1

The Adequate Answer to

the One Who Asks About the Satisfactory Remedy for the Fitnah

of Abdurahman; TheTransgressor

Written by Abu Ishaaq Ayoob Bin Mahfoodh Al-

Daqeel Al-Shabbaamee

Translated by: Ehsan Bin Manzoor and Yusuf Al-Biritaanee

2

بسم اهلل الرحمن الرحيم

All praise is for Allah the lord of all that exists, and I testify that none has the right to be worshipped besides Allah alone without any partners, and I testify that Mohammed is his slave and messenger .

As for what follows: Imam Muslim narrated in his Saheeh, on the authority of Tameem Ad-Daaree that the Prophet said: “The religion is advice”, we said: (i.e. the companions that were present) “To whom?” He said: “To Allah, to His book, to His messenger and to the heads of the Muslim's and to their general folk”

So the well-being of the Dunya and the religion is built upon advice. And it is for that reason, the religion has been brought together with advice, so therefore it is incumbent upon the people of the truth that they establish this great obligation, enforcing the truth, and bringing about the downfall of falsehood.

And if it wasn't for that (i.e. the advice) – after the aid of Allah – Misguidance would prevail upon the land. And the truth would become hidden, the good would become (seen as) evil, and the evil would become (seen as) good. So it is not permissible for the people of the truth that they slack from this, otherwise that would be considered as treachery in the religion.

Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in Sharh us-Sunnah:

“It is not permissible to hide sincere advice from any of the Muslims, whether pious or impious, in matters of the religion. Whoever hides that, has acted deceitfully towards the Muslims. Whoever acts deceitfully towards the Muslims has done so towards the religion. Whoever acts deceitfully towards the religion has behaved treacherously”

And from this matter, I have presented to my Muslim brothers this advice which comprises of a clarification to some of the problems which some of the conspirators use to deceive (others) with, in what is related to the Fitnah of Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee and what derives from it from commotion of the unknown people, who are in charge of the finances1 of this infatuated individual (i.e. Abdurrahman) and those with him in it from corrupt business.

1 The author of this treatise is striking a parable and is referring to the Fitnah as a business.

3

Those in charge of finances (i.e. those leading the Fitnah) are meagre and miserable – (and they are) [unknown people], and the product (that this business offers) is corrupt – (i.e.) [Abdurrahman], and the market that they enter into (to sell their product) is destitute and abandoned – [www.wahyain.com], and the one purchasing this product doesn't have recompense – [The idle one with time to waste]. And the gain, if you are not guarding yourselves is – [the departure of the Sunnah and the loss of knowledge], truly to Allah we belong and truly, to him we shall return.

So I made this research urgent and summarised upon a formula of questions and answers, as an advice to the Muslims and a warning to them from the actions of those unknown biased forgers, and also as an explanation to the truth and a removal of the doubts. So I undertook this as a defence of the truth and an abolishment of falsehood. Allah the Most High says:

﴾وقل جاء الق وزهق الباطل إن الباطل كان زهوقا﴿

And say: "Truth (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism or this Qur'ân or Jihâd against polytheists) has come and Bâtil (falsehood, i.e. Satan or polytheism, etc.) has vanished. Surely! Bâtil is ever bound to vanish." (Al-Isra 17:81) And from the wisdom of Allah, glorified be He, the Most High, is that He tests the people of the truth by way of the people of falsehood in order for the occurrence of jihad in the way of Allah with the weapon, with the pen and with the tongue in defence of the truth and warding off the falsehood. Allah the Most High said:

لو ب عضك ﴿ هم ولكن ليب ﴾م بب عض والذين قتلوا ف سبيل الله ف لن يضل أعمالم ولو يشاء الله لنتصر من

…but if it had been Allâh's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost, (Muhammad 47:4)

And He the Most High said:

