07/07/2025
FREEING THE INNOCENT ONES FROM THE CLAIMS OF AN UNKNOWN WRITER (5)
Bismillāh al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh.
After clarifying the two claims the claimant noted as defects in the Manhaj of the Mashayikh, we move to third claim which is his statement - Their inconsistencies in the concept of Ilzam bi Tabdi' and the implementation of the qooidah of "La Naj'al".
If consistency requires that a person should not be guilty of what he criticizes others for, then true steadfastness lies in applying one’s principles with clarity, precision, and justice. As for us, by the grace of Allah, our use of Ilzām bi’t-Tabdīʿ is not emotional or reactionary, nor is it founded on blind allegiance. Rather, it is grounded in sound understanding, guided by the correct application of the aathār and the principles of Ahl al-Sunnah. We do not hide behind vague concepts like the "Laa Najʿal" to excuse deviations, nor do we selectively apply principles based on convenience or tribal loyalty. What we affirm and implement, we do so with knowledge and deliberate adherence to usūl, not contradictions.
Although the writer has requested that anyone who refutes him does so without insult, it's disappointing that the claimant's claims are full of veiled insult hidden using innuendos and what experts referred to as "dog whistles" to pass his subtle insults in his write ups, I will try my best not to tow this path with you and rather make my responses clear and factual and devoid of insults to my possible best- I ask Allah to make this possible for me and pardon my mistake if I fall into one.
First of all, It is misleading to assert that the use of Ilzām bi’t-Tabdīʿ is what led to the disorganized state of daʿwah. The reality is:
EVEN THE VERY PEOPLE THE WRITER IS DEFENDING ALSO APPLY ILZĀM BI’T-TABDĪʿ.
The key difference is:
We apply it based on the well-known principles of the scholars of Jarḥ wa Taʿdīl, using it only when its conditions are met.
They, however, have introduced three innovative conditions (2 from Shaykh al-Halabī, and 1 from Ustādh Abū al-Barakāt), namely:
1.Ijmāʿ (consensus of the scholars on the innovator)
2. Iqtināʿ (Conviction)
3 Shibh al-Ijmāʿ (Quasi-Consensus)
We have repeatedly challenged them to produce even a single quote — from a book, article, or scholarly paper — from the early generations or reputable scholars that prove these conditions. As of today, 12th Muharram 1447AH (7th July 2025), nothing has been produced. Rather, what is now unfolding is that they have resorted to destroying all what they have earlier upheld with the criminal "La Naj'al" qaidah.
As for the first 5 questions you asked in the write up, they can all be answered by returning to the principles of the Salaf regarding Ikhtilāf in Jarḥ wa Taʿdīl.
If that’s what you want to discuss, let’s isolate that discussion — not repeat the misleading statement of Ḥusayn al-Karābisī, “If you declare one person an innovator for doing something, then you must do the same to everyone else who does it.”
Most of the cases you have listed do not meet the criteria of inconsistency. Rather, they show your misunderstanding of the topic — and I say this with all due respect.
But to expose the double standard more clearly, I will now list 13 examples from your own people, the Halabiyoon (those who call day and night to the path of Shaykh Al-Halabi May Allah forgive him),
These are figures about whom your group differs — despite your “conditions” (Ijmāʿ / Shibh Ijmāʿ / Iqtināʿ):
1. Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʿribī – Sunni to some, innovator to others.
2. Muḥammad Ḥasan – Sunni to some, innovator to others.
3. Bābā Oniwāsi Agbaye – Some call him Sunni; others, a staunch Ṣūfī.
4. Shaykh Ādam al-Ilorī – Some say Sunni; others say Ashʿarī.
5. Shaykh Kamāl al-Adabī – Sunni or not? You differ.
6. “The Prof” – Sunni to some, innovator to others.
7. Dr. Imrān – Same contradiction.
8. M***i of Jamāʿat Tablīgh – Also disputed among you.
9.TMC leader in Lagos – Some call him Sunni, others reject that.
10. Dr. Jawharī – Difference of stance among you people
11. Dr Sanūsi Lafiagī – Controversial among you.
12. The people of ikorodu - Same.
13. "Muhaddith of Egbaland" – Declared the Ikhwān as Ahl al-Sunnah. Still, no Tabdīʿ from your side.
Each of the persons on this list have been accused by you people as either someone who fall into the Sufi thought(Where Ijma' condition is fulfilled) or the Ikhwan (where the Shibhul Ijma' ideology you smuggled in works too).
If our scholars are “inconsistent” for not applying Ilzām everywhere, then what will you call this?
You would have no resort than to return back to the Qawa'id that the Ulama of Al-Jarh Wa Ta'deel have laid down and I will be waiting for you on that aspect to answer all your questions that you have raised in your third baseless claim.Otherwise, you remain silent and pretend the aḥādīth and aathār supporting Ilzām bi’t-Tabdīʿ have been abrogated.
In reality, you're not calling to Ilzām bi’t-Tabdīʿ — but to Ilzām bi’t-Taslīf: forcing others to declare people “Salafi” even when they differ with them or question their manhaj as evident in the statement of one of you when he said regarding Ustadh Amubieya.
"الشيخ سليمان محمد الأول أموبحيا (حفظه الله) عالم سني و من أنكر ذالك فهو خارجي متكبر متشدد
Which translates to:
Shaykh Sulayman Muhammad Al-Awal Amubieya(May Allah protect him) is a knowledgeable sunni scholar, WHOSOEVER REJECTS THIS IS AN EXTREMIST, ARROGANT KHARIJI(INNOVATOR).
Is this not Ilzam bi Taslif wa Tabdee' from you people too on someone that there is no Ijma' or shibhul Ijma' (as you have posited) on?
I will end this piece with the statement of our brother and Ustādh, Abu Haatim Abdulwahab which he wrote on his facebook timeline on 9th of Muhharram 1447AH (equivalent to 4th of July 2025)
"Take it or leave it.
We are not attaching ourselves to any scholar because he sees all what we see, or on the exact mawqif we are upon in some affairs.
But because he's closer to the truth we know, and doesn't change colour just like others do.
It doesn't concern us if such a scholar holds Fulaan and Fulaan to be innovators, as that's not a condition that everyone must pronounce that an innovator is an innovator.
What's more concerned is; is he aware of their mukhalafaat and still defending them on it, or not?
And it's not a must for us to take the mukhalafaat of that Fulaan to such a scholar so that he could also hold onto our mawqif, No!
Because truth will continue to be the truth, even if it's only one person that affirms it."
Waṣallallāhu ʿalā Muḥammad wa-ʿalā ālihi wa-ṣaḥbihi ajmaʿīn.
