All perfect praise is for Allaah alone. We beseech His peace and blessings upon Muhammad (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam).

In the previous post on the same topic, the foolishness and lies of Muhammad ‘Aliyy Jabata al-Khoorijee was exposed in order to proof the statements of Imaam Maalik. He (Imaam Maalik) said, “Knowledge is not to be taken from four types of people, and is to be taken from anyone else: (One) the fool who is known for his foolishness, even if he narrates more than anyone; (two) the liar who lies on the people, even if he doesn’t lie upon the Prophet (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam); (three) an innovator who calls people to his innovation; (four) a shaykh who is known for his virtue and worship if he doesn’t understand what he talks about.” [Reported in al-Jaami’ li Akhlaaq ar-Roowi wa Aadaab as-Saami 1/139] The following explanation exposes his calls to innovations and obliviousness of what knowledge of the religion entails.

CALLING TO HIS INNOVATIONS: Muhammad ‘Aliyy Jabata al-Khoorijee said, “(SUNNAH IS) THE PERSON WHO DECLARES ANYONE WHO FALLS INTO SHIRK AND BID’AH AS A KAAFIR AFTER THE CONDITIONS ARE PERFECTED. BY ALLAAH, IT IS THE MONHAJ OF SUNNAH. IT IS THE MONHAJ OF THE SALAF. IF ONE FAILS TO DO THAT AND HE BELIEFS AND PRACTICES EVERY OTHER ASPECT OF SUNNAH COMPLETELY, THE PERSON IS NOT A SUNNAH (THAT IS, HE IS A KAAFIR). THAT IS THE PROBLEM! YOU PRACTICE ALL WHAT SUNNAH CALLS TO BUT YOU RESTRICT YOURSELF FROM MAKING TAKFEER ON PEOPLE; BY ALLAAH, YOU’RE NOT A SUNNAH (THAT IS, YOU’RE A KAAFIR).” The innovations in these statements are; one, he beliefs that every bid’ah takes a Muslim out of the fold of Islaam, two; any Muslim guilty of shirk al-asghor is a kaafir, three; anyone who fails to declare people who fall into bid’ah mufassiqoh and shirk al-asghor after the conditions and impediments is a kaafir. This Khoorijee even swore by Allaah that his innovations are from the monhaj of the Salaf.

As for the first belief, ‘every bid’ah takes a Muslim out of the fold of Islaam’; Shaykh ‘Abdillaah al-Bukhooree (and other than him) said, “This statement contradicts the evidences of the Qur’aan and Sunnoh, and the way of the Salaf from the first Salafs till now. THIS STATEMENT IS AN INNOVATION.” We ask him to mention his Salaf upon this. “Mr tatment and drammer”, is this “tatment”, “drammer” or both??? Some of his advocates have been crying that we should put our evidences for the categorization of bid’ah forward. We have done this, times without number, only for them to reject the evidences with the philosophy they learnt from Muhammad ‘Aliyy Jabata al-Khoorijee. We ask Allaah to free his intellect from the philosophy he learnt in Cairo. As for the evidences; let me quickly mention a few.

One: Narrated Ibn ‘Abbass, “While the Prophet was delivering a sermon, he saw a man standing, so he asked about that man. They (the people) said, “It is Aboo Israil who has vowed that he will stand and never sit down, and he will never come in the shade, nor speak to anybody, and will fast.” The Prophet said, “Order him to speak and let him come in the shade, and make him sit down, but let him complete his fast.” [Soheeh al-Bukhooree 6704] Brief Explanation: If bid’ah renders all good deeds void, the fasting should have been void. The errors added to the fasting were rejected by the Messenger of Allaah (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam) in line with the hadeeth, “He who innovates something in this matter of ours (i.e. Islaam) that is not of it will have it rejected (by Allaah).” The fasting was retained because it is from the good deeds in our religion. If all bid’ah is a major kufr, the bid’ah should have rendered the fasting void, and as such, he should have been ordered (by the Messenger of Allaah) to terminate it, but to compensate for it (later) since it was a vow. This evidence was used to support the categorization of bid’ah by Imaam Shaatibee in Al-‘Itisoom, Imaam Al-Turtushi in Al-Bidaul awliyah, Shaykh Soolih Fawzaan in Kitaabu ttawheed and many others.

