Shaikh al-Albaani

Translations From His Works

Tag: creed

“If the Muslims Differ in ’Aqeedah Then They Will Differ in Things Less Than ’Aqeedah all the More so …”


 

The Imaam said, “If the Muslims differ in ’aqeedah then they will differ in things less than ’aqeedah all the more so—differing in ’aqeedah is what causes harm, differing in subsidiary issues does not harm as long as a person sincerely tries to follow the truth wherever it is [found]. So [the fact that] the majority of Islamic callers in all Islamic countries today have left the importance of spreading the correct ’aqeedah amongst the people, this is a deficiency from all of the scholars, so importance must be given to this area …”

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 424.

Did the Messengers or Prophets Fall Into Minor Sins?


 

Questioner: Did the Messengers fall into minor sins?

Al-Albaani: Before answering this question right away, [I’d like to say that] I believe it is a non-issue as they say today, because it is not connected to methodology or to the rectification of our aqidah or actions. It is only something connected to those Messengers or Prophets who preceded the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, so I do not hold that questions like this should be given much notice, but [having said that] we have to answer it to disclose the knowledge we have regarding this issue.

We believe that the unequivocal infallibility of the Prophets and Messenger is, firstly, regarding conveying the da’wah, and, secondly, from knowingly falling into major sins.

As for falling into minor sins which do not result in anything except [to show] an absence of absolute perfection then there is no harm in some of that occurring by the Prophets and Messengers–and this is so that it remains established in the hearts of the believers that absolute perfection is for Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds, Alone, Who has no partner.

And there are many parts and proofs in the Quraan establishing this reality concerning more than one Prophet or Messenger. [For example] the story of Aadam عليه السلام when the Lord of the Worlds prohibited him from eating from the tree, and His Saying, And Adam disobeyed his Lord and erred. [Taa Haa 20:121], and the Noble Quraan saying concerning our Prophet عليه السلام, “He frowned and turned away,” [Abasa 80:1] “May Allaah pardon you, [O Muhammad]. Why did you give them permission [to remain behind]?” [Tawbah 9:43]. All of this proves that it is possible that a Prophet may be susceptible to minor sins which do not befit the rank of Prophethood–but are they blemished by that? The answer is no, because these are human traits.

[For example]: is a Prophet or Messenger criticised for being susceptible to that which people in general are susceptible to, like making an unintentional mistake or forgetting? We say no, there is nothing preventing the fact that a Messenger or Prophet may be susceptible to such things, because such things do not affect the station of da’wah which the Messengers were sent to all mankind with.

So his saying عليه السلام reported by the two Shaikhs from Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood, may Allaah be pleased with them both, [in which he stated that] the Prophet prayed five rak’ahs for the midday prayer, so when he gave salaam they said, ‘You prayed five,’ so he performed two prostrations of forgetfulness and then said عليه السلام, ‘I am only a man like you, I forget as you do, so when I forget, remind me.’ [Bukhari and Muslim]

So it does not harm the status of Prophethood or that of being a Messenger that something should transpire from them which had it not would have been more perfect–but absolute perfection is for Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic.

It would be more perfect if the Messenger عليه السلام did not forget, but Allaah’s Wisdom necessitated that he did, but this forgetting does not affect the da’wah because he does not forget that which is connected to conveying the message [da’wah], and our Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, points to this reality by His Saying, the Most High, “We will make you recite and you will not forget, except what Allaah should will,” [A’laa 87:6-7] like [for example] an aayah which he had conveyed to the people which he might forget, i.e., he has conveyed the Message and fulfilled the trust [that was upon him] … it is possible that after performing this obligatory conveyance [of the Message] the Messenger عليه السلام may forget something which he had [previously] conveyed to them, as occurs in Sahih Bukhari where he entered the mosque one day and heard a person reciting the Quraan and so said, ‘May Allaah have mercy on so and so, he reminded me of an aayah I had been made to forget.’

