Wednesday, 27 December 2017

Nouman Ali Khan product of the Wahhabiyyah insults Holy Prophet(s)






Noman



Quote:
Nouman is the founder and CEO of Bayyinah, as well as the lead instructor for a number of Bayyinah courses including the ‘Fundamentals of Classical Arabic’ and ‘Divine Speech’. His first exposure to Arabic study was in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia where he completed his elementary education. He continued Arabic grammar study in Pakistan, where he received a scholarship for ranking among the top 10 scores in the national Arabic studies board examinations in 1993. 
But his serious training in Arabic began in the United States in 1999 under Dr. Abdus-Samie, founder and formal principal of Quran College, Faisalabad, Pakistan who happened to be touring the US for intensive lectures in Tafsir and Arabic studies. 



Under Dr. Abdus-Samie, Nouman developed a keen methodical understanding of Arabic grammar. He further benefited from Dr. Abdus-Samie by internalizing his unique teaching methods and later translating his work into English for the benefit of his own students. Nouman served as professor of Arabic at Nassau Community College until ’06 and has taught Modern Standard and Classical Arabic at various venues for nearly 7 years with over 10,000 students nationwide.



Currently he has dedicated himself to a seven-year-long project, of conducting a linguistic & literary focus Qur’anic Tafseer series in English...  Here




He claims
that until Gibril alayhi's salam came to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam with wahy, he was not a Muslim and he BECAME a Muslim first.

Watch at 22:30 

Bayyinah Institute-Published on 29 Mar 2015
545,550 views  (what are these viewers listening to?)

Nouman Ali Khan has committed kufr by insulting RasulAllah صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم and saying:

RasulAllah صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم had to become a Muslim at the age of 40. He had to convert. Meaning, he wasn't a Muslim before this. (more info Here )

--
@21:25, he says:

i want you to imagine the situation. Allah is telling this aayah, to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam directly. ok. bila Hijab. he is telling him directly. and the thing he tells him is, that the Rasul SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam...

see..if you are talking to someone...if i talk to you...if you are, for example a professor, I say: 'you are sitting here'. I don't say: 'the professor is sitting here'. because if i am talking to you, i use the second person; i don't use the third person.

But Allah is talking to the Messenger alayhi's salatu wa's salam. what does He say: 'Aaman al-Rasul'...laa, lam yaqul (no, He did not say)...aamanta. yukhatibuhu mubasharatan, a laysa kadhalik...(He is addressing him, is it not so?). he is talking to him directly. He didn't say: 'you believed', he said: 'the messenger believed'. SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. wa hadha takriman li'n nabiyy alayhi's salatu wa's salam. even in his presence He speaks in the third person to honour him. alayhi's salatu wa's salam.

the messenger is not just any messenger. the messenger believed.


@22:28 says:


and Allah is letting him know, that when Gibril first came. alayhis salam. when Gibril first cameeven the messenger, had to accept islam. 

like you know we say somebody converted to islam? 
somebody reverted to islam?  
somebody took shahadah? 

well the messenger alayhis salatu was salam also had to...in a sense...become muslim. when the angel came. and that moment was a big moment. when the angel came he has no idea what is going on. he has no clue, what this is yet. when he is being shaken and when he is told iqra'a 'read, read' he has no idea (nouman snickers here) what is going on.

ma ana bi qariy. this is an incredible scene.


======

This is sarih kufr. because nouman is clearly saying that RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was not muslim before this.  al-iyadhu billah.

and if you would have any doubt, notice that he clarifies in THREE clauses: that it was the same as: CONVERTED, REVERTED, TOOK SHAHADAH. that is when a kafir becomes a muslim.

Astaghfirullahi'l Azeem.
--

Noman


The Insulter of RasulAllah صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم

Nouman Ali Khan misused the ayah of the Qur'an in order to show his Wahhabi/Ahlehadith/Deobandi/tablighi aqidah

Aayat of Surat Shuura - explained v52
 Page1 Here and Page2 Here
--
Bhopali's shaykh, ali al-shawkani said in his fat'H al-qadir:
"i.e. you did not know how to call people towards iman" scan
--
fat'h al-bayan of Siddiq hasan khan bhopali qinnauji
ibn khuzaymah said that "iman" here means 'prayer'. not faith per se. Here: scan
--


“ Inspiration”





and 

“ The Inspiration”

 

Dr Abdus-Samie:  Facebook

--





=====
but this is not serious. if he is serious:

1. he should categorically repent from disrespectful statement to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in that video.
2. renew his faith and publicly say that he has renewed it (and nikah; which is his own responsibility, we will assume he does it)
3. edit the video and remove the offensive segment and publicly put out a statement to not share that segment/ video that contains that segment.
=====

we will keep our word of withdrawing our protest. in sha'Allah.

