The following is a reply to brother Ali Timeemee's recent outburst on the net - yet again trying to confuse sincere young Salafi brothers and sisters who are trying to gain beneficial knowledge about their Lord, their Deen, their Messenger and the way of the Salaf. I ask brother Ali to fear Allaah and stop trying to agitate the people against their scholars with false paranoid ideas and conspiracy theories....

Aboo Khadeejah as-Salafi (Birmingham)

(Ali's words are in >..< )

>Another manifestation of the new world order in which we find ourselves and to which I and other brothers have commented on this forum for the past few years is the re-interpretation of concepts of the Islamic religion in order to support the new world order in the name of the Sunna and Salafiya.<

My response: The scholars we refer to are Shaykh al-Albaanee, Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh ibn Al-Uthaymeen, Shaykh Saaleh Fawzaan, Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee, Shaykh Muqbil ibn Waadiee, Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiree and their likes - These are not from the new world order but from the way of the 'old' (qadeemi) order known as the salafus-Saalih. As for Shaykh Muqbil and Shaykh Rabee, then Shaykh Al-Albaanee has mentioned that the ones who criticizes them is a person following his desires (hawa) - Shaykh Al-Albaanee also described Shaykh Rabee as the imaam of jarh and tadeel (the imaam of knowing the narrators and the one who disparages and praises them), Albaanee in fact has written the introduction to his new edition of manhaj al-anbiyah (now available in English). As for the refutation of this accusation by Ali of some salafis supporting the new world order, then refer to Madaarak an-Nadhr fis-Siyaasah by Shaykh Abdul-Maalik ar-Ramadhaanee with introduction and praises by Shaykh Al-Albaanee and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad. As for the true promoters of the new world order, then that is the likes of Syed Qutb, Muhammed Suroor, Salmaan al-Awdah, Safar Hawaalee - these ones who promote setting up of parliaments and democratic elections, demonstrations in the streets, setting up of numerous hizbee groups and organizations that split the unity of the ummah, organising Marxist type revolutions and overthrows - see Madaarak an-Nadhr for Shaykh Albaanee's and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad's views on Safar and Salmaan. Also Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen have given clear praise for Shaykh Rabee and his works and his manhaj. And it was Ibn Baaz who gave the fatwa for the detention of Safar and Salmaan to prevent their Marxist style fitnah spreading !! (see www.salafipublications.com for more information). 

> While originally a phenomenon that for the most part was a local issue in response to the activities of certain scholars in Saudi Arabia, it, thereafter, grew to a world wide destructive movement which its cancerous teachings were seen from the west coast of the United States to the islands of Indonesia.<

My response: The activities of 'certain scholars..' - of course what Ali means here is the likes of Safar and Salmaan who were spreading the fitnah of revolution, democracy, demonstrations etc., publicly criticising the rulers and other affairs - for which Ibn Baaz gave the fatwa of their detention - Shaykh Saleh Fawzaan criticised them, as did Al-Albaanee (Jordan), Muqbil (Yemen), Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad (Madeenah) and Rabee (Madeenah) - And they were criticised for their misinterpretation of the principles of the Salafi dawah - Shaykh Al-Albaanee described them as Ikhwaanees, Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin as ignorant youth (shabaab) - See Madaarak an-Nadhr fis-Siyaasah. The destructive movement is the movement that opposes the way of the Salafus-Saaleh not the one that agrees with them. So destruction is upon the ones that call for open demonstrations in the Muslim lands and other lands (which the Prophet and the Sahaabah never did), and call for taking part in open democratic elections (which the Prophet and the Sahaabah never did), and call for marxist style revolutions against the Muslim rulers (which the Sahaabah never did), and call for setting up of groups (jama'aat) and societies (jami'yaat) and movements (harakaat) each one of them claiming that it is upon the truth and is calling for unity whilst in reality they are causing more discord and more disunity as bad as (and if not worse) than the sectarianism of the madhhabs and soofee tareeqahs (which the Prophet and the Sahaabah never did), splitting tawheed into a fourth distinct category (which the Salaf or the middle-era never did) and calling for a new fiqh and madhhab in the west and elsewhere for the 20 th century (and as Maalik said: the latter part of this Ummah will not be corrected except that which corrected its earliest part) ..... and one could continue!!