نة أتصبون وكان ربك بصريا﴿ ﴾وجعلنا ب عضكم لب عض فت And We have made some of you as a trial for others: will you have patience? And your Lord is Ever All-Seer (of everything). (Al-Furqan 25:20)

4

And He the Most High said:

ل اليات ولتستبني سبيل المجرمني﴿ ﴾وكذلك ن فص And thus do We explain the ayat in detail, that the way of the criminals may become

manifest (Al-An'am 55) And He the Most High said:

ل اليات ﴿ ﴾ولعلهم ي رجعون وكذلك ن فص

Thus do We explain the ayat in detail, so that they may turn (to the truth) (Al-A'raaf 174)

I ask Allah that He benefits by way of it Islaam and the Muslims, and progression towards what was intended (i.e. towards clarification). Q 1): If it is said to you, “Do you doubt concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee and the Hizbiyyah of the one who is fanatical towards him and is in opposition towards the people of the truth?” A): We don't have any doubt concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee, and those that are with him. Just like there is no doubt with us concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abul-Hasan (Al-Ma'ribee) and those that are with him – at the time in which some of them ordered with the stopping of the articles whilst they would also have praise for Abul-Hassan and we didn't have at that time the smallest of doubt in regards to his Hizbiyyah, and just like that today with the likes of him – so be gentle with yourselves!

Q 2): If it is said to you, “Has anyone from the people of knowledge said this, or are they the dispositions of some from amongst the students?” A): Yes, As-Shaykh Al-Alaamah Yahya Bin Ali Al-Hajooree has said this, and he is from the people of knowledge who understand the reasons for Al-Jarh Wa At-Ta'deel1. And he is (also) from the people of Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta'deel with attestation of the people of knowledge. And some of the scholars, who have seen the Fitnah in Dammaj, and in other than Dammaj and they have lived it, agree with the Shaykh on this (i.e. concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abdurahman).

1 The praise and disparagements of individuals.

5

Q 3): If it is said to you, “Why did you accept the disparagement of Shaykh (Yahya) Al-Hajooree?”

A): I accepted it for many reasons, from them:

1. Because he is from the scholars of this affair.

2. Because his disparagement is detailed, and the Islamic principle states: ' The detailed

disparagement takes precedence over the (general) appraise, even if the disparager is on his own and those appraising are in a group'. As we have accepted before the disparagement of our Shaykh Muqbil, may Allah have mercy upon him, in regards to a group (of people), and we didn't search to see who agrees with him. Rather, we found those who opposed him in regards to some of them (i.e. those who were disparaged) and we didn't turn our faces towards them.

Just like that it is today, and from the examples of these (people) (i.e. those whom Shaykh Muqbil disparaged) is: Al-Zindaanee, Mohammed Rasheed Ridaa, Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaaliq, Mohammed Suroor, Ahmad Al-Mu'allim, Mohammed Al-Mahdee and (Aqeel) Al-Muqtaree and more. So Ahlus-Sunnah accepted his disparagement together with the authentication of others because his disparagement was detailed, i.e. clarified.

3. Shaykh Yahya has more knowledge of this man, and of this Fitnah than other than him – and the native man is more understanding (in regards to his country) than other than him, and his statement proceeds over the statement of other than him – because this man (i.e. Abdurrahman) was there (i.e. in Dammaj), and the Fitnah came from there. And whoever has inspected an affair, and has witnessed it knows it with what those who didn't observe it know. And with this, the Prophet said: “The news is not like observation”1.

And just as it is said: 'the owner of the house is more knowledgeable of what is inside it' and 'the people of Makkah are more knowledgeable of its paths'. So then we are in no need of a statement from other than him and neither are we waiting for anyone to make us aware of it (i.e. his Hizbiyyah). For it is clear to us like the clearness of the sun at midday.