---



---
^ some deobandi apologist for nouman apparently used tafsir tabari to explain nouman's blasphemy and hinged on the 'in a sense' that nouman inserted.
smarty, what about the "converted, reverted, took shahadah" comparison?

and thereafter the rest of the derisive piece - he calls 'tafseer'.
shame on scoundrels who have no adab when talking about RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
----
Tafsir al-Jalalayn:
﴿ما كنت تدري﴾ تعرف قبل الوحي إليك ﴿ما الكتاب﴾ القرآن ﴿ولا الإيمان﴾ أي شرائعه ومعالمه
“And you did not know” i.e. you did were not aware before revelation to you “what the Book was” i.e. the Quran “and what Imaan was” i.e. the laws and the symbols of Imaan
--
Tafsir ibn Kathir:
مَا كُنْتَ تَدْرِي مَا الْكِتَابُ وَلا الإيمَانُ﴾ أَيْ: عَلَى التَّفْصِيلِ الَّذِي شُرِعَ لَكَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ،
and you did not know what the Book and what Imaan was” i.e. the details which were legislated for you in the Qur`an
--
Moving on to the more detailed and voluminous commentaries 
al-Tafsir ul-Kabir:
ثُمَّ قالَ تَعالى: ﴿ما كُنْتَ تَدْرِي ما الكِتابُ ولا الإيمانُ﴾ واخْتَلَفَ العُلَماءُ في هَذِهِ الآيَةِ مَعَ الإجْماعِ عَلى أنَّهُ لا يَجُوزُ أنْ يُقالَ: الرُّسُلُ كانُوا قَبْلَ الوَحْيِ عَلى الكُفْرِ، وذَكَرُوا في الجَوابِ وُجُوهًا:
الأوَّلُ: ﴿ما كُنْتَ تَدْرِي ما الكِتابُ﴾ أيِ القُرْآنُ (ولا الإيمانُ) أيِ الصَّلاةُ، لِقَوْلِهِ تَعالى: ﴿وما كانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إيمانَكُمْ﴾ [البَقَرَةِ: ١٤٣ ] أيْ صَلاتَكم.
الثّانِي: أنْ يُحْمَلَ هَذا عَلى حَذْفِ المُضافِ، أيْ ﴿ما كُنْتَ تَدْرِي ما الكِتابُ﴾ ومَن أهْلُ الإيمانِ، يَعْنِي مَنِ الَّذِي يُؤْمِنُ، ومَنِ الَّذِي لا يُؤْمِنُ.
الثّالِثُ: ﴿ما كُنْتَ تَدْرِي ما الكِتابُ ولا الإيمانُ﴾ حِينَ كُنْتَ طِفْلًا في المَهْدِ.
الرّابِعُ: (الإيمانُ) عِبارَةٌ عَنِ الإقْرارِ بِجَمِيعِ ما كَلَّفَ اللَّهُ تَعالى بِهِ، وإنَّهُ [] قَبْلَ النُّبُوَّةِ ما كانَ عارِفًا بِجَمِيعِ تَكالِيفِ اللَّهِ تَعالى، بَلْ إنَّهُ كانَ عارِفًا بِاللَّهِ تَعالى، وذَلِكَ لا يُنافِي ما ذَكَرْناهُ.
الخامِسُ: صِفاتُ اللَّهِ تَعالى عَلى قِسْمَيْنِ:
مِنها ما يُمْكِنُ مَعْرِفَتُهُ بِمَحْضِ دَلائِلِ العَقْلِ، ومِنها ما لا يُمْكِنُ مَعْرِفَتُهُ إلّا بِالدَّلائِلِ السَّمْعِيَّةِ. فَهَذا القِسْمُ الثّانِي لَمْ تَكُنْ مَعْرِفَتُهُ حاصِلَةً قَبْلَ النُّبُوَّةِ.
Here, Imam ul-Mufassireen, the genius exegetist, Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi in his monumental Tafsir, Mafateeh ul-Ghayb (aka al-Tafsir ul-Kabir) categorically destroys the Wahhabiyyah/Deobandi argument.
He states, ‘“and you did not know what the Book and what Imaan was” – ‘The scholars have differed regarding this verse, HOWEVER there is `IJMAA (CONSENSUS) that it is NOT PERMISSIBLE to say ‘the messengers were upon disbelief before revelation’, and the scholars mentioned various ways of answering the issue:
