> The Reality of Madkhalism: From Those who Invented an Imaginary Madhaab to Those who Made Taqleed

[al-boriqee]

The only thing I will mention as a proof is actually from the words of one of the most staunch followers of the haddadee manhaj when he stated in a recantation.

It was stated

Due to our haste and ignorance, some of the brothers like myself warned the people from the imaam, Abu Dawood and the masjid when we felt that he was not doing a sufficient amount to remove the influence of the mukhaalifeen from the masjid. In fact, we contacted the people of knowledge regarding affairs at the masjid and spoke to some of the tullaab and du'aat in this country, without us even realizing that changes were being made at the masjid all along during our absence from the masjid.


One more point on this is actually an example. If a salafee, for instance, differs with a certain scholar on a matter of ijtihaad, and this is in a formal conversation to a haddadee, then the haddadee will automatically interpret this in his mind as if the one who disagrees is opposing the sunnah and this is usually practiced nearly 90 to 98 percent of the time to Shaykh Rabee hafidhahullah. This action of course is on an individual basis and only shows their lack of aql in deen, and all of it is due to the type of tarbiyyah (dhalaal) that this haddadee has been receiving from his leaders.

[abdulrahman al muhajir]

Bro you should write a book on refuting Madkhalees

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by abdulrahman al muhajir

Bro you should write a book on refuting Madkhalees

believe it or note. I kinda did

I wrote about 140 page refutation of them highlighting their troublesome characteristics. Howeer, I don't like or tend to use the term "madkhalis" because it is a term that no one of repute adopted, and none of the people of knowledge deemed that Rabee is the intentional advocate of this anarchic behavior. He may have been an accomplice to individuals who promote this and he may have a share of the pie, however I do know that there is a much greater difference between him and those who made taqleed in his name and Allah knows best

oh, by the way, I am a madkhali according to some adherents to the IA forums. In order to understand this phenomenon, reread the first initial post inshallah

[Ibn Ilyas]

Assalamu Aleykum ww

JazzakAllahu Khayr akhi boriqee

You have cleared up a lot of confusion in my mind, but subhana'Allah it makes me sad at the same time the way things are.One quick question though, about the fitnah of Abu Hasan al-M’arabi could you elaborate some on this or maybe refer me to a site or a post.

Also if possible could you link your 140 page refutation book/post?

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Ibn Ilyas

Assalamu Aleykum ww

JazzakAllahu Khayr akhi boriqee

You have cleared up a lot of confusion in my mind, but subhana'Allah it makes me sad at the same time the way things are.One quick question though, about the fitnah of Abu Hasan al-M’arabi could you elaborate some on this or maybe refer me to a site or a post.

Also if possible could you link your 140 page refutation book/post?

when I get a chance, I'll do just that. Wlel I won;t upload the treatise I made but I will divide it into different post for a more reader friendly read. Maybe I will put it on a pdf.

as for Abu Hasan, that issue was looked at by the troid clowns as the ultimate criterion of what makes one a salafi or not. I do not have the time now to address it, I have other obligations on the forum here first inshallah.

[Ibn Ilyas]

Assalamu Aleykum ww

Ok Insha'Allah

[Abd al-Muhsin al Hindy]

AsSalaamu alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Brother al-Boriqee nice story , but has nothing to do with reality.Why don't you write your refutation against so-called "Madkhliyyah" and InshAllah we so-called Madkhalis will present it to shuyookh and Imam like Abd al-Muhsin al-Abbad, Abd al-Azeez al Aqeel...etc and see what they say !

For the time being to reveal the truth please visit :
***************** | The Madkhalis and So-Called 'Madkhalis' - Their Beliefs and Methodologies

Exposes the Ikhwani...etc claimof Ghuloo.....etc
I hoep brother al-Boriqee uploads his refutation as soon as possible so that we can ask the Shuyookh about the issue and see what they say.

AsSalaamu alaykum.

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Abd al-Muhsin al Hindy

AsSalaamu alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Brother al-Boriqee nice story , but has nothing to do with reality.Why don't you write your refutation against so-called "Madkhliyyah" and InshAllah we so-called Madkhalis will present it to shuyookh and Imam like Abd al-Muhsin al-Abbad, Abd al-Azeez al Aqeel...etc and see what they say !

