Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website http://www.bilalphilips.com/printer_friendly.php?

c=254

www.bilalphilips.com - Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website

Print this page

Reply To Critcs
Written by Dr. Bilal Philips

Indeed all praise is due to Allaah, as such we should praise Him, seek His help and ask His forgiveness. We seek refuge with Allaah from the evils
within ourselves and the evils resulting from our deeds. Whoever Allaah guides, none can misguide and whoever Allaah allows to go astray, none
can guide. I bear witness that there is no God worthy of worship but Allaah alone, without partners, and I bear witness that Muhammad (pbuh) is
His slave and Messenger. To proceed:

I would first like to say that it is not my intention to enter the revolving door of endless responses opened by my brother Aboo Khadeejah with his
nine page public barrage in response to a brief explanatory paragraph which I privately gave to some brothers in Sri Lanka who questioned me
concerning the up coming conferences being held in the USA and the UK geared to exposing me and others. Consequently, I hope that this first
and last response will sufficiently clarify the issues for whoever seeks the truth with regards to the accusations thrown at me by Aboo Khadeejah
and others. As for those who insist on having the last word and spreading fitnah among the ranks of sincere Muslims, disguised under the banner
of Defending the way of the Salaf, I will follow Allaah, the Most Exalted and Glorious’ advice “And if they hear al-laghw (evil, vain, false talk), they
withdraw from it and say, ‘For us are our deeds, and for you are your deeds. Peace be with you. We do not seek the ignorant ones.” (28:55) For it
is evident from the negative tones and words used in the first attack that no matter what I say or how many evidences they receive, it will be of no
avail. While Allaah said, “Do not let your dislike of a people cause you to be unjust. Be just, that is nearer to taqwaa.” (5:8) And I pray that Allaah
makes me worthy of being among those He Himself defends, as He said, “Indeed Allaah defends those who believe.” (22:38) And what is left for
me is, “a Beautiful patience, for Allaah is the (only) One whose help can be sought against that which you proclaim.” (12:18). If students of
knowledge of the stature of Shaykh Abul-Hasan al-Misree al-Maribee can be labeled a hizbee because he opened in Yemen a branch of Dar al-Birr
(the charitable organization in which I also work, and at which Shaykhs ‘Alee Hasan, Saleem, Khaalid al-Ambaree, ‘Abdul-Malik Ramadaanee all
give lectures and classes), who is a simple student like myself to complain.

Secondly, as I see it, there are some elements in our midst who are masquerading as Salafees who really do need to be exposed. However, a vocal
minority among our English-speaking and Arab Salafee brothers with limited knowledge have high jacked this legitimate need and gone overboard
with it. They have taken it upon themselves to act as the ultimate judges of common Muslims and students of knowledge. They claim to have the
criterion by which they can justly expel whoever they please out of the realm of Salafiyyah. Much valuable time is dedicated to slandering those
who have been already labeled, or to searching for the past or present mistakes of those on the current hit-list. Furthermore, if anyone disagrees
with them on any issue, they issue severe warnings to him and if he doesn’t fall in line, they then proceed to warn against him also, and attribute
their actions to the Salafee manhaj, under the name of jarh and ta‘deel. They have made it a hobby to search for ambiguous statements of the
popular du’aat, and then they distort and twist the statements to suit their personal agendas, and publicize them in other than their correct
context. They then label the daa’ee or student of knowledge as being of ahlul bid‘ah wal ahwaa (the people of innovation and desires), and relegate
him to off-theminhaj.com. In addition to that, anyone who knows or affiliates with any of the people crossed off the list also gets the boot and
anyone who knows anyone who knows anyone from those they’ve labeled also gets labeled a deviant. Likewise any Islamic center or Masjid which
hasn’t managed to keep up with the latest list of off-theminhaj.com and inadvertently invites any of those labeled deviant gets branded as well.
Subsequently, anyone who goes to an Islamic center or masjid which has been labeled deviant, also becomes labeled a deviant. And so on and so
forth. It has gotten so bad that recently when a friend of mine was speaking on a mobile phone to the head of Brixton Masjid, I asked that he pass
the phone to me so that I can give him salaams as we were once old friends, and he told the brother not to pass me the phone, refusing to even
accept and return basic salaams from and to me. Furthermore, after a congregational prayer in a masjid in Birmingham a couple of years ago,
some of the brothers saw me in the masjid and quickly left and crossed over to the other side of the road, to avoid giving me salaams or being
seen giving me salaams, which they themselves confessed to Khalid Barry (a British student in Madeenah University who was with me at the time).
And when I mentioned these two incidents to Shaykh ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabee, he stated that such actions are clearly wrong and inappropriate and
should not be done.

