, and may prayers, peace and blessings be upon or Prophet Muhammad, his family and all of his companions.

 



Shaykh Sālim at-Taweel, Wa Aydhan Risālah Lam Yahmiluhā al-Bareed ilā Fadeelat ish-Shaykh ’Ubayd bin Hādī al-Jābirī hafidhahu Allāh, 2-3. [And Also a Letter Which Cannot be Delivered by Post to Shaykh ’Ubayd al-Jābirī, May Allāh Preserve him, 2nd of 3 Letters]. Dated 24 Muharram 1436 AH/17 November 2014 CE, see:

http://www.saltaweel.com/articles/372

Summarised translation by ’AbdulHaq al-Ashanti

 

 

About Salafibayaan

Check Also

muslim insurgents

Are Isis khawarij? Shaykh Dr Ahmed an-Najjar

  Are Isis khawarij? Shaykh Dr Ahmed an-Najjar Question:Is the organisation who name themselves as …