So the Prophet’s forgetting عليه السلام an aayah like this does not harm that which is connected to conveying it–because he already has–and that is why that person was able to recite it, and when he did, the Messenger عليه السلام remembered it.

So such forgetfulness does not harm him.

Likewise, some of the Prophets and Messengers falling into some minor sins does not harm them, because it does not turn those who are being called away from their call in opposition to falling into major sins, and for this reason, they are too exalted from falling into major sins to the exclusion of minor sins.

Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 188.

A Question About Some Sentences Connected to Creed


Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Questioner: There are some sentences or phrases which many people have fallen into saying. [We would like a clarification] about their permissibility or impermissibility. Some of them say, ‘O Faasiq! [one who is rebellious and disobedient to Allaah]. Or, ‘O Fattaal! [like faasiq]’ And, ‘[The answers to my problems are] with Allaah and then you,’ or when someone says, ‘Come and [eat] with us,’ they reply, ‘May Ar-Rahmaan eat with you,’ or ‘May Ar-Rahmaan be with you,’ and such words …

Al-Albani: These [words] are [said] amongst you?

Questioner: Yes.

Al-Albani: How strange! We have words that are similar to these and all of them are not allowed. Here in Syria they say, ‘We trust in Allaah and you.’ There is no doubt that some of those phrases which the question is about are incorrect. Like I just said to you in some places in Syria we have sayings that resemble those, like, ‘We trust in Allaah and you,’ this is shirk. Also, ‘Whatever Allaah wills and you will,’ is shirk. The correct wording is, ‘Whatever Allaah wills and then you will.’

Most of the Arabs today do not differentiate between ‘then’ and ‘and.’

The sentence, ‘‘We trust in Allaah and you,’ is disbelief in His Saying, “… and in Allaah (Alone) let those who trust, put their trust.” [Ibraaheem 14:12]. Namely, [we trust] in Allaah alone. So without a care such a person says, ‘We trust in Allaah and you.’

The saying, ‘We trust in Allaah and you,’ is shirk.  Here amongst us they also say, ‘Allaah’s Hand and your hand …”

Another questioner: Or they say this other wording, for example, [if someone invites you to eat, saying], ‘Come and eat with us, O Shaikh,’ he will reply, ‘May Ar-Rahmaan eat with you,’ ask about this, is there anything wrong with this?

Al-Albani: What is the second wording?

Questioner: He said, ‘May Ar-Rahmaan eat with you … may Ar-Rahmaan eat with you.’

Al-Albani: And there is nothing wrong with this?!

Questioner: This phrase … I’m not saying there is something about it.

Al-Albani: Is there something with it or not?

Questioner: I don’t know.

Al-Albani: He eats, Allaah eats?!

Questioner: We, yes … may Ar-Rahmaan eat with you.

Al-Albani: Our Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, eats? No, this is disbelief. This is likening the Creator to His Creation. This is not allowed. Is there anything else they say?

Questioner: Some of them say, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you.’

Al-Albani: Ar-Rahmaan is with you?

Questioner: [If one of them were to invite you, saying], ‘Come with us.’ The other person replies with, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you.’

Al-Albani: Let us hear its interpretation …

Questioner: He’s saying, [when someone calls you saying], ‘O Shaikh, come to us … with us.’ He replies, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you.’ Namely, he is excusing himself [by saying that]. He doesn’t say, ‘No, I’m not coming.’ He [excuses himself by] saying it in a softer way.

Al-Albani: But what is the meaning of, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you?’

Questioner: Namely, [by] Ar-Rahmaan [they mean] blessings, goodness, ‘I can’t sit with you … [but] Ar-Rahmaan is with you.’

Al-Albani: He doesn’t want to give a harsh reply so [instead] he says something which is not fitting to be said [in the eyes of the] Shariah?

Questioner: Because of his notion that it is something good.

Al-Albani: Because of his notion. But we want to correct his notion.

Questioner: No problem. If there is something blameworthy in it he should be stopped.