In contrast, Allaah describes the believers in His Noble Book as making the following du’aa, “Our Lord, do not place in our hearts hatred toward the
believers.” (59:10) Yet some of our brothers have been doing just the opposite: placing enmity in the hearts of the people against the believers. It
is sad that conferences, which used to be gatherings of learning, imparting beneficial knowledge, spreading the Sunnah, and increasing our
eemaan, have been turned into gatherings of character assassination and maligning scholars, students of knowledge, and du‘aat. So much so that
the hearts of those who attend these conferences have become hardened with hatred toward many students of knowledge, who have dedicated
their lives to spreading the correct ‘aqeedah and Sunnah, and who should in fact be loved for the sake of Allaah. Rather, we should advise one
another and try to guide our brothers if we see them make mistakes or see them straying from the correct manhaj. We should not rejoice nor feel
triumphant when we see our brothers fall or err; so as not be like those whom Allaah describes saying, “If some good comes to you it grieves
them, while if some evil befalls you they rejoice at it.” (3:120) We should give one another the benefit of the doubt: Perhaps he has a shubhah
(doubt or point of confusion) about such and such an issue, perhaps he does not know the proofs regarding such and such an issue, perhaps this
mistake, in his view, was based on what he held to be knowledge, but rather it was statements of scholars taken out of context, etc. Allaah
describes the believers as being harsh to the disbelievers, and merciful with the believers. (48:29) Now, it has been reversed. Some of these
brothers in a recent lecture in the United States went so far as to say about me that I am worse than the Jews and Christians! May Allaah protect
us from that which they ascribe us to. This state of random labeling and boycotting has become among the greatest fitnahs of our time, where
Satan creates fitnah cloaked in an Islaamic garb. He disguised this fitnah under an honorable name, under the name of Truth, under the name of
Salafiyyah. While the noble Salafee manhaj, the only way to attain success, is innocent of such behavior. The path of true guidance, i.e. Salafiyyah,
was never intended to be an exclusive club, in which certain individuals can grant membership and confiscate it from whomsoever they please.
This attitude is similar to the very hizbiyyah (factionalism) which our brothers are trying to fight.

I advise these brothers of ours to spend their time beneficially, learning the basics, studying Arabic, tajweed, the classic works of ‘aqeedah, such
as al-‘Itisaam, al-Usool ath-Thalaathah, Kitaab at-Tawheed, al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah, al-‘Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah, etc. under scholars in the
original Arabic. And, rather than trying to take some quotes here and there from great scholars like Shaykhs Nasirud-Deen al-Albaanee, Bin Baaz,
‘Uthaymeen, and Muqbil, may Allaah have mercy on them all, I recommend that they actually listen to and study their tapes. Al-hamdulillah, there
are many commentaries of Shaykh ‘Uthaymeen on the various books of ‘aqeedah, and tafseers, etc and Silsilat al-Hudaa wan-Noor, the tapes of
Shaykh al-Albaanee, rahimahullaah, are available in the hundreds for them to actually listen to from beginning to end.

Finally, I sincerely advise all my brothers and sisters to remember that we are all going to stand for account before Allaah and answer for every
word we said (or wrote); and we should remember that injustice is a great sin indeed. Let us all (myself included) never forget that the source of
guidance and light is Allaah, the Most Exalted, so we should sincerely pray to Him to guide us to the Truth, and regularly make the du’aa:
allaahumma arinal haqqa haqqan warzuq nattibaa’u wa arinal baatila baatilan warzuq najtinaabuh O Allaah, show as the Truth as truth, and grant
us the blessing of following it, and show as falsehood as falsehood, and grant us the blessing of staying away from it.

We should beg for Allaah’s divine guidance with our hearts free from diseases, such as envy, hatred, fear of not being accepted by people, or a
desire to maintain a good reputation amongst some. I ask Allaah to expose the reality to those who sincerely desire the Truth.

THE FOLLOWING IS A POINT BY POINT RESPONSE TO THE ACTUAL ISSUES RAISED BY ABOO KHADEEJAH IN HIS FIRST NINE-PAGE VOLLEY.

1 of 5 03-07-2010 14:39
Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website http://www.bilalphilips.com/printer_friendly.php?c=254

POINT ONE: As far as Aboo Khadeejah’s statement, “… he has disassociated himself from the Salafi students of knowledge, du’aat and callers in
the West (and in the Khaleej) in favour of the People of Hizbiyyah and Desires,” this is far from the truth. I not only associate with salafees, I
openly attribute myself to Salafiyyah. I have given many lectures entitled, “Salafiyyah”, based on Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaalee’s tape, Limaatha
ikhtarnaa al-Minhaj as-Salafee (Why we chose the Salafee Minhaj). I dedicated a section of my ‘aqeedah intensive course in Dubai to the topic
“Following the Salafee manhaj.” I also taught on various occasions the first three chapters of Shaykh Abdul Malik Ramadaanee al-Jazaa’iree’s book
Sitt Durar fee Usool Ahlil- Athar.

