AN ASSOCIATE of Maḥmūd al-Ḥaddād, known as ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl, claimed that the Shaykhs of Madīnah, such as Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) were calling to a deviant political methodology in complete secrecy built upon the errors of Shaykh al-Albānī (رحمه الله). He accused them of being infiltrators, working on the inside for political objectives. He also claimed that they were following the ways of the Ikhwānīs by not making tabdīʿ of certain callers in Saudi Arabia. These Ḥaddādis had exaggeration in matters of tabdīʿ and tajrīḥ, aiming to incite discord and chaos within the ranks of Ahl al-Sunnah. To support their claims, they attached themselves to well-known scholars in Saudi because they opposed Shaykh al-Albānī in various issues, and they leveraged this attachment to attack Shaykh Rabīʿ and others. Bashmīl is from the first wave Ḥaddādīs, and even though Maḥmūd al-Ḥaddād is the origin, and he disappeared into obscurity after being expelled from Saudi, Bāshmīl became the main promulgator, spokesman and caller to the ideology. After them, came Fāliḥ al-Ḥarbī, then Fawzī al-Baḥraynī and they carried on the methodology with their own infusions.

In his refutation of the Ḥaddādī, ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl, Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hadī (رحمه الله) said:^[1]

Notes

01  In the early 90s when Shaykh al-Albānī (رحمه الله) was not fully aware of the Surūriyyah and the deviations of Sayyid Quṭb—as was the case with other senior scholars—ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl used this, and the Shaykh’s position on the 1990 Gulf War, as well as al-Albānī’s differences in jurisprudence with the Shaykhs in Saudi Arabia to attack the Shaykh and to throw Shaykh Rabīʿ and others alongside him, accusing them of being agents for a secretive political call that works against the rulers and scholars of Saudi Arabia.

So Shaykh Rabīʿ (رحمه الله) refuted these allegations and exposed the deception, lies and fabrications of Bāshmīl, and the Ḥaddādīs in general. Their tactic was to make a display of defending the scholars of Saudi Arabia after throwing the errors of Shaykh al-Albānī onto Shaykh Rabīʿ and thereby accuse him and others of having a secret call centered around al-Albānī’s errors.

02  Because Bāshmīl and the Ḥaddādīs themselves were the ones engaged in calling to taḥazzub (partisanship) and takattul (amassing followers), they tried to undermine the integrity of Shaykh Rabīʿ by throwing this accusation against him.

This is one of the hallmarks of the Ḥaddādī methodology, these people resort to outrageous lies because they are bankrupt in evidences against their opponents, and using the art of deception and falsehood, they level these types of accusations as a form of intellectual terrorism to keep their followers in line and prevent them from listening to evidences and clarifications of truth. All of this while the history, writings and activities of those whom they slander in this manner are replete with evidence that this claim is patently false, which is something that Shaykh Rabīʿ amply demonstrated in his response to Bāshmīl.

03  After quoting Bāshmīl’s statement: “The emergence of a new foreign daʿwah after the Gulf War similar to the calls of the Islamic, political factions… its people proclaim the slogan of ‘Salafiyyah’, and call themselves Salafīs”, by which he intended the daʿwah of Shaykh Rabīʿ—Shaykh Rabīʿ mentioned a list of points in refutation of his absurd claim, and they include (summarised), headed by the question: “What has disturbed you about this daʿwah and compelled you to distort it and portray it upon other than its reality”:

• Is it the defence of Ahl al-Ḥadīth, past and present, and promoting the Salafī daʿwah which is established upon Tawḥid and the Book and the Sunnah as occurs in the book “Ahl al-Ḥadīth Hum al-Ṭāʾifah al-Manṣūrah”?

• Is it the book, “Maṭāʿin Sayyid Quṭb Fī al-Ṣaḥābah?” which contains a defence of the Companions of Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), especially the third khalīfah, ʿUthmān (رضي الله عنه) and Banī Umayyah, and which comprises destruction of Socialism and its principles, and destruction of the false takfīr which Sayyid Quṭb relied upon to make takfīr of the ummah?

• Or is the book “Aḍwāʾ Islāmiyyah ʿalā ʿAqīdah Sayyid Quṭb”, and “al-ʿAwāṣim Mimmā fī Kutub Sayyid Quṭb min al-Qawāṣim” and “al-Ḥadd al-Fāṣil bayna al-Ḥaqq wal-Bāṭil” which destroyed the falsehoods of Sayyid Quṭb and his great innovations. Those books which shook the people of desires?

Note when the first of these books came out, some hate-filled Ḥizbī went out to collect mistakes of al-Albānī from his cassettes as a means of diverting people from these books refuting Sayyid Qutb. The intent being to say that look, al-Albānī has great mistakes as well, he is like Sayyid Quṭb. This is one of the traits of the Ḥaddādīs, that when a figurehead of theirs is refuted, they rush to compile the mistakes of the refuting party or one who is upon the same way, in order to divert attention and exonerate and shield the refuted.

Shaykh Rabīʿ continued:

• Or is it the book “Manhaj al-Naqd” and the book “al-Maḥajjah” which make clear the true Islāmic methodology in protecting Islām in terms of its creed, legislation, methodology and foundations and destroys the false methodology of al-muwāzanah (mentioning the good points of the refuted when refuting) which necessitates destruction of those (Islāmic) foundations?

• Or is the book “al-Naṣr al-ʿAzīz” which truly aided the Salafī methodology and repelled the falsehoods of al-Shāyijī and his group.

Then Shaykh Rabīʿ said:

04  From the above, the way that Shaykh Rabīʿ refuted this vile Ḥaddādī was to list all of his works in refutation of taḥazzub and takattul and foreign imported ideologies which aimed to undermine the Salafī creed and methodology and the foundations of Islām. So how can it be said, with all of these tremendous works, that its author is an agent for an imported foreign political call, this is a mighty fabrication!

Shaykh Rabīʿ demanded the evidence from Bāshmīl who made this claim and continued to press him, again and again, because the onus of proof is upon the claimant, and these types of claims must be evidenced. However Bāshmīl was unable to provide any evidence because he was a lying treacherous Ḥaddādī with no integrity.

So this is the reality of Bāshmīl, the Ḥaddādīs and those who resemble them in their conduct. They make absurd and outrageous accusations—due to their inability to counter the strong refutations—and they appeal to the intellects and sentiments of unscrupulous people like themselves.

Arabic text:

Footnotes