Al-Albani: It is not allowed to say, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you.’ Because … look now, the people of innovations … the people of hadith and those who cling to what the Pious Predecessors were upon, and those who believe in the aayahs and hadiths about Attributes are called mushabbihah [by the people of innovation] … they say that they are mushabbihah, mujassimah [anthropomorphists/people who liken Allaah to His Creation]. Namely, they say about us that we are mujassimah, why? Because we say, ‘[Ar-Rahmaan] The Most Beneficent rose over the Throne,’ [Taa Haa 20:5] i.e., He rose over it in a manner that suits and befits His Perfection. So when explaining this aayah if you say rose over means He sat on the Throne you would have opened the door for them to vilify you and would have given them support in their claim that you are a mujassim.

This saying, ‘Ar-Rahmaan is with you,’ they [already] deny that Ar-Rahmaan rose over the Throne, [even though] it is an aayah which we explain as the Salaf did, i.e., they deny the meaning of rose over because they falsely think that such a statement contains tashbeeh of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic as though He is sitting on a seat, [whereas] He is the One free of all creation. So what would the case be if they hear this saying, ‘With you is Ar-Rahmaan,’ i.e., Ar-Rahmaan is a guest with you. … Ar-Rahmaan is sitting with you, these are extremely vile meanings. [Rather], ‘[Ar-Rahmaan] The Most Beneficent rose over the Throne.’

Maybe it is possible to interpret this [saying] with a good meaning but from the cultivation that the Prophet عليه السلام taught his believing followers is his saying, ‘Do not say anything which requires an excuse before Allaah.’

So [after saying such dubious statements maybe someone will say], ‘I don’t mean that Ar-Rahmaan is with you in Essence, the Most High, but I mean His good, His aid and His blessings and so on,’–so this is an interpretation, but this interpretation does not contain good, [for] in another hadith there occurs, ‘Beware of that which requires an excuse,’ i.e., don’t say things after which you will be required to say, ‘By Allaah, I meant such and such.’

Questioner: Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt.

Al-Albani: Well done, precisely.

Mawsoo’atul-Allaamah, al-Imaam, Mujaddidil-Asr, Muhammad Naasirid-Deen al-Albaani, of Shaikh Shady Noaman, vol. 3, pp. 1186-1189.

Is the Hadith, “Every Prophet has a Pool [Hawd] except Saalih. For his Pool was his camel’s udder,” authentic?


Translated by Ahmed Abu Turaab

Question: It was mentioned in As-Sunnah of al-Barbahari …

Al-Albani: As-Sunnah of who?

Questioner: Al-Barbahari, this manuscript, it’s a book.

Al-Albani: For that reason it seemed foreign to me, I wasn’t aware of this book. Tayyib.

Questioner: He was speaking about the Pool of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and said that every Prophet has a Pool except for Saalih, for his Pool was his camel’s udder.[1]

Al-Albani: This is something strange! Did he attribute it as such without a mention of the chain of narration?

Questioner: His book will be printed soon.

Al-Albani: It will be printed soon?

Questioner: Printed soon, yes.

Al-Albani: Okay. This is the manuscript?

Questioner: It’s been checked, this is the book.

Al-Albani: Okay. Did he mention it with a chain of narration?

Questioner: Shall we read it?

Al-Albani: Al-Barbahari, he has been spoken about in relation to the Attributes [of Allaah], he is a Hanbali …

Questioner: Abu Muhammad al-Hasan.

Al-Albani: He is a Hanbali.

Questioner: Was he from the fourth century?

Another questioner: From the fourth century, possibly …

Al-Albani: As far as I recall he has been spoken about concerning his excessiveness concerning the Attributes [of Allaah]. Is it as such? Al-Barbahari.

Questioner: When the [manuscript’s] verifier spoke about him he mentioned the sayings of the scholars [about him] … he was regarded as the Imam of Ahlus-Sunnah in his time.