When Shaykhs Ali Hasan, Saleem and Khalid al-Ambaree gave a weeklong series of lectures last Ramadaan, I attended them. And during the last
visit of Shaykhs Ali and Saleem this summer, I spent several hours in private discussion with them. Furthermore, the last visit of Shaykh Husayn
al-‘Awaayshah I spent time with him and he (and his family) had lunch with me (and mine). While Shaykh Mahmoud Atiyyah (one of Sh
Al-Albaanee’s students) was living in the Emirates, I often used to call him on Islamic issues (he was banned from having circles). Furthermore,
since Aboo Abdillaah al-Mawsilee (another of Sh Al-Albaanee’s students) has moved to the Emirates, I have regularly relied on him for answers to
various questions. Likewise, I was in regular contact with Sh Abdullaah Sabt from my arrival here in the Emirates in 1994. As to the du’aat of the
West, I was in contact with Aboo Usaamah, Fareed Abdullaah, Dr Muhammad Jibaly, Yahya Ibrahim, and ‘Abdur Raheem Green (before he was
cancelled from the “list”). Furthermore, I most often gave and continue to give lectures at Masjid Khaalid ibn Waleed in Toronto, known as the
most active and knowledgeable Salafee center whose administration are Madeenah graduates and whose chief administrator is Sh Basheer
as-Somaalee whose minhaj and knowledge of hadeeth was attested to by students of Sh Al Albaanee and others. (But I heard they were recently
dropped off the list because ‘Adnaan ‘Ur‘oor give talks there after he was cancelled off the list.) My close friends are not people of hizbiyyah and I
do try to maintain a distance from people of hizbiyyah in general. When I say I do not make hajr from them, I mean that I do not go as far as to
refuse to give them salaams if I happen to see them, etc.

Furthermore, as to my supposed disassociation from “the Salafee students of knowledge”, there is evidence to the contrary in Aboo Khadeejah’s
statement that I met with the students of Madeenah university. Last year (2000 when I got my first opportunity to make ‘Umrah since leaving
Saudi Arabia), I took it upon myself to visit the students in Madeenah and asked them to express all the doubts and rumors they had regarding my
manhaj. None of these brothers or any brothers in the UK (with the exception of Abu Sufyaan, who pointed out a possible error in my book Islamic
Studies Book 2, which I accepted to ambiguous wording and have instructed the publisher, al-Hidaayah, to change the phrase – wa jazaahullaahu
khayran) ever came and sat with me to point out my errors or clarify rumors. At any rate, I went to see them, due to my concern about the
brotherhood and my desire to strengthen the ranks of those committed to the Salafee manhaj. We sat from after Salaatul-‘Ishaa until Salaatul-Fajr
and discussed many issues. I clarified that statements attributed to me regarding ‘aqeedah as not being important were false, as well as other
issues, such as the widespread false claim that I gave a “fatwaa” to the effect that women in the West can remove their hijaab and go to university
and to work! Not only did I never make such a deviant statement, I never even thought it. I explained, that in a lecture which I gave on the
responsibility of community to new converts, I only mentioned the following scenario: if a woman accepted Islaam and the community didn’t come
to her support and she was forced to go out and work to provide the basic necessities for herself and children, and she thoroughly searched for a
job in which she can keep her hijaab but all her genuine attempts failed, then she removed her scarf to get the only job available, then the
community would carry the sin for not coming to her aid, if they were able, and she would be excused by Allaah, in shaa Allaah. (This is based on
the principle of dire necessity (ad-durooraat) make permissible the impermissible). And a brother who was studying under Usaamah al-Qoosee in
Egypt, called up Shaykh Muqbil, rahimahullaah, himself when he was in the United States receiving medical treatment and presented the above
scenario to him for verification. He asked the shaykh, in such a case, can one say that she is not in sin but the community is, for not coming to her
aid? He responded that yes, this is correct. If you want this information verified from the brother directly, please email me and I will give you his
email address.