> Among the notions this group raised:<

My response: I will deal with theses so-called notions one by one insha'Allaah.

This is a lie and fabrication - Our position is same as the Prophet (s) and the Sahaabah - That is, that the Prophet (saw) did not take the war to the kuffaar (i.e. offensively) until he was the Imaam or leader of the Muslims. So our position is the same as that which is that jihaad is behind a Muslim Ruler of a Muslim nation. As for if one wishes to go and defend and aid some Muslims in a different land where the disbelievers are taking their land and lives, then this is something fine if one has ability and will benefit the situation as the Allaah says: Help one another upon piety and righteousness... and the Prophet (saw) said: The one who dies protecting his property is a martyr... This is the position of Shaykh Albaanee and Shaykh Ali Hasan and Shaykh Saleem - So brother Ali has been beguiled and misunderstood this simple concept. 

Yes and this is true, these Islamic Movements are sometimes more dangerous than the Jews and Christians. We should not be fooled by emotions. This doesn't mean that these Muslims are worse than Jews and Christians in that the tableeghis or ihkwaanees are kuffaar and in the eternal Hell - not they are not kuffaar - What this means is that these types of innovated movements and sects destroy Islaam from within like a cancer without even the ummah realizing it until very late. Whereas the danger of the Jews and Christians is apparent and open as it was in the time of the Prophet (s) and we see how the Allaah and His Prophet (s) dealt with them. But the cancer within the ummah which spreads without being noticed is far worse. This is why we find the statement of Imaam Ibnul Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d756H): The war against the innovators is greater than the war against the musrikeen. And as Yahyaa ibn Maeen (companion of Imaan Ahmed ibn Hanbal) was asked: Is the one who defends the Sunnah better than the one who fights on the battle field getting injured and dusty? Ibn Maeen replied: Yes, by a great deal. And Ibn Wazeerah said: Fighting against the innovators is better than fighting against the Mushrikeen because fighting against the mushrikeen preserves the borders of Islaam, yet fighting against the innovators preserves the capital of the whole Islamic nation.... And Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah saw the threat from a group of innovators greater than the threat from the Jews and Christians... This doesn't mean however that the Salafees or the Imaams of the Salaf make takfeer of the deviant Muslim sects - It does, however mean that we are aware that if these sects are allowed to continue unchecked, then soon there would be no Islaam to fight the Christians and Jews for, nor any light of Islaam to call them to !! (Please refer to Muslim Unity in light of the Numerous Sects and Parties by Shaykh Ali Hasan al-Halabee in English translation - Salafi Publications). So Jamaatut-Tableegh and Ikhwaan Muslimeen (and many others) are clearly deviated sects that must be warned against.

> * That to be aware of current events (fiqh al-waqi') was equivalent to studying the corrupted scriptures like the Torah<

My response: This is lie and a corruption of the reality of what scholars like Albaanee, Ibn Baaz, Rabee, Muqbil etc say. Rather, the muslim should be balanced, not being extreme in anything - a Muslim should know that Islaam is comprehensive and its call is based upon the Qur'ân and Sunnah from which emanates the principles and guidelines of calling. Studying the tawheed and correct aqeedah is its core hand in hand following the complete guidance and example of the Messenger with the understanding of the Sahaabah, followed by making purification of our souls. All of this involves also knowing the sate of the Ummah - Read 'The Methodology Of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah' by Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee (now in English) read Fiqhul-Waaqi of Shaykh Albaanee and Shaykh Ali Hasan and read Muslim Unity by Shaykh Ali Hasan and you will clearly see the reality of the false accusation of brother Ali. If it not the Salafi scholars who are always talking about how to revive the ummah according to the guidance of the Sunnah and the sahaabah, then it is none !!