Al-Albani: He is praised for the fact that he used to wage war against the innovators and it is [indeed] correct that he would hold firm to the Sunnah and the Salafi Creed. But in many such cases there is excessiveness.

Like Ibn Battah al-Hanbali for example, author of Al-Ibaanah, he is of this type … but in his Ibaanah itself he narrates all types of hadiths [i.e., including those which may not be authentic] even those relating to the Attributes [of Allaah].

So this is a very important point. Not everyone who writes about the Attributes is a verifier concerning the narrations that he mentions.

Whatever the case, this is the first time that I have heard this exception that was mentioned [in the hadith in question]. And I do not think it is authentic in relation to the mutawaatir hadiths about the Pool. And in Ibn Abi Aasim’s book, As-Sunnah, there is a large group of narrations about the Pool, and there is no mention of this exception. So at the very least that which can be said about it is that it is gharib. And it is befitting that we refrain from being certain about it until it comes from a path through which the proof is established.

Questioner: Okay. In his book, Al-Ibaanah as-Sughraa, should we take from Ibn Battah regarding the Names and Attributes for example. You mentioned Al-Ibaanah, did you mean Al-Ibaanah as-Sughraa or Al-Kubraa?

Al-Albani: I don’t recall right now. With us in the Dhaairiyah Library in Damascus is a handwritten manuscript of Al-Ibaanah whose order is mixed up. Some water had damaged it such that a lot of what was written was effaced. I benefitted by it in many things, and it [also] became apparent to me that he was from the Hanbalis who have some excessiveness in affirming the Attributes. They may affirm an Attribute which has been reported through narrations whose chains of narration are not authentic, and [some narrations which] even if they are authentic then it is [still] not correct to attribute them to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم because they are either mowquf or maqtoo’, yes.

And similar to this is Ad-Daarimi in his refutation of al-Mareesi … this can be found in him too.

The reality is that this is an extremely important topic and it is befitting that the weak narrations are filtered out and expelled from the correct Islamic creed. This is what I tried to do when I summarised [the book] Al-Uluww lil-Aliyyil-Ghaffaar or lil-Aliyyil-Adheem of Imaam adh-Dhahabi. So although Imaam adh-Dhahabi, as you know, was an Imaam in this regard he [still] was lenient in mentioning certain narrations.

From them, for example, is the narration of Mujaahid that Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, will make the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم sit with Him on His Throne. And many of the scholars in whose aqeedah we trust, accepted this narration as though it was a marfoo hadith raised back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

Whereas had Mujaahid said concerning a fiqh issue, ‘The Prophet of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said …’ such a hadith would have been regarded as mursal and no fiqh ruling would be established through it–so what is the case when, firstly, he did not raise it back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم [i.e., it is not marfoo]? And, secondly, it is regarding creed [aqidah] and not fiqh and along with that they accepted it as though it was a sound narration.

So the reality is that we have to be cautious in matters such as these.


[1] The compiler said, “Fabricated. Mentioned by al-Uqaili in Ad-Du’afaa (3/64-65) and Ibn al-Jawzi from him in Al-Mowdu’aat (3/244) and he said, “It is a fabricated narration which has no basis.””

Mawsoo’atul-Allaamah, al-Imaam, Mujaddidil-Asr, Muhammad Naasirid-Deen al-Albaani, of Shaikh Shady Noaman, vol. 9, pp. 354-356.

A Discussion Concerning the Difference of the Companions in Creed [Aqidah] | 2


 

Continuing from the first post.

Shaikh al-Albaani continues, “And a group called the mufowwidah can be found which is between these two.

They [incorrectly] do not believe or accept the apparent meaning of the proofs from the Book and the Sunnah which are connected to the Attributes [of Allaah] while declaring Him free of any likeness to His creation and not ascribing the qualities of the creation to Him [tanzeeh]. They do not perform ta’weel as the Khalaf do about whom we spoke earlier and who are the ones who say, ‘Indeed the madhhab of the Salaf is safer, but the madhhab of the Khalaf has more knowledge and is more precise.’

