Shaykh ʿUbayd al-Jābirī: The Exposition of the Deceivers Who Hide Behind Salafiyyah
Shaykh ʿUbayd al-Jābirī (رحمه الله) said:[1]
NO ONE EVER concealed himself behind the Sunnah and deceived people until (the people) gathered around him, became attached to him and ended up depending upon him and accepting everything that comes from him without Allāh (سبحانه وتعالى) exposing him, uncovering his veil and revealing to the elite and common folk what he used hide and conceal of deception, misrepresentation, cunning and trickery.
Allāh prepares virtuous, intelligent, wise, strong insightful men who possess knowledge, perspicacity and comprehension in religion through whom Allāh uncovers the veil of that cunning, deceitful and fraudulent man. So when the condition of that man whose fame has spread far into the horizons, has become highly regarded and pointed towards, then you must beware of him, so long as the people of knowledge and faith, and those who are upon the Sunnah have warned from him. For they will reveal (the matter) to you with evidence.
There is no harm in investigating the condition of that man whom a scholar or scholars have warned against with etiquette and good manners. That scholar will tell you: “I saw such-and-such in him, and in that book such-and-such, and in that cassette such-and-such.” And they are clear evidences that uncover for you what that man used to hide, and (uncover for you what) that man whose fame has spread far into the horizons and whose words have become relished would hide of innovations and deceit that he would not display of the Sunnah.
Notes
Every now and then, there appear claimants who hide behind Salafiyyah, using it as a veil for their true and real agendas and activities, until they acquire large followings, and they think they see their objective in sight, until they are exposed in broad daylight through what they had been concealing. Often, they have political goals and agendas which are their real purpose or for which they mould Salafiyyah, to align with those goals. The Shaykh (رحمه الله) mentioned the requirement of clear evidences, which means that the disparagement and warning has to be based on clear, indisputable evidences, and that whoever brings that, it is to be accepted from him, and there is no harm in requesting these evidences for the one who wishes to investigate the matter for satisfaction.
From the most prominent examples of this is Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʾribī, who was a former Ikhwānī who penetrated the space of scholarship and daʿwah, gained fame and repute while the great scholars of the era were alive—Shaykh al-Albānī, Shaykh Bin Bāz and Shaykh Ibn al-ʿUthaymīn—and when they passed away, he openly came out with this revolution against Salafiyyah, hoping he could infuse his false principles into it and nurture the youth upon them.
However, he was subsequently exposed by a group of the scholars, at the head of them Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله).
From his crimes were: trying to implant taḥazzub (partisanship), restricting the affairs of Salafī daʿwah to particular shaykhs in certain lands, praising and defending innovators and inventing principles to that end, casting doubt about the role of sound reports of trustworthy individuals (or denying their role) in order to prevent legitimate and warranted judgements being made through them, and trying to foster unhealthy sympathy for the misguided, such as the Takfīrīs, in order to soften stances towards them.
Al-Maʾribī resented and resisted the verdicts of the scholars against Muḥammad al-Maghrāwī for example, who was declared astray for his language of generalised takfīr of the ummah and other affairs. Thus, he invented principles intended to undermine these refutations and to place barriers in front of their acceptance. From them was his principle of “tathabbut” (verification). One of the greatest giveaway for deviation (inḥirāf) is when principles are devised in order to reject correct reports on the basis of which valid judgements are made against individuals.
There were some scholars who differed with Shaykh Rabīʿ, Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī, Shaykh ʿUbayd and others in their warning from this man, however, these scholars had all the evidences which were obligatory to accept. They were proven right years after, when al-Maʾribī came out supporting the revolution in Egypt against the legitimate ruler.
Note: Some senior scholars even criticised Shaykh Rabīʿ, Shaykh ʿUbayd and Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī, when they stood against this evil and refuted it, from them Shaykh ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-ʿAbbād, but he was mistaken in that, and though his advice regarding the necessity of gentleness between Ahl al-Sunnah was correct in and of itself, it was wrongly applied to the situation. Just because other scholars may raise objections and disregard what the disparaging scholars bring, it does not mean that their objections have merit, unless they actually address the evidences in substance and show that they are not valid.
There is a general rule mentioned, which is that whenever you see taḥazzub (partisanship) being nurtured, you can be safe in assuming that somewhere along the line, there is a connection to matters of wealth and politics.
These are tell-tale warning signs:
01 Devising a restricted or exclusive marjiʿiyyah (reference-point) around particular shaykhs for the solving of the problems of the world in daʿwah and other affairs, along with exaggerations of their statuses (without this implying that those shaykhs actually agree with them in this and approve of it).
02 Inventing false principles to shield innovators from the valid criticisms from senior scholars, and from them is undermining the role of reliable reports in forming judgements.
03 Supporting political movements, their leaders or their sympathizers in word or deed, and attempting to deceive or mislead scholars for that end, by concealing information from them or burying their fatāwā that oppose their goals and ambitions. This resembles what the Quṭbiyyah, Surūriyyah used to do in 1990s.
04 Reviling Ahl al-Sunnah, in particular, those who are foremost in exposing their deviations, and belittling them and accusing them of backbiting scholars and the likes. This is to confuse their followers and onlookers, to provoke their emotions, so that they do not consider the evidences.
05 Lying, deception and scheming of various sorts. This immediately gives the game away.
...and others.
Prior events which served as opportunities for those with ambitions of sorts to come out into the open with their call include the Gulf War of 1990, which precipitated the Quṭbiyyah and Surūriyyah, the passing of the great scholars at the end of the same decade, which precipitated the revolution of Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʾribī ot infuse Ikhwāniyyah into Salafiyyah, and the Arab Spring uprisings after 2010 which exposed many false claimaints to Salafiyyah.
Arabic text:
Footnotes
1. From the cassette lecture: Ḍawābit al-Taʿāmul Maʿa Ahl al-Sunnah wa Ahl al-Bāṭil, Question No. 14.