SHAYKH RABĪʿ BIN HĀDĪ refuted a false principle that was invented by the innovator, Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʾribī, known as carrying the mujmal (general) upon the mufaṣṣal (specific) in the speech of men. Practically speaking, he was applying this to outright statements of falsehood, such as Sayyid Quṭb’s explicit statements about the Qurʾān being a creation (ṣunʿ) or Muḥammad al-Maghrāwī’s clear statements of mass takfīr of the ummah, and saying we must refer to their speech in other places which is specific.
However, this principle of carrying the general upon the specific and the unrestricted to the restricted and so on, these apply to the speech of Allāh and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) which admit to no error, unlike the speech of men.
Shaykh Rabīʿ destroyed this principle from many angles and explained the real intent behind this principle, which was to shield those who had been refuted by the scholars and make excuses for them and their false speech, creed and methodology. In the course of refuting it, he provided an illustration of refutations between three scholars and them assisting each other in reviewing and accepting the truth.[1]
These three scholars are Shaykh Ḥamūd al-Tuwayjirī, Shaykh Bin Bāz and Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn (رحمهم الله). We can present the issue here, through Shaykh Rabīʿ's summary of it:
01 Shaykh Ḥamūd al-Tuwayjirī criticised Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn for a general statement which can comprise truth and falsehood, and it is: “Allāh is with us with His essence (bi dhātihī).” Though Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn explained his intent thereafter, and denied the false possible meaning, al-Tuwayjirī criticised him and Shaykh Bin Bāz supported his criticism and praised it. Thereafter Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn supported al-Tuwayjirī and Ibn Bāz against himself due to his generous spirit and truthful nature.
It was a saying of the Sālimiyyah (or a faction of them) that “Allāh is above the Throne with His essence and He is with the servants (in every place) with His essence”. From their leaders who held this was Abū Ṭālib al-Makkī (d. 386H) and a contradictory view is also related from him. So this was indicative of ḥulūl (indwelling, or incarnation).
02 Shaykh Ḥamūd (رحمه الله) wrote a book critiquing this view in detail, after citing the words of Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn in question, he said:
I say: It is not hidden to the one with knowledge and understanding what the speech of the writer comprises of contradiction and combining two opposites and agreement with the one who says from the Ḥulūliyyah (Incarnationists): “Verily, Allāh is above the world with His essence and in every place with His essence”, and what it comprises of opposition to the Book, the Sunnah and the consensus of the Salaf of the ummah and its leading scholars.
After this, he proceed to outline all the observations and criticisms regarding this statement.
03 The book was read and endorsed by Shaykh Bin Bāz (رحمه الله) and from what he said was:
In summary, this is a book of immense value and great benefit, containing many proofs from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah affirming Allāh’s Names and Attributes, His loftiness above His creation, and refuting all those who hold deviant beliefs. It also includes many useful quotations from the words of early and later scholars of the Sunnah, as well as from the words of the Companions and their Successors, may Allāh be pleased with them all and shower them abundant mercy.
04 Further, Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله) requested a copy of the book from Shaykh Ḥamūd (رحمه الله), read it and wrote what supported Shaykh Ḥamūd, in aid of the truth, and in aid of his brother againt his own self, saying:
I have read the book authored by our honourable brother Shaykh Ḥamūd bin ʿAbd Allāh al-Tuwayjirī regarding affirmation of the loftiness (ʿuluww) of Allāh the Exalted and His distinctness from His creation, while refuting those who claim that Allāh the Exalted’s nearness (maʿiyyah) to His creation is with His essence. I found it to be a valuable book in which its author established the following realities:
Then he mentioned them:
Then he said:
And everything he corroborated is the truth… and the falsification of the statement of ḥulūl (incarnation, indwelling) is known by indication from the Book, the Sunnah, reason, original disposition and consensus, because affirming it completely contradicts affirmation of the loftiness of Allāh the Exalted with His essence… and rejecting the saying of nearness with His essence is obligatory because it necessitates ḥulūl and because the saying of ḥulūl is false, hence, everything that necessitates it is false, and must be denied and refuted, whoever said it.
05 Then, Shaykh Rabiʿ commented:
These are the strong men, they are the peaks, the giants, and in these positions of theirs (taken in the matter) there is a great lesson for the wise and noble. Within it are indications of the piety, cautious reserve (waraʾ), truthfulness and sincerity of these men, especially Ibn ʿUthaymīn (رحمه الله).
There was no compromise or flattery from Ibn Bāz and al-Tuwayjirī, and nor carrying the general upon the specific, and nor evasion and noise (bluster) and nor any demand to carry the general upon the specific. There was no uproar from Ibn ʿUthaymīn because all desire the Face of Allāh the Exalted, they respect the truth and aid it, even against the self.
They enacted the speech of Allāḥ the Exalted: “O you who believe, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allāh, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives.” (4:135-).
How often have I sat with those unique, great men, especially Ibn Bāz and al-ʿUthaymīn. When I discuss anything them with, I find from them humility, lofty morals, and open hearts that accept giving and receiving and respect the truth, even if it was with someone who is younger than them. O Allāh forgive them and raise them in ranks in ʿIliyyīn.
The Shaykh wrote this in 1433, which is almost twenty years after the authoring of the book in question by Shaykh al-Tuwayjirī.
From the above, inclusive of Shaykh Rabīʿ demonstrating the example in the course of refuting false principles and those who defend errors, we can take the following benefits from the action of the four shaykhs:
01 Infallibility is only for the Prophets and Messengers in matters of religion and as for those besides them, no matter what their rank or status, they are not immune from error, not even in great affairs of creed, in this particular case, a matter related to Allāh’s ʿuluww and maʿiyyah. These errors do not diminish from their status in any way, because they do not persist in them and do not emanate from errant and deviant methodologies but from genuine slips and oversights. For this reason, Imām Mālik said: “Everyone’s (speech) can be accepted or rejected except the companion of this grave”, meaning, Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم).