So the disagreement [with these groups] is not in the [subsidiary] parts, it is not possible to escape that, but rather in the foundational principle.

What is the rule that the Salaf go by?

It is to have that faith in everything reported from Allaah and His Messenger which includes believing in the apparent, clear, linguistic meanings [of the words reported] in the texts while declaring Him free of any likeness to His creation and not ascribing the qualities of the creation to Him [tanzeeh], as occurs in the Most High’s Saying–and this is a proof which is often used, “There is nothing like Him. And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.” [Shooraa 42:12]

So in this sentence our Lord the Mighty and Majestic firstly mentioned, “There is nothing like Him …” declaring Himself free from having any likeness to His creation and then He followed this negation of likeness with an affirmation, which is His Saying, “… And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.”

So now, when we want to tread upon the path of the Salaf, [we find that] they did not differ whatsoever in understanding [the meaning] of “… the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.” For the belief they held was that the attribute of Hearing is not like that of Seeing and that [in addition to this] both of the attributes are just like the rest of the Divine Attributes: we affirm them as they have been reported while differentiating between each one and while declaring Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, to be free of any likeness to anything from His creation [tanzeeh].

What is the stance of the Mu’tazilah, the ones who negate the Attributes? They take the first part of the aayah, “There is nothing like Him …” [believing in it] declaring Allaah to be free of any likeness to His creation and not ascribing the qualities of the creation to Him [tanzeeh]–but they went to extremes in this tanzeeh and they [ended up] negating the meaning. So they said the meaning of, “… And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer,” is ‘The All-Knowledgeable.’

Thus they negated these two Attributes, because humans can hear and see and so they thought [that by affirming this it would mean that] they were the same [as Allaah]. And they thought that by fleeing from affirming these two Attributes they were performing tanzeeh without ta’teel [negation of the Attribute], but they didn’t notice that the thing which they thought they were fleeing from is what they fell into …

So there is, as the Shaikh of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allaah have mercy on him, said, an association in the wording but no such real association [between Allaah and the creation] in the meaning.

The Attributes of Hearing and Seeing and the Eye, are three Attributes which our Lord, the Blessed and Most High, has been described with in the Quraan just like [He has been described with] the other Attributes mentioned in the Quraan.

But that does not mean that a person’s hearing, seeing and knowledge is like the Hearing, Seeing and Knowledge of Allaah.

For this reason, when the Mu’tazilah fled to this incorrect interpretation of the Hearing, Seeing and Knowledge [of Allaah], it is said to them that they negated two true and real Attributes from the Attributes of Allaah, the Blessed and Most High.”

A Discussion concerning the Difference of the Companions in Creed [Aqidah] | 1


باب الكلام حول خلاف الصحابة في العقيدة

Chapter Being a Discussion of the Difference of the Companions in the Islamic Creed [Aqidah]

Questioner: In the Name of Allaah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful. [All] praise is [due] to Allaah, Lord of the worlds and may the peace and praise of Allaah be upon the Messenger of Allaah.

As for what follows:

The questioner says, ‘Noble Shaikh! You claim that creed is a matter which the Righteous Predecessors were united upon, yet along with that we find that there is difference between them in affirming an Eye or two Eyes.

Al-Albaani: Firstly, [what did you say], ‘You …’ what?

Questioner: You claim.

Al-Albaani: Claim, ok. Would that he worded it slightly more softly.

Questioner: … that creed is a matter which the Salaf were united upon yet along with that we find that there is a difference [of opinion] amongst them in affirming an Eye, or two Eyes, and the Shin. For it has been reported from Ibn Abbaas, may Allaah be pleased with them both, that he interpreted the Saying of Allaah the Most High, “The Day when the Shin shall be laid bare.” [Al-Qalam 68:42] to mean hardship and the suffering [of that Day].