Two: Narrated Sa’d bin Abee Waqqos, “The Messenger of Allaah (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam) prevented ‘Uthmaan bn Mazun from celibacy, and had he allowed him, we would have got ourselves castrated [Bukhooree 5074, Muslim 1402]. Brief Explanation: There is no doubt that celibacy is an innovation, and as such, he (‘Uthmaan bn Mazun) was ordered not to do it. Despite this warning from the Messenger of Allaah (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam), Uthmaan bn Mazun later did this tabattul in a different manner and wasn’t declared as a kaafir by the Messenger of Allaah, despite the iqoomotul hujjah. How? Zhuhri reported form ‘Urwah that ‘Aaishah said, “The wife of Uthmaan bn Mazun entered upon ‘Aa’ishah, her name is Khawlah bint Hakim. Aa’ishah asked her, “Why are you like this?” She said, “My husband neither attends to me in the night nor in the day.” The Messenger of Allaah entered while ‘Aa’ishah and (the wife of Uthmaan bin Mazun) were discussing. ‘Aa’ishah narrated what she (Khawlah bint Hakim) said about her husband (Uthmaan bin Mazun). When the Prophet met Uthmaan bn Mazun, he said, “O Uthmaan, verily this is monasticism that you’re doing and it isn’t ordained for us. Do you not see an excellent pattern in me! By Allaah, do not think that you can fear Allaah more than I do, I am the one who fears Allaah mostly, and I am the one who watches Allaah’s limit the most [Reported in At-ta’liqootul hisaan of Shaykh al-Albaanee as an authentic hadeeth in Sunaan Abee Dawood]. In his false creed, he beliefs that no matter how small or big the bid’ah is, once iqoomotul hujjah is established, the person will become a kaafir. Why wasn’t ‘Uthmaan bin Mazun declared as a kaafir after the iqoomotul hujjah? This evidence in addition to some other ahadeeth on wisool was mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah in Iqtidoo as-sirootul mustaqeem li mukhoolafati ashaabil jaheem, Imaam Shaati’bee in al-‘Itisoom, Imaam Ibn Rajab al Hanbali in jaami’ul ‘uloom wal hikaam, Shaykh Haafidh Ibn Ahmad Al Hakami in Ma’arij al-Qabul bi-Sharh Sullam al-wusool.

Three: Narrated Aboo Sa’eed Al-Khudri: The Prophet (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam) used to proceed to the Musalla on the days of ‘eid-ul-Fitr and ‘eid-ul-Adha; the first thing to begin with was the prayer and after that he would stand in front of the people and the people would keep sitting in their rows. Then he would preach to them, advise them and give them orders, (i.e. Khutbah). And after that if he wished to send an army for an expedition, he would do so; or if he wanted to give and order, he would do so, and then depart. The people followed this tradition till I went out with Marwan, the Governor of Medina, for the prayer of ‘eid-ul-Adha or ‘eid-ul-Fitr. When we reached the Musalla, there was a pulpit made by Kathir bin As-Solt. Marwan wanted to mount that pulpit before the prayer. I got hold of his clothes but he pulled them and ascended the pulpit and delivered the Khutbah before the prayer. I said to him, “By Allaah, you have changed (the Prophet’s tradition).” He replied, “O Aboo Sa’eed! Gone is that which you know.” I said, “By Allaah! What I know is better than what I do not know.” Marwan said, “People do not sit to listen to our Khutbah after the prayer, so I delivered the Khutbah before the prayer.” [Soheeh Bukhooree 956, Muslim 889] Brief Explanation: There is no doubt that there are two innovations evident here; mounting of the mimbar at the Musalla and delivering the Khutbah before the prayer. If Aboo Sa’eed al-Khudri was upon the ‘aqeedah of “every bid’ah is a major kufr”, he would have declared Marwan as a kaafir after the ‘iqoomotul hujjah because Marwan insisted despite seeing the clear evidence. Secondly, even if for argument sake, it is fairly accepted that Marwan did Ijtihaad to derive the ruling of delivering khutbah before the prayer. Is there any Ijtihaad in mounting mimbaar at the Musalla? Thirdly, if Aboo Sa’eed al-Khudri was afraid of declaring Marwan a kaafir because he is the leader, he would have at least retracted his pledge from him. How will a Muslim pledge allegiance to a kaafir? Fourthly, in another narration (from Imaam Ahmad, Aboo Dawood, Ibn Moojah) it was reported that a man corrected Marwan before Aboo Sa’eed intervened; this is an indication that the incident occurred more than once, yet they never declared Marwan as a kaafir. If one is to sincerely apply his creed, one of two things would happen. It is either Marwan is declared as a kaafir or Aboo Sa’eed out of his fear didn’t declare Marwan a kaafir and as such would be accused of having the ‘aqeedah of the Murji’ah (a’uzubiLlaah). May Allaah grant us a better understanding of this religion. This evidence was mentioned and explained by Shaykh Haafidh Ibn Ahmad Al Hakami in Ma’arij al-Qabul bi-Sharh Sullam al-wusool.