As to the statement that their advice was to no avail, it is not that I rejected what they had to say about Muntada or brushed off what they had to
say. I explained that I had given lectures in al-Muntada and other subtly or clearly hizbee organizations believing that this was permissible based
on my understanding that Shaykh Naasir permitted it, as long as one does not accept any conditions they place on him and calls to the Salafee
minhaj. I also pointed out to the brothers that years ago, out of a desire to be just, when I first heard rumors about al-Muntada, I gathered the
du’aat in London and sat with al-Muntada’s administration and raised questions concerning their manhaj. They affirmed the salafee manhaj and
that they did not support any call to rebellion against Muslim rulers or declaring them apostates, etc. The point which remained was their sale of
the magazine as-Sunnah in their establishment, even though they claimed to distance themselves from the outlandish statements of Muhammad
Suroor. When they were advised not to, they agreed to stop selling the magazine there. So at that time, the rumors appeared to me to be false,
and I preferred to give them the benefit of the doubt. So I did not speak there with the intention to support any deviant ideas. However, the
brothers insisted that these elements and others were present in al-Muntada and that if I addressed them directly, they wouldn’t allow me to
lecture there anymore. So I even suggested to them to make a list of all the issues, and promised that the next lecture I gave there, I would
address each and every issue. Some of the brothers accepted that, while others didn’t. At that point, I said that I would continue to lecture there
until clear evidence comes to me of their deviance at which time, I would cease lecturing there altogether. And Shaykh ‘Alee Hasan told me
directly that the fact that I didn’t accept the advice on Muntada right away in the past out of a desire to not go on rumors is justified, as I had a
right to look into the issues myself since I was a daa’ee and student of knowledge, so that if I am asked about them I would be able to explain
from a position of knowledge and not rumor. However, since then (last summer), when Shaykh ‘Alee and Shaykh Saleem advised me to stop going
there, I agreed based on some explanations Shaykh ‘Alee provided me as to their hidden nature and largely based on what I know of Shaykh ‘Alee
and his just methodology in dealing with such issues, may Allaah preserve and reward him, as well as his restraint from passing judgments based
on mere rumor or conjecture. So when it came from a person of knowledge, whom I trust, I accepted it without any problem, as I would not want
to aid them in an erroneous manhaj nor do I want my lectures there to be used as an excuse for people to accept the mistakes in their manhaj.

POINT TWO: As regards my, as Aboo Khadeejah put it, “open declaration of alliance and affiliation with JIMAS and al-Muntada either through
speech or action or both” which he has demanded that I make an open retraction of and an open declaration of my freedom (baraa’a) from them. I
don’t believe that I openly declared alliance and affiliation with them through lecturing among them any more than lecturing in universities
indicate my allegiance to the various Muslim student organizations there. I do not support any bid’ahs and misconceptions which they have. I do
openly declare my freedom from any errors in their manhaj, both those I am aware of and those I am not, whether apparent or hidden, as I declare
my freedom from the manhaj of groups like Jamaati Islaami, the Ikhwaan, Hizb at-Tahreer, Jamaa’at Tableegh, etc. whose errors are definitely not
as hidden. And as I stated, I already agreed and made a commitment that I would not speak there, as a method of distancing myself from
elements of hizbiyyah and showing my disapproval of anything other than the clear salafee manhaj; and I think that this speaks for itself. I further
decided, on my own will, that I would have myself removed from the academic board of London Open College, due to certain surooree elements I
myself smelled from some of its people.

POINT THREE: As to Aboo Khadeejah’s baseless statement, “… So how will he speak against ‘their bid’ah and errors’ if he himself is unaware of the
bid’ah and errors? You cannot give what you don’t have – verily ships do not sail upon dry land!” I have indeed written and spoken on numerous
occasions about the deviation of hizbiyyah and innovations of modern Islamic movements and groups. For example, the following is a quote from
my book “The Moral Foundations of Islamic Civilization” currently being studied by students in my Islamic Online University course ISE 101A and
taught in a number of intensive courses given in Ireland, Montreal and the UK as well as at the American University in Dubai.

Movements

In the beginning of the twentieth century movements and groups arose calling to the return of Islamic rule in Muslim lands and to the reformation
of Muslim beliefs and practices. Among the political movements were those of Hasan al-Bannaa (d. 1949), founder of the Ikhwaan Muslimoon
movement in Egypt and Sayyid, Abul-A’laa Mawdudi (1903-1979), founder of the Jama‘at Islami movement in India. Both of these movements
called for the establishment of an Islamic state to replace the existing colonial or neo-colonial administrations. Consequently, they both came into
conflict with the rulers of their areas. One of the members of the Ikhwaan, Jamaal ‘Abdun-Naasir, seized control of the government and
systematically rounded up members of the movement and tortured and executed many of them in order to crush it. The Ikhwaan was then forced
underground, and became a secret society which developed a structure similar to communist cells in order to continue to operate. Oaths of

2 of 5 03-07-2010 14:39
Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website http://www.bilalphilips.com/printer_friendly.php?c=254

allegiance were required of all members and the call for Islamic State evolved into a recruitment drive for members. Many of them entered a
dangerous realm, declaring the Muslim rulers disbelievers, due to the fact that they did not rule according to what Allaah revealed, and many
others even called for revolt against the rulers, an action strictly prohibited by the Prophet (s). They neglected the rectification of issues of
‘aqeedah and others, deserving first priority, and made their focus the establishment of an Islaamic state. Very little efforts were made to correct
beliefs and practices as collecting members became the chief priority. Controversial issues of beliefs and practices were seen as divisive and, as
such, were deliberately avoided. Their members who fled to the West to avoid persecution and further their academic studies set up student
organizations like F.O.S.I.S. and M.S.A. and I.S.N.A. through which members continued to be recruited.