The same is said about the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم seeing his Lord, the Majestic and Most High. Whoever affirms it then it is obligatory upon him to believe that, and whoever negates it then it is obligatory upon him to believe that which the negation means.

So what should our stance be, may Allaah reward you with good?

Al-Albaani: It was befitting that the question [be posed] without this warning, since I don’t think the questioner was relating my opinion and [thus] building the direction of his question upon that. That is because we are the ones who hold it to be religion that there is no difference between what is called usool and between what … [part of the recording is lost here]

… that they should be in agreement and united when they are able to. As for when it is possible that that may not be the case in the usool let alone the furoo [subsidiary issues] then the affair goes back to the mujtahid: if he had striven to come to the Truth and was correct he has two rewards, and if he made a mistake then he has one. As we said there is no difference in that between the usool and the furoo.

As for the claim that there is unity in all of the usool in contrast to the subsidiary issues [furoo] then I do not believe that this is something which a scholar would say with absolute certainty.

The most we can say is that the Salaf agreed that the foundation regarding the Attributes of Allaah which occur in the Book or the Sunnah is that they be taken as they are without any ta’weel–this is what it is possible to say they were united upon … but this does not negate the fact that some difference can occur in some of the issues connected to this methodology.

And it is true that difference occurred concerning the example which the questioner mentioned regarding the interpretation of the Shin.

But is there difference amongst these [people from the Salaf] who may have differed in some of those parts connected to creed or tawheed, is there difference amongst them in the principle foundation [al-asl] of the rule?  The answer is no.

And this is the difference between the followers of the Salaf and the followers of those who came later [the Khalaf]. For this is the rule with the Salaf, i.e., to believe in everything that has been reported from Allaah and His Prophet without making ta’weel and without ta’teel.

As for the Khalaf, then the rule with them is ta’weel which is not submission/or the rule with them is not submission.

Click forherethe second part.

 

The Definition of Creed [Aqeedah] and the Importance of Calling to it


[1] Chapter: The Definition of Creed [Aqeedah]

The Imaam said, “Creed is everything that is connected to the world of the Unseen to which a ruling regarding actions is not connected.”

[2] Chapter: The Importance of Calling to Creed

“My opinion is that we must talk about creed in all of the Islamic world, and [talk about] the failure of the entire Islamic world in turning away from [the affairs of] creed and from clarifying it to the people.  The greatest proof is that the well-known Islamic sects, [which have] large numbers and have been around rallying for a long time, hold that busying oneself with calling to Allaah and correcting [people’s] views is a mistake.

And we have had many unfortunate experiences [in this matter].  More than thirty years ago when I was in Madeenah, we were sitting in a gathering exactly like this one, but we were sitting as they do in an Arabic gathering, on the floor, and I was sitting in the place where this brother Maneer is sitting, i.e., [I was] the last one.

A man entered who was an eloquent orator [khateeb] and the head of an Islamic group which was well-known in some lands.  So he gave salaam and started to shake [everyone’s] hand.  I noticed his facial features started to change [i.e., he was upset and started to frown] as occurs in the hadith.  And the reason was that nobody stood up for him, and there is no doubt that this is something which is not common in such gatherings, [especially] for someone entering [who is] of his standing in society.

[He carried on] until he reached me and I was the last one sitting there, right next to the door, so I said [trying] to [console] him, “O Ustaadh! As we say in Syria, ‘[You are] honourable without [anyone even having to] stand up,’” [I said this] because I felt that he felt something in himself due to these people not having stood up for him.  He had hardly heard these words when he exploded and said, “O Ustaadh! We now want to busy ourselves with such details and such and such …” and he was boiling as they say in the Arabic language [yahdur]: boiling … and he was a khateeb, [and he was saying], “And we have to be united, and we are living with the Ba’athists and the Shi’ites and …” and so on.

So I left him until he finished and then said, “O Ustaadh! Does it suffice me to say based upon what I have heard from you that it suffices us to unite upon [the declaration of faith], ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah,’ without understanding?” He said, “[Yes], even without understanding.”