4. We have witnessed and inspected this Hizb and its signs with our own eyes. Just as we have witnessed and inspected what came before him from the various innovated sects which attacked the Salafi Da'wah. 1 The full part of the Hadeeth is “The news is not like observation. Musa did not smash the tablets when His

Lord told him what his people were doing. But when he saw what the people were doing, it was only then that he smashed the tablets.”

6

5. Since we have known the Shaykh (i.e. Shaykh Yahya), he has not disparaged anyone with his evidence and then abandoned him except that (that same person) was disparaged and abandoned by others (i.e. from the Mashaayikh) due to that evidence, and not due to blind following. This shows a clear proof that Allah has bestowed upon him perception of Fitnah, and some examples of that are: Abul-Hasan Al-Misree (Al-Ma'ribee), Saalih Al-Bakree, Faalih Al-Harbee, Abdullah Al-Mar'ee and the last of them, Abdurahmaan Al-Mar'ee, which will come to an end, with the permission of Allah. And with that we say: We cannot except imitate the example of what Ibn Hajr, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in the biography of Yahya Bin Sa'eed Al-Qattaan: “The heads (of the people of knowledge) would use him as a proof, and would say: 'whoever Yahya abandons, then we abandon him too'” And likewise we say: whoever Yahya (i.e. Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree) has abandoned then we abandon him too. And Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee is one who is abandoned (due to the fact that); Al-Alaamah Al-Hajooree abandoned him. Q 4): If it is said to you: “Has anyone opposed him in this?” A):

هم ما كانوا يكسبون ﴿ ﴾قد قالا الذين من ق بلهم فما أغن عن Verily, those before them said it, yet (all) that they had earned availed them not. (Al-Zumar 50)

Then I say to you: Had a consensus occurred concerning other than him (i.e. Abdurahman) from the disparaged ones, like the ones who have previously been mentioned. Just like them, the example of: Sayed Al-Qutb, Hasan Al-Banna, Mohammad Al-Ghazaalee, Al-Maghraawee, 'Ar'oor, Abu Ishaaq Al-Huwaynee and Abul-Hasan Al-Masree and.... So this is an obsolete argument, something the Hizbiyyeen used before, up until it deteriorated, and it didn’t come to benefit them and neither will it benefit these (people) today. And if we were to act upon it (i.e. the argument), we wouldn't have abandoned anybody. Then I say to you Oh' brother, may Allah Bless you: this is the way of Allah in His Creation, this one disparages and this one attests to the righteousness of someone. But the people of knowledge have laid down for us principles that remedy this doubt. And from them are:

7

* That the detailed disparagement – if it is issued clearly from one who knows its reasons – then it takes precedence over the appraise. Just as they (i.e. the people of knowledge) gave precedence to the disparagement (of the disparagers) concerning Imam Ash-Shaafi’ees Shaykh (Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahya) whilst (at the same time) Ash-Shaafi'ee declared him to be reliable and defended him about the affair related to lying and he said: “That him falling from a distance is more beloved to him than he lies ”, but the people of knowledge did not turn to his (As-Shaafi’ees) statement due to the disparagement concerning him being detailed.

* The native man is more knowledgeable of who is in his land, than other than him, because he has with him an increase of knowledge. Hammaad bin Zayd used to say: “A man would come to us from different lands and would mention a man and we would narrate from him, and we would present praise upon him. And if we were to ask the people of his land (regarding him), we would find him upon a different (condition) than what we would say (he was upon), and he (i.e. Hammaad) would say: “the people of a land of a man are more knowledgeable in regards to the man”. Al-Khateeb (Al-Baghdaadee) said (in regards to the aforementioned narration)