As to the statement that their advice was to no avail, it is not that I rejected what they had to say about Muntada or brushed off what they had to
say. I explained that I had given lectures in al-Muntada and other subtly or clearly hizbee organizations believing that this was permissible based
on my understanding that Shaykh Naasir permitted it, as long as one does not accept any conditions they place on him and calls to the Salafee
minhaj. I also pointed out to the brothers that years ago, out of a desire to be just, when I first heard rumors about al-Muntada, I gathered the
du’aat in London and sat with al-Muntada’s administration and raised questions concerning their manhaj. They affirmed the salafee manhaj and
that they did not support any call to rebellion against Muslim rulers or declaring them apostates, etc. The point which remained was their sale of
the magazine as-Sunnah in their establishment, even though they claimed to distance themselves from the outlandish statements of Muhammad
Suroor. When they were advised not to, they agreed to stop selling the magazine there. So at that time, the rumors appeared to me to be false,
and I preferred to give them the benefit of the doubt. So I did not speak there with the intention to support any deviant ideas. However, the
brothers insisted that these elements and others were present in al-Muntada and that if I addressed them directly, they wouldn’t allow me to
lecture there anymore. So I even suggested to them to make a list of all the issues, and promised that the next lecture I gave there, I would
address each and every issue. Some of the brothers accepted that, while others didn’t. At that point, I said that I would continue to lecture there
until clear evidence comes to me of their deviance at which time, I would cease lecturing there altogether. And Shaykh ‘Alee Hasan told me
directly that the fact that I didn’t accept the advice on Muntada right away in the past out of a desire to not go on rumors is justified, as I had a
right to look into the issues myself since I was a daa’ee and student of knowledge, so that if I am asked about them I would be able to explain
from a position of knowledge and not rumor. However, since then (last summer), when Shaykh ‘Alee and Shaykh Saleem advised me to stop going
there, I agreed based on some explanations Shaykh ‘Alee provided me as to their hidden nature and largely based on what I know of Shaykh ‘Alee
and his just methodology in dealing with such issues, may Allaah preserve and reward him, as well as his restraint from passing judgments based
on mere rumor or conjecture. So when it came from a person of knowledge, whom I trust, I accepted it without any problem, as I would not want
to aid them in an erroneous manhaj nor do I want my lectures there to be used as an excuse for people to accept the mistakes in their manhaj.

POINT TWO: As regards my, as Aboo Khadeejah put it, “open declaration of alliance and affiliation with JIMAS and al-Muntada either through
speech or action or both” which he has demanded that I make an open retraction of and an open declaration of my freedom (baraa’a) from them. I
don’t believe that I openly declared alliance and affiliation with them through lecturing among them any more than lecturing in universities
indicate my allegiance to the various Muslim student organizations there. I do not support any bid’ahs and misconceptions which they have. I do
openly declare my freedom from any errors in their manhaj, both those I am aware of and those I am not, whether apparent or hidden, as I declare
my freedom from the manhaj of groups like Jamaati Islaami, the Ikhwaan, Hizb at-Tahreer, Jamaa’at Tableegh, etc. whose errors are definitely not
as hidden. And as I stated, I already agreed and made a commitment that I would not speak there, as a method of distancing myself from
elements of hizbiyyah and showing my disapproval of anything other than the clear salafee manhaj; and I think that this speaks for itself. I further
decided, on my own will, that I would have myself removed from the academic board of London Open College, due to certain surooree elements I
myself smelled from some of its people.

POINT THREE: As to Aboo Khadeejah’s baseless statement, “… So how will he speak against ‘their bid’ah and errors’ if he himself is unaware of the
bid’ah and errors? You cannot give what you don’t have – verily ships do not sail upon dry land!” I have indeed written and spoken on numerous
occasions about the deviation of hizbiyyah and innovations of modern Islamic movements and groups. For example, the following is a quote from
my book “The Moral Foundations of Islamic Civilization” currently being studied by students in my Islamic Online University course ISE 101A and
taught in a number of intensive courses given in Ireland, Montreal and the UK as well as at the American University in Dubai.