> Also among their deviant concepts was that the removal of the Sharee'ah and its replacement by secular law was only a sin, albeit kufr duna kufr, and not apostasy and moreover to preach to the necessity of Allaah's Sharee'ah being supreme and that all judgment be by His Sharee'ah and to His Sharee'ah was among the ways of the Khawarij and an innovation in the religion.<

My response: by Allaah, brother Ali should fear Allaah - All the Salafi scholars I have mentioned above call for the full implementation of the Islamic Sharee'ah but they call for it upon the methodology of the Salaf not based upon entering into parliament or democracy or demonstrations in the streets or by rebellious over throw. I sincerely ask my brothers and sisters to refer to the last two chapters of 'The Methodology Of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah' by Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee (now in English) and you will see the truth of what I am saying. 

> To support this end, this group initially began to pick on a phrase first coined in this century by al-Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb, i.e., hakimiya. They argued that the term from both a linguistical and religious perspective was a bid'a and hence it is forbidden to use the term. They also raised the issue regarding the permissibility of dividing tawhid into more categories than the traditional 3 categories found in the books of the scholars.<

My response: Yes, this is true - because the term Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah as a fourth category was not used by the Salaf and was innovated by the innovators like Syed Qutb - this term is not to be found in any of the books of the great Imaams of the past or even lesser than them. And every good is in following the Salaf and every evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf (those of later times)! All the scholars mentioned above like Ibn Baaz, Ibn Uthaymeen, Albaanee etc., have clearly mentioned that separating this term into a fourth category is and innovation and that the one who does so is a deviant innovator !! See www.salafipublications.com for the statements of these shaykhs. However it does not mean that these scholars deny the obligation that judgement is only for Allaah as their fatwas clearly state. (see previous response).

> Their efforts was not as they portrayed to defend the aqeeda from innovation, but rather they sought to introduce into the aqeeda their false notions which in the end only seeks to acknowledge the secular status quo of the Middle East. And hence we witnessed amazing events and statements during the past few years. To the degree that their doctrinal leader was able to visit and preach the "Salafi" aqeeda and manhaj in the lands of the Batini, apostate state of North Africa. A nation which its kufr ideology and war against the deen espoused by its desert (false) prophet can only bring back memories of the Fatimid state of al-Hakim who in the end pronounced himself to be Allah.<

My Response: I don't know what brother Ali is referring to here... but however, this cannot be considered a proof of ones falsehood no more than assuming that Bill Clinton supports brother Ali and his dawah just because brother Ali lives in the heart of kufr empire in Washington DC...??!!

> This group also attempted to further propagate its teachings among the youth regarding ruling by Allah's Sharia with its books, tapes, and seminars. However, as the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) has informed there will always remain one group of this umma upon the truth. And as Imam al-Bukhari and others have said they are the scholars.<

My Response: Yes... and the scholars are the ones I have mentioned above and the ones who are with them in aqeedah and manhaj.

> The first to respond to these deviant ideas were a number of students of knowledge. When Ali al-Halabi printed Murad Shukri's book Ihkam at-Taqrir fi Ahkam at-Takfir, a Saudi student of knowledge Abu Abdur-Rahman as-Subai'i published a short essay entitled Bara'a Ahl as-Sunna. Then when al-Anbari printed his book al-Hukm bi ghayr Ma Anzala Allah, other students of knowledge wrote works refuting it. And when Ali al-Halabi printed his book Fitna at-Takfir wa l-Hakimiya again we found a professor of Islamic studies Dr. Abu Ruhayyim refuting it.<