“When they had with them an increase of knowledge concerning his affair over what the foreigner knew from the apparentness of his reliability, Hammaad made the ruling in accordance to what the people (of that individuals land) knew of disparagement relating to him, disregarding what he had been informed of by the foreigner regarding his reliability”. [The end of Al-Khateeb's statement from his book: ‘Sufficiency in Knowledge in What Relates to Narrating’]. Alee Bin Al-Madeenee said: “Every man from Madinah whom Imam Maalik didn't narrate from, then in his hadeeth is something (i.e. some kind of weakness)”. (End of Al-Madeenee's statement) i.e. he (Imaam Maalik) didn't abandon him (the narrator from Madinah), except due to what was within him (from defect) whilst he (Imaam Maalik) was the most knowledgeable in regards to him. Because a man can beautify himself to the people of hadeeth who are not from his land, so (as a result) they are deceived by him, just as Ibn Abdul-Barr said regarding Abdul-Kareem Bin Abee Al-Makhaariq: “(he is a) Basree1, they (people of Hadeeth) do not differ in regards to his weakness (in Hadeeth), he misled Maalik (i.e. Imam Maalik) by way of his character.

1 I.e. that he was from Basrah a city in Iraq.

8

And he (Imaam Maalik) wasn't from the people of his (Abdul-Kareem’s) land so that he may have known him. As Ash-Shaafi'ee was also misled by Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahya due to his mastery and eminence, and there was a consensus upon his (Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahya’s) weakness [end of the statement from ‘Meezaan Al-I'tidaal’]. So it has become evident from that which has passed, that the differing (that occurs concerning an individual) does not wipe out and neither does it produce any effect with that which relates to the acknowledged disparagement because the disparager has with him an increase of knowledge. Q 5): If it is said to you: ‘However, we do not see them inclining towards the Hizbiyyeen and neither do they affiliate themselves to any Hizb’

A): You have narrowed something vast thing, this is a confined understanding in identifying Hizbiyyah, do you restrict Hizbiyyah to this characteristic, so if it is not found within them then they are not Hizbiyyeen?! This indicates towards a lack of knowledge concerning the signs of Hizbiyyah and this is not except from searching for them (the Hizbiyyeen) innocent ways out in order to defend them, so I say, may Allah bless you, indeed many signs from the signs of Hizbiyyah have appeared within these Hizbiyyeen. And also, it is not a condition that all of them (i.e. the signs of Hizbiyyah) have to combine within a particular group, (so as to say) if they (the signs) do not come together then it is not (considered) a Hizb. Then I also say: indeed Abul-Hasan and those that are with him and Faalih Al-Harabee and those that are with him did not affiliate with any Hizb from the Ahzaab and likewise the followers of Abul-Hasan, they (i.e. the scholars) warned from all of them whilst they are were not like that1. And those that have inclined (towards a particular group from the followers of Abul-Hasan) then (they have only done so) recently and some of them (followers of Abul-Hasan) still do not cease to remain separated (from deviant groups) yet the Mashaayikh do not cease to be advising (the people) with distancing from them (i.e. the aforementioned Hizbee leaders and their followers), so do we (now) say that they are not Hizbiyyeen because they do not incline towards or….

Q 6): If it is said to you: ‘what are these signs that have appeared within this Hizb?’

A): I will quote to you them in summarization and I refer you for more detail with proof to the section that our brother Ma’aafa has wrote, which is entitled “Clear proofs” and here are some of them (i.e. signs of Hizbiyyah):

1 I.e. - inclining towards any of the Hizbiyyeen, neither affiliating themselves to any Hizb.

9

(1) Restricted allegiance and dissociation (2) Lying (3) Deception and deceit (4) Incitement (5) Slandering the people of the truth (6) Repulsive fanaticism (7) Relying upon narrations of unknown narrators and spreading them (i.e. the narrations) (8) Disunity (9) Warning from Dammaj, its people and its Shaykh and we have not known of this except from the Hizbiyyeen (10) Slackness in giving Dawah, teaching and seeking knowledge (11) Being preoccupied with the Dunya and being ardent in gathering wealth even at the expense of the Dawah and even at the expense of loss of knowledge (12) Their harm to the Salafi’s (13) Secretiveness1 (14) The appearing of unknown writers (15) The wasting of time, effort and wealth in that which does not benefit, rather in that which harms from spreading of Fitnah.