1. ‘“and you did not know what the Book” i.e. the Quran “and what Imaan was” i.e. Salaah, citing verse 143 of Surah al-Baqarah – “And Allah would certainly not put your Imaan (i.e. Salaah) to waste” as an example of the Quranic use of the word Imaan for the meaning of Salaah. (The verse of al-Baqarah was revealed after the changing of the Qiblah, when the Muslims wondered about the status of the Salaahs they had prayed facing the previous Qiblah). So, ‘you did not know what Imaan was’, actually means ‘you did not know what the prescribed method of Salah was, before the rulings were revealed to you’
2. Interpreting the verse as having an omitted mudaaf, i.e. ‘“and you did not know what the Book and about the (people of) Imaan”, i.e. who would believe and who would not believe
3. ‘“and you did not know what the Book and what Imaan was”, i.e. when you were a child in the cradle
4. Imaan” refers to affirming all of what Allah has tasked a person with, and before revelation, the Prophet (s)was not aware of all of the obligations of divine Law from Allah, rather he was aware of Allah (and believed in Him)
5. The attributed of Allah are of two types; those which can be recognized just through logical evidences, and those which can only be known through revelatory evidences. The negation of Imaan in this verse is only of those attributes that fall into this second category, i.e. the recognition of those attributes was not attained before revelation.
Now having understood this, especially the Ijmaa (consensus) upon what cannot possibly be intended by this verse, let’s study Imam Tabari’s commentary.
He states:
وقوله : (ما كنت تدري ما الكتاب ولا الإيمان ) يقول - جل ثناؤه - لنبيه محمد - صلى الله عليه وسلم - : ما كنت تدري يا محمد أي شيء الكتاب ولا الإيمان اللذين أعطيناكهما"
‘And His statement – “and you did not know what the Book and what Imaan was” – Allah says to his Messenger Muhammad , ‘ You did not know, O Muhammad, what that Book and what that Imaan was that we granted to you’
Here Imam al-Tabari is not saying that the Prophet didn’t have Imaan before revelation; rather he is saying that this verse negates that specific Imaan that came with the revelation of the book (hence why these two things – the Book and Imaan – have been coupled together, with the Imam referring to them both with a dual Ism Mausool and a dual Dameer) – i.e. you did not know the Book, and you did know the Imaan that came with the Book.
The Imaan in the Existence and Oneness of Allah is not being negated here, as that was always possessed by the Prophet (s), but rather this verse is referring to the finer details of Imaan, such as the details of prayer, fasting, charity, etc.
Thus concludes the exposition of the Wahhabiyyah/Deobandi deceit and misquoting of Imam al-Tabari.