02 Ahl al-Sunnah are in between the way of the Jews and Christians in their affairs of religion.
The first opposed their prophets and messengers, reviled them, abused them and even killed some of them. And the latter raised ʿEīsā (عليه السلام) until they made him the Lord of the Worlds.
Likewise, with their scholars, Ahl al-Sunnah are upon a way other than that of the Jews and Christians towards their priests and rabbis, for they exaggerated in them, made them infallible in religion and obeyed them absolutely, even in their errors, in disobedience to Allāh.
Whereas Ahl al-Sunnah obey their scholars only in what is obedience to Allāh and His Messenger, love them with a legislated love that does not exceed the bounds, and do not revile them or declare them misguided for genuine slips that they recognise and retract from.
03 This example indicates the truthfulness and sincerity of those scholars and their mutual assistance and cooperation in clarifying, accepting and supporting the truth, in aid of the truth, not the self, and for the Face of Allāh, and not for any other reason. Thus, when Shaykh Ḥamūd al-Tuwayjirī wrote his book in criticism of the errant speech, with firmness, Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn supported it, and Shaykh Bin Bāz endorsed it, and it became an example to be struck of true scholarship and genuine pursuit of truth.
04 The way demonstrated by these scholars in this example contrasts with the way of the people of innovation and misguidance and the people of ḥizbiyyah, and those with love and loyalty to personalities over and above the truth, of which there are many examples, and we can mention a few below:
05 Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) wrote many refutations against Sayyid Quṭb, refuting him in various arenas, in creed and in methodology, and he took a leading role in that. He was supported by others when they became aware of the truth, such as Shaykh al-Albānī, and these refutations were taken with acceptance. However, it was too much for the people of exaggeration (ghuluww) and love of personalities, and they did not receive it well, they reviled and abused the Shaykh a great deal, and schemed many plots, and this is well known.
There were even shaykhs, held with esteem and respect, who resisted these refutations and cast doubts about them, from them Bakr Abū Zayd and Ibn Jibrīn, and they and their positions were used to attack and undermine Shaykh Rabīʿ.
06 Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī refuted Ibn Jibrīn for his defence of innovators and defence and support of the Ḥarakiyyīn, and he was the only one who stood to perform that task, and he declared him an innovator, too. He too was reviled and spoken against a great deal.
Refer to the series:Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī’s Refutation of Ibn Jibrīn’s Defence of the Ṣūfī Mufawwiḍ Ḥasan al-Bannā: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6.
In fact, Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī was somewhat upset and dismayed that other mashāyikh were evading the truth and found fault with him for what he did:[2]
By Allāh, besides whom there is no other deity, I love the man who defends the religion, protects its boundaries, and refutes those who introduce into it what does not belong to it.
But I do not know why some mashāyikh (scholars), may Allāh guide them, avoid the truth, even though they know it, and criticise those who fulfill any of this duty, labeling them as transgressors, aggressors, and oppressors. Yet, if someone were to speak ill of these same critics, they would raise a huge outcry.
But when the religion is attacked, its rights violated, and its principles are disregarded, the world is at peace and well-being. Is this fairness and giving its due right, or is it disregarding its right, neglecting its principles, and obscuring its signposts?
Shaykh Ibn Jibrīn was a towering figure at the time, and he had been on the Lajnāh al-Dāʾimah (Permanent Committee) for giving verdicts, and his fatāwā were turned to, like those of Shaykh Bin Bāz.
07 Shaykh Rabīʿ refuted Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʾribī for what he described as a “revolution” against the Salafī daʿwah. After some years of advice in private, he refuted him openly. He was supported in that by other scholars and shaykhs, and it was taken with acceptance. Again, he was attacked by the partisans of al-Ma’ribi and even some from Ahl al-Sunnah, who were respected scholars, but who did not fully comprehend the matter. Some of them spoke and authored against Shaykh Rabīʿ and his brothers from the scholars, claiming that what they were doing–[refuting error, falsehood, and deviations in methodology]–was creating fitnah among Ahl al-Sunnah and in the daʿwah. However, this was misplaced and the truth was with those scholars who explained what was with al-Maʾribī of error and deviation in methodology.
Refer to the article: Regarding Abū al-Hasan al-Maʿribī al-Ikhwānī: Why Shaykh Rabīʿ Was Correct and Shaykh ʿ Abd al-Muḥsin al-ʿAbbād Was Wrong. The reality of al-Maʾribī and the truthfulness of Shaykh Rabīʿ became clear when al-Maʾribī revealed his true colours during the “Arab Spring” revolution in Egypt, wherein he supported the aḥzāb and the revolt against the ruler, alongside other affairs, indicating that he did not really venerate the Salafī methodology, despite lip-service to it, and tried to undermine it with false principles.
07 In all of the above examples, from all of these scholars, and their upholding the truth with sincerity, even if it is against their own selves, is an important lesson for Ahl al-Sunnah. So may Allāh reward them all tremendously and increase the ummah with their likes.
08 Ibn al-Qayyim (رحمه الله) said: [3]
Whomever Allāh the Sublime guides to accepting the truth wherever it is and with whomever it lies, even if it is was with one whom he hates and shows enmity, and rejects falsehood with whomever it is (found), even if it is with one whom he loves and shows loyalty to, then he is among those whom Allāh has guided to the truth in that which has been differed over of the truth.
May Allāh make us from those who see beyond love and loyalties, hatreds and enmities and accept the truth wherever it is and with whomever it lies.