Q 7): If it is said to you ‘this is a differing between Abdurahman and Shaykh Yahya and the judgement (that is to be made) is for the Mashaayikh’. A): This is speech that one is calling to with ignorance, heedlessness and deception. I say:

Firstly: The disparager is Shaykh Yahya only, as for Abdurahman then he is by no means a disparager and neither is he fit for that, rather Abdurahman was advised so he refused and therefore was disparaged. So if he retracts (from his Hizbiyyah) and rectifies (himself) and makes Tawbah then the disparagement will cease and the affair will end. And how can you call this a differing? This statement of yours means that if a scholar disparages a (particular) person and (that person) defends himself, you would call it ‘differing’? This is what the companions of Abul-Hasan had deceived the general folk with, (they would say) ‘This is a differing between the scholars and these (people)2 are getting involved’. Secondly: This is deep ignorance of the science of Hadeeth, and we have the right to imitate Shaykh Muqbil’s statement as a note upon the likes of these despicable statements, (where he would say): “this speech would make a man laugh about it from his knees”3 because the meaning of this gullible speech is: if a scholar disparages a person and someone else opposes him (in that disparagement) then we (would) destroy the principle of ‘disparagement and appraisement’ and we (would) say this differing is (an issue of) adjudication and the (final)

1 From the secretiveness that was carried out was many of the ‘Adanee students and other than them that were

fanatically attached to Abdurahman Al-‘Adanee would gather in sittings and mock Shaykh Yahya, the other Mashaayikh present in Dammaj, the students and anyone close to the Shaykh, whether that be in their houses, the farms, on the mountains and valleys. Even to the extent that they would carry this out in Shaykh Yahya’s lessons in front of him!!!

2 I.e. the Mashaayikh and students of knowledge that are refuting Abul-Hasan. 3 The meaning of this is one would laugh so excessively about it that he would not be able to control himself.

10

statement (which is to be considered) is the statement of the people of adjudication, which is in reality appraisement!!! What strange and weird affairs? Thirdly: We say to you, no problem, no one is going to delude you, for Abdurahman did not differ with Shaykh Yahya in anything, neither any land, nor any wealth, nor anything else…rather it was violations that emanated from Abdurahman not differing, so if Shaykh Yahya was to praise Abdurahman after his retraction then Abdurahman would become pleased and it would become apparent to you that Abdurahman does not request anything except silence over his falsehood. Fourthly: know, that from the newly invented matters that which is intended by it the falsification of the principle of ‘disparagement and appraise’ is the changing of the appraisers to adjudicator, ‘never did we hear such a thing among our fathers of old’. If the affair was as this deceitful one says, then there would not remain anyone disparaged, because the person that says this, (he himself) has people that oppose him concerning those that he sees to be disparaged, so would he be pleased if the one that opposes him is placed as an adjudicator and that his statement be (made as) a statement that is adjudicated?!! Q 8): If it is said to you that the speech of Shaykh Yahya concerning Abdurahman is ‘speech of the peers’ and that the speech of the peers should be kept quiet about and not narrated. A): Know that most of the occurring disparagements that which the people of knowledge have acted upon is of this kind and it is that: ‘the disparager being a contemporary to the disparaged’ and the speech of the contemporary (about his peer) is more worthy (in being taken from) than speech from other than him. Because he (the disparager) is more knowledgeable about him (the disparaged) than the one that comes after him due to the nearness of contact with him, and the only thing intended by this feeble doubt is; the falsification of the principle of disparagement in totality, and with this doubt the people of desires wanted to repel the disparagement away from Abdurahman Abdul Khaaliq, Az-Zindaani, Al-Qaradaawi, Muhammad As-Suroor and those that are like them. Yes, the scholars say: if the disparager’s reason (for disparaging) is due to jealousy, enmity, and personal gains, then it (i.e. the disparagement) is not to be accepted for this reason, (and) not due to him being his peer, so understand this! Our Shaykh Yahya may Allah preserve