For the time being to reveal the truth please visit :
***************** | The Madkhalis and So-Called 'Madkhalis' - Their Beliefs and Methodologies

Exposes the Ikhwani...etc claimof Ghuloo.....etc
I hoep brother al-Boriqee uploads his refutation as soon as possible so that we can ask the Shuyookh about the issue and see what they say.

AsSalaamu alaykum.

ain.

akhee. maybe you have to re read everything in the thread once again.
I said that madkhalism is an imaginary madhaab invented by straight up kharijis. I said there is no alim on the planet who has clarified for the ummah this "sect" that these khawaarij claim exist. All the reputable ulema that we all agree are reputable from the senior shiyookh all praised and recognized Rabee as amongst their calibur and never called him a deviant.

What I also said is that the reason why this baseless claim was fueled with legitimacy (meaning from the look of it, but not in reality is because the hizbis of SP and troid marketed a gangster version of actual salafiyyah that every alim that we know of blasted their manhaj into smickerins.

lastly, "my refutation" was not really my refutation. All I did was to collect everything that the scholars stated and now that you challenged what the major salafi scholars has said to be something that is not within reality, now I will have to blast you.

[al-boriqee]

The Words of Alaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan in Explaining the Heretical Practices of the Haddadiyyah

A Reply to Those Upon the Millah of Tabd’ee, Hajr, and Tadheer from the Heads of the Propagators of This Methodology Salafipublications and Troid and to Their Loyalists


... As for the one who adds something in the acts of worship that has not been legislated by the Messenger, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, then this one is a mubtadi’ (innovator), and not a muhsin (well-doer). And this is because the testimony that Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is the Messenger of Allah is defined as obedience to him in what is commanded, affirmation of what is informed of, avoiding what is prohibited and rebuked, and not worshipping Allah except with that which he legislated. The requirement of the testimony that Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is the Messenger of Allah is to follow him, and not innovate something that he, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, did not come with, as Allah, subhaanahu, said: “And what the Messenger comes to you with, then take it. And what he prohibits you from then leave it off,” and as He, subahaanahu wa ta’aala, said: “O you who believe! Do not precede before Allah and His Messenger. Fear Allah, indeed Allah is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing.” This is the one who is the mubtadi’ (innovator), the one who innovates in the religion of Allah, that which is not from it, that which has no evidence, not from the Qur’aan and not from the Sunnah, this is the innovator. The innovator is not everyone who disagrees, or makes mistakes in his ijtihaad. He is not named an innovator. When the mujtahid makes ijtihaad, if he is correct, he receives two rewards, and when he is wrong, he receives one. This is the mujtahid, and what is intended by mujtahid is the one who is qualified to make ijtihaad, because he meets the requirements of being able to make ijtihaad. This one, when he makes ijtihaad, and is correct, he receives two rewards, and when he makes a mistake, he receives one. He is not called an innovator because he makes a mistake. Likewise, when he makes a ruling based on ta’weel, when the mistaken one makes a mistake in ta’weel, and makes ta’weel according to doubt, and calls to it, the ruling regarding him is that he is either an innovator, or that he is a kaafir. This is because he makes a presumption without surety with this ta’weel, and rejects other than it, or blindly follows in ta’weel the one who presumed without surety it opposite to the truth. He (the first one who makes a mistake in his ijtihaad) is not given the title of innovator. It is said that that he made a mistake, or had a difference in opinion, and what is correct is that it is not said that he is an innovator. Rather the innovator is the one who introduces something into the religion of Allah that which is not from it. So not all of those who make mistakes in their ijtihaad are said to be innovators. The Sahaabah, radiyallahu ‘anhum, were people who made ijtihaad, and differed with one another in some matters, and they did not call each other innovators. There were brothers, who loved each other and aided each other, one nation, along with the fact that they differed with one another in some of their ijtihaad in some matters which the sharee’ah commends ijtihaad and deriving rulings. Some of them ascribe so and so youth (to the people of innovation), or so and so from the beginning seekers of knowledge, considering the one who makes rulings an innovator, and considering the one who makes ta’weel and taqleed an innovator. Because of this, this issue came about. It began, and some of them began to call one another innovators, and boycott one another and cut relations with them, and turn their backs on them, and did not let the matter be just between them. Rather they took from the scholars of the past, and called them innovators. They said that Ibn Hajr is an innovator, that an-Nawawee is an innovator, Aboo Haneefah is an innovator, Fulaan is an innovator, some of the major Imaams, because of mistakes. Some times they made mistakes, and sometimes they did not. If they were mistakes due to ijtihaad, then it is not acceptable that we call them innovators. These were mistakes in evidences (by) these Imaams who have a portion in Islaam, and they had leadership and stature. They brought about in Islaam many things, from action, and they preserved many beneficial narrations for the Muslims. Many things, and these are their writings, these are they books, these are their discussions, that benefit the Muslims. They sought help in them using the understanding of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. They are the Imaams. It is possible that some of their speech contains errors, or that the speech which they transmitted from other than them contain errors. What is their share in Islaam? What do they posses of knowledge? What do they posses from stature in Islaam? What is their service to the Prophetic Sunnah? All of these are great matters. All of these cover up these meticulous errors. It is obligatory that we know the rank of our scholars, those of the past and the present, and that we ask Allah to have mercy upon them, and that we make du’aa for them, as Allah, subhaanahu wa ta’aalaa, said: “And the ones who come after them and say: ‘Oh Lord forgive us and our brothers, those who preceded us in Imaan.” [unclear] We do not speak about their mistakes and shortcomings, and overlook the many good things and wonderful actions which they did. They overlook them, and focus on the shortcomings and mistakes. When some of them make a mistake, and it becomes widespread, they write books about their mistakes, and they are not from the Imaams. They bring about many things in them, from labelling people as innovators, and labeling people as sinners, and so on. This is fitnah, I swear by Allah! This is the innovation. Then, also innovation is not all of one category. Here is an innovation that causes one to become a disbeliever, and this is an innovation lesser than that. We do not assert that all innovations are equal. We weigh the matters, then return the matter to the scales and speak about them with knowledge in them. Innovations are of two categories, the ones which cause one to become a disbeliever, such as the sayings of the Jahmiyyah, and the extremists from the sects, the sayings which cause one to leave the fold of the religion, and there are innovations that are lesser than that which does not cause its companion to leave Muslimeen, but rather with him is something of innovation which is lesser than disbelief. So we do not violate others rights, or be partial to people, even if they are our relatives.

