All perfect praise is for Allaah alone. We beseech His peace and blessings upon Muhammad (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam).
In continuation, Shaykh Muhammad Noosirudeen Al-Albaanee said, “IF A MUSLIM BEGAN AN INNOVATION AND THE INNOVATIVE REALITY OF IT WAS MADE CLEAR TO HIM, BUT HE INSISTS ON DOING IT, AS IN THE EXAMPLE WHICH I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT WOULD BE LIKE THE ONE WHO DENIES THAT ALLAAH ROSE ABOVE HIS CREATION OR DENIES THAT THE QUR’AAN IS FROM HIS SPEECH, ETC. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS OR THAT AT ALL, NEITHER NEGATIVELY NOR POSITIVELY. POSITIVELY, WE WOULD SAY THAT HE HAS DISBELIEVED, BASED ON THE CONDITION THAT WE MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT EVIDENCE WAS MADE CLEAR TO HIM. AND THE OTHER HAS DISBELIEVED AFTER EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO HIM. NEGATIVELY SPEAKING, THERE’S NO DECLARATION OF DISBELIEF OR APOSTASY IN EITHER CASE, NEITHER THE FIRST NOR THE SECOND, ONLY WITH THE EXISTENCE OF THE CONDITION WHICH WAS MENTIONED.
First of all, we have to understand the application of these statements from the Shaykh himself. How did he relate with the people he declared as innovators? Did he declare all of them as disbelievers saying the innovative reality of their cases have been made clear to them and as such their ruling is like the one who denies that Allaah rose above his creation or denies that the Qur’aan is from his speech? During his lifetime, Shaykh Albaanee declared some people as innovators, yet he related with them as Muslims. Is this a contradiction? No, it isn’t. The two cases are different. We could liken the action of a person to ‘so and so’ judgment without the person having that ruling exactly. It is just like saying; anyone who says ‘so and so’ statement is an innovator, which does not necessarily mean anyone who says it becomes an innovator automatically. There is need to examine the case further. His statement, ‘IF A MUSLIM BEGAN AN INNOVATION AND THE INNOVATIVE REALITY OF IT WAS MADE CLEAR TO HIM, BUT HE INSISTS ON DOING IT, AS IN THE EXAMPLE WHICH I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT WOULD BE LIKE THE ONE WHO DENIES THAT ALLAAH ROSE ABOVE HIS CREATION OR DENIES THAT THE QUR’AAN IS FROM HIS SPEECH’ relates to the what the action could be likened with, not the ruling of the person himself.
Let’s briefly have a look at how he related with some of the people he referred to as being from the people of innovation. Shaykh al-Albaanee said regarding the person of Sayyid Qutb, ‘THE MAN WROTE A BOOK CALLED AL-‘ADAALAH AL-IJTIMAA’IYYAH (SOCIAL JUSTICE) WHICH IS WORTHLESS, BUT HIS BOOK MA’AALIM ‘ALA AT-TAREEQ (MILESTONES) CONTAINS SOME VERY VALUABLE IDEAS. THE MAN IS NOT A SCHOLAR BUT HE WROTE SOME WORDS THAT SHINE WITH GUIDANCE AND REFLECT KNOWLEDGE, SUCH AS THE PHRASE “MONHAJ HAYAAT (A WAY OF LIFE)”. I BELIEVE THIS CONCEPT WAS ADOPTED BY MANY OF OUR SALAFEE BROTHERS, THAT “LAA ILAAHA ILLALLAAH IS A WAY OF LIFE”. THIS IS WHAT I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT HIM.” [Silsilat al-Huda wa’n-Noor] Why didn’t he declare him as a Kaafir? Therefore, we simply say that you do not understand the application of his statements. He (rohimohuLlaah) also said about Sayyid Qutb in this same conversation we are explaining, “THEREFORE, IT IS NOT SUITABLE FOR US TO IMAGINE THAT SAYYID QUTB HAD FALLEN INTO WAHDATIL WUJOOD (MONISM) AS IBN ‘AROBEE, FOR EXAMPLE, HAD; THAT HE, MEANING SAYYID QUTB, INTENDED IT AND HIS HEART WAS SET ON IT LIKE IBN ‘AROBEE WHO MISGUIDED MILLIONS OF SUFI MUSLIMS, ETC. PERHAPS IT WAS ONLY A LEFT OVER OF SOME SUFI THOUGHT WHICH CAME TO HIS MIND OR TO HIS HEART WHILE HE WAS A PRISONER, AND HE HAD NOT DEVELOPED COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE ISSUE. AND HE WROTE THAT STATEMENT WHICH I WAS THE FIRST TO CRITICIZE. WE CANNOT RULE THAT HE WAS A DISBELIEVER BECAUSE WE DO NOT KNOW THAT DISBELIEF HAD BECOME SET IN HIS HEART OR THAT THE EVIDENCE OF THE ERROR OF HIS WRITING OR THOUGHT WAS BROUGHT TO HIM, ESPECIALLY WHILE HE WAS IN HIS PRISON.”
Shaykh Albaanee said about Hasan al-Banna, “I BELIEVE THAT HASAN AL-BANNA HAD A GOOD INFLUENCE ON MANY OF THE MUSLIM YOUTH WHO WERE LOST IN (DIFFERENT FORMS OF) AMUSEMENT AND WESTERN HABITS LIKE PLACES OF ENTERTAINMENT AND CINEMAS. HE BANDED THEM TOGETHER AND IT WAS A HIZBEE BLOC THAT THEY FORMED WHICH WE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH BECAUSE…[TAPE IS UNCLEAR HERE]…BUT HE CALLED THEM TO FOLLOW THE BOOK AND THE SUNNAH AND TO CLING TO THE ISLAAM THAT HE KNEW, SO THROUGH HIM ALLAAH CAUSED THERE TO BE AS MUCH BENEFIT AS HE WANTED AND HIS CALL SPREAD TO THE ISLAMIC LANDS. THIS IS WHAT WE HOLD TO BE TRUE BEFORE ALLAAH REGARDING HIS CALL. BUT WE DO NOT GO TO EXTREMES REGARDING HIM AS THOSE WHO ARE PARTISAN TO HIM DO-FOR HE, REGRETFULLY, DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE BOOK AND THE SUNNAH AND WAS NOT A CALLER TO THE BOOK AND THE SUNNAH UPON THE METHODOLOGY OF THE SALAF AS-SAALIH…[Tamaam al-Minnah fit-Ta’liq alaa Fiqhis-Sunnah, translated by shaikhalbaaniwordpress] In this case too, he didn’t declare Hasan Al Banna as a Kaafir. Therefore, Rosheed Mustopha does not understand the application of the statements he wishes to use to shield his erroneous ideology.
To be continued…
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 till the end of time.
Aboo Aaishah Al Odeomeey