Our challenge to these ignoramuses, whose ignorance is such that they don’t even know the plural of ignoramus, is to bring any evidence from any classical Sunni scholar in history who said ‘The Prophet had to convert to Islam’, with or without the clause ‘in a sense’ ?
---

In Ikmal al-Mu'lim, Qadi Iyad says :




there is no difference of opinion among research scholars that our Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, like all other prophets before their [announcement of] prophethood have their hearts [lit. bosoms] opened for monotheism [tawhid] and faith in Allah; it is not suitable that they should have any form of disbelief [in their faith] or doubt or even ignorant of it. nor is there any dispute concerning their immunity from sin [ismah] contrary to those who permit it [i.e. permit possibility of smaller sins before prophethood].

---

Al Shifa 
bi-al-Mustafa
tarif houqouq 

Al-Qadi Iyad (d.544 AH)
 Those who insult or belittle
The Prophet (صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم
is a Kaafir!
Al-Qadi Iyad confirms that to
 insult or demean the Prophet is disbelief
Here
---
---
Message from Shaykh Asrar Rashid حفظه الله to Nouman Ali Khan Deobandi
FB: Here
---






Debate: 

Nuzul (decent) of Jesus alayhi's salam


03/March/2018
Shaykh Asrar Rashid & Mufti Abu Layth  (Nahiem Ajmal Khan)



---
pre debate discussion: Here

Debate Format:Here




On Saturday 3rd March 2018 via live stream (above) in front of thousands, nationally and internationally, a certain individual agreed to a debate with Shaykh Asrar, agreed to a cordial debate, agreed to debate conditions, and put on a wonderful act of love and hugs thus sealing the deal so to speak.
Unfortunately, the truth followed soon thereafter.
Shaykh Asrar contacted him directly early afternoon on Monday 5th March in regards to the debate, however, he did not answer or reply.
Instead 9 hours later he goes online via his own Fb live stream and makes a statement in front of his 300 viewers refusing to debate, with excuses that were good enough for him and his followers to convince themselves they are in the right.
Now although there was no contract, and the individual was not blood bound to debating Shaykh Asrar it does show the character of the individual. Someone who cannot keep their word, someone who cannot abide by principles of a mufti or scholar. If you are posing as a mufti/scholar then you need to live up to these titles or else denounce them, because otherwise this is misleading the innocent unsuspecting naive public, both Muslim and non-muslim.
He is someone who cannot follow through on issues pertaining to our religion which are crucial to the faith of many, which can affect the Imaan of many. The individual has lost all credibility.

Indeed he has fallen short, leaving his character in question by not just the Ahlus Sunnah, but the Salaf, the Shia and many others who have messaged us since.
--
Abu Layth on his FB: Here

---

---
Forum discussion: Here
---

Decent of Jesus - Isa (AS)

1) Hadith on the authority of Abu Hurayra: I heard the Prophet say: "By the one in Whose hand is Abu al-Qasim's soul, `Isa ibn Maryam shall descend as a just and wise ruler.
He shall destroy the cross, slay the swine, eradicate discord and grudges, and money shall be offered to him but he will not accept it. Then he shall stand at my grave side and say: Ya Muhammad! and I will answer him."

Abu Ya`la relates it with a sound (sahih) chain in his Musnad (Dar al-Ma'mun ed. 1407/1987) 11:462;
Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani cites it in al-Matalib al-`aliya (Kuwait, 1393/1973) 4:23, chapter entitled: "Concerning the Prophet's life in his grave" and #4574.
Haythami says in Majma` al-zawa'id (8:5), Chapter entitled: "`Isa ibn Maryam's Descent": "Its sub-narrators are the men of sound (sahih) hadith."

2) Is there a sahi hadith in Musnad of Imam Hanbal( rh) or any other book which says that Isa Bin Maryam ( alaihis salaam) will be buried next to the grave of prophet Mohammed ( sal lallahu allaihi wa sallam)?

3) Is there any hadith in which prophet said that a prophet is buried at the place where he dies
If yes , then will Isa Bin Maryam ( alaihis salaam) die near the grave of prophet? Or the hadith in (2) mentions only to those prophet who come with book? I would be really thankful to you if you can please provide the clarification on the above issues.
--
1. Yes, the above hadith has been confirmed and mentioned in Mustadrak lil Hakim as well.
2. This hadith had been mentioned in Mirqaatul Mafateeh on pg 67, volume 11, Maktaba Imdaadiyah print. Similarly, the hadith concerning a prophet being buried at place of his death is mentioned in Shamaail Muhammadiyyah, pg 665, hadith 396.
3. Hazrat Eesaa (AS)’s reappearance in this world will not be as a Nabi but rather as an Ummati of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه و سلّم).
[Ml. Haroon Dhooma,Checked and Approved  by: Mufti Ebrahim Desai , Darul Iftaa]
---
---
Shaykh al-Islām Muammad a-āhir ibn ‘Ashūr al-Mālikī (d. 1394 A.H.) said:
"And what one must believe in is according to the text of the Qur’ān, that ‘Isā عليه السلام was neither killed nor crucified but Allāh has raised him to Himself and saved him from those who were pursuing him; and anything else is a matter of doubt.” [ Tafsīr at-Tarīr wat-Tanwīr. Dār Sanūn. Tafsīr of Āyah 157 of Surat an-Nisā’]
As for the second coming of ‘Isā عليه السلام, Sīdī ibn ‘Ashūr says:
A group of the companions of the messengers of Allāh narrate Aadīth about the second coming of ‘Isā, and there is nothing in the Qur’ān that goes against the second coming of ‘Isā in the last days.”

