hr

h

[umbrella @cucumbrl4]

“One does not reside among a people who rule by other than the rule of Islam.”

Imam Abdullah Bin al-Imam Ahmad:

“I asked my father: ‘what do you think of people who reside in comfort in a land separated from their support from the Muslims by a sea, and their enemies are on an island, except they (the Muslims) are dominant over them?’

My father (Imam Ahmad) replied: ‘If the rulings of Islam are apparent among them and they are stronger, then I hope there is no harm in that. And if they are not like that, then one does not reside among a people who rule by other than the rule of Islam.’”

مسائل الإمام أحمد رواية ابنه عبدالله بن أحمد ٢٤٦

[hr @abusaleh568]

@AllahOverPowers @Barkhadle25 I wonder if you know what they meant by “they reject ahadith” maybe you should refer to what Uthman ibn Sa’id said when he was speaking about Abu Hanifah’s rejection and called it a mistake and made a distinction between that and kufr

[أَبُو إِسْلَامَ السَّلَفِيُّ الْمِصْرِيُّ @Salafization1]

Shaykh Fawzan Describes Preachers Who Declare Current Arab Rulers as Disbelievers as "Ignorant"

It’s truly astounding how utterly ignorant and lost these Takfiri promoters and their brain-dead Khawarij followers have become. They constantly throw around general statements from scholars like Shaykh Fawzaan and others, even though they themselves don’t consider these scholars to be upon “true Salafiyyah.” Their sick minds have led them to believe that the only "true Salafis" are those who follow the footsteps of rabid Khariji innovators disguised as scholars—people who inhale and exhale takfir in every breath.

What’s even more absurd is how they keep using the statements of Shaykh Fawzaan and other Saudi scholars as “evidence,” despite the fact that they don’t even recognize them as scholars. It’s almost laughable, if it weren’t so tragic. These people post general rulings about takfir and ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, but conveniently ignore the fact that the same scholars don’t make takfir on the current Muslim rulers. Why? Because there’s a clear distinction between general rulings and specific rulings. Not to mention the Tafsil and distinction between many types of legislating by other than what Allah has revealed.

For example, Shaykh al-‘Allamah al-Fawzaan himself when asked about a preacher that is saying that the Arab Rulers of today are Kuffar, and how to respond to him. The Shaykh has described these Takfiri promoters and their idiotic preacher as ignorant people who don’t know what they’re talking about and aren’t worth replying to because they are juhaal (ignorant). (Video attached)

If Shaykh Fawzan truly held the same belief as you claim, and if his words supported the interpretation you’ve imposed on him, then why hasn’t he made takfir on the Arab rulers himself? Why doesn’t he affirm the preacher’s statement and say, “Yes, this preacher is right, and we should respond by affirming that indeed, they are disbelievers, O ‘Allamah!”? The fact that he hasn’t done so speaks volumes about the difference between your reckless interpretation and the actual understanding of the scholars.

Will any of this penetrate their thick skulls? Of course not. They are deaf, dumb, and blind, completely consumed by their obsession with takfir, with hatred and rage having filled their blackened, stone-dead hearts. They are beyond reason, trapped in their delusions, and refuse to see the truth that is right in front of them.

[hr @abusaleh568]

@SpingeBinge489 @Monotheist_7 What has he said about the Sharia?

[hr @abusaleh568]

@ly957194227756 @Hanbali2024 Idiot it doesn’t need to be verbatim for example Al Zajjaj said “when” indicates time, does that suddenly mean we can’t make deductions through his statement here? (Idc if he made ta’weel on certain issues) Your ashari brothers would read your thread and laugh at ya

[hr @abusaleh568]

@ly957194227756 @Hanbali2024 Why the hell does it need to be verbatim? You guys are retarded lmao

[Abu Khadeejah SP @AbuKhadeejahSP]

Is refuting the People of Desires and Innovations, and those who openly commit sins, considered to be chasing the slips of the people and seeking to uncover faults and shortcomings of others?

[💌 @9xnsomali]

Lower your gaze wallahi. The Zina of the eyes is to look at what is forbidden.

Shaykh Abū ʿUways said: “If you don’t look, you won’t see it, if you don’t see it you won’t desire, if you don’t desire, you won’t seek to make contact. It all starts with the glance.