11

him, with the testimony of the Mashaayikh1 (and Abdurahman Al-‘Adanee also) have said: “He (Shaykh Yahya) does not speak with an incentive of envy or resentment and neither does he speak with an incentive of desiring to bring down anyone from Ahlus-Sunnah, rather it is with an incentive of jealousy upon the Sunnah and its people”. It was for this reason that his speech was accepted, may Allah preserve him, so then what is remaining? Here is some speech for you of Imaam Al-Waadi’ee which is similar to this; he, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “the peer is more knowledgeable about you than other than him, so it is incumbent that he is given precedence…so if it is known that there is some competition or materialistic enmity between them (i.e. the two peers) then it (the speech of one peer about the other) is not accepted, as for if he speaks against him and says (for example) he is a liar! And there is no enmity between them, then speech of the peer about his fellow peer is the most reliable and most significant (type of speech) because he is most knowledgeable about his condition”. [Taken from the tape: ‘Al-Ajwibah An-Nadiyyah ‘Alaa Al-Asilah Al-Holandiyyah’]. Q 9): If it is said to you, why do we not be patient and slow down until the remainder of the scholars have spoken? A): I say to you: Firstly, these are oh my brother Khalafiyyah2 statements and not Salafiyyah statements, there is no presence of them amongst our pious predecessors from the earlier of them and from the latter ones of them, so we say to this speaker, you have erred, so due to this, this is a newly invented statement. Secondly, this doubt has also come from the people of desires. The infatuated ones from this Hizb and those before them from the various Ahzaab have blindly followed them (in saying this), so that they may preserve the status of the one being disparaged in front of the general folk. The summary of (what) this doubt (entails) is: no matter how much speech occurs concerning anyone that is disparaged, then he will not be abandoned, (this is) because he is excused due to (the absence) of speech of (all of) the scholars being gathered (against him)

1 Note oh noble reader that this testimony was carried out by the following: Muhammad Bin Abdul-Wahhaab

Al-Wassaabi, Shaykh Muhammad Al-Imaam, Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Al-Bura’ee, Abdullah Bin ‘Uthmaan Adhamaaree, Shaykh Muhammad As-Sawmali, Abdurahman Al-‘Adanee (Al-Hizbee) and others.

2 The word Khalaf is the opposite of Salaf which literally means the people who came after, in opposition to the word Salaf which is commonly translated as predecessors.

12

and the absence of them obligating disparagement against him and this is from what is impossible. So according to this, it means that reliability remains affirmed for him (i.e. one that is disparaged) as long as the scholars have not agreed (in disparaging him), and this is from mockery in the legislation of Islam and the principles of the religion, and the one that (says) this doubt, (then) he (himself) has abandoned people; whom an agreement (till now) has not (yet) occurred concerning (i.e. their Hizbiyyah). So then (according to the way he is acting now) he is obliged to wait, (and if he waits) then he has now exited from the methodology of the Salaf. So then there occurred to him this disorder, and glory be to Allah, how much the followers of Abul-Hasan have exhausted us concerning this affair, and now they themselves are repeating this doubt which they have by way of it stirred up many people against us, then they made Tawbah after extreme disorder, after them being a reason for the deviation of many due these fabrications. And now today they are confused just like they were confused the first time, may Allah save us from their evil, and may he protect those that are deceived by them from their Fitnah. For indeed the ones that are confused in this Fitnah were mainly the ones that were confused in the Fitnah of Abul-Hasan, this shows lack of success and lack of understanding, and lack of benefiting from what has preceded, all praise is for Allah upon (having) well being. And let us go back a little bit and remember when Shaykh Yahya spoke against Abul-Hasan, they (the followers and defenders of Abul-Hasan) said: the rest of the scholars of Yemen remain (to speak), so when they spoke, they said the scholars of Madeenah are remaining, so when they spoke, they said the scholars of Makkah are remaining, so when they spoke, they said the scholars of Shaam are remaining and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is remaining and Shaykh Fawzaan is remaining and he remains…and he remains…and like this they exhausted the people because they were not searching for the truth, rather they were people of desires, so it is binding (upon us) to be aware of these people and to keep a distance from them, because they will (try) to make your religion unclear for you. And here is some delightful speech of Al-Imaam Muqbil concerning this, may Allah have mercy upon him and forgive him and his parents, it is a reply to a question: The question: some of the people reject the statement of the disparager from Ahlus-Sunnah concerning some of the innovators, with the excuse that the rest of the scholars of the Sunnah have not yet spoken about this disparaged one, (whilst saying) where is so and so, why are they not speaking?! If it was true (i.e. what is said concerning the disparaged one)