source:the audio clip was taken from the tape at-tabdee’ wat-takfeer, wa atharuhu ‘alal-ummah.if i’m not mistaken it was recorded sometime before the death of imaam ibn baaz, rahimahullah.

[al-boriqee]

Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan on Ghuloo

at-Taqwaa al-Islaamiyyah Recordings have published a tape with the title, “Weekly Meetings” #17, by the eminent Shaikh, the father, the Imaam, Saalih al-Fawzaan, hafidhahullaahu ta’aalaa, dated the 18th night from Allaah’s month of al-Muharram of the year 1423H. It included a group of the distinguished fataawaa and from them was this fatwaa on the first side:

The questioner said: “It is unfortunate that many of the students of knowledge today, from their concern was that they incriminate others, or they pass judgement upon the people, that this is a jaahil or mistaken or this is so and so, know him well, or occasionally they will conclude that so and so is from the Khawaarij. So is this from the manhaj of the Salaf us-Saalih and what is the opinion of your eminence regarding that?”

The Shaikh answered:

Quote:
“It is not from the manhaj of the Salaf us-Saalih to busy one’s self with the faults of people and the people do not have (anything) except so and so is good, so and so is not good and so and so is like that and...

The person should busy himself with his own faults and he should busy himself with the faults (from himself), firstly.

If one sees another upon an obvious mistake, then he is to give him naseehah with what is between him and between him and that he clarifies for him because this is naseehah, and the religion is naseehah. As for him speaking about the people in sittings, and he praises this one and he dispraises this one, he makes this one mubtadi’ and he makes this one thiqah, this is not permissible. The person should busy himself with his own faults, he should not look to the faults of the people.

Secondly, if one sees another upon a clearly obvious mistake, he should make sure from him that it was a mistake. Then he is to be easy towards him and clarify the mistake for him. This is from the door of naseehah and he should not speak about him in the sittings or in his absence, (for) it is from the prohibited backbitting. Na’am...”