Fear Allāh

[hr @abusaleh568]

@SpyroX96 @huseynmehsum @TaymiFawaid Wait till I show you what he said about establishing the hadd on the hakim lol, if you can’t even speak from the texts then stay silent.

[hr @abusaleh568]

@SpyroX96 @huseynmehsum @TaymiFawaid He wouldn’t assist in the rulers bloodshed by mentioning his faults and defaming him through that

[hr @abusaleh568]

@huseynmehsum @TaymiFawaid What? Not how it works since the point of not allowing them to begin with is their well known betrayal against the ummah and the mafsadah that comes from it. Ibn Taymiyyah even said their assistance to the Jews is a known matter

[أهل الحديث والأثر Ahl alHadith @alhamdullah54]

🟢 *Fatwa of the Erudite Scholar, the Muhaddith Muqbil al-Wadi'i (may Allah have mercy on him): That affiliation with Salafiyyah must be a reality, not a false claim while in truth they are innovators—either Suroori, Ikhwani, or Tablighi… Therefore, it is obligatory to beware of these individuals cloaked in the name of Salafiyyah while they are innovators and causers of corruption on earth, hypocrites who outwardly display affiliation with Salafiyyah while covering up and concealing Ikhwanism, rebellion (Khurooj), Irja', and other innovations and misguidance*

[https://t.co/KDYu8ntpm6)

[hr @abusaleh568]

@Opti_prime87 @AhmedSheriffdin Great to mention how Ahmad used both, taking the dhahir and pass them along, when it came to the ruyah. I wonder why he didn’t make a distinction between the 2

[hr @abusaleh568]

@huseynmehsum @TaymiFawaid Because ibn Taymiyyah held that it’s haram to even unite with the nusayriyyah now imagine if he saw today’s rawafidh? Every deviant sect in the past is worse now which is why Saffarini gave the Shia a new name

[hr @abusaleh568]

@RealAbuisa Out of curiosity why didn’t you put shaykh for Albani and Rabee?

[hr @abusaleh568]

@Hanbali2024 No akhi it means “and” in this context 🥺

[Dr. Abdulilah Lahmami @Abdulilah_UK]

Name us your men and we will name you ours... some of the greatest scholars
Sh AbdulAziz Bin Baz rahimahullah
Sh Ibn Uthaimeen rahimahullah
Sh Albaani rahimahullah
Sh Rabee bin Haadi
Sh Abdulmuhsin al-Abbad
Sh Ahmed al-Najmi rahimahullah
Sh Saalih al-Fawzan
Sh Zayd bin Haadi ra

[hr @abusaleh568]

@orionurban @AashiqalIslam Specific case akhi specific case

[Jad 🇸🇾 @jado375]

"innovated jarh"

"no one from the scholars labelled him as the next scholar to follow."

Does this jahil not know that Shaykh Rabi' bin Hadi al-Madkhali رحمه الله was praised by many major scholars for being a person of Sunnah and for doing jarh' of the people of innovation?

This is a full compilation of scholars who praised Shaykh Rabi':

Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Bāz

Shaykh Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī

Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Ṣāliḥ al-ʿUthaymīn

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ ibn Fawzān al-Fawzān

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ al-Luḥaydān

Shaykh Muḥammad Amān al-Jāmī

Shaykh Muqbil ibn Hādī al-Wādiʿī

Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Yaḥyā al-Najmī

Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhalī

Shaykh ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-ʿAbbād

Shaykh ʿUbayd ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Jābirī

Shaykh ʿAlī ibn Nāṣir al-Faqīhī

Shaykh Ḥammād al-Anṣārī

Shaykh ʿAbd Allāh al-Ghudayyān

Shaykh Falāḥ Ismāʿīl Mandakār

Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Bannā

Shaykh Ṣāliḥ ibn Saʿd al-Suḥaymī

Shaykh ʿAbd al-Salām ibn Barjas.

[Abu ʿAbdur-Razzāq @jadoeit]

A List of Some Scholars who narrated the Consensus of the Permissibility of Taqlīd for a layman

1. Ibnul-Qaṣṣār رحمه الله said:
The taqlīd of a scholar for a laymen is permissible according to Mālik, in general. The basis for this is the statement of Allah, the Exalted: ‘So