13

then they would have surely followed him (i.e. the disparager), so is it a condition in speaking concerning a person and disparaging him, that the majority of Ahlus-Sunnah or that all of them have to disparage him (in order for it to be accepted)?

The answer: “Na’am, Na’am, oh brothers the affair is that the people have not read the science of Hadeeth, or they have read it but they are trying to deceive people. We say to you with what is greater than this, suppose Imaam Ahmad says (a particular person is) trustworthy and Yahya Bin Ma’een says he is a liar, then does it affect Yahya’s statement? When Ahmad Bin Hanbal had apposed him, so then what? Leave this, if Yahya Bin Ma’een disparaged him alone (it would be sufficient). So upon this, if a scholar arises from the scholars of today and they bring forth the evidences upon the misguidance of Muhammad Al-Ghazaalee and Yusuf Al-Qaradaawee or the methodology of the Ikhwaan Al-Muflisoon, then we accept it and it is obligatory to accept it:

نوا أن تصيبوا ق وما بهالة ف تصبحوا عل ﴿ مني يا أي ها الذين آمنوا إن جاءكم فاسق بنبأ ف تب ي ﴾ ى ما ف علتم نا

O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it, lest you harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done. (Al-Hujurat 49:6) What is important is if there comes to us someone just (with some disparagement) then we accept it, as is the understanding of this Aayah, so where are you from this Aayah? So what matters is that these people are deceivers and are ones that oppose our scholars, the earlier of them and the latter of them, and all praise is for Allah (for indeed) the people do not depend on you or your speech, oh crazy one!. Q 10): If it is said to you: “I have difficulty in understanding a part of the issue, which is... Why do some of the scholars say “Abdurrahman is upon earnestness” and if they are asked about the purchasing of land in Fuyoosh1 and the seeking of knowledge there, they will answer with prohibition and advise with abandoning that (i.e. that issue)”? A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them. Q 11): If it is said to you: “I have another issue I find difficult in understanding, which is... Why do we hear from some of the scholars that they say: “ Shaykh Al-Hajooree doesn't speak from desire” and “We don't say Shaykh Al-Hajooree made a mistake completely or in a particular aspect” and “Shaykh Al-Hajooree doesn't speak with falsehood “ and then they say “Don't spread these articles” and “Abdurrahman is upon earnestness”, why is this?

1 Fuyoosh is the name of Abdurahman Al-‘Adanee’s Markaz in 'Aden.

14

A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them. Q 12): If it is said to you: “I have a third problem pertaining to this issue, which is... Why do the scholars make an equal comparison between the writings of the scholars and well known students of knowledge and between the writings of the unknown foolish ones? A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them. Q13: If it is said to you: “What do you know about the website 'Wahyain.com'? A): If you mean the one named 'Wahlain1' then the answer is: the website itself doesn't know who posts on it, even the administrator isn't known and neither are the members, so then how are we to know anything about it?

1 The Website is called Wahyain, the author used the word Wahl as degradation, and it can be translated as

mud or dirt.