My Response: As for Shaykh Alee Hasan printing the book of Muraad Shukree, then he has clearly and PUBLICLY stated that he was wrong to print the book of an amateur like Muraad Shukree, and Shaykh Ali Hasan published this in numerous newspapers and magazines. As for the other two books, then they have clear references from the great scholars like Al-Albaanee and Saleh Fawzaan, Ibn Uthaymeen etc., so it is going to take more than two unknown names (regardless of how you promote them) to refute. Also just to mention that they have been refuted by a "professor" gives a false impression to the laymen, so fear Allaah. And just because someone has refuted another doesn't mean much in itself - because then we would have to say Imaam Ahmed ibn Hanbal was wrong in his aqeedah because he was refuted by Bishr Mireesee !!. Also that Imaam Barbahaaree (d 329H) is wrong because he was refuted by Hishaam (the innovator) Kibbaanee from downtown somewhere in Canada - and that Shaykh Al-Albaanee is wrong because he was refuted by Hasan (the innovator) as-Saqqaaf and Nah Haah (the innovator) Meem Keller. And what a calamity all this would be!! And who as matter of interest in so-called enlightened USA where Sunnah is supposed to be strong has answered in detail to the likes of Kibbaanee, Keller and Hamza Yusuf or are the so-called duaat like brother Ali more interested in the goings on in the palaces of the Kings ? (See www.salafipublications.com for replies to these deviants). So Bakr Abu Zaid and Ibn Jibreen are Shaykhs but they were incorrect in this case and we should "Know the people by the truth they bring" - so where are the proofs... we are not muqqalid (blind followers). Where is the precedence from the Salaf that Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah is a distinct fourth category?, where is the proof that the Salaf set up groups and parties (jama'aat and jamiyyaat)?, where is proof that the Salaf approved of parliamentary style elections?, where is the proof that the Salaf organized demonstrations in the streets?, where is the proof that the Salaf encouraged the lay-people and the ungrounded general people to join the people of bid'ah (innovations and deviation) and co-operate with them?

> However, this group insisted that their teachings were supported by the major scholars of the day and that their teachings was in the end the pure doctrine of Ahl as-Sunna.<

My response: Not only supported by the major scholars of today but also by the creed and methodology of the Salaf.

> Those of us who were familiar with this group and its origins and teachings knew otherwise. For we had seen that when they attacked Sayyid Qutb, may Allah be merciful with him., the major scholars pointed out the extremism of their view points. There was the letter of Bakr Abu Zaid and then the fatwa of Ibn Jibrin, two members of Saudi Arabia's Hay'a Kibar al-Ulima'. There was also al-Albani's statements and comments on tape which went to the degree of praise regarding Sayyid Qutb's tafsir saying that sections of it were inspired by Allah and that all Salafis should read a certain chapter in Milestones.<

My Response: If anyone wants to know the truth of this affair - I sincerely encourage you to look to www.salafipublications.com about what the scholars say about Syed Qutb. Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd and Ibn Jibreen's very short words have no basis with the weight of evidence against Syed Qutb and the sayings of the likes of Al-Albaanee, Ibn Baaz, Ibn al-Uthaymeen, Rabee, Muqbil etc.. so again I say: just because someone responds (and in the case of Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd, just a small pamphlet) to another doesn't mean that the response is correct ! Shaykh Rabee has brought over 700 pages of proof against the methodology of Syed Qutb and gave him the Jarh (criticism) that was just and correct and as I said before Al-Albaanee said that Shaykh Rabee is the Imaam of Jarh (criticism) and tadeel of this age.... So my brothers and sisters justice is hard to find in these times - so look at www.salafipublications.com and you will find the truth in this affair.

> And when this group attacked Salaman al-'Awda for distinguishing between the saved sect and the victorious group, we heard the statements of Ibn Jibrin and we read the concurrence of what Salman opined by both al-Albani and Muqbil b. Hadi.<

My Response: Let us see what Albaanee said, that Salmaan al-Awdah's manhaj is hizbee/Ikhwaanee (i.e. deviated) and I've already told you above what Ibn Baaz said and there are too many tapes of Muqbil against the Surooree/hizbee/dawah of Salmaan and Safar to mention here and you can phone him if you wish or visit him and ask him. Again I ask you to refer to www.salafipublications.com and you will see what the scholars said about Salmaan al Awdah - Also distinguishing between saved sect and victorious group as Salmaan al-Awdah did is bidah that was not done by the Imaams of the Salaf - And Ibn Baaz rebuked him for that.

> Indeed, we had the declaration of the 33 Kuwaiti students of knowledge which refuted all their main notions and to which was appended Ibn Baz's approval.<

My Response: Why do you mix truth with falsehood, fear Allaah. Shaykh Ibn Baaz did not approve of Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah as a fourth category as brother Ali Timeemi claimed on one of lectures in the UK recorded on two tapes called "Advice to the Salafis of the UK" which was refuted by Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaalee with the same title ! In this lecture brother Ali claimed that Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah is a fourth category these 33 students and Ibn Baaz approved. I ask you did Ibn Baaz approve that statement of yours?... if not fear Allaah and the next time brother Ali Timeemi comes to England he should publicly take back this statement and take this lie back and repent.

