A mention of an incident that occurred with Al-Albani involving "Muhammad al-'Abdah," and a discussion regarding his methodology and the methodology of "Saruur Zayn al-'Abidin."

The Shaykh : He said: "I and 'Muhammad al-'Abdah' had read 'Al-Bayan' magazine, and then we disagreed. I said to him: 'Yes.' He said: 'This report has no basis.' I said to him: 'That is what we seek.' Then he went on a bit in his speech, and from his words it was clear that you are saying the pot is lost and he remained silent. I said to him: 'What do you mean?' He said that Saruur is not known whether he is a Salafi or an Ikhwan. I said to him: 'Correct, this is what is in my mind.' He said: 'Yes, I am not of the Ikhwan. I was of them twenty years ago, and then when it became clear to me—he spoke beautifully, meaning—he separated from them.' I said to him: 'Well, what I know about you is that you are of the Ikhwan, and we did not know otherwise. So the default is that we remain on this default until new news reaches us. So you have now—may Allah reward you with good—brought us the new news, and this is a good omen.' During his speech, he indicated that the news reaching you about me should not be accepted. I said to him: 'It is not my custom to accept news; rather, I warn people against such things, and I say to them on many occasions: "The defect of news lies only in its narrators." As for the first issue, I was informed of it, and reality confirmed that you partnered with 'Muhammad al-'Abdah' in publishing the magazine, and then you became independent with 'Al-Sunnah' magazine. So you are now saying that you did not disagree; that is what we hope for. As for me, I say: the pot is lost. And I do not know if Saruur is of the Ikhwan or a Salafi, so my excuse is very clear. And it was up to you—and perhaps you did so, but it did not reach us and we did not know—that you mention and clarify that you were and became [a Salafi], and this is what we did not know. Yes, and then we continued in the topic. We said to him: 'The magazine is "Al-Sunnah" magazine.' He said to me: 'Does it not come to you?' I said to him: 'It comes to me intermittently, and from recent days, meaning, since it was published, it has not come to me.'"

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : He said: "In summary, he began to tell me something of the history of his life, and something good appears from his words. So I took it as an opportunity, because he said that I hear news about the Saruriyyin, and the Saruriyyin—this is the common talk today. I said: 'I hear it, but I do not believe it, because I do not proceed except on evidence. But I take something from you, and this thing makes me hesitate about whether your methodology is Salafi. Do you remember the Salafiyyah in your magazine?' He said: 'Yes.' I said: 'Well, I do not remember this, but this contradicts your frequent mention of the people of the Sunnah and the community. So I see that your use of this word is not good, because you know that the people of the Sunnah and the community are not intended to be the Salafis, but rather the Maturidiyyah and the Asha'irah are intended by it.' There was a bit of discussion between me and him. I had 'Asim yesterday, whom he and his wife brought; they are with me now. So I said to his wife: 'Give him a signal to let him come and listen to this discussion.' So he listened to the discussion, and he regretted that it was not recorded."

The questioner : He said: "... because the meaning is that I am now..."

The Shaykh : That is it.
The intended meaning was that I asked him a question: "Do you not know, since centuries, that this word is used and applied, and the Maturidiyyah and the Asha'irah are intended by it?" He deviated from the answer, and this annoyed me, and changed some of my opinion about him. He said: "I—meaning he—do not mean by this word the Maturidiyyah and the Asha'irah, but rather I mean the Salafis." I said: "O Professor, this is a deviation. I am not asking you what you mean, but rather I am asking you what people mean and what they understand from this word..."