Four: Narrated ‘UbaydiLlaah bn ‘Adiyy bn Khiyaar: I went to ‘Uthmaan bn ‘Affaan while he was besieged, and said to him, “You are the chief of all Muslims in general and you see what has befallen you. We are led in the Solaat (prayer) by a leader of Al- Fitaan (trials and afflictions etc.) and we are afraid of being sinful in following him.” ‘Uthmaan said, “As-Solaat (the prayers) is the best of all deeds so when the people do good deeds do the same with them and when they do bad deeds, avoid those bad deeds.” Az-Zuhri said, “In our opinion one should not offer Solaat behind an effeminate person unless there is no alternative.” [Soheeh al-Bukhooree 695] If the companions were upon the creed of ‘every bid’ah is a major kufr’, ‘Uthmaan bn ‘Affaan wouldn’t have said these statements. How will a Companion order the Muslims to pray behind a kaafir? SubhaanoLlaah! Are you accusing him of having the ‘aqeedah of the Murji’ah? Why should a sensible being leave the Fatwa of the Companions which does not contradict anything in the Qur’aan and Sunnah because of the statements of a man who can’t recite the Qur’aan appropriately let alone understand it? Allaah’s aid is sought!

Five: Al-Hasan said, “You can offer prayers behind that Imaam (an innovator) and the sin of heresy will be against him.” [Soheeh al-Bukhooree] What will they say about this too?

The evidences above are a just a few from amongst the evidences which proves that every bid’ah is not a major kufr. How can one leave the understanding of the Messenger of Allaah and the pious predecessors because of the statements of one philosopher? Gaskia! Ko le werk! May Allaah rectify our affairs.

As for his statements claiming that shirk al-asghor takes the Muslims out of the fold of Islaam, it has been explored in the previous posts.

In addition, he also claimed that anyone who fails to declare people who fall into bid’ah mufassiqoh and shirk al-asghor after the conditions and impediments is a kaafir. We say to him that this claim is an innovation. It has no evidence in the Qur’aan, Sunnah, and the understanding of the pious predecessors. Who are his predecessors upon this claim? SubhaanoLlaah! This is an unguarded takfeer. Does that mean that all the pious predecessors and the scholars are kuffar? What kind of nonsense is happening in this country called Nigeria? We challenge him to mention the books wherein he read all these brainless claims? Haba!

From the heresies he fashioned for himself and the ignoramuses following him, apart from the ones earlier mentioned are: “everyone who attaches himself to a group or sect (no matter how small or grave their deviation is) is a kaafir”, “there is no difference between a female who wears pant alone (or brassiere alone) and the one who covers her body completely, but exposes her face”, “the 7 takbeerat in the first raka’ah and 5 takbeerat in the second raka’ah of solaatul ‘eid is wrong, it should be the same as that of the daily (obligatory) solawaat”, “eating with spoon is kufr because it is an innovation”, “it is an innovation which takes it doer out of the fold of Islaam to give Islaamic lectures during romodoon”, “it is bid’ah (which takes its doer out of Islaam) to say Aameen to du’a”, “it is an innovation (which takes it doer out of the fold of Islaam) to observe solaatu taraweeh after solaatul ‘Ishaa”, “praying second Jama’ah in a mosjid is bid’ah, thence it will make its doer become a kaafir”, and many more. We ask Allaah to save him and his students from the problems they’ve created for themselves.

HIS OBLIVIOUSNESS: There is no difficulty in this. What would have made him turn himself to an authority in the deen if not for his obliviousness of what knowledge entails? He doesn’t know the role of the scholars. That is why he views his ignoramus students as ‘scholars’. Scholarship is nothing to him. One of his students has said it publicly that there is nothing in doctorate degree. They only write about trees and birds. He has been raised to the level of Shaykhul Islaam by his ignoramus students. In one of his phone calls with one of his ignoramus students, he said he would release his wife’s digit for the females to ask her questions regarding the deen. Imagine! Their religion is now judged to be accepted or otherwise by Jabata and his wives. Pathetic!

May Allaah make it easy for us to make use of what we have learnt appropriately and make us learn more beneficial knowledge.

We ask Allaah to guide Muhammad ‘Aliyy Jabata and his students to the correct ‘aqeedah and monhaj of the people of Sunnah.

I beseech Allaah to show us the truth as being the truth and to grant us its following, and to show us misguidance as misguidance and to make it easy for us to abstain from it.

May prayers and peace be upon Muhammad (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam), his respected households and companions, and on the generality of the Muslims who follow them upon goodness till the end of time.

Aboo Aaishah Al Odeomeey


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s