[Ibid. v3. pg. 259]

---

The Return Of Isa

(Jesus peace be upon him)


---


(Edited by ADHM)

Thursday, 21 December 2017

Who Explained Sahih al-Bukhari ?




Pseudo-Salafis admit: Indeed, all of the explainers of (Sahih) al-Bukhari were Ash’aris and many besides them’

العنوان الأشاعرة والماتريدية من أهل السنة والجماعة
المجيب جمع من العلماء
التصنيف الفهرسة/ العقائد والمذاهب الفكرية/الأديان والمذاهب الفكرية المعاصرة
التاريخ 29/06/1427هـ
السؤال
ما حكم التعامل مع المخالف لعقيدة السلف الصالح كالأشاعرة والماتريدية ومن نحا نحوهم والتعاون معهم على البر والتقوى والأمور العامة وهل يحرم العمل معهم سواء كانت الإدارة لنا وهم يعملون تحتنا أو العمل تحت إشرافهم؟ وهل هم من الفرق الضالة الاثنتين والسبعين؟ وهل التعامل معهم يعد من باب تولي غير المؤمنين؟.
الجواب
الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله وبعد:
فجواباً على ذلك نقول: الأشاعرة والماتريدية قد خالفوا الصواب حين أولوا بعض صفات الله سبحانه. لكنهم من أهل السنة والجماعة، وليسوا من الفرق الضالة الاثنتين والسبعين إلا من غلا منهم في التعطيل، ووافق الجهمية فحكمه حكم الجهمية. أما سائر الأشاعرة والماتريدية فليسوا كذلك وهم معذورون في اجتهادهم وإن أخطأوا الحق.
ويجوز التعامل والتعاون معهم على البر والإحسان والتقوى، وهذا شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية رحمه الله قد تتلمذ على كثير من العلماء الأشاعرة، بل قد قاتل تحت راية أمراء المماليك حكام ذلك الزمان وعامتهم أشاعرة، بل كان القائد المجاهد البطل نور الدين زنكي الشهيد، وكذا صلاح الدين الأيوبي من الأشاعرة كما نص عليه الذهبي في سير أعلام النبلاء، وغيرهما كثير من العلماء والقواد والمصلحين، بل إن كثيراً من علماء المسلمين وأئمتهم أشاعرة وماتريدية، كأمثال البيهقي والنووي وابن الصلاح والمزي وابن حجر العسقلاني والعراقي والسخاوي والزيلعي والسيوطي، بل جميع شراح البخاري هم أشاعرة وغيرهم كثير، ومع ذلك استفاد الناس من عملهم، وأقروا لهم بالفضل والإمامة في الدين، مع اعتقاد كونهم معذورين فيما اجتهدوا فيه وأخطأوا، والله يعفو عنهم ويغفر لهم. والخليفة المأمون كان جهمياً معتزلياً وكذلك المعتصم والواثق كانوا جهمية ضُلاَّلاً. ومع ذلك لم يفت أحد من أئمة الإسلام بعدم جواز الاقتداء بهم في الصلوات والقتال تحت رايتهم في الجهاد، فلم يفت أحد مثلاً بتحريم القتال مع المعتصم يوم عمورية، مع توافر الأئمة في ذلك الزمان كأمثال أحمد والبخاري ومسلم والترمذي وأبي داود وعلي بن المديني ويحيى بن معين وأضرابهم من كبار أئمة القرن الهجري الثالث. ولم نسمع أن أحداً منهم حرم التعامل مع أولئك القوم، أو منع الاقتداء بهم، أو القتال تحت رايتهم. فيجب أن نتأدب بأدب السلف مع المخالف.
والله أعلم وصلى الله على محمد وعلى آله وصحبه وسلم.
د. عبد العزيز بن عبد الفتاح القارئ عميد كلية القرآن في الجامعة الإسلامية سابقًا
د. محمد بن ناصر السحيباني المدرس بالمسجد النبوي
د. عبد الله بن محمد الغنيمان
رئيس قسم الدراسات العليا بالجامعة الإسلامية سابقا
الذي علق على الفتوى قائلاً:
هذا جواب سديد صحيح ولا يسع المسلمين إلا ذلك، ولم يزل الخلاف يقع في صفوف العلماء، ولم يكن ذلك مسبباً لاختلاف القلوب والتفرق، وقصة الصحابة لما ذهبوا إلى بني قريظة معروفة مشهورة وغيرها، قاله عبد الله بن محمد الغنيمان. تحريراً في 22/4/1427
هـ