Movements

In the beginning of the twentieth century movements and groups arose calling to the return of Islamic rule in Muslim lands and to the reformation
of Muslim beliefs and practices. Among the political movements were those of Hasan al-Bannaa (d. 1949), founder of the Ikhwaan Muslimoon
movement in Egypt and Sayyid, Abul-A’laa Mawdudi (1903-1979), founder of the Jama‘at Islami movement in India. Both of these movements
called for the establishment of an Islamic state to replace the existing colonial or neo-colonial administrations. Consequently, they both came into
conflict with the rulers of their areas. One of the members of the Ikhwaan, Jamaal ‘Abdun-Naasir, seized control of the government and
systematically rounded up members of the movement and tortured and executed many of them in order to crush it. The Ikhwaan was then forced
underground, and became a secret society which developed a structure similar to communist cells in order to continue to operate. Oaths of
allegiance were required of all members and the call for Islamic State evolved into a recruitment drive for members. Many of them entered a
dangerous realm, declaring the Muslim rulers disbelievers, due to the fact that they did not rule according to what Allaah revealed, and many
others even called for revolt against the rulers, an action strictly prohibited by the Prophet (s). They neglected the rectification of issues of
‘aqeedah and others, deserving first priority, and made their focus the establishment of an Islaamic state. Very little efforts were made to correct
beliefs and practices as collecting members became the chief priority. Controversial issues of beliefs and practices were seen as divisive and, as
such, were deliberately avoided. Their members who fled to the West to avoid persecution and further their academic studies set up student
organizations like F.O.S.I.S. and M.S.A. and I.S.N.A. through which members continued to be recruited.
Another movement arose in India during this period which prided itself in being totally apolitical. Maulana Muhammad Ilyas founded what came to
be known as the Tabligh Movement. Its main focus was on bringing Muslims back to the mosques which had become empty over the years of
Colonial rule. In order to appeal to the general masses, its founder combined the practices of the major sufi sects of the continent in its inner
teachings. Travel to different locations to invite Muslims was added to its outer practices. However, those traveling to give the “da’wah” are mostly
ignorant people, while the Prophet (s) used to send out scholars to teach the people and call them to Islaam. And when he sent them, he did not
instruct them to spend a few days, weeks, or months in a masjid, nor did he instruct them to call people to come to the masjid then invite them to
go out and give da’wah with the group. Rather, he instructed that they live among the people until they learned their religion, and ordered them to
call to the correct ‘aqeedah first and foremost. And they were not to call to anything else until the people understood laa ilaaha illallaah, as is
evident in the hadeeth of his sending Mu‘aath ibn Jabal as well as others. And the Tabligh’s fixed numbers of days and months to travel have no
basis in the Sunnah or the practice of the Sahaabah. Yet its apolitical stance has enabled it to spread to all corners of the Muslim world without
resistance from Muslim or non-Muslim governments. However, very little effort is made to correct the beliefs and practices of its members and its
main text, Tablighi Nisab, is filled with inauthentic material. The tradition of Taqleed remained alive in all of these movements as avoiding it
facilitated recruitment of followers.

Parallel to the previously mentioned movements, another set of movements evolved from the tradition of the earlier reformers who opposed
Taqleed and called to a return to the Qur’aan and Sunnah as they were understood by the Prophet’s companions and the early generations of
righteous scholars. These groups are generally referred to as the Salafee movements. In Egypt the Ansaar us-Sunnah movement was founded by
Shaykh Haamid al-Fiqhee, ‘Abdur-Rahmaan al-Wakeel and ‘Abdur-Razzaaq Hamzah and in India the Ahli Hadith movement was formally
established by Shaykh Thanaa’ullaah al-Amritsaree. (Although in time the latter too developed hizbee elements). The Salafee groups focused on
the correction of Muslim beliefs and practices as a prerequisite for change. They opposed the factionalist attitudes which developed in the political
movements as well as a negative attitude towards knowledge and innovated practices which had developed in the Tabligh movement. In the
second half of the twentieth century the great Hadeeth scholar of our era, Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee, picked up the banner of Islamic Revival in
Syria as did Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen in Saudi Arabia, completely free from any form of hizbiyyah. In Yemen, one of Shaykh
Naasirud-Deen’s students, Shaykh Muqbil ibn Haadee continued the call to reform of beliefs and practices.

3 of 5 03-07-2010 14:39
Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website http://www.bilalphilips.com/printer_friendly.php?c=254

The ugly head of Hizbiyyah (factionalism), which had plagued Muslims through the misinterpretation of the math’habs, again reared its head in the
political and apolitical movements of the twentieth century. These groups shared the common characteristic of fundamentally calling people to
‘their’ organization and to avoid others. The have ameers to whom the followers pledge oaths of allegiance which should only be given to the true
leader of all Muslims. They all contain bits and pieces of what Muslims need, however, they are lacking the most fundamental component which is
‘Aqeedah (correct beliefs). Muslims do need to revive Islamic government and the caliphate and they do need to get Muslims back to the mosques.
But the focus must be on ‘aqeedah, first and foremost. Gathering for the sake of overthrowing foreign rule in Algeria in the Fifties did not bring
Islamic rule into place because the communist elements among the Muslim forces hijacked the ‘revolution’. In Afghanistan Muslim groups came
together to combat the threat of communism, but after Russian forces were expelled and the communist regime overthrown, the Muslim groups
turned on each other. In Egypt the Ikhwaan have tried to resurface under a political cover, patiently trying to work its way in through the political
process. However, the next generation of youths, due to their lack of knowledge and upbringing were no longer prepared to wait. As far as they
were concerned, the Islamic revival was taking place in Iran, the Islaamic state was being established now. Many from the Ikhwaan gave oaths of
allegiance to Khomeini as the caliph. New offshoots from the Ikhwaan appeared under the names of Takfeer wal-Hijrah, Jamaa’atul-Jihaad, and
al-Jamaa’ah al-Islaamiyyah with members prepared to seize power immediately. In these groups a philosophy of violence evolved which was
justified by declaring all Muslim rulers to be disbelievers as well as all those who worked in state institutions… These failures are a result of their
lack of focus on ‘aqeedah and their adopting a methodology which contradicts that of the Prophet (s) and his companions.

The Solution

The only solution to the current dilemma facing Muslims is to return to the true roots of Islamic civilization and culture. The way lies in
rediscovering the correct sources of Islamic knowledge and the correct methodology of interpreting it. There is no other way. As Imaam Maalik
said, “The latter part of this nation will not be able to reform itself successfully except by using what reformed its early part.” Prophet Muhammad
(r) informed his followers that the Muslim nation would split up into 73 different sects, 72 of which lead to hell and only one leading to paradise.
Then he clarified that the path to paradise was the path he was on and his companions were on. That is what is known as the way of the Salaf…”

POINT FOUR: I have been accused of getting my Islaamic “tarbiyah” from the likes of Muhammad Qutub and Maududi, and that I encourage people
on my website to read specific books of his! Subhaanallaah, how things can be distorted to fit the desires! I mentioned in an interview on how I
accepted Islaam, twenty-eight years ago, that before I was Muslim I was involved in the university Communist movement. Then I read a book by
Muhammad Qutb and another by Maududi, which heightened my interest about Islaam (as a NON MUSLIM). Does this mean I received my Islamic
tarbiyah from them, or that I aid their minhaj and mistakes? This is indeed tahreef (distortion).

And for the record, I do not consider Maududi and Muhammad Qutb to be true scholars. I put the word scholars in quotes to stress this point.
Though they are not scholars to be relied on for knowledge, as the scholars are alhamdulillaah available, many laymen consider them such.

I do agree, based on my discussion with Shaykh Ali Hasan, that upon mentioning Muhammad Qutb’s name, or anyone else’s with an incorrect
manhaj, that I should make a brief note pointing to his mistaken methodology. He also said that after making such a note and laying the
foundation regarding him or others, that I need not do this every single time his name is mentioned in passing. So I will inshaa’Allaah make a
footnote with this regard in the interview as to how I accepted Islaam on my web page. As to whether or not I am justified to say that I can
recommend Muhammad Qutb’s book for non-Muslims coming from a political background, I will firstly go back over the book to make sure it in fact
doesn’t have any major mistakes (as I read it twenty-nine years ago), and IF it doesn’t, I will ask Shaykh ‘Ali his view on my statement, then I will
act according to his judgment inshaa’Allaah. If it does have any major mistakes, then I take back that statement.

Anyhow, as I mentioned previously, I studied in the University of Madeenah, and I used to sit in the circles of Shaykh al-Albaanee, Shaykh Bin
Baaz, Sh Abdul Muhsin al Abbaad, Sh Ghunaymaan, Sh Muqbil, Sh Umar al Fulaataa and others, whose circles I attended during the six years that
I studied there. I personally went to Shaykh Muqbil’s house and asked him to teach me takhreej (authentication of hadeeths), which he did,
alhamdulillaah. Furthermore, I currently have over 500 tapes of Shaykh al-Albaanee, from which I’ve listened to nearly 200, and am still listening
(daily), not to mention over 200 of his earlier tapes which I listened to in Saudi Arabia prior to emigrating to the Emirates. He is amongst my
greatest role models, and Allaah knows I love him and his minhaj. He was indeed a great man.

POINT FIVE: I have been accused of taking isolated statements of Shaykh al-Albaanee, rahimahullaah, to suit my desires. The statement of
Shaykh al-Albaanee to avoid practicing hajr (abandonment) of people of innovation, or those who fall into innovations, is not just on one tape, but
several. And not once did I hear him speak about hajr any differently. Aboo Khadeejah responded by saying that Shaykh al-Albaanee encouraged
people to expose the people who have fallen into innovation, and praised works in which their innovations were exposed. I did not say otherwise. I
was not speaking about exposing innovations of innovators, nor of distancing ourselves from them, but of abandoning them, etc., and these are
two different issues. So let us not confuse the issues for the people and let the readers judge for themselves the statements of Shaykh
al-Albaanee, which, to my knowledge, he has not retracted or changed. The translation of the entire tape is available here. I encourage the readers
to read the entire discussion of the Shaykh. The following is the context in which Shaykh Al Albaanee clearly spoke against the practice of hajr in
our times.

“If we find in some of the statements of the scholars of the salaf rulings stating that one who falls into an innovation is in fact an innovator, it
should be taken from the point of view that it is a statement of warning and not a statement of belief. Perhaps it is also suitable to mention on this
occasion the well-known statement of Imaam Maalik: “The setting above is known, and how it is so is unknown, and asking about it is a form of
innovation. So expel this man, for he is an innovator.” This famous narration took place in an occasion when a man came to Imaam Maalik and
asked him about the rising above the throne, as regards to Allaah. Imaam Maalik responded, “The setting above is known, and how it is so is
unknown, and asking about it is a form of innovation. So expel this man, for he is an innovator.” He did not become an innovator for merely asking
about it; the man wanted to understand something. But Imaam Maalik feared that while questioning, he may make some statements which are
against the belief of the salaf. So he told them to remove the man from the sitting. “Remove the man, for he is an innovator.” Look now how the
means have differed. What do you think: if I or any other person of knowledge were asked the same thing by either the generality of Muslims or by
specific groups amongst them who have more knowledge, do you think we should give the answer which Imaam Maalik gave? Would we tell the
people to get him out of our gathering because he is an innovator? NO. WHY? BECAUSE THE TIMES ARE DIFFERENT. SO THE METHODS WHICH
WERE USED IN THOSE TIMES WERE ACCEPTABLE THEN, BUT ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE TODAY BECAUSE THEY WILL HARM MORE THAN THEY WILL
BENEFIT. AND WE CAN ADD TO THIS THE PRINCIPLE OF HAJR (BOYCOTTING), WHICH IS KNOWN IN ISLAAM. We are often asked, “So-and-so- a
friend- doesn’t pray, he smokes, and he does this and that. Should we boycott him?” I say, “No, you should not boycott him because boycotting
him is what he would like for you to do. Your boycotting him would not benefit him. In fact, it is the opposite, it would make him happy. And it
would allow him to continue in his misguidance.” Not to mention, on this occasion, a Shaamee saying relative to a man who is corrupt and has
abandoned prayer. This man repented and went to pray his first prayer in the masjid only to find the door of the masjid locked. His response to this
was, “You’re closed, so I’ll drop the prayer.” That corrupt individual who has abandoned prayer, does he want the practicing Muslim to boycott him?
This is just like the example- “You’re closed so I won’t bother to pray.” The [boycotted] man would similarly say, “I do not need his
companionship; I do not want to be with him anyway.” This is because the companionship of the righteous with the corrupt prevents the latter
from being free to do whatever he wants to do. The corrupt individual does not really want that. Thus, the boycotting of the un-righteous by the
righteous is what the un-righteous prefers. Consequently, the Islaamically legal boycott is intended to fulfill a legal benefit, which is to teach that
individual. So if the boycott in no way teaches him a lesson, but in fact, it increases him in misguidance on top of his already misguided state, in
such a circumstance, boycotting is not applicable or appropriate. CONSEQUENTLY, TODAY IT IS NOT SUITABLE TO IMITATE THE METHODS USED BY
THE EARLY SCHOLARS BECAUSE THEY DID SO FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH AND THE ABILITY TO PREVENT. Today look at the how the
situation of Muslims is. They are weak in everything. Not only in the governments, but the individuals as well. The situation is as the Prophet
(pbuh) described it when he said: “Islaam began as something strange and it will return again to become something strange, so give glad tidings
to the Strangers.” He was asked, “Who are they, O Messenger of Allaah?” He responded, “They are people who believed, a few righteous individuals
amongst many people; those who disobey them are many more than those who obey them.” SO IF WE OPEN THE DOOR OF BOYCOTTING AND
DECLARING PEOPLE INNOVATORS, WE MAY AS WELL GO AND LIVE IN THE MOUNTAINS. WHAT IS OBLIGATORY ON US TODAY IS TO CALL TO THE

4 of 5 03-07-2010 14:39
Dr.Bilal Philips' Official website http://www.bilalphilips.com/printer_friendly.php?c=254

WAY OF OUR LORD WITH WISE PREACHING AND A GOOD EXPRESSION AND DISCUSS WITH THEM WITH THAT WHICH IS BETTER.”

5 of 5 03-07-2010 14:39