> However this group insisted on their error. Instead of approaching these issues with an open mind, their fanatacism and partisanship led them to a state of denial and wickedness in argumentation. The Kuwaiti declaration became a Sururi forgery. The documented statements of the 'ulima became abrogated. The scholars of major repute like Ibn Jibrin and Bakr Abu Zaid were dismissed and in private they were called heretics. In the end neither Ibn Baz, nor Ibn Utahmin, nor al-Albani could escape their wrath and demented views.<

My Response: Stop trying to agitate the people into a frenzy and an atmosphere of paranoia - Let us look at the facts and not at emotions. You say 'in private they were called heretics'... fear Allaah, anyone can make a claim, but as the Salaf used to say that "Isnaad (the chain of narration) is the Deen" and "The Isnaad is the weapon of the believer" and as Muhammed Ibn Sireen said: "Name us your men" - So who said from the salafi shaykhs that these two are heretics? As for Ibn Baaz, Ibn Uthaymeen and Al-Albaanee, then none loves them more than we Salafis and their noble students.... Stop the emotional claims and stop trying to confuse sincere brothers and sisters. You should sit with Shaykh Ali Hasan al-Halabee and Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaalee and Shaykh Abu Anas Hamad al-Uthmaan and put your claims to them next time they come to the West and maybe they can clear your confusion brother.

> However, al-hamdulillah, Allah has promised to preserve His religion and with time the major scholars began to address these issues. With regards to the topic referred to as hakimiya, we first heard Ibn al-Ghunayman's fatwa that the issue of the division of tawhid is not one that leads someone into heresy.<

My response: I refer you to my previous answers on the issue of: just because someone responds does not mean he is correct. What is correct is what is found from the Salaf and what the scholars bring today by way of evidences. Running around looking for anyone who will support you is not from the methodology of the Salaf !

> We then had the fatwa from hay'a kibar al-ulima that Murad Shukri's book was one of bid'a (Irja') trying to pass itself off as a book of the Sunna and that the author and publisher must publically renounce these ideas.<

My Response: I've already dealt with this above.

> And now we have what I hope in Allah will bring an end for once and all to these teachings Ibn Baz's praise of Abdur- Rahman Abdul-Khaliq's book as-Sirat and his recommendation that the book is worthy of being published and distributed.<

My Response: The this reference if anything is for this particular book - this does not now mean that Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul- Khaaliq is the Imaam of Ahlus-Sunnah rather he is a hizbee. And the proof of his hizbiyyah and hatred for the correct manhaj is that he is continually being told by the major scholars to correct his manhaj - For example Al-Albaanee calling him a hizbee/ ikhwaanee, Ibn Baaz ordering him to repent for his vicious attacks upon the Imaams of the Sunnah, Shaykh Saaleh Fawzaan asking him to correct his manhaj and Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee refuting him in two volumes for which Shaykh Saalih Fawzaan, Al-Albaanee, Muqbil praised him for, Shaykh Muqbil al-Waadiee ordering him to stop corrupting the manhaj and the sunnah and to leave the methods of hizbiyyah and the ikhwaanees. So let us be sensible, yes if Ibn Baaz praised the book, then it is the book that he is asking you to benefit from - not from the hizbee/ikhwaanee ideas of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq.

My Response: And I too pray that you stop misleading the sincere brothers and sisters and that you make tasfiyah (purification) of your manhaj and you repent for your dawah to misguidance - that you should sit at the feet of the scholars and clarify your confusion, and that this will not be achieved by sitting in Washington DC expecting Ibn Baaz or Ibn Uthymeen or Albaanee or Rabee or Muqbil or Ali Al-Halabee or Saleem Hilaalee to come knocking on your door - rather knowledge is attained by going out and seeking it.

>Ali<

Abu Khadeejah as-Salafee