The Ash’aris and Maturidis are from Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama’ah
Answered by: A group of scholars and authors.
Date: 06/1427/09.
Translated for IslamicNetwork.com

Question: What is the ruling on working with the opponents to the creed of Salaf as-Salih, such as the Ash’aris and Maturidis and those who follow their way, and cooperating with them in matters of goodness and piety and general affairs?
Is it forbidden to work with them no matter if the administration was in our conrol and they work under our auspices, or if it was under their control?
Are they from seventy-two misguided sects, and is working with them considered from the realm of alligience with other than the belivers?

Answer: All praise is for Allah, and may the Salah and Salam be upon the Messenger of Allah.

In response to this we say: 

The Ash’aris and Maturidis have opposed what is correct when they performed Ta’wil of the Divine Attributes of Allah the Exalted, however, they are from Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama’ah and not from the seventy-two misguided sects except those who go into extremes among them in denial and agree with the Jahmiyah- where his ruling would then be like those of the Jahmiyah.
As for the remainder of the Ash’aris and Maturidis, then they are not like that, and they are excused for their Ijtihad even if they erred in the truth. It is permissble to work and cooperate with them in piety, righteousness and goodness.

Take Ibn Taymiyah, who studied under many of the scholars of the Ash’aris, nay, he even fought under the banner of the Mamlukes- the rulers of that time-and the generality of them were Ash’aris, nay, the military leader of that time, the brave Nuruddin al-Zanki the martyr as well as Salahuddin al-Ayubi were both Ash’aris, as has been stated by Imam adh-Dhahabi in his Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala.

And there were many besides them from the scholars, military leaders and people of rectification.

Many of the scholars and Imams of the Muslims were Ash’aris and Maturidis such as;
al-Bayhaqi, al-Nawawi, Ibn al-Salah, al-Mizzi, Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani, al-Iraqi, al-Sakhawi, al-Zayla’i, al-Suyuti, and indeed, all of the explainers of (Sahih) al-Bukhari were Ash’aris and many besides them. 

So with this, the people benefited from their knowledge and admitted their virtue and leadership in the Deen while believing them to be excused for what they made Ijtihad in and erred. May Allah forgive them and pardon them.

The Khalifah al-Ma’mun was a Jahmi Mu’tazili, as well as Mu’tasim and al-Wathiq, they were misguided Jahmis, however, none of the Imams of Islam delivered Islamic legal verdicts to the effect that it was not allowed to follow them in prayers and fighting under their banner in Jihad.
So no one, for example, gave a legal verdict stating that it was not allowed to fight with al-Mu’tasim on the day of al-Amuriyah, despite the large numbers of Imams in those times such as: Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ali ibn al-Madini, Yahya ibn Ma’in and their likes from the major Imams in the third generation of the Hijrah.
We have not heard any of them forbidding working with these people or preventing (others) from following them or fighting under their banners. So, it is an obligation that we observe the manner of the Salaf as-Salih with the opponent, and Allah knows best. May Allah send Salah and Salam upon Muhammad and his family and companions

Signed:

Dr, Abdul Aziz ibn Abdul Fattah al-Qari’ (former head of the faculty of the Qur’an at the Islamic University)
Dr. Muhammad ibn Nasir al-Suhaibani (teacher at the Prophets Masjid)
Dr. Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Ghunayman (former head of the department of higher studies at the Islamic University who added to this fatwa the following:

” This is a correct and upright answer that a Muslim cannot take but it. The differences have not ceased taking place among the ranks of the scholars, yet that was not a cause for seperation and the hearts differing. And the story of the companions when they went to Banu Quraydhah is well known and famous as well as others.”
--


---

--


---
(Edited by ADHM)