What do you think?  The head of an Islamic group!

And I know that these sects live on this principle.  They are satisfied that the generality of the Muslims say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah,’ even if they have not understood that this declaration of faith or that these good words demand disbelieving in the false objects of worship [taaghoot].  But not [just] disbelieving in the false objects of worship which only refer to the present day meaning, because this too is from the present-day calamities–[that] many of the Muslim youth nowadays [hold that] the false object of worship [taaghoot] is the ruler who does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, whereas [the reality is that] there are many different types of false objects of worship … these vows and oaths and supplications directed to other than Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, these negate the declaration [that], ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah …’ in the eyes of the one who understands [that], ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah,’ means tawhid al-uluhiyyah and tawhid al-ibaadah.

The Islamic world lives like this, for this reason it is upon the callers to Islaam to truly gather, not only on good technique, which their talk is always centred on, but rather [to gather on] correct knowledge from the Book and the Sunnah along with that, this is what the Islamic world is in need of …”

Mawsoo’atul-Allaamah, al-Imaam, Mujaddidil-Asr, Muhammad Naasirid-Deen al-Albaani,  of Shaikh Shady Noaman, vol. 1, p. 169-170.

Progressing in Calling to Allaah …


 

“How can the Muslim progress and ascend in the field of calling to Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic?”


Shaikh al-Albaani said, “In reality when I was giving that brief word about beneficial knowledge and righteous actions I had felt like saying something that was connected to [the topic of] calling to Allaah, now this question has come along which has opened up the way for me to talk about that which I had thought of but did not do.

So as for how a person advances himself or progresses in the path of calling to Allaah, then that, without doubt, requires two things in my opinion.

The first: That his ties with the people of knowledge are persistent, whether with those of them who are alive through their books or those who are alive and are calling to Allaah.  Namely, that he should have a connection to the highest degree with the books of the people of knowledge who are known for their correctness in affairs of creed [aqeedah], such that he never cuts off from referring back to, reading, and taking more and more from their knowledge since that will help him to ascend and proceed in his calling to Allaah, the Blessed and Most High.

The second: That he should increase in his connection to the people of knowledge who are alive, especially those among them who are known to have correct aqeedah and gracious, pleasant manners,  Since we know that a good example has an enormous affect on the people who follow them.  When a man, or a scholar or a Shaikh who is followed has some form of deviation, whether it is ideological or in his manners, then it will not be far fetched to find that this person or Shaikh has an [adverse] affect on those people who contact him or who take knowledge from him.

And there are many well-known hadiths from the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, encouraging one to accompany and associate with righteous people, like his, صلى الله عليه وسلم, saying, “Do not accompany except a believer, and let none but someone who fears Allaah eat your food.” [Reported by Ahmad and others, Shaikh Al-Albaani declared it to be hasan].

So the Prophet’s, صلى الله عليه وسلم, counsel in this hadith is that we accompany the Muslim who fears Allaah and this is only because the affect of a righteous person is contagious such that the one who accompanies him will receive some of that good.  This is why in Sahih Bukhari the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, said, The example of the righteous companion is like the perfume seller.  He will either give you some perfume, sell you some, or at least you will smell a pleasant fragrance from him.  And the example of the evil companion is like the blacksmith.   He will either burn your clothes or you will smell a wretched smell from him.”

Thus, whoever wants to progress and ascend in the path of calling to Allaah has to safeguard these two matters:

1) That he is well-connected with the books of the people of knowledge of the past who were known for their beneficial knowledge and correct aqeedah.

2) And that if it is easy for him to get in touch with the people of knowledge and righteousness in the community in which he lives then he should contact them whenever he is able to, so that he can be influenced by their way, and benefit from their manners and conduct.

This is what appears to me to be the answer to this question.”

Al-Fataawaa al-Kuwaitiyyah, pp. 11-